[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6608550,"mediaKeyId","2939439-bf3fd2ff270a02ba4cd81ff5ce3cbf61","parentId",2939439,"title","Planning commission recommends approval for mini-storage, RV storage and proffer amendment on George Washington Memorial Highway","audioSeconds",1414,"startMs",177000,"endMs",1591000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2939439-bf3fd2ff270a02ba4cd81ff5ce3cbf61&start=177&end=1591","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2939439-bf3fd2ff270a02ba4cd81ff5ce3cbf61/thumbnail_177000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6608550/York-County/Virginia/Planning-commission-recommends-approval-for-mini-storage-RV-storage-and-proffer-amendment-on-George-Washington-Memorial-Highway","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6608550-d13c34a91571bf86f40c1156f8609415/orig.mp4?Expires=1771186820&Signature=jnTYtS8ftqDD-JOCmddhJZkxexmXRwjISQWI6yf3nOMbAx4bXL2oNCTZ8Cj5ntVEtgDDNx8WlOdffaew2Ikk7N9DA8rCKWASXm07NCADz1DVqYHZmrb9DgBgpDCmSXyqe33RZqsoUBmSxjYoz7bh9SXirndW4lrPk1ZxZjZVYl1N0rmCHIOyhi7oMpenYEThouzf2ZmRK8dkLRu43M6baGvlhZraKqgoaEXzQoZmEYMLuy51qjF6x3hCJIAE~8cbBAbFkRVHPAc~lokC4QDL5S-UQ1qLwDzqktCpn5PhHYhFbWU7tfsNmo~Um5ZLKLbkxR56mZbQYwN6CBui16XZTw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","York County","date","2025-04-09T00:00:00Z","article","The York County Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of three related actions for a multi-parcel site on George Washington Memorial Highway: a proffer amendment for a four-acre portion of the site and two special-use permits to authorize a single-story mini-storage facility and recreational vehicle (RV) storage.

Staff told the commission the combined site includes two parcels (one listed as 12100 George Washington Memorial Highway and the larger parcel listed as 2044) totaling a little more than seven acres, and that roughly four acres of the property were rezoned in 1993 with proffers that staff proposed to amend to allow RV storage. Staff said the property is designated General Business (GB) in the county comprehensive plan and is within the Route 17 corridor overlay.

Why it matters: the applications would replace an existing contractor/junkyard use with a clustered, single-story storage development. Staff said the project is consistent with the comprehensive plan and that conditions can limit impacts on adjacent residential areas.

Staff overview and conditions

Staff described a sketch plan showing a consolidated single main entrance (to replace two existing driveways), a front facade facing Route 17 designed to meet Route 17 overlay aesthetics, a 35-foot transitional buffer abutting the Tab Lakes residential neighborhood, and an existing berm and tree cover that staff proposed to augment with an eight-foot opaque fence where needed. Staff said the application proposes about 572 storage units, a mix of climate-controlled and non-climate-controlled units, three customer parking spaces near the on-site office, and parallel parking inside the gated storage area for the bulk of required parking.

On lighting, staff referenced the county zoning ordinance's foot-candle limits and full-cutoff fixture requirements, noting that at a residential property line light levels must be very low (about 0.1 foot-candle) and that fixtures are required to be cut-off to avoid uplighting.

Staff said the RV-storage area would include covered canopy parking with full-cutoff fixtures; the RV pull-in spaces would be about 12 by 45 feet and larger enclosed storage bays could be as long as 45–50 feet. The applications include Knox-box emergency access and fire-flow considerations to ensure hydrants are available behind the gated area for firefighting.

Applicant comments

Andy Bilmanis, who identified himself as the applicant and developer for S3 Storage and gave a North Carolina address, told the commission his team completed a Phase I environmental assessment that “came back clean,” and that the applicant will perform a Phase II analysis during site-plan design as due diligence. Bilmanis said two or three fence boards had been damaged and that the fence structure itself is standing; he said the applicant planned to replace or refresh damaged sections. \"We do feel that this is the best use for this property,\" Bilmanis said, arguing the development would be quieter and cleaner than the existing contractor and salvage uses on the site.

Commission discussion and public hearing

The public hearing produced no members of the public speaking in opposition. Commissioners discussed buffers, maintenance of the required fence, and lighting. Commissioner Porter said, \"I think it's a great improvement for the area,\" and noted the applicant had met with Tab Lakes residents. Commissioner Brooks said, “It's not what I would have wished for the property…But this is a big improvement over what it currently has,” expressing mixed views over turning an industrial stretch into more storage-related uses.

Formal actions and vote

The commission took three separate votes, one for each application as advertised. The motions, as recorded in the meeting minutes/transcript, were:
- PC25-04 (proffer amendment): motion by Commissioner King to adopt Resolution PC25-04 to recommend approval of an application to amend proffer conditions applicable to the four-acre portion at 2044 George Washington Memorial Highway. Roll call recorded: King—yes; Smith—yes; Chamberlain—yes; Titus—yes; Brooks—yes; motion passed.
- PC25-05 (RV storage): motion by Commissioner Brooks to adopt Resolution PC25-05 to recommend approval of a special-use permit authorizing a recreational vehicle storage facility at (listed in the record as) 212044 George Washington Memorial Highway. Roll call recorded: Brooks—yes; King—yes; Smith—yes; Chamberlain—yes; Titus—yes; motion passed.
- PC25-09 (mini storage): motion by Commissioner Titus to adopt Resolution PC25-09 to recommend approval of a special-use permit to authorize a single-story mini-storage warehouse facility at (listed in the record as) 212044 George Washington Memorial Highway. Roll call recorded: Titus—yes; Brooks—yes; King—yes; Smith—yes; Chamberlain—yes; motion passed.

What the approvals mean next

These are Planning Commission recommendations to the Board of Supervisors. The proffer amendment requires action by the Board of Supervisors because proffers run with the land and must be amended by the board. If the Board approves the rezoning/proffer amendment and special-use permits, the applicant will still need to complete detailed site plan reviews, perform required environmental studies (Phase II), and comply with the conditions of approval (fencing, buffer and landscape requirements, lighting limits, emergency access/KNOX box and fire-flow arrangements) before construction.

Clarifying details and conditions raised in the meeting

- Combined site: just over 7 acres; a four-acre portion is subject to 1993 conditional GB proffers that the applicant proposed to amend.
- Storage units: staff noted “about 572” units (mix of climate-controlled and non–climate-controlled).
- Parking: three public parking spaces by the office; remaining required spaces provided as parallel parking within gated areas; condition prevents parking from blocking unit access.
- Buffers and fencing: a 35-foot transitional buffer and an eight-foot opaque fence where required by prior proffers/conditions.
- Lighting: full-cutoff fixtures required; residential property-line foot‑candle limits referenced by staff (about 0.1 at the property line).
- Environmental: applicant reported a Phase I assessment “came back clean” and will complete a Phase II prior to site plan.
- Use restrictions: applicant said leases will prohibit on-site vehicle maintenance and overnight sleeping in stored vehicles/RVs.

Speakers (attributed in this article)

- Staff member, York County Planning Division (presenter)
- Andy Bilmanis, applicant/developer, S3 Storage (applicant)
- Commissioner King (Planning Commission member)
- Commissioner Brooks (Planning Commission member)
- Commissioner Porter (Planning Commission member)
- Commissioner Titus (Planning Commission member)
- Commissioner Chamberlain (Planning Commission member)
- Commissioner Smith (Planning Commission member)

Authorities cited or relied on in discussion

- Ordinance: York County Zoning Ordinance — Route 17 overlay standards (referenced by staff regarding façade and sign requirements) (referenced_by:[\"article-body\"])
- Other: 1993 conditional proffers applicable to the four-acre portion of the site (referenced_by:[\"article-body\"])
- Other: VDOT driveway standards (referenced_by:[\"article-body\"])
- Policy: York County Comprehensive Plan — site designation General Business (GB) (referenced_by:[\"article-body\"])

Discussion vs. decision

- Discussion: buffer adequacy, fence condition and long‑term maintenance, lighting and access details, environmental testing (Phase II) and site‑plan stage conditions.
- Direction: staff will include conditions addressing opaque fencing, emergency access (KNOX box), fire-flow/hydrant access, and lighting full‑cutoff/foot‑candle limits in recommended approval.
- Decision: Planning Commission recommended approval of the three applications (PC25-04, PC25-05, PC25-09); final legal approvals remain with the Board of Supervisors and required site-plan reviews.

Community relevance and next steps

The recommendation replaces a contractor/junkyard use with single-story storage and RV parking; staff and the applicant said the use will generate low traffic and no new demand on schools. The items proceed to the Board of Supervisors for final action; additional technical approvals (site plan, stormwater, Phase II environmental work) remain required before construction.

Ending: The commission moved on to the next agenda item after recording the three recommendations for the Board of Supervisors.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","York County - Board of Supervisors - Apr 09, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The York County Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of a proffer amendment and two special‑use permits that would allow a single‑story mini‑storage facility and an RV‑storage area on a multi‑parcel site along George Washington Memorial Highway.","taxTitle","York County, Virginia","taxId",38210,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6608537,"Planning commission certifies CIP conformance with comprehensive plan, flags school 'other projects' and high-cost items for review",660,3475000,4135000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2939439-bf3fd2ff270a02ba4cd81ff5ce3cbf61&start=3475&end=4135","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2939439-bf3fd2ff270a02ba4cd81ff5ce3cbf61/thumbnail_3475000.jpg","/articles/6608537/York-County/Virginia/Planning-commission-certifies-CIP-conformance-with-comprehensive-plan-flags-school-other-projects-and-high-cost-items-for-review","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6608537-8637066a9ca2a326be6fd77af52ad0e3/orig.mp4?Expires=1771186820&Signature=fl5jrsfIkgurqxK5G4vIDTzF9-C9n4gOtoJZZ1f8iEr2R3zuR6GW8ZpfmzAL9rh8Po7tK8DyqhIAgxQ2MrAVHxHiFCnQGAG8sHtwPY8HH3HOSE0mBFMNm2q7Qvw5L4Zn32n-wzDs5VyDMUGO4X-Mi0w62gX7MXw9ryQScpeT-d6fNVR7-J93nORwqHHQDd07FBAN9k8hWGohVCqm-mFqY4K4e7lJBFFxKnRgvK6Q58fcjTmD4gV745SOR7t6wLdVact6jO3cjsdR02DxyxiPOZ9YuCUP37L87XMt6CfgLjkPducpuF9osc~eAZpEjWdI4SHw7e97cyIw5fsJrGkHeQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The York County Planning Commission voted to certify that the county’s proposed Capital Improvement Program (FY 2026–2031) conforms to the York County Comprehensive Plan and forwarded that certification to the Board of Supervisors as Resolution PC25‑13.

Staff said certification is an annual function required before the county adopts its budget and emphasized this action is an assessment of conformance with the comprehensive plan rather than final budget approval.

Commission discussion and clarifying questions

Commissioners generally supported the CIP certification but asked staff clarifying questions about school‑division entries. Commissioner Titus asked about an item labeled \"other projects\" in the school division section and a nearly $16.8 million geothermal system entry for a high‑school project. Staff explained the “other projects” line generally bundles smaller work such as generators, roof replacements, or similar building repairs and pointed the commissioner to the detailed project sheets in the CIP attachment where those items are enumerated. Staff also said the geothermal line item had been discussed in prior Board meetings and that the Board’s meeting materials explain the cost and scope in more detail.

Vote and next steps

The Planning Commission adopted PC25‑13 by roll call (motion by Commissioner Smith), certifying the proposed CIP’s conformance with the comprehensive plan and forwarding the certification to the Board of Supervisors for consideration in the budget process. The item will appear on the Board’s agenda for final consideration.

Speakers (attributed in this article)

- Staff member, York County Planning Division (presenter)
- Commissioner Smith (Planning Commission member)
- Commissioner Titus (Planning Commission member)

Clarifying details

- Staff noted the \"other projects\" line in the school CIP typically includes smaller items such as generators, roof replacements, and other building equipment; the detailed project sheets list those items.
- Staff said the geothermal system cost and scope were discussed in detail at recent Board of Supervisors meetings and recommended commissioners review those meeting materials for full context.

Ending: The commission certified the CIP’s conformance to the comprehensive plan and forwarded the certification to the Board of Supervisors; staff will provide the detailed CIP project sheets to commissioners as requested.","The commission adopted PC25‑13 certifying the Capital Improvement Program for FY2026–2031 as conforming to the comprehensive plan and discussed specific school projects (including a line item for 'other projects' and a geothermal high‑cost item) that commissioners asked staff to clarify when the CIP goes to the Board of Supervisors.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6608542,"Planning commission recommends fee increases for zoning and subdivision filings, including new resubmittal and archaeological review deposits",1148,3003000,4151000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2939439-bf3fd2ff270a02ba4cd81ff5ce3cbf61&start=3003&end=4151","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2939439-bf3fd2ff270a02ba4cd81ff5ce3cbf61/thumbnail_3003000.jpg","/articles/6608542/York-County/Virginia/Planning-commission-recommends-fee-increases-for-zoning-and-subdivision-filings-including-new-resubmittal-and-archaeological-review-deposits","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6608542-5784945490c9598474361daea9d59f7c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771186820&Signature=beGZeEhpU-z37TipRogBlpR8ZzMKmcmmJT-ZQriROhhiwRJncuocLatsM3jMxpVGfvdZ5NPWRQBNsbOHT9oqHm4Hgy4KIWjFNuTLpPkNfhy6fi8vSK1vb48qx4k~5H2WDwodNlZgKwqHDwKtHSq4ByopPser360wYSTMExSXsynGfmHxahnoaGt~3nBAQu1xt191R7I1saE~kNGik3sHZglYut~i01BnAJq~k1ZbauLE1AaOuTgCnzrVoJD-EBvW3VvpLHZJyCz2QC~zTAqDA2iK5i0EEKJjXLr61HfFfP-MwJ1MEbVHJl-BsypoqhhVYGB2oQJcv4fXoy6e5ZRaUA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The York County Planning Commission voted to forward proposed changes to subdivision and zoning filing fees to the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation of approval. The amendments, collected in Resolution PC25‑12 as presented to the commission, include modest increases to final plat and inspection fees, a new resubmittal fee schedule for third and subsequent plan submissions, a higher fee for most special‑use permits, a higher acre‑based fee for rezonings over five acres, and a deposit for archaeological study review when required.

Why it matters

Staff said the changes respond to inflationary increases (especially advertising costs required by state law), to comparisons with neighboring localities (James City, Gloucester, Isle of Wight, Newport News, Hampton), and to the county’s need to cover consultant review costs that were previously handled by the State Department of Historic Resources. Staff also said the new resubmittal fees aim to reduce repeated plan resubmissions that consume staff time.

Highlights of proposed changes (as described to the commission)

- Special‑use permits (non‑home occupation): base fee proposed to increase to $750 to better cover advertising costs.
- Rezoning applications: base fee unchanged but the per‑acre charge for acreage above five acres would increase (staff proposed a higher per‑acre rate with a maximum cap).
- Site plans (commercial): slight increase to the per‑square‑foot rate (from $0.60 to $1.00 per 1,000 square feet on the submittal fee) while maintaining the same base fee; no change to single‑family attached/multifamily rates.
- Resubmittal fees: new fee for the third or subsequent site‑plan or subdivision submittal (e.g., the third submission set at $150 and increasing by $50 for each additional submission) to incentivize complete submittals and reduce staff time spent on repeated reviews.
- Subdivision final plat filing fee: increase from $60 plus $5 per lot to $10 per lot and adjustments to acreage charges.
- Subdivision inspection fee: nominal increase from $30 to $35 plus $5 per lot.
- Archaeological study review: a tiered deposit to cover on‑call consultant review costs now that the State Department of Historic Resources no longer routinely reviews Phase I/II/III archaeologic studies in the region; deposit refunded or reconciled based on actual consultant charges.

Public comment and commission discussion

Tim Cross, who had spoken earlier on a different agenda item, returned to speak in favor of the changes and said the proposed fees were reasonable and that advertising costs should be borne by applicants rather than taxpayers. Commissioners generally supported the adjustments; several commissioners said staff performs extensive review work and the proposed fees remain modest compared with surrounding jurisdictions.

Vote and next steps

The commission moved to forward PC25‑12 to the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation of approval. The recorded roll call accepted the motion (King made the motion as recorded; votes in favor were recorded for the full commission present). The Board of Supervisors will consider the ordinance amendments during its coming agenda cycle, ahead of the county budget adoption.

Clarifying details from staff

- The archaeological review deposit is a tiered deposit intended to cover third‑party consultant review costs (staff explained the county now calls on an on‑call consultant because the State Department of Historic Resources no longer performs routine reviews in the region).","Staff proposed and the Planning Commission recommended changes to filing and inspection fees in the subdivision and zoning ordinances to better align York County with neighboring localities and to cover advertising and third‑party review costs. The commission voted to forward PC25‑12 to the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation of approval.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6608545,"Planning commission backs American Battlefield Trust park and trail at Crawford Road with conditions on lighting and surfaces",1399,1601000,3000000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2939439-bf3fd2ff270a02ba4cd81ff5ce3cbf61&start=1601&end=3000","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2939439-bf3fd2ff270a02ba4cd81ff5ce3cbf61/thumbnail_1601000.jpg","/articles/6608545/York-County/Virginia/Planning-commission-backs-American-Battlefield-Trust-park-and-trail-at-Crawford-Road-with-conditions-on-lighting-and-surfaces","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6608545-e9fb393dfbfdc6854711e8879d481410/orig.mp4?Expires=1771186820&Signature=T9pXNKfNNTf45F4jIbHBlwzVAU7ggjZ7flOtMahZrZt3VDn6Gub-Z-WXakuyf~V5C~9EDmkYBVMl6quN~RypqzyX54GYCPFLdPM-5aUG~b4BElRg49Q3FbrsvvxbSkDAWqWgrN90tS6JN2z85N7YZ-feY2ZcHlCV~LBTb9CTSwzLydU1Sy01gfHnoVlsXI4WW-DQP-YLEuQRBiQspZuq~iIoIUI5mRAsEOls5ieYX3w3Z9DswoQlVFyFJGVb9t~RWTH~AQVkUjR3-1OGQt3t2-3E-J8yp12qTWrKue8zTE0xgfX6VtfpQ8t4qx3yQ3XmaSb0Cz1~J~E0vkXso551OQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The York County Planning Commission recommended approval of a special‑use permit allowing the American Battlefield Trust to establish a small park and pedestrian loop trail on two parcels at 393 and 401 Crawford Road, forwarding Resolution PC25‑10 to the Board of Supervisors with conditions addressing trail construction, parking surfacing, and lighting.

Staff summary and recommended conditions

Staff described the request as a park and pedestrian loop on two parcels — approximately 0.4 acre at 393 Crawford Road and roughly 3.6 acres at 401 Crawford Road — both zoned RC (resource conservation). Because the trail would cross both parcels, staff proposed a condition requiring vacation of the interior property line between the two parcels.

The applicants proposed a stone‑dust surface for the first 150 feet from the parking area and a mulch surface for the remainder. Staff recommended that the entire trail be constructed with a compacted aggregate (three inches of aggregate with two inches of stone dust as a wearing course) and metal edging to improve durability and accessibility. Staff also recommended the nine‑space parking area (one accessible space) be constructed of a dustless surface rather than gravel to assist wheelchair access and patrol visibility.

On lighting and security, the American Battlefield Trust initially proposed no lighting and three ungated parking entrances; the county sheriff’s office asked staff to require the parking lot to be lit at night for safety and patrol visibility. Staff included a condition requiring lighting from dusk until dawn for the parking lot. Commissioners discussed options such as motion‑activated lighting and cameras; the applicant said two cameras would be installed “before lunch tomorrow” and was open to discussing a mix of continuous and motion‑activated lighting.

Historical and interpretive elements

The Trust said the site is associated with Revolutionary War and Civil War events, and proposed three wayside interpretive panels plus one site identification sign. Staff noted sign standards (zoning ordinance section 24.1‑703) limiting site identification signs to a 40‑square‑foot freestanding monument at up to six feet tall or a pole sign up to 12 square feet at six feet tall. The Trust told the commission the panels would reflect the French encampment, a Freedman site found by the Trust’s surveys, and a commemoration tied to a tree‑planting event.

Public comment and applicant remarks

Public comments included local residents who supported public access and urged limited nighttime access because of past illicit activity in the area. Tim Cross, a nearby resident and advocate during the comprehensive plan update, said the Trust’s proposal aligns with county goals to make conserved lands accessible and encouraged flexibility on trail surfacing if accompanied by a maintenance schedule. William Triplett, another nearby resident, asked that access to the parking area be limited at night to prevent it from becoming a hangout spot.

Chuck Laudner, representing the American Battlefield Trust, described the Trust’s preservation work, the site cleanup (removal of invasive species and trash), and plans for interpretive panels. Laudner said signage, a split‑rail fence along the road frontage, and security cameras were planned and that the Trust’s intent is to make the site accessible as an outdoor classroom and commemoration site.

Vote and conditions

The commission voted to recommend approval of PC25‑10 by voice and roll call. The motion by Commissioner Brooks to adopt Resolution PC25‑10 carried with recorded yes votes by Commissioners Smith, Chamberlain, Titus, Brooks and King.

What the conditions require next

- Trail construction: staff‑required stone‑dust/aggregate trail with metal edging for durability and accessibility.
- Parking: nine‑space lot (one accessible) to be constructed of a dustless surface; gravel was not approved.
- Lighting/security: parking‑lot lighting required (dusk‑to‑dawn); the commission discussed but did not require a specific motion‑activated schedule. Applicant indicated cameras will be placed and said the Trust could close the property if after‑hours activity is observed.
- Property line vacation: required so the trail spans both lots without cross‑parcel legal issues.

Speakers (attributed in this article)

- Staff member, York County Planning Division (presenter)
- Chuck Laudner, representative, American Battlefield Trust (applicant)
- Tim Cross, resident (public comment)
- William Triplett, resident (public comment)
- Commissioner Brooks (Planning Commission member)
- Commissioner Titus (Planning Commission member)
- Commissioner Smith (Planning Commission member)

Authorities cited

- Ordinance: York County Zoning Ordinance, section 24.1‑703 (site identification sign standards) and section 24.1‑706 (parking surface requirements) (referenced_by:[\"article-body\"]).

Discussion vs. decision

- Discussion: trail surfacing (stone dust vs. mulch), parking surface (gravel vs. dustless surface), security (lighting, cameras, gates), and maintenance responsibility over time.
- Direction: staff proposed conditions to require a stone‑dust walking surface and a dustless parking surface and to require parking‑lot lighting for patrol and safety.
- Decision: Planning Commission recommended approval of PC25‑10 subject to those site‑construction and safety conditions.

Community relevance and next steps

The site sits adjacent to Colonial National Historical Park and contains Revolutionary/Civil War resources; the Trust’s plan aims to open conserved land for public use with interpretive signage. The Planning Commission’s recommendation goes to the Board of Supervisors for final approval; required conditions (surface, lighting, property‑line vacation) must be satisfied before construction and public opening.

Ending: The commission recorded its recommendation and moved the item to the Board of Supervisors for final review and action.","The commission recommended approval of a special-use permit to create a recreational trail and small parking area on two Crawford Road parcels owned by the American Battlefield Trust, subject to conditions requiring a stone‑dust trail surface, a dustless (paved) parking area, and lighting for safety.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning commission recommends approval for mini-storage, RV storage and proffer amendment on George Washington Memorial Highway

Planning commission certifies CIP conformance with comprehensive plan, flags school 'other projects' and high-cost items for review

Planning commission recommends fee increases for zoning and subdivision filings, including new resubmittal and archaeological review deposits

Planning commission backs American Battlefield Trust park and trail at Crawford Road with conditions on lighting and surfaces