About this meeting
- Government Body
- Board of County Supervisors
- Meeting Type
- Board Of County Supervisors
- Location
- Prince William County, VA
- Meeting Date
- May 12, 2026
Transcript
1370 sections (from 1,566 segments)
You could please find a seat. This over? All right, everyone. It is 02:00 on Tuesday, May 12. We are going to begin with a moment of silence.
Thank you everyone. Please rise if you're able for the pledge of allegiance. All right. Thank you, everyone. Before we go into the approval of minutes, I just want to notice note a few changes on the agenda.
Item 7C, an agreement has been reached with the owner of 4227 Prince William County Parkway and item 10 C has now been withdrawn. So with that I would like to move on to agenda item number three for approval of the minutes.
So moved Madam Chair.
Second.
It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Alright. Let's go ahead and take our vote.
Vote unanimous.
Alright. Thank you so very much. We're now moving on to agenda item number four, that's commendations and proclamations. Can I get a motion for four a through four p?
So moved. Second.
Any discussion? Alright. Let's go ahead and take our vote.
Vote unanimous. Alright.
I am gonna move down. For some of them, let's see. I know I have a couple supervisors who are gonna be coming down as well. I'm just taking a quick scan. I know you have one, Tom and Law Day. So if you would join me for Law Day, four m. Supervisor Vega if you can join me for four n and four p. And if I missed any of the rest of you come on down when it's time. So with everyone associated with Older Americans Month, if you can please make your way to the podium. And I noticed we have a few people standing.
If you are sitting next to an open seat, please raise your hand. We have a couple seats over in here and a few seats over on that side as well. Everyone in board chambers, if you're not here for a proclamation, please make sure you find a seat. Thank you. And I should have noted because we have so many today.
What we're going to do is we're going to acknowledge everyone and we're going to wait till they're all done to take photos out at the end. We'll go into recess to take photos. So 4A is to proclaim May 2026 is Older Americans Month. We are here to recognize Older Americans Month and this year's theme is Champion Your Health, focusing on wellness, prevention and proactive health management. Older adults in Prince William County who represent over 18% of our residents are a vibrant part of
our
community who make vital contributions as mentors, caregivers, volunteers, professionals and community leaders. As a number of older adult grows, 400% just since 2000, we must do our part to take care of them so that they can continue to live independently as long as possible. The Prince William County Area On Aging provides essential services to our older adult communities such as Meals on Wheels, adult day care, caregiver support, and programs that promote independence, health, and well-being. And we appreciate greatly their service to our community. So today, the Prince William Board of County Supervisors hereby proclaims May 2026 is Older Americans Month to recognize older Americans' contributions and reaffirm our commitment to supporting their health and independence.
Would you like to offer a few words?
Thank you, chair Jefferson. Thank you for members of the board and county leadership for recognizing, May as Older Americans Month, Prince William, Area Agency on Aging. I appreciate your support. For the sake of time, I'm gonna be brief, but I will bring up a member of our community, a volunteer, and a business owner, Diana, to say a few words for us.
Good afternoon, chair Jefferson and members of the board. My name is Diana Pahuaga, and I am honored to stay on the Commission on Aging and represent older adults throughout the community. Older adults in Prince William County are active contributors who continue to volunteer, mentor, support families and strengthen the community every day. As our older adult population continues to rapidly grow, it is important that we continue planning for the future by expanding opportunities for connection, wellness and community engagement through senior centers, community programming and aging services. The work of the Prince William Area Agency on Aging plays an important role in helping older adults remain independent, healthy and connected.
Thank you for your continued support and investment in older adults across our region.
Thank you.
All right. If we can have Phyllis Jennings Holt and her team for May 2026, foster care month. May is National Foster Care Month dedicated to raising awareness about the children and youth in The US foster care system. It honors foster parents, care ship kinship caregivers, and professionals who provide stability while highlighting the need for more support in permanent homes to help youth transition into adulthood. Every May the Board of County Supervisors recognizes Prince William County foster parents and the Department of Social Services staff for their enormous impact on foster children and their professional and deeply personal commitment to these children.
This year's theme, engaging youth, building supports, strengthening opportunities, focuses on supporting young people, particularly those transitioning out of care. When it comes to children, it really does take a village. And the Prince William County Department of Social Services is a central part of that village. DSS has 127 children in custody who need foster care with a 36 member staff in its Family Support Services Division dedicated to youth in custody. And there are 51 local foster families who assume the responsibility of providing adequate care and love for foster children in DSS custody.
Director Jennings Holt, we truly appreciate all that you and your team do. Today, the Prince William Board of County Supervisors hereby proclaims March 2026 as foster care month and proclaims your continued support of foster parents and staff who help the children and families of our community. Would you like to offer some remarks? Good
afternoon, Madam Chair Jefferson, Vice Chair Angley, members of the board, county exec Mr. Shorter, and county attorney Ms. Robill. Phyllis Jennings Holt, Director of Social Services. Today with me, I have a few, individuals from my team from the Family Support Services, but I would like to start with Krissy Falls, who is a member of our DSS Advisory Board, Deputy Director Holly Handy, Assistant Director of Family Support Services Jessica McCauley, Human Services Program Manager Katina Wafford, senior human services caseworker, Marcy Capers, and human services caseworker workers, Trudy Miller, Michael Page, Mona Ryerson, and Tiffany Smith.
On behalf of Prince William County Department of Social Services, thank you for recognizing May as foster care month. Today, we recognize the children and youth in foster care, as well as the foster parents, kinship caregivers, and dedicated staff who support them every day. Virginia has more than 5,500 children in foster care, and Prince William County has 127 children in our custody, and each one deserves safety, stability, and the opportunity to thrive. We especially recognize our kinship caregivers, grandparents, relatives, and family friends who step up to keep children connected to family and community. We also celebrate the young adults in our independent living program who are working hard towards successful and independent futures.
At this time, I would like to say congratulations and thank you to our twenty twenty six Prince William County foster parents of the year who are are not with us today, James and Bobby Joe Haynes. We will be recognizing and celebrating them at our foster parent appreciation schedule for June 13. It has been shared that James and Barbara Johanes embody the heart of foster care for teens with special and complex needs. Even during moments of significant behavioral challenges, they respond with patience, empathy, and consistency, ensuring the children feel safe and supported. We could not do the work that we do without our foster parents and this partnership.
Lastly, thank you again for the for this recognition and your continued support and commitment to the children and families in our community. Thank you. Thank
you. We are now on to foresee that's the proclaim May 2026 as historic preservation month.
Hello.
Alright. May 2026 is historic preservation month. And as we celebrate the two hundred fiftieth anniversary of the declaration of independence, this year's focus is on that most powerful promise, all men are created equal. So it's up to us this year to celebrate the historic sites, neighborhoods and landmarks that tell the full American story. Places that remind us of how far we've come and how far we still have to go.
Historic preservation is also an effective tool for revitalizing neighborhoods, fostering local pride, and maintaining community character while enhancing livability. It is an important contributor to the economy and tourism market with over 42% of visitors to Northern Virginia going to historic sites and museums, including a 150,000 visits to county owned historic sites in 2025. Prince William County honors its heritage by preserving and protecting its history through the of numerous historic sites and educational programming for the public. Our historical commission and the architectural review board advises and assists in these efforts by identifying and promoting historic sites in their history. So therefore today, the Prince William Board of County Supervisors hereby proclaims March 2026 as historic preservation month.
Would you like to offer some remarks?
Thank you, Chair Jefferson, Board members. My name is Eric Griffiths. I'm your Heritage Resource Specialist in the planning office. Established in 1973 by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, Historic Preservation Month is cosponsored by local preservation groups, state historical societies, parks, businesses, civic organizations across the country. During Preservation Month, events are planned to promote historic places for the purpose of instilling national and community pride, encouraging heritage tourism and showing the social and economic benefits of historic preservation. Local placemaking, sustainability, heritage tourism are all possibly impacted by historic preservation. We thank the Board for the support of the proclamation as May as historic preservation.
Good afternoon, madam chair and members of the board. My name is John DePue. I'm the chairman of the Prince William County Historical Commission. It is truly a privilege to be able to be a member of the historical commission on this, the two hundred fiftieth anniversary of our revolution and our country's freedom. When one thinks about the American Revolution, what comes to mind initially are names like George Washington, the Adams's, Thomas Jefferson, and events such as the battle of Bunker Hill, Saratoga, and all the other major historical battles of the war.
But we must not overlook the fact of our count our county's own rich history of persons and events that occurred right here in Prince William County, which although they are not so well known, nonetheless played a significant role in our country's freedom. For example, in 1774, the Prince William Resolves proclaimed for the first time that taxation without representation is tyranny. That call was a marching song and a clarion for all the remaining colonies throughout the rest of the revolution. The third regiment of the Virginia Continental line, a much storied combat unit, was raised at Brentsville and mustered on the green there. In September 1781, elements of George Washington's army and Rochambeau's French command marched through Eastern Prince William County and probably spent the night at the Woodbridge Home Home Center.
Colonel William Grayson, a Dumfries lawyer, served as an aide to general Washington, commanded a regiment in the battle of Monmouth, was our first state United States senator, and he lies buried off of Longview Drive in Woodbridge. Light horse Harry Lee was born at Leesville, Virginia and raised in Leesville, Virginia. He was to become one of president general Washington's paramount leaders in the revolution of cavalry. This board has played a vital role in commemorating and preserving these and other significant events and personages of our Revolutionary War history. Your financial support has made possible the impressive revolutionary war memorial that is now being erected at Williams Ordinary and has enabled the acquisition of property and buildings, the erection of historical markers throughout Prince William County.
For these, you have our everlasting gratitude. You and you and our and we owe you and our debt. We are deeply appreciative of your support. And as the commemoration of our revolutionary war years proceed, we look forward to continuing to work with you to ensure that our county's contributions during that transcendent era are not forgotten.
I'll give you the conversation. And we will take a photo of the end. Thank you. You. All right. Oh, you go.
Oh, thank you.
If we can get everyone here for bike month and bike to work day. Alright. May is National Bike Month, a celebration of biking, its transportation, its recreation, as essential to our well-being and everyday lives. And here's a fun fact, 40% of all trips in The United States are less than two miles, making biking a feasible and fun way to get around. What's more, bicycle commuting and or bicycle access to public transportation or ride sharing to and from work is regionally recognized as an effective means to improve to improve air quality, reduce traffic congestion, and conserve energy.
Today, the Prince William Board of County Supervisors proclaims the month of May 2026 as bike month and 05/15/2020 bike to work day, and endorses the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board's regional bike to work day efforts. We encourage people and places we encourage people to find ways to celebrate biking each and every day. And therefore today, the Prince William Board of County Super no. I already did that. Alright. Thank you. So come up.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Rick Cannazales, your Director of Transportation. Thank you for letting us celebrate bike month here. I'm going present to you Bryce Baird, is our bicycle and pedestrian planner for the county. He's gone through a lot of effort to put this bike to work thing together and bike month, he just did an adult bike rodeo the other day, and he and he's taken a lot of initiative in moving this county forward in a multimodal fashion. I'll let him introduce our special guest as well. So Bryce, please.
Thank you, everybody. As Rick said, Bryce Barrett. So Rick kinda stole a little bit of my thunder. We had a very successful adult learn to ride class last Saturday at the county complex where 18 new people learned how to ride a bike for the first time. That's part of our ongoing efforts to celebrate bike month, which is nationally recognized holiday, but also an opportunity for us to
raise
awareness, advocate for safety, and just engage the community in the options that they have. So this is part of a concerted effort. We did our adult learn to ride class last week. We have a bike to work day this Friday. There's still time to sign up.
You get a free t shirt, water bottle, and there's also a chance to enter to win a raffle for a bike. I'd also like to give special thanks to a partner that I've worked with multiple years in a row on this effort, which is OmniRide. They have gone done everything from man managed pit stops in the county to purchasing banners for some of our VRE stations, as well as, you know, sharing and pushing out communication outreach efforts between the two of us organizations that reach just as many people as possible. So I'd like to invite them to come up and say a few words as well.
Okay. Just me. Hi. I'm Sarah McGowan. I'm with OmniRide. I'm the transportation demand manager there. We are so happy to be partnering with the county on this effort bike to bike month, the month of May. Biking is a wonderful first and last mile option for accessing our OmniRides local free bus system. The bikes ride for free as well. We will be out this Friday at several of the county's pit stops for bike to work day. Hope to see you there. Again, thank you so much.
Alright. I'll give this to one of you for safe keeping. Alright. I'll give this to right. There you go.
All right, Rick O'Connor of your team for Building Safety Month can come on down. Are you here, Ricky? Alright. You got a pretty big crew. LaBelle, we're gonna have to see what you're gonna do later with fire, know, or you can be able to beat this.
Alright. Building safety month is an international campaign celebrated in May led by the International Code Council or ICC to raise awareness about the importance of safe, resilient, and sustainable buildings. The 2026 theme is built to last, focusing on modern building codes, fire safety, disaster preparedness, and sustainability. Building safety month is an opportunity to increase public awareness of the role of building safety and fire prevention officials. Local and state building departments and federal agencies play in protecting lives and property.
And our development services team has several educational initiatives lined up this month. May 1 and May 10, safe homes, strong communities, focus on simple actions homeowners can take to improve safety at home. Week number two, voices of the built environment spotlight building safety professionals and the roles they play in keeping communities safe. Week three from May encourages community preparedness and highlights how disaster resilient building codes protect people and property. And finally week four, communities without limits showcases the importance of accessibility in building construction and design.
That's a lot. All right. Therefore today the Prince William Board of County Supervisor hereby proclaims May 2026 as building safety month. Mister O'Connor, do would you like to offer remarks?
I think you said it all.
I'm sure you have something to add.
Alright. Sure.
I tried. Alright. Madam chair, members of the board, Ricky with development services. Proud to be a part of this team of heroes. Their expertise is the invisible foundation of Prince William County. Because of this team's vigilance, our residents sleep soundly, our businesses thrive in stable structures, and our visitors explore with with confidence. Thank you very much.
We'll take pictures at the end. All right. And then next we're going to have the specialty treatment document docket month. So if everyone associated with that can come on down. When one rises, we all do.
And few things make that clearer than treatment and diversion programs run by the courts. It's critical that our justice system recognizes that criminal behavior can be tied to deeper issues including substance abuse and mental health challenges. If we are to truly promote a safer and more equitable community. Treatment courts are becoming increasingly popular across the nation for this exact reason. It's not just because these documents save the county money on traditional court and prison expenditures, or that they provide other economic and public safety benefits.
They offer a compassionate alternative to incarceration that has shown to reach participants on an individual level and improve treatment outcomes that address the root causes of crime. The county's first treatment docket serving veterans began in 2019. And since then the county has expanded the services to a wider group of individuals dealing with substance use issues and soon behavioral health issues as well. Thanks to the program, we can see our community growing stronger and therefore today the Board of County Supervisors is proud to recognize this month as Specialty Treatment Docket Month. Would you like to offer some remarks?
Thank you, chair Jefferson. Members of the board, county leadership, thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I'm joining you today by members of the adult recovery court, veterans treatment docket, and the implementation team of the behavioral health docket. This month, we join communities across the nation in wreck reckon in recognizing specialty docket month as a time to honor the programs that provide treatment focused, accountability driven alternatives for individuals and the justice system. Here in Prince William County, our specialty dockets, especially veterans treatment docket, reflect our commitment to rehabilitation, public safety, and stronger community outcomes.
These programs change lives. They reduce recidivism, connect participants with vital services, and help restore stability for individuals and families and help restore yep. None of these would be possible without the dedication of the judges within our judicial system. Judges Irving, Coleman, Jarvis, Covington, and Miller, and our partners in the Commonwealth's attorney office, the public defender's office, the court clerks at all levels of court, the Prince William County bar, partners in community services, and I'd also like to thank the many service providers and also within our veteran treatment docket. We thank those veterans who volunteer their time to be veteran mentors, battle buddies for those within our docket.
While the docket coordinators sit in criminal justice services, the dockets can only happen when good leadership allows for and trusts and their employees to do the right things for the citizens of this great county. We would like to further recognize those who have given their support, and I would offer that they recognize themselves or stand if able to, the honorable Amy Ashworth from the Commonwealth's Attorney's Office for Prince William County, the honorable Jacqueline Smith of the county clerk or the clerk of the circuit court, miss Lennox, the public defender of Prince William County, mister Blakely, our DCXO for safe and secure community, mister Elijah Johnson, DCXO for health, well-being, and environmental sustainability, miss Thomas, director of community justice services. Miss Madron, director of community services. Doctor Yazeen, director of community safety. Miss Brown, director of communications engagement.
Miss Bachman, deputy director of community services, miss Hannah from the office of the executive secretary, members of the community criminal justice board, and members of the Prince William County Services Board. We thank you for your continued support for these efforts and for recognizing the positive impact of specialty dockets and what they have on our community. Thank you. I have some of
the safekeeping. Alright, and we'll take Thank you. You. Alright, Public Works Week. Everyone, come on down.
Katab, you and your team. All right. The week of May 17 to the twenty third is public works week, and it is a fantastic time to recognize the work of our dedicated county employees who are very literally keeping our community running. These dedicated people are engineers, managers, equipment operators, and employees at all levels of government. Pollock's works is more than just pipes and wires.
It is litter removal, landfill operations, code and safety inspections, sanitation management, and so much more that is all too easy to take for granted when things are working well. This is the kind of work that too often goes unseen and underappreciated, which is why we want to encourage everyone in the county to learn more about the importance of the various public programs, public works programs in their communities, such as dumpster days, composting and recycling. Therefore, today, the Board of County Supervisors hereby proclaims the week of May 17 to May 23 as public works week, we want to applaud the contributions of all of our workers. Thank you. Would you like to offer a few remarks?
Good afternoon, Madam Chair, members of the Board. Kitab Shmucha, Director of Public Works. We appreciate this proclamation. As the Director of Public Works, I'm very proud to recognize this week, May, as the National and Prince William County Public Works Week. And all the professionals, the dedicated professionals, you can see them, that take a good care of us, the health and safety and the infrastructure we have in the county, which is very important to our community.
Now with that, I also want to announce and want to invite you to our open house, our first open house for many years on the twentieth from 10:00 to one at the DSP Building, at the Development Services Building. I would like to welcome the community to come and meet our team and get to know more about what we do. Ask as many questions as you want. We'll be there to answer to the best we can. Thank you very much. Thank you, the
team. Thank you. All right. LaBelle, you may come back. And everyone associated with emergency medical services week.
Where's your crew? Okay. Oh, here they come. Thank you. I was gonna say. I wonder if some people, like There's nobody out there. Department rolls deep y'all. And you could come on down. We don't bite. We shower, you know. Okay. I heard something. Maybe some of the people did not. Well, I did. Alright.
May 17 to May 23 is emergency services medical week, which celebrates our EMS professionals and the intense life saving work that has touched so many across our community. Access to timely, high quality emergency medical services dramatically improves the survival and recovery of those who experience sudden illness or injury. And providing it requires a large force of both professionals and volunteers who can respond at a moment's notice no matter the hour of the day. We recognize everyone who makes this critical care possible, including not just the first responders who races the scene, but everyone who supports them before and after they arrive. Dispatchers, educators, administrators, pre hospital care providers, emergency medical personnel, and the trained members of the public who jump in to help their fellow man.
Therefore today, the Board of County Supervisors hereby proclaims May 2026 as emergency medical services week. Chief, would you like to offer any remarks?
Good morning. Thank or yeah. Good afternoon. Thank you. Tom Lobel. I have the honor of being your fire chief. Just very quickly, this celebration, involves unquestionably the wonderful volunteers and career staff that serve this community so well, including the person listening to the radio behind me. The and and so people often think about the fire department as fires, and that is saving the capital of our community. EMS is saving the potential capital of our community. Nothing else happens if people aren't taken care of.
It's 80% of what we do. It's incredibly important. And so I'm just thrilled to have just a small portion, of our team here with us. I particularly wanna point out, doctor Aman Shah. You were all kind enough to, include in the budget, a full term medical director. And so this is doctor Shah. He will be taking on that position. And we already have whole blood. We've saved numerous lives who would have bled out, unquestionably, and that's under doctor Shaw's care. So we have an incredible team. More to come. Really excited about where we're going, as a combination system. Thank you very much.
You. Alright. Chief Newsome, it's your turn. Let's see how many people you have. Come on. Where's your
team? All
right.
I'm not gonna take sides, I'm just saying one department has a really good social media team. Alright. Prince William County's law enforcement officers serve with professionalism into Oh, we got more people. Alright.
All three
veterans. All three veterans. All right. Prince William County's law enforcement officers serve with professionalism, integrity, and courage, working each day to protect the safety and well-being of residents across our community while adapting to the evolving needs and challenges of modern public safety. Through their commitment to service, these dedicated men and women help ensure Prince William County remains a safe, strong, and welcoming place to live, work, learn, and raise a family.
During National Police Week, we honor the unwavering dedication and sacrifice to the officers who serve our community. And we solemnly remember those who made the ultimate sacrifice in the line of duty. We also recognize the families, loved ones, and colleagues who stand beside them in service. We commend the Prince William County Police Department and all law enforcement agencies serving our community for their coordinated and continued efforts to build trust, strengthen community partnerships, and then hold the balance between public safety, justice, and individual freedoms. Therefore, today, the Prince William Board of County Supervisors hereby proclaims May 15 05/15/2026 is National Peace Officers Memorial Day, And the week of May 10 to 05/16/2026 is National Police Week in Prince William County.
Chief, would you like to offer a few remarks?
Good afternoon, chair Jefferson, members of the board. I'm Pete Neusham. The Chief of Police here in Prince William County. We have lost four officers in the line of duty here in Prince William County. Pete White, Mike Pennington, Chris Young, and Ashley Gwyndon. And as you all know, this is the ten year anniversary of Ashley losing her life. Many of you showed up for the tribute that we had a week ago, Monday. I want to thank you for that. I tell everyone I am absolutely convinced that those four officers are in a better place. But those four officers left a family of survivors and they left friends on the department when they left us.
And those folks suffered a sacrifice as well. The men and women who gave their lives is one thing. Those families who stand as survivors is why we have police week. When we meet with the survivors after a line of duty death, we tell them and we mean it when we say it, that we will never forget. And I have to say that the Board of County Supervisors has done the same by issuing this proclamation to recognize this as police week. So God bless you, and thank you for doing that.
I trust you will protect us until we take our photo. All right, National Prevention Week. If we can have community services come to the podium. Substance misuse and mental health challenges affect individuals and family in every community, including Prince William County. Prevention, education, early support, and access to resources play an important role in helping individuals lead healthier and safer lives.
National Prevention Week serves as an opportunity to raise awareness about substance use prevention and mental health while recognizing the work being done by community organizations, educators, healthcare professionals and advocates across our county. Prince William County remains committed to supporting efforts that connect residents with resources, encourage healthy lifestyles, and strengthen the overall well-being of our community. Therefore, today, the Prince William Board of County Supervisors hereby proclaims the week of May 10 to 05/16/2026 is National Prevention Week in Prince William County and encourages residents to promote awareness and prevention efforts throughout the year. Would you like to offer some remarks?
Good afternoon Madam Chair, Board of County Supervisors. It's good to see everyone. Mr. Shorter, thanks for having us. I'm Heather Martinson. I am the program manager for the wellness prevention program over at community services. I want to introduce the rest of the team. We've got Natalie Lozano and Danielle Winkworth, two of our wellness and prevention specialists. And Wendy Hunt, who is our wellness and prevention, supervisor. So I just wanted to give them, the credit.
I know a lot of you see my face year after year. They are the ones doing, the hard work day after day and what we call the heart work. Thank you for recognizing the power of prevention. As you can see, we're a team of four. We do not do our work by ourselves. We do them with our community partners, the members of the prevention coalition, and other agencies across this family of government. I do want to a few of you popped in. We are having popsicles with prevention this week. A few popped in today. We do have more popsicles over in the Aqua Con Room and just a display of everything we do all day every day.
Tomorrow, we will be over at Sudley North from twelve to three. Yes. Twelve to three. Tomorrow and Thursday, we are over at the recovery hub at Worth Avenue from one to four. So if you have anyone it's open to anyone. But if anyone wants to pop in for a popsicle, learn more about what we do and why we do it every day, and just say hello, we invite you all to do that. So thank you so much.
Thank you. Thank you. Alright. I believe Rabbi Shmueli is here and everyone with Jewish American Heritage Month. And twenty twenty six Jewish American Heritage Month focuses on celebrating the inspiring history and vibrant living culture of Jewish Americans.
The 2026 celebration highlights true, joyful, and powerful stories of Jewish life in America while countering antisemitism through education and recognizing two hundred fifty years of Jewish contributions to American independence. Now two hundred fifty years is a very long time, but the first group of Jews arrived in New Amsterdam in 1654, well before the declaration of independence. The American Jewish community has grown to 7,500,000 people representing a price 2% of The US Population Day today, including Prince William County's 9,000 Jewish residents. Prince William County is the most diverse county in the Commonwealth of Virginia, and it is important that we celebrate the different cultures and faiths that contribute to
our
community. Therefore today, the Prince William Board of County Supervisors hereby proclaims the month as Jewish American Heritage Month, celebrates the many contributions of Jewish Americans since the colonial era, and encourages county residents to learn more about the history, culture, and accomplishments, and diversity of the American Jewish community. Rabbi, would you like to offer some remarks? Okay.
So just wanna recognize who's here. I'm rabbi Shmueli. We're coming out from the Chabad at the western end of the county. We have representatives from Ner Shalom on the Eastern end. We have also Vicky came all the way from J part of the JCRC in the federation representing the greater Jewish community of Northern Of Northern Virginia and Greater Washington. Also, community members which are here with us. I was told to keep it short. I see there's still a pile of proclamations, so I kept it to one paper. It's about size eight font and 40 paragraphs. Jewish story and the American story have been intertwined since the very beginning.
Long before the ink was dry in the declaration of independence, Jewish people arrived on these shores seeking one thing that that was denied to them for centuries, the freedom to simply be. Our history here hasn't always been easy. There were times when we've met shut doors and sometimes made to feel unwelcome, but the Jewish spirit is defined by resilience. And in the face of adversity, we didn't just survive, we built, we contributed, and we thrived. Our ancestors called America the Golden Medina, the golden country.
They saw it as a place founded on a radical idea that freedom and justice belong to all people endowed by our one shared creator. This deeply mirrors the Torah's most fundamental message that every human being is created in the divine image and possesses inherent dignity. From when the shot was heard around the world, until today, Jewish Americans have poured their sweat, talent, and values into the soil of this nation. We have worked alongside our neighbors to ensure the promise of freedom remains a reality for everybody. This year is a special is is uniquely special as we stand on the threshold of America's two hundred and fiftieth anniversary.
My hope is that the bond between this country and the Jewish community continues to grow stronger, that America always be a place where we don't merely tolerate differences, but celebrate the unique light each community brings to our shared story. So thank you for this recognition. We're proud to call this country and Prince William County our home, and we have the next generation here with us. And we pray that America continues to uphold its core values of faith, freedom, and justice for the next two hundred and fifty years and beyond. Thank you.
You've got your hands. All right, next group is ALS awareness month. Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis or ALS, also known as Lou Gehrig's disease, is a progressive fatal neurodegenerative disease in which a person's brain loses connection with their muscles, slowly reducing a person's ability to walk, talk, eat, and eventually breathe. ALS awareness month provides an opportunity to increase public awareness of the dire circumstances of people living with ALS, acknowledge the terrible impact it has on them and their families, and to support research to eradicate this relentless disease. Through awareness campaigns, fundraising events, and community initiatives, ALS month inspires people to unite in compassion, advocacy, and hope for those impacted by the disease.
Therefore, today, the Prince William Board of County Supervisors hereby proclaims the month of May 2026 as ALS Awareness Month and calls upon all Prince William County residents to join in supporting ALS research and standing in solidarity with those affected by it. Would you like to offer us some remarks?
Thank you.
Thank you Chair Jefferson and to the Board. I just wanted to express my sincere thanks to you for this proclamation of May as ALS awareness month. My name is Karen Koenig and I'm a lifelong Virginia resident. I'm a friend of someone that was lost to ALS Lou Gehrig's disease. He was also a lifelong Virginia resident and a father. And I really thank you for spreading awareness of this horrible disease and for supporting families and loved ones of those who have been affected. Thank you very much.
Thank you for coming down, Mr. Gordy. All right. Jackie Smith and everyone associated with Law Day, please come on down.
While the clerk is making her way down, I I I have to say that, two Friday evenings ago, we celebrated a law day art competition, that was sponsored by by Jackie and her team, and it was absolutely incredible to see the the the talent of our young people and their interpretation of the idea of rule of law in America. So thanks again for for doing that. Law Day observed annually on May 1 is a celebration of the rule of law and its importance in protecting freedom, justice, and democracy. Established in The United States in 1958, Law Day encourages citizens to reflect on the role of laws and the constitution in shaping society and safeguarding individual rights. The day is often marked by educational programs, community events, and discussions that promote civic responsibility, equality, and respect for the legal system.
On 05/01/2026, circuit clerk, clerk Jacqueline c Smith hosted her sixth annual Law Day Art Contest ceremony to recognize students whose artwork reflects their understanding of the rule of law and its role in shaping the American experience. We appreciate her annual efforts to showcase how important this day is and to educate our students on its importance. Today, the Prince William Board of County Supervisors hereby proclaims 05/01/2026 as law day in Prince William County and urges all residents observe this day by promoting understanding of the rule of law and supporting the rights, freedoms, and opportunities that allow the pursuit and fulfillment of the American dream.
Thank you, supervisor Gordy, chair Jefferson, and members of the board, for your continued support of the circuit court clerk's office and the services we provide to our shared constituents every day. This year's Law Day Art Contest was the largest we've had in the six years we've been doing it. We had more than 100 art submissions following the theme, the rule of law and the American dream. And if you find yourself needing a pick me up, I encourage you to visit the display that we have in partnership with Prince William County Libraries. All of the artwork will be on display until the May at Central Library. I encourage you to take a visit. It's really inspiring. Thank you again.
All right. Supervisor Vega and everyone associated with National Skilled Nursing Care Week, please come on down.
Skilled nursing care centers play a vital role in supporting individuals recovering from illness or injury, as well as residents requiring ongoing long term care helping ensure dignity, safety, and quality of life. Nurses, caregivers, therapists, and interdisciplinary care teams provide compassionate, high quality care each day to some of our community's most vulnerable residents and their families. Prince William County recognizes and appreciates the dedication, professionalism, and service of skilled nursing care staff and volunteers who work tirelessly to support the health and well-being of others. Therefore, the Prince William Board of County Supervisors hereby proclaims May 2026 as National Skilled Nursing Care Week in Prince William County and encourages residents to recognize the vital contributions of skilled nursing care professionals throughout our community.
Good afternoon and thank you chair Jefferson. My name is Terren Gannon, administrator at Manassas Health and Rehab Center, joined by our fabulous activities director, Joanne Santa Maria. Thank you to the board of supervisors for the recognition of National Skilled Nursing Care Week. Most importantly, thank you to supervisor Vega for their con the continued partnership and frequent visits to our center. Enhancing the quality of life for our residents is what we strive to do in each and every interaction every day, and you do just this in each interaction you have with our residents on all of your visits.
Nursing home week is a busy and fun time celebrated across our profession to recognize and celebrate who show up every single day with skill, heart, and a genuine commitment to our residents and their care. This year's theme, Moments in Bloom, says it beautifully. It's the everyday acts of compassion, big and small, that grow into something meaningful for residents, families, and people that care for them. Thank you for having Manassas Health and Rehab Center here with you all today.
All right, and then World Hunger Day. Everyone associated with World Hunger Day, please come forward. According to the United States Department of Agriculture, millions of Americans, including millions of children, continue to experience food insecurity, highlighting the urgent need for continued action and community support. The Capital Area Food Bank estimates that in 2025, 43% of Prince William County household households experience food insecurity. Prince William County is grateful for the organizations, volunteers, food pantries, faith communities, and service providers who dedicate their time and resources to supporting residents experiencing food insecurity.
Their work not only helps provide meals to families in need, but it also strengthens the health, dignity, and well-being of our entire community. Therefore, today, the Prince William Board of County Supervisors hereby proclaims May 20 I'm sorry. 05/28/2026 is World Hunger Day and encourages residents to support efforts to combat hunger and build a more food secure community. Would you like to offer some remarks?
Thank you Chair Jefferson and the Board. My name is Doctor. Julia Biggins, the Chair of the Board of Directors of Northern Virginia Food Rescue and with me today we have our warehouse manager Anthony Brent, our partners relation manager Alexa Anderson and a fellow board member Mickey Ajiman. I would like to thank the board and the chair for presenting Northern Virginia Food Rescue with the annual hunger day proclamation. As I'm sure you're aware, food insecurity affects all aspects of one's life.
If one does not know where their next meal is coming from, everything else becomes more challenging. Students who are hungry are more likely to struggle with concentration, attendance, and academic outcomes, and this affects their long term opportunities. Rising food prices and stagnant wage growth force families to choose between food, rent, healthcare and transportation thus deepening the economic instability in the area. As chair Jefferson just mentioned, the issue of food insecurity remains exceptionally challenging in our own backyard. Prince William County ranks second highest in the DMV with nearly 43% of our residents identifying as food insecure.
This marks a sharp increase from prior years and highlights the severity of the issue locally. Food insecurity here in Prince William County is higher than in neighboring Northern Virginia jurisdictions like Fairfax County, which is at about 27%, and Arlington at about 22%, indicating a particularly acute local challenge. Northern Virginia Food Rescue's mission is to respond to the disconnect between wasting up to 40% of our food while one in six of our residents go hungry. Weekly, we serve a 130 local pantries, churches, schools, community centers, and senior centers senior centers that in turn feed over 7,000 individuals. Northern Virginia Food Rescue works to bring healthy options to the table for families in need.
We are committed to helping break the line between poverty and poor health. Rather than being sent to a landfill, rescued food is used to create nutritious meals for some of the region's food insecure residents. In closing, despite not finding the words food insecurity, health, or nutrition in the 2025, 20 '8 county strategic plan, I hope that food insecurity of its residents remains a priority for this Food insecurity in Prince William County is both a symptom and a cause of broader community challenges. Addressing this issue requires both immediate action to feed families today and long term investments in food access, economic security and equitable opportunity for all residents. Thank you.
All right and Osborne Park High School girls basketball team they will be here for our 07:00 meeting so I'm gonna set this aside and give this to the clerk. Everyone else, if you can line up outside, we'll take photos, and we will take a roughly fifteen minute ish break. I say fifteen minute ish because I wanna get all the photos done, we'll hopefully come back shortly. So we're in recess. Pull in the back if you can find a seat.
We've got a few seats left. So we are now going on to agenda number five, item number five, and that is the consent agenda. I want to see if there's anything anyone on the dais wanted to pull off. Let's see. Supervisor Bodhi?
Yeah. Thank you, madam chair. I just wanted to ask a question for item five gs as in green.
Five gs as in green, Rick Konisales?
Hi, Rick. Good. Good afternoon. Just very quickly, five gs, that doesn't confirm us for a set alignment for the bridge, does it? It's just sort of standard to do agreements for funding and work?
I'm sorry. Yeah, was looking at the wrong item, sir. Madam Chair, members of the board, Rick Canizalis, your Director of Transportation. We're talking about item five Gs, which is the pedestrian bridge over Route 1, correct? And the question sir?
Is does that lock us into a configuration or is this just more of a procedural thing?
This is actually locking us into the agreement with VITA to receive the funds necessary to continue the thing to continue with the project. We are already locked into a design. The design is about to be turned in for 100% completion. We are trying to get the right of way completed on this project right now, which we have already we're already in an agreement with the right of way needs that we're going to have. So we're actually moving hopefully in June to a in June, we're hopefully moving to a I'm sorry, to a bid document so we can bid this out construction started, either late this summer or early next fall. Understood.
Supervisor Bailey, do you have anything you would like
to I do. Item five. No, please.
Hold on. I'm sorry. I have the screen is working, and I see people are in queue. So she was in queue first.
Am I good, manager? You're good. Thank you. Item 5E, I'd like to pull it please.
You said 5E. All right. Supervisor LeCroy.
I heard you the other day at the OmniRide and you wanted to merge the VRE with that pedestrian pass that we just talked about. We're not I'm not in agreement with that at all and I'll tell you why. Because the Parks and Recs and Belmont Bay and anybody who's using that area and Belmont Bay is that area right there. We want to be able to ride our bikes over. A lot of them do.
Same with the Parks And Recs. And that's what it would do instead of going all the way up the VRE and that tower and then bring it over. That means that it's just going to be more for the VRE and for people that are passengers on the VRE. So we are strongly against what you suggested. I just was too new to the OmniRide to question that when you mentioned it before. But we would oppose it. And we like the plan that the staff has written out for multiple reasons.
So I just want to understand for do you want to pull five gs? No.
No. I'd like it to stay as Okay. It
Thank you. So what I would like to do is I'd like to get a motion for five d five a through five d as in dog, five f through five b.
So moved, madam chair.
Second. It's been moved and properly seconded. Any discussion on those items? Supervisor Gordy.
Thank you, Madam Chair. On item 5J, it's a public hearing to request the Virginia Department of Transportation and the Commonwealth Transportation Board to consider restricting through traffic on Lexington Valley Drive. As you know, we just extended University Drive from Sudley Manor through the neighborhoods over there. And since then, we've had a significant increase in truck traffic and has presented a lot of dangerous situations for the residents there and for kids who are waiting for buses. So I really appreciate our transportation department for working to help us get to this point and getting this public hearing. And again just really appreciate all the hard work that's gone into that. Thanks.
All right, first of all for folks in the back if you can we have a few seats if you can take a seat. Supervisor Boddy.
Thank you, madam chair. Just quickly on item five in Nancy. Grant application potential matching funds to advance traffic safety initiatives throughout the county. Wanted to thank Rick and his team and Richard Wyman who I just saw walk in. I know that in the last few years we've been really leaning into traffic safety also with the comprehensive traffic safety action plan. Really wanted to appreciate Rick and his team and Richard and their team for continuing to pursue funds to continue implementing those traffic safety measures. Thank you madam chair.
Before I go to supervisor Bayley, supervisor Vega?
Thank you, madam chair. I have a question for chief on item 5W.
Good afternoon. Captain Heather McLean on behalf of Chief Mission.
Madam chair, point of order. When you made the motion, you asked for, through five v Okay. Instead of through five y.
Alright.
Should we change the motion to ensure that
we Let's carry amend the motion. Sorry. I didn't get to the last. So need a motion for five, I apologize, supervisor Vega. We will allow you to ask your question shortly. Five a through five d, five f through five Y.
So move.
If supervisor Stewart is good with just amending his motion, you can go with the original maker.
I am.
Thank you. I'm sorry, give me one second. So, supervisor Vega requested that I give her a moment. I'll go to supervisor Bailey. You guys can don't go too far. Supervisor Bailey?
Don't go far. I just wanted to just comment and thank Mr. Seth Hindler Voss and his team for what has been a two and a half year project. It is finally coming to fruition. And so, Seth, you and everyone on the team, you so much for the Vernal Heights project. It'll make for more well-being and healthiness in my district and for the community. So, thank you.
All right. Thank you so much. I'm so sorry. Supervisor Baker?
Madam Chair, I apologize. Withdraw my question and get with chief Nuschum and ask him directly. Thank you, Heather.
All right, thank you so very much. All right, I don't see anyone else in queue so let's go ahead and take our votes.
Vote unanimous.
You so very much. Five E, supervisor Bailey.
Thank you very much, madam chair. I'd like to, I pulled this item because I will not be supporting it on the agenda. A matter of process for me and setting the precedence for persons who had signed up for public comment time and and disappeared and was not able to give public comment time, but has an opportunity to come today or any other day to give comments on this. County staff made a decision without any consultation with my office in reference to this, and it's kind of disheartening in terms of the collaboration that we usually build in going forward. But anyone can come and give their public comment time during a public board hearing.
And so this project will the board, the planning commission voted unanimously to pass this project so it could go forward for the community. The community wants it, and so I will not be supporting this project, item 5E.
All right, can someone please? Sure.
Shall we make a motion?
I was going to ask a motion to move it forward. I mean, don't know if you have anything else you want to add or you're going to do a motion to deny it.
It's a motion to deny.
All right, you can go ahead
and Not deny.
I'm sorry.
Madam Chair,
members of the board, at the Planning Commission, it's my understanding that a person signed up to speak during the public hearing. His name was not called. The Planning commission went forward on the item, and he said, I'm here. They allowed him to speak during the public comment time afterwards. However, because he was not able to speak during the public hearing, there there could be a deficiency alleged in it, and that's why staff worked to put the resolution before the board. I apologize if we all did not coordinate with you, ma'am, on that. But because of the procedural defect, the recommendation is this go back to the Planning Commission to allow for a proper public hearing to be advertised and held.
So what does that mean in terms of timing and moving the project forward?
I'm not sure how soon planning can advertise That's
a question that I have.
Planning Commission.
Supervisor Bailey, I do apologize for us not coordinating with you on this. This has been a long conversation, and I apologize for not reaching out to you, beforehand. Please tell
me your name and who you are.
I am Mike Modesto, senior planner with, land use in the planning This case, we have already organized so that it will have the quickest turnaround possible by going to planning commission on May 20. With that, then it will go to board on June 23. All of the staff reports have been written and edited. Unfortunately, originally had been scheduled to go today at board to be heard on the consolidated agenda. However, with many discussions among staff, it was seen as potentially a legal issue later on, especially considering the content of the public comment.
And so Oh. This is something that we believe would be best to be sent back so that if that person would like to make the comment again, it is heard and considered in the decision of recommendation by planning commission.
And have we had have we circled back with
Yes. So I have communicated with that, person consistently for ever since February 11 when this was first heard on at Planning Commission. We've had very many conversations on both sides. Yes. So that has been discussed. Discussed. There There was was a a question question of of easement easement access. Access.
Okay. And and the timeline again, you said?
So this is scheduled to go back to planning commission on May 20 and board on June 23. So that is the earliest slip we could possibly do. As now, it's not on the agenda for today for consolidated. It would have to be rescheduled for board if this was denied. And so that would still push back the the date of being heard, probably around to June 23 still.
Okay. So the improper word is deny. I don't wanna deny it. But I do want to bring resolution, make sure that the citizen is heard Mhmm. Respected, and the voice is heard, you know. And I just need for you to get with my office, please. Madam Chair, I will not remove it as such. I can vote for this, but I'm expecting it to come back, coordinate with my office to make sure that there's clear understanding with the citizen in terms of what their concerns are.
Of course. I will definitely reach out, as soon as I can.
Okay. So the recommendation is to remand for those reasons?
Yes.
Okay. Would you like to go ahead and move
it forward? I would. In that case, I move for approval of this 5E. Second.
All right. Been moved, properly seconded. Any other discussion? All right. Seeing none, let's go ahead and take our votes.
Vote unanimous.
All right thank you very much. We are on to agenda item number six and then it's public comment time. I am going to call people up in groups of five And then when we're finished with them, I will move on to supervisor Angry. For remote public comment time first, I would like to welcome Hilda Bargue. She is the former Woodbridge supervisor. After her will be Kristen Gleason, then Susanna Machado, Jill Browning, and Jeff Cahill. So if we can start with Hildebarg. Actually, Joe, could you give her the microphone? Can you just pull it off and give it to her if that's easier?
I'm just gonna sit in this chair. Thank you madam chair.
If you can sorry madam. If you can bring it a little closer to your mouth and again everyone please state your name even though I just said it and where the Magisterial District where you generally reside. We need it for the record. Thank you.
My name is Hilda Barg and I am speaking today to you on behalf of Triangle Baptist Church. I really shouldn't have to be here today, and I feel really I feel almost embarrassed. As most of you know, Triangle Baptist Church has agreed to sign a portion of its to sell a portion of its property to Elm Street. The development required the subdivision of the church property. When it went for the Planning Commission review, we got the surprise that there had to be an amendment to two of the special use permits.
Number one, the church daycare playground. The playground has been where it currently is forever. The playground, there was nothing to amend because the playground is where it always was, in the same place. The second SUP amendment that was required was the cell tower. The cell tower is not moving.
Nothing is moving except the boundary because of the sub the change came because of the subdivision. These are things that could easily have been clarified with a stroke of a pen. Our attorney has tried very hard to speak to the Planning Commission to let them know we could resolve this with administrative stroke of a pen, but we have been refused. We were promised our church was promised a meeting in June, but we cannot get a date in June. Our attorney is not here today because he had a conflict that could not be changed.
This is pretty embarrassing. This seems like a useless bureaucracy to me. This is something that I shouldn't be here and you shouldn't have to listen to. Our church has spent thousands of dollars. All we need is a subdivision deed approved.
I would also like to stress to the board, in no way am I here speaking on anything other than our church deed approval. We're not connected in any way to the rezoning of Elm Street. I'm here today asking you for your help. Our church has had a burden, a big burden, and you are our last result.
Ma'am, my team will follow-up with you. Thank you. Next speaker will be Kristen Gleason.
Madam chair and members of the board, my name is Kristen Gleason. I'm the chief deputy clerk of the circuit court, and I'm a resident of the Atomic District. I am here today to respectfully request that you reconsider resolution two six dash two four six approved at your last meeting. As it stands, this decision would significantly disrupt our operations and diminish the level of service we provide to the residents of the Prince William County, Manassas, and Manassas Park. It would impact key staff in critical roles, eliminate or relocate important customer service points, increase wait times for residents, and create an operational layout that hinders coordinated work our office performs each day on behalf of county and city residents.
It has been an honor to serve the residents of Prince William County for nearly nine years. During that time, I've witnessed firsthand the unwavering dedication of the clerk's office staff to public service. Their work ensures smooth operation of criminal and civil court proceedings, concealed handgun permits, land records, probate services, and many other essential functions. These services directly support residents and multiple county agencies, including those responsible for public safety. Our office has successfully navigated difficult challenges before, particularly during COVID nineteen pandemic.
Despite constant changes and circumstances beyond our control, we remain steadfast in our commitment to serving the public. The situation we face today, however, is different. It is the result of a decision with significant and far reaching consequences, one that could affect many residents in Prince William County and one that can still be reconsidered. For the benefit of our residents, the quality of service that we provide, and the stability of our local justice system, I respectfully urge you to reconsider this resolution. Before this resolution was introduced, FFM, informed by our input, had already developed a solution that aligns with the county's goals, delivers meaningful taxpayer savings, protects the critical services we provide, all while preserving suitable workspace for our staff.
I strongly encourage the Board to move forward with this balanced and previously recommended solution. Thank you for your time, consideration, and continued support of the essential services we provide to our community.
Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Madam Chair and members of the board, my name is Susana Machado. I am a resident of the Coles District and the court manager for the Circuit Court Clerk's Office. On 04/21/2026, the board approved resolution number 26Dash246. I am respectfully asking the board to reconsider said resolution. The clerk's office is currently structured to provide constituents with a single point of contact for their service needs.
Relocating certain offices would create significant hardship for many residents who may then be required to travel between multiple locations to complete necessary services. For many constituents, taking time away from work is already difficult. Requiring visits to separate locations could mean additional time away from their jobs and families to complete court related matters. All divisions within the clerk's office are connected in one way or another. Separating these divisions would create operational difficulties for deputy clerks and unnecessary burdens for the public.
For example, the probate and civil division work closely together. Individuals often leave court needing copies of court orders before attending probate appointments. In many cases, they must continue filing documents related to their probate matters throughout the process. Currently, because these offices are located on the same floor, these services can be complete completed efficiently and without added stress. The demographic that will be most greatly impacted will be the elderly citizens of Prince William County who often go to probate after the death of a family member.
Relocating this division would make an already difficult process even harder for grieving families. Furthermore, as court manager, I am deeply concerned about the impact relocating courtroom clerks would have on critical court operations. Courtroom clerks handle time sensitive duties required by statute, many of which demand complete focus and immediate attention. These clerks are responsible for preparing and signing arrest documents and jail cards to determine whether defendants remain in custody or are released. Interruptions and logistic inefficiencies increase the likelihood of mistakes that could affect defendants, their families, law enforcement, the residents of Prince William County.
I could provide many additional examples, but the allotted three minutes does not allow enough time to fully explain the operational impact this decision has. In closing, as a Prince William County resident for more than twenty one years, it concerns me greatly that taxpayer dollars may be spent on a project expected to cost millions of dollars when a more cost effective rec effective recommendation was presented on 04/06/2026. That recommendation would meet the needs of judicial center center at an estimated cost of only $500,000 and would not require relocating offices or staff. Despite being the most financially responsible responsible option, it was not approved. I respectfully ask the board to reconsider this recommendation as it is the most cost effective solution for the taxpayers of Prince William County while preserving the efficiency and accessibility of clerk's office services.
Thank you.
Thank you. Next speaker please.
Good afternoon chair Jefferson, vice chair angry and members of the board. My name is Jill Browning from the Gainesville District. I'm here to talk about item 10 b on the agenda which is the CPA twenty twenty six dash three. I am one of the original homeowners and residents of the Cat Harpen Valley Estates. I'm here today on behalf of all the homeowners and residents who strongly support initiating our proposed CPA. First, thank you to those who have met with us, and thank you for your consideration. This is not a debate about growth versus no growth. Growth is here. The real question is whether Prince William County chooses planned growth or inefficient sprawl. The corridor where the project is planned has already fundamentally changed.
To the South of us are the Regency, Heritage Hunt, the soon to be developed Smith Farm, and nearby Piedmont, all of which were once farmland before becoming thriving suburban residential communities. Several of these communities, including Piedmont, Heritage Hunt, and the Regency, are gated communities with extensive amenities and have become highly desirable places to live in the county. To the West of us is Oak Valley, another suburban residential community. To the East is the QTS Digital Gateway campus. There is nothing agricultural or rural about this corridor.
And really does anyone today look at the Regency or Heritage Hunt or Piedmont and regret that they became the beautiful and thriving suburban communities that they are. Even look at Dominion Valley, another thriving community that used to be farmland. These neighborhoods are part of what makes Prince William County a desirable place to live. We can't just close the door behind us and deny future residents the opportunity to live in a thriving suburban community. Yet, the Planning Commission is recommending its own plan, which is an extremely land consumptive housing pattern and calling it conservation.
All of us agree there's a great need for new housing, but the Planning Commission's plan requires more than double the acreage to achieve the same goal. That is not anti sprawl planning. Moreover, the Commissioner's plan was hatched behind closed doors and sprung on us, the landowners, without consulting us or giving us any advance notice whatsoever. Further, our own supervisor, Stuart, refused to meet with us, the homeowners in his district, to discuss our CPA. Our proposed CPA creates the type of planned residential community that people increasingly want to live in, one with amenities, shared community spaces, recreational opportunities, and trails.
We, the landowners, should not be forced to bear the burden of maintaining a rural character that has already been transformed. The environmental arguments that planning put forward also do not withstand scrutiny. The surrounding communities that I've identified, they're all on public water and sewer. Our existing 10 acre lots are on septic system and wells. These systems are aging and over time, things can fail or leak, creating environmental risks.
The proposed development, moreover, is projected to generate approximately 15,000,000 in tax revenue compared to the approximately 240,000 it generates today. I wanna ask all of my residents that are here today to support, to stand up and show their support for the CPA, and thank you again for your service and for your consideration of this project.
Alright. Next speaker, please.
Hello, ladies and gentlemen of the I'm proud to speak to you tonight. I'm here also to I would start with reiterating everything Jill Browning just said. I won't go through all that. She's a good speaker and has a lot of experience in that. My name is Jeff Cahall. I'm a longtime resident of Prince William County, over thirty years. Moved here from Alexandria. Wanted to raise my family here. I love this county. I've been before this board before at times past to get things done by the federal government, and I've had help by both sides of the aisle, Republicans and Democrats.
I know that everybody that's elected on this board at one time has said Prince William County needs more affordable housing, and I agree with that. This project that we've just spoken about will help that. I don't see how anybody here can vote against it. It should go forward as planned. Thank you very much. Hope you have a nice day.
All right. Before I call the next speaker, I want to make sure I have the next line up. I have Joe Singleton, Kim Bacamani, Bishika Ramos Carrera, Glen Cannon, Dan Colos. That's all of you. And if you're not in queue to speak, if I didn't call your name, I'd appreciate if you could please have a seat.
You, chair. You, supervisors.
Please adjust the mic because we cannot hear you. You're tall.
Thank you, chair. Thank you, supervisors. Jill's a hard act to follow. She pretty much summed everything up. I've been a resident of Cat Harbin Valley since 2003. And I think our neighborhood is is ready for re gentrification. I mean, most of us have been in there since day one. We raised our kids, and we're all getting to the point where we're ready to move on. And all we keep hearing about is is housing. We need housing.
We need housing. Well, we don't just need housing in Western Prince William County. We need affordable housing. And there's not a lot of affordable housing because most of the homes are on large acreage. So I'm here to ask that the supervisors take a hard look at our plan, which was laid out in detail, and approve our comprehensive plan amendment. So thank you very much.
And just quickly say your full name and where you generally reside.
My name is Joe Singleton, and I live in Catarpon Valley.
Gainesville District. Thank you. Alright. Next Thank
you.
Good afternoon, madam chair and members of the board. My name is Kimberly Bokampani, and I live in the Brentsville District. I'm a senior deputy clerk in the courtroom support division of the Prince William County circuit court clerk's office. I'm here to ask the board to reconsider resolution number 26Dash246. The resolution as written fails to provide concrete guarantees that there will be no disruption in services during and after the construction.
It is my understanding that the costs are undefined undefined at this point, but are upwards of $3,400,000. This seems an unnecessary expense when the clerk of the circuit court has offered a solution that displaces no staff, interrupts no services at any point, and costs approximately $500,000. Resolution twenty six dash two forty six as written eliminates my office space effective yesterday, 05/11/2026 or as soon thereafter as practical with no suitable and adequate plan in place for where my workplace is to be relocated. In addition to the job responsibilities which will be described by other clerks, the courtroom support division prepares and processes critical documents which ensure the safety of the residents of Prince William County. As a resident of Prince William County, I would like to believe that local law enforcement has the information to help keep me safe.
With resolution number 26Dash246, there will be a delay in processing high risk orders due to unsuitable workspaces. These high risk orders include protective orders and substantial risk orders, which prohibit the subject of the substantial risk order from purchasing, possessing, or transporting a firearm for the duration of the order. They involve not only the preparing and processing of the orders, but also reaching out to other law enforcement agencies to ensure these agencies are provided with the information. An additional form, the SP two thirty seven, not ifies state police that people found to be incompetent or ineligible to purchase firearms. Another delay may come in the processing of criminal and DNA records, which must be timely processed as soon as the criminal cases are resolved through conviction, dismissal, or other means to ensure accurate database records.
This processing provides the information to provide criminal history reports to law enforcement, prosecutors, and other agencies. Without this untimely member of the public will have delays in applying for expungements. Also, without a suitable workspace, these critical documents cannot be processed in a timely manner, which directly impacts the citizens of Prince William County. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter, and I ask that the board reconsider resolution 26 dash two forty six as it is too vague, overly expensive, and fails to ensure no disruption of services to the resident of Prince William County.
Alright. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Good afternoon, madam chair and members of the board. My name is Brushenka Ramos Carrera, and I'm a resident of the Gainesville District. I currently serve as a lead deputy court clerk in the courtroom support division of the Prince William County Circuit Court. I am here today to respectfully ask the board to reconsider resolution number 26Dash246. The proposed resolution does not provide adequate or functional space for the courtroom support division and would create operational issues that impact both court operations and the public we serve.
Part of my responsibilities is to process appeals to the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court of Virginia. This process requires special software that is installed on a designated workstation and cannot simply be transferred from computer to computer as needed. The work requires a quiet suitable workspace that allows for a high level of focus and attention to detail. Every page filed within a case must be individually reviewed and verified for accuracy and any discrepancies within the record must be identified and corrected before submission. Some appeals contain well over 70,000 pages, all of which must meet the standards and requirements set by the appellate courts.
In addition, I must prepare and organize digital media exhibits that are physically mailed to both courts as part of the appellate process. Because appeals often involve strict deadlines and immediate issues requiring coordination, I also need to remain reachable. Without an adequate workspace, dedicated equipment, and reliable communication access, the timely and accurate processing of appeals could be significantly impacted, potentially affecting critical deadlines. Inquiries from interagency departments often involve time sensitive matters. For example, while clerks still actively in court, the adult detention center may contact us with questions or concerns involving a jail card.
These issues can directly impact whether a defendant is held longer or potentially released earlier than intended. The recalling of a KPIS also requires urgent action. If not recalled promptly, it could result in a person being wrongfully arrested affecting that individual's rights. These are not minor administrative matters. They involve real legal consequences.
These responsibilities do not stop simply because jury proceedings are taking place. The court continues to function in many other capacities every single day. Removing a suitable workspace risks slowing down services, disrupting communication, and creating avoidable delays that affect not only court proceedings, but the public we serve. I respectfully ask this board to reconsider resolution number 26Dash246. Thank you for your time.
Thank you. And did I'm sorry. Did you give me your magisterial district?
Yes. I live in the Gainesville District.
Alright. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Good afternoon, madam chair and the members of the board. My name is Glenn Cannon, and I've been a deputy clerk for the Prince William County probate office and for the clerk for the past twenty five years. I'm a re also a resident of Prince William County, and I live in Woodbridge, Virginia. I'm here today to ask the board to reconsider number 26Dash246 on behalf of the clerk of the circuit court, my probate team, and the constituents of Prince William County in which we serve and will be the most affected by this resolution. If passed, this resolution will create unnecessary difficulties for our office to provide the best service to our customers and would cause extreme inconveniences to the citizens in an already difficult time and and a consuming a time consuming process.
There
are
just a few ways that the county citizens could here are just a few ways that county citizens could be affected by moving through with this resolution and moving the probate office out of the judicial center. Issues with the, issues with guardian and conservator court orders during the qualification phase cannot be addressed while being in a different location causing delays and possible cancellation of appointments for citizens. This would result in additional court appearances at the taxpayer's expense. One of our overwhelming concerns is our weekly docket in which incapacitate incapacitated citizens and their families attend hearings in the judicial center. This proposal resolution would now require them to inconveniently be transported after court from the judicial center to a separate location for the mandatory critical step of the qualification phase, adding unnecessary burdens to the families.
This essentially would affect an average of 20 to 30 families per month. With our growing senior citizen demographic in Prince William County, our office has seen an increase in assistance needed from senior the senior population. To provide the necessary service to them, the probate team works closely with the land records department, civil civil department, judges chambers, and the sheriff's office, which are all located inside the judicial center. Asking the elderly citizens who can sometimes be between the ages of 70 to 90 years old with limited mobility and other handicaps to travel back and forth between two different location feels irresponsible and neglectful to this demographic in which the probate office primarily serves. Safety regarding transferring money between locations, expenses and availability for the building of an office security, the need for daily access to circuit court archives, and not being able to have IT personnel or immediate assistance are just a few of the many additional concerns our probate department has with this proposed resolution.
In closing, having worked for the Prince William County probate off or Prince William County clerk's office for twenty five years under numerous clerks, we have always served to uphold the Prince William County vision. Our current clerk works relentlessly
Alright. To
Thank you, sir. Thank you. Before I next speaker, I wanna call up the next group. I have Del Pinnenbirch. I have well, first Dan Colores Colas. Dale, Margarita Moylan, John DePue, Curtis Porter. Sir, you may want to adjust the mic.
Yeah, it's a little low.
You can take it off, you can take it off too. Just swing up.
There we go. Good afternoon. My name is Daniel Colos.
I'm I'm
sorry. Bring it a little closer. We could barely hear you.
Okay.
That's why you might just take it off. Alright. You got it.
Good good good afternoon. My name is Daniel Colos. I've been a resident of Prince William County for the last twenty one years. I presently live in the Gainesville district. I'm one of the property owners at the Canterbury Valley Estates, and I'm seeking the county supervisor approval for the comprehensive plan plan amendment, the CPA twenty twenty six zero zero zero three.
I know a lot's been talked about. I think it's been well covered with concerns and and where we like to go forward as residents of Caterpillar and Valley States. One of the things that I have not heard about, but I've seen some work done on on Ketterpin Road. And I think it's been for traffic studies and and how it's gonna be able to handle the traffic that could develop from increased housing there. And currently, it works well.
And I'm not I'm I'm sure not everyone's familiar with Caterpillar Road, but it is probably about six miles of of winding two lane road, goes from 25 miles an hour at the bull run I'm sorry, at at the elementary school there, the middle school goes to 30 miles an hour, goes to 35, and it goes to 40. There are a couple of stretches except for during at the school when it's 25. One at the basically, the intersection of Heritage Farms Drive and Catapin Road I'm sorry. Heritage Farms Drive and Catapin Valley Drive. That's about a little more than a half a mile long, and it's a straightaway.
And so frustrated traffic sometimes tries to pass slower moving vehicles there, and it doesn't happen a lot, but it happens. What I would like to see whether this comprehensive plan goes forward or not is a traffic circle or one more traffic circle at, you know, traffic circle at that intersection or having a track traffic circle also at Caterpillar Road and Sudley, I think that would alleviate a lot of the concerns about the control of traffic that goes through that area. That's it.
All right. Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
My name is Dale Penenberg, a resident in Gainesville District, live in Caharpen Valley Estates, and I would like the Board to move forward the comprehensive plan amendment that was submitted and not supportive of the C RES-1C that was alternately submitted. And the primary reason is because of the need for housing in Prince William County. One home per two acres, which is what was proposed in the C RES-one, gets you out of a 300 acre lot, gets you 150 homes. It just doesn't get it done, okay? We need affordable housing in Prince William County.
My wife and I have raised six children in Prince William County, and I'd like for them, which more small business owners as well, so we're not going anywhere. We we our business is in Prince William County, but our six children can't afford to live there. So we need some type of affordable housing so that they have a chance to thrive and succeed. So that's why I'm here to ask you all to please support the comprehensive plan amendment that was submitted by Kat Harp and Valley Estates. I thank you for your time and appreciate your consideration.
Alright. Next speaker. I just wanna say to everyone who's speaking, he's Dale as a model. We heard him, it was clear, he said his name, his majesty district. Thank you, sir. Alright, next speaker.
Alright.
You may go.
Who goes next? Do you know who's on the list?
Either. It's actually, it's going to be Margarita and then John. I know you're a frequent flyer, all right. Let's just I'll talk back to follow.
My name is Margarita Moylan, and I live in the Gainesville district. We chose to move here twenty four years ago because we wanted to live in an area that maintained the rural character and Oak Valley specifically because it was surrounded by beautiful farmland and was close to the Manassas Battlefield. We felt this area was very protected and appreciated the land use that had been planned. We never thought that a development that was built after our neighborhood, Cat Harpin Valley Estates, would be rezoned. Some of our neighbors chose to relocate to Cat Harbin Valley because they wanted more land.
This was never a planned move in anticipation of generational wealth. These were homes that they wanted to live in. Much of this changed after the digital gateway project came through. The only reason homeowners contemplated selling was because they didn't wanna live next to the world's largest data center complex, and I don't blame them. They were subsequently approached by developers from the digital gateway, including mister Looney, who represents landowners and the Compass assemblage, to sign nondisclosure agreements which tied up their properties.
I do believe it is very premature for the county to make changes to anything in close proximity to the digital gateway given it is in the middle of a legal dispute where QTS has filed to overturn the lower court's rulings through an appeal to the Supreme Court. This has also brought investors from outside the county who have bought into an LLC that owns properties in Cat Harp and Valley Estates and are looking to capitalize on this land speculation. The courts have stayed the ruling as requested by the developers for the digital gateway. So why would the county make any changes until all legal proceedings have been exhausted? If this land designation is changed, it is simply a way for a developer to land bank this assemblage.
Let's also not lose sight of the issue that currently exists with Cat Harpin Road being a two lane country road that cannot handle any more traffic. Another development was already approved, and they've started clearing construction, which is the Smith Farm. For the life of me, I don't understand how even that project was approved without addressing the dangers that currently exist on Cat Harbin Road.
Madam chair, we Sorry.
We in recess. There is there may be a potential Fire. Fire. So I'm asking everyone to please orderly exit board chambers. Go outside. We will resume when everything is clear. I want to say that we left off with Margarita Moylan. She had forty seconds. If we can just restart the clock. I know you're not going take the whole time, but just to keep it procedurally accurate. And, Margarita, if you can just resume Okay. Your comments. Thank you.
Okay. I do believe that there needs to be more transparency and community outreach before the county makes any recommendations. As a realtor, I understand the need for more housing, especially affordable housing. A great example of smart planning where this has been addressed and makes a lot of sense is the reimagining of Sudley and Route 66 where the movie theater used to stand. The multiuse plan, which includes townhomes, condos, makes sense being close to Northern Virginia Community College and public transportation and jobs.
It will bring residents and small businesses to an otherwise unutilized area. As a representative principal and county, you should ask yourselves, are we a sense of place, or are we building a sense of investors who are ready to cash out and leave a mess behind? Please defer any votes or changes to the area until the Supreme Court rules on the appeal. Thank you.
Thank you. And before we get to the next speaker, I want to call up our next group. Curtis Porter, I didn't see you, but I'm calling you Kristen Molkren, Jay Molkren, Diane Jaeger, Elaine Schlossberg. Alright, sir, yes. I'm just calling the next group. I'm sorry, did you have a question?
Pardon me, didn't you didn't you call John to be quiet?
Yeah, you're gonna be next. I'm just calling him. You know, next group of people to be in queue. So, alright. You may proceed. John, you may proceed.
Good afternoon, madam chairman and members of the board.
Just the microphone please because we cannot hear you.
Good afternoon, madam chairman and members of the board. My name is John DePue. I am the chairman of the Prince William County Historical Commission and a resident of Coles District. We are statutorily charged with providing this commission information and guidance with respect to the preservation and maintenance of historic sites here in Prince William County. And I am here to do precisely that with respect to Bennett School.
At the outset, I've spent most of my adult life in courthouses, courtrooms, and judicial centers. So I am fully conversant and aware of the need for this county to improve its judicial centers and facilities. That, however, does not foreclose the preservation of historic Bennett School. In college and later in law school, I studied the Supreme Court's 05/14/1954 decision in Brown versus Board of Education. There, the court held that racial segregation in public schools is a badge of slavery and is therefore prohibited by the thirteenth amendment to The United States constitution.
I later taught that decision when I was an instructor of constitutional law at the United States Military Academy at West Point. But it wasn't until I got involved with the Bennett School that I realized for the first time that it took ten years for the public school system in Virginia and in Prince William County to be fully integrated and two more trips to the Supreme Court of the United States, the first of which the court said, you are to integrate schools in Virginia with all due deliberation. Ten years. That dream finally came to be realized in this county in 1965, where the school system was integrated for the first time. Where?
At Bennett School. So I implore you, when you consider revising the your judicial center, you incorporate in your scheme the preservation of Bennett School. What better symbol could there be to the maintenance of justice in this county than the Bennett School where it all happened? Thank you.
Thank you so very much. Next speaker, please.
My name is Diane Yeager. I live in the Gainesville District. I would ask the board to deny initiation of this comprehensive plan amendment for Catharpen Valley Estates. My husband and I have lived on Catharb And Road since 1988 when we purchased a six acre pop parcel from a much larger agricultural parcel of land. At that time, Prince William County required that we rezone that six acre parcel from a one to r five and then subdivide that six acre parcel into one six acre parcel, a process that began early in 1986 and took two years to complete.
With the exception of basic surveyor services to legally plot our parcel, we worked through the county requirements without assistance from attorneys or land development engineers. We have witnessed many changes to land use on Cat Harbin Road in the last thirty eight years. Some were desirable and others not so much. Yet the peace, privacy, and natural wooded ecological environment of our property has thankfully remained relatively unchanged. This proposed plan amendment of over 1,300 homes as well as the staff alternative of 500 homes occupying 292 agriculturally designated acres is profoundly out of sync with our local community.
The proposed density would so adversely affect the groundwater runoff, well purities, septic systems, ambient noise, intrusive nightlight hours, drinking waters for 800,000 people serviced by the Occoquan Reservoir, all not to mention the impact of an absurd addition of thousands of vehicles per day that would be traveling along a two lane country road. These cumulative effects on our rural Crescent community would substantially diminish the safety, well-being, and property values of our residents. The harm is incalculable. I believe the ambitious that the ambitions of these predatory developers would be seriously destructive to any rural community. Thank you for your time.
Thank you so very much. Next speaker please.
Good afternoon, madam chair and members of the board. It's nice to see a lot of you again. Thank you for taking the time to meet with us for those that did. And for the couple of you that we have not met with, my name is Kristen Mulcairn. I'm a resident of the Gainesville district, and I'm also a homeowner in Cat Harbin Valley.
And today, surprise, our CPA initiation is up for vote, and I wanna paint a picture to you guys of how we got to this point. About a year and a half ago, our neighborhood came together as a group and decided we wanted to sell our land and specifically focus on residential development. We end up partnering with NVR, and that has been a blessing. Right now, three fourths of us are original owners, which means we moved out here twenty two years ago. Our kids have left the homes, and next year, our development will have one elementary school student, one middle school, and zero high school age students.
And this set this trend is being seen throughout Gainesville and Haymarket. People are stuck in their starter homes because there are no homes to buy. This has prevented young families and young professionals from moving out to our area, and the end result is our schools are way under capacity. If you look at the school board's capital improvement plan, enrollment is declining. There's a cluster of about four elementary schools near of near us, three of which we've been zoned to in the past, and all are under capacity.
In two years, two of them will be at 5456% capacity. Bull Run Middle School in two years will be at 83% capacity. And what you need to understand of these schools have been at a 100% and above for so many years. The most alarming statistic is Battlefield High School. Today, it's close to 100% capacity.
In five years, it will be at 59% capacity. That is 900 open seats in that school. So NVR is proposing a development that will help address these issues. It's a combination of starter homes for young professionals and families, homes for more established families, and a 55 and older section. On behalf of Cat Harbin Valley, who we all stood up earlier, we're asking you to vote yes to the CPA submitted by the applicant, which is NVR, and allow the county to go through the proper studies so that NVR and planning can come up with a solution together.
Another thing I want to address is the conservation residential designation. From our perspective, staff is proposing a designation that was never discussed with us. We reached out to supervisor Stewart, and we wish we could have had a conversation from you so you understood where we were coming from. But staff is putting forward a recommend recommendation that is not economically viable for our community. The market value of our homes, the the I guess the deal becomes not a deal for us if you rezone our land to conservation residential.
So it seems like this is a backdoor attempt to block our project, and it's strange to us that planning is recommending the board to approve a project that's not economically viable to move forward.
Thank you. Time is up. Next speaker.
I don't want to do this thing and it's all bent over. Madam Chair, members of the Board, my name is Jay Mulcairn. I'm lucky husband of Krista Mulcairn. I've lived in Gainesville for twenty two years. We've raised two daughters there. Most of the points were covered for Catarp And Valley Estates. The one thing I wanna talk about was the rural designation. I don't if people have been there that actually made that designation. There's we have shopping centers five minutes from our house with Harris Teeter, bars, restaurants, all that kind of stuff. On that way, I think Jill Browning mentioned we passed three gated communities as an addition to two other communities.
I think there were farms in Oak Valley and Catarpin Valley before we moved in twenty five years ago or whatever. But right now, we have easy access to that. We also have two miles from Harris Teeter, which is right up the road. We have 25 restaurants or another town center, I guess it is, you call it. So that's just wanted to make that brief and short. Thank you.
Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Can I have Elmo please?
And while we're waiting, just want to let IT know it looks like everyone's screens are down right now.
So My name is Elena Schlossberg, and I live in the Gainesville district. And this was one of those fancy word things that Ashley Stutholm did for our fabulous Sweeney Barn event. And these are the things that we asked people who attended to tell us what are your concerns as residents of the county? And this is what they pointed to, loss of green space, sprawl. What you're hearing here today is actually sprawl.
And it's not about affordable housing. If we want to do affordable housing, you all have in front of you also Ashley's wonderful three r's, which replicates the comprehensive plan that exists today. And that's our guide to a sustainable future for everyone. So I wanna talk about this assemblage. So this is actually a map that was put together of all the letters that have gone out and also assemblages that have been put together.
And you can see Cat Harpin Valley Estates is right there. And if you'll notice, all those other pinks are other assemblages. This is chaos. The yellow is, of course, the terrible Dulles Cloud South. The gray is Digital Gateway, and that is the Manassas National Battlefield. This is not planning all these assemblages. You all are responsible for planning. Your job is to look at the comp plan and what was approved and say, does this fit? It is not about making sure people have more than you buy a home, you don't think that when you sell it, you're gonna move to The Bahamas and get a yacht. You think, you're gonna live comfortably, it'll be a nice investment.
So the point that I want to express to everyone, I know I sent you, first of all, that email I sent you, you didn't get till like one in the morning because I was up really long writing it. And I wanted to remind you of the responsibility of smart growth and why. This, look how special we are. You see all that pink? That's the Occoquan Basin.
That's our stewardship. We are responsible for ensuring that there's enough water for two two million people. Now, there's one thing that Anne Wheeler and I agreed on. You may find this shocking. It was when she said, well, look, you've already developed so much of the watershed, the overlays in the watershed. And I'm, I know. Look. Look at how much we have already developed. This is not the time to say, well, we've already screwed some up. Let's do more.
This is a time to reflect on the challenges we face now. And how we develop is critical to protecting our opportunities for ag, our opportunities for rural, our opportunities for real affordable housing. We have the magic now, but if you start approving all these assemblages, we will lose that opportunity, and we will be going backwards. So please, don't initiate the CPA. Do the right thing. Thank you.
Alright. Before our next speaker, let me call up our next group. We have Kevin Parker, Owen Mayer, Rachel Ellis, Freddie Hardin.
Patrick Harters, Gainesville district. Madam chair, supervisors, before I talk about what I really came to talk about, one thing I just wanna put before you is just a housekeeping. Other counties treat the citizens as honored guests and allow them to speak at the pulpit or the the podium. And I would ask to reconsider that we bring the citizens back up to the podium, just as a sign of respect. But I have heard each each and every one of you talk about smart growth, talk about wanting good development, talking about doing what's best in our communities, preserving open space, all the discussion points that we continually talk about.
We had an event at Sweeney Barn. This is what we discussed. I was recently listening to old supervisors meeting, and I listened to one with supervisor Bodie in May 2021, and he was wanting to fully fund the PDR program. That was five years ago, and we haven't done it yet. And the question is why do we want to do that? Why do we want to fund a PDR program? Why do we want to promote good development, reinvestment, reimagining areas, redevelopment? And how do we go about doing it? The way we go about doing it is very simple. You have to stop sprawl.
If you look at other municipalities, other cities, you go to Charlotte, you go to Atlanta, it's sprawl, it's bad development. When I ran for supervisor, I met with developers and I asked them. I said, how do we get good development? We don't need a sheet put on Cat Harpin next to Cat Harpin Valley and all this crappy development we get. We want good development. You get that through reinvestment. On the way in here, I drove through Manassas Park. And if any of you drove through Manassas Park fifteen years ago, it wasn't a nice area. And now they've done some redevelopment, and there's some nice stores going in, and nice restaurants, and a good community being developed. And that's what we want.
We want density put in Woodbridge and building the density to attract good development. We want Manassas to have the same thing. And the way you get that is to stop sprawl. I had a good friend that was looking to develop in Prince William County, and he said, I really want Patrick, I'm looking for 300 acres to put a wedding venue. And he couldn't do it.
He had the money that he should have been able to do it, but he's competing against all these assemblages that you see, LSI, the data centers, everything else, and his offer will never be accepted. Nobody's going to accept the PDR program and that if we allow housing to be put in the center of this, if we allow data centers to be put here. Who would sell up their development rights when you could have a fortune coming down the road? So this is simply bad development. This is what we've had. It doesn't help affordable housing. It doesn't alleviate traffic. It doesn't build density. It doesn't attract good development. And so I ask you to do what we need to do, that's draw a hard line and say, we're looking for good development, and sprawl is not the answer.
Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Hello. Kevin Parker, NABSCO District. Hello, supervisors, chairman. If I am a frequent flyer, tell me where my civic points are because I would like to cash them in. What I wanted to talk about, first of all, is I wanna talk about that pedestrian bridge. This was not my original topic. I think this is a tragedy of design and urban planning. It's it should be a piece of great infrastructure for Woodbridge. We talk about these people that want to have, you know, no sprawl, but we need to have great places. And we have this development of Riverfest that is supposed to be a dense urban walkable place.
And then we have this bridge where you walk up and walk down and have to walk up and walk down. It's it's embarrassing. It doesn't make any sense. And it's not it's not a choice. You could also have a ramp for the people of Belmont Bay, go up that and back down. It could be both. This is not brain science. It's not rocket science. It's something that we could be do, but it's become this kludgy, bureaucratic, oh, well, I guess this is all we can get kind of a thing. It should be better for Northwood Bridge.
The other thing that I originally came here to talk about was CPAs, and I am it's against CPAs. And I think that we can compare the health of the land and the health of the community to our personal health. And one thing we do with our personal health is we can either live poorly and then have an emergency, or we can, you know, live healthily and, you know and I think that the the comprehensive plan, it seems to me, is like our health plan for our community. And we have these temptations. Oh, we could just do this one little thing over here.
We could just do this one little thing over here. It'll be great for this right now. But I really think that it's better to stick with the comprehensive plan and not accept these comprehensive plan amendments. Thank you.
Thank you. Before I get to the next speaker, I wanna get our next group up. I have I called Freddie Hardin. I don't know if you're still here. Robert Jager, Jessica Grove, Mitzi Turner, and Gordon Bear Washington.
You may proceed.
Good afternoon, madam chair and the board of county supervisors. My name is Owen Meyer, and I live in the Occoquan District. I graduate next week from Northern Virginia Community College with my associate's degree in political science. My organization is called Communities for Youth. Last September, I came to you all with a problem.
I noticed that high school and college age students lack third spaces, places that aren't home, school, or work, places that build community. Third places such as community centers, gyms, parks, and more are important for social cohesion, civic engagement, and community building. When students lack these places, students are forced to ask, do I belong here? Does this county prioritize my interests? I know the county is interested in students.
Our schools have high quality specialty programs that prepare students for careers and further education. In high school, I took AP classes that made college more affordable and I found community through my theater program. I'm here today with a solution for a lack of community and I want to involve all of you. Myself and other students have come together to create communities for youth. Here's what we're doing. A free event for high school and college students on the last day of school, June 12 at the Chin Center. Here's what we'll have. Live music from student bands. We wanna show off student talent to others. Food trucks from the community.
We want small businesses to benefit from this community building night. Free games and activities, Giant Jenga, volleyball, and more. We'll also have booths from local clubs and student organizations. We want to show students what resources already exist for them. We're putting on this free event for students thanks to our sponsors who support student engagement, including but not limited to our advisory sponsor, supervisor Kenny Bodhi, Presto Pizza, our food sponsor, the School of Rock, and our community partner Campbell's Frozen Custard.
Our goal, give students a night of community to look forward to. Eventually, we want these free events to be regular at our recreation centers all across the county. To do this, I need you. I'm inviting all of you to our Communities for Youth event at the Chin Center on June 12 from four to 7PM. I want you to see for yourself how a community building night for students benefits them directly.
You'll see students laughing, making friends, and building community. Additionally, you'll have the opportunity to connect with students and future voters on issues that matter to them. They'll be the next generation ready to inherit our beautiful, diverse, and unique county. This evening, I'm going to email each one of you an invite to our event. I hope to meet you there in one month, so we can talk more about community building and opportunities for students. Additionally, please invite any students in high school or college that you know would love to come to this free community building event. Thank you for your time. I truly appreciate your support and student interests.
Thank you so very much. Rachel Ellis, you're up next.
Good afternoon. Rachel Ellis, Gainesville District. I am asking you to vote no on initiating the CPAs for both Woodlawn and Cat Harbin Valley Estates. I commend county staff for the reports rejecting both at the current density proposals. I wanna highlight a couple notes, specifically about Cat Harbin Valley Estates from the planning reports.
Incompatibility with surrounding land use and comprehensive plan designation, conflict with smart growth principles. I have lived in the Caharpen area since 1979. The reason this project is not viable at a lower density is because of the 29 homes in this proposal, approximately 25 of them have property assessments of well over $1,000,000 This is not a dilapidated area that is in need of being redeveloped. This is the definition of resource intensive sprawl, which is against the county's smart growth strategies and principles within the comp plan. It is asking for an increase of 30 to 90 times the current density of people.
There are no sidewalks, and this is not a transient oriented area. This is not appropriate for affordable housing. Cat Harbin Road is a very rural, curvy road with little shoulder and guardrails throughout. And for those of you on the eastern side, imagine Purcell Road between Dumfries Road and Hoadley because that's exactly what it's like. This road cannot handle this type of influx of traffic without significant road improvements throughout the length of the road.
And on a personal note, my nephew fifteen years ago was in a car accident on that road, totaled the car and was in the hospital. And guess what? Nothing has changed on that road except for more development. Finally, this area does have portions that are in the environmental resource protection overlay, which includes Lick Branch, is part of the Bull Run Watershed. This area serves a key role in protecting the Aqua Quon Reservoir, hence, the current low density of 29 homes in this area.
And a plight reminder to you guys, we are currently in a drought. We need to protect our water sources with urgency. We need to on the side of caution when making land use decisions, especially in the watershed, as we are still waiting for the water study from four years ago. I am respectfully asking that you please vote no on Woodlawn And Kettle Harbin Valley Estates CPA initiations. Send a message to the developers that Prince William County has a comprehensive plan for a reason.
Surrounding land use patterns matter. Densities that are compatible with surrounding development patterns matter. Prioritizing the preservation of natural resources matters. Directing growth toward infill and existing development matter. Agricultural and forested land matter. Approving this is green lighting all predatory land assemblages in Prince William County. Thank you.
Next speaker, please.
Good afternoon, Chair Jefferson. I'm Jessica Grove, I live in the Gainesville District. I gonna read you my email because what I have already heard this afternoon has been
really
disheartening. I'm writing today to ask you to vote no on 10 a Woodlawn and 10 b, Catarban Valley Estates. When the 2040 comp plan was adopted, there were spaces that were set aside for development. Catarban Valley Estates was not one of them. Catarban Road is a very curvy, slender road with lots of wildlife and blind curves.
It cannot handle any more traffic. I've lived here all my life, and the idea that the rural area has developers offering astronomical amounts of money for people's land is disturbing. People who work hard all of their lives to make the biggest investment of their lives should have some assurances that their quality of life will not drastically be changed because of a developer's wishes. The developer is asking for up to 2,719 homes units. The people of Cat Harbin are used to change.
We've seen the Marsh Farm turn into Heritage Hunt. We've seen Red Fence Farm turn into the Regency. We've seen Oak Valley and all the development along Heathcote. But we still have to remember that high density housing does not belong anywhere and everywhere. We still have to protect the watershed.
Most of Virginia is in a severe drought. We cannot continue to abuse mother nature and expect her to forgive us and continue providing clean water or any water at all for that matter. Stop allowing developers to use threatening language and predatory techniques to ruin the quality of life for those who chose to live in the rural spaces of Gainesville District. Please represent the wishes of the residents who make this community what it is and not the developers who are driving wedges between neighbors. I went to Tyler Elementary, took Ken Urban Road every single day.
Mikey Smith owned that farm. And every day, there were cows and a bus and a little white house. And you guys came into Cat Harbin Valley Estates, and you have beautiful homes. Jealous. I am extremely jealous of the beautiful homes that are there.
But the rest of us are still gonna be here. I understand that Prince William Digital Gateway is a terrible situation to live next to, but you chose to give up and not fight. And now you're leaving us with a terrible situation, And I'm I'm I'm really upset because I've lived here all my life, and I've had neighbors, and we've built a community. And it's tragic that the developers are coming in and saying, don't worry, you don't have to sign. We'll build around you.
It's fine. We we can make it work. You stay right where you are, and that's a terrible position to be in. I feel sorry for anybody who has had to hear that.
I'm sorry. Your time is up. Thank you. Next speaker.
Madam chair and members of the board my name is Mitzi Turner I'm the residential services manager for the circuit court clerk's office. I'm a resident of the city of Manassas. I'm here today to ask you to reconsider resolution number 26Dash246. I have worked for the clerk's office for over twenty years and have experienced several construction projects during my time in the judicial center. Those projects, while sometimes disruptive, were undertaken to improve the delivery of essential constituent services and to enhance experiences of staff and visitors.
While I understand the importance of providing an area for jury assembly, I am concerned that the board's decision to move forward with this particular option will result in years of disruption to services and cost taxpayers millions of dollars. In my view, this approach is fiscally irresponsible. Given that alternative options were presented, including one proposed by the clerk at a significantly lower cost of approximately $500,000 with a completion timeline of less than one year and no impact to current services, I struggle to understand the rationale behind this board's decision. The proposed configuration will not only disrupt staff operations and departmental coordination, it would also make it much more difficult for us to effectively serve the constituents of Prince William County and the cities of Manassas Park. I respectfully urge the board to reconsider resolution number 26Dash246.
Thank you for your time.
Thank you. Next speaker please.
Madam chair, members of the board, I'm Gordon Bear Washington, and I'm a senior deputy clerk of the circuit court for constituent services. I have, over the years, had the pleasure of helping hundreds of constituents in each of your magisterial district with a wide range of both court related services and services available through the general government. It's been a distinct privilege to work with many of you and your offices in those cases. It is with constituent services in mind that I ask you to reconsider resolution 26,246. The proposals so far which have not included input from the clerk of the circuit court have costs upwards of $3,400,000 and they fail to preserve the needs of constituents beyond the courtroom, which are the bulk of services that the clerk's office provides.
Things like name changes, concealed weapons permits, wills and estates, marriage licenses, all services provided to the public by our office outside of the courtrooms. The clerk has given input to FFM to provide the county with a more cost effective option that satisfies Supreme Court guidelines for jury assembly without sacrificing service levels. My colleagues are subject matter experts in over 800 different legal processes that our office provides to the public. They need suitable workspace to perform their jobs. And to be clear, the only people with the ability to tell you with certainty what services could be affected by this decision are the clerks in this room and out in the atrium.
I don't believe that you were afforded this kind of context before you made your initial decision. I ask that you reflect on what my colleagues have to say now that you have the chance, and I ask that you reconsider twenty six thousand two hundred forty six. Thank you.
Thank you. Before I allow the next speaker, I just want to call up my next group. I don't know if it's Telma or Velma.
Then we also have Christy Covington, Lauren Schwartz,
and
Courtney Buckley. If you guys can sir, you can go next, but I'm just calling up the next group.
Good afternoon. My name is Robert Yeager, and I live in the Gainesville district. I am, going to speak on behalf of the Harbin Valley Estates.
And I'm sorry, can you adjust the mic? Thank you, so we can hear you. Move it closer to you.
Okay.
As you know, in 1974, the first comprehensive plan was created for Prince William County, which limited development to where water, sewer, roads, and schools were most available, which was not the Gainesville end of the county, the at all. In 1998, that plan was revised to a new comprehensive plan, and it was basically to control suburban sprawl. And what came out of that was something called the rural crescent, which is where the Katharpen Valley Estates now would exist. And that called for no more than one home per 10 acres of land that has since been revised, as I understand it, to one home per one acre of land. Now this may not solve the problem of low income housing, but it does address the challenges of required services to any residents.
If it's a 10 acre or one acre, public sewer and water is not required. You know, there's a good chance that a private sewer and water works on that size property. Also, the challenges we now face with power, which the data centers have caused the possibility of not having enough power available for everyone to receive the power they need in the county and adjacent counties, keeping it down to lower or not moving forward with large residential projects until that problem of having adequate power, which as I understand it requires additional power plants, is addressed and when power will be available enough to generate the power for these data centers that have already been approved and are under construction.
Thank you, sir. I'm sorry. Your time is up. Next speaker, please.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, madam chair and members of the board. My name is Christie Covington, and I am the courtroom support supervisor and the clerk of the circuit court's office. I am here to respectfully ask the board to reconsider resolution 26 dash two four six. This decision is to relocate the courtroom support clerks from their current workspace. This issue is not simply about office space.
It is about the decision that could affect the clerk's ability to efficiently serve the citizens of Prince William County and the agencies that rely on the clerk's office every single day. The courtroom clerks do not simply work in the courtroom. The courtroom is only where our work is seen. The work that allows the judicial system to function accurately, securely, and efficiently happens outside of it. The clerks are the operational support system behind the daily function of the circuit court.
Our current workspace is not incidental. It is designed around workflow, coordination, and timely communication with the judges, interagency departments, and our community. Courtroom support clerks require a suitable workspace that allows for quiet, uninterrupted, and secure processing of sensitive and confidential work. Relocating courtroom support clerks away from that operational flow and into an unsuitable workspace may create delays in communication, processing court orders, and increased movement of sensitive documents and evidence through public areas and interruptions to time sensitive judicial responsibilities. Those delays do not only affect our clerk, they affect the community that we serve.
The courtroom support clerks are a vital part of the infrastructure that allows this office and the court to serve citizens of Prince William County. This request is not about convenience. It is about serving it is about preserving a suitable workspace that allows courtroom support clerks to continue serving this court, our partner agencies, and the citizens of Prince William County. I respectfully ask that the board reconsider resolution 26 dash two four six and preserve the current operational workspace of our courtroom support clerks so they can continue performing these essential duties accurately, securely, and without disruption. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Thank you. Next speaker, please. Just leave it as is.
Good afternoon, madam chair and members of the board. My name is Lauren Swartz, and I'm the supervisor of the criminal division of the circuit court clerk's office. I'm here to ask the board to reconsider resolution number 26Dash246. This change would directly affect how our office functions every day and could disrupt the services we provide to the public and to our justice system partners. The criminal division operates in a fast paced, high urgency environment.
While we use electronic systems, much of our work still depends on physical presence, paper records, and immediate in person communication. Relocating our division without a suitable workspace could slow our operations and impact the people who rely on us. It is often assumed that court operations are now fully digital, but that is not the reality. We handle search warrants that must be filed, logged, secured, and retrieved from a restricted access area, hundreds every month. We hand carry transportation orders to the sheriff's office, and law enforcement agencies retrieve capiases in person from our windows so they can serve them.
These responsibilities require constant movement of staff and documents, direct communication, and close coordination among offices. Search warrants are among the most time sensitive matters we handle. Officers must file them with the clerk's office as required by law, and sealed warrants must be retrieved from a secure area. None of this can be done remotely. Any transition that leaves the division less than fully operational could delay law enforcement activity.
We also support attorneys throughout the day both before and after court. They come to our windows to check whether orders have been entered, obtain copies, receive restitution information to then relay in court, and confirm next steps. Because we currently share space with courtroom support, many questions can be answered immediately, often before anything is scanned. If we are relocated farther away, that coordination becomes more difficult and less efficient. In addition, we're a public facing office with three customer service windows, and our visibility matters.
Members of the public, attorneys, law enforcement, and the press come to us for immediate assistance, often while navigating stressful circumstances. A significant portion of our daily work involves customers coming to our office to pay fines, court costs, and restitution. Many have been coming to us for years and rely on being able to find us quickly and receive help without confusion or delay. Spanish language access is also essential to our service. Three of my four front counter clerks, along with me, speak Spanish regularly and assist Spanish speaking customers.
If we're moved to a less visible or less functional location, these individuals may face greater difficulty getting the help they need. In short, relocating the criminal division without a suitable workspace would slow our ability to serve the public, attorneys, law enforcement, and other partners. Much of our work depends on the physical handling of documents, immediate in person coordination, and our shared setup with courtroom support. For all these reasons, I respectfully ask the board to reconsider resolution twenty six two forty six.
Thank you. Before I have the next speaker, I just wanna make sure. I don't know if it's Thelma or Velma Zambolekova of Bristow. If you can go to the back. We have Rebecca Courtney Buckley, Rebecca Cartlett, Jennifer Schering, Sarah Boney, and Jason Evans. If all of you can come forward. You may begin.
Good evening madam chair and members of the board. My name is Courtney Buckley. I'm a senior deputy clerk.
Can you adjust, I'm sorry, the microphone and state where you reside?
Okay. Culpeper, Virginia.
I I'm sorry. We can barely hear you.
Is this better?
No. Like, make it close to you. Or you take it off if you need to.
This just moves up and down if you need to, so you can just adjust it
and get a little closer to Now we can restart. Hold on. I'll let Andre go back. If we can restart. Speaking to the mic?
Is this better?
No. Is this better? Just bring it close to you.
Hello.
Can you be louder?
Is this better? Yes. Okay. Good evening, madam chair and members of the board. My name is Courtney Buckley.
I'm a senior deputy clerk and I work in the courtroom support division. I am one of the many clerks directly impacted by resolution 26 dash two four six. My role includes record keeping of court sessions, including tasks ranging from note taking, exhibit tracking, swearing in witnesses and interpreters, notifying agencies and attorneys, and writing criminal orders that range from continuances and sentencing. One of the more important task is maintaining custody of overnight juror notebooks and exhibits during and post trial. These exhibits include not only photographs and paper documents, flash drives, but also include high security items such as rape and DNA kits, guns, weapons, and controlled substance, the latter of which requires the movement of such exhibits with the assistance of law enforcement.
All of which in order to keep for safekeeping require transporting exhibits through the public space. Right now, with these exhibits can be roughly limited to 15 feet of public space from my division's door to another division's door. This resolution could now place drugs such as fentanyl to be passed through highly trafficked areas of the public as these exhibits will cross the hallways to enter into the circuit court courtrooms. And for the foreseeable future, they're not just passing through highly trafficked areas, but through an extensive construction zone. Losing our space creates unnecessary logistics and moving exhibits in journal books.
Furthermore, other tasks are now going to be delayed further, some of which we may not know the full scope of impact until after this change would occur. Resolution 26 dash two four six eliminates suitable working conditions. We already know this judicial system, I apologize, judicial sister does not meet the community demands. But frustratingly, you're asking taxpayers to invest potentially millions of tax dollars when you already have a judicial explanation, a little nervous, judicial center expansion plan and development that solves the general housing and current judicial center inadequacies. I ask that you reconsider resolution 26 dash two four six. Thank you.
Alright. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Can you hear me? Yes.
Okay. Good afternoon, madam chair and members of the board. My name is Rebecca Carteret. I live in Warren County. For the last five years, I have worked in the Prince William County Circuit Court Clerk's Office as a lead deputy clerk of the criminal support division, and I am here to ask you to reconsider resolution number 26 dash two forty six.
This action directly affects my day to day work by eliminating my office space with no adequate plan for where to be relocated. The board approved the reassignment of space, which displaces over a dozen civil servants for a jury assembly space that would only be used for an average of three hours total a week. Juries do not happen every week, and they do not happen every day of the week, but numerous civil servants serve the public from that office space Monday through Friday for around eight hours a day. We, as clerks, work with tight deadlines, confidential documents, evidence, and multiple points of contact within our office agencies. This means we need a dedicated and suitable workspace that is quiet and easy access to other agencies we work with.
Sheriff's deputies come in daily to make sure the dockets are available and unchanged, that inmates are not needed and should not be added to the docket. Pretrial comes to drop off paperwork to us directly so we can get a copy to the judge that morning on if a defendant is a good candidate for bond. Pretrial information is confidential. Not having a drop off secured location risks risks that confidentiality. Dockets do not prepare themselves. We need to have a suitable space to do that as well
as a space to come
back to to write the orders from the docket. There is almost daily contact between our office and the jail officers to verify bonds and sentences to he to see who should and should not be held and who should be out of custody. KPSs go out of our office. Multiple different police departments have to come to our office to pick up and serve those KPSs. Our our dockets need to be updated and posted in a timely manner so that the public has that information, such as next court dates, failures to appear, who their attorney is, quarter point court costs and due dates, and evidence uploaded for media access.
We as clerks strive for excellence in serving our community by keeping this information to date and accessible. This issue is not about resisting change. It is about ensuring that that in trying to solve one operational need, we do not unintentionally create several others that compromise the overall efficiency and functionality of the court system. Thank you for your time, and I respectfully ask you to reconsider resolution number 26Dash246.
Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Madam chair and board members, my name is Jennifer Schering, and I reside in Fauquier County. I've been an employee of the Prince William County clerk's office since July 2014. I'm here before the board to ask you to reconsider resolution 26Dash246. I began my career at the clerk's office as a member of the court support team, and I am now a lead in the civil department. I work daily with the court support team as all civil orders that are entered in court are are processed by the civil department.
If the clerk's office is broken up into multiple locations, customers would have to go between buildings in order to complete their transactions. Access to all departments within the clerk's office for staff members as well as the public is imperative for the constituents of to have their concerns answered in the most efficient manner. The civil department's front counter clerks process all new cases that require funds to be receded, whether received in person or through the mail. If a disruption to the windows occur, the processing of new cases would be delayed, and the access that our customers have to the civil team would be affected. Our service windows, which there are currently four, can have a line of customers waiting to be assisted at any given time throughout the day.
On Fridays, that line can be a never ending cycle of customers coming directly from the courtroom to obtain copies of entered orders or initiate the restricted license process. If the civil department is moved into a separate location, the litigants would not have easy access to these types of services. Combine that with our normal traffic, there are many times myself or other team members perform triage of the line to ensure customers that have transactions not involving money can have their requests or filings expedited to reduce lengthy wait times. One of our most popular types of filings in civil are applications for concealed handgun permits. The statutory time period for processing the CHP is forty five days.
On a daily basis, we receive numerous new CHP applications, which are required to be received in person. These applications must be processed immediately due to the statutory nature. A disruption to the civil department could potentially jeopardize the clerk's office mandate regarding these filings. The information that is supplied to customers by our civil team members is essential to the public's access to the civil court system. A disruption in our services would be a denture would be a detriment to the residents of Prince William County and the cities of Manassas, Manassas Park. Thank you for your reconsideration of resolution 26 dash two four six. Thank you.
Next speaker, please. Hello.
Just testing. Hello madam chair and members of the board. My name is Sarah Beninny and I work for the clerk of circuit court as the jury lead deputy clerk in the criminal division. My purpose here today is for you, the board, to hopefully reconsider resolution two twenty six dash two four six. For the past several years, the board has coordinated with the clerk of court in nominating citizens to serve as jury commissioners, helping ensure a well represented body for the selection of jurors in our community.
Your nominations have a direct impact on the administration of justice. These commissioners review and audit thousands of questionnaires annually to determine qualified jurors who then go on to be summoned to perform one of the most important civic duties in our democracy. What was once a one day event has evolved into a week long process due to the increased demand, population growth, and an ever expanding court system. So the issue of adequate space is nothing new. There has long been an effort to make the best use of what we have.
The prior jury assembly room, for example, was sacrificed to create the newest and now smallest courtroom in the circuit court. Our office's multipurpose training and development room has helped in the short term, but adds little value compared with what jurors previously had. I'd like to talk specifically about the more affordable and less negatively impactful proposal to repurpose the outdated cafeteria into an improved space for jurors to assemble. This proposal is practical and it's achievable. Jurors currently enter the judicial center through the lower level for added privacy and experience shorter wait times than going through security through the main entrance, separating them from members of the public coming into the courthouse for other business.
The cafeteria already exists as an underutilized space near that juror entrance with the potential to better accommodate the realities of modern jury operations without the need for costly and lengthy construction, which would affect other office services. Repurposing that area would allow for improved seating capacity to streamline jury orientation, organization, and create a more professional and welcoming environment for the citizens we ask to serve. The impractical option to relocate the whole of courtroom support, criminal vision, probate, etcetera, in exchange for a jury assembly area hinders far more than it helps. It displaces clerks, creates disruptions in their ability to effectively administer support, as well as limiting services rendered to the public. Our citizens should feel that their jury service matters and that their local government is committed to providing a functional and suitable environment for them to carry out the civic duty.
At the same time, this does not have to come at the cost of our other services our office provides. I encourage the board to support a practical solution that improves the experience of jurors, supports court operations, and strengthens public confidence in our justice system. Please, respectfully, reconsider resolution twenty six dash two four six. Thank you for your time.
And for the record, can you state where you reside?
Oh, I'm so sorry. Live in Manassas.
Alright. Thank you. Next speaker. We're doing so good. We had such a great running streak. Alright.
Good afternoon, madam chair and members of the board. I reside in the Potomac Magisterial District, and I'm also a land records deputy clerk. I sit at the front window. I'm here to just offer my brief perspective about resolution twenty six two forty six. Most logistically of the most affected divisions have spoken already, and I stand with them in their stances.
I speak mainly just from a stance or my customer facing stance. It's a position that I'm constantly learning, and I've been there two years. I'm constantly being challenged in, and I'm constantly becoming a stronger asset to the county. And in my role, I'm allowed a chance to regularly interact with much of the public that visits our judicial center. Since we're positioned right near the entrance, I see daily the variety and interconnectivity of the services the public counsel has to provide.
A person will regularly come to my window searching for a deed, and by the time they leave, they visited our law library, probate centers, criminal centers, and civil centers as well. I regularly refer to these divisions, and I have a constant working relationship with these divisions because the depth of any issue that we see daily are are just the scope and the depth of the issues that we see are so very I found that having accessible and informed people under one roof has been of great assistance to me as I learn, and I grow in my role as a deputy clerk and to the public as well. Our divisions are always in a working conversation. There are a few processes that exist solely under the purview of just one, meaning a great change like this would hinder, I think, unseen daily operations across the entire judicial center. Problems presented us are often personal, time sensitive, and complex, and our constituents are often confused and frustrated with these problems.
This resolution in its current state, I feel like, would place a much greater tax on the public than need be and, a greater tax than the potential good that it hopes to achieve. While I do see the benefits for our jurors and the courts and understand and have witnessed the need for additional space, I do not believe it should come at the expense of the services our most vulnerable constituents rely on. This is why I humbly request that agenda item c m one resolution twenty six two forty six is reconsidered. Thank you.
Just state your name for the record.
Jason Evans.
Alright. Thank you very much. We are done with the in person public comment time. I'm gonna turn it over to my colleague supervisor Victor Angry for remote public comment time.
Thank you madam chair. Chris, is it Chris?
Yes sir, can you
hear me?
Yes sir, can hear you.
Excellent. We have our first speaker for the day. Our first speaker is Daniel Foti.
Alright, Daniel. If you're with us, go ahead. Okay?
Yes. Can you hear me?
Yes,
sir. Alright. Terrific. Thank you very much for the time, and, I wanna thank you all for making this available virtually. Madam chair and the board, thank you for for hearing this.
My name is Dan Foti, and I'm from the Gainesville District. And I wanted to urge the board to not move forward on the Calfin Valley Estates development plan, item 10 b. I have three real reasons why why I think it's a bad idea to do this, and that is the traffic that would introduce to the area that is already being tasked with traffic, the water issue, so many of us are on wells, and the school issue. And I would just like to say, really, you know, speaking plainly, all you have to do is drive down from 234 on Cat Cat Harpen Road and get to Heathcote, and you can tell that this is a bad idea. Cat Harpen is not equipped to handle the volume of of cars and automobiles that this development would introduce.
I live adjacent to the development, and I can tell you that leaving my street is already a bit dangerous. I have three small children at home, and I don't feel safe with them near Katharpen. And the amount of of traffic that would this would reduce during rush hour, particularly, with school buses trying to let children off, it would be a nightmare. I really I really believe there's kind of two types of of, developments of plans. There's plans that make sense for everybody involved.
Those that have a stake in making money off of it make money. We introduce new houses to the area, but also those that still live there are able to enjoy the, you know, the development that goes forward. And then there's plans that only really benefit those that are making money off of it and that want to develop an area. And I really, just to be frank, feel like this is what that is. This is going to just introduce more con congestion to the area.
It it really makes me concerned being on well water, and I know tons of my neighbors, some that have already experienced well water going dry their wells going dry. It's going to really tax those you know, our our our utilities. And somebody that spoke earlier about this development in favor of it stated that this really isn't a rural area anymore. Perhaps it's not like it used to be, but our our infrastructure is is rural. And I think we need to treat it accordingly.
There will be need the major upgrades to the roads for this to really facilitate the, you know, the amount of of traffic congestion and the impact that it's gonna have on our watershed. And I would, at a minimum, urge the board to move forward with the aqua point water plan model to really assess whether this is realistic for those you know, hundreds of us, thousands of people that rely on well water for drinking, for bathing, for animals, etcetera, to really get a good idea as to whether this is this is a smart thing to do. So just speaking frankly, really for the traffic reason, for for the water, and and for the schools, you know, I think people I myself moved to this area because of the lack of traffic, the good schools, the open spaces, the rural feel, and and the dark nights. And I think that we should really cherish, foster, and protect that. And for all the reasons I stated before, board, I urge you to not move forward on this plan.
Thank you for your time.
Alright. Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Our next speaker is Elspeth McCormick.
Good afternoon, madam chair, supervisors. My name is Elspeth McCormick from the Brentsville District. I'm a member of the Amberley Station HOA and I'm speaking on behalf of the 110 homes in our neighborhood about the Novak appeal of the Diamond Hill Substation, PFR 0 zero five, which was denied by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission's denial reflected serious concerns about this application's alignment with the county comprehensive plan. We strongly urge the board of supervisors to uphold that decision.
Doing so would not only protect the quality of life and land use expectations of our community, but also send a clear message regarding the county's commitment to proper process and thoughtful planning. Amberley Station residents have deep and ongoing concerns regarding the proposed 300 megawatt electrical substation and its close proximity to existing residential neighborhood. A power facility of this scale sitting immediately adjacent to established neighborhoods with only a 100 foot buffer raises questions about land use compatibility as well as long term community impacts. Residents are particularly concerned about the cumulative effects of such large infrastructure installation near our homes and schools as well as the potential precedent this approval could set for future infrastructure expansions in close proximity to residential areas. For our community, this proposal is not an abstract policy discussion.
It has direct implications for daily life, neighborhood character, and long term expectations about how industrial scale facilities are buffered from residential uses in Prince William County. I also wish to express my concerns and objection to the initiation of the Katharpen Valley Estates comprehensive plan amendment. The requested CPA presents the likelihood of highly negative impacts, which are easily identified even with long range planning. You have heard many of them already this afternoon. This CPA is incompatible with surrounding land uses and comprehensive plan designations, and it is in conflict with the county's smart growth principles and strategies that are well documented in the county's comprehensive plan.
We need to follow that comprehensive plan and avoid predatory developers and one off CPAs that go against that comprehensive plan. Thank you very much for your time and consideration on both these items this afternoon.
Thank you, ma'am. Next speaker, please.
Speaker is Chris Grove.
Go ahead, Chris.
Hey,
Chris. Can you speak up? We can barely hear you in there or maybe turn your volume, your mic up. Go ahead, say something.
Yeah.
Hey, Chris, you're not coming through. So other Chris, Chris Craze, can you either either come back to him? I think he's he's got a weak signal or in a bad area. Maybe try turning up his volume.
Yeah. Let's see what we can do. He is as of right now, he's our final speaker.
Oh, he is? Oh.
Yes, sir.
Okay. Well, let's let's give it another you wanna try that again?
Chris? Yeah.
Yeah. Can you hear me now?
Yes. Yes. Yes. There we go.
Okay. I'm gonna I'm just gonna pull the side of the road. Sorry. I'm in front. So I'm Chris Grove from Gainesville, National District.
I would like to say ask you all to not approve the 10 b rezone or for CPA initiation for Ken Harbin Valley Estates. First off, we're still a rural area whether or not we have the rural crescent designation anymore or not. And until the digital gateway is fully killed by the Virginia Supreme Court here, I don't think you should be approving any assemblages within the formal rev rural crescent within the Gainesville district until we get that matter settled. I would like to remind the board that as the CPA amendment is written is how you should be evaluating this. This is not to approve something for a hope and a wish of how something should become.
You need to do it as written. So that is another reason that you need to be careful for approving this as is. Send it back for reconsideration if that has to be it. The roads out there are simply not able to handle another 50 times the traffic based on going from 21 houses to, you know, what, 500 to a thousand plus houses or resident areas of units. Also, just this is not affordable housing.
It will not be affordable housing. You by approving this, CPA amendment, you are actually validating the assemblages that are piecing themselves together out in our district, and you're validating a market price, a market price that has been artificially pumped up because of all the data center demand in our area. So you're actually contributing to the lack of affordability because of the high value, the high input price that these developers have to go in on. They've gotta make their money back, so you're not gonna get cheap housing out of it. I just implore you to a vote no.
Send it back for planning if you have to, but it not at this time. This is this is way beyond where we should be. And by the way, where's the water studies that we've been asking for? You know, in the digital gateway fight, any assemblages that are continue aft continuing after this. Where is the water study? Because we are in a very sensitive aquifer. We're under severe drought across statewide. Fairfax has asked for it. Citizens keep asking for it. Why don't we initiate that? Let's do that at first before we try to shoehorn more mass development in the form of a rural crescent in Gainesville district, in the Brentsville district, or any of the the leftover remaining rural spaces in Prince William County. Thank you.
All right. Thank you, sir. Chris, did I hear you say that was our final speaker?
Yes, sir. That was our final speaker.
All right. Thank you very much. All right. Madam Chair, back to you.
All right thank you so very much. This concludes our public comment time for the two p. M. Meeting. We're going to move on to agenda item number seven that is public hearings. Before we get started I just wanted to make sure that is there anything anyone want to pull off. If not I'm going to hear the sheets, if we can get the sheets so that I can open the public hearings. No one signed up? All right, so we do not have we're just going to double check. It looks like we don't have anyone signed up for the public hearings. Do we have anyone online?
Chris, can you hear
us? Yes,
sir. We have nobody online
right now. You have no online? No one in person? I'm just double checking. All right. So I'm going to go ahead and close the public hearings for seven a through seven gs. All right. I wanted to move this forward. Can I have a motion?
So moved. Second.
All
right. This motion is for seven a through seven gs. Is there any discussion on anything? Supervisor Gord Bodie. Gordie, need to get to.
Gordie, Gordie, or Bodie?
Oh, he's not working. Alright. So Bodie then Gordie. Okay. Gordie.
Gordie. There we go. Thank you, madam chair. Just very quickly about seven c. I wanna thank Rick Kenazales and his team for their continued work on the Prince William Parkway Old Bridge Road intersection improvement program. I know that there's a lot of different businesses and other folks and landowners you have to work with to get this project done. So I know it's not an easy process, but you guys are obviously moving along in a good clip. We one of the the addresses got taken off before we came came to this public hearing, so that's good. Really appreciate that Rick and his team continues to work with folks. Really looking forward to us breaking ground on that intersection improvement. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Supervisor Gordy.
Madam Chair, I'd just any time we're talking about a taking of property, it always makes me uncomfortable. And I know that what's the holdup with the other eight folks in terms of getting them to a place of agreeing to their property being included in this easement.
All right. Rick can come up and next time I ask that if we have any questions we do that before the motion.
All right.
I was trying but couldn't get hints quick enough.
Madam Chair, members of the Board, Rick Cannazales, your Director of Transportation. We just continue to be in negotiations with them. All of those people have received their appraisals and what the county has offered. We continue to negotiate with them. What you're doing today is actually an action that we will not be recording for the next thirty to forty five days. So we hope to continue to negotiate with those and keep on crossing out those numbers as we're going along before we have to go record a month and a half from now.
Okay. Thank you, Rick. Thank you, sir.
All right. I see no one else in queue. So let's go ahead and take our votes on these items.
Vote unanimous.
All right, thank you. We are now moving on to agenda item number eight, county executive time. Mister Shorter, the floor is yours.
Alright. Good afternoon, madam chair, members of the board. A few items that I wanna go over. First, as as usual, I'll talk directives. There were no directives issued since our last meeting.
There was one directive closed since our last meeting. Yesterday, I sent a memo to the board from the police department providing a six month report, regarding the impacts, associated with the updates to the county's towing ordinance, specifically the implementation of the ten minute grace period. This memo closes out that directive. Over the last, few weeks, I've sent the board several updates including, information about the county's activities related to the commemoration of the two hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the United States, including recent and upcoming programs and events led by our county department of parks and recreation, our office of historic preservation, and tour and the tourism teams as well as opportunities for the board to participate and engage. An update on the timeline for bringing the data center overlay overlay zoning text amendment to the board for consideration with the goal of completing any board action prior to the August recess and potential adoption in September.
I've also provided an update to the county's ongoing on the county's ongoing panhandling initiative and the work of the panhandling response action team, and you will receive an update on this work during your next meeting. And,
of course,
a brief update on the processing of land use cases during the calendar year of 2026 for the planning commission and for the board. In terms of kudos to staff, I wanted to acknowledge our deputy county executive Bob Blakely. He recent recently received a US Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's Public Service Award at the National Lifesavers Conference. This award was given for his leadership and commitment to improving traffic safety through community engagement, education, and enforcement in his prior position, and reducing traffic fatalities by nearly fifty percent over the last year. I wanted to congratulate Bob and thank him for, for his work and certainly glad to have him here on the Prince William County team.
I also wanna recognize director Joni Duckett and the housing staff for the release of the application for the notice of funding availability, for the county's affordable housing fund. The application period opened on May 1, and the deadline is June 1. We anticipate the announcement awards in October. Certainly grateful and proud of the work that the team has done in making the initiative a reality and look forward to the impact we'll have on this community. Lastly, but certainly not least, I wanted to take a moment to recognize some of the outstanding programs we offer here in the community.
I want to first thank Josh Lee and the Area Agency on Aging staff for hosting another fantastic Older Americans Month celebration last week with dancing, with games, with with great food. As always, it is a wonderful opportunity to spend time with our seniors and I absolutely enjoyed it along with the team here. So Josh and team, thank you very much. I want to acknowledge Raul Torres and the team at Human Rights for the absolutely phenomenal Human Rights Student Leadership Council program. The team graduated 52 students, 52 scholars graduated as part of the program this year.
Yeah. Absolutely. It's fantastic. I attended the graduation, heard from students, and it just it was a phenomenal event. It always is to see the parents and the scholars.
Wanted to acknowledge Christina Wynn and her team for a very successful calibrate small business conference. I had an opportunity to talk to some of the entrepreneurs that experienced that conference and they were they all left energetic about Prince William County and what what they could do here. So just wanted to congratulate Christina and the entire economic development and tourism team for the great work. And the police department on a successful community police academy. This gives our residents, I think many of you probably know, gives our residents hands on learning opportunities while strengthening the partnership between our police officers and the community.
The program concluded last week, and I am pleased to share it will return next spring. So great job to our police department. So very thankful that we have the program here in Prince William County. I wanna sincerely thank all the county staff who make these programs so so engaging and successful, and I want to thank the community members who also take advantage and get involved in the programs. We will continue to host and promote, the programs as we go forward.
Madam chair, I would also end by inviting community members to attend the fifth community the career expo tomorrow from 10AM to 2PM at the Hilden Performing Arts Center. As of yesterday, more than 850 people have signed up, registered for the career expo with 23 different departments on-site ready to hire, and we certainly accept walk ins. So this is just phenomenal that the HR team has built a phenomenal program here with the career expos and, obviously, with 850 attendees already registered. This is making a difference here in Prince William County. And then finally, the Memorial Day ceremony next Tuesday at 05:30PM right here at McCourt out in our plaza.
There will be coloring activities for children and opportunities to certainly honor those who have gave, the greatest sacrifice for our country, as we do every year. So with that, madam chair, that is all that is all for me.
Thank you so very much. Supervisor Bailey?
Thank you, Madam Chair. Chris, I just wanted clarity on this. You said for the overlay piece that you're going bring it back to us in September. What did you say August?
Let's see here.
I thought it was
Yes, Tanya. Good
afternoon, Madam Chair, members of the board. Tanya Washington, Director of the Planning Office. Our current schedule is to bring the data center overlay district zoning text amendment to the Planning Commission for public hearing on June 10 and then to the board for a public hearing and final action on July 21. The initiation resolution directed staff to bring it to the board no later than September. But as noted, our goal is to get it to the board for you to take final action on the ZTA before you go on August recess.
Okay. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, Chris.
All right. I don't have anyone else, so thank you very much. We're gonna go to agenda item number nine, county attorney time. The floor is yours.
Thank you, madam chair, members of the board. For item nine a for closed session, we will have consultation with legal counsel and briefings by staff members regarding probable litigation with regards to the Novak Diamond Hill Substation Public Facility Review Appeal, PFR twenty twenty six dash zero zero zero five, along with the accompanying consultation with legal counsel and briefings by staff members regarding specific legal matters requiring the provision of legal advice by such counsel pertaining to land use law, where consultation, discussion, or briefing in an open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position, negotiating strategy, or litigating posture of the public body. We will have a personnel discussion relating to the performance of the members of the Board of County Supervisors. We will have consultation with legal counsel and briefings by staff members regarding specific legal matters requiring the provision of legal advice by counsel pertaining to the Freedom of Information Act and the First Amendment law, where discussion in an open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position, litigating posture, and negotiating strategy of the public body. We will have consultation and discussion with legal counsel and briefings by staff members pertaining to the acquisition of Real Property for a public purpose with the accompanying legal advice by legal counsel and briefings by staff members pertaining to actual litigation in Prince William County Circuit Court case number CL twenty four zero zero zero seven four zero four dash zero zero regarding specific legal matters requiring the provision of legal advice by such counsel regarding land acquisition of property interest for right of way for property located at 17870 Fraley Boulevard in the town of Dumfries, owned by apartments at Dumfries two LLC for the Route 1 Fraley Boulevard project, where consultation or briefing in an open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position, negotiating strategy, or litigating posture of the public body.
We will have consultation with legal counsel and briefings by staff members regarding probable litigation by the circuit court judges against the board of county supervisors regarding space at the courthouse, probable litigation by the clerk of the circuit court against the board of county supervisors regarding space at the courthouse, along with the accompanying consultation with legal counsel and briefings by staff members regarding specific legal matters requiring the provision of legal advice by such counsel pertaining to courthouses. Where such consultation, discussion, or briefing in an open meeting would adversely affect bargaining position, negotiating strategy, or litigating posture of the public body. These items are appropriate for closed session pursuant to 2.2 dash thirty seven eleven a one three seven and eight of code of Virginia.
Move for approval madam chair.
Second.
All right, let's go ahead and take our vote on the first item.
Vote unanimous.
And we have another item.
Thank you, madam chair, members of the board. Annually, the general assembly moves several pieces of legislation forward, and some of those require changes to the county code to be adopt prior to July 1. Assistant County Attorney Robert Roberts is in our office. He's here in chambers and along with paralegal Erica Hilton. They've spearheaded it this year. This is the authorization of the public hearing to authorize to consider a public hearing. We plan to come back on June 2 for the public hearing to amend these code provisions, and they will be effective then on July 1.
So authorized, madam chair. Second.
Alright. Let's go ahead and take our votes.
Vote unanimous.
Alright, thank you. We are now moving on to agenda item number 10 that is agency time. Mr. Shorter, it's back to you.
All right. Thank you very much, madam chair, with item 10A. This is a CPA initiating a CPA. I will turn it over to Director Washington.
Good afternoon again. Tanya Washington, Director of the Planning Office. I'm just here to introduce our staff member, Reza Ramyar, who will present to the board a request to initiate comprehensive plan amendment CPA 2020 six-six Woodlawn in the Brentsville Magisterial District. I will turn it over to Reza.
Good afternoon. My name is Reza Ramyar, the case planner for this CPA request. This is a request to initiate comprehensive plan amendment. CPA twenty twenty six dash zero zero zero six Woodlawn. This is a request to change long range land use designation for 67.8 acre property from AF Agriculture and Forestry to CIRES one c Conservation Residential with transit one c.
The property located on the South Side of Windhill Road in Knoxville. And a staff recommendation a staff recommend the board initiate this amendment with a modification. And instead of Series one, see a staff recommend changing long range land use for this property from AF to Series 1B with lower density. The difference between Series 1B Transfig 1B and 1C is their density. Transsect 1B recommended maximum density is one dwelling per two acres with a minimum of 60% protected open space.
And for Transsect 1C, the recommended maximum density is two dwelling units per acre with a minimum recommended protected open space of 50% of the site. This slide shows the location of this property in the county. The property includes highly ecological valuable resources in the middle of the site with major trees and forests that with trees that are almost 100 years old. This slide compare the existing long range land use and the proposed the requested long range land use for this application this request. The property is zoned A1 and adjacent to property Zone A1 also.
The applicant also submitted a rezoning request for their property to rezone their property from a one to p PMR to have 67 single family detached dwelling units in their property, and staff believe it's high in this context and not consistent with surrounding density. As you see in this slide, on the east side of this property, there is a property plan for park and open space with zero density. And then further east and south property are the area plan AF, and their actual density is one dwelling unit per 20 acres. And on the west side, there is a residential neighborhood with density of one dwelling per 5.5 acres. And further west, also the area plan Series 1B.
Our recommendation is changing long range land use for this property from AF to one b, which is more consistent with the area. And one also unique characteristic this property has is very long and narrow. And if the applicant want to support 67 detached dwelling unit in this property, they have to build the road extended to the end of the property that and this road has significant impact on the ecological resources in the middle of the site. So a staff recommendation is changing long range land use designation for this property from AF to Series 1B with additional guidance. Staff recommend preserving ecological valuable features as larger cohesive and functional area rather than a small fragmented remnant.
And also, staff recommends securing preserved natural protected open space through permanent conservation easement. And also, staff recommend strict construction construction phase protection for the preserved area. That's end my presentation. I will be happy to answer if you have any questions.
All right. Does anyone Supervisor Gordy, got anything? Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair. So I know the applicant has requested T1C, but you're making a recommendation of T1B. Yes. But in our conversations with the applicant, we're looking at going half of T1C, which is it's weird because it's twice T1B but half of T1C in terms of the rezoning. So we're looking at one unit per acre with 50% open space. So we're still getting closer to the T1B, but also ensuring that the density is lower than the T1C and maintaining the open space that's more consistent with T1B. That's your understanding, correct?
Yes. Okay. Thank you.
All right. Do we have any other questions or comments? Did anyone I didn't see anyone else. All right. Then if there's nothing else, Supervisor Gordon, do you want to move this forward?
Madam chair, I move to initiate conference plan amendment CPA twenty twenty six, zero zero zero six Woodlawn, with the, t one c designation.
Second. Properly moved and seconded. Any discussion? I don't see anyone. Supervisor Vega?
Madam Chair, just have a quick question. This is 67 single family detached units, yes?
Yes.
Thank you.
Is there anyone else? Alright. Let's go ahead and take our votes. Book unanimous. Alright. Thank you.
Thank you.
Alright. I guess I'm gonna call up. Do you wanna call up the next person, 10 b, or I'll just call you up, 10 b?
Good afternoon again. Tanya Washington, Director of the Planning Office. I will introduce Eric Griffiths from our staff who will lead the presentation regarding the request to initiate comprehensive plan CPA twenty twenty six-three, Cat Harbin Valley Estates.
Chair Jefferson, supervisors, Eric Griffiths with the planning office. I'm here to present before you CPA twenty twenty six, three. This is a CPA initiation for Cap Harden Valley Estate in the Gainesville Magisterial District. Just this is this is just to be clear, this is a request to change the long range land use designation of 292 acres that is currently designated AF, Agricultural and Forestry, to RN3 Residential. And that will allow for a development of a mixed use residential neighborhood that will include single family dwellings, single family detached, single family attached dwellings, multifamily residents and senior housing.
Currently, this is located East of Katharpen Road, and Lick Branch forms the northern boundary of this particular project site. Sudley Road is roughly a half mile to the north. Staff recommends not to initiate the CPA to change the land use to RN3, but we do recommend the board consider initiation to a lower density district, which is C Res 1C. If we look at existing proposing land use, that's on the left is the current AF property, agricultural and forestry designation, and you can see that it's kind of similarly surrounded by other agricultural forest land, but there is some housing development, notably Smiths Crossing, the Sea Rest to the South and Oak Valley Stage, which is located adjacent to the West. And also, as I mentioned before, we do have environmental resource in the area.
Lick Branch is located north along the northern part of this particular development parcel. Now when we make our recommendations, we can do recommend two things to the board. We can recommend that the board initiate a CPA resolution. We can recommend that the Board deny initiation, or we can recommend that the Board consider initiation to another land use that is more compatible with the existing area. And we're taking that option with this particular CPA.
We believe that this area is not really doesn't have any agricultural need to protect agricultural farmland, but we do recognize that there is environmental resource there with Lick Branch, so that's why we're looking at Conservation 1c. We also recognize that there are existing neighborhoods to that same similar densities to the South and to the West, Smith as I mentioned, Smith Crossings to the South, Oak Valley Estates to the West. And when we look at the existing zoning, I think you see that a little bit more clearly. The SR 1 c, which is semi rural cluster development, that is Oak Valley's estate. The current property is all A1 property, agricultural zoned property.
The requester will bring a rezoning application forward to change that to PMR. So there'll be opportunities to sort of mitigate impacts through the rezoning, and that's something that, you know, needs to be considered when we think about this project. So when we want to talk about demographics, I think this chart shows that there's going to be a significant uptick in density when you're looking at the what's being proposed under the RN3. Even though they're bringing housing at 1,300 housing is still, even in this land use, kind of closer to the lower end of that range that you can see here under dwelling units. It's still a significant amount considering what's allowable there now.
By comparison, C Res 1C will bring a maximum of five eighty four dwelling units, which is significantly less than the proposed density allowment, but it is also notably higher than what is existing there as well. When staff does not recommend initiating the CPA to change the long range land use to R and three, you know, basically for the following reasons. It's a we feel that it's very incompatible with the surrounding long range land use. We believe that the proposed density represents a significant increase over the existing designations. It's not compatible with the existing long range land use designation in the comprehensive plan.
And also that it conflicts with comprehensive growth plus smart growth principles. When we consider housing developments of this magnitude, or in three magnitude, we want those to be located near new residential corridors, town centers, employment centers, and also with transit with access to transit. So while it's also we also want you to understand also, and it's clear that, you know, I know that you all understand this, but for the people in the room, people I mean, this is an initiation is just to initiate that this be further considered by the board. So if you feel like this is something that should be considered by the Board to be further studied and to understand those impacts, that's something that we can do. But we are going to recommend initiation for to the C Res 1C for the following reasons.
We believe that this better aligns with to address the protection of Lick Branch, which is an environmental resource that will require protection, and also better aligns with the surrounding land use. And as I said, I mean, we're just asking. We just think that this makes better sense as a land use designation that for further study. We're not necessarily full of throwing our full support at this. There certainly are impacts that need to be further addressed, and the rezoning and the further CPA process will allow that to happen. And that's about it for my presentation. I'll take any questions. Thank you.
Alright. Does anyone have any questions? And I really wanna focus on questions. If if we have comments, let's do that when it's in the motion. Any questions? All right. Looks like you got something for me, Yasley? Got something? Just going back. Anyone else? Questions? Questions? Questions? All righty, supervisor LaCroix to the rescue.
So quick question. If we recommend yes, means that you all will look at it a little bit more to make sure that it fits a little bit closer. This is just saying for the staff and the county to look at it a little bit further.
Yes. But in context of your question, regardless of what you're recommending, we'll look at it closer. So you have to consider, are you going to recommend us to review this based on the RN3 designation or do you support maybe a lower land use designation? But the process is that this is just the initiation. The Board initiates us to further consider this project.
And at that time, the rezoning will be submitted, and we can together, we can further initiate address impacts. Certainly, little bit more deep dive sort of analysis into all things considering transportation related, environmental related. Those are usually done post initiation. So that's kind of the time that
we're So this is just for the county to look at it a little bit more because if you think it's overdense, I think it's a little bit too dense, that would just say, hey, I want you to look at it further, right?
As Eric noted, there are two options, really three options on the table. One is for the board to consider initiation of the company's plan amendment that was submitted, which is to RN3. The staff proposed an alternative lane designation at a lower density for the board to consider, which is the CRES. But in terms of the process, you're correct, and this is what Eric noted. This stage is just for the board to if the board initiates a CPA, whether it's this one or any other CPA request, is just authorizing staff to further analyze the CPA request.
And ultimately, this instance, because if this were to be initiated by the board at either of those density options, there is an intention to submit a rezoning application that would be a companion. In those instances, the process is that the CPA request undergoes further staff analysis looking at the range of issues that was noted. The rezoning application goes through the formal county staff review process and ultimately they are both brought together at the same time for public hearing at the Planning Commission and then subsequently to the board. So if a CPA is initiate and there is a companion rezoning application, there will be opportunities for community members to weigh in not only at the public hearings but for rezoning applications, special use permits. We have guidelines for applicants to do community engagement before public hearing.
Got you.
All right, Supervisor Stewart.
So just so that I'm clear, we're really only here to look at the CPA as it's been requested, not any other changes recommended by staff or any other entity. Yes,
what is before you is the CPA request that was submitted to the county which is to change the long range land use to RN3. If I can add further clarification if I may, as part of the CPA request, part of the options are the staff can also make a recommendation to an alternative land use designation for the board to consider initiation. That's so you have those two options or the board could vote to initiate one or the other or neither.
But just to be clear we're only looking at what was submitted.
That's correct.
Thank you.
Alright supervisor Bailey.
Okay time don't leave because this is gonna probably sound like a redundant question, but it's okay. I'm testing understanding. So this is a recommendation. This is not I'm I'm try what I'm trying to understand is staff is making an alternative recommendation. That's correct. Rather than what was submitted. That's correct. And the reason for that is why.
The
reason for that is that, you know, we feel like DRN3 designation is too dense for this particular location. And our analysis that this is largely based on the existing land use, which is largely, you know, if you look down here, excuse me, well, it's largely, you know, it's a lot dense. We have existing areas that are already designated conservation residential to the south. And certainly, areas that are zoned more conservation residential to the west. So it's more in context to those areas.
It makes more sense that, that designation be sort of considered for this area rather than a more dense development as an RN3. And when we talk about density, we're talking I think RN3 brings in anywhere between four to 12 dwelling units. C Res one C brings in two dwelling wounds per acre. So it's a significant sort of decrease in range and what's allowable in terms of density. Does that answer your question?
It does and it does, but it's okay. It does. Okay.
All right, hold on. Have more people. Have supervisor Vega then Lacroix.
Thank you, Madam Chair. So at our end three, what would the high end in terms of units be? I know you said between four to 12 units per acre, but at the high end of RN3, how many units are we talking about?
I believe that's at the high end is about 2,700, and they're bringing in what they're proposing is about 13, I believe thirteen ninety in that range. So it's not exactly at the higher end, so it's closer to the like the I think their density is about between four and five dwelling units per acre in that range that it's allowable between four and twelve. So it's closer to the lower range, but, you know, it's still a lot of dwelling units to consider for this particular area. 1,300. Yeah.
Yeah, thank you for that. And just to kind of elaborate a little bit more on supervisor Lacroix question, obviously initiating a CPA is not approving the formal application that will follow. We understand that. However, I did make the point at the very last board meeting where we had to take another CPA into consideration how many times the staff come back and recommend denial right of a formal application. I believe it's been once since I can't even remember since forever. And so the likelihood is is that if we were to initiate the CPA here today, we would be faced with an application of at least up to thirteen ninety. Is that my understanding?
I don't think we're gonna come back and support that.
So And that's not the question. The question is is that we would be facing an application with the possibility of thirteen ninety units. Yes. Okay. Thank you.
And so at that point, of that formal application process, how much in terms of negotiation do you think the office can do with the applicant in terms of reducing that thirteen ninety number? I understand that it may be speculative in nature. I just want to paint the picture for my colleagues on the dais and for folks who are part of this process because I understand firmly respect property owners desire to develop their property, but I also am obligated and have a responsibility to address the county's needs, urgent needs to protect infrastructure and our natural resources. That's why I'm asking the question in the manner that I'm asking it.
So I would say just in general with any rezoning application, staff, rezoning applications that include housing, proposed housing units, staff definitely take into consideration the proposed density in a number of units for those projects and where staff have concerns about the level of density or the number of units, we will make recommendations to reduce the number of units.
That's all I have for now, I'm sure. Thank you.
Supervisor LeCroy?
What I'm having a little bit of problem with and I actually a big problem with is every one of the neighbors have come in and wanted to sell their property. And I agree, I think it's too dense, what they showed me. But I know this isn't the end of the line, and I don't wanna just say, I feel not, I don't want to say no to them because they want to sell their property. And I just think that the CPA allows the staff to make recommendations on our behalf while looking at it in a bigger way. So of course we on the day as have the ability to go with your recommendations after you've given it a serious look, but it's it's I'm struggling with it because you're already saying it's too much.
And if we deny it today, it throws everything back at the neighbors and it's a no and a whole lot more rigmarole for the applicant. Is that correct? Do I have that right?
If the board chooses votes to not initiate this CPA at either density, then the CPA will not move forward. And there's a rezoning application, I mean, the applicant has the ability to submit a rezoning application, but it would the CPA would not move forward any further. I understand. Thank you.
Supervisor Stewart?
Yes. So we're only going to be talking about one thing and it's the CPA as it's been submitted. You know the applicant has already said no to CRAs in emails and public comment time. So I personally have a problem with staff coming back and saying, well, we don't like it submitted this way, so you can consider that way. We're only going to address this as it was submitted.
We're not going to substitute Filet O Fish for Big Mac, right? We're not going to do that. So in fact, I'm a little surprised that that would even be recommended by staff. We're just going to look at it as is, as submitted, and that's it. All right, so like I said, the applicants have already said that they're not interested in CRISS, so we shouldn't even be talking about that.
Supervisor Bailey.
Thank you, Madam Chair. And I can appreciate what Supervisor Stewart is saying because here's what when I said yes, does answer my question, and no, it doesn't. Because what we're trying to achieve, along with people that want to sell their property, but also what we're trying to achieve is diversity in housing prices. Correct. Am I wrong to assume that?
I mean and if we are, you don't have to answer that. And having diversity in housing styles, I mean, that's the vision. If I'm not is that not and and looking at that, not making a final decision, but looking at what that can produce for the quantity and the quality that we're trying to provide for those who wanna live here. Right? Or am I wrong in assuming that?
I would say just in general, county's comprehensive plan does have housing policies that support a range of housing types across the county.
Right. And so with that, we're trying to provide variety of not just affordability, but attainability and all of that. So what is confusing me is to what he's saying about why would we not take this opportunity to really take a look. We're not making a final decision. We're actually taking a look initiating the study. Am I correct in saying it that way?
The Board, they vote to initiate the CPA, and this is again just general process, means it authorizes the staff to study the CPA request in more depth to ultimately come back to the board later With to the public hearing with a recommendation on the CPA itself.
With a stronger recommendation?
With an actual recommendation for the board to consider to take action at that time on Okay. The CPA So,
back to what Supervisor Stewart is saying with what, excuse me, has been submitted, that's the tool that you are working with right now? Nothing different, just that's the tool that you are working with right now?
Yes, that's correct. Okay.
All right. Thank you.
Supervisor Vega.
Thank you madam chair and I actually disagree with supervisor Stewart. I appreciate the alternative recommendation and this is why. Oftentimes on this day as we talk about having a lot of needs we do have a lot of needs, but we're at a point in Prince William County where we are a growing county. You say that all the time, madam chair. There's opportunity in this county for growth, but I believe that there's opportunity for smart growth.
I respect and believe firmly in property rights, and this idea of just being completely against anything needs to stop. I am more upset that we're in the position that we're in right now because I'm in the in in in in in the position of, well, where was a supervisor? I hear people saying we try to meet with you. We try to do this. We try to engage, and here we are having to figure this out amongst us.
I don't like to be put in that I certainly don't. And so I appreciate the alternative because I do believe that this is an area where we could create some sort of transition, right? I appreciate being able to consider, I think you said, had calculated five eighty, you said it was $5.84, give or take, but I appreciate that because it at least gives us an opportunity to be able to say this is what I can support, this is what I won't support, This is why, right, while also trying to mitigate or bridge the gap on some of these needs that we have in the county. It is clear that there is some sort of consensus on this dais that what is being proposed is way too dense, and so we are now left to to to to to figure that out. And so I appreciate the alternative because I respect the desires of these homeowners or landowners to want to sell their property, but at the same time, how do we do that, right, While being mindful and responsible when it comes to protecting our infrastructure and our natural resources.
And and I feel for folks. I I really do because there has been environment, madam chair, that has been created where folks are being offered, you know, so much money. You can't compete with this industry and vice versa, and it's created created a very difficult environment for us to be able to not only govern, but to make sound decisions in because you're penalizing certain individuals for the actions of others. And I know that I'm ranting here, but it's just frustrating that we find ourselves in in in in this position. And I just wanna be clear as we continue to, you know, figure out and decide where we're gonna land on this.
The initiation, yes, does not approve, the the the the application that will follow, but I hope that, those representing, you know, this this this future application heed the warnings of members of this of this day is in terms of that density and what that will look like.
Great, thank you so very much. I'm going to jump in before calling for the vote. So I do have serious concerns about the way it was presented to us and I have. Now I haven't met with the homeowners but I've met with representatives on this project. And I've said twice I just think it's too dense. I know I am I support housing but I think that this project is too dense. And the changes haven't been made to make me comfortable with moving the CPA forward. I'm also, this was not part of the CPA but I know there's a discussion about paying for infrastructure through a special tax district. That is something else that gives me concern. You know we're seeing a lot more resident led CPAs that are not necessarily in line with you know the board's stated vision for growth.
Now the CPA was created by a previous board But even with this board there's a lot of concern about a number of the assemblages we're seeing. So I actually I do agree with my colleague supervisor Vega. I appreciate staff coming back with a recommendation. Because to me it shows that you're trying to find a solution for this problem. And it may not be the solution that everyone wants to hear or see.
But I would like to have continued discussion. I also, I'm a little nervous right now because of everything that is going on next to you with the digital gateway. We don't know what that's gonna pan out to be. And that was one of my big questions when I met with your legal representative. How far away is the nearest home gonna be from data centers? Because that was a huge concern of mine. So I personally am interested for my one a, I'm okay with moving forward with the staff recommendation of T dash one c transact. I know that's not what a lot of you are looking for or what you want. You know, I've been warned that that could possibly compromise this project. I believe in solutions.
Maybe there is a way that you can salvage this using that land designation. Again, it may not be what people want to hear. I don't want to shut the door completely but there are a number of problems with the way that this first came to me and those problems haven't been resolved. And I don't want to keep having the same conversation because if I move this forward, if I vote to go with what the applicant is recommending, there is no guarantee that you're gonna come back with a less dense project. I haven't seen it already.
So that's a big concern. I'm willing to work with people. I'm willing to have discussions. But I'm also nervous about moving something forward and then coming back to a project that I just cannot support. I don't want to waste anyone's time with this. Supervisor Lacroix then angry. Oh wait, I'm sorry, LaCroy you've gone, you've done your twice. Didn't waive the rules so do you have a question or, I'm sorry.
I just have something I wanna say.
Okay, all right. Well you know what actually no, we need a motion. So if you I just want to know if there's any questions. I should have held my comments but angry.
I only jumping in because you commented.
Yes, so okay go and then we'll get the motion and everyone else can This
is an initiation of a CPA. So I'm not so sure how we got to the second portion of your your recommendation because it's an initiation of a CPA. So I've always said from the beginning, affordability, if you want affordability, you gotta have density. And and I'll tell you, I've told you we need more houses in the county. So I'm all four houses.
Been that way since I got on this board in 2019. This is an initiation of a CPA. I'm not worried about what the end product will be because I'm pretty sure there's gonna be much discussion about that. This is an initiation of a CPA. I'm interested in saying where this goes from here and what that final number looks like and what we all agree to or whatever that looks like. So it's an initiation of a CPA. That's all I'm saying. So I'm ready to move forward and we'll see where we're going with this motion, but you don't get affordability without density.
All right, I have Lecore and Gordy. Do you guys have questions because I want to go ahead. If there's comments, let's get it in the motion because you have a question so Gordy. He'll do it. So Supervisor Stewart, what would you like to move forward? What motion would you like to make a motion?
Only motion I'm making is that we don't do it.
So your motion is that we deny the project?
Absolutely. Second.
CPA. Okay, it's been moved to properly second it.
I I guess we don't understand what we're
voting on.
So he is moving. Supervisor, Stewart is wants to make a motion that we deny the CPA. That we do not do what the applicant initiated. We
deny it.
Yes, we say yes, we deny it. And then it was seconded. So supervisor LaCroix, Gordy Vega. You have a comment.
Well my comment is that this is a CPA And I just after seeing and hearing from the majority, the total neighborhood that they want to sell and knowing that this is just an initiation. And also in the meetings that I had, I said I thought it was too dense as well. But knowing that it's right now as it stands, it wouldn't pass because it is so dense, because this board's not gonna do it. But also I take very seriously our planning commissioners and or our planning committee. And what they say holds a really huge weight to me, not necessarily on the initiation of the CPA.
What I'm basically saying in that is please look at it harder for me. And when you come back to me I'll listen. So that's just the comment I want to make. It's really hard for me to hear that exactly you guys think what I think but I just don't want to put a halt to the entire neighborhood who's come in here saying please help us to sell our homes. That's my comment.
Thank you. And Supervisor Gordy.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I was on the Planning Commission when we worked diligently on the comprehensive plan. And I'd just like for us to review the fact that when we looked at the idea that we were going to get rid of the rural crescent, that we were going to move forward with a what are called conservation residential zonings in order to create more of a transition between the suburban area and I don't even call it the rural area anymore, call it the agricultural area. Because the reality is that when it oh, and the and the other piece to the comprehensive plan, if you recall, was to put the density in the activity centers. That's where density is supposed to go.
Why? Because that's where the infrastructure is. It's where the schools are. It's where the water is. It's where the roads are. It's where all the infrastructure currently exists. And so the the this board and the and the planning commission operated under an idea that we are gonna control growth. We're gonna be smart about it. We're not gonna just blow this out. We're gonna get rid of the rural area and then blow it out by putting high density suburban development in the rural areas.
But this is what this does. So this is breaking faith with our own comp plan and and the and the negotiations that we had on that comp plan to get to the compromise that it was. And now we're blowing that wide open. And this isn't the only one. I've recently had one come in for 12 units per acre out in the middle of nowhere in my district.
12 units per acre, no infrastructure, nothing, but a dirt or or or just a rural road. And so when we think about what we're doing here, we're only inviting more of this. We're inviting more of it. And I've already told four other developers not interested that have come in with very similar projects. So I I just wanna remind ourselves what we agreed to in that comprehensive plan in terms of how we were going to allow growth to take place into what was called the rural crescent, but do it with a conservation residential in order to make that transition and focus density on and in the activity centers.
And so I leave it at that, madam chair, but I just just remind ourselves, we are we are now just blowing this thing wide open, and I think it sets a very dangerous precedent, and it's opening up Pandora's box for what is to come because of what we initiate high density residential in the what was the rural area. Thank you.
Supervisor Vega.
Thank you for that refresher Tom. It was also very important when we started to talk about affordable housing how affordable housing needed to go in areas with mass transit and obviously now affordable housing is being pitched in areas where there isn't all of the things that Tom mentioned to include access to mass transit. With that being said, I struggle a little bit with the recommendation that staff has provided us here with today only because, you know, staff recommended, initiating the CPA for, Holy Square that encroached on the Occoquan Reservoir. They removed Potomac Tech Park, which I will go on the record and say it is dead on arrival whenever it rears ugly head back again on the agenda. They removed it from the agenda here tonight, but that was recommended for approval, if I'm not mistaken.
And so, you know, we gotta we gotta have some consistency here. Right? Because I don't understand how okay. Yes. Maybe it's it's it is it is hot. It's it's not maybe. I agree that it's it's it's very dense, but I don't understand how a data center's encroaching on the national forest is compatible, with the surrounding areas and how staff arrives at the conclusion that we recommend initiating a CPA for something like that. I just wanted to go on the record with that and get it off my chest. But here we are, you know, being being asked to reconsider a CPA. I don't wanna lose focus of what a CPA is.
It's just an initiation to go ahead and consider the area to further study it. You know, I agree with what Tom has stated. I agree with what a lot of the discussions that has that that we've had here on the day. It's and it's a difficult one, you know, but but I think that we can do better. I think that we can have, all stakeholders come at the table. And when I say stakeholders, I'm also talking about the coalition groups because we need to better that relationship. We need to figure it out. Right? Because this idea of having, different conversations with different groups with not everybody being at the table at the same time creates a nasty environment like the one we're dealing with here today. And I do agree with the comments that were said.
I do agree that we can have it all. We can have smart growth. We can preserve our natural resources, and we can accommodate for the additional growth that this county is going to experience. I'll leave it at that Madam Chair. Thank you.
Alright Supervisor Stewart.
So a number of things. Number one, let's just start with the road that this is on. This is a very dangerous road. We've already had loss of life there. And when the builder approached me, the very first question that was asked is, are you are you ready to widen that road to four lanes from from Sudley Road to Heathcote?
No. Alright? To pour this much traffic into that, we are already where it is. And, you know, the the argument was made that, you know, this is this is going this is gonna this is gonna have QTS to the east. I don't I don't think that's gonna happen. I don't I I don't think that's gonna happen. And then the arguments being made for affordable housing, Again, you know, to speak to what supervisor Gordy said, this is in the middle of nowhere. There's no bus. There's no there's nothing. Right?
You need a car. You need two cars per household to get out of what would be this subdivision. Cat Harbin Road cannot handle that. It can barely handle the traffic that's there now. That's number two.
There's no employment center or anything like that even close. So, everybody keeps talking about this thing with housing. So, I just want to say this, our comp plan already addresses housing needs out to 2040. We don't need this amendment to address housing needs. What we need is the developers to use our comp plan as guidance.
That's what we need. So the argument that the applicant makes is suggesting that there aren't enough T3 areas designated already. And that because the area's infrastructure, particularly transportation, hasn't completely collapsed yet, we should happily continue to stress existing or lack thereof infrastructure. You're building a time bomb if you put one a tent on Cat Harpin Road that for a family to live in. It it it's it's done.
It's done. And unless we widen this road, it it's it's it's it's it's it's for me, it's a nonstarter. Now, I will say this. Looking at the road, I'm not saying that nothing should be done there. I'm I'm I'm I'm I'm willing to have something there if if we can come up with this intelligently.
Right? But the way this is for that many homes, it there's no other choice. My my there's no other choice. We we need to start this process from the beginning, and I think supervisor Vega's right, we need to bring all the parties to the table, and we really need to hash this out so that we can do something that when people look at this area in fifty years, and there's a sense of place, nobody's gonna go, what were they thinking? Because right now, it's, you know, this this this developer wildcatting, it's gotta stop.
That that's what's going on here, and I get it. And you and you folks are caught up in this, but that that's what this is. This is the this is this is San Francisco 1849, And this neighborhood represents a part of the gold rush, whether it be land banking or especially for data centers. And you know, I spoke to the folks that you know, the developer when they came to my office, and I know what this is because I I and I'm I'm not gonna go that deep into it, but I will say it's not about housing. It's not about that.
So we have to do this deliberately, intentionally. Smart housing starts with smart thinking and smart process, and that's what we have to go through now. And so, look, I'd be willing to meet with anybody and everybody to get this done the right way. This is not it.
Supervisor Bailey.
Thank you Madam Chair. I just that was a lot. That was a lot. We went from Gainesville to Independent Hill, now we're back at Gainesville. Potomac Tech no longer lives. I want you to just breathe, Supervisor Vega. So I get you. I get you. The thing that, I do want to say though is, we do need housing. And with the density, I understand the concern about the density.
This is an opportunity for us to reduce density. It's a study. It's an initiation of a study. And if we don't start somewhere, we will be nowhere, and we'll still be talking about this in the next two years. But to what supervisor Vega is saying about collaborative, that's what we haven't done, rather than politicize it.
But people still wanna live in Prince William County. People deserve to live in Prince William County with a view of variety of diverse housing, with a view of what it looks like with the current neighbors that are there. This is what this will initiate. And and and I think that we are very shortsighted when we don't take an opportunity, and we do politicize it, but we don't take the opportunity to look at the tools that we have in our toolbox to make decisions and understand what those tools are before we blurt out what we don't know. And so that's why this decision, as it relates to density, as it relates to respect of who lives there now, as it relates to the future and how we grow in a smart way.
It's very important that we take an opportunity to look at that and learn the comprehensive plan and decide what that is as it applies to what applicants are putting in in our county, whether we want it or we don't want it. We still have to use those tools to make policy and to make decisions. And so I think that we miss the mark when we don't understand what we're working with initially. We just make a decision based upon we don't know. But I think we don't make smart decisions if we don't make them based upon what history tells us and what we've created in the past to make the future look better for the next generation.
And I think that's important. But if we don't know the tools that we have to make those decisions, then we're sending a different message to our current residents as well as our future residents if we don't know what the tools are. That's my thoughts. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Supervisor LeCroy.
This is my last ditch effort to be I'm a real estate agent and somebody comes to me and says, want to sell my home. I work towards a yes, I don't say no. And when we have an entire neighborhood that says, look to my left, to my right, people are doing it, this would be very like minded. And said to them, because I want to support you so much, but I said to them, this is too dense, but let's get it started somewhere. And if the road, Cat Harbin, is dangerous, then that needs to be a requirement that our good friend right here in the front row would address.
And he would make sure that that was part of it because he's that good. And our planning commission, they said exactly what I said immediately. And honest to gosh, if it comes back I mean, of course, it's gonna come in at the highest of density, but it does remind me of my neighborhood that came in at a ridiculous number. And working with the developer, it got down not even half a third. But I just can't imagine us with an entire neighborhood coming in and saying, we'd like to get started to sell our house.
And it's like the neighborhoods that are going up beside us, and us just saying no and throwing it back. I think collaboration is everything with the people that are from the West that are concerned about it. And I just think we should be seriously considering that this CPA is the starting point, not the end point. And we all know from these other developments that we can work towards a yes instead of saying no and then let them try to figure out what to do. They're asking us to please allow them to sell, and some of these people have lived there all their lives.
But this is either an opportunity for them well, for sure but they all have come together and said they want this done. And I think that we should allow it to start knowing that there is just no way it's going to land where it is and taking all your serious considerations into consideration. That's all I have to say. Supervisor Stewart.
I appreciate that. And this is not a no like it's like a complete shutdown. This is a no that I don't know why go through the motions of looking at something that's dead on arrival, so to speak. And I get that again, you're looking at the neighborhood. I am also looking at the total neighborhood, which is 500,000 plus people.
Prince William County, right? And as I iterated, the comp plan addresses housing. It was studied, it was gone over back and forth, back and forth, it was voted upon and ratified. And so now we want to make changes. And then changes to the changes on top of the no, consider that the comp plan got it right.
Just consider that for a second, that maybe the comp plan got it right. You know, we lost some things we shouldn't have lost. We lost the rural crescent, know, but consider that when it comes to housing that the comp plan got that right. Okay? And like I said, it's not that I don't want anything to happen with Cat Harp and Valley Estates, want nothing to happen with that, but let's take a look at this step by step and come up with something that everybody can and when I say everybody, I mean 500,000 plus people can be happy with that fits this area in an appropriate way.
Right? I don't see it going from mansions to two family townhouses. I I I just I I can't see that.
Supervisor Vega, I know you had a question for supervisor Stewart.
Thank you, madam chair. In lieu of of of everything that you've stated, supervisor Stewart and in regards to what we all have discussed on the day is would you support a deferral to give you time and your team to meet with the applicant and the homeowners to see where we land? Yes.
And I support as the seconder as well.
I support it as well.
Wait hold on. We're not going to jump in. So you are making a motion to defer this you want to make a substitute amendment a motion to defer this project?
That's correct. Yes. I'd like to make a
motion Madam to Chair, I
may, yes.
I would suggest that we defer to a date certain and this is why. We've had folks reach out to all of our offices indicating their interest and their desires to sell their land and to develop this area. We've heard, right, that there has been issues in in regards to meeting with you and whatnot. Having a date certain gives these folks the ability to properly plan and to ensure that we're no longer going to kick the can down the road. I want to go on the record saying that I'm acting in good faith with the hope that, we land at a better place.
And when that date certain, whatever that date is that we agree on, we're going to come and we're going to make a decision one way or the other In terms of we move forward or or we don't. I just don't like where we're at right now. I think it would be unfair. I don't know how the vote would go, but if I were to speculate and say that if the vote fails, it would be unfair, right, because of all of the time, energy, resources that folks have put into getting here today. And so I think that the prudent thing would be to defer it to give you as a district supervisor and your team an opportunity to meet with the applicant to hear from the homeowners and bring in the additional stakeholders that would be instrumental in deciding where we go in a reasonable fashion.
Before we say or call anyone else, are you comfortable doing a date certain or do you want to do a date uncertain? If it's a date certain, what date would you have in mind? Because I want to make sure that we have a clean motion that everyone understands before I have additional comments. Now we can quickly look at, because I don't know how much time you need. I don't know what your schedule looks like.
I don't know if you want to push this to July, June 9 is not. I don't know how much time it's going to take because if we are, wait hold on there's a lot of side conversation. I just want to note that if we do this sooner rather than later we also started working on the other agendas but more important you need time to really meet with people, get everyone on the schedule And if changes are to be made, it's going to take time. So I'm just gonna be look, we need to be realistic about this process. If you're gonna defer to a date certain, then we have no meetings in August.
So you can look at July, can look at August. Yes, as I said we don't have any meetings. So I hear June 23 but I don't know if that's really truly enough So this is your district, technically it's our district but I just wanted to see if you because again there was a motion to deny, now there's a motion to defer. There's a lot of pressure so and we're also getting close to our 07:00 meeting. So I don't know if you think that there's an appropriate date or timeline or do you want to continue to leave this as a defer to an uncertain date?
He's saying July 21. It's like this is a
Would you like the September meeting dates?
Have them pulled up.
Super. I want July. I like July.
Wait. This is George's decision. And we're also coming up against our 07:00 meeting.
Here's what I'm going do. Alright. I'm going to keep my original motion to deny the CPA. I am still going to get everybody together and we're all going to come back and put this forward the right way.
Alright. So then we're gonna okay. So then we will revert. I'm sorry because we already have a new motion. Do we need to vote the new motion down, Andrea?
My motion right now is to defer. Are we going back to the
To deny. Do we need to vote that down?
Supervisor Stewart is the maker of the motion. If he's changing it to be a denial, if the seconder who is supervisor Gordy is comfortable with that. Let's say you supervisor.
We can stick with the original motion.
Okay. So we are going to keep the original motion that is to deny the CPA. Supervisor Boddy.
Yeah. Thank you madam chair. In the interest of time I won't be long. Just wanted say, supervisor Vega, I appreciate, your suggestion for deferral because I I do believe that was the actual answer. I I just wanna say thank you for that because to me, you know, we have applicant who's asking for RN three. We have a staff combination of CRES. There's a lot of daylight of planning designations between those. And, you know, there's rural destinations. There's transition communities. There are lot of there's RN one, RN two, like, there's a lot of daylight there.
And supervisor Lacroix, think you're on the right track too. There is so much daylight between what staff recommended, and I do appreciate staff making a recommendation, and where the applicant is. And I know there's actually another option if we could have recommended something completely different, which I think we we should end up doing at some point. But I'll just say I think that deferral was the the right choice. I'll be voting against denial.
Supervisor hold on. Vega you have done your twice or do you have anything else to add real quick?
Yeah I'm not speaking madam chair. I would then, offer the substitute motion to defer to a date certain of June 23.
Second.
So we have a substitute motion to defer to June 23. Any discussion on that point? I don't see anyone so let's go ahead.
What was the date?
June 23.
Is that enough time? I'm just planning items are already being sent in and routed for the agenda for June 23. I'm just concerned about the turnaround time.
As the clerk noted, there's roughly a three to four week lead time for staff to prepare materials to be added to meeting agenda. So that would not give very much time for Supervisor Stewart. It's not impossible, but just letting you know, it would be we would have to submit it very soon. Well, as she just noted, items are it would be next week that we would have to submit whatever the updated packet would be.
Alright. I hear a lot of negotiating with people, you know, trying to throw around dates. Did you have anything else to say? Otherwise I want to call for the vote.
Yeah I'll amend my substitute motion then to July 21 that should give staff plenty of time to get in their materials in.
All except for the seconder.
Right it's been moved and any other discussion on this point? Right. So let's go ahead and this is to defer.
Supervisor Vega and the second was supervisor Bode? Yes. Thank you. Okay. And that was July 21?
Yes.
Motion passes seven to one. Supervisor voting nay.
All right thank you so very much. So I will work with staff and your office supervisor Stewart for July 21. Thank you everyone for attending. We are very close to our 07:00 meeting. I am gonna have to move some things around the agenda because I do want us to start as close on time. So what we're gonna do is we're gonna take a ten minute break. When we come back, we're gonna honor the Osborne Park girls basketball team And we're gonna move right straight into our 07:00 meeting. After that, we will do closed session and supervisors time. Thank you very much. Ten minutes.
Sorry. I'm just getting everyone in before I I gavel in. I want people to find a seat. Actually, for the students, I'm sorry. I see you're on crutches. If you wanna go over there to that side if it's not too much or if you wanna sit there because we're gonna be over we're gonna do that. If everyone, including those on the dais, can settle in. All right. I'm gaveling us back in at 07:12. Thank you.
We had to take a little break. But before I, go back, there was a question I had. 10 c was withdrawn. It was withdrawn, but I just want to, director Washington, if you can answer a quick question. Guys, I'm sorry, we're back. So 10C was withdrawn. Can you tell us where this by the applicant's request, can you tell us where that stands right now, that project stands?
So CPA requester requested to withdraw that item from today's agenda. They did not provide a reason. Based off of the information that we have we understand that they'll be working with supervisor Bailey would like to do some additional coordination with them, and so we so we are waiting for the outcome of that. Additionally, there is a rezoning application in SGP, a special use permit applications that are companions to that CPA that have been submitted and are going through the first review with staff. So we are waiting for further updates on the CPA request.
All right. Thank you for the update on that. I just wanted to make note of that. All right. What we're going to do is move on.
We have the Osborne Park girls basketball team here. So supervisor Vega and I are going to come down and we are going to honor this winning team. All right. Oh, Andrea. Do you have the Good job.
Moms, you can get closer. Don't be shy. Wanna snap pictures? Come on over. How do I, lower this thing? I've never had to lower it.
There we go.
There you go. Alright. The Osborne Park High School Yellow Jacket girls basketball team demonstrated exceptional determination, discipline, teamwork, and sportsmanship throughout the 2026 season representing Prince William County with pride both on and off the court. Through their hard work and perseverance and an unwavering commitment to excellence, the Yellow Jackets secured their second consecutive Virginia High School League class six state championship. That is a remarkable and historic achievement for Osborne Park High School located in the Coles District.
This back to back championship reflects not only the talent of these student athletes, but also the dedication of the coaching staff, school leadership, families, and supporters who helped guide and encourage the team throughout the season. The Prince William Board of County Supervisors proudly commends the Osborne Park High School Yellow Jackets girls basketball team for their extraordinary achievement and congratulate all those who contributed to this historic season. Congratulations, coach, and congratulation, ladies, coach.
Thank you, for the recognition. You know, the season was really fun. Being able to go back to back was also, you know, something that has not been done. So, like she said, was historic. But,
yeah, just, you know, super happy to play basketball, and we're pretty good at it. So yeah. Obviously. Alright.
Thank you for having us here tonight. I'm coach Kelly. I've been the Osborne Park girls basketball coach for the last nine years. It's my second stint in Prince William County. I was at Forest Park from 2000 to 2007 and opened them inaugural season and then came back to Prince William County.
So to be able part to be part of two different programs to to win state championships has been a really cool experience. But, really, it all goes to the girls. I I I think they're just an amazing group of young women who are constantly persevering and constantly working hard, committing to something that's something bigger than them. Like my five seniors, all five are going to college and all five are gonna play college basketball. All five have over a 3.5 GPA.
I only have a couple of my juniors here and and none of the really young ones, but I have two of my juniors here as well who are gonna play at the next level. It's it's just really an amazing group of young women, and I I a lot of behind the scenes stuff isn't you've clearly seen, but we have a lot of 5AM practices. We work out every single day. We've already been in the gym since the Monday after the state championship. So it's, we're trying to win another one for the county and and to represent Osborn Park High School.
Another, acknowledgment needs to go to the parents. I know there's only a couple here or a few here, but they're the ones who sacrifice, and and they drive all over the county the the very first couple years until their daughters get driver's license, but they're just amazing. And they support and fundraise and allow us opportunities to travel across the country to represent this county, and I I think these girls do a really amazing job. But it's we're just I'm really fortunate to coach such an incredible group, and we'll continue to represent Prince William County the best we can. So thank you for having us. All
right. If anyone else on the board wants to go outside, we're going to take a quick picture. Come on, this is such a big deal. Let's go. And we're going to make this quick, y'all.
We're going make it quick. All right, everyone. We are back. We are now moving on to agenda item number 13. Those are the public hearings.
First, we are going and I'm going to obviously break these up. We are gonna start with 13 a, the proper amendment for Old Bridge Road. If the applicant can come up for your presentation.
Good evening, madam chair, members of the Board of Supervisors. My name is Noah Klein. I am an attorney with the law firm of Vedible. And here tonight to present to you my presentation for thank you, the proper amendment at 39 Old Bridge Road. That's actually not too far from where we sit at this meeting.
This is an application that's been in the works for a few years. There's been quite a bit of community engagement on discussions with Locopelt, discussions with the Occoquan District and we feel that we've arrived at a very good place. This was a project that was recommended unanimously for approval by the Planning Commission, and we're excited to bring it to you tonight. So just to give you an idea of the area overview, as I mentioned, this site sits right up the street from where we sit on Old Bridge Road. This is the last unimproved piece of the Glen Of The Glen master plan.
That was originally approved back in, I believe, 1989, so it's been around for a while. And this parcel is Parcel 4 Of The Glen. You can see it here, it's divided into two pieces though that triangular piece you see on the opposite side of Old Bridge Lane is not projected for any development. In fact, it wasn't allocated for any FAR in the original master plan for The Glen. But that's a property it's about 3.5 acres and change and it is currently zoned B1, zoned B1 back with the original zoning.
Its long range land use designation is MU4. The B1 zoning here is the specific proffer that we are amending relates to an allowance for a multistory office building with ground floor restaurant. So we're amending that proffer to essentially remove the office designation and produce what we anticipate to be a very successful modern commercial plaza. This proffer amendment, if approved, will finalize the build out of the Glen master plan. It is less impactful and less intense than the BioWrite development office development.
And we believe it will further invigorate this established commercial corridor. I mean I think folks most folks are probably familiar with The Glen as you approach from this direction, as you head east, you have The Glen is essentially anchored by the Safeway shopping development. On the other side of the street, have Chipotle, Apple, Federal Credit Union and then this again is the last remaining parcel. So this would we think just help solidify this area, this concentrated area for commercial development. Here is good sampling of our community engagement.
We initially held an open house meeting at the Chin Center back in November 2024. It was pretty well attended. We were there for a good chunk of the evening talking with folks and the comments we heard were ones that you would anticipate what's this development going to mean for our communities and folks who live along Old Bridge Lane and further down Bear Pond Road. What's it going to mean in terms of traffic? What's it going to mean in terms of how the project is going to function?
And really what is the ultimate effect on us. And we were obviously very sensitive to that. We've built a few mitigation measures into the project, one pretty unique one I should say. But ultimately feel pretty confident in what we've put together here. So that was the open house meeting at the Chin Center.
We did have a sign up sheet and so what we did through coordination with Doctor. Jack at Locopel. So we took the sign up sheet, added that to the distribution for Locopel. So every Locopel meeting that we had and you can see we had a number of them, we included all the folks who signed up. And so we had some folks in the community who show up at those meetings.
Locopel has been very supportive of this project, asked us a bunch of very good questions, pushed us in the right direction and they've been in support. I think someone from LococoPhill was here, someone from LococoPhill showed up at the Planning Commission and spoke in favor. We did we've been engaging with folks who live nearby. We met with folks who live across the street to talk to them about any concerns they might have about the project and met with them. We're going to provide additional screening on their property. And again, just happy to engage with folks and see
where
we can meet people on this project. So here is the basic layout with the landscaping. One thing I'll point out in terms of the landscaping here along the bend on Old Bridge Lane, you'll see there's sort of a lighter green shade. That is existing vegetation that we are going to preserve. One comments, of actually not one, a few comments we heard the public at our initial public outreach were folks who lived along the bend, the single family homes along Old Bridge Lane and they were concerned about cars coming into the property with and headlights potentially creeping out onto the street and potentially into their property.
So we added additional landscaping in terms of evergreens here and we kept that existing vegetation. The site here, it is we have a standalone restaurant space. It is anchored by a Dunkin' drive thru with three in line tenant spaces. They do say restaurant on there, but I want to clarify that that restaurant is only for parking purposes. We want to assume the most conservative parking environment, but those three interior tenants would be sort of neighborhood commercial in line tenant spaces.
We have access right in, right out access off of Old Bridge Road. I'll spare you the details of working with VDOT through that, but we were able to get right in, right out access. The access we have another access point on the south on Old Bridge Lane and that we've pushed over from the last when we were last in front of the Planning Commission to address some comments. I have a slide that shows us one update to the application since I think it was routed to everyone, we'll talk about in a second. But this is the layout.
I think one thing I want to identify here and you'll see it a little more clearly in the renderings is that this property slopes downward from Old Bridge Lane essentially to Old Bridge Road. And so we've taken advantage of that topography through the design as you'll see. So it's a sort of a tiered design. And what we've really kind of taken advantage of that is we are providing an outdoors tiered hardscape outdoor seating environment here at this plaza, which is something that we know folks have asked about and folks have wanted to see. And I frankly don't know what other opportunity there has been for that type of offering to really kind of activate some space within a commercial context.
But we have that just to the south of that left most parking lot and then we have outdoor seating for a restaurant with some walkways and things you'll see a little more clearly when we show the elevations. So here are just the black and white renderings. This is going to be a modern shopping plaza. You'll see the color when we in the next slide. And again, as I mentioned, we sort of take advantage of sort of the topography of the site.
So you can see steps leading up a little bit of some retaining walls there. But this is going to be as I mentioned, a very aesthetically pleasing design that takes that borrows elements of some of the newer development commercial development you see in The Glen and incorporates that to create something that's new, something that's modern and something that we think will help set the tone for commercial development in the area. So here are the color renderings. Again, a very modern design. We've featuring quite a bit of glazing of glass with some accents and a roof line that sort of breaks up the massing and really creates some visual interest and create something new that I think is really needed in this corridor.
The Glen is the main Glen Shopping Plaza was part of a development that happened back in the early 90s has sort bears that look. So the newer development that comes in really needs to showcase what modern development can look like when it's done correctly. And so that's I think what we're providing here. Here's a glimpse of our proposed signage. And here are just some of the accents materials that we are going to be proposing for this project.
So here's something that came in that we provided I think after the report went out. So I want to clarify that the proper statement would be dated 05/07/2026. Staff has a copy of that. And the GDP was last revised 05/07/2026, really only in this one measure. So this is we added a sidewalk connection from Old Bridge Lane to the site just to the left of our access point.
This was something that had come up at the Planning Commission meeting and reiterated through the Occoquan District and something that we heard and understood to be something important as a feature and I think staff as well they can speak for themselves, but I believe that they've also found it to be important. So we added a sidewalk, made it work with the property and only updated the proffers just to reflect the last revised date. So we didn't have to really touch upon any substantive proffers. But here's a sidewalk connection that will give folks who are coming from Old Bridge Lane, who might be on foot, maybe on a bike, have a way to access this commercial plaza without having to go on the access and within the access road. This gives you a glimpse of the proposed development versus buy rate condition.
As I mentioned, buy rate, we are allowed office restaurantretail, total FAR 0.4, height of 45 feet. Our proposed development pretty much half of that in a lot of respects or actually I would say even 75% a quarter of that. We have commercial drive through single story. We are 0.05 FAR, we're at a lower height. You can see sort of the difference there.
And in terms of our traffic breakdown, it's pretty meaningful drop in traffic. And one thing about traffic that I'll point out here is that we are able to get the access off of Old Bridge Road because we have this because it's commercial development. And if I'm wrong about this, our traffic consultant, gross label correct me. But if this were a primary office building, we may be in an environment where traffic would have to be circulated in a by rate condition to Old Bridge Lane. So with the commercial, we're able to have another point of access off a primary arterial road that does help the condition of the property, helps take the load off Old Bridge Lane.
And as you can see, it's going to generate far fewer trips than what's allowed by rate. And then the last thing I'll say here is that when I talked about sort of uniquely looking at things for this project and mitigation, We understood that traffic is a concern to folks who live in the community. This is property that's been unimproved for probably as long as folks have lived there, who may not have been aware that this is B1's own property that was just waiting to be developed and here we come along. So we knew from our study that a traffic signal would be a pretty significant boon for that intersection Old Bridge Lane and Old Bridge Road. It would be pretty meaningful drop in levels improvement in levels of service.
However, the issue there is understand that VDOT will not want to locate a signal there because it's too close to other signals along Old Bridge Road. And VDOT's theory, and you can't really disagree with them, is that on these major arterial roads, you kind of want to keep things moving and things flowing as best you can. So even though a study shows a signal would help things, VDOT ultimately, we understand won't authorize a signal there. So we are proffering on the front end to do a study, signal study and then be responsible for our pro rata share of that traffic, which is no small number of that of a future signal. But because we understand that VDOT will not likely authorize a signal there, we kind of look at things and say, well, what do we do with that money that otherwise would go towards that signal, would otherwise sort of be the sort of the direct mitigation for our impact.
And so we started looking and talking to folks about transit and seeing where we can improve things from a trans perspective. There's a bus stop, OmniRide bus stop right along Old Bridge Road right on our frontage. So I had a conversation with PRTC and one of the things that PRTC is very interested in doing is creating a micro transit service area within Lakeridge. Now I'm not a spokesperson for micro transit, but I can represent sort of what it provides here, which is a sort of a public rideshare option where people can call, people can call the service, an electronic van will come pick you up and take you potentially shopping centers and to transit locations. It's worked very successfully in other areas of the county in Dumfries, Triangle, they have a micro service area and if you talk to PRC they'll tell you it's been incredibly successful.
And so we know that PRC wants to initiate a service area here. And so what we are proffering is if VDOT decides not to authorize that signal, and there's a portion of that money that we can then apply to a future micro transit service area here to sort of kick things off because we would benefit from that no question. We believe folks who live along Old Bridge Lane up Air Pond Road, folks who live within sort of these cul de sacs that don't have multiple entrances and access points which is what microtransit is intended to serve that those folks will benefit. And ultimately the whole point of that is to reduce vehicle trips, get people to transit and for PRTC to then design better transit solutions based on the usage of this service. So that is something that we are happy to do.
And that is my presentation. And I'm happy to answer any questions folks may have.
So please.
Alright. Does anyone have any questions for the applicant? Alright. Sir Roger Boddy.
Thank you, madam chair. Thank you, mister Klein, the presentation, and I appreciate all the work we've been able to collaborate on over the past few years on this project. You already answered my first question was about traffic impacts versus buy right, so I won't go into that, but I appreciate you you illustrating that. You did mention that you presented to LOCA quite a few times. I see my constituent Clancy. Good to see you, sir. And one to the broader community. Can you summarize the key themes you've heard? I know you touched upon a little bit. And what concrete steps have you taken to reduce those impacts, how will you ensure those commitments are followed through during construction operation? Sort of walk me through the screening, especially for the light on folks on Old Bridge Lane.
Sure. Let me see if I can go back. I think this is a good slide. I think something something malfunctioned here. It may have been me. So whenever this decides to get the slide that I would like to see. What I don't know if there's a way to go back. Sure. We'll figure this out in real time right here. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Sorry, what was your question?
No. So
well, let me answer that last part about I think construction. So we're part of the we sit within the original Glen master plan district. That plan included a proffer for local pelt review at the time of site plan. Clearly we're not amending that. So there is an opportunity for folks to speak to the project, talk to the applicant when we're at the site plan stage if again we're fortunate to be approved.
So that could be a really good opportunity to talk about what construction might potentially look like. In terms of what we've done, the concerns we heard were really what does traffic look like for us on Old Bridge Lane. Now is this project going to represent a change from the existing condition? Course, of course and we understand that. How we try to address that is there's what we can do based on what our study show.
And our study says a signal here would be a benefit at Old Bridge Lane and Old Bridge Road. We and I went through that whole discussion, won't reiterate it here, but what happened with that discussion, how we ended up with micro transit. We did look at other options. We looked at maybe there are physical improvements we could do along Old Bridge Lane, but anything meaningful there would have necessitated acquisition of right away from folks from homeowners who live along Overland and that just not a viable option, not one that I would even want to raise here in this setting. So we've that's how we ended up with where our transportation mitigation sits.
You know, it was very important to us to try to maintain as much of the existing vegetation where we could, to ensure that there was really as as less as as little impact from a light standpoint, would say, from cars that would be potentially accessing the the drive through. And we happen to also I mentioned the topography before. We're at a higher level than where Old Bridge Lane sits and even the folks that live along Old Bridge Lane are even at a slightly lower elevation. So there's the natural sort of screening there. And we were happy to meet.
We met with folks that live right across the street from the access. And they're I won't speak for them, but they're concerned about what traffic looks like here and about any of the impacts of cars leaving that access point. And we talked to them. We are going to provide some additional screening for them on their property. But through all that we look to what we can achieve and what's keeping within the bounds of our development and try to look at options that we thought would work and some works and some didn't. And so this is where we ended up.
All right, Supervisor Bodhi two point zero.
Okay. Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate it because he wastes some of my time with pretending not to hear me So that's fine. No. I appreciate that. And so my last real question is, you mentioned near the end that you believe this will be a pretty successful Yes. Shopping center. I know that some folks, you know, have said, hey, right now it's a a greenfield, what have you. There's other parts on other on other corridors that have, you maybe know, underutilized office space, what have you, why are you going here? Can you talk about sort of market study that you all have done and sort of why you believe this will be a highly utilized Well,
have so we already, I believe and the applicant correct me, but I believe we have potential tenant within the inline tenant spaces. The Dunkin' is the end cap unit that's in place. There are conversations happening with the restaurant. I think folks are there's interest, but folks want this project to have some definitiveness, I would say. But we can if you'd like to hear more of the applicants here to sharing those details, But I can tell you that there is definitely seeing interest here just waiting for this project has been around for a few years and so seeing it materialize as I think things are becoming a little more real for folks who want to come in here.
Sure. Actually, Manisher, just one more thing. And Mr. Klein, thank you. And you also mentioned one of other things that was discussed, which is that sort of new in line sidewalk, which was added to I Old Bridge appreciate that because again, we don't want people having to walk in through a travel lane to get it there, I appreciate that. Talking about the rest of Old Bridge Lane, can you talk about sort of the dilemma you had and the the the the balancing act between, hey, folks have mentioned wanting more pedestrian access, but the the screening from the neighbors. So you talk about that.
Yes, that was a bit of a it's
a bit
of a balancing act. So one of the comments that we received was looking at a potential sidewalk along Old Bridge Lane. So we have just I guess I should it's a good opportunity to point this out. We are updating the sidewalk that's along our Old Bridge Road frontage and we have two pedestrian access points on either side of the access off of Old Bridge Road. But we did get a comment about sidewalk along Old Bridge Lane.
I've said it before, I'll mention it again, the topography here pretty challenging. So when we looked at a sidewalk because we didn't really have any real sort of philosophical objection to that necessarily, but looking to see what works here and for a sidewalk to go in there, a reasonable sidewalk, five foot sidewalk, you'd have to cut out a lot of that vegetation to make it work. And that was if there's any takeaway from that meeting that we had at the Chin Center, it was the folks that lived along Old Bridge Lane wanting to make sure that we maintain as much screening as we can and that was a commitment that we made to them and we wanted to keep it and still maintaining that commitment. Appreciate that. Thank you.
All right, Supervisor Bailey.
Thank you. I just want to compliment you on acknowledging in your presentation and putting it in your plans about the OmniRide and the new transit system. Supervisor Bodhi and I, and we joined our chair, Supervisor Angry, on the board. And that's one of the things that we executed for communities like this, to make sure that that mobility piece that we have in a comp plan comes out when these kind of presentations are made. And so just thank you for understanding the tools that you have in your toolbox to make sure that our citizens are served better and well.
Now a pleasure.
Are there any other questions for the applicant? If not, I'd like the county to come up.
Good evening, supervisors. My name is Micah Modesto with the planning office. Staff is recommending approval of proper amendment rezoning twenty twenty three dash zero zero zero seventeen thirty nine zero nine Old Bridge Road. This is a request to amend the proffers associated with PLN 2006Dash00525 to allow for the development of a shopping center type a featuring a drive through facility and four additional spaces for retail, neighborhood commercial, or restaurant tenants. The subject property is approximately 3.55 acres and is located at the south corner of the intersection of Old Bridge Road and Old Bridge Lane.
The site is addressed as 3909 Old Bridge Road and is identified on county maps as GPin8193Dash71Dash1918. It is the recommend it is the recommendation of the planning commission and staff that the board of county supervisors approve rezoning 2023Dash00173909OldBridgeRoad subject to the proffers, now dated May 7. As shown on the zoning map oh, sorry. As shown on the zoning map on the left, the site is zoned b one general business and is surrounded by residential uses and a one agricultural and R 16, suburban residential zoning districts. As shown on the long range land use map on the right, the site is designated MU 4 mixed use community with the transect for and the con and the county's comprehensive plan.
The site about abuts RN 2 residential neighborhood to the and South and M U 4 to the West and North. Staff believes the proposed use is complementary to its surrounding uses. Staff believes this request is generally consistent with the development standards of the zoning ordinance. Shopping centers types a through d are by right in the B 1 General Business Zoning District. Drive through facilities are a special use and section thirty two four hundred point zero seven point two a permits drive thru facilities through a proffered rezoning as long as it is specifically identified in the proffers or on the generalized development plan.
And this project satisfies both of those requirements. The proffer amendment amends and supplements the proffer set forth in PRA PLN two thousand six zero zero five two five as they apply to Parcel 4. The site was originally a part of rezoning 1988 Dash 0052 and underwent three previous proffer amendments. This site remains the last undeveloped portion of the original rezoning, which has been developed into housing, commercial, and office buildings. This site was designated as office and commercial use in the original rezoning as well as in the previous proffer amendments.
Staff believes the proposed use is a lower intensity use that is, than what is currently permitted under the existing proffers. As already mentioned by the applicant, staff does believe that it's a strength that the applicant will contribute to PRTC micro transit service if the signal is not authorized by VDOT. I just wanted to mention on the sidewalk, originally and we do have transportation if you have questions later about it. But originally, transportation did request a sidewalk along Old Bridge Lane either on the this side of the property or in the small triangular portion on the, southern portion of their property across Old Bridge Lane. I this portion, the right of way already exists with the neighboring properties, so it would be easier to connect that.
The applicant did end up providing a sidewalk here, which is quite new. It was submitted late last week or early this week. I So I won't speak for all staff at this. Staff hasn't had enough time to be able to fully review the new submission of the sidewalk, to be able to give a great recommendation on that aspect of this project. The planning commission and staff recommends that the board of county supervisors approve proffer amendment rezoning 2023 Dash 00173909 Old Bridge Road subject to the proffers dated May 7 for the following reasons.
The proffers associated with PLN 2006Dash00525 reserved the site for an official build for an office building with retail permitted on the Ground Floor. Staff finds the proposed use to be a lower intensity use. The proposed commercial center and drive through facility will be construct constructed in substantial conformance with the elevations. The applicant proffers the use of high quality materials and design features that are in line with land use policy 4.2, which says, encourage the creation of places with distinctive identities using high quality design features consistent with the character of the community. Thank you. And we are happy to answer any questions and have transportation here as well.
Alright. Thank you so very much. I'm gonna start with supervisor Bode then Bailey.
Thank you, madam chair. Thank you, Micah. And I appreciate your work on this. Really appreciate staff and all the reviewing agencies on on their work on this. So just a couple questions, Micah. Mhmm. To go back to one of your first slides, you know, and and it's been talked about a couple of times here. This is the last piece of the Glenn, and I'll just say it. This master plan has been a long around it almost as long as I've been alive, and I'm glad that we're finally here to to finish it off. From your perspective as a planner, knowing that it's m u four in the comp plan and not this side of the street anyway, In this stretch, it's all just residential. What do how do you see this that we're finally putting sort of a commercial, residentially facing use that's nonresidential in that piece?
In discussions with applicant, it has been and reviewing of the maps, this project will fill a commercial the commercial aspect on this side of Old Bridge Road. Currently, there is commercial, oops, sorry, not far to the south, but it will add easier access to quick commercial on on the right side of Old Bridge Road. So I do believe that it it is a positive contribution. I do think, specifically, the architectural design of the project can have an impact on what future projects could be coming into our county. And I do think that it's it seemed that the applicant has worked hard to communicate with the community prior to, bringing this to us.
And so while it's not perfect and there the addition of the the concerns of traffic on Old Bridge Lane and the left turn from Old Bridge Lane to Old Bridge Road is still a concern and the addition of this, may have an impact on it. Although I'm not a transportation planner. I would say in general, this project will contribute to the county and our goals.
Appreciate that. And, Mike, I will jump to transportation a second, last question for you. One of the other concerns that was shared with you by one of one of the residents is storm water runoff and things like that. In the review and the other agencies that sort of looked at this, was there any concern of of water management, things like that that you found in your analysis?
So in discussions with Watershed, I should have asked them to be here. They did not have significant concerns about the impact on it. They're still maintaining, portions of the existing forest, on the site. And also, I believe they're doing they have just you made a change to the stormwater management in the last submission? Yeah. We
did. Okay.
Sorry. The applicant made a change in stormwater management since the last, submission.
Sure. I I can just very quickly touch upon this. As to the general point about, runoff, that was something we had heard when we we were at the the Chin Center. We wanted to clarify for folks there that in terms of runoff, everything slopes down from our from the rear of the property in Old Bridge Lane to Old Bridge Road. So everything drains and flows in that direction. We had a storm water facility, a wet sort of a small wet pond in the corner of the property, but we realized we didn't need that because we have an underground detention along closer to the front of General Bridge Road.
Appreciate that. And then my question is for transportation. Thank you, Micah. So in transportation, let's talk about traffic a little bit. And based on the analysis you have done, if there are any concerns there? And can we also talk about that sidewalk that was mentioned earlier and sort of what the thought is around that?
Chair Jefferson, members of the board, Kevin Wyrock, Transportation Planning Manager. Regarding traffic, we don't have significant concerns. We think the proffers are strong enough to warrant their share of a traffic signal if it's needed based on their analysis. And then I'm sorry,
repeat
the This question on a the sidewalk sidewalk along Old Bridge Lane that you guys were originally sort of
wanting a sidewalk along Old Bridge Lane. If you look further south of the site on Old Bridge Lane, there's actually, some people call it a desire line. Other people will call it a goat path on, Old Bridge Lane near Beaver Pond Road. And what that is is an area of the grass where the grass has, you know, sort of been turned into a dirt path because people are walking on it. So we we know that there is a need here for pedestrian accommodations in the area.
We didn't expect the applicant to make the full connection. Obviously, it would require many off-site improvements. But we did want them to take a look at putting a sidewalk either on the north side of Old Bridge Lane along their property. For the reasons that they stated previously, whether it was screening or grading constraints, they did not do that. There's also an option on the south side since they do own a portion of the prop of the, you know, south of the roadway to dedicate more right of way to allow for a sidewalk to be built there in the future.
If you look at the property lines on County Mapper, adjacent to their sliver of property on the South of Old Bridge, the right of way narrows where their property is by about 12 feet. It it we can't force them to do it. It's not a comp plan road, but knowing that the, need for pedestrian accommodations is there, we would be supportive of them dedicating some additional right of way on that south side, and then we could go in later with trip funds or with grant funds to make a sidewalk connection from Old Bridge Road all the way down to Beaver Pond Road.
If I could, madam chair, just on that bead, if I'm the only one that's still in queue. Okay. Thank you. And just on that note, just looking back at the applicant, is the applicant willing to give that reservation? Okay. I see a thumbs up. Is that right of way reservation?
Just to clarify on the smaller triangular piece, which I think you're alluding to, we are our plans do have right of way dedication along that stretch.
You. And
that's all I got, Madam Chair. Thank you. Thanks to staff.
Alright. Thank you so much. I do not have any speakers in queue. So I'm going to go ahead and open the public hearing for item 13 a. The proper amendment for 3909 Old Bridge Road.
I have two people signed up, Clancy McQuigg and Carla Cristiano Cristiano. And you have five minutes I'm sorry. If you're in an organization, Clancy, if you want to request your five minutes, let us know at the top. Otherwise, you have three minutes. And begin by stating your name, where you the magisterial district where you reside, and there is a timer up there that will count you down.
Somewhere.
So did you want your five or your three or what you want, Clancy? What you want?
Five.
Alright. And I'll use as little of it as possible.
Alright.
First of all, I'm Clancy McQuig from the Lake Weichakwa Pacific Association. And Jack, doctor Jack, as you all call him, has sent greetings to you. He has survived major lung surgery from two weeks ago, and he is now back home. So it's really a magnificent thing. Everybody was praying for him.
The doctor said he's not gonna make it, and we said, nah. He's gonna make it, and we all got together and started praying for him. And then two days later, the doctor says, I don't know what you guys did, but he's recovered magnificently. So that was a testimony to the power of prayer at a public hearing. We wanna thank Noah for his work for the last three and a half years.
Maybe it's a little longer than that. We've we've been doing this Glenn project in Loca ever since it was first conceived. It's a great project, and we enthusiastically want to report that the applicant has been more than magnificent in working with us. And we appreciate his time, and we appreciate his efforts to upgrade the community. That little sidewalk they're putting in on, I don't know what you wanna call it, the Southeast Side or whatever.
It is a nice addition. They didn't have to do it, but they did it anyway. And that's a testimony to them for future projects. If he comes up and represents somebody else again in the future, we will be happy to work with him. Thank you very much. God bless you all.
Thank you so very much for that update. Next speaker, please.
Hi. My name is Carly Cristiano. I live in Obridge Estates in the Occoquan District. I have come to just about every single meeting that the developer and his representatives have had. I still oppose it.
I have a lot of concerns. They have a really nice presentation and I really appreciate that and I appreciate supervisor Bodhi and his staff working to reduce the issues that this project has. But it's still gonna be a problem with traffic on Old Bridge Road and Old Bridge Lane. A twenty four seven Dunkin' Donuts does have an impact to this residential area. And I I I don't understand why why nobody else can see that.
Yeah. It may not it's gonna it's gonna have an impact to this residential area. And I ask that if possible could you possibly restrict it not having a twenty fourseven Dunkin' Donuts and that potentially having a restaurant that could have a lot more traffic and noise in this particular residential area. I appreciate your time. Thank you very much.
All right. We don't have anyone else signed up to speak in person. Supervisor Angry, do we have anyone online?
Chris, do we have anyone online?
Good evening. We have no one online. Thank you.
All right. Thank you, sir.
Alright. Since we have no one online, I'm gonna go ahead and close the public hearing for item 13 a. Supervisor Boddy, would you like to make a motion?
I would. Thank you, madam chair. I would like to move 13 a forward for approval.
Second then, June.
Dated 05/07/2026. Second. Thank you.
It is properly moved to second. Any discussion on this? Sir, Risinger Boddy.
Yeah. Thank you, madam chair. Thank you to the applicant. Thank you to staff. And, miss Cristiano, I know that we spoke, by email earlier. I hear you. I also live in Old Bridge Estate, so I know the change is hard being able to, right now, drive down that section of Old Bridge Road and Old Bridge Lane and just see nice greenery and trees there. So I hear you, and I know that that's gonna be an adjustment for all of us that live in in the community over there, especially for the folks that live sort of in the Beaver Pond area on that back end. So I I hear you on that. People get used to seeing the trees there.
I I know that's an issue, and I understand that. That's why it was important for me to make sure that as we talked about filling this final piece of the Glen, it would truly serve our neighborhood. The applicant's first concept was simply well, it was a lot more dense than it was here. When they came to my office, well, three years ago, I think, at this point, there were two drive throughs, a two story office building, and a lot more density, which would have generated a lot more trips. It would have been a lot more sort of concentration on a very constrained parcel.
So I pushed back. I asked the applicant, go back. Let me get a little bit more creatively and to see what would really fit in in this part of the Glen and so close to to, Old Bridge Estates. What came back is a much better fit in my opinion. Outdoor gathering space is a place you can walk to for coffee, dinner, a quick errand, and with opportunities for uses like a medical office or a sit down restaurant.
Again, this is a community serving, retail and restaurant piece, and I think it serves well as part of this. It and over the last three years, this also has evolved quite a bit. Really appreciate, mister Klein and the applicant reaching out to OmniRide, talking to doctor Bob Schneider, having that transit piece if VDOT still pumps the brakes and doesn't allow for the traffic light. And pedestrian access for a place like this and transit access for a place like this is very, very important to me. I I was originally told, as was said, there's terrain constraints, what have you, but I appreciate the applicant sort of us pushing through together to find a way to get a pedestrian access onto the site because we know us that live in Old Bridge Estates know that people will walk from Old Bridge Lane to that that that shopping center.
And I have teenagers at home. I know there are a few things they'll get between them in a donut and a matcha latte when they really want one. They will walk. They will skateboard. They will bike.
They will play frogger to get that matcha latte if they want it. That this plan now includes safe connections of Old Bridge Road and Old Bridge Lane. Other improvements along this, include shifting old the interest of Old Bridge Lane farther down away from those away from Old Bridge Road, but also away from those entrances and those other residences so they don't have lights shining into their their their parcels, and adding evergreen screening along along the way. We talked about that that balance point between transportation and screening for the existing residents. And when VDOT didn't support a signal, we worked with you all to have a really innovative, first of its kind contribution to microtransit, which, again, especially for a use like this, knowing that this entire will be served by microtransit, you'll be able to have an opportunity where folks that work here will hopefully be able to take a small omniride microtransit to the place they work.
And to me, that's really exciting. And the last thing I'll just say is we have very few opportunities to have a new shopping center or a new strip plaza that actually serves the community and has activated space. We talk a lot about transforming our our commercial shopping centers to a place where people just go do what they do need to do and leave versus actually staying there, enjoying it, having a a place where if you're, wanting to to drive by there, you see, hey. There's something happening in this area. To me, that's very forward looking, and I think I really appreciate the work that you all did with with, with Locopel on making that vision real.
So for all those reasons, madam chair, I'll obviously be supporting this, and I think you did say, both mister Klein and and Micah, that this can help set the tone for future commercial and resident and and future residential facing commercial development in the county. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Second. All right. It's been properly moved and seconded. Supervisor Bailey.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want you know, this is what it looks like when a plan comes together, and it comes together in a positive way. When you have a case planner like Micah, and you have an applicant like Mr. Klein, and you have a resident that gave you that's big coming from Clancy, I'm just saying. You know, but that's because they really pay attention to their community, and we appreciate when you work together to make sure that it is as wholesome as it possibly can be with the respect of, I can't remember your name, she's not happy, but they did the best.
You know, but community is important. And so when you listen to the community and you really work with the supervisor well, when you get a good product, it shows. And I just want to compliment you on that. It's not going to be perfect. It's not going to be perfect. And we don't always get it right, but I just want to say that because it's not that we don't always know what we're doing, we try to know what we're doing. And we don't get it perfect. But thank you so much for working with the citizens as best you can. We appreciate that. And Michael, you rock. I know I got you earlier, but you rock.
Supervisor Stewart.
I think this is a gorgeous product. The curb appeal, I mean Stevie Wonder could see it. So, what did I say?
So,
Loudoun County gets such beautiful things and it's nice to see that we're getting beautiful stuff. So, I really like it. I'm looking forward to more stuff like this coming.
All right, thank you so very much. Let's go ahead and take our votes.
Supervisor LaCoya, are you a yes or no?
I'm gonna be
a yes. Thank you. I'll fill you in. Gotcha. We'll get it fixed. Vote unanimous.
Alright. Thank you so very much. We are now gonna move on to I'm gonna ask the county to do 13 b, 13 c, and 13 d altogether. I'm going to open the public hearing for all of those together, but we're going to vote on each one of those separately. Ready?
Chair Jefferson, members of the board, Kevin Wyrock, Transportation Planning Manager here to present, three mobility chapter CPAs, CPA 2026Dash 00007, zero eight, and zero nine mobility chapter updates for Sudley Road Route 234, Heathcote Boulevard extension, and Manassas Battlefield Bypass. I'm joined here by deputy director of transportation, Paula Bellita, and our principal planner, Bryce Barrett, worked, very hard on this as well. He's not here tonight, but we'll get started. So under section 15.2 dash two two two nine of code of Virginia, the board of county supervisors may consider amendments the adopted plan. This is a request from a board initiated request to change mobility chapter of the comprehensive plan with the removal of Sudley Road Route 234 and its associated shared use path, the Heathcote Boulevard extension and its associated shared use path, and the Manassas Battlefield Bypass.
This was initiated in, May 2025 with CPA twenty twenty five dash zero zero zero zero seven, mobility chapter changes, and comprehensive plan land use long range land use designation. All three of these roads were included in that motion, and, some other roads that were previously approved in in prior CPAs were in that motion as well, namely the removal of the Route 28 Bypass and the widening of Route 28 from four lanes to six lanes in the Yorkshire area. So the site location of the Sudley Road widening is, between US Route 15 James Madison Highway and, Pageland Lane slash Manassas Battlefield Bypass, in the Gainesville district. This, again, includes, the widening from two to four lanes as well as the addition of a shared use path. So the CPA, as it's on the table right now, would remove that widening as well as the shared use path.
For the Heathcote Boulevard extension, it is west of Route 15, heading out to Antioch Road. This is a major collector. Suddenly, road is a minor arterial. There are subtle differences in how each road is supposed to operate. This is also a request to not only remove this roadway from the comp plan, but the associated shared use path as well.
And the Manassas Battlefield Bypass did not have an official location in the comprehensive plan, but its intent was to take traffic away from the center of the Manassas Battlefield Park. And the, how it was shown on the map was paralleling Pageland Lane and, Sudley Road to the west and north respectively of the Manassas National Battlefield Park. So the county partnered with an outside consultant to run several model scenarios of the approved 2040 comprehensive plan demand travel model derived from MWCOG Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. Slight adjustments were made for approved major developments since the adoption of the Mobil chapter. We wanted it to be as current as possible.
The results of the model runs were analyzed for changes in daily level of service, LOS, and vehicle miles traveled, VMT. LOS is, a letter grade that pertains to roadway or intersection delay performance, a through f. So, LOS a is free flow traffic with no delay, and LOS f is significant delays in in between our b, c, d, and e. So I don't expect you to take a look at this entire chart here, but these are just, you know, the 17 scenarios that we ran to look at every different permutation of potential change, whether it was leaving things in the comp plan, taking things out, and which combinations we were looking at. Now as I mentioned previously, the Route 28 bypass removal and the Route 28 widening have already been approved.
So we for for this analysis, we only looked at the scenarios that had those as, you know, defaults already. So that was scenario eight, ten, eleven, twelve, sixteen, and seventeen. So we're looking at different combinations of what do we do if we keep the Heath code extension in, but we remove Sudley Road? What do we do if we remove all three? What do we do what what do we do if we just remove the Manassas Battlefield Bypass?
So we looked at all of that. And it it it gave us this analysis here, which is even more busy. Again, I'm not going to go into all the details because there is a lot, but every segment ID you see here is a different segment of roadway in the comp plan. So, you know, we have segments of Route 28, Route 15, and even some unbuilt roads like the Route 29 alternate here. And every scenario showed us what the level of service would be on that segment of roadway with all the other changes considered.
So for example, VA 234 North, that is Sudley Road, and the, parameters are between Gum Spring Road and James Madison Highway. So roughly where we're looking at taking away the widening from the comp plan. And in the scenario some of the scenarios we ran where we removed it, the level of service went from a b all the way down to an e. So it went from basically very close to free flow traffic all the way to, you know, one level above LOSF, which is called breakdown flow. In other words, significant delays of minutes at a time at traffic lights and taking a long time to get through, the roadway.
So, the overall results of these scenarios, in Sudley Road, it degraded from LOSB to E in every scenario that we studied where we removed it. For, Heathco Boulevard, it also degraded when we took, that out of the comp plan from a D down to an E. So it was still not an improvement, but it was less severe of a change than the Sudley Road change was. Sudley Road through the Manassas Battlefield, which is not considered for removal right now, That also degraded from a d to an e due to removal of the Manassas Battlefield Bypass. So that traffic that would be using the bypass to, as the name implies, bypass Battlefield would go on the Sudley Road and degrade the level service there.
However, we're a little bit more comfortable with that. In our comp plan, arterials can operate at a level of service e. We understand that, you know, if we were to do a level service a or b everywhere in the county, we would have 10 to 12 lane roadways everywhere and we would have impacts that are negative from an environmental aspect, the land use aspect, all of that sort of thing. So there is a balance that we need to strike while preserving highway capacity, but also making the county livable. So, you know, we we we work we're okay with the level of service e on arterials and in small area plans.
And there's also roadways in the comp plan that serve the same travel market that the Manassas Bailfield Bypass would serve. Route 29 Alternate is a roadway that goes to the south of the existing Route 29. It sort of parallels I 66, and it's meant to be a bypass of the battlefield. And Page one lane is also goes from a two lane to a four lane section in the comp plan as well. That would also serve some of that market.
So the proposed changes with the CPAs to the roadway network and the bicycle network are as follows. So you can see the Manassas Bailfield Bypass is taken out entirely from the roadway plan. Sudley Road remains, but it's only from Pageland Lane to Gum Spring Road, and it remains a minor Arterial MA 2 with four lanes. And Heathcote Boulevard would be removed entirely as well. Now this is only the major collector part of Heathcote Boulevard.
East of Route 15, it's a minor arterial, and that would remain in the comp plan. The bicycle network is as follows. The Heathcote Boulevard shared use path would terminate at James Madison Highway Route 15, and the Manassas Battlefield Bypass would be removed entirely. The Sudley Road shared use path would terminate at Pageland Lane going north from I-sixty 6. So the board initiated change.
This is what the board wanted us to look at for Sudley Road, would make the existing Sudley Road essentially complete as a two lane section through this area. But it would also take out the shared use path because when we are directed to take a look at roadways in the comp plan, we have to look at the associated multimodal trails and connectivity with it as well. Over here is our staff recommendation. We think the level of service decrease is just too significant here to do anything with it, and we also believe that the shared use path here along Sudley Road is a major East West connection in this part of the county. In fact, it might be one of the only ones.
And we want to keep that in the comp plan for bicyclists and pedestrians. For Heathcote Boulevard, the staff the board initiated change is to remove this extension that goes through the Heflin Farm here. The way the comp plan is written, the section that has the roadway description for Heathcote Boulevard extension mentions that care will be taken to minimize the impacts of the Heflin Farm. That hasn't changed. That's still our staff position, and and that's what we plan intend to do in the event that this ever becomes a reality.
Again, there are no current, you know, or, you know, immediate future plans to make this connection. This is just about keeping it in the comp plan. So our recommendation is to keep that in there for now, not only just because we are believers in connectivity and making sure that each roadway has multiple points of contact in the event of traffic, but also emergencies. We have the UVA Medical Center right here, and currently the only way to get into it is from Heath Koppel of our Via Route 15. For emergency response times along Antioch Road and on the Northwest section of the county, having a second connection is very important.
In cases there ever is an incident on the Antioch Road bridge over I 66, anywhere along Route 55 here or even at the intersection of Heathcote and Route 15, having multiple emergency access routes to the hospital is important. It's part of our strategic plan. It's part of our comp plan, and it's something we feel very strongly about at DOT. Finally, the Manassas Battlefield Bypass. The board initiated changes to remove that parallel roadway from Pageland And Sudley Road entirely.
And because of the minimal changes to level service and the other, roadways serving that travel market, we are supportive of that change. We have no objection to it. So, we took this to the PC back in, March, and PC made the following recommendations. They recommended approval of all three CPAs, which meant the removal of all three, roadways from the comp plan. But our, staff recommendations tonight are to deny comprehensive plan amendment CPA twenty twenty six dash zero zero zero zero seven Sudley Road.
We believe the proposed change eliminates important multimodal connections. Our analysis shows the proposed changes significantly degrade levels of service. However, there is an alternative recommendation. We feel very strongly that we need to maintain this shared use path connection no matter what. So a motion can be made from the board to remove the widening but maintain the shared use path.
That is one option on the table for you tonight. For the second CPA, we would also recommend denial of CPA 2026Dash00008, the Heathco Boulevard extension. We believe the emergency response times to the medical center will be impacted by the removal of the Heathco Boulevard extension. And, again, we are in favor of connectivity throughout the county and making sure that our network has multiple node points of contact with each roadway, even, you know, with the care that we need to make sure that there are minimal impacts to the Heflin Farm as a result of that roadway. And finally, we recommend approval of CPA twenty twenty six-nine on the mobility chapter update Manassas Battlefield Bypass.
Staff analysis shows the proposed change does not significantly degrade levels of service and other comp plan roadways such as the Route 29 alternate will serve the same travel markets. So that concludes our presentation. Paula and I are here to answer any questions that you may have for us.
All right, thank you very much. I wanted to entertain some questions. We have Supervisor Stewart.
Thank you very much for your presentation. So just to kind of get into it, if you could go back to the for the Antioch Heathcote connection. Alright. So, the Heflin Farm has been violated enough. I mean, 66 cuts through their property.
And this is I don't know how you don't how you make a road that goes all the way through their property a minimal impact, but there is an alternative. So on Antioch access, above where the shared youth, yeah, there's a there's a road there that goes out, I'll I'll give it about a,
I don't
know, like a little over a quarter of a mile, right, that ends. If that path continues, it comes out right at the emergency room for the hospital. Okay. Alright? And I as an alternative to violating this farm more than it already has been, and considering it's a fifth generation farm, alright, I recommend using that path as an alternative, and DOT already has access to it.
And it could be made just for emergency vehicles, right, as continues through. So that's one alternative. And as far as the widening of two thirty four, so I'd like to see the shared use path. I'd like the alternative recommendation of keeping it two lanes and adding the shared use path. But other than that, everything as approved for the CPAs. But I do want to ask about the Antioch Path that yeah.
Madam chair, members of board, Paula Polido with the Department of Transportation. If it's strictly a emergency access and strictly just for emergency vehicles, it doesn't have to be a complaint road that could be done separately. The reason we have it as a complaint road is as an extension not just to certain emergency vehicles but open to general traffic. So that still could be done outside of this process.
Thank you.
All right, Supervisor Gordy.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, so on the Heathcote extension, a couple of points I'd like to make. I have been out to the Heflin Farm. The original plan cut right through the middle of their property, would have destroyed their farm. Tonight, we're taking up a case, Klein Farm, that was destroyed because a road was put right through the middle of their property.
That dairy farm, it cannot exist when we put when people are raising cattle, you cannot put roads through the middle of their farms without shutting their farm operations down. We are so one of the things that we talked about is moving that road out to where along 66 to where VDOT already owns right of way, right next to 66, which did come from the Heflin Farm when they were building 66. However, that parcel that's next to the development, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that RPA?
I am not sure. I can get an answer for you.
It's RPA. I'm almost certain that is all RPA, and we've got a road design that is going through RPA, not across it. So that's one of the things I think we that's also of a big concern about this extension is that it literally cuts through a resource protection area. And so and that's for those two reasons alone is why I support the removal of this from the comp plan. Thank you, Madam Chair.
All right. Does anyone have any other questions? Okay. Supervisor Angray. Wait. I don't see you. I saw you hit it but do you want to speak? No it's not you're not coming up but go ahead let me refresh.
We're Yeah. We're doing some stuff up here.
Alright. You just go.
Yeah. I you know, tonight has been just an interesting night on this board because you can't on one breath say we're a growing county of over half a million people, and we consistently I mean, we are literally choking ourselves out, and I get the properties. And I I I got the farm. I got their email. Read all about it. I'm simply sitting here saying, like, guys, we we we're cutting roads. We don't wanna put houses over here. You you say we're growing county. At some point, all of this is gonna come to head. Traffic right now is horrible everywhere.
You know, there's a lot of infrastructure improvement upgrades we need to do. And I'm just simply saying, like, look, I don't know where y'all want to go at this, but at the end of the day, this is all going to come to head with a lot of the things that we're not doing. So
don't All right, anyone else? All right, if not, I'm going to go ahead and open the public hearings for 13 B, C, and D.
what I'm gonna do is because this is all open at one time. I'm gonna give the people who signed up, if you are speaking as an individual you will get your you will get six minutes if you're in both sheets. If you're an organization you get up to ten minutes. I have Elena Schlossberg, Rachel Ellis, Melody Miller, you have amazing handwriting. Sidenote and Lisa Schroeder. If the four of you can go back.
Hello, my name is Elena Schlossberg. I live in the Gainesville district, and I'm speaking on behalf of the Coalition to Protect Prince William County. So I'd like ten minutes. Not saying I'll use it all, just saying I'd like it. And if I can have Elmo, please.
So I'm here to speak. First of all, I think actually the shared path and not widening 234 is fantastic. Great compromise. Works out perfectly well. You don't have to seize them in a domain. All's good. So I'm going to spend most of my time on protecting our remaining working farms in the Western End. What is missed from this presentation, I'd like to share that after that meeting, the Planning Commission hearing, I stayed and I chatted with the Heflins. And I spoke to both Kevin and Bryce. If you read my email, I hope that you did.
You will see that I invited them out to Antioch Road, Because I'd like to be able to collaborate with people, so that we can find solutions. And so I met them at Starbucks. I did buy them coffee, but it was not a bribe. And we got in my car, and I said, Okay, let's go for a ride. So I took them down Antioch Road, and I went as fast as I know people drive on that rural road, which is minimum 55.
So we went over. You immediately go onto the bridge. And as soon as you just gain line of sight, there is the access road. I took them all the way down Antioch, which is a scenic byway, turned around, and we parked on the access road. And then we watched as cars came zipping by.
And I said, I want you to tell me that you think it's possible to terminate Heathcote Boulevard onto Antioch Road. You tell me that you think VDOT is going to approve this. And Kevin and Bryce, to their credit, said, yeah. This is clearly a safety problem, and this will require significant road improvements on Antioch Road. So you can't just look at Heathcote, you have to look at what happens when it terminates onto Antioch. It is at the bottom of the bridge. So, okay, I'm gonna play it for you. I had my husband send me this video. I was like, Honey, know you took it for me. Okay.
Turning on to so I've turned on to the bridge. Zero line of sight. Coming over the bridge, two lane bridge, going about 50. Those are
the that's not
the Heflins, those are the other neighbors. There's the entrance. Zero line of sight. Another blind curve. So there's no way also if you cut through the farm.
You can't hear me talk anymore. So there's no way that you're going to terminate Heathcote Boulevard onto Antioch Road and not cause a complete road taxpayer boondoggle. No way. So there is a perfect solution, and the perfect solution is what Supervisor Stewart just described. What you can do is you can take that access road, and I've spoken to the other gentleman whose homes that you saw there, his home, He has no problem with that access road being utilized for emergency vehicles only.
And you can follow that access road. I'm not sure, Supervisor Gordie, I know what you're talking about, So I'm not sure how you could do the access road. I think it does avoid that particular. So you could do the emergency. But if this is about saving lives, two reasons why you should trash the Heathcote extension, protect the Heflin Farm they've been there one hundred years you hear a lot about generational wealth, and people are owed generational wealth. What about generational access to their farm? What about that generational ancestry? We should be protecting that. That's just as valuable. So solution is you use that access road only for emergency vehicles.
You could put a gate, their lights go off and it automatically lifts up. And that gets you access to literally the emergency room front doors. So if you are truly worried about saving lives, the only solution that you should approve trash Heathcote extension and simply use that shared access road as an opportunity to get to Heathcote Hospital. I drive that road, please don't approve it just because you know I live off that road. But in all seriousness, I drive it every day.
The traffic is coming from Fauquier, and they're going straight to 66. Having a cut through is not going to deal with that. The problem at 15 And 55 has been growing because of development that's been approved along 55. The only solution that you have to if you really want to address the backup, you're going have to do something about that intersection. You're going to have to get a path onto 66, which, by the way, we spoke about when I met with Kevin and Bryce.
So I'm not going to use all my time, but I just want to impress upon you. The Heflins are such wonderful people. They do not deserve to have their property impacted once again. And as we talk about this agro economy and rural resources, you are moving in the opposite direction. I disagree with supervisor Angry. It's gonna happen no matter what. Well, you all are in control. West Of 55 is still one home per 10 acres. You have all these environmental and historical resources. You should take this solution. It will save lives quicker, and it also protects farmland, and it's the right thing to do.
Alright. Next speaker, please.
Rachel Ellis, Gainesville District. Speaking on the Sudley Road, Route 234, additional two lanes, making it four lanes, there's not enough right away. The imminent domain cost would be astronomical, especially since we know what people are being offered for land in assemblages in that area. The future land use map shows us as staying agricultural forestry, so there's not a need to approve more lanes. I've lived in my house that I'm in now since, well for twenty three years, and the only way for me to go anywhere is to get on two thirty four in that section.
And I've never ever sat there and been like, wow, I could use another two lanes on each side because it's there's traffic. There's not that type of traffic. And just to, like, keep myself honest, my son drives to Reston every single day, and he takes that. And I said, Christian, do you think 234 needs to be widened to four lanes? And he said, no.
He said, where we need the extra lanes is on 66. Like so that's not what the problem is. The planning commission voted yes to the CPA. I I do appreciate staff's recommendation about removing the four lanes and doing the shared use use path, so I agree with that. Now speaking towards to the Heathcote Boulevard, at Planning Commission, one of the reasons staff noted this was needed was because there was only one way into Haymarket Hospital. And I just want to note that Route 15 in Heathcote has 30 individual lanes. And I'm not making that up. I counted it. I'm not over exaggerating. 30 individual lanes of traffic.
So even if there was a catastrophic event, I do think that there's enough space to get access to the hospital. I like what they're talking about, about that access road. I didn't know about that. And I know staff noted, like, emergency response times to the hospital will be impacted if this extension is removed, but it currently doesn't even exist. How can something be impacted if it's not currently there?
The cost to mitigate the road and bridge on Antioch for this extension will be astronomical. Again, future land use shows this as being agricultural forest, not being developed. This road extension will destroy one of the few working family farms that have been here for five generations. And I listened to the Heflin family speak at Planning Commission regarding this. They've been fighting the dismantling of their farm for generations, and they were told by staff that this road would probably not be needed.
Well, take it off the comp plan. Like, let these people just live and farm without having to fight Prince William for the their property every couple of years. And I feel like that's just part of the frustration of actually living in this county is every couple years you're fighting something because I I just don't know who's in control. So please vote yes to that and let these people like just farm their land and not have to come here every couple years to fight for it. Thank you.
Thank you so very much. Next speaker please.
Can you guys hear me?
Yes.
Okay. Let me
try again taller. Perfect. My name is Melody. I live in Nebsco, as you guys know. But I run on the West End of Prince William County, so I'm very familiar with Pageland and Sudley and all of these roads out there. I've been running Fire and Rescue for twenty seven years in Prince William, so I have run my share of accidents on that end of the county. And I wanted to just take a moment. I know we've talked about traffic. I know we've talked about right of way. I know we've talked about a lot of stuff.
I was listening to some of the public comment earlier this afternoon about, urban sprawl and how we are not doing smart development. And I just wanna reiterate, I've spoken with Victor, with supervisor angry, several times about his belief on urban density. I don't necessarily think he's wrong. I think he's just applying that to an entire county, and that, in my mind, is not appropriate. There are parts of Prince William County that can absolutely support high density.
The West end of the county is not one of them. Some parts of the East end of the county probably should be less dense, but the West End really is getting more dense, and that's, not serving anybody really well. But I also want to talk a little bit about the broader policy issues that are kind of underneath these amendments that are causing a lot of contention in the community. We're trying to reduce congestion. We're trying to get better emergency access. I will say the gate with the Opticom trigger, we use it all the time in Prince William. We use it for over 55 communities. We just hit our lights in the whaler and the gate opens right up. So if that's an option, that's a great option for us. And easier commuting, might be a pipe dream at this point.
But the thing that I'm most worried about, is habitat loss, is the induced sprawl that is not really necessary if we were better about, planning, is more pavement, more heat islands, more runoff, long term dependency on infrastructure that doesn't exist, we keep cutting money for it to exist. Right? And the citizens pay the cost of that. I think for me, the thing that is most important is that we are ignoring the environmental costs of the things that we're doing. For some of these amendments, suddenly, like Manassas Battlefield is a has got a lot of historical kind of amendments around it.
There's a lot of history there. There's a lot of RPA out there, which also means there's a lot of wildlife out there. I've run a ton of deer strikes out on the west end of the county. And if you widen that to four lanes, those deers are not those deer are not gonna be like, oh, well, they're 55 now. So, guys, we can't cross the road. People are just going to hit them at higher speeds, and you're going to have more human fatalities. We are not planning for wildlife relocation. We are creating these land islands, which not only make animal strikes more prevalent, I've seen four in the last seven days. And I will tell you that some of those animals do not die on impact. And they go off into the woods and they die, or they die in the middle of the street because they get hit four or five times.
Or people stop because they hit them and the animal is not dead, and then they get out and create a hazard in traffic. So not only do they create these land islands where animals have no place to go, or anybody in Prince William County who's ever had an infestation of field mice after they take down clear cutting, they come to us. We reduce the genetic diversity of those populations that we would then landlock, and then those animals become diseased, and then they create a vector for humans. So I just want to encourage you guys to think about there is a possibility for high density planning. Just put it where it belongs and stop trying to develop every square inch of Prince William County.
Not only do we need the trees to clean the air from the 20,000 cars we keep adding to the streets, But, like, we need the water runoff. We need the green to reduce the heat reflect. I mean, last summer, it was like a 107 degrees. I don't have a tree older than forty years in my neighborhood, and I couldn't even walk outside. I couldn't take my dogs for a walk because the pavement was 192 degrees.
Now part of that is VDOT not allowing trees to be planted in the right of way, but that's a whole another conversation, and I've had my own arguments with VDOT. But these removals and these amendments, we we have to consider that there is ecological preservation benefit in my opinion. Right? We have to not only consider the impact of the roadway expansion on the citizens, but on the actual land. And I know that songbirds and deer and stuff don't get a vote, but they will interact with us if we don't wanna interact with them. And, I appreciate your time. I know I'm beating a dead horse, but, maybe it won't be a dead deer next time. Thank you so much.
Thank you so very much. Next speaker, please.
Good evening. My name is Lisa Heflin Schrader, and I am very pleased to represent my dad, Carlton Heflin, and my three other siblings. And I want to thank you for the opportunity to express our support of the removal of the Heathcote Boulevard extension from a comprehensive plan. Our father still lives in the home where his mother spent part of his childhood, her childhood, on land our family has cared for, for ninety years. Today, we are here to ask that this farm be allowed to remain whole.
Supervisor Stewart, thank you for acknowledging the longevity of our farm. And thank you, Madam Chair and Board of Supervisors, for giving me a moment to share a bit of history. In 1936, our grandparents purchased the Cedars Farm. This year marks ninety years of family ownership, but our connection to the land goes back even further. My great grandparents were tenant farmers on what was then a larger property called Waverly.
The home where our father lives today is the same home where my grandmother spent part of her childhood. Our father and mother have devoted their lives to their family and to the steady care of their land and livestock. At this stage of his life, dad asks only one thing of Prince William County, to be left alone. Unfortunately, the proposed extension of Heathcote Boulevard is not the first time our family has faced the loss of our land. It is part of a long pattern.
In the late nineteen seventies, a portion of the Cedars Farm was taken for the construction of Interstate 66. At that time, the farm entrance was moved from State Route 55 to the newly constructed access road F288, taking additional productive farmland. In the early 1980s, the proposed Disney's America theme park would have bordered our farm. Our family joined many others in grassroots opposition to that project. Years later, we faced another proposal that would have placed a park and ride facility in our front yard.
That battle lasted years, and we are grateful when the proposal was finally laid to rest in 2015. Because of these repeated threats, our family has spent decades watching planning meetings and board decisions, not because we necessarily wanted to, but because experience has taught us that we must speak up for what is ours. And so we are here again. For our family, this farm represents nearly a century of stewardship. On a planning map, it is reduced to a single line, a line that could potentially cut our farm if Heathcote Boulevard is extended.
A primary justification offered is the goal of achieving an eight minute emergency response time from the hospital to Western Prince William County. However, response times were not specifically evaluated in the transportation modeling requested by the Board, and a bit of research shows that most urban communities operate with a response time of ten to twelve minutes. Urban communities can expect an eight minute emergency response. Our family has cared for the Cedars Farm for generations. We respectfully ask that you reconsider the extension and allow the Cedars Farm to remain whole. And I thank you for your time this evening.
All right, thank you very much. I'm going to turn it to Supervisor Anger to see if we have anyone for remote public hearing.
So, do we have any remote?
Good evening. Yes, we do. Vice Chair and the Board, our first speaker is Suzanne Blenning.
Hi, Suzanne. Go ahead.
Suzanne Good evening. I'm Suzanne Heflin Blenning. Since 1936, my family has invested in the land and cattle at the Cedars Farm, 6115 Antioch Road, the location of the Heath Code extension. My sister just spoke previously. Thank you all for hearing us and for your long discussion and consideration of our needs.
In the 2022 comp plan update, many of you remember concern for our farm was placated by the following language. If the roadway is extended before the development of our parcel, the county shall work with the adjacent property owner to minimize impacts to the operation of the existing farm. It turns out these are empty words that have no actual authority to achieve the intentions of the board that adopted it. Staff and the Departments of Transportation and Planning assure me that the language can be entertained or ignored and is completely unenforceable. Do any of you remember the promise made by Rick Connozales to the Board in the wee hours of mobility chapter adoption on 12/13/2022.
The promise was to only locate the extension on the exact footprint of the existing access road. He guaranteed. More importantly, if we are so blessed to make it so far, will my grandchildren and children remember it? Or will those words be as irrelevant as the words in the comp plan? As others have noted, this comp plan commits our family to fight for our farm until it is paved over.
First, let me remind you, we had no representation from our Gainesville supervisor throughout the comp plan update process. Thankfully, principal representatives Janine Lawson and Tom Gordy took up our case. We are so thankful that Supervisor Stewart is spearheading this revisiting the issue again. Second, the current termination of Heathcote Boulevard leaves no doubt that the exact intention of the County has been to bisect our farm. Third, landscape and layout complications of the extension, as Elena Slotsberg noted, will make the cheap route of bisecting our farm very tempting.
Lastly, any taking of property for this extension will put us below critical acreage needed to sustain our farming operation, which I made a little more clear in the email that I sent and I appreciate your time looking over that. All that we are asking for is that our plans for our property receive the same respect, care, and freedom that our developer and subdivision neighbors enjoy. My family, my Western Prince William County neighbors, and even our Planning Commission agree. We don't want the Heathcote Boulevard extension for any reason. So please take this opportunity to remove it from the comprehensive plan and I appreciate your considerations.
Thank you, ma'am. Next speaker.
Speaker is Jessica Grove.
Go ahead Jessica.
Good evening Chair Jefferson and supervisors. I'm a little bit unprepared but I had the opportunity to listen to the two Heflin speakers before me and again I would ask the same thing that I asked at the Planning Commission and that is to please not disrupt their farm. Again, this is an opportunity for you to stick up for what is right. Promises were made and promises need to be kept. We have the opportunity to create an area that people want to come to and people want to live in.
You keep on talking about housing but it has to be in the right places and something like this is going to destroy a farm that's been here for over a hundred years and it also leads to the opportunity to create sprawl in an area that it does not belong. And like miss Heflin said before, the people of Western Prince William County in the Gainesville district do not want these extensions and widenings of roads. Plan to widen Sudley Road from 15 to who knows where will take so much land from homeowners along Sudley Road, it would be astronomical. Like the previous speaker said, the number of deer strikes in this area is going to be catastrophic for the animal population that we moved out here to protect and to keep and to enjoy. So I ask that you remove these from the comp plan because again we did not have any representation throughout that entire process and here we are again.
Please do the right thing and remove these from the comp plan so that we can rest easy for a little bit.
Thank you ma'am. Next speaker please.
Good evening, was our last speaker. Thank you.
Alright, thanks Chris.
Alright, thank you so very much. I am going to close the public hearing for items 13B through 13D. I want to ask the county if you want to come up and respond to anything that you've heard. No, you do not. All right, so what I'm going to do with these is I'm actually going to take each one of these separately because there's some people may want to vote for some vote against others. George, I'm looking at you and I'd like to get a motion to move 13B forward.
So moved Madam Chair.
No, you're going to give the motion. So
I make a motion 13 B is that quadruple zero seven?
No, is zero seven. That's the Sutley Road Dash 234. And did you want to keep the shared use?
I do want to use the staff alternative recommendation, keeping it two lanes and adding the shared use path. Second.
Alright. It's been properly motioned and seconded. Any discussion around this? Supervisor Boddy.
Yeah. Very quickly. Thank you, madam chair. Thank you to staff for your analysis, and I really appreciate the the the matrix that you put up during that looking at all the different scenarios. I know that staff obviously sends a little bit apart from where the board and the planning commission is going on this one, but I do appreciate the the alternative you sub you you talked about, which is keeping that shared use path. And because to me, we need to have more pedestrian bike connections throughout the county, especially East West connectors on the western end. So that was the one sticking point that I had that I was very hesitant to support the complete removal of. But since that's being included into the into the motion, I can support it. Thank you, madam chair.
Alright. Is there anyone else? And I hold on. I just want to look at something to make sure with this motion that it is my computer gets to me. I just want to see if it's, you know what you were recommending we do or the staff was recommending we do and I apologize my computer is a little slow. Andre can you answer for me or can someone answer. The motion that is actually the resolution that is in our agenda packet the one that has published is that?
That's in the agenda packet.
Okay, that's the one. So is that the actual resolution, is the actual resolution not the staff recommendation, is the actual resolution say to approve or the actual deny? It says to deny? I understand. I'm asking what is in the resolution that is in the board packet. My computer is slow and I would like to know what is the resolution that was in the board packet.
I believe the resolution was to deny.
Okay. So I just want to double check. You
know, overwritten or I'm sure you guys know what to do.
Okay. So the resolution there is to deny and that is what you wanted to move forward to the I'm sorry, no. You want to move to prove. This is why I'm asking the question. Gotcha. Because what we have actually, know, and it can be changed.
I want to approve this removal.
You want to vote to remove these. Absolutely. And you still want to keep that second. All right. Any further discussion on this? We're voting to remove this. Anyone else? All right, let's go ahead and take our votes.
You
kind of mess with us here.
Motion passes seven to one supervisor Ingray voting nay.
All right let's moving on to 13 C supervisor Stewart.
So I'd like to make a motion to approve the comprehensive plan amendment for CPA 2026 quadruple eight to To remove. It's to remove. Yes. Heathcote Boulevard. Second.
It's been properly moved and seconded. Any discussion?
No worries.
To approve removal of the, Heathcote extension, CPA 2026.
And Gordie was the second.
Yes, quadruple eight.
Any discussion? All right. Supervisor Boddie.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Supervisor Stewart, you mentioned I wouldn't call it a staff alternative. I would call it a supervisor Stewart Gainesville alternative which is to allow for there to be emergency access. Guess my question, I'm not sure if it's for county exec or for staff or whatever it is, but can we have something in the resolution that direct staff to work with the landowners and any agencies to allow for that emergency access? You know what? Yeah.
Madam Chair, members of the Board, yes, that could be done. It could be it doesn't have to be a complaint rollaway, but that could be reference or direct staff to look at an emergency access outside of the Heathclote extension.
Yes. I I would like you definitely to look to look at that. It's yeah. Thank you.
Supervisor Lacroix, did you have anything?
I just can't imagine us putting even an emergency access in there.
The road's already there. Already an existing access road that exists. It's just and it even goes past the farm. It's just finishing it out to the emergency room.
Yeah, I know. I understand that, but they have live animals on there and they'll just scare the bejesus out of them all. I just think, I mean can you imagine a bunch of emergency vehicles flying through the farm? Mhmm. I just can't imagine it. I'm just good that's just my my my opinion.
Alright. Thank you. Any other comments? If not, let's go ahead and call for the vote.
Vote unanimous.
All right, thank you so very much. 13D, supervisor Stewart want to move it forward.
I make a motion to approve comprehensive plan amendment CPA twenty twenty six quadruple nine for the Manassas Battlefield Bypass.
To be removed.
To be removed. Yes.
Second. It's been properly moved and seconded. Any discussion? Supervisor Boddy.
Yeah. Thank you, madam chair. And I do want to sort of talk about something that some of those are angry, talked earlier, and and I get it. You know, I I know that that that we still need to have segments of the county that we improve the connectivity. We still need to build more road connections and mobility connections in some places. So I I don't want that thought to be lost. I also understand that the Manassas Bypass itself has much longer history than anyone on this dais. So there are times that folks have been supportive of it. Manassas Battlefield supported at one point then didn't, and we're at we're it's no longer do they not support it, but right now, per our own planning staff, not necessary. So I think that that that deserves consideration as well.
It is my hope, though, that as we have taken these actions today to remove these various roads from the comp plan, we think about it with the similar urgency as we thought about when we removed the 28 that some of these road connections still need to be made at some points, but they can be done in collaboration with the with the community, if it's just a supervisor to make sure that as we are looking at roads, we are doing so holistically as opposed to the piecemeal that we've done in the past. I know that, myself and Sureser sort of had conversations around what this holistic view of this area could look like when we turn the page on what currently exists there in the comp plan. I I don't think I to go much farther than that. I look forward to working with him on what we can do to look at a holistic look on the land use and the transportation piece on what comes next. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I just want to highlight that although Supervisor Weir is no longer with us here physically, he initiated this conversation that we're having here today and although he's not with us here in body, he's very much still very present with us still dealing with some of the stuff that he initiated. So Bob, wherever you are, may you continue to rest in peace.
Thank you so very much. If there's no other comments, I'd like to go ahead and call for the vote. That was.
Thank you. No, I'm good. We'll get it. I think we had a fire earlier and I think we burned out some, burned out a few things. Yeah, we burned some stuff down. Okay, hold on one minute. Okay. Supervisor Stewart, seconded by supervisor Bodhi. Go now.
Wait, hold on. It's back.
Supervisor Bailey, are you good? Vote unanimous.
Thank you very much. We are now going to move on to 13E. If the applicant can come down for their presentation. Sorry. Yes.
Sorry. 13 e and f. We're doing it all together. So 13 e and f, you will present together. How kind of you to wait.
Thank you.
I was caught in traffic myself. Good evening, Madam Chairman, members of the Board. I'm Sherman Patrick with Compton and Dueling. We're representing the Stanley Martin Companies in this application. The application that we're coming forward with tonight involves 87 acres that are located at the intersection of Prince William Parkway, Warrington Road and Liberia Avenue. The property after right of way dedications is about 85 acres. This is an application that's been in for a while. And so it has some history associated with it that many of you know and some of you may have heard a little bit about. I will not delve too much into the history. It's been a while, but the application was initially much more intense and much to the dissatisfaction of many members of the community.
And Stanley Martin has spent a number of years now working through the process closely with the supervisor for this district and with the community and bringing it to a point where we think that it is acceptable to everyone involved and solves a couple of problems because it does appear to solve a transportation issue that I'll explain in more detail. So the present proposal is for two forty homes. Those are a combination of different unit types. One is a there's 132 villa type units that are being proposed and 108 single family detached homes. The villa type unit is a kind of a townhouse, but it's a low elevation type of design.
It's two stories high. It has a Ground Floor primary bedroom and it is built for age restricted type of community. And this proposal also includes, not in addition to reducing its intensity and density that was previously proposed, it's also proposing an age restricted community, which eliminates impacts on schools and reduces the transportation impacts and on many other public services. In combination with this, there's an 8.6 acre commercial area. It's also a low intensity use.
The idea is to create a neighborhood commercial use that is convenient to the community and also convenient to the surrounding property owners as well. The proposed use for that property is for a restaurant or event center type of use, and we'll give you some more detail about that in the future. The application does involve the comprehensive plan amendment. And the comprehensive plan amendment does in fact reduce the intensity of development that is called for or targeted in the county's comprehensive plan. The issue from the very beginning has been that the county comprehensive plan was calling for a level of intensity here that was out of step with what the community wanted.
And so now we have a comprehensive plan amendment before you that is bringing the density down, bringing the intensity of commercial uses down to a level that is comparable to what is in the surrounding area. The rezoning itself, as I mentioned, is for a community of 55 years of age plus, 80% of the units would be occupied by an individual of that age, 20% would be occupied by an individual of 45 years of age or older. That does reduce the amount of public service that are requested from the community and overall has a positive effect on the community in terms of the real estate assessments and values that it brings, in addition to bringing experienced employment opportunities. The property will have 40% open space. There is a commitment to work affordable and workforce housing that is consistent with what you've seen recently in many other applications.
There was a question that was raised about the environment environmental impact potentially in other properties that are across Prince William Parkway that have wells. And so there is a commitment that there will be some an opportunity for preconstruction testing of the wells and remediation if there is in fact any impact. We don't believe there's going to be any impact because honestly, it's a different watershed. Prince William Parkway is essentially the watershed dividing line. And there are buffers along the Prince William Parkway.
The exhibit to my left now is showing you the an aerial photograph of the area. At the very top, you'll see that the city of Manassas is on the left hand side of the project. There's the Harris Teeter Shopping Center, which I think is a pretty well known landmark. There's also the Texas Roadhouse restaurant also on Prince William Parkway at the intersection with Liberia Avenue, which is pretty well known. And there's a suburban residential community known as Arrowwood immediately adjacent to the Texas Roadhouse and across Prince William Parkway from this property.
Further towards the east to the right on the screen is a community known as Hinson Knowles. Hinson Knowles was the old Hinson Farm in the 1980s or 70s. It was subdivided under the zoning regulations that were in effect at the time that allowed you to have a one acre minimum lot size. And so the lots in Hinson Knolls are one plus acres. They are kind of a mixture.
Some of them get to be I think there are a few that are five acres in area, but it is a non conforming agricultural area. It is not consistent with the county zoning ordinance and it's not consistent with the county comprehensive plan. The comprehensive plan amendment that we're discussing is on the screen now. The map on the left is what the current comprehensive plan is showing. The long range land uses include at the very right outlined in yellow, an area that's identified as POS, and that means parks and open space.
The way that that got on this property was because when in 2022, when the comprehensive plan was being updated, the Stanley Martin application for this property included a relocation for the Greater Manassas Baseball League. They were looking for a new home. Micron was expanding and needed their site. And so they were going to they were interested in relocating here and the county had joint was working with the city of Manassas towards building a little league baseball complex here. That did not come to fruition.
And so that is no longer a part of the plan. However, it was on the comprehensive plan. So now we need to do something to make a change to that. So that was the first effort that we were coming forward with. As the county staff was reviewing this proposal for the parks and open space site, they said, well, we think that you should extend the RN2 all the way up to roughly across from Arrowwood Drive, where it comes and intersects with Prince William Parkway on the opposite side.
It and that's a good idea. It was consistent with what the applicant was proposing. It seemed consistent with what the community wanted, and so that's why we are coming before you this evening asking to be down planned to reduce the intensity on the site. This is these are the acreages that are set aside for the replanning. You see these two land base here, light blue and green, are designated in this map RN2.
It also indicates that the single family detached dwellings are located in this part of the newly proposed RN2, which is 43 acres and in a smaller area light blue is almost 35 acres and is where the villas would be located. This area in yellow is to remain mixed use transect three. That is a much higher intensity commercial designation than what the applicant is proposing in this application, But this 8.66 acres could be developed with the transect three designation at a much higher FAR, floor area ratio. But what the applicant is proposing here is 0.03 FAR, and what you'll normally have with one story development is 0.25 or 0.3. So this is oneten of the amount of intensity that might go in the MU3, even at one story development.
And so there is a substantial down zoning that's being proposed below even what the comprehensive plan is showing for this property. This is the layout of the homes in the community. The villas here are highlighted in yellow, and the single family detached homes are in kind of a rose color and purple color here, and the commercial area is shown here. You'll see that the building in the commercial area is not occupying very much of the space. And there's an open space area here that we'll show you in more detail as we move through the process through the presentation.
This exhibit is showing you the existing vegetation on the property. The property was a farm. Like you heard reference to in an earlier case today, sometimes when right of ways come through or taken from property, they diminish the size of the property to where it's no longer feasible to keep livestock on the site. That's what happened on the Klein property. They had an active dairy farm there back in about 1990.
Prince William Parkway was built through, and the Liberia this is once called Liberia Extended, it's now also called Prince William Parkway, and that took property away from the site and made it no longer feasible for them to have a dairy operation there. It was already becoming difficult because of the amount of traffic and because they didn't have land to rent around them to have additional sources of grazing, but that was just the last thing. So it was a farm is my point. There are some areas that were low on the property where there are some trees and vegetation, and but most of the trees and vegetation that you see on the property are along fence rows or around buildings. The symbol you see here that's dark, very dark colored circle is a is where there's a house located on the property.
There's some trees that remain around that house. Here was another house. Again, there's some trees. And here was a barn and a house, and again, trees exist there, but the rest of the property is largely open grassland. And the reason that we added this exhibit is we don't normally drill down this deep into a presentation, but we did it because in the staff report, you'll see that there's a comment that the turf areas of the property are not good for the ecosystem.
We had not heard that before when we got the staff report. We know that there's been an effort to save trees, and I'm going to show you in this next exhibit those same areas that I pointed to before are being preserved to the best of our ability given grading and topography of the site. But trees are preserved at these locations and in these open spaces. And it's for the reason that everyone wants the trees to be preserved, but there are other areas of the property where there simply aren't trees. There will be more trees on this property after the required tree canopy is installed with the development of the site and so it will be greatly improved from its present condition in terms of the ratio of tree to grassland area.
One of the issues with this case was always about the intersection of Prince William Parkway, Liberia Avenue and Wellington Road. Wellington Road leads into the city of Manassas. Liberia Avenue goes to the north, and Prince William Parkway runs here. We call this the East West section of Prince William Parkway, and this section of Prince William Parkway referred to as the North South section. So in dealing with this intersection in the very early applications, we were trying just not to make it worse.
However, there was a good idea, and frankly, it came from a planning commissioner, to create a left turn, a kind of a bypass. Bypass. And if this left turn was cut through the property in this manner, then the left turns coming off the parkway could come through the site this way and right turns could come through this way, and that would take a very substantial amount of traffic out of the intersection. As you can imagine, there are a lot of lefts and rights that are occurring at this intersection. You take those two turning movements out of the intersection, then you can greatly improve the timing on this signal and clear up the congestion that is currently commonly starting to accumulate during peak hours at this point.
So this is supported by the Prince William County Department of Transportation. It was supported by the regional branch of VDOT, the Northern Virginia branch of VDOT. But it needed to go through an approval process with Richmond, and that approval process is still underway. We don't have the final conclusions from that. But the proper conditions say that this improvement would be made, which actually does improve the intersection can solve issues here.
But if, for some reason VDOT doesn't approve the medium break that's right here, then the applicant will still work with the Department of Transportation, both Prince William and VDOT to find a solution that will improve the
level
of surface in the intersection. The proposal is a part of the Liberia Avenue Activity Center, and activity centers are multi areas of multimodal activity where the county is trying to take advantage of proximity to mass transit and encourage densities. And all that I want to do here is to acknowledge that Manassas Park VRE Station, which is located here in the Old Town Manassas VRE Station, are both about a ten minute drive from this property, and they're a fifteen minute bike ride. And so this does meet the requirements for multimodal opportunities, although we're developing at a much lower density than would normally be expected in a multimodal area. Prince William Parkway currently has a 10 foot shared use path on this side of it, and it comes to the intersection with Liberia and continues up Liberia into the city of Manassas.
It also crosses over Liberia and continues along Wellington Road. So there's a substantial shared use path. And by that, I mean it's a 10 foot wide paved surface is suitable for pedestrians and also for bicycles. On the north south leg of the Prince William Parkway, there is also a shared use path, and that is another multimodal feature that this application is tying into. The applicant will connect with at this end of the property at Buckhall Road and provide a path of its own through the site.
And this light blue and yellow alternating pattern here is indicating that the applicant is going to dedicate that for and put it in a public easement and allow that to be used for the general public in Prince William County to pass through the site. Also, in support of the multimodal concept, the applicant is providing a public trailside park here. That will be in a public easement. It will have improvements in amenities. It will be open for all of the people using the trail, and it'll be a nice rest spot along the way.
We're showing here the amenities that are proposed on the property. We'll get into these in more detail, but I want to point out the trailside park that I was talking about before. That's amenity A. Then B, there's a connecting pocket park that goes adjacent to it. There's also just pointing out the major features, there's a square here in the middle.
This is the clubhouse park area. There will be a clubhouse improvement there. And this square here is called the Courtyard Park and is a major area of tree preservation. Here we have the two silos that are on the property that are targeted for preservation if they pass the structural testing that is necessary to make sure that those are sustainable. And then there's an arrival park at this end of the property that is to announce your arrival at this corridor here, where the applicant will be providing buffering along Prince William Parkway.
Giving you more detail now on the Clubhouse Park, it's approximately two acres. It will have active recreation, including pickleball courts and bocce courts. There will be literally a clubhouse and then fire pits and outdoor gathering areas for the use of the residents of the community. There's an art garden here that's a continuation kind of the clubhouse. This is more of a passive garden area.
Here we have the trailside park. The trailside park will have a repair station for bicycles, a water station and then exercise equipment fitness equipment for use of the general public. And over here is the one acre pocket park that I pointed out earlier. This is the what we're calling Silo Park because of the two silos. It will have garden plots that will be available for the residents of the community.
There's also a proposal for an interpretive marker that will talk about the history of this property, in particular, and other agricultural activities in the county. And here's a more detailed exhibit of the Arrival Garden. Sorry, I missed one. Here's the Courtyard Garden. There's a nice path here around the existing trees.
These are aerial photograph inserted trees that are already in this area. We think it'd be a very nice area for these homes that will back up to it and also be a pleasant amenity for people to walk through and enjoy the outdoors. The homes that are being proposed are going to have quality of construction commitments. 30% of the facades will be will include masonry products, including brick and cultured stone and cementitious siding. They'll be alternated so that they have a quality appearance from the road.
And then similar to that are the single family detached homes. They will have the same commitment to the quality of exterior materials. And finally, we have here the commercial area. So the commercial area is a building that would be 10,000 to 12,500 square feet. It is set up to have an agricultural appearance as you see in this illustration.
It is intended also to have an amphitheater, an outdoor gathering area. This is almost an acre in area here and is considered one of the amenities that will be available to the immediate residents of this area, but also to the greater community in Prince William County. So the project not only sets aside areas for the residents of this community, they also set aside two areas, the trail side park and then this commercial amenity area, as well as the community or the public use path that goes through the site here. So giving back to the community as well as providing for the residents of the community. So we have a comprehensive plan amendment this evening.
We're reducing the residential density through the comprehensive plan. The non residential intensity is being reduced through the rezoning application as well. It's an age restricted community, which is having less impact on schools and all types of infrastructure, but also on transportation. There's a coffee shop, restaurant, brew pub or event center type use that's being proposed as the commercial use here. It's a secondary non residential use that's associated with the PMR zoning that's being requested.
There's the bypass turn option intersection that I talked about, where that is distributing trips taking trips out of the intersection of Prince William Parkway, Liberia Avenue and Wellington Road. There are 40% there's 40% open space that adds up to about 35 acres of open space, which is a very substantial commitment. There's affordable housing, preconstruction testing of wells and remediation after construction, if there's any evidence that there has been impact, and there's buffering along the Prince William Parkway corridor. I mentioned earlier about the turn bypass the turn off bypass here. And the improvement that was first proposed and I showed you at the beginning is reliant on a median break here.
That median break requires an access management exception that has to be approved out of the Richmond office, and that's what we're waiting for. But I mentioned also that there is a proper condition that there was sort of a backup to the original proposal that the applicant would work with the Prince William County Department of Transportation and with VDOT to make sure that whatever is done, if this median break isn't approved, will improve the traffic flow on Prince William Parkway. So what this exhibit is showing you is the length of the queue. That's the number of cars waiting to go through the intersection. The red indicates 2,030 without development of the Klein property.
So the traffic waiting to go through this intersection would be the length of this line. So it's coming back almost to Knowles Drive. That's without development of this site. Even if this road doesn't get the median break, it will still serve to have a right turn off and all of those right turns will be taken out of this intersection. And here's the improvement.
This in 2030, this is the length of the queue that is waiting to go through this intersection And there will be turn lanes here so that that will all be within the turn lanes for the project. This is during the PM peak, which is when conditions are the most significant. Coming from the other direction, you can see that in 2030, without the development of the Klein property, without any improvements that are coming with the Klein property, the queue length this is the intersection of Prince William Parkway, Liberia Avenue and Wellington. The queue length would be all the way back to Hastings Drive. It's actually coming through the intersection of Hastings Drive, also a very undesirable situation.
However, with the alternative that I'm showing you this evening, the queue length would only be this long with the light blue colored here. So there's a very substantial and significant improvement. Even if we're not able to get the ideal, we're still hopeful and confident that VDOT will approve the access management exception that allows the median break because that gives the greatest improvement to the intersection. But we're still waiting for that answer. But the message is that we're still able to make some pretty significant improvement to that intersection and to traffic flow in that area, even if VDOT doesn't ultimately approve that access management.
And VDOT and Prince William County Transportation may have other ideas that will further improve this intersection. So if you have any questions, I'd be happy to try to answer them, but we're hopeful this evening to receive approval after a number of years and multiple iterations of the plan.
All right. Thank you so very much. While waiting for people to jump into the queue, you know, I had questions regarding the wells in the area.
Yes, ma'am.
So, you know, is groundwater level well testing on climb is that gonna be a part of your is that a part of your profits or is that something you guys are willing to work with area residents on?
That it's a part of the proffered conditions. And the proper conditions specify that homes within 800 feet of the property that are on the most of them are on the North Side Of Prince William Parkway in a different watershed. We'll work with with Stanley Martin. They will do baseline testing of the wells to determine the quality of the water, the flow and things of that nature as it exists today before construction starts. And then if the owners believe that they want a follow-up test to see if their well capacity or the turbidity has changed, then they will do a follow-up test to determine if there has been an impact.
And if there appears to have been an impact, they will repair or replace the problem.
Alright. Thank you. Supervisor Boding.
Thank you, madam chair. And thank you, mister Patrick for the presentation and for the work everyone has done on this so far. So going off of a beat of that, madam chair, sir, but the other direction, I know that in the proffer, there's also a groundwater monitoring well proper that talks about allowing there to be groundwater monitoring wells actually installed in the property somewhere. Can you talk a little bit about that and how we make sure that that, you know, as if the project moves forward, that's that's done? Because as I understand, there's really only a couple of groundwater monitoring wells in the entire county, one in the West too. Yeah. One in the West and one in the East. There's not really one for Mid County. So can you talk about that a little bit?
Yes, sir. Thank you for for asking that question. The at the Planning Commission hearing, it was brought to our attention that there is some interest in doing some county wide groundwater monitoring. There are monitoring wells, I believe, substantially more than two. I'm aware of some others that are throughout the county.
And so the what the what the applicant has done in this case is he's agreed to work with Prince William County to locate to to provide and make accessible to whatever governmental entity is doing the county wide groundwater studies to locate up to two groundwater monitoring wells on this property.
Okay. And then my only other question with that is, I know that there's you just sort of alluded to it, mister Patrick, that whatever government mostly, whether that's USGS or DEQ, just wanna make sure and stress that if that once we move forward with that, if if the board approves it, that we do that in earnest. It's not just sort of a proverb that sits on on on the list and no one really enforces it or anything like that.
No. It's a commitment that the applicant is making.
Appreciate that. Thank you.
Alright. I don't have anyone else in queue for you. So county staff, if you would come forward.
Good evening, Chair Jefferson. Scott Meyer in the Planning Office. Nice to see everybody on the Board. We have a combined presentation. I am working I was reviewing the rezoning and then we have Ahmad Bazad who's going to be talking about the comprehensive plan amendment. So I guess to start, I guess I'll call Ahmad forward and then we can kind of he's going to talk for a little bit and then he'll and then I will take over after that. Thank you.
Thank you, Scott. Good evening, Madam Chair and members of the Board. Ahmad Behzad with Countywide Planning presenting you CPA twenty twenty five-five client property. This is a request to amend the comprehensive plan for approximately 58.7 acres of land from parks and open space and mixed use MU3 to residential neighborhood transit two. The 58.7 acre of the proposed amendment is part of our larger project area of 87 acres.
Just to give a brief background on the request, this was initiated by the Board on 10/07/2025. And on 03/25/2026, the Planning Commission heard the CP and recommended approval of this request. And the staff recommendation is also to approve the this CP request. As you can see in this slide, we have the existing and proposed long range land use designation based on this request. To the left, the existing long range land use designation for the four parcel, which is part of the project area involves mixed use MU3, RN2 and parks and open space.
When the applicant when the requester first submitted their request to initiate the CPA, it included only the parks and open space portion as mentioned by the applicant. However, based on the preliminary analysis of the staff, we recommended extending the R and two and reducing MU3 to respect the density of the surrounding neighborhoods and also respect the vision and goals for this activity center to promote mixed use development, also promote walkable communities and leverage VRE station and utilize the existing potential of this activity center. To the right, after the requester showed positive like response towards the staff recommendation, we have the proposed long range land use designation for the area, which is mostly RN2 and to have a good transition between the intensity of land uses. We started from retaining MU3 along the Liberia venue coming towards the Prince William Parkway and having R and two towards the sensitive areas to the east and south. The current zoning for the parcel is agriculture and requester also submitted a companion rezoning to change the zoning to plan mix residential, which my colleague, Scott Meyer, will give you his presentation on that.
As I mentioned, the vision and goal for all the activity centers within the comp plan is to shift the rural character of those activity centers towards suburban. And since we as Commissioner Supervisor Gordie mentioned, we already have existing infrastructure to support that and we should utilize that existing infrastructure and promote mixed use development for our determined activity centers within the comp plan. Some of the proposal merits include as I mentioned previously, we just not reduced the density, but also respected the vision for this activity center, which was one of the key advantage or strength of this proposal. And also we respected, as I mentioned, the surrounding neighborhoods since we have low density adjacent abutting land users.
With that,
staff recommends approval of the CPA, twenty twenty five-five client property for the reasons mentioned. And I would also like to thank everyone for coming together and pushing this project in the right direction, including Supervisor Vega, Commissioner Justice, reviewing agencies, my colleague, Scott Meyer, who is involved with this project for almost a decade and ultimately the applicant for being very receptive of staff recommendation. With that, I will hand to Scott Meyer, who will present the companion rezoning. Thank you.
Thank you, Matt. Scott Meyer. I'm back. It has been a full decade. I've been working on this for ten years. This project was initially accepted on 05/18/2016. So, 20 submissions later, nine hearings later, but it's evolved and it's been changing. Here we are. So, the time has come. Ahmad and Sherman gave a lot of detail before.
So we have the comprehensive plan amendment. Just to point out, you've all been oriented to the site. When this initially came in, where I'm pointing to right here, this was also part of the Klein property as well. And at one point, the comprehensive plan amendment included this area here. And it also enveloped this area, which is no longer part of the property.
So at one point, given my history, we had about 110 acres involved with the project. But now it's kind of morphed into what is about 87.11 acres. So Maude talked about the comprehensive plan amendment. And so the CPA is changing the land use policy. And then the rezoning, the component that I've been working on is kind of the implementation tool, if you will, the rezoning itself that has proffers associated with this.
So the subject request in its latest form is to rezone the 87.11 acres from A1 to plan mix residential. Over time, this was a lot more dense before. We had 400 units six years ago. We now are down to two forty units. It was a lot denser at the Northwestern area. I have a graphic which I'll show in a few slides from now. There were numerous pad sites. There was also a self storage facility across here. This is a separate application which is not part of Klein right now. So it has become a lot more suburban over time, a lot less urbanized as an earlier form.
So its latest rendition, two forty units single family attached Villa homes as Sherwin had mentioned and detached and it's age restricted. So, we have in the past had a lot more school impacts. We now don't have those school impacts anywhere near what they were before and virtually they've got away with the age restricted component. Staff is recommending approval. So currently, this is the long range lane use as it exists.
Ahmad showed you a graphic of how we're basically realigning MU3 neighborhood mixed use, and we're replacing the MU3 with RN2, which is basically one to four dwelling units per acre. That's suburban low density residential. The eastern part is also going to be replanned to RN2. So we basically have a lot of the commercial mixed use component, which is aligning to the north and then it's transitioning over to the east with what now is lower density residential. This is an aerial view, which I extracted from the design guidelines.
This is the parkway to the lower left is showing Buckhall Road. It gives a really great bird's eye view. In the back here, you know, we have the seek center over here and we have a few the existing homes here. And then we have the major intersection up here where the Harris Cedar Shopping Center is. These are the silos that Sherman had mentioned in his proffered contingent upon the results of a structural analysis.
The applicants committed to trying to save those two silos. There's also a network of open space areas which are providing place making and other meaningful amenities. Just real quickly in terms of the background, this started off as Klein property. And as I mentioned before, it was initially submitted to the planning office in May 2016. It's gone through many rounds of review and it's evolved and the scope has changed considerably.
We've had actually 20 cumulative submissions just to show you all that it's been evolving over time. It's been on hold for a while. It it has come back and it was renamed as legacy. It's been around so long. The name even changed to legacy, which but the the comprehensive plan amendment is still client property.
So the current assemblage it that we're looking at, it was accepted by the planning office a little over a year ago in May in April 2025. It's currently 240 homes, and we have three land base. And just to point out, this is really important, where the overall density gross area is 2.76 dwelling units per acre. In MU3, we can have up to 12 units per acre. So this is on the low density end of that.
That's a big, big thing worth pointing out. So if you look at the overall area, we're 2.8 dwelling units per acre. We have the Western non residential area, the coffee shop or the venue, entertainment venue, brew pub if you will. That's gonna be with an underlying zoning of b which is convenience retail. We have the Middle Land Bay, which is 3.7 dwellings per acre.
And it was important to create a transition as you go east towards Buckhull Road and we feel that that has sufficiently been accomplished. And now that land base has a density of 2.5. So point is it's a lot less dense than it used to be before. This is the latest layout exhibit. It's showing again the non residential component here. This piece is now no longer part of the property. Big thing is that we have this road a, which is the bypass. That's a public road, and that's gonna drastically change the, you know, pressure on this intersection. Again, we're awaiting VDA approvals. The previous design for the quadrant intersection, it was denied.
So now the applicant's submitting an access management exception. So we don't know the results of that yet, but we've from what we know, it's trending positive, we have transportation staff here to elaborate. Single family attached to the west, single family detached to the east transitioning. Also want to point out, this is what we had when this went to the planning commission October 2017. So if you go back here, see this piece is no longer included in the project, but just for comparison, it was a much more intensive project.
There were different pad sites. We had 400 units, a much denser rate. I just wanted to show that to and we also had the project extending over here as well, which is not the case. So just wanted to explain that, you know, this has evolved greatly over time. This is the environmental constraints analysis, the different land bay configuration with this being replanned.
The yellow is showing the single family attached. The pink to the right is showing the village homes or cluster homes as it transitions. A transition was really important here, having the greater intensity in the middle of the site going off to the east. This is showing, as Sherman explained, the network of the trail networks, the interconnectivity of these different areas. Also, to back up, we have the highway corridor overlay, which the applicant is maintaining, you know, the 50 foot buffer.
There's a wide array of buffering. This is the public improvement plan, which, you know, is in the staff report. We have the traffic consultants here. We have our county transportation staff, and we also have the applicant team as well. This is just showing the different, you know, configurations.
This is where it would meet the south bound Prince William Parkway. And, again, you know, this is all this is all extracted from the from the MZP. This slide is showing the connected, you know, pedestrian travel ways on the site as well. And just to repeat, there's a variety of open space amenities. The historical commission brought up an issue a while back about having a historical interpretive marker and the applicant has proffered for that because this was a dairy farm obviously at one point and it's paying homage to the history of the site.
This is showing the landscape areas again. One of the things that we look for in a planned development is to have an integration of uses. We've gotten the buffering, we feel in a good place where it matters the most and a few things are being modified but that's not uncommon in planned developments such as this. We have elevations which Sherman already showed about the showing the single family detached, not attached units, the open space areas. And just to point out, in the staff report, we're yes in every category except for transportation.
There are modified reduced landscape buffering. A few modifications to the standard buffering are being requested. The applicant has provided justification we feel which we could support, but as always, we strive for full compliance. So staff can concur with the modifications, but because it doesn't meet the full standards, it is, know, thus we have to cite it as a weakness. Environment with open space, there's not a lot of trees on the site.
There's extra turf area. It was a farm, but when you have intact tree areas, the point that I was mentioning in the environmental section is that we always look for an intact, more treed environment. Turf grass is resulting. It's just not ideal when we look for tree areas. And with transportation, there's needed VDOT approvals for the quadrant intersection.
As I mentioned before, this is for the Road A, that road that cuts through the site. The approval of this access management exception will significantly improve access and traffic management issues in the vicinity. We again just don't know the final results of that. So at this time, we're not able to support the transportation component. But in the event that VI is able to approve it, then staff can certainly stand behind that.
And we have staff here that could elaborate on that. So Planning Commission recommended approval back in late March. There were four recommendations. Applicant has updated the proffers and we basically concur with the proposed layout. We feel that it's now compatible with the area.
The applicant's evolution has been very sensitive to the context of the area. We have a concurrent comprehensive plan amendment. And previous CPAs were kind of following the project, but we feel like that we've created a balance or the planning is now being replanned to kind of be responsive to the area. There's also the affordable housing component, 10%, which we look for in every project that implements various elements of the strategic plan. And with that, I'll be happy to answer any questions. And staff is recommending approval with the latest proffers dated April 23. And again, have planning staff here, transportation, we have environmental staff and the applicant team. Thank you very much.
Thank you so very much, Supervisor Vega.
Did you say Vega? Yes. Okay. I heard something else.
Vega. Have something in my mouth. I have
a cough
drop. Just making sure. Vega. Thank you, Scott, for the presentation. Indeed, it has been a long time coming. I almost feel like Truett and I are breaking up, and it's weird. I
can't I
can't believe I'm even saying that, but we'll get to that here in a minute, Truett. Let's talk a little bit about traffic because for a while there, we had all of the boxes checked in terms of the plan's consistency, and the only, no that we have, is because of the transportation piece that we are waiting to hear back from, Richmond. I do wanna share to my colleagues, it is my preference to always, whether it's project in the Coles District or outside of the Coles District, for all the t's to be,
crossed. Thank
you, Alex. All the t's crossed and all my i's dotted, and, in this case, it was not possible. We've been waiting to hear back from VDOT, I believe, Paulo, since the April. I did engage our state delegation, and they've been in contact with VDOT. We've had good conversations, and it's looking promising.
It's just that we could not get that yes before this meeting here today. Paulo, can you please talk to us a little bit about the work that's been going on behind the scenes, how confident we are in regards to hopefully getting that approval and the improvements to this intersection. But before you do, I wanna divide the credit. I wanna give the credit fifth, the chair 50% of Mark's contributions to this transportation design because he is your appointee at large in the on the planning commission, but he is a constituent of mine who resides in the Kohl's District. So I'm pretty sure Mark is watching.
He's been, instrumental on all things transportation. And so I believe that the applicant and staff shared that this idea actually came, from him. And, they've been working in a collaborative matter, and I'm happy that we're we're we're here today. So, Paulo please.
Thank you. Madam Chair, members of the board, Paulo Bellito with the Department of Transportation. This is a very fluid situation. At the time that staff report was developed, the applicant had just submitted the AME, which is the access manager exception that is needed for the medium break. A mouse here. That is needed for the median break here. This is the partial signal. I know it shows a a full signal. Through movements will still occur. It's free flow. It's just the lefts. At the time, about a month or so ago, the applicant was reacting to VDOT comments based on an older version of this plan. So they're being reactive. Initially, staff had concerns just because of the timing. We've been working with VDAP throughout the process.
From what we hear, there is a lot of support for the approval of the AME. It's just a matter of timing. We just don't know when that will occur, but we do know that it's favorable. So while we're a no, we believe that this is an option that works and we believe that there's a good chance that the access managed exception, will get approved. It's more of a timing issue.
Do you want to go a little bit into detail on the proffers?
Sure. There are proffers, that talks about alternative design in the event that we're at site plan and we don't have additional VITA approvals. So we need very specific language that allows, the Director of Transportation and the City of Manassas Public Works Director to identify alternative improvements. There's also language in the proffers that limits occupancy to a certain amount, before additional occupancy occur based on improvements. So we did work with the applicant on specific profit language.
Thank you. Scott, do you want to expand on that or no? I saw you. I'm not sure if you wanted to. Not at this time. Okay. Thank you. Well, that's all I have in regards to transportation. I do want the applicant to come up and talk a little bit about, questions and concerns that, my office received in regards to water and blasting. I do, for the sake of transparency, want to say that I got a ton of emails that came in, and those emails I sent directly to the applicant so that he can find a solution and mitigate the concerns. And if you could just please talk a little bit about, those two concerns because those are the the top three. It's been traffic, well slash water, and blasting.
Yes, ma'am. For the record, I'm Truett Young with Stanley Martin Homes, and, I'm the answer of all emails regarding the Klein property. So concerns from the neighboring communities, people live on wells. They're obviously concerned about the large farm across the street from their home adversely impacting their well. Early on, we established a protocol, Sherman mentioned it, for testing wells within 800 feet of the property, whereby we send out certified letters at the beginning of the development process before we actually do anything and offer homeowners within that perimeter, and there's like, I think like 90 of them that we've identified, where we'll come out and we'll do a baseline testing of your well for water quality and water pressure.
If during the process of development, it's determined that your well or you feel like your well is not functioning the same or as well, you just call us. We come back out and we retest it and effectively puts us on the hook for any damage to your well. We handle blasting in a very similar manner. So there are protocols in place with the fire marshal's office. Fire marshal runs the the permits for blasting in Prince William County, But the rules and regulations they use are federal, state, and local.
There's a ton of them. But part of that is every property within two fifty feet of the blast area is notified prior to any work being completed, and they are offered a pre blast survey of their home, where we go out and take a look at their foundation and we videotape their foundation to make sure that, you know, in the event that they feel like after the blasting work has occurred, there's at least a baseline for any damage to their homes. Everybody kind of point to and say, yes, this is or is not. It's quite frankly the both the wells and the pre blast surveys are protections for both the homeowners and our company. It makes it very easy to identify if it was or it was not a problem.
And so I think there were some questions about the types of explosives that are used. The word ampho has been thrown around a lot. Apparently, don't use ampho. Think it's ammonium nitrate. We use an emulsive explosive that is apparently safer and that's what the industry standard is now.
There's also a significant amount of notification regarding when blasting is to occur. The way blasting works, it's not an ongoing thing throughout the day. The in all practical sense, the team drills all day, loads the shots, and every day at about 03:00, one shot goes off, and it's not like a big bang and it's not like rocks flying through the air. It's more of a thump. But there are monitors set up at the blast area to determine if there's any seismic activity that has left the property. So a lot goes into it. I know that it kind of freaks people out a little bit, but it's not uncommon. It happens on almost every project in Prince William County just as a matter of process.
Thank you for that. I don't have any additional questions. For colleagues on the dais. The reason why I asked the applicant to come up and address those concerns is because there is some information that was conveyed back to members of the community and as a result we started to get emails asking about the very thing that the applicant just answered. But when the applicant provided a response, those concerns pretty much went away and folks were satisfied.
So if you're here and are going to be speaking on this matter, for the sake of transparency, want you to know that those questions were addressed and that pretty much everybody, with the exception of two, were satisfied with those responses. Madam Chair, I don't have any further questions at this moment. I will follow-up for the next round.
All right. You so very much. Supervisor Boddy.
Yeah. Thank you, Madam Chair. Going towards the other big thing that's been talked about is traffic, probably looking at Paolo. But Mr. Patrick talked about that road and I appreciate both Madam Chairs, Planning Commissioner and Survivor working through that alternate bypass road. Can you talk about levels of service Paulo, and how that how if the road is approved by Richmond and what have you, how that will actually affect levels of service?
Sure. Management, members of the board. So as we know, the intersection Liberia and the Parkway is currently failing. So when we looked at the traffic impact study completed by the applicant there's a couple of things we look at. We look at the current levels of traffic.
We look at a future without the development and a future with the development. So with this improvement in the future and Kevin has some of the traffic data, with the reroute that's assumed, there is a significant improvement not just in mitigating the impact but in the overall intersection at Prince William Parkway and Wellington. I believe in the future with that development, it's failing significantly. And with the reroute, we are looking at still failing, but it is significantly less. You're cutting the delay in half. The delay is so bad at that intersection, even if you cut it in half, you're still failing, but this improvement does improve overall operations intersection.
Appreciate that. And my second question in regards to traffic is, you know, some of the the things that I've heard a lot from at least my constituents is concerns about people going out like this development and then people will go down Prince William Parkway and cut over to Yates Ford and take Davis Ford and clog up more of the traffic congestion nightmare that is going to Clifton and coming back during the evening. So can you talk about that, what your analysis has shown based on where people will probably model and and go if they're trying to go east?
So when we look at the traffic analyses, there was a certain assumption in distribution. 10%. I believe, in in working with VDOT and applicant on analyzing it, it's about 10% that is assumed to go east towards Yates Ford and to Clifton. That's 10% of the overall traffic. So in terms of what traffic we have in the parkway already, it's a small, very small amount.
Appreciate that. And my my next question goes in the complete opposite direction is on traffic and pedestrian safety. So that part of the bypass that you have right there, that piece that yep. You're right there. So I take it that sort of turns off into the commercial piece of the property. Is there any crosswalks or anything like that right there?
There is not. That is something we did look at, and it was brought up to the applicant's attention. VDAU will likely not approve a uncontrolled crosswalk. So what we made sure the applicant had in their plans was so you do have connectivity along the quadrant roadway, but you do have signals on each end. So you have the ability to cross there using a pedestrian signal.
And is there any kind of traffic calming that could be done in that area? Because I I just I fear that as we as folks get comfortable with that and, you know you know, God willing, Richmond approves that, it becomes a major sort of place for people to go and knowing that there's a chance in the in the future that more of this will sort of continue to grow out. You know, we're gonna have more traffic there. So my concern is people will not want to walk all the way down to the parkway to then cross street and go all the way back up to that commercial piece. They will try to cross the street where the closest connection is. So is there any traffic coming that's possible there?
Unfortunately, there is not immediately. It is a collector roadway. So when it comes to traffic calming, it's limited to some of our smaller residential roadways. But there are other measures that we could look at, once, traffic grows and this is approved and there's other improvements in area.
And I'd also know that the other wrinkle there is there's no driveways that go right there. More to work on with Richard. I appreciate that, Paolo. Thank you. All
right. Thank you so very much. I do not see anyone else in queue. So I'm going to go ahead and open the public hearing for 13E and 13F combined. So do we have anyone who has signed up?
Alright. We I'm gonna start calling people. So because I'm combining these, if you wanna speak, you have up to six minutes. If you're an organization like Midco, you have up to ten minutes. But make sure that you ask for that at the start. I'm first gonna have Martin Jeter, Melody Miller, Devinder Singh, Jessica Wagner, and Al Harris. If you can all make your way. And again, please start by stating your name, the magisterial district where you reside, and the timer up there will let you know how much time you have. So if you could start, mister
Good evening, Chair Jefferson, members of the board. My name is Martin Jeter. I live in the Occoquan District, and I'm here tonight representing the Mid County Civic Association. So I'd like to extend the time, if I could, please. Thank you. So as has already been mentioned, we've been reviewing this project at Midco, working with the applicant and the community for over ten years, and we've actually been working longer than that. There was a previous project for the Klein Land called the Pyramid Project that was twelve years ago. So we've been actually working with this land for twelve years. So it's been a long road. We do think this project represents some improvements over previous iterations of it.
Of the improvements is that transition of the housing from the West to the east, The reduction in density is a good thing. We do like the fact that the commercial area has been reduced in size. We have plenty of commercial up and down Liberia Avenue. At one time, there was a lot more commercial area here. So we think that's a positive.
And we also think that the overall traffic improvements may be a positive. I'm not sure that kind of remains to be seen. But we do feel like the density on the project is still a little too high. It doesn't really fit with the surrounding community, the larger lot homes that are in the surrounding community. We feel that the loss of parks and open space on this project, the 25 acres that would be converted into housing, we we think that's a negative.
We in in this area, Prince William County, we have the least amount of acreage per person, park acreage per person of any park district. So we hate to lose 25 acres of parks and open space. And that was something that was included in the previous project, as was mentioned, and it was agreed to by the applicant and everyone. So we hate to see that. But I wanted to to home in on two particular items.
One is that the the well issue, the groundwater monitoring wells. And this is something that Midco talked to the applicant about and the planning commission. And at the planning commission, we did get a proffer that was mentioned here earlier to provide for up to two monitoring wells for groundwater levels. Now, just to give you some background, there are only two groundwater monitoring wells in Prince William County right now. And if you want to verify that, I know it was mentioned earlier there's more than that, but there are only two.
And USGS will verify that for you. I can give you the contact information. But there's only two, one in the East, one in the West. If we could get one in Mid County, that would be a valuable addition to our groundwater monitoring network. It's hard to call it a network when we only have three, but that would give us another one.
And Mid County area is important because the community in Mid County all the way from from Holy Road on the East to Manassas City line on the West, almost all the area, almost all the residents are on are on groundwater for their families. And we have 16,000 private wells in Prince William County. Upwards of 30,000 or 40,000 people are on groundwater in Prince William County. We don't have a great idea as to what the groundwater is doing, whether the trends are up or down, know, what's going on with that. So we do need more wells.
We have a study by USGS that's underway right now, but it's not using actual groundwater monitoring wells, which are the gold standard for monitoring groundwater, which kind of makes sense. So we do have the commitment by the applicant. Unfortunately, we don't have a means to actually obtain the wells. In other words, we have to have money to drill the wells. And in my conversations with the USGS and and Virginia DEQ, the cost for a well is anywhere from 10 to $15,000.
And we either need the applicant or the county to come up with that 15,000. Now USGS will pay for the equipment, the the monitoring equipment, and between USGS and DEQ, they will do the monitoring, but we have to come up with the money for for actually drilling the well or it's just lines on a piece of paper. We'll never actually get a well. So that and also, we need the county government to show USGS and DEQ that you're serious about this well. I mean, I talked to USGS, and and it's, you know, it's just a guy from a civic association.
But we we I'm asking the county to make it clear to USGS and DEQ that you want this well and it's something you need for your for your people. And so, as I mentioned before, we have 16,000 people in well water from the East to the West in this county, mostly in the Western and mid county areas, and we don't have a firm idea of what's going on with the groundwater. So we really need this well. And it would also serve the surrounding community because people are concerned about impervious services that are being added along Liberia Avenue and so forth and with this project. And so you have concerns about that.
But if you had a well on this property, you'd be able to at least know what the trends were and what was going on. You could relay that information to the community. So the other two items I wanted to home in on are related to transportation, and one has been talked about a little bit. Brought up during the planning commission, Midco brought up the issue cross of through road and the pedestrian crossing on that cross through road. And we tried to work towards some kind of a light or a flashing light or some kind of raised crosswalk or something to help folks to cross that internal road.
We have to remember this is an over 55 community. You're gonna have more people in wheelchairs. You're gonna have people that, you know, don't move as well as they used to as as I don't at 71. So it's very important to have a good crossing there. Now you heard that the preferred route would be to have somebody instead of going straight across that cross through road, go all the way down to the parkway at the signal and cross there and then come all the way back.
And you you know nobody's gonna do that. We're trying to build walkable communities in this county, and this is kind of counter to that goal. So we'd like to see some kind of help with that crossing area. We have to also keep in mind that the five acre parcel that you saw in upper left corner of the Klein project that used to be part of this project and no longer is, that five acre parcel will be developed eventually, most likely with commercial and retail. And so that'll be more even more of a reason for people to want to cross over that four lane highway.
So that's something that I really would hope that we could get some kind of commitment to have some kind of help with that cross. And the other thing related to transportation is there was early talk when this project with the cross through was first proposed of turning off the left turn lights at Prince William Parkway and having all the westbound traffic go through this community. Now now lately, that's that talk has died down because VDOT has required that cross through road to be brought up to the levels of the parkway, and that would be really expensive. Well, I just wanna make sure that we keep those left turn lights open because that would keep this community from having all of the parkway traffic going right through the middle of it. So that would even make that problem with that crossing worse.
So bottom line, hopefully we can get some kind of commitment tonight for actually putting those wells in place in addition to just having a commitment to allow them and also to do something with that crossing. Those are the two main things. As I said at the beginning, there's some positive aspects of this. It has come a long way. Appreciate the reduction in density and appreciate the way transmits across the project, lower to the eastern side. But hope we can just do a few more things on this to make it really work. Thank you.
Thank you so very much. Next speaker, please. Just bring it closer to you if you can. Oh, it's not off.
Is it? Oh, there it is. You turned it off. See, I see what you're doing. I would love all six minutes if you don't mind.
You would like I'm sorry?
I signed up for both, so I would love all six minutes. Yep.
Okay, Cool.
Good evening. I'm still Melody. I'm still in the Nyabsco. Still live on the East, still run-in the West. I want to object to both the the proposal and the rezoning, and I would ask the board to deny or at the very least defer until late summer so that we can get some other things done.
But I wanted to go through the reasons why if you'll grant me a moment. And I wanna be really direct about what's actually happening tonight. So the board is being asked to simultaneously rewrite its own long long range use map and rezone the same 87 acres in a single meeting because after nearly ten excuse me, twelve years, this application still does not conform to the county's comprehensive plan. And rather than requiring the developer to meet the plan, the plan is being changed to meet the developer. That precedent alone should really give the board a a very significant moment of pause because these are not minor technical adjustments.
They are permanent foundational changes of how this land has been designated for the benefit of the entire county. The citizens of Prince William County deserve to know why the county's long range vision is being revised to accommodate a decade old application rather than the application being required to conform to the county's vision. So on the loss of open space that the gentleman talks about, the parks and open space, there are 25 acres of mapped parks and open space that will be permanently eliminated with this decision. The land sits adjacent to Signal Hill Elementary School near the growing Liberia Avenue corridor and within reach of thousands of county residents who, if you take this opportunity away, they will never get it back. The staff justification is that the original baseball park did not concept did not advance, but that application actually underscores the problem in that the county has not fully explored what this land could provide to the public.
Once it's rezoned and redeveloped, that opportunity is gone. No future board board can recreate it, and the citizens of the Coles District and of the county broadly will lose that opportunity forever. On the there's an economic attached to this. The county's own demographic analysis of this shows that this amendment will reduce potential jobs at this location from as many as eight thirty four down to as few as seven. This site was designated mixed use originally because of its proximity to the VRE Manassas Station, which somebody mentioned earlier.
But converting it to low density residential permanently forfeits the economic productivity, the tax revenue, and the neighborhood serving businesses that this activity center was designed, in fact, originally to generate. On my favorite topic, as everybody has undoubtedly known by now, on the environment, this property borders the environmental resource protection overlay and the Occoquan Reservoir Watershed. The ERPO and the ORPA designations exist because this watershed directly affects drinking water supply of Northern Virginia throughout the Occoquan Reservoir. 240 residential units, any significant number of residential units will bring impervious service runoff, lawn chemicals, grading directly to that sensitive edge of the watershed. The staff report defers environmental protection almost entirely to developer proffers, which I think is inappropriate.
The wildlife habitat in this area and I haven't heard anybody talk about this, but I'm taking a side slow, side tangent. There is even in the developer's application, there is a wood turtle habitat noted. And I just wanna make it really clear to people, the wood turtle is a threatened species in all 17 states that it exists. It is a threatened species in Virginia. They are incredibly sensitive to habitat loss.
They are incredibly slow to reproduce, and they are present on this property. They will be decimated by development. They are on petition right now to be on the endangered species list. So in your decision, there should be a consideration that you are possibly causing the extinction of a species locally. So the integrity of the drainage corridor in addition to this deserves more than a proper commitment, right?
Once this land is graded and built, no amount of future mitigation can restore the natural hydrology. We can't restore the vegetative cover, and we can't restore wildlife movement corridors that exist today. Proffers are promises really that future boards can modify as we saw earlier with the farm where they promised to do stuff and then she came back and said they didn't, the watershed damage would be permanent. At a minimum, I believe there should be a study by VDWR required to talk about that wood turtle and their habitat and what developing this land would mean to a threatened species that has clearly been documented as present. In my last minute, I wanna say that the age restriction framing on this, so the 55, does not change any of The open space is gone permanently.
The mixed mixed use land is gone permanently. The environmental buffer is compromised permanently regardless of who lives there, whether it's 55 or not. And the county's own comprehensive plan will be rewritten not because the community's needs changed, but because a private developer's project does not conform to it, and that's gonna set a precedent that the comp plan is negotiable whenever a project is large enough or persistent enough. I don't really think that we want that to happen. And I understand that there are valid traffic concerns.
Those can be addressed separately, without approving this. So I I just I also wanna be clear. I am not opposed to housing in Prince William County. I am opposed to the permanent sacrifice of public open space, economic potential, environmental buffers, and long range planning integrity to accommodate a developer's application that has not been able to conform to the county's own vision in nearly ten years of in over ten years of trying. So I urge this board to deny both items or at the very minimum defer them and require them to put an application forth that genuinely conforms to the comprehensive plan as written and to perform due diligence for threatened species protection. The citizens of Prince William County hope that you are able to do this for us. Thank you so much for your time.
Thank you. And before I get to the next speaker, just want to let everyone know the default time for this one is six minutes. So you don't have to use it, but you have up to six minutes if you wish. All right, you may proceed.
Hello, respected board members and chairperson. My name is Devinder Singh. I represent six Central Virginia. We are the closest neighbor to the legacy of clients. We are just across the state. I'm here to request board members to approve this project. This project, as the gentleman said, is not from 2017 or '16. This project started in 2012 when Paramed Centre, a small company for Oaktown, Fairfax, started the application. So this project is here for a long, long time. And why we need to approve this project?
Prince William County needs more house. And at the same time, we need the correct houses, which we needed. We need our senior citizen, 55, to stay in Prince William County. Even we can bring senior citizen from Fairfax or London County to Prince William County. Because if we look at the location, it's very close to Jubier Medical Center.
Seniors need more medical care. So if you're looking at all the dentists, all the doctors are on the it's very close to the client property. Currently, we have shortage of the homes in Prince William County. If we look at the graph in Northern Virginia, the people living in house, we have the second highest people living in our homes. Only Manassas City Park had the highest residents living in their homes.
We are next. If we compare with the city of Alexandria, we are far apart. So definitely we need this project to be approved so we can reduce the shortage. We can meet everything by 2040, even if we build all the homes which are currently approved Prince William County, still we are going to be 19,000 to 25,000 homes short. So Prince William County needs more homes so that people can live here, work here, and definitely this project, as we said before, is here for a long, long time.
So now is the time to compromise and request the board, let's approve this, let's make history today, May 12, that Klein property is approved. Thank you so much for listening.
Thank you so very much. Next speaker, please.
Hi, good evening. My name
is Jess Wagner. I'm from the Coles District. Good evening. I'm just requesting that you would vote no today or defer the CPA. And I will say, I do remember when this was first proposed.
Twelve years ago, I was going to high school. I grew up off Lake Jackson Drive, and I've seen a reduction of rural land in that area of my entire life. And so I'm not naive enough to think that this is going to never happen. But just wanted to mention a couple of things to keep in mind. My my family, we live on a well system, and it's a bit nerve wracking to hear whenever there's gonna be a large community that's gonna be relying on a well water system, and it's gonna be and the concern for the county in terms of the decrease of water availability due to the increase of people and the demand due to the increase of data centers in the county.
I heard that there's a mention of the well monitoring system. That sounds great. They mentioned that they'll be they'll test before and after, and they're gonna be held responsible. That's awesome. But I'm just curious how my widow mother is going to be able to hold Stanley Martin Holmes accountable if something were to happen to her well water after thousands of dollars of legal fees and then the well water being potentially ruined.
Like I said, I'm not naive enough to think this land won't eventually be developed, but I think that the need to develop the plot of land without the proper infrastructure public transport and walkable areas is is a bit rushed. This is supposed to be a pedestrian centered community with a sense of place. There's no guarantee that there is gonna be pedestrian access to the LiveArea areas. Sidewalks over there are poorly maintained. They're maintained by the city of Manassas. So you as Prince William County can't guarantee that the people of this community are going to have pedestrian access all year round. Yes, there's the multimodal sidewalks around the area, they're going to where not to where people need to go. People need to go to Liberia. Earlier when we had snow this year, the sidewalks never got plowed. People who need to go to buses, they can't even they couldn't even get to the sidewalks because there was no they weren't ever plowed.
And if you're saying that that's where the people need to go, they did not have access to it. We said this is workforce housing. Say these people who these 55 or older people that need to get to work and they need to take a bus, how are they gonna get to work if they can't get on the sidewalk? Manassas is just not it's not a walkable city. It's barely a bikeable city.
So the only option that these people have is to drive, which adds more cars to the real to the roadways that already have congested roads. And I think we all have family members, no offense, who people over the age of 65, but I I know I do. I have family members who are genuine traffic liabilities. I don't feel better knowing that the least agile range of people will be entering and exit one of the busiest areas of the county I've heard a lot of mention about smart planning for cities, but this is not a smartly designed idea. I feel like a lot of the times we're putting the cart before the horse.
We don't have the public infrastructure or public transport system that is robust enough to support this. It's frustrating and a little bit embarrassing because we have the richest and smartest people here in this county versus I went to school in Port Tempe, Arizona and I got a free bus to school every single day. We don't even have that here. So it's a bit frustrating whenever we want to add more housing, we want to increase the density, which is I understand we need to do that. This is a really important part of the country, but maybe we should put the things in place before we start to add this because I can respect that they took the time to really think through this project and make these amendments and add the cut through.
So those are things that I acknowledge and they're good, but there's also some other things that need to be considered. And then my last statement is, I think it's a little bit out of touch and I ask that you guys consider this as well that this is an affordable housing area. The Stanley Martin homes over at Innovation Park are on average $500,000 and those are townhouses. And these are gonna be built with better materials than over there. So that's gonna be at least a minimum of $600,000 And if that's you think that's affordable, I'm sorry. That is not. Unless you're 55 plus and you have this, like, established wealth. But thank you for your time.
Alright. Before I call up the next speaker, I wanna get other people in queue. I have Adam Dunn or Dion. I have and then Justin Ingle. Alright, sir. You may proceed.
Good evening. I'm I'm Al Harris. I live across the road from this project in in Hinson Knowles. I've been going to meetings about this thing for years and years. Tonight, I I didn't really come here to propose a project or oppose it. I I think it's a a reasonable compromise, and it has some things in it that are good for our local citizens like a good reduction in density, and there are road improvements and reduced load on schools and traffic. So I think those are good things about it. My concern at the moment is the transportation improvements. It seems like there is a lot of uncertainty around this. And I think about things that can go wrong.
And, we talk about tonight about, well, we think this is probably gonna be approved. And I I don't I don't know, you know, how we work with VDOT and Richmond and all that. But it strikes me that we could be more comfortable if we had firm commitment on the the transportation improvements. If they weren't approved or they were opposed or something, where where could that lead, and what would we wind up with? So I'm I'm suggesting to the board that perhaps deferring this until we have certainty on transportation might be a good thing to do. Thank you.
Thank you. Next speaker, please.
I'm Adam Doan. I'm from the Coles District. We live about point seven miles from South of Buckhall Road. Direct and we get up to Prince William via Lake Jackson. It really concerns me that the project has been on the books for about twelve years.
And one of the things that Martin Stanley has that should have in place is a wealth of metrics. And that wealth of metrics and the past of what the traffic and patterns were like, what what they were like during the days and stuff like that. As far as I've I haven't seen any public metrics that left turn lanes have a certain amount of traffic. I worked for a civil engineering firm in San Diego, California. And we did metrics for the San Diego Padres new ballpark, at the time it was new, from all over the California and Arizona and various places.
And we measured the traffic and literally be able to determine what's the projections would be down the road. And since we've lived here, I haven't seen any assurances to the public that this traffic patterns that VDOT was gonna come up and put together is really gonna be valid enough. And and the the the common theme that we're hearing from the residents in the area are literally the traffic in the wells. And I would like to see for the wells that even if we're 7.7 miles from Buckhall, we're not even talking about the extension of the the other part of the property, that will be included in a escrow to get our wells tested. I think that should be open to a certain amount of people that not just 800 feet or 200 feet from the construction site.
Think I it should be open for everybody that's on a well in a mile radius or something that could be affected. I think that would be a great opportunity as the board would be able to share good measure with the residents. And and we we talked about earlier the omni ride. I would love to vote in for the omni ride if I can get a ride from my house to Fairfax City. I think there'll be a great opportunity because I would love to use public transportation.
And I think most of us would. In fact, when we lived in Seattle, my father would live on Bainbridge Island, would take the Seattle State ferry to Downtown Seattle, pick up a rideshare bus, and then pick up people, and then drive and drop them off on his way to work, their work, and then do the opposite on the way back. So public transportation is very important, but we don't have that in this area. We just have it in the county wide. And a lot of people in Prince William do commute to Fairfax, Arlington, and DC for work.
So the traffic is a really big difference. And having that metric of data that we can actually monetize and be able to look at this and say, our twenty five year plan of traffic, we can actually say that this is not gonna be impeding, that we're gonna actually help. The developers themselves, it's a financial decision. This is land. This is money making.
This is the ability pay money and put it into a $3,000,000,000 company. So if they're not here for the residents, they're really for the the revenue. Now it's it's really good opportunity for these times to hear from the residents and be able to work together. And there has been some of that, in which I'm really grateful. I just want to make sure we're not checking boxes. Checking boxes, listening to the public, and the decisions already been made in the backrooms. And that's what sometimes it feels like. Thank you.
Next speaker,
Good evening. I'm Justin Engel. I live Coles District, Ellis Road, which is Parallels Moore Drive, which is right up the street from this. And usually, I stand up here and hammer you guys, give everybody a hard time for what they're not doing correctly. I wanna I I have reservations, some hesitations about this project. I've lived in this county forty years. I've seen everything was two lanes when I grew up in this county. A lot of development has taken place. Miss Bailey, say some some good, some bad, made some mistakes here and there. Thank you.
I like the progress that this project is making. Like I say, it's almost right across the street from me. The direction it's going, I got a text message from my parents the other day that said, hey. We're moving across the street. And I what the heck are they talking about? And to see this brought up again, I was like, wow. Because it's been silent for a long period of time exactly what was going to happen with this. I think it's great to see exactly 55 and up, community for older people. My reservation there, as it was mentioned, was the cost. What it's really gonna cost for a house?
I do like the design of the project, less density. You know, are my parents gonna be able to afford to buy a brand new house in that area? Maybe if I can get them off everything else they have. But, anyway, that that it's great to see that development and that movement. This area is very expensive for people as they get older to live in.
My parents spent a lot of time staying at my house, and they live out in Shenandoah Valley now. They originally owned 12 acres right up the street from me years and years ago, but kind of pushed out of this area because of the cost of living and the cost of housing in this area. The attention to traffic, I like the idea. I don't like that it's not set in stone before moving forward with the project. That is something there is an abomination of an intersection right up the street from this, and that's the Prince William Parkway Prince William Parkway Prince William Parkway 234234, and there is everything is so confusing about that intersection.
It, it took me forever to figure out that intersection. It has no general direction of a cloverleaf like ingress, egress of a four lane highway should be. Anybody with a general sense of direction gets confused when they go to that intersection and there's nothing but bollards and all the lanes and you're driving down the wrong side for a second. It doesn't make sense. I like the idea of the cut through on this so long as we stay within reasonable, it makes sense in general direction.
I like the attention to Wells. The fact that Stanley Martin is standing up and saying that, Stanley Martin. I I appreciate that. This is gonna be the fourth farm that I see you guys, I won't say destroy. I'll say develop near me in my general area.
There was an attention to Wells in the project that was right across the street from me. But with that said, I like that there is attention to that now. Is that a perfect scenario situation? I'm not sure. But the fact that there is foresight put on that, the fact that it will affect people that are a one, you know, acre, acre and a quarter lots in that area that rely on nothing but well and septic.
That is a big, big deal for all the existing houses in this area that may not be able to afford to, you know, just drill a new well or do something like that. So the fact that there is, you know, attention being brought to that is great. Credit where credit is due. Thank you guys for this project as I get again, accountability. Yes, Lee, you know I'm gonna feel out about that.
Hold Stanley Martin accountable for what they're proposing. What the the the grand plan, grand scheme of all of this project, please, you know, I like the direction it's going. Stay in that direction. Hold hold the developer accountable for what they say they're going to do and follow through with it. Sidewalks is a big thing. The wells, everything like that. So thank you guys. Credit where credit's due. Thank you, Yaslee and commissioner Justice for this this project and working together with Stanley Martin to push it forward. Thank you.
Alright. Thank you very much. I'm gonna go to my colleague, supervisor Angry for remote public hearings.
Thank you, madam chair. Chris, do we have any online online?
Good evening. Yes, we do. Our first speaker is Bob Marshall.
Okay. Go ahead, Bob. Go on.
Hi. Thank you very much. A Loudoun County Board of Supervisors voted $3,400,000 to help homeowners in the flood prone Selma Estates development, sell their homes to the federal government, and blasted two local developers in the process located off Virginia
I'm sorry. Bob? Hey, Bob?
Yes, sir.
Hey. Can you speak up a little bit?
Oh, okay.
Okay. Thank you.
Alright. Thank you.
Alright. Can I should I start over? Or
Yes, please. Yes.
Okay. Thank you very much. This is from an article by Neil Augenstein, WTOP. A Loudoun County Board of Supervisors Committee has voted $3,400,000,000 to help homeowners in the flood prone Selma Estates development to sell their homes to the federal government and blasted two local developers of the process. Located off Virginia Route 15 between Leesburg and Lucketts, Selma Estates now consist of 277 homes.
Between 2013 and '18, during and after heavy rains, storm runoff flooded through windows and doors and into the basements of homes. Last year, FEMA enlarged the area's floodplain by 14 homes. The WTOP reported that Loudoun County Board of Supervisors contemplated buying the homes. These homes were constructed by Stanley Martin. According to staff, implementing a buyout program is the most valid viable option for the Supervisor's Board of Finance Committee voted to fund the measure by 3,400,000 to facilitate filing an application for FEMA's flood mitigation assistance, a voluntary buyout programs for homes in Selma's estate.
Soot Loudoun supervisor, Caleb Kirscher, had harsh words for Christopher Consultants and Stanley Martin for not reaching an out of court settlement with homeowners. Stanley Martin has even filed a countersuit against these homeowners for filing suit against them, Kirscher said. It's disgusting. These companies who build homes for our families in Loudoun County have millions of dollars, and I want them to be profitable, and I want them to build, said Kirscher. But if they cannot step up and take care of a few homes where clearly an engineering study has gone wrong, they don't deserve to do business in this county.
To be eligible for FEMA aid, the county must commit to funding 25% of the flood mitigation project, but neither Christopher Consultants nor Stanley Martin would commit to participating in the project. They spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on attorneys fighting this, said Kirchner. This is not the kind of business we want here in the county. Board of Supervisors chair, Phyllis Randell, agreed with Kirchner's criticism. When people buy a home, they plan on raising their family there.
They bring their child home from the hospital. They have graduation and weddings and moments. And Randall said, so it's not just that you lose your house, you lose your home and all the memories that come with it. Christopher Consultants and Stanley Martin did not respond to WTOP for comment. Now the second point is, in April 2025, a joint collaboration between Virginia Tech and the United States Geological Survey was initiated with Prince William County, quote, in response to growing concerns about groundwater sustainability heightened during the digital gateway case and a recommendation by the Prince William Sustainability Commission, which noted that there are only two active continuously monitored ground wells groundwater wells exist in Prince William County and cannot provide data on future groundwater in the various watersheds in the county essential for supply.
The USGS uses the soil water balance method to begin developing, quote, the information needed to make informed decisions about groundwater resources in Prince William County to assessing the impact of historic and forecasted land use changes on recharge to aquifers. The US and I received this on May 8. The USGS currently is in the final stages of quantifying groundwater recharge across the county. This information will be finalized and made publicly available later this year. Data will be used by Virginia Tech to determine the effect of future climate and land use changes on groundwater recharge.
It would be premature for the supervisors to vote on May 8 to approve Stanley Martin's legacy at Klein, 87 acre dense 240 mostly attached res residences across overcrowded Prince William Parkway in Liberia without waiting for the groundwater study, which is one third finished, the results of which the USGA says is that Prince William County needs to make informed decisions about groundwater resources in Prince William County. So if you make a decision now, you're baking basing it on an uninformed decision. How much public confidence will there be in the supervisors if you vote yes without any of the critical data you they need from the USGA and Virginia Tech to make an informed decision. For example, Stanley Martin Consultants in their 2017 hydrologic survey did not physically test Klein's Aquifer, did not use recent data, and it appears that their supposed average residential well recharge was based on what took place at Cedar Run and Broad Run, not characteristic of hydrologic group e under the Klein property and adjacent area. To illustrate the need for accurate data, when Stanley Martin built their homes, an incorrect floodplain map was used and their development flooded badly.
At a Loudoun supervisor meeting in 2020, supervisor Caleb Kirscher expressed disappointment with both Stanley Martin and Christopher consultants. They are largely responsible for this flooding issue that has occurred, and quite frankly, people have almost lost their lives. And I ask them from my position here to step up to the plate and see what they can do to make this right rather than fighting litigation and trying to get out of their, out of their responsibility. This is from an article in in Loudoun. Lastly, ANFO is largely used for for explosives.
It it is it is a problem with the contamination of nitrate that happens with ammonium nitrate fuel oil blasting, which is used in 99% of all blastings. But if in fact, Stanley Martin is not gonna use this, they they should accept a proffer that whatever blaster they hire will not use ANFO. And I I sent a an article from the American Chemical Society to the supervisors earlier this week, a peer reviewed article, including the United States Geological Survey identifying the
Thanks, Bob. I you ran out of time. That was six minutes, I believe. Alright. Next speaker, please.
Next speaker is Kathy Marshall. Sorry.
Is Marshall? Kathy? Okay. Go ahead.
Yes. Thank you. Please defer this project. We don't have the current groundwater data. You have heard that over and over again. Stanley Martin's hydrogeological study was done in 2016. That was ten years ago. Excuse me. It needs updating. At the planning commission meeting, Stanley Martin agreed to allow two monitoring wells. But so far, there's no money. So there might not be any of those wells. The groundwater data is needed before the development is approved. Not later. I mean, we could use it later, but it's more important to have it before they go forward with this development.
Can you imagine if something happened to the wells? What would the county do? It would be a huge headache for property owners and the county. I don't know how you'd be able to supply well water to people that use well water for everything in their home. And as my husband said earlier, Stanley Martin apparently did not wanna get involved in repairing the flooded homes.
They might have had their reasons, but, you know, when previous planning commissioner Moses Ned asked Truett Young what would well owners do? Because their their well proper is not that great. It only goes 800 feet, and it's only for six months. Nobody mentioned that tonight that I'm aware of. So she said, well, if somebody had a problem after six months, what would happen?
And Truitt Young said they could litigate or they would litigate. Okay? So that's a problem. Now the other thing is he says it goes he he added base paving to the proffer because we were concerned that six in six months, you're not gonna have any impervious surfaces on that property. I mean, I'd be very surprised. So he put in base paving, and that does not include asphalt paving. Asphalt is impervious. Buildings are impervious. Driveways are impervious. Roads are impervious.
Parking lots are impervious. Those are the things that affect recharge of wells of the area. Okay? The water can't seep into the ground and recharge our wells. If Stanley Martin meant to say impervious asphalt paving in his well proper, then he needs to say that now. We do not have any legal assurance that if our homes or wells are damaged from blasting or loss of well recharge area, residents would be made whole by anyone. Okay. My husband covered some of this stuff. So anyway and don't think that blasting accidents don't happen. Just Google it.
You will find them everywhere. And right in Manassas, the Coles District, in Great Oak, in 08/18/2022, Prince William Times article stated, their first clue came in 2020 when loud explosions that seemingly came out of nowhere shook the ground beneath their home, leaving cracks in their foundation, patio, and even an interior wall. Virginia courts have held that blasting is inherently dangerous. There's a reason the blaster is required to carry $5,000,000 in insurance, but that's to indemnify the county. We need a financial assurance that we won't be left holding the bag and have to sue Stanley Martin who doesn't like to be sued if something happens to our wells or our homes from blasting.
The other thing is we don't have any updated traffic accident data in the busy corridors surrounding Cline. That's the most important aspect of traffic safety. The last time we looked at the accident data, the death of our dear neighbor in an accident on Liberia Avenue, which happened in January, this January, was not even included yet. At what point does the county conclude traffic has reached its maximum load or that the road should be not made more dangerous? Losing most of the median, separating oncoming traffic on that dangerous busy part of the parkway is not gonna improve safety.
No. Nobody mentioned that they're adding former traffic lights. As far as I know, there are three egresses and ingresses at the at the development that are gonna need traffic lights. Another one for the turn lanes that are gonna cut into the median. So that's another light. And nobody mentioned the five massive storage buildings. I know that's not part of this this, application, but it was part of the original Klein application. But they probably figured nobody would like that, so they didn't put that in. Five massive storage buildings on eight acres adjoining the Klein Senior community. Everybody knows that storage buildings attract crime.
I don't think the seniors are gonna like that very much. Okay. And now I was given a traffic analysis. And when I started looking at it just today, it only included phase one of the development. 79 residences. That's it. So the project has 240 residences. So I'd like to know what the traffic impact is for all of those residences. And also, I don't think the TIA was done since 2022. That was probably the massive thing that Gaurav Slade did.
But anyway, since when do we approve applications when we have no idea what the transportation plan is gonna be? I've never heard of such a thing. We still need to know if based on prior blasting projects, traffic will need to be stopped on the busy roadways around Klein. Most of the time it is. We've tried to get that question answered. Nobody will they just say we won't know until the site plan. Every question we ask, we won't know until the site plan. Well, that shouldn't be that hard to understand because they've been blasting other areas. Do they stop the traffic or not? We need to know if the ANFO explosive
Thank you, ma'am. Next speaker, please.
We have no more speakers. You.
Okay. Thanks Chris.
All right. Thank you so very much. I am going to go ahead and close the public hearings for items 13E and 13F. I would like to invite the applicant back up to address any of the concerns that you've heard, including the wood turtle. I couldn't find it in the so.
My environmental consultant is happy to come up and talk about the wood turtle or lack thereof. I think there's just a misreading of the application, the environmental constraints analysis. I would just I want to take a minute to talk through the issues in Loudoun County that delegate Bob was able to read a story from WTOP for me for. Back in the downturn, a number of projects went back to the various banks in Northern Virginia and across the nation. The community in Loudoun County, Selma was partially developed.
The developer went bankrupt and the property went back to the bank. So we were asked by the bank to purchase the property. We went in, cleaned up the property, put it back together, developed the rest of the property. Unbeknownst to us, there was a report that had been done in 2004, like, I don't know, eight years before we got involved with the project at all regarding the flood plan analysis. That was done by a third party consultant for the previous owner of the property, reviewed by Loudoun County using Loudoun County data, and it was faulty.
And it turned out to be a really terrible situation for us, for the community, for the people in their homes, it was an absolute debacle. But to say that Stanley Martin chose not to participate in something that we had caused to create is insanity.
That's all.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak about some of the comments that were said earlier. My ink my pen ran out of ink. And I got another pen and it ran out of ink too. So I apologize if I'm a little bit disjointed here. I was going to organize the thoughts into a more organized effort, but it's not good when your pen runs out.
There were comments about pedestrian crossing of the A, the turn lane. So the turn off bypass is going to be carrying much less traffic than Prince William Parkway carries today. I mean that's part of the purpose of the turn off bypass is to draw traffic off of Prince William Parkway. So it's only handling a fraction of the traffic that is that people are currently will currently be required to go over to the Hastings Square Shopping Center to go across the existing North South leg of the Prince William Parkway or the East West leg of the Prince William Parkway, both of which are very popular routes for bicyclists and for pedestrians already today. So the traffic on Road A, I want you to realize is much, much less than what people are encountering as they cross the six lane divided road that is already there.
But in addition to that, the applicant has proffered to provide crosswalks in accordance with VDOT standards, and in addition has agreed to provide high visibility crosswalks. This is something that has been in the application from the very beginning because we did have that desire to be pedestrian oriented because that's part of the comprehensive plan goal for the multimodal areas. So we have this commitment in the proffers, high visibility sidewalks. That means additional signs. That can mean raised pavement.
It can mean different textured pavement, so that there's kind of a rumble strip effect as you go across one of the crosswalks. And it can also mean flashing signals. But all of those get approved on a permit by permit basis with by VDOT during the site plan review process. But those would occur normally, as we answered, at the major intersections where there are traffic signals because VDOT finds that's the safer place for people to cross highways. And so the mid block crossing is not something that VDOT normally would approve, but they may make an exception, I don't know.
The operating speed on this Road A is going to be much reduced also from the operating speed on Prince William Parkway because you have turning movements at both ends. This is a reasonably short road. So the operating speeds are less. There are high visibility crosswalks proffered, and that is all part of the VDOT permitting process. There was another comment about changing the comprehensive plan to meet the developer's proposal.
And that's just a misunderstanding because someone's coming to this process very early or very late. We early on were trying very hard to comply with the county's comprehensive plan, which was much higher density. And in fact, the staff recommended approval of the application at that higher density, but the community was dissatisfied with the outcome. And so the applicant has worked with the community and lowered the density. And we did that in response to being a good citizen and to embracing the thoughts and desires of the neighborhood here and perhaps correcting something that was in the comprehensive plan that shouldn't have been.
Maybe the density just should not have been as high as it was the way that it was previously written. There were comments about there's been a lot of comments about wells. The applicant in this case is using public water and sewer. So they themselves are not drilling wells on their property for these two forty homes. Public water will be brought to the property, they not be drawing down the aquifer as has been applied.
The other thing that we heard was the applicant is going to create impervious areas that will prevent groundwater recharge, which will help sustain the aquifer. They didn't use the word groundwater recharge, but that's what they were talking about. The fact is that the Department of Environmental Quality enacted stormwater management regulations about fifteen years ago that require that stormwater management be done in a manner that recharges the groundwater. And so the new standards for development don't allow you to cap off the surface and let the water all run off the site. It requires you to capture that water and manage it in a way that it's possible for it to go back into the aquifer.
That being said, we did a hydrogeological study of the site early on. And that hydrogeological study found that this property is in a different watershed from the Hinson Knowles development, which is on the other side of Prince William Parkway. The hydrogeological study was mentioned briefly by one of the speakers. It has been available to everyone for ten years. It did show that there was no indication that this project would have any adverse effect on the wells in the surrounding area.
However, Stanley Martin, in an effort to allay the concern, has agreed to this commitment that will have them go out and collect baseline information on the functioning and utility of the wells that already exist within 800 feet of their property and then use that information if someone later finds that or feels that there has been an adverse impact on their well water supply. So without collecting the baseline information, it would be impossible to know if the well was how the well was functioning before. They need to get that information. They have a process, a protocol that's outlined in the proper conditions, where they notify the surrounding owners that they're anticipating starting construction. They do this baseline collection of information prior to starting construction.
And then they advise people or beginning when the subsurface of the impervious areas are constructed, they will go to the they will respond to applicant or neighbor concerns that there might have been an impact on the well. There was a comment about the base material being the trigger for starting that review. We actually had asphalt to begin with. And in an earlier meeting, one of the neighbors had complained that, no, it's not the asphalt when we'll start to see the effect of increased impervious area. It's the base layer.
So the proffer was changed to say base layer. This evening, we heard that it shouldn't be base layer, it should be asphalt. We're trying to find the right timing. We think we found it. We think the base layer, the resident who came to us and said it should be the base layer, not the asphalt, we think they were right and we changed it in response to that.
So we think that the concerns about the wells are real. We understand them. We've done everything that we can to try to address them. And we don't think that anyone's going to have a problem there in the future. With respect to the traffic impact analysis or with the data that we should have collected by now, the metric that we should have by now, we do have a very substantial collection of metrics and data on traffic in this area. It is in the traffic impact analysis that's about this thick. It has been updated with the latest submissions of this proposal. And so we have that information. It's available. It's a part of the public record.
It's in the file and that can be read. And it is complete. It's not just for 74 houses, it's for all two forty houses. And it's also projecting forward for background traffic. When you have to do a traffic impact analysis, you're not allowed to just talk about the units that you're adding to the traffic system.
You have to assume that the traffic that is already on the road is going to be growing at a rate of 2% per year compounded over the life of construction and then several years beyond completion of construction. That's why when I was showing you the exhibit earlier today, was showing you the traffic levels in 2030. It's because we projected forward growth in other traffic from other places that are passing by this project and it's added on top of the traffic that this proposal would increase. There was a comment about using public transit. We would love to have public transit here.
That was in fact the concept. However, public transit in Prince William County is very difficult. I've talked to the owner of or the I'm sorry the operators of PRTC many times. They feel the density is not high enough to make it sustainable. So we need higher densities to accomplish that. But at the same time on this particular property, the residents are telling us the density is too high. So we responded to their concerns and their comments and lowered the density very substantially. The county staff has now agreed to adjust the comprehensive plan accordingly. So we're fitting into the character of the area. We found the right balance there.
But there's a balance for high density development and transit oriented development. The appetite is just not there from the community, especially in this particular area. There was some discussion about the cost of housing and we understand We are very in tune to that. It's commonly heard in the media that there's a housing crisis across the entire country. That is because there is an issue of not having sufficient supply.
And if you read federal documentation of this issue and state reports, the conclusion always comes down to there's not sufficient supply of housing, and that's why we have the deficit that we have. In fact, there were a number of changes to the enabling legislation at the state this year that are designed to encourage local governments to approve more housing because many people feel that zoning is part of the problem. Zoning has in many instances been used as a way to keep densities down and artificially control the supply of housing, which leads to the escalation of costs. And then finally, with respect to the traffic impact at the intersections, the applicant is providing very concrete commitments toward trying to resolve that issue. But to be clear, the issue is not coming from this development.
The issue is already there. And the issue will continue to compound with or without this development. The applicant in this case has actually found a solution that is going to approve what improve what is already a public problem. They're solving a problem for VDOT at this intersection and rather than creating the problem. So we think that that addresses the issues and some of the comments that have been raised this evening.
If there are other questions that you have, I would be happy to try to answer them or get other members of our team to address them. Oh, there was the issue of the turtle. There was a misunderstanding, a misreading of the documentation. There were no wood turtles on this property. They're within a two mile area. And Avi Serene is here to give you more detail about that. Avi?
Good evening, Chair Jefferson, Distinguished Board. My name is Avi Serene with TNT Environmental. We conducted as part of the ECA a database review of of state listed, federally listed species, for the both state and federal Endangered Species Act. These searches are the radial searches. We used a standard two mile radius, and what popped up was the potential for the wood turtle to have habitat within two miles of our site, specifically within Buckhaw Branch, which is located about half mile to a mile north across Prince William Parkway.
Our site is not drained to Buchhol Branch. It drains generally west and then southeast into different receiving water bodies. So based on that, we've concluded in the ECA that there doesn't appear to be a potential for habitat on this site. Further, there really aren't any perennial water bodies for the the wood turtles to live within, which is their preferred habitat for most of the year. And, we we would also have to coordinate all of our work eventually post site plan submission with the Department of Wildlife Resources as part of the wetland permit process.
So they do have a bite at this apple down the road to provide formal review and comment on the proposed application when it comes before them. But happy to answer any other questions you guys might have about our Tuesday evening turtle talk.
I like that Tuesday evening turtle talk. Before supervisor makes a motion, does anyone have any questions? Questions, questions, alright no one has questions so supervisor Vega.
Thank you madam chair I first want to thank folks that reside in the Kohl's District for coming out to all that have emailed and called the office to the Klein family, to the applicant. I started my comments by saying I feel like it's a breakup between Truett and I because it's been a long time coming. I'm in my, I believe, seventh year now, serving the people of Coles District, and this land use application, predates my time on the dais and in the seat. I recall vividly, as a candidate going to a town hall that you hosted at Signal Hill Elementary. It was standing room only, and boy, were people livid at you.
And I would argue that at the time, it was warranted, rightfully so. And I know how upset people were because of the initial proposal at the time, but we are here today. You know, we've talked about the many submissions of this project. 20, I believe, is the last I heard. And, you know, I am very simple in in my way of governing and especially when it comes to, land use matters that come before me in the Coles District.
I ask two things of applicants. Respect and maintain the rural character of the Coles District and work with me to address every concern that is raised by my constituency. And, Truett, you've acted in good faith. You've done exactly that. I don't feel that it is the supervisor's responsibility to, answer and solve questions.
I think that it's the developer and the applicant's responsibility to answer questions and to come up with a solution. And, the applicant has done that. I want to thank, folks in the Coles District who have played a vital role in making many of these asks, and, again, county staff adhering to those asks and helping us push, the applicant to find that middle ground, which I think is important. And so, you know, I also want to, talk a little bit about, how we arrived at the, 55 and over. In the many versions of this project, we've had folks talk about their concerns when it comes to overcrowding in our schools, when it comes to traffic, when it comes to high density.
At one point, we were looking at 400 units, then it was 311. There was a park and play, but it was only open spake open space, sorry, and park on paper. It never materialized. And for those that just recently started to engage or, you know, provide comments about this project, the community was quite livid about that because there was also a school in play at the time. Right?
And it was to address a problem created by the city of Manassas and Micron where the county was going to bear most of the responsibility for financing those fields for the MOU and the upkeep for a private league, and we can, you know, go back and forth in regards to who was really gonna benefit from that. But I I I say that because the background and the context matters and how we arrived here today. And so, you know, my role as a supervisor is to try to make a project better to address these concerns, mitigate those concerns, and I think that we've done just that. A 55 and over community expands our housing portfolio. It is demographic and great need of housing here in Prince William County.
It addresses the concerns about overcrowding to our schools, which virtually there are none. There are less vehicle, traffic impacts to this intersection, because it is a 55 and over community. It addresses, the long range, land use, the community designs, cultural resources, environment, fire and rescue parks, open space, and trails because over it's a little over 40% of this project is designated as open space. It checks the box for police, for water, sanity sanitary sewer, schools, and, of course, we are waiting on that transportation component. I will be the first one to say, if it were my preference, I would have rather have that, but I am pretty confident that we're going to get a positive answer from Richmond.
In addition, it aligns with our strategic plan for smart growth and for quality of life, and it addresses the concerns also that I've mentioned. But most importantly, we often talk about our seniors here in this county with the office of aging and allowing our seniors to actually age in place. And, I think that this community does just that. I went into, extensive detail and conversation with Truett in regards to the product type, what I would like for it to look like, and we arrived there. It's going to be a beautiful community.
It's going to be a beautiful community with amenities that is going to address a very important segment of segment of our population here in Prince William County, and I'm very proud of the work that our office has done. I obviously didn't do it alone, and I'm certain that she's watching because we've been chatting. Commissioner justice has been instrumental also in ensuring that this project arrives, here today. So, Carla, thank you for your service and dedication to the people of the Coles District on the Planning Commission. And with that, madam chair, I would like to go ahead and move, CPA 2025Dash00005 along with the rezoning 2016Dash00021Legacy at Klein for approval. Second.
Alright. It's been moved and properly seconded. Any discussion on this?
Madam chair?
Yes.
I will also, after we formally vote on the CPA and other rezoning, I will be issuing a directive so that the county executive can work with staff to ensure that my proffer, my office proffer funds can be utilized to pay for the funding of the well monitoring that we need. It's gonna be a one time expense, and we will coordinate with public works so that they can coordinate with USGS and DEQ to ensure that we see this through. And I'll formally read the directive after we vote on this per the county attorney's, guidance.
Alright. That's a lot. I don't see anyone in queue so thank you very much I know this has been a long time let's take a vote. Unanimous. Alright. Thank you. Supervisor Vega.
Thank you madam chair and thank you for my colleagues for your unanimous support. Would without objection I like to direct the county executive to work with county staff to review the Coles District proper funds and determine if it would be appropriate to use $15,000. We're gonna say that, because we gave we were given a range to, let's say, $15,000 of the funds for the well. The county attorney office will review for legal issues. The county executive will then bring back an appropriate agenda item for the board consideration to budget inappropriate any any available, funds. Thank you madam chair.
Thank you so very much. I'm sorry did you guys have something planning?
Yes, so there are two motions or two votes that are needed for the board. You voted on 13 E, which is the comprehensive plan amendment, but there's still 13 F. Yes, put them on
both. Okay. Yeah.
Alright.
This screen only showed 13 e,
so we wanted to Don't make worry.
Madam Chukka.
I'm sorry. Okay. Supervisor Vega, hold on.
Before staff leaves, I forgot to thank you all. Alex, Scott, the team, Paulo Transportation, you all have been amazing. Thank you very much for your work and dedication to this county. Thank you.
I think the best thank you is to let them go. Thank you, guys. All right, so I just want to announce that we do have a couple of changes. We are going to go into public comment time, so if I can get the sheets, the sign up sheets. After that, we're gonna do closed session because I know that there are some people who are here kind of waiting to see what happens with that.
Then we will do supervisor's time and then we will adjourn. Yeah. And I see circuit clerk of the court Jackie Smith has joined us again. Thank you. All right, so public comment time, I'm going to have and again, everyone has three minutes.
Please start by stating your name and where you reside, whether it's one of the magisterial districts and for residents who are outside of the county, if you can say where you reside. Up there is a screen, three minutes, I have Melody Miller. If I think did she leave? I think I saw Melody Miller, if you're still here. We have Colin Turner, Marsha Settle, and Adam Grant. I think Melody left.
Good evening. Colin Turner, Manassas City resident. Good evening, chair Jefferson and members of the board. I wanted to say it was great seeing Osborne Park High School girls basketball team recognized earlier tonight. As an OP graduate myself, it brought out a little bit of yellow jacket pride, especially as I'm helping plan our ten year class reunion with my fellow class officers. And hearing discussion tonight about the Klein farm also hit home. I actually went to homecoming with the Klein. It's another reminder that many of these places and names are deeply connected to people's lives and memories here in Prince William County. Tonight, I wanted to speak about the future of the Old Bennett School and the judicial campus expansion. First, I wanted to recognize that this conversation continues to grow because people genuinely care about this place and its history.
At this point, more than 950 people have signed a petition supporting the preservation and thoughtful consideration of the Bennett School site. That support includes residents from Prince William County, the city of Manassas, and Manassas Park. I also wanna thank supervisor Gordy for his willingness in helping facilitate a broader conversation involving the various historic organizations and planning bodies as well as the public. I look forward to continued coordination. Because at the end of the day, being a good neighbor also means being a good partner.
The judicial campus may be owned by Prince William County, but it sits in the city of Manassas and serves the broader region. Decisions here affect the identity of the future of this entire area, not just one jurisdiction. And I also want to acknowledge that some members of this board have not been here for every stage of this project or some of the earlier decisions that have shaped where things stand today. But this is an opportunity, an opportunity to ask questions, to learn more about our history and significance of this building, and to make thoughtful decisions that will impact generations of residents after we're all long gone. Manassas, as our city seal says, is a city rich in historic interest.
The Bennett School is part of that story. It's one of the oldest surviving public schools in the area and was previously determined eligible for the listing on the National Register of Historic Places by the Virginia Department of Historic Resources. Historic preservation is not about freezing community and time. It's about deciding what stories and places are important enough to carry forward with us. I understand the need for long term planning and expanded court facilities, but I also believe this community deserves a transparent and collaborative process before irreversible decisions are made.
And lastly, I want to invite the board and the public to attend a special announcement with nonprofit Preservation Virginia on May 20 at 05:30PM at the Manassas Museum Plaza regarding the Old Bennett School and its significance of our shared regional history. Thank you for your time.
Next speaker, please.
Good evening. I'm Marcia Settle. I'm here with Steve Hirsch tonight. We represent the Manassas Architectural Review Board. We both live within a mile of the old Bennett School, and we are here to plead with you to hear our call for historic stewardship.
The decision currently facing this board regarding the preservation, rehabilitation, and reutilization of the Bennett School is not merely a budgetary or logistical matter. It is a question of the legacy this body will leave for the citizens of Prince William County and the city of Manassas. We stand at a crossroads where we must choose between a short term convenience of clearance and the long term enrichment of our cultural landscape. History serves as a stern witness to such decisions. We need only to look back to the early 1960s to find a haunting parallel.
At that time, the Manassas Industrial School for Colored Youth was taken down. It was not only a loss of brick and mortar, it was the erasure of a profound monument to African American education and the vision of Jenny Dean. It is now universally recognized that the demolition of that campus was a terrible mistake, a short sighted act of cultural destruction that has left a permanent scar on our community's history. The memory of those who orchestrated and allowed that demonstration is forever diminished by it. Indeed, citizens today do not look back on that error with respect for its efficiency.
They look back with deep regret. They do not look back on that speaking of those responsible with a sense of betrayal for the heritage that was stolen from future generations. Today, a similar decision faces this board regarding the Bennett School. Like the industrial school before it, the Bennett School is a profoundly beautiful and historically significant structure. It represents a vital chapter in our educational and architectural story.
To choose demolition or neglect today would be to repeat the failures of the sixties with even less excuse given that we've learned our the history has taught us lessons. We would urge the board of supervisors to recognize the gravity of this moment. Preservation is an act of respect for those who came before us and an investment in those who will follow. We must commit to the rehabilitation and creative reutilization of the Bennett School so that decades from now, the people of Prince William County will look back to this board with gratitude for your foresight rather than the same sense of loss and condemnation directed toward those who leveled the Manassas Industrial School. Let us choose to
I'm sorry. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Adam Grant, Manassas Park.
Please pull the microphone just a little closer so we can really hear you. Is that good? No. Closer, closer,
like
Is that?
Yes. There you go.
Adam Grant, Manassas Park. Board of County Supervisors and those observing. I originally had a full three minute speech planned that I had written out over the last few weeks. However, I believe everyone is quite ready to go home at this point. So I will simply point out that there are multiple people in this room who came specifically for the discussion of the old Bennett School, and they have been here for five hours.
I have school tomorrow, and I have come here and waited for five hours just to express that I care about the Bennett School. And if I'm willing to come out to my first Board of County Supervisors meeting and have a very unpleasant morning tomorrow, I believe that it is worth preserving for its history and architectural importance to not only the county, but also the cities of Manassas and Manassas Park. Thank you.
Alright. Thank you very much. Did you wanna speak? If so, I just need to get your name and everything. Siri.
Hello. My name is Kevin Allen. I'm president of the Silver Leaf Estates Homeowners Association. I'm here to urge you to deny the Diamond Hill Substation PFR. I wish this was part of a public hearing so we could have gotten proper notification to our residents before it was voted on.
We certainly did not get proper notification before the Planning Commission voted on it. Signs were put up. One sign was put up where part of the neighborhood could drive by and see it. Most of the signs were put up on Casey Lane, which gives access to two storm drains, one for Amberley Station, one for Silverleaf Estates. Four or five other signs were put up along the proposed University Boulevard extension, which none of our homeowners can get to without trespassing.
So it was just ludicrous that that's where the signs were placed. The notifications as far as what we're getting mailed out were not very far in advance, did not go to very many homeowners. And so I urge you to make sure that we have proper public notification before we have meetings, and specifically for this one, before you vote on it, that you have a meeting with proper public notification. There are many problems with this substation. It is close to residential areas to to residential neighborhoods.
There, is a resource protection area that is close by to it. There's additional substations that we'll be putting in close by. There, when this area was zoned, in 2021, I believe it was, shortly thereafter, we had a had a 100 foot buffer was given in part of our proffer. And one of the part other parts of the proffer was that they had to go through perpendicularly through the buffer for any utility easements. And shortly after the buffer was approved as part of the proffer, the 20 to 25 foot swath of the buffer was destroyed, and nothing has been done to resolve that.
It's been going on for multiple years now. I brought this up at numerous meetings, and nothing has ever been done to resolve that that destruction of the buffer that was supposed to provide us some some prevention and protection. It leaves our community with no trust in Prince William County government. I urge you to vote no on the Diamond Hill Substation. Thank you.
Alright. Thank you so very much. And, this concludes public comment time. Thank you for everyone who's come out. We are going to go into closed session.
And then, after that, we will do supervisors time. So, we're going to take a brief break and emphasis on the word brief. Okay? Five minutes. All right, we are back.
Good morning, everyone. First order of business, if I can get a motion to certify closed session.
So moved. Second.
Been properly moved to second. Let's go ahead and take our votes.
Vote unanimous.
Thank you. And we have something to report out. Supervisor Bailey.
Yes, madam chair. I'd like to make a motion to authorize settlement of the acquisition of property located at 1700870 Fraley Boulevard in the town of Dumfries owned by apartments at Dumfries two LLC in conjunction with the Route 1 Fraley Boulevard project in the Potomac District.
Second.
Alright. I don't believe any discussion. Let's go ahead and take our votes.
Vote unanimous.
All right. We have something else to report out. Supervisor Gordy.
Madam Chair, thank you. We've had a couple of folks speak today in regards to the Novak Diamond Hill Substation. The one of the things that has been come to our attention is that it was improperly advertised when prior to it going to the to the planning commission. And so we have a resolution to remand this back and ask for it to be properly noticed in accordance with the ordinance and law. And so therefore, madam chair, I'm gonna read this resolution.
It's a public facility review, PFR twenty twenty six zero zero zero zero five Novak Diamond Hill substation action, whereas on 03/11/2026, the Prince William County Planning Commission held a public hearing on public facility review Novec Diamond Hill substation, after which the Planning Commission determined that the general or appropriate location, character, and extent of the facilities proposed under the PFR is not substantially in accord with the comprehensive plan and whereas the applicant for the PFR appealed the Planning Commission's determination to the Prince William Board of County Supervisors and whereas the Prince William County Board of Supervisors aware that concerns were raised during the 03/11/2026 Planning Commission meeting regarding the adjacent property owner notice for the Planning Commission's public hearing on the PFR and whereas county staff recommends approval of this resolution, now therefore be it resolved by the Prince William County Board of County Supervisors that the PFR is remanded to the Planning Commission for a new, I'm sorry, for one, a new public hearing on the PFR after advertisement and notice in compliance with all applicable Virginia code and county code requirements, and two, a determination on the PFR. Be it further resolved that the Prince William County Board of Supervisors directs the planning director to provide a copy of this resolution to the Planning Commission.
Second. So move.
He did move it.
No, I think he just read it. He didn't make a motion.
Alright. It's that late. Alright. Thank you. Thank
you. Both unanimous.
All right, thank you very much. We are now on to supervisors time, and I'm going to start. Supervisor Bailey.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Oh, forgot. Yep. All right. I don't have my agenda. All right. The one on the screen right here. Oh, no one else. Sorry. I just I know all of us want to get out of here. It's very early. So let's go ahead. I would like to get a motion for 11A through 11D.
So moved. Second.
All right. Any discussion on these appointments? If not, let's go ahead and take our votes.
Vote unanimous. Thank you.
Now we can go around the horn. Supervisor Bailey.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I just want to let my colleagues know I'm going to bring my directives at our next meeting, but I do have notices of intent. I'd like to reappoint Erin Brown to the board of equalization, Samantha Sempore to the housing board, William Carr reappointment to the community service board, and Eric Fagerholm to the Animal Advisory Committee, and Neville Welch to the Cherry Hill Community Development Authority.
Thank you. Supervisor Stewart.
Thank you, Madam Chair. So I'll do this all very quickly. On Monday, April 27, I attended the town of Haymarket sponsored Bob Weir Day. After Bob's passing, the town wanted to memorialize Bob in a special way, so they created their Open Government Day. This event is intended to connect the public with their local elected leaders to get information, discuss local issues, and just get to know their representation.
I'd like to thank madam chair and school board member Jen Wall for attending the inaugural inaugural event and look forward to future years. On Saturday, May 2, I attended the funeral of corporal Dennis Dunlap, a World War two veteran who served as an airplane mechanic with the twelfth Air Force repairing p 47 Thunderbolts supporting combat missions, and what was meant to be a celebration of his 100 birthday became a time to honor an incredible life after he passed just two days before his birthday.
Mister
Dunlap lived an extraordinary one hundred and four years right here in Prince William County, leaving behind a legacy of service, resilience, and dedication. I attended a ribbon cutting at Minnieville and Prince William Parkway, and I would like to thank Victor for his leadership around that. And I attended the fallen heroes ceremony to to commemorate fallen police officers here in Prince William County. I also attended Youth for Tomorrow Burgundy and Gold on Tuesday, 05/05/2026. I attended the thirty seventh Annual Burgundy and Gold Banquet on Friday.
I attended the Older Americans Month celebration in my district at Camp Snyder. It was good to get there and meet everyone and keep up with their Zumba and electric slide. That's my dance right there. On Saturday, we had our district fire and rescue system pop up at Pat White in Manassas. We had all kinds of information and had lots of hands on, such as a fire extinguisher simulation, and I got simulated at putting out a fire in fifteen point nine seconds. So, I'm the man. As well as teaching hands on only CPR.
Thank Supervisor Bodhi.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Just very quickly. I don't have really any updates, but I do know that at some point we as a board need to discuss our office budgets. I'm not really ready to pull up the trigger on that right now, but I think we need to discuss it in the coming weeks. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Supervisor Angry.
Yeah. I just wanna give an upcoming event. I'll give my back history next week. But just Saturday, May 30, we got our spring dumps today. That's gonna be at the Gemini Way, commuter lot from ten to two. So Saturday, May 30, dumpster day, Gemini Way, ten to two. Thank you, madam chair. Where is that?
I don't have She's waiting on her.
So do you do you have his information? Okay.
Yes. We yeah.
We So I will give my notice of intent to reappoint Yes. Thank you. Michael Garcia. Thank you.
Alright. Thank you. I would like to give a notice of intent to appoint Rich Leonard to serve as a retired police representative to the supplemental pension plan for sworn and uniformed police. I'm a public safety personnel board of trustees replacing Don Harmon. I'd like to give a notice of intent to appoint Samuel Wiggins to serve as a board member to the Northern Virginia Career Works. I'd like to give a notice of intent to appoint Amber Gray to serve on the community services board. And I'd like the notice of intent to reappoint Diana Paglia to the board
equalization. Quickly, would like to mention that we will have access to '24 twenty three zero four affordable housing ordinance. We will have access to that after 07/01/2026 and that should be discussion for a later meeting. Supervisor Vega.
Thank you madam chair. Everybody is aware of this directive. Madam chair without objection I'd like to direct the county executive to work with staff to livestream the regular board of county supervisors meeting on Facebook Live. The feed should be the same stream as the county is currently using to stream the board of county supervisors meetings, and the county shall make it clear by providing a disclaimer in the Facebook Live post for each meeting that the stream, including any comments, questions, or concerns by the public, will not be monitored, and therefore, any questions or FOIA requests should be made to the appropriate agencies. The disclaimer should also make it clear that comments left on Facebook Live posts will not be part of any public hearing or hearings and explain the process for signing up to speak at public hearings if they so desire.
The county attorney shall review all processes and disclaimer language for any legal issues. The county executive will provide a timeline for implementation at a board meeting or via memo to the board. This information should be included in the county's social media policy.
Supervisor LeCroy.
I have an intent to appoint, Bill Fitzgerald to the Board of Equalization, also Heather Rice to DCSM zoning ordinance, and Jennifer Williamson to the library board.
Is that it?
That's it.
Alright. Thank you, supervisor Gordy.
I'd like to provide notice of my intent to reappoint Samuel Snow to the board of equalization, and you have his resume and information on file. I also have a directive. The county executive directed to work with county staff to schedule a public hearing on June 2 for the board to consider conveying a permanent sewer easement across county owned property at 12115 Nokesville Road, Bristow, Virginia to the Prince William County Service Authority, also known as Prince William Water. The easement is necessary for the county's long planned project to extend public sewer to the Bristow Manor community to address issues within the community's existing sewage disposal system. Before the board can consider granting the easement over its property, a public hearing must be advertised and held.
As part of the county's project, Thomas Farm Owners LLC, the developer of the Thomas Farm community, which is located adjacent to the county project, will acquire and convey a sewer easement across property owned by the Brit New Bristol Village Homeowners Association to Prince William Water. This easement is necessary for the completion of the county project. The parties have drafted an agreement subject to board approval addressing the conveyance of these easements to Prince William Water, the construction of the project, the developers payment of funding to the county for its shared portion of the total project cost. The county executive is also directed to work with staff to schedule an schedule agenda items on June 2 for the board to one, consider approval of the proposed agreement with the developer, two, accept budget and appropriate the developer funds, and three, any other documents that staff determines are necessary and or appropriate for the board to consider approval of this project. The county executive is directed to bring back any appropriate recommendations for the board's consideration at the time.
Such recommendations should, where applicable, include timelines, fiscal impacts, and other pertinent impacts for board consideration. The county attorney's office is directed to review the agenda items included including the agreement deed in plat and any staff recommendations for any legal issues. That's all I have, madam chair.
Thank you.
Madam chair. Thank you very much. Supervisor Bailey?
Yeah. I'd like to give my one directive.
Alright. Go. I'm
sorry to exasperate you. Madam Chair, without objection, I'd like to direct the county exec to work on with staff, including the police department and the office of community safety, to review the establishment of a comprehensive human trafficking education program for residents and community members. The county executive is directed to bring back any appropriate recommendations for the board's consideration. Such recommendations should, where applicable, include timelines, fiscal impacts, and other pertinent impacts for board consideration. The county attorney's office is directed to review the information and recommend for any legal issues.
When the research and work is complete, county exec should report back to the board with his analysis and recommendation during a board meeting or by memorandum as we determine as he determines appropriate.
I just wanna say, I don't have an objection, quickly, my team and I have talked to mister Shorter about doing something similar to what they have in Fairfax. So we're probably gonna reprise those discussions. I just, I will keep you in the loop. So thank you, with Ms. Arch Parlis. I can, my team will send you additional information. With that, I'd like to move to agenda item
Excuse me. What did you just say? I didn't hear what you said.
Oh, I'm sorry. So a while ago my staff has spoken to Mrs. Shorter about massage parlors. There was something that an ordinance passed in Stafford County and we're trying to determine if that's something feasible for us to do in Prince William County. So at the appropriate time, I mean we'll share that with you as well. What you're looking at is more educational. This is actually directing towards a particular industry. But we will loop you in, my team will loop you in in those conversations.
Well, that seems like two different directors, Mentor. This is something in consideration.
Mean, understand. I'm just telling you that Can I finish what
I'm saying?
I'm gonna finish what I'm saying. I'm just telling you this is something that we're working on that's separate, that we will also share with you. Yes, I know it's separate. I'm telling you it's separate. I said we will work with you on this. We work with you on this so that you can also understand. Because I think it will complement what you're doing.
And I love when you complement me. So that would be great. But in the interim, is it okay if we
Yeah, I have no objection. Okay, I thank said I had no objection.
Thank you very much.
Alright, thank you. So we're gonna move on to agenda item number 15, and that is to adjourn.
So move.
Second. Second. I already seconded Alright.
Oh, I'm like why is nobody seconding this?
Yeah. I was a little worried too. Alright. Let's go ahead and take our votes. Thought you couldn't second. I can't.
Unanimous.
All right. Our next meeting is next week on Tuesday, May 19. Thank you very much. We are adjourned.
This transcript was automatically generated from the official public meeting video and is presented unedited. It reflects remarks made on the public record by elected officials, staff, and public commenters. Transcript accuracy may vary; view the original recording for reference.