03SN0109-Mar12.pdfMarch 12, 2003 BS
STAFF'S
REQUEST ANALYSIS
RECOMMENDATION
03 SN0109
KMD Land, L.C. and RMCRK Land, L.C.
Bermuda Magisterial Disitict
West line of Ruffm Mill Road
REQUEST: Amend Conditional Use Planned Development (Case $5S 121 ) relative to screening
and setbacks.
PROPOSED LAND USE:
Light and general industrial uses are planned.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROFFERED CONDITION ON
PAGE 2.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The original conditions of zoning were negotiated with area property owners. After consideration of
public input, should the Commission and Board wish to approve this amendment, acceptance of the
Proffered Condition would be appropriate.
(NOTE: CONDITIONS MAY BE IIVIPOSED OR THE PROPERTY OWNER MAY PROFFER
CONDITIONS. THE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH "STAFF/CPC" WERE AGREED UPON BY
BOTH STAFF AND THE COMMISSION. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "STAFF" ARE
RECOMMENDED SOLELY BY STAFF. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "CPC"ARE
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.)
Providing a FIRST CHOICE Community Through Excellence in Public Servic~
PROFFERED CONDITION
(STAFF/CPC)
Adjacent to Tax IDs 808-638-7283 and g08-639-7909, a mlnlroum twanty-
five (25) foot setback shall be maintained for all driveways, parking areas and
buildings. Within this setback~ a berm shall be installed. The berm shall be
landscaped at a density of 2.5 times Perimeter Landscaping C. This
requirement shall not be applicable once Stated_adjacent parcel(s) are zoned
for industrial use. (P)
(Note: This condition supersedes Condition 4 of Case 85S121.)
(Staff Note: With approval of this request,-Condition 4-is superseded and
Condition 2 is deleted in Case 85S 121~ for the request property only.)
GENERAL INFO~TION
Location:
West line of Ruffin Mill Road, north of RuffinMill'(
1566 and 808-639-3226 (Sheet 35).
Existing Zoning:
I-1 with Conditional Use Planned Development
Size:
45.7 acres
Existing Land Use:
Vacant
Adjacent Zoning and Land Use:
North - R:12; Vacant
5role. TaxIDs 807-638-8509, 808-638-
South - I-1 with Conditional Use Planned Development; Industrial or vacant
East - A, R-15 and I-2; Single ~mily residential, general.industrial or vacant
West - I-1 with Conditional Use Planned Development;':Light and general industrial
UTILITIES; ENVIRONMENTAL AND PUBLIC FACILITIES
This request will have no impact on these facilities.
2
03SN0109-MAR12:BOS
LAND USE
Comprehensive Plan:
The Consolidated Eastem Area Plan suggests the request property and surrounding area. is
appropriate for light industrial use.
Area Development Trends:
Adjacent property to the north is zoned. Residential (R-1:2) and is vacant. Properties to the
south and west are zoned Light Industrial (1-1) and Light industxial (i~l)with Conditioml
Use Planned Development and are occupied by light or general industrial uses or are vacant.
Adjacent properties to the east are zoned Agricultural (A)~ Residential 01--i 5)and Ger/eml
Industrial (1-2) and are occupied by single family residential USes, general industrial uses Or
are vacant. It is anticipated that light industrial uses will continue tO bedeveloped in the area
in accordance with the Plan.
Zoning History:
On October 8, 1980, the Board of Supervisors, upon a fivorable recommendation fr0mthe
Planning Commission, approved mzoning of the request pmpe~ and adjacent property to
the south from Residential (1{-12) to Light Industrial ~-.1.); (Case 808111)
On September 25, 1985, the Board' of SUpervi.s. ors, upon a-favorable re¢ommendationfrom
the Plmaning Commission, approved a .Conditional Use Blatmed Development with. Use
exceptions to permit all General Industrial 0VI-2) uses: e~Pt ~ani~tary sewage treatment.
plants, plus a meat products processin~ and manufacturing~Plant (a Heavy:Industfial.(lV!~3)
use) and setback exceptions (Case 85S 121 ) on the request Pti)petty:anfladjacem pr0po~ tO
the south.. Conditions were imposed relative to a Mastei P!an,-.paving} right 6f-~ay
dedication, limited access onto Ruffin Mill Road, architectural treatment, setbacks: from
adjacent agricultural proper~ and screening; Subsequenfly~ in 786~ an amendment t0 the
Conditional Use Planned Developmem was approV?on a:porti,'on of the request property
and adjacent property to the south to permit residential dwellings to house emploYees. Of the
industrial uses located on the adjacent property to the south~:~C~e,8~S075); ~os~ dweltings' -
were constructed; however, have now been removed.
Current Proposal:
As noted herein, with the approval of Conditional Use Planned Development (85S~2~'),
conditions were negotiated with adjacent property, ownerslwhi~h required r,~ttain 'set§~?s
and screening to insure land use transition betweenthe proposed industrial uses and'e/i~g
and anticipated residential development
3 03SN0109-MAR12-BOS
The applicants are proposing to delete Condition 2.0f Case g$Sl~!, which requires all
loading and outside storage areas to be screened fx0m vie~:.ofpublie~ roads in aee0f ~d~!ce
with a screening plan approved bythe Planning Departm.~e~ ThUS~, development 0f itf~ ~ite
will be subject to current Ordinance standards relative to seree~g of loading tmd.oiftside;
storage areas. Verbally, the applicant has indicatedan intent!to seek a devel6pment standards
waiver through a future application.
The applicants are also requesfmg.t~
and screening for buildings and parking
allowed by the current Ord'manee along
industrially-zoned prbperties. In :addition,
requirement for a 100 foot setback adj
which are zoned Agricultural (A) and are
applicants are proposing to pro~i&
that a berm will be installed
times the
for industrial use,
(Proffered Condition)
Site Design:
Setbacks and Screening:
properties to thc west have
Industrial (I-2) uses. The majority
to permit General Industrial (1-2) uses.
requirements where
properties. With the a
as required by the
applicant is proposing a twenty-five (25)
Tax IDs 808-638-7283 and 808-639-7909,
District. Condition 4 of Case 85S121
parcels. Likewise,
4
The
parcels rather than the twenty-five (25) foot setback proposed by the applicant. In order to
mitigate potential impact ofthe reduced setback adjacent to these parcels, the applicants have
proffered that a landscaped berm will be installed to mitigate the impact of uses on the
request property (Proffered Condition). It is anticipated that these adjacent Agricultural (A)
properties will be developed in the future for industrial uses as suggested by the Plaa.
Should Condition 2 be deleted, screening of loading areas will be regulated by current
Ordinance Standards. Again, the applicant has indicated an intent to seek a development
standards waiver to these requirements in the future.
CONCLUSIONS
The original conditions of zoning were negotiated with area property owners. A majority of the
property surrounding the request property was already zoned or designated in the Plan to permit
single family residential uses. Currently, properties surrounding the reqnest property are designated
in the Plan for industrial use, and the majority of the property east of the request site hasbeenzoned
to permit general industrial uses. After consideration of public input, should tbe Commission and
BOard wish to approve this amendment, acceptance of the proffered condition would be appropriate.
CASE HISTORY
Applicants, Staff, Bermuda District Commissioner and AdjaCent-Pr0perty Owners~( 10/10/02):
An on-site meeting was held to discuss the applicants' plans for development and citizens
concerns. Concerns were expressed relative to grading and clearing on adjacent propertyand
proposed screening. The applicants indicated propertyboundmies would be.resurveyedand
that a meeting would be .held with the adjacent property owners to discuss the results and
proposed screening.
Planning Commission Meeting (10/15/02):
At the applicants' request, the Commission deferred this case to December 17, 2002.
Staff (10/16/02):
The applicants were advised in writing that any significant new or revised information should
be submitted no later than October 21, 2002, for consideration at the Commission's
December 17, 2002, public hearing.
5 03SN0109-MAR12aBOS
Staff ( 11/22/02):
To date, no new information has been received.
Planrfing Commission Meeting (12/17/02):
At the applicants' request, the Commission deferred this ease to their February 18, 2003,
meeting.
Staff (12/18/02):
The applicants were advised, in writing that any significant new or revised information should
be submitted no later than December 23, 2002, for COnsideration at the CommissiOn's
February 18, 2003, public hearing.
Staff I1/27/03):
To date, no new or revised information has been submitted.
Applicants, Staff, Bermuda District Commissioner and Adjacent Property Owners (2/13/03):
A meeting was held to discuss the applicants' plan for screening within the proposed reduced
setback.
Applicants (2/18/03):
In response to adjacent property owners' concerns over the impact of the reducedsetback on
their properties, the applicants submitted revisions to the Proffered Condition relative to
specific screening to be provided: (Proffered Condition)
Planning Commission Meeting (2/1 $/03):
The applicants accepted the recommendation. No one spoke in favor of or In 0ppoSition to
the request.
6 03SN0109-MAR12-BOS
On motion of Mr. Cunningham, seconded by Mr. Stack, the Commission recommended
approval and acceptance of the Proffered Condition on page 2.
AYES: Unanimous.
The Board of Supervisors, on Wednesday, March 12, 2003, begirmin~ at 7:00 p.m., will take under
consideration this request.
7 03SN0109-MAR12-BOS
/
/
03SN0109-1