Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening. We had an agenda review in the Potomac conference room and went over the agenda for this evening. If everybody could please silence your cell phones, we're going to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. All right.

Madam Clerk, would you please call the roll? Vice Chair Justice? Here. Commissioner Carroll?

Here.

Commissioner Ross?

Here.

Commissioner Scheifler?

Here.

Commissioner Shaik? Here. Commissioner Sherman?

Here.

We have quorum. Great. And do we have anybody signed up for remote participation?

We do not.

All right. We need a motion to approve the brief and resolutions from the hearing on February 25th.

So moved. Second.

Moved by Commissioner Shaik and seconded by Commissioner Ross. Madam Clerk, can you please call the roll?

By Chair Brown. By Chair Justice.

Here. Yes.

Commissioner Carroll. Yes. Commissioner Ross? Yes. Commissioner Shaik? Yes. Commissioner Scheifler? Yes. Commissioner Sherman? Yes. Motion carries.

Excellent. And do we have anything for consent agenda?

Those were the items for consent agenda. Okay.

Thank you. Sorry. It was above. Anything for expedited agenda?

Chair Justice, we do have three items for the expedited agenda. Items 11B, proffer amendment for courts district. Item 11C, rezoning for Madison Square. And item 11D, rezoning for Neabsco Reserve.

Okay. So let's go to item B. And since the Neabsco District isn't here, I'll turn that over to Commissioner Scheifler. Okay. Oh, do we have anybody for public comment? Oh, I'd like to open the public hearing. Sorry. Do we have anybody to speak for proper amendment RAZ-2026-00028?

There is one speaker in favor. I'm not sure if they'd still like to speak as we move this one forward. Chanel Pittman. Okay.

Thank you. Okay. I'll turn this over to Commissioner Scheifler then.

Do we have the date for the February 6th? Okay. 2026. Six. Okay.

I would like to close the public hearing.

Public hearing is now closed.

I'd like to move to recommend approval of proffer amendment R E Z 2000 26 dash 0 0 0 2 8 courts district with, uh, proffers dated February 6th, 2000 26 second.

It has been moved by commissioner Schaeffler and seconded by commissioner shake. Can you please call the roll?

Vice chair justice. Yes. Commissioner Carol.

Yes.

Commissioner Ross? Yes. Commissioner Shea? Yes. Commissioner Scheifler? Yes. Commissioner Sherman? Yes. Motion carries.

Excellent. Moving on, we'll now go to item C, rezoning REZ 2024-00032, Madison Square. Do we have anybody signed up to speak?

We do have one individual signed up against the project. We'll call you to the back, Joseph Daly. You'll have three minutes to speak. Just name magisterial district and generally where you live. To the back, please. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Joseph Daly. I'm a resident of... 15808 Kensington Palace Court in the Estates of Brierton. I'm here in two capacities, one as a resident, but then also as the president of the Homeowners Association. primarily my main issue that I'd like to raise, and I'm excited about the new opportunities and new development that comes to that part of the county. However, I do not see any efforts to mitigate the traffic that we see on Lee Highway. So as we continue to build, and now we're bringing mixed-use properties along with other areas that have been approved, Buffalo, Carolina, the strain on our highways, school systems need to be considered. Secondly, I was just reviewing the proposal dealing with the land resolution. And I noticed that there was a section that said that the developer had reached out to community members. I've not received any notification, nor was I contacted, so I'm raising issue with that. I just had an opportunity to read this, and I needed to read it a little more extensively, but that's one of my main concerns. I don't know if I'm close to my minute, but that's essentially. Yeah, so again, we're excited about new development in Prince William County. And we've already been known as the fastest growing data center community in the country. I don't know if we can take that with pride or we should be concerned. So with that, along with the additional residential and mixed use expansion in that area of the county, I'd like to pause and let's look at the environmental impact the impact on our schools the impact on public services as well as the overall homology of The subdivision in area. That's all I have to say.

Thank you Thank you, I Will now turn it over to Commissioner Carroll Thank you and

I don't think you mentioned which HOA you were from. Okay. Um, if we can, if you can email, um, the supervisor's office, supervisor Gordy, and then, you know, we're just the recommendation and we can definitely connect and, um, connect on that before it goes to the board hearing. Thank you. Um, and definitely appreciate you coming out tonight and sharing those concerns. Um, So with that, I would like to close the public hearing.

The public hearing is now closed.

And I move to recommend approval of REZ 2024-00032 Madison Square, subject to the proffers dated January 8th, 2026, with the following recommendations. Inclusion of a potential trail or sidewalk connection to the undeveloped parcels to the east. and clarify that it is 78 multi stacked units. Second.

All right. Motion has been made by commissioner Carol and seconded by commissioner shake. Madam clerk, would you please call the roll?

I shared justice. Yes. Commissioner Carol.

Yeah. And just to, you know, I don't want to minimize those concerns. You know, the traffic on 29, it's definitely always a concern. And we definitely looked at it in this application, but I think we can definitely continue to look at it as this goes forward to the board to make sure those concerns are getting mitigated the best that we can. But with that, I'm a yes.

Commissioner Ross?

Yes.

Commissioner Shaik? Yes. Commissioner Scheifler?

Yes.

Commissioner Sherman? Yes. Motion carries.

All right, we're now going to move on to item D, rezoning, REZ-2025-00021, Neabsco Reserve. And do we have anybody to speak on item D?

We do have one individual signed up against, Rebecca Herman. If you can head to the back, just name magisterial district or generally where you live, and you'll have three minutes to speak or five minutes. Here. Thanks.

My name's Rebecca Herman, and I live on, you want the actual address or?

Generally, magisterial district.

Savannah Drive in Woodbridge. Yeah, actually, right before we started, I was able to talk to... the developer, and he answered a few of the questions that I had. So he's going to provide me with more stuff tomorrow. Because I back right, it looks like y'all have it further away than I thought. I was trying to find a map, he showed me a map. And Ken, that's his name. Now, I know there's a stream there, and that's, where you're going to build is closer, or not you all, but them, it's closer to Delaney, but we do have a lot of animals in that section, and I've been living there since 1987, and so there are a lot of deer, there are a lot of turkey, raccoons, there are beaver, so... my concern is, um, I don't know what y'all do. Cause I know the department, Virginia department of wildlife resources, um, you know, or protect, you know, the beaver. So do y'all, did you do anything to look into the wildlife and how that'll affect them? And, um, The other thing is the traffic. I know they're only going to be 15 houses, but believe me, when you start getting kids that drive, there's going to be more traffic. Delaney, I don't know if they're planning to widen that or anything. Most of my stuff is really questions, but I do have a concern for the wildlife. I paid actually a an extra fee to back up to the woods but the developer said that I'm going to be further away from that so anyway that's about all I have so thank you for listening to me thank you and any concerns that you have you can reach out to supervisor angry's office and because the next step from here is to go to the board

So between now and the board, you could get a lot of questions answered as well. Thank you.

I will turn it over to Commissioner Scheifler.

I'd like to close public hearing.

Public hearing is now closed.

I would like to recommend approval of rezoning RAC 2025-00021, Napsco Reserve, subject to proffers dated March 16th, 2026. Second.

Motion made by Commissioner Scheifler and seconded by Commissioner Shaik. Madam Clerk, would you please call the roll?

Vice-Chair Justice? Yes. Commissioner Carroll?

Yes.

Commissioner Moseson? I know I'm just getting in.

If you have an opinion about that one.

Commissioner Ross?

Yes.

Commissioner Shaik?

Yes.

Commissioner Scheifler? Yes. Commissioner Sherman?

Yes.

Motion carries.

Alrighty. We're now going to move on to number eight public comment time and this time is for anything that is not on the agenda tonight. So if anybody has any public comment, commissioner Carol, there's no one signed up for public comment.

So I think we're good.

Perfect. Do we have anything for deferral or continuation?

We do not have any items for the deferral or continuation.

Thank you. Moving on to number 10, planning director's time.

Good evening, commissioners. Tanya Washington, director of the planning office. I have a brief presentation to share with you about recent and upcoming planning office activities. Great. You can go to the next slide. Next slide. So I wanted to share that two of our staff members, Eric Griffiths and Emma Dietrich, who are with our countywide planning division within our cultural resources team, along with Lauren Malloy, who works for Parks and Recreation in their Office of Historic Preservation. were speakers at the Virginia Association of Museums Conference in Williamsburg on March 16th. They jointly held a session, a panel discussion called From Dirt to Display, The Critical Partnership Between Cultural Resources and Historic Preservation. It highlighted the partnerships within Prince William County government for staff who work on historic preservation through the lens of an archeologist, an architectural historian, and a museum professional. And they also provided assistance in how to curate these partnerships with other local professionals. So again, very proud of our staff to have this opportunity to share their expertise and to share some of the great work from Prince William County with colleagues across the Commonwealth. Next slide. Just this morning, I was a speaker at the Northern Virginia Building Building Industry Associations, or MVBIA, Prince William Chapter Breakfast. I was asked to provide some updates on planning office activities, so I covered a lot of things that I've shared with you all already. And there were a couple of other speakers as well, one from the Prince William Realtors Association and also from the National Home Builders Association who provided INFORMATION ABOUT THE LOCAL HOUSING MARKET AS WELL AS NATIONAL TRENDS IMPACTING RESIDENTIAL AND OTHER TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT. AND SO GREAT EVENT THIS MORNING. GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO NETWORK WITH THE DEVELOPMENT INDUSTRY. AND THERE WERE ALSO MULTIPLE SUPERVISORS WHO WERE THERE. SO IN THIS PHOTO WITH SUPERVISOR INGRI, OUR NEWEST SUPERVISOR, LACROIX FROM THE WOOD BRIDGE DISTRICT AS WELL AS SUPERVISOR STEWART.

NEXT SLIDE.

And tomorrow night, so actually, I think at my last planning director's time, I shared some updates about our recent three community meetings to kick off with the community the Sustainability and Resilience Comprehensive Plan Amendment. We are doing some additional community engagement tomorrow night. We will be meeting with the Sustainability Commission to have an in-depth discussion about the project, and we will also be meeting with Lokapelk, the Lake Ridge, Occoquan, Coles, Civic Associations, Planning, Environment, Land Use, and Transportation Committee to also talk about the project, talk about the project goals. We actually have some data results from the survey there was an online survey that was up until March 19th but actually I could have included in this presentation so maybe I'll do that next time and so we can share some of the feedback from that survey and again just continue our engagement with community members on this project for anyone in the audience if you weren't if you didn't participate in any of the meetings the county has a website called PWC works if you just type in PWC works, you can find it, and we have a project page for this project along with several other planning office initiatives. And that concludes my update for tonight. Happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. Does anybody have any questions? All right, very good. Thank you. Thank you. All right, we're now going to move on to item 11A, which is the capital improvements program. Is there anybody to speak about the capital improvements program? I should ask?

Before we get started, just Tony Alston, planning office. Our capital improvement, I just want to introduce our newest principal planner to our team, Supriya Cheveley. Don't roast her too hard, but we're very happy to have her. She has been with our team for just under three months. And so, again, we're looking forward to the great work that she's going to contribute to not only to the planning office, but to the county as a whole. So again, welcome, Supriya.

Welcome.

Thank you. Good evening, Chair and members of the Planning Commission. Again, my name is Supriya Chesley with the Planning Office. Tonight I'm presenting the proposed fiscal year 2027 to 2030 to Capital Improvement Program. This doesn't work. Does it work? In the presentation tonight, we will start with the background of the CIP, discuss your role in the process, provide an overview of the proposed county and school programs, analyze them for consistency with the comprehensive plan, and conclude with staff's recommendation. The CIP is a six year road map that prioritizes and funds major infrastructure to support our county's growth. Every project included must meet five categories. It must align with our comprehensive plan service levels, support strategic plan goals, have a clear revenue source, follow the debt financing policies, and integrate both county and school projects in a single affordable plan. The development process is a collaborative cycle. It begins with the agency's identifying needs, followed by a staff ranking process based on community goals. After a detailed financing planning and a review by the county executive, we reach the stage we are here tonight, the planning commission's review and public hearing. This will lead to the final review and adoption by the Board of County Supervisors. Your role is vital. Beyond holding work session and public hearing, you're tasked with making a formal recommendation to the board. A key part of this is the public facility review. According to our comprehensive plan, the PFR requirement can be satisfied during this annual CIP review. At this time, staff does not have any recommendation regarding PFR determinations. The proposed CIP again is a roadmap for the future of Prince William County. By investing in transportation, public safety, parks, and community development, the program seeks to project existing assets, prepare for a growth population, and directly enhance the quality of life for every resident. We want our citizens to be fully informed about how their county is growing. Our online interactive mapping tool, which is accessible via desktop or mobile, allows you to see exactly where and how the CIP funds are being invested. Whether it's a new park, a road improvement, or public safety facility, you can find the specifics on any project. So the total proposed expenditure for the county, excluding the schools, show that the transportation remains our largest investment area at nearly 35%, followed by public safety at roughly 28%. This basically reflects our commitment to the infrastructure and community security. How do we pay for this? The funding for CIP projects come from multiple sources including, but not limited to debt, NVTA, the general funds, state and federal resources, I mean revenues, fire levy, proffers, and so on. The proposed CIP includes several new additions across multiple service areas. For example, park improvements, public safety equipment replacement, transportation and infrastructure improvements, pedestrian and trail connectivity projects. These projects support both community needs and long term planning goals. The parks division is proposing 5 million in FY27 for improvements to existing facilities, including field lighting, comfort stations, and picnic areas, ensuring our current assets remain high quality for residents. This slide details specific one-time investments ranging from property acquisition to park developments. These projects total $17 million, directly support the park and tourism chapters of the comprehensive plan. For public safety, centralized apparatus replacement program is highlighted. Strict replacement schedules for critical life-saving equipments with a 15 year lifespan for breathing apparatus and a 10 year lifespan for firefighting gear are maintained. This approach ensures that the first responders consistently have equipment that meets current safety standards. These initiatives ensure compliance with safe and secure community chapter of the comprehensive plan and improve emergency response capabilities. The North Woodbridge pedestrian bridge is more than just a walkway. It is a vital economic catalyst. This project directly implements the vision of the North Woodbridge small area plan by bridging the gap created by Route 1. This project supports the land use chapter by fostering activity centers and the mobility chapter for providing safe and non-motorized access to transit. This project is a high priority congestion relief project. at one of the county's busiest crossroads. This ensures that the parkway remains a reliable corridor for residents and emergency services, keeping pace with the growth outlined in our comprehensive plan. This project directly supports mobility policy eight, which dictates that the county must meet increasing travel demand through capacity enhancement on major thoroughfares. This project builds a shared use path along Elm Foreign Road and Prince William Parkway. It strengthens the pedestrian connectivity and supports a safer, more efficient transportation network for everyone. Current infrastructure priorities focus on enhancing safety and connectivity. across the county, anchored by the Route 1 widening study, which will deliver a comprehensive safety and congestion analysis by fall of 2027. The trail network is also being expanded with a 3,500-foot Jefferson Park connector, which is slated for completion in 2028. Along with a key link at Gatt Harpen Creek on Route 15, near-term safety remains a priority as seen with the Bow Ridge Drive sidewalk completion in 2027. Each of these projects directly fulfills our comprehensive plan, specifically the mobility policies one and eight, by prioritizing the safety of all road users and using innovative improvements to meet growing regional demands. Moving to the school CIP, the budget process is again a collaborative and data-driven process. The superintendent's proposal is refined by public input and school board sessions, then funded through revenue sharing agreement with the county. Projects are prioritized using enrollment and facility data to ensure every dollar is spent wisely. Finally, to stay on track, plans are updated every year to handle rising construction costs and changing timelines. As part of the superintendent's proposed CIP, formal authorization was requested from the school board, and they were offered two scenarios. The school board chose scenario B, which was presented to you at the work session by the school earlier this month. Scenario B replaces 14th high school project with a series of targeted modernization, reducing immediate CIP cost by $191 million. This alternative introduces robotics center and prioritizes energy efficient infrastructure, including geothermal systems and LED lighting upgrades across dozens of campuses. Even with these new investments, the plan allows the school division to avoid over $256 million in future costs. While no entirely new school construction projects are introduced in this year's plan compared to the last year's, there are notable additions, renovations, facility modifications. artificial turf replacements, and major maintenance and repair projects. For example, implementing solar PV arrays at six schools, LED upgrades at 22 schools, and improving air quality through HVAC retro commissioning at 41 schools. These school investments support the community education chapter of our plan, ensuring that our families can handle enrollment growth while providing a 21st century learning environment. In conclusion, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend adoption of the Prince William County's proposed FY2027 to 2032 CIP, including the proposed Prince William County's public schools FY2027 to 2031 CIP. And regarding public facilities reviews, staff does not have a specific recommendation at this time. Following tonight's hearing, the board will hold public hearings on the budget and tax rates on April 7th, with final adoption scheduled for April 21st. Thank you, and with that, along with the planning staff, we have representatives from Office of Management and Budget and schools here to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you. Does anybody have any questions?

Hi. Thank you for that great presentation. I just had more of a process question and maybe a funding question. So Cardinal Drive, for example, we have 500K dedicated for the study. Any of the funding coming from the state? And is that all just sort of down the road funding? I'm just curious how the study for State Road is funded.

Good evening. Matthew Cornelius with the Office of Management and Budget. And let's see if I happen to have that information directly here in front of me. I may not. I may have to get back to you.

It's fine. I'm just more curious about the percentage of funding for studies like this that are sort of state roads, but, you know, obviously carry.

While you were asking the question, I was looking through to see if I had it. Could you restate the question again, please?

The question is how much of the 500K is this totally from our county budget, or does the state help fund any of these type of state roads?

It's an easy answer to get. I just don't have it readily available in front of me here.

Got it. And the other question I had was more, again, process. Is this the first time the public's hearing the CIP? You mentioned public hearings, but...

There was a work session on February 25th, and this is the public hearing for it.

But is that the only time the public gets to weigh in before it goes to the... No, the proposed CIP is presented to the Board of County Supervisors.

In this case, it was February 10th, I believe. It's usually the second week of February. THEN THE PROPOSED BUDGET IS PRESENTED THE FOLLOWING WEEK. IN EACH OF THOSE MEETINGS, THERE'S PUBLIC COMMENT ON PUBLIC'S GOT AN OPPORTUNITY.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER CARRILL.

THANK YOU. IN TERMS OF Libraries in a rec center, is that, just to make sure I'm clear, that's all potentially maybe coming in a bond referendum versus any of that being included in the CIP?

Right, because current discussion amongst the board about potentially a bond referendum in November, and I believe there's going to be a meeting, the Finance Budget Committee is meeting in early April, that'll be part of the discussion, then there'll be ongoing board discussion between now in the next several months about what, if anything, to include in a bond graph. Gotcha.

Okay. And then in terms, I think I asked this when we had our work session, in terms of the potential land acquisition for parks in Brentsville, which is being included in the CIP, is there still no further information on what potentially that project looks like? Not that I'm aware of. Okay. Okay. I think that's all for now.

I had a question about Elm Farm Road. There's a planned pedestrian path on that?

That's what transportation tells us, yes, ma'am.

So is that a study that's being done on that, or if you could expand a little bit more?

Vice Chair, Justice, members of the Commission, Kevin Wyrock, Transportation Planning Manager. The Elm Farm Road project is a capital project. It's not a study. What it is is going to continue the multimodal network away from the interchange at Prince William Parkway and Minnieville Road. So it will be a continuation of the existing network to sort of bypass that major grade-separated interchange that is under construction right now.

So I guess as part of that project, they'll be lighting that road? Because I know that that's a dark, windy road with barely a shoulder on each side.

Yeah, I believe there's additional enhancements being done as part of the roadway being brought up to, you know, what it's being used for in the coming months is certain turning movements at Prince William Parkway and Minnieville are going to be bypassing that intersection so we can build the interchange there. So some left-hand turns are going along Elm farm road. Uh, the S I believe it's the, um, south bound left from the parkway to many bill. We'll be using that as, as sort of a bypass of the intersection. So while I don't know if there's actually going to be any lighting upgrades there, uh, it's going to be, um, significantly enhanced and, uh, there'll be some reconfiguration after the interchange project is completed in order to enhance that road further.

So I guess the main reason why it's being done is because if you're bypassing vehicle traffic, you're also bypassing any pedestrian or bicycle traffic.

Yeah, both in the short term and temporaries, we're building the interchange, and long term, once the interchange is open, we do want to make sure those connections are in place.

Okay, all right, perfect. I didn't have any other questions. Commissioner Ross? Sorry, he had his light on.

Is there anyone who can describe to me what a robotics center teaches? I can ask later.

Hi, Dave Beavers with the Budget Department in the School Division. I think part of the vision for the robotic centers, one east, one west, is some drone technology and potentially underwater robotic technologies, but opportunities for students to learn those as well as probably other technologies that I'm not aware of.

Thank you.

Commissioner Scheifler?

Could you expand upon the PFR? You said there's normally some PFRs we resolve through the CIP process.

I'm going to go ahead and end.

So usually, last year when the CIP program was brought to you, there was recommendations that staff made for some of the projects. Some of the projects that were new, we do not have that clear information at this point to make that determination.

Okay, so there's no PFRs included in this?

No, not in the CIP. Okay.

And I just want to say that the study is local funding for that. I think the recordation tax...

You're referring to the court Cardinal?

Is that typical um for a state road, I'm don't want to go down a rabbit hole but My first reaction is a while.

That's um, you know, there's a variety of funding sources and just for this particular one they decided the record ation tax was the best most appropriate funding source and

sometimes it could be state could be federal county just depends on what it is and at the time what's the most appropriate funding source I just want to say for a record I think the studies needed but I'm just wondering the percentage of breakdown for funding yes my question well probably about all three of the projects particularly the pedestrian bridge I know It initially was on the table. Um, and then I think Mr. Canizales thought it might be off the table at some point, um, because of, of the question marks around, uh, Belmont Bay. Um, so is, does this mean it's, uh, definitely a done deal or the pedestrian bridge is happening? Yes, it is happening. Okay. And on the Route 1 widening study, is there a particular focus, or will it just continue what we currently have from North Woodbridge continuing south?

I believe it's a continuation of what we've already widened in that corridor.

Okay. And this is just the study, though, right?

This is just the study. We hope to wrap it up sometime this summer and then hopefully get into design and construction activities in the coming years.

And... the connector between Betts Park and Jefferson Park. We talked a little bit about that, I think, when the apartments, the LIHTC project was going in. Does this make it a done deal, or is this an additional study?

No, this would be, I think design work is actually ongoing right now. This is part of the one million of discretionary multimodal trail funds that were in the previous year's capital program. So we are doing that for real. It's not a study.

And is it purely a trail connector?

Yes, I believe it's actually an unpaved trail. So it will be available for pedestrians and cyclists, but it won't be up to shared use path standards or anything like that.

Okay. All right. Thanks much. Commissioner Shea?

Thank you, Vice Chair. Um, coming back to the bond 2019, the county had a referendum for a $400 million bond, which was supposed to help with the road 28 bypass. Then the board shot down the bypass, uh, last year. Now, what will happen to that approved funding by the public?

I am not sure about that. I can get an answer for you though. All right. Thank you.

Commissioner Carol.

Thank you. Just in kind of the judicial expansion, I guess with this approval, of the CIP or is like that site plan or is like the planning, the master plan for that expansion? Is that, is that already approved? Is that like, would that be resultant of the CIP approval?

The master plan was completed a number of years ago. I believe it was two years ago and it was presented to the board and the board said, okay, we'll provide funding to begin. So it's the parking garage and the new courts building, which has been budgeted. That's the funding that's been appropriated. That's just one element of the larger master plan. There's a number of It may be, I don't know what the number is, but it may be a 20-year look ahead just for overall expansion. These are just the first two projects that are born out of that master plan.

Right, gotcha. Okay, so does that, I guess, so in regards to the historic Bennett School and the impact to that, I believe, I don't know if it was last year or two years ago, that master plan, I don't think, had included anything on that. like the Bennett school. And obviously now it seems like it's going to be, you know, demolished, so to speak.

Latest information from the construction development team is the Bennett school disposition is still not finally decided yet.

Okay. So there, there still is potential that the, I guess master plan could be amended. I don't know if that's more of like a, planning type of question?

I don't know if the master plan, I don't have it committed in memory. I don't recall if the master plan definitively called for the Bennett School being removed or if it was just one option to keep it or maybe not. But the current plan right now with the project, the Bennett School disposition is still to be determined.

Okay. All right. Thank you.

Commissioner Scheifler?

And a question for Kevin about the Route 1 pedestrian bridge. Is that fully funded or is that still partially funded?

It is fully funded to the best of my knowledge, yes.

Okay. And is it going to connect with the VRE bridge or is that still in design?

It will not connect with the VRE bridge. The reason for that is the – Federal funding on the project expires this year, so we had to do design activities very quickly. And VDOT will be maintaining the bridge. VDOT will not maintain the bridge unless it begins and ends in their right-of-way. So while it's unfortunate that we won't be able to directly connect to the VRE bridge, we have been working with VRE on ways to enhance the pedestrian pathway between the two bridges, whether that's with a wider sidewalk covered walkway and other options. So yeah, it's unfortunate, but we do think this bridge will enhance the pedestrian realm in the area in general, not just for VRE customers, but also for pedestrians and cyclists going between Belmont Bay areas to the south of the railroad and to the Northwood Bridge small area plan.

All right. All right. If there aren't any other questions, I'm going to turn this over to Commissioner Scheifler.

Does anybody sign up to speak?

No. No speakers.

All righty.

Okay, I'd like to close the public hearing.

The public hearing is now closed.

I'd like to recommend adoption of the Capital Improvement Program, DPA 2026-0005, FY27, CIP. Second.

Motion's been made by Commissioner Scheifler and seconded by Commissioner Moses-Nedd. Madam Clerk, would you please call the roll?

Vice Chair Justice? Yes. Commissioner Carroll?

Yes.

Commissioner Moses-Nedd? Yes. Commissioner Ross? Yes. Commissioner Shaik? Yes. Commissioner Scheifler? Yes. Commissioner Sherman? Yes. Motion carries. All right.

We are now going to move on to Item E. And item F, so first the applicant will present, then county staff, and then we will open it up for public comment.

Good evening, Madam Chair and members of the Planning Commission. I'm Sherman Patrick. I work with Compton and Dueling. We're here this evening representing Stanley Martin in this application for the Legacy of Klein Rezoning and Comprehensive Plan Amendment. This is a proposal that was presented previously as a mixed-use development that staff found to be consistent with the long-range land use designations applicable at the time. The community input, however, sought less intense development of the property, and so the proposal has gone through a variety of changes over the years And all those changes have led to reduced intensity of development on the property. The mixture of uses that are now proposed have substantially shifted away from the commercial area that was at one time thought to be very important to this location because it was identified as a center of community in the comprehensive plan that preceded the 2022 comprehensive plan. And then The densities that are also proposed in the Liberia Avenue Activity Center designation also implied that a higher density commercial element was necessary for the proposal. But we've worked through those. Again, we have the age-restricted community with a much, actually a very small commercial area that is supportive of the community now being proposed. The property fronts on Prince William Parkway, as you can see on the exhibit to my left, the proposed, the property abuts the city of Manassas. And the actual land area has been reduced as well. And with respect to the comprehensive plan, giving that a little bit more detail, the Liberia Avenue Activity Center vision reads specifically that the transition, that transition the area to a more urban character that leverages the area's proximity to VRE stations by accommodating new housing and employment options as well as neighborhoods serving commercial uses and public facilities. It should provide a range of housing types and mobility options in the area while emphasizing the integrated multimodal connections that reduce the need for automobile-reliant local trips. The comprehensive plan amendment that is now proposed reduces the range of dwelling types that can be permitted on the property. It is shifting from MU transect three, mixed use transect three, to more of the acreage being RN transect two, residential neighborhood transect two. It also reduces very substantially the amount of commercial uses that are permitted. The Board of Supervisors initiated this comprehensive plan amendment a few months ago. In addition, there is a reduction in an area that was identified as parks and open space of approximately 25 acres. That was proposed as a part in the earlier application by the applicant as a part of a 45-acre area that was at the eastern end of the property that was being made available to the public school system for a school site and to a youth baseball complex that was going to be sponsored by or underwritten by the County Park Authority Parks Department and also the City of Manassas. None of those proposals made any further progress through the public funding processes, and so those are no longer included in the applications. The rezoning application is for 87 acres and is requesting planned mixed residential. Earlier applications included a combination of planned mixed residential and planned business district and B1 general business types of uses. This area, the total area of the rezoning has been reduced from 100 acres as well as the intensity of commercial has been greatly reduced And, uh, there is an age restricted community that is now proposed here. You would have residential single family attached in detached homes. Uh, there are 132 Villa type dwellings, 103 single family detached dwellings. There are two types of detached dwellings that I'll talk about a little bit later, uh, and a secondary residential use on 8.7 acres. The area of the commercial has been greatly reduced consistent with the comprehensive plan amendment that's been recommended or initiated by the Board of Supervisors. The 8.7 acre property is for a very limited B3 use. And, uh, there is a restaurant coffee shop brewery type of use that's proposed on that property with approximately 1200 and 500 square 1200, five 50 square feet of, uh, floor area. So it's not very large. The overall project, uh, for the PMR, including residential and commercial has 40% open space, uh, community amenities and public trails. There's a commitment to affordable and workforce housing. There is a commitment to pre-construction testing of wells and remediation if surrounding wells on adjoining properties are impacted. And there is significant buffering along the Prince William corridor. The surrounding land uses are identified on this exhibit. You see that the property is outlined in yellow. The northwestern corner is at the intersection of Prince William Parkway and Wellington Road that leads into the city of Manassas and Liberia Avenue. Note that the city of Manassas boundary is here dashed in, so the property does abut some of the city of Manassas. The Harris Teeter and that shopping center associated with the Harris Teeter is probably the most visible and well-known landmark in that area. There's also another shopping center to the north of that on the other side of Wellington Road. And in the county, there is a shopping complex here. Texas Roadhouse is the most visible use there. So you may know that location. Three of the four quadrants of this intersection are currently being utilized for commercial use. The property here was once a part of this application. The owner of that property has decided to move forward independently, and so it is not included in this application. And previously, in earlier applications, this property across the street, across Prince William Parkway, was also a part of the application. And again, that has been removed from the application. So what we have now is the residential age-restricted community. That's for 55 and above residents. And it has the small area that I mentioned there for some commercial. The SEEK Center is located to the south. Fred's Used Auto Parts is located down here on the eastern corner of the property. Arrowwood is a suburban residential zoning across the street, across Prince William Parkway, and it's a large community to the north. And Henson Knolls is an A1 agricultural zoning, but it is a non-conforming development It has one-plus-acre lots. It was developed before the 10-acre minimum lot size in the A1 district. And so you have kind of a rural flavor, but one-plus-acre lots over here. Some are larger than that, but there is a very definitive residential existence or area there, as is the same down here on Lake Jackson Drive, non-conforming A1 subdivision. This is the comprehensive plan as it exists today. The existing long range land use designations for the property, and the properties I'm outlining here, shows all of this area is MU, mixed use, transect three. And transect three calls for four to 12 dwelling units per acre. So that's a much higher intensity use. We have R and two here, and then this is that parks and open space area that I mentioned. It's about 25 acres. It was a part of that school and baseball complex proposal that was previously considered and then not pursued by the public agencies involved. What the staff suggestion to the Board of Supervisors was, if you change this to RN2, you should also extend the RN2 all the way up to a proposed bypass turn off road here, and greatly reduce the MU3. So the MU3 intensity of use is being down-planned with this application. This exhibit gives you a little bit more detail on how the boundaries are changing. Here you have the boundary for the parks and open space piece, and that's a proposed expansion of the RN2. Over here you have the boundary for the MU3 designation, and that's being shifted in this direction and becoming residential neighborhood transect 2. This is approximately 35 acres, so that's a pretty substantial revision, and that's a shift of this boundary 1,200 feet, almost a quarter of a mile, towards the city of Manassas. And then the MU3 that remains here is what's being proposed as a part of the secondary non-residential use that is a part of the PMR zoning that's being requested. I keep holding the button a little bit too long. This is the layout for the community. The yellow color here is indicating single family attached dwelling unit types. These are villas. These are two story townhouses. You've been seeing some of these now. It's become a much more popular product in the housing market. We say it lives a lot like a single family detached home, but you don't have the side yards. The part of the reason for it being used in this case is it has a ground floor master suite. And so that makes it very appealing to the age restricted community that's being proposed. The homes in this direction are single family detached. The magenta homes are village type homes and the purple are actually what's called a a cluster home in the zoning ordinance. So there are three dwelling types that are being proposed here. And this is the location of the secondary non-residential use. It's a smaller building. There's a great deal of open space here that you'll see that is being utilized. There's an outdoor element to the restaurant market that has become very, very popular. And so that's going to be included in this proposal. And we think it'll be attractive to the residents of this community as well. There was some comment about the preservation of trees on the property. The property has been used agriculturally for a number of years. It's still on land use assessment. So there's some cropping that is occurring in this part of the property. But by and large, there are not a lot of trees on the property. This exhibit is showing you the location of trees. These are mostly associated with structures that are on the property and some topography. this as well, and we wanted to make, and there's a couple here, we wanted to make sure that this exhibit was provided so that you would see how that the, oh, this next exhibit is mirroring those preservation, those treed areas so that they can be included as preservation areas as a part of the design of the project. There is a 50-foot parkway buffer along the Prince William Parkway on the east-west leg of the parkway. That will be enhanced through proffered conditions to include berming and fencing and take advantage of the opportunities of topography to help provide a good viewshed screen along this side of the corridor. And there are buffers here where the product type is different than the neighboring properties. There's not a buffer here because none is required because these are single-family detached homes, and these are also single-family detached homes. And down here, there's buffering around a cemetery that is located along Buck Hall Road. The Parkway intersection has always been a concern of the community. There was a great deal of congestion at this intersection during peak hours, during rush hours. And an idea was promoted that if you could take this intersection and this bypass intersection, as was mentioned earlier in another presentation on the CIP, you can draw some of the traffic out of this intersection. So the left turns that are coming from Mid-County and going towards I-66, which is the prominent destination for this part of the Prince William Parkway, and the right turns that are coming back from I-66 and going towards Mid-County, then you can greatly reduce the volume of traffic that's going through the intersection. And what the Department of Transportation is learning is that this type of innovative design has the ability to improve the intersections. When we did the earlier versions of this proposal, The goal was always to keep the intersection functioning as it was, and those applications were successful. There was no diminished level of service at this intersection. But this configuration is actually improving the level of service at this intersection because it is diverting a significant amount of the traffic that currently has to pass through it. through a different route. The traffic signals associated with this would be coordinated with the signals that are already at these two intersections and through that coordination VDOT and the Prince William County Department of Transportation believes that this will in fact be an improvement and they are supportive of the design. There is a approval procedure that we're going through right now with VDOT. It takes some time but the applicant has committed in the proper conditions to modify the design in whatever way is necessary to make it effective through that review and provide alternatives if necessary. With reference to the Liberia Avenue Activity Center, this map is to provide an explanation of how the property is connected to an external trail system that exists along both legs of the Prince William Parkway. already extends into the city of Manassas. There's also a trail along Liberia Avenue. It is two miles from this site to the Manassas Park VRE station, and it's two miles to the Old Town Manassas VRE station. So that puts it in a very unique location in terms of accessibility. That's about a 12-minute bike ride. It takes a little bit longer to walk. But not only is it that relevant to the idea of commuters and traffic, it's also these are desirable destinations. Both downtown areas are coming on their own now, and they're popular locations on the weekends. And people actually would have the opportunity to be able to walk to those destinations or bike to those destinations. This slide is giving you an overview of the internal pedestrian connectivity. And so the purple lines here are the internal connector sidewalks and trails. This also is a private trail that comes along the southern side of the legacy of Klein property. And there is an additional trail that is going to be put into a public access easement that would allow public access to come from Buckhall Road through the site and then across and down into the property. Also, there is a public trail side, trailside park that's being proposed that will have public access that is along one of the earlier the existing trails that I mentioned along Prince William Parkway and this would be an area of almost an acre where bikers would be able to come take a break get water there will be a hydration station there and there is a park bike repair station and benches and We think it'll be a nice addition for people to take advantage of as they use the county-wide trail system. We are also proposing 7.3 acres of internal amenity areas within the community. There's the bike station that I mentioned already, the Trailside Park, located here. But there are eight parks, including the Trailside Park. There's the Pocket Park. Um, there, uh, an arrival park down at this end of the area where the county is, uh, had asked for some sort of, uh, announcement that you're coming to, uh, a developed area to create a sense of place, uh, moving further up along the Prince William Parkway. This is called the silo park and silo park. We'll have a garden beds that will be available to the residents to use. There are two silos here. that are concrete that the applicant will do structural evaluations of, and if they are sound, then those will be preserved and conveyed along with this park. As you move further up the parkway, there is an art garden. This is a small park area where people would take a break and just enjoy some of the public art that would be available there. The main attraction would be the clubhouse area, and this clubhouse area will have playing courts. It is showing bocce courts and pickleball courts, and a clubhouse that is available for the residents to use as well. And then there are additional park areas. Here is the outdoor open space associated with the restaurant brewery site. We anticipate that it would have an amphitheater type of configuration or whatever the users of this, the final users of this facility have in mind as far as providing an entertainment element to go along with the dining experience. The following slides do provide enlargements in summary of the various areas. This is an enlargement of the clubhouse area and the art garden area. The clubhouse, you see the playing courts that I was talking about, and here's the clubhouse itself. And significant landscape areas here associated with that. This is an enlargement of the trail side park. and some of the amenities and workstations that would be available there. This is an example of a bike repair station and a fountain. Exercise stations would be there as well. This view is of the silo park and these would be the garden beds that would be available for resident use. And here is the, uh, arrival garden, uh, another area that would just will be a nice, uh, place to relax, uh, and, and enjoy the, the natural area. And this is the courtyard area. Now this, this has some significant trees that are being preserved by the applicant. Uh, this is where one of the older houses on the property, uh, are current is currently located. And because of that house location. the trees were allowed to grow and mature for the period that it was actually used for agriculture. And so that's available for all of the residents to enjoy. The single family attached units are the villa design. These are renderings of the appearance of those structures. There's also commitments in the proffer conditions to quality materials There may be some additional provision to clarify and confirm the quality of materials on the facades of those structures, all of the structures actually, the detached and detached. The single-family detached units village-style house are shown in this diagram. All of these are included in the design guidelines and are committed to. And this is the final slide. It is showing the commercial area, the potential amphitheater design that would be here for live entertainment and other activities. The building here we anticipate could house perhaps a couple of different restaurants, not a large destination type of restaurant, but rather some of the smaller restaurants that are popular that you're seeing develop in some of the downtown areas. and around the county now. So if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. This is a comprehensive plan amendment as well as a rezoning. The comprehensive plan amendment is actually reducing the residential density and non-residential intensity by increasing the area designated RN residential neighborhood, transect two. The application itself is for less acreage than what was previously presented. It is an age-restricted community which removes school impacts and reduces the transportation demand because many of the residents will be retired and not commuting to jobs. The restaurant, coffee shop, brew pub type of secondary non-residential use will have significant open space and we think be valued in the community. The innovative intersection design that improves the level of service on Prince William Parkway we think is also significant. Limiting non-residential supportive restaurant uses on the property is a significant reduction through that MU designation that's been changed. There's 40% open space throughout the community. There's a commitment to affordable housing. There's pre-constructing testing of wells and remediation if there are impacts. That's outlined in some detail in the profit conditions. And buffering along Prince William Parkway that exceeds the normal standards for the county. So if you have any questions, I'd be happy to try to answer them for you. But we hope that we will receive your support this evening.

Thank you. We'll hear from staff now.

Good evening. Scott Meyer in the planning office. We actually have a combined presentation. I'll be focusing on the rezoning. We have Ahmad Bazzad. He's going to start by talking about the comprehensive plan amendment. We also have a few staff here. We have transportation. Kevin's here. We have Will and Eli, our arborists. We have fire marshal's office here as well. In our discussions, there have been some environmental questions that have come up. There's some transportation considerations. There's also been a few questions about blasting during development. So we have different staff here as well. But I will now hand it over to Ahmad, and I'll be back in a few slides later. So thank you.

Thank you, Scott. Good evening, Madam Chair and members of the Commission. Ahmad Bezod with Planning Office. I'm here to present the comprehensive plan context of this proposal, this amendment. So this is a request to amend the comprehensive plan and the long-range land use designation for approximately 58 0.7 acres of land, which includes both parks and open space and mixed use with transect tree. 25 acres is the open space, parks and open space, and 33.7 acres will be the mixed use with a transect tree, which will be redesignated to RN2, residential neighborhood, with transect two. This CPA was initiated by the board on October 7th. As you can see here, the existing, the project area consists of three designated, long-range land use designation, which is like MU3, RN2, and parks and open space. However, when we were analyzing the CP initiation, staff analyzed that we, will redesignate the site in a way to be more compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, and that's why, as the applicant mentioned, we extended the RN2 towards the west. The current zoning for the project area is agriculture, and the applicant is also requesting a rezoning, which Scott will be covering later during his presentation. When we were analyzing this amendment, the three main categories that we were looking into was to answer first why we first, at the first place, designated this as a park and open space, and the second one was the location of this project within one of our activity center, and the third one was how we can make this proposal more compatible with the surrounding uses. So to answer those questions, first, during the comp plan revision in 2022, part of this project area was designated park as an open space. as mentioned by the applicant because of a deal which was to bring some facility here and also school, which that deal is no more on the table, and that's why it's a good reason now to reconsider that decision. And the next one was the presence of this project within our activity center. As you can see in this exhibit, this project falls within the Liberia Venue Activity Center, Our activity centers are usually the place of focus for the development and because they have some good potential to be used and we can utilize those potential by moving or encouraging density, either it's commercial or residential, we should have a mix of uses so that it can be best used since those areas are very critical and crucial for the county overall. If you can see the Liberia venue map, you can see that we have lots of mixed use within this activity center. However, it lacks residential uses. So when we were analyzing this case, we thought that this proposal sounds like a good proposal to add a little bit of extra residential use. like, users in this area bring, like, population, but because of several factors, like, including the proximity to a VRE station and also the one of the, we have policies and action strategies in this related to the Liberia venue activity center, which encourages, like, having diverse housing stock. The other reason was that we have already followed these policies and action strategies. Now it was time to make this and see, analyze whether this proposal will be compatible with the surrounding uses. So to address that, the main focus was reducing the density, the future density. As the applicant mentioned, the reduction of MU3 is a key step towards reducing the density of this parcel or project area in the long run. and expanding the RN2 will help us achieve that because the surrounding neighborhoods are low density residential developments. And also the other key thing was to maintain the MEU frontage along the Prince William Parkway. So considering all these factors, the staff recommends that this amendment is a sound decision which will help us to achieve the policies and action strategies that we have determined in our comprehensive plan related to this activity center and also it will be and compatible use with the surrounding users. And to be honest, this application has been around for 10 years. And I think now it's in a very good position to move forward based on our analysis. Now I will ask Scott to talk about the rezoning and all the detailed part of this application. And I will be happy to answer any questions you might have. Thank you.

Thank you, Mon. All right. So shifting to the rezoning, um, Sherman went into a lot of detail, but, uh, this is the request, uh, 87.1, one acres. It's currently zone a one agricultural. The request is to rezone, uh, the entire site from a one to PMR plan, mixed residential. The proposal is for an age-restricted planned mixed development with up to 240 residential units, so it'll be a combination of single-family attached townhouses or like villas, and then there will be a village and cluster single-family detached homes on the eastern side. There's also going to be a much smaller commercial retail component compared to previous history of the project, obviously this is contingent upon approval of the CPA. So we have the CPA which needs to be changed in order for the zoning to implement it. As such, staff is recommending approval. So just to recap, looking at the current long-range land use, Ahmad talked about what is being proposed. But right now, a lot of the site is MU3. The comprehensive plan amendment is essentially realigning the MU3 with the alignment of what will be that new public road coming through here to minimize pressure on the intersection. We feel that's a positive attribute. The RN2 is moving further west and also eliminating the part that is parks and open space. Just to give you perspective, this is the current long range designations, but the comprehensive plan, of course, will make it, again, a little bit of MU3 at the western end and probably over two thirds as R and two. This is a vantage point which I pulled from the design guidelines. This is the Prince William Parkway. I thought it was a really good image. This is Buckland right here and down here is the intersection that's the Harris Teeter where the parkway and the parkway makes that really hard turn. So this is the 87 acres in here. In a previous rendition there was a portion on the other side of the parkway and also this portion at the corner but Now it's 87 acres before it was 100 acres. Now just a little bit of background, just because I've been working on this for 10 years. It was called Klein Property, now it's Legacy at Klein. So it's been rebranded, changed. This is a very different proposal than what we had 10 years ago. It was accepted in May of 2016. It went through numerous iterations of public hearing items and public hearings. I will say the applicant was extremely receptive to public input, changed policies, staff input over time. This was on hold for a couple years. So what we have for consideration right now, it's evolved considerably. It was on hold for the last two years. It's now come back in April of last year, 87 acres. And it's now age restricted. There's a very minimal non-residential component. In an earlier rendition, as of nine years ago, it was up to 400,000 square feet of office commercial. All that's gone away. We also had 400 residential units. All that's gone away, it's now 240. So it's been a substantial, I guess, you know, reduction in intensity. The overall gross density is 2.8 dwelling units per acre. I think that's really important to mention. Before we had, you know, probably four times that density in earlier renditions of the proposal, but now overall, and I broke down the three different land bays, 8.66 acres is for the non residential component. What Sherman mentioned before, the 35, 36 acre piece is going to be, that is where we're going to have the villa style and the single family attached. And then the eastern end is 42 acres. So breaking that down even further, 3.4 dwelling units an acre 2.5 dwelling units an acre. Looking at that in aggregate, I feel this is really important to emphasize, the overall gross density will be 2.8 dwelling units per acre, which is very suburban It's form. This is the current proposal from the design guideline. Sherman already talked about this, but you basically have land a a this previous piece here is no longer part of the application. There were several special use permits, which all that's gone away. There's a new comprehensive plan amendment. There's also a self storage unit, which I'm working on. with another representative that's no longer a part of the proposal that used to be on this side over here, which is not. So this is the current proposal. Just for 240 units, just for a little bit of background, I pulled from when this went to Planning Commission, October 4th, 2017, Alex Venegas was On the Planning Commission at that time, everyone else has, there's been 100% change. But just for perspective, this is showing what we had before. I know we're not looking at this now, but very intense, there was office, commercial, you had different pad sites, you had a self-storage over here. All that has since gone away, much more dense. Now, of course, going back, we now have this. but we initially had that, just a little historical perspective. Bottom line is it's been drastically reduced in its intensity. Sherman mentioned this before, this is pulled from the environmental constraints analysis. It is a farm site, there are trees here, and the applicant's done a good job overall to maintain the specimen trees worth saving in the public areas that they're creating. There are some impacts, there are some trees being removed, There is going to be more turf. We always like to see a larger amount of treat areas, but it was a farm site, and there are meaningful open space areas being created. So I just wanted to mention that. This is showing the three land bays, ABC, and Sherman and Ahmad had talked about how that's shifting. The current proposal, again, on the left, this is the non-residential component. Very much lesser intense, less than 0.1 FAR, just to point that out. The yellow is showing the villa, townhouse, single family attached. And then the purple and the pink on the eastern side is going to be the cluster in the village single family detached homes. Just to reiterate, there's a variety of interconnected pedestrian pathways on the site. The public road is going through, again, which will eliminate and greatly relieve the pressure at the intersection. Also, this is from the MZP, we have transportation here to talk about this. City of Manassas had concerns about how the TIE was analyzed and there's been subsequent coordination with the City of Manassas and more intersections to the west have been looked at and we feel that the City of Manassas at this point supports the application. There is a quadrant intersection analysis that's still under review with VDOT that takes a little more time of course. And at the intersection here, point out, as proposed, there'll be a double left turn going south. Major improvements to this intersection. Again, and with that new public road, that will further decrease the previous pressure that was at that intersection. Again, this is just showing the interconnected sidewalks, and we have different you know, the shared use path and also a public easement for that trail. Variety of amenities, trailside park, pocket park, the art garden, silo park, these are all called out in the design guidelines. We tried to also focus on the transition going east and, you know, we feel the applicant has, you know, done a good job of adding more vegetation on the eastern side. We have the buffering around the land, around the historic cemetery here, and there's also a pump station here as well. So we feel like the project has evolved. Just to point out, this is a key to the different buffering. As Sherman had mentioned, 50-foot H-Cod buffer along the parkway. Along Buck Hall, there's a 30-foot landscape area, but it's offset with more vegetated areas. And then we have, you know... There are buffers being modified, separating unit types. We feel like, excuse me, that it's not fully meeting standards, but with planned developments, it's not uncommon to have that. And we also feel like overall, with a planned development, you're looking for more integration rather than separation of uses. But like anything, we have to tell all sides of the analysis. So environment, you know, there was just a weakness we pointed out about the extent of turf, but again, the merits of the other design aspects outweigh that, and also with the modification. Staff is supporting the proposal. Again, we have the single-family attached to villa style that has already been mentioned, the village house, and then the largest lot, up to 7,500 square feet. The cluster house is on the eastern part of the site. This has gone through the non-residential part. It's gone through different iterations. Right now, it's been narrowed down to what will be implemented under B3, convenience retail, commercial use, more of a coffee shop, more of a small scale brew pub. It'll provide gathering opportunities. For an age-restricted community, we feel it's important to have a variety of amenities, and this will do that. Staff is, in our analysis, it was yes in every category. Again, we have to be comprehensive in our analysis. Just to reiterate, modify to reduce landscape buffering. I do want to point that out because ideally we always want all the buffering to meet full standards, but we feel that it's fine the way it is. Additional open space, there is more grass areas in turf grass. We have Will here that can talk about that if needed. And there's further analysis needed for the quadrant intersection. But overall we feel this has evolved a lot. We feel it's in a much better shape than it was. Applicants have been responsive to community input. And we, and we are recommending approval with the proffers dated March 17th. Again, uh, we feel overall that, uh, this will be compatible with the area. The comprehensive plan amendment is being responsive to the land use pattern. There's a high quality design. Um, we also are getting an affordable component. We need more houses in the county. That's an important thing. And this also lines with different strategies in the strategic plan. So with that, I'll be happy to answer your questions. I'm here, Ahmad's here, and then we have different department representatives. Thank you very much.

Thank you. We are now going to move on to public comment. And because we have the rezoning and the CPA individuals wanting to speak on this project, we'll have six minutes. And if you're from an HOA or organization, you'll have 10 minutes to speak. And Commissioner Carroll.

Thank you. So I'll call the first five speakers, Adam Dunn, Devinder Singh, Jim Leanders, Sarah Jens, and Parit Dilan. Apologies on any of the names, but if you can head to the back. Again, as these are combined, you'll have six minutes to speak, 10 minutes if you're representing an organization. and then just name magisterial district generally where you live and we can begin.

I think I'm next, Adam Doan from Cole District. I just want to say thank you for the board and thank you for the developers to spend their time getting this proposal together. I'm against the proposal for a good part of it But I want to praise the good work that went in, listening to the community. I think we're very, very close of being there. And the biggest concern that we have had amongst the community is traffic and well water. A lot of us in the surrounding areas are on well water, and I would like to see in a proposal some legal documentation that if we have surveys done before, after, and maybe a year after the completion of the project, that if there's a depletion of well water, that there's some legal recourse that the residents can actually utilize. I think that's very important for the future. The other one is everybody, we're all talking about traffic. The traffic is not getting better. If you look at the county, the main thoroughfares create an X chromosome. This area is the center part where you're traveling through to the other parts of the county. Everybody is going from a different part. This is a transition spot. So to me, it's very crucial for adding a lot more, at least a thousand more car travels in a day. Those are just for the residents. We're not talking about people visiting. and the increase of residents in other parts of the county all converging in the same area. Within the last five years, we've seen a huge amount of traffic. And I think the bypass is a really good positive direction. It would be nice if we can see it drop south just a little bit so that it doesn't interfere with the other lights. On Prince William County Parkway in rush hour, it does become a very backup almost to Lake Jackson. We live just south of the property, off of Lake Jackson area, so we're very concerned about the traffic. We've seen what VDOT has done with Dumfries and Prince William County, I mean Prince William Parkway on 234. A lot of people have used, since that reconstruction, Lake Jackson's become a bypass and a raceway. I can see that same thing happening with this new bypass that is coming in. The residents that are looking to build Establish that as their home they're gonna see an increase of people driving through and probably use it as a speedway as well so I just wanted to I'll ask you to kick it back just for a bit more polishing, because I think we're almost there. And I'd really appreciate everybody listening to the community. And I believe that the community and the developers can actually come together even more and with the board of providing a really good package that everybody would agree upon. Thank you.

Hello, my name is Devinder Singh. I'm from 6th Center of Virginia, which is just across the Klein property. So we are the next door neighbor. And I'm here to request the commission members to please approve this project. I'm following this project since 2016. I remember there is a first meeting in the church on Moore Road. There is a lot of opposition that time. That time we know we have a lot of homes coming, a lot of traffic coming, but now as the county staff said very beautifully way that they are approving each and every aspect. Normally county staff they have always question on few here and there but this is the first time I'm seeing county staff is fully Support this project. So this is the time for the commissioners to approve so it can go to the next step because the density is reduced to 240 and it's beautiful homes because it's going to be high scale 7,500 square feet single family and Our population is growing. It's growing in age, 55 plus. So if this development is going to be 55 plus, so we need the mix. It's going to still look like countryside living suburban area, not in the city in Arlington County or Alexandria City. So we are going to be in Prince William County and living at the same time. Because our congregation, every Sunday they ask when this home is going to come because they are so excited to buy these homes. So we are talking traffic. Maybe we're going to have less traffic because a lot of homes are going to buy homes. SENIORS WHO ARE LIVING CLOSE TO SICK CENTER VIRGINIA AND THEY CAN WALK AROUND. AS THEY ARE MENTIONING THE TRAFFIC, BEFORE THERE IS NO PUBLIC ROAD AND IT SEEMS NOW THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE PUBLIC ROAD WHICH GO THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT THAT DEFINITELY CAN REDUCE THE TRAFFIC. So this project, I didn't see any negative right now. It sees all positive, all positive because Prince William County is growing. We're growing a lot with the data center, but we need residents too. We don't need open just buildings and buildings. So I request again, please, as all the expert as approving that and The applicant did good job finally to bring whatever the people are asking, now they bring the application exactly to whatever they asked before. So now without any hesitation, let's approve that.

Thank you. And again, just if your name is called and you'd like to speak, Jim Leanders. Sarah Jens, Parjeet Dhillon, Bellador Dhillon, and then Martin Jeter. And then if there's anyone else who would like to speak, that's everyone I have signed up. You're welcome to queue in the back if we can just kind of keep it to about five people max. Thank you.

Hi, I'm Jim Lenders. I live on Moore Drive. My concern is water. I have well water at my property.

Could you pull the mic a little bit closer?

I'm sorry?

Could you pull the mic a little bit closer so we can hear you?

Oh, is that better?

Thank you.

So I know in the proposal, I believe I read there was gonna be city sewer and city water, if I'm not mistaken, for the Klein project. So maybe that would mitigate the effect on the well water. I do believe there were studies that talked about 500 feet from the border of the property that they would check the well, you know, there'd be well testing that far out. But I believe the water table would be a lot farther out than that. So if there is an effect on the water, my concern is about that. And the other issue is traffic. I've lived in Prince William County for 20 years. I've seen a lot of growth from the expansion of Minnieville Road from Dale Boulevard out to the Dumpfries Road, all the houses that have been built out there. There's more construction going out there now near the dump. We've got the Kincaid Apartments. We can just go on and on. There's a new housing development going down to Lake Ridge. And my concern is all of these proposals are looked at individually by the planning committee, but I don't know if you guys are looking at it from the whole perspective of the impact of all of these, the cumulative effect of all of these developments. If you're in the unfortunate circumstance of having to head from Liberia into Woodbridge down Prince William Parkway, like say five or six o'clock at night on a weekday, Sometimes you'll end up in a mile-long line of traffic from the light and holy road You know I've experienced that and so that's my concern. I don't know if there's a a proposal to maybe widen Prince William Parkway from Liberia down to Hoadley. Those kind of things might need to be looked at. I don't think the infrastructure has kept up with all the development. I know in other states people are successful in limiting growth. I don't know how. I'm not that familiar with county government. I don't know. I don't believe you have a House and a Senate where you can propose bills, but if there's a way for the citizens to try and prevent growth, I'm going to look in to see how we would go about that. Thank you.

Testing, testing.

Good evening, commissioners. Good evening, everybody.

My name is Sarah Jens, and I'm from Manassas Park. An outlier, but still concerned. Yes, what happens on Prince William Parkway and Liberia will also affect us. Traffic is a big, big thing. However, I do come down to Woodbridge sometimes, and it's already... It's already harsh. I do want to thank everybody for all the work that's already been done. I've been involved with this project as a citizen for like six or seven years, and I've seen some good changes. But like was said, I think we need to do a little bit more. Some of the things I want to address that was already addressed are the cut-through road that was talked about, That's not going to be safe. There's going to be drag racing down there. And even though it's a 55 and over community, there will be children and there will be people. And some of us old people don't move fast enough. So I would really look at that some more. Talked about moving the, taking away the exit on Liberia going left. I know you're not VDOT, but I think you have an ear. They have, you know, you have an ear with them. And we really wish that wouldn't happen because I think it's going to be just one mess. The idea is to direct traffic where you want to direct it, where it's going to be the most flow. And I don't really see a very good flow there. Trees. Good idea. I don't think the buffering is enough because it gets really, really loud in the Prince William Parkway. A lot of people, a lot of trucks, a lot of cars, and of course the occasional drag racer. So I would ask the people to really look at that some more and make sure that it's native, non-invasive plants. We don't need any more Bradford pears around here. As to the non-working aspect of the 55-plus crowd, most people I know in the 50s and above are continuing to work. So that corridor is still going to be used a lot. So one more thing, yeah. And just a request, please don't get rid of the blue silo. It really means a lot to the whole aspect of the grounds there. I see absolutely no reason to get rid of it. So good work is being done, and I know a couple other people want to speak, so I will yield my time back. But I hope that you will take some of these other aspects into consideration and that we can continue to get closer and achieve a good project for everybody. Thank you.

Good evening, Vice Chair Justice and members of the Commission. My name is Martin Jeter. I live in the Occoquan District. I'm here representing the Mid-County Civic Association tonight, so if I could have the extended time, I'd appreciate it. So we've been reviewing the Klein project at Midco for actually 12 years now because there was a previous applicant before Stanley Martin got involved. So we've been looking at this a long time. The last time we reviewed the project was actually just last week at our Midco meeting. And I just wanted to offer some comments based on what we've seen over the years and what we saw last week first a couple positives always like to start off positives that the um fact that it's an over 55 community is a is a big positive that intersection as others have mentioned is and as you know is a very well-traveled intersection it's it's um somewhat over-traveled, some might say. So the fact that the traps will be reduced by the over 55 community aspect is a positive thing. Another positive thing is the transition in the intensity and density of the housing units as you go from west to east is a positive thing. However, we still feel that the project doesn't really match the character of the community around it. As was pointed out during the presentations, the surrounding community on three sides is larger lot homes, one acre, sometimes more than one acre. This is, as was pointed out, I think three or four units per acre on average. So it doesn't quite fit in with that. But two things I wanted to really home in on. One is the aspect of the cross-through road or cut-through road, however you want to call it. There's been talk in consideration of removing the left turn lane movement at the Liberia Parkway intersection. I just want to point out that obviously that would route all the traffic on the parkway going westbound through this community. And I think that would be a very unfortunate thing for the community if we keep that left turn open and i know that's a v dot and pw dot call but um you have some involvement too so if you keep that left turn open at the parkway liberia intersection that will enable the the times for all the other movements at Liberia intersection to be reduced, maybe not quite as much as if you closed that one left lane movement, but it would still allow those times to be reduced since you're gonna be drawing off some of the traffic on the cut-through road. But mainly, that would relieve some of the truck traffic, some of the bus traffic, some of the commuter traffic that'll be going right through this Klein community if it's built, and that would be going between the residential area of the community and the commercial area of the community. And since it's an over 55 especially, I think that's important to reduce the traffic as much as you could on that. The other thing we have to keep in mind is the five-acre parcel that was mentioned that's not part of this rezoning anymore, that will be developed at some point, and that will most likely be commercial retail development. So there will be more people that need to cross that road in the internal community. So the other thing I want to mention about that cut-through road is that We're recommending that some kind of control be put on that pedestrian crossing for that internal road that crosses that four-lane cut-through road. Currently in the plan, there isn't any control there. Ideally, there could be a signal there for folks to cross, but some kind of control for that I think would be very helpful. The other big issue that we've heard from people over the years, is the well issue. The majority of people or all the people on three sides of this are on well and septic. So it's a big issue for people. We hear this project after project that's near Mid-County or in Mid-County concerned about the well water. And it's a valid concern because In Prince William County, we don't really have a good idea of what the groundwater situation is. We just started a study with USGS to see what the groundwater levels are, what the trends are with our groundwater, up or down or whatever. We don't have the results of that yet, but One thing we could do on this project, actually two things, but the first one as far as the groundwater goes is to put some groundwater monitoring wells on the client project area around the perimeter of it. And that would enable us to add those to, we only have two groundwater monitoring wells in the entire county right now. One is in Prince William Forest Park and one is out near Haymarket. So if we had some monitoring wells here, it would be helpful for the folks that live around here to know what the groundwater situation is. It would also be helpful for the county in general, because we could add these to the USGS monitored wells, the two that we have now. and that would help us to start our network of monitoring wells in the county. So we're also asking that the, right now there's an 800 foot distance that the private wells for the community are gonna be monitored for the folks that live around this project. So we would ask that that boundary be moved out to 13, 20 feet or a quarter mile. And the reason for that is that roughly coincides with the, not roughly, but it coincides with EPA recommendations on well monitoring for situations like this. So if that could be moved out, I think that would be helpful for the folks that live around there. We'd also like to see an escrow or a bond be put in place for money that needs to be spent on anybody's well that would possibly need to be remediated or somehow repaired. So just something else I wanted to mention is the parks and open space aspect of this. We understand what the applicant's doing here. As I said before, we appreciate the changes in density as you go east, But we can't support removing parks and open space in this part of the county. The mid-county area has the least number of acres of park space per resident of anywhere in the county. So we don't want to see any of that removed. And so we can't support that. But those are just some of the things. We sent you a letter previously, actually yesterday, with some other things. I won't talk about all those. I know you want to get on with your meeting, but I appreciate your time, and I hope you can consider some of the things I said. Thank you.

Is there anyone else in person who would like to speak?

Okay.

I know that a couple people had signed up, virtual.

Good evening, planning board. Our first speaker tonight is Jen Geddes.

Thanks for your time, commissioners. My name is Jen Geddes, and I live in the Coles District. I have been active in opposing the client farm proposals for over nine years now, not as long as some in the room, but I think we've illustrated this has been going on a long time. While I do feel that this most recent proposal provides an improvement with traffic numbers, building quantity and heights, my concern for the water quality and quantity of surrounding wells, in addition to the structural integrity of nearby wells, remains a concern even in light of the proffers in place. Frankly, it's alarming that the county doesn't have an apparatus in place to actively protect the water and wells of 16,000 homes and vastly more individual residents. Luckily, champions like Martin Jeter with Midco and some generous expert residents step up where the county falters. Please work with colleagues on a remedy for this serious oversight. To that end, I urge you to please use Midco's March 24, 2026 letter as a guide for well water protections and the other stated improvements mentioned to make this proposal better for the surrounding community. And thanks for all the improvements and to the family as well. Thanks for your time.

Our second speaker is Kathy Marshall,

We can't hear the speaker if she's speaking.

I'm asking her to unmute again. She's not unmuted yet. Okay, thanks.

Can you hear me now?

Yes, we can. Thank you.

Okay. I'm so sorry. Okay. Kathy Marshall from Coles. We live right across from Klein, but we received no written notice about this public hearing. Thankfully, Midco had a last-minute Zoom meeting on March 19th, less than a week before this Planning Commission hearing. I really think that if enough residents in the area knew that at least 1,000 more daily vehicle trips and two or more traffic signals would be added to the parkway, putting more traffic onto liberia and even 28 or that their wells could be threatened by the loss of well water recharge area from all the impervious paving parking lots and buildings and that the blasting with chemicals to level the site could affect wells they would be very concerned how can this be called a walkable community if seniors must walk across four lanes of traffic to a commercial area without a traffic signal for safety? How will cars exit the commercial area without yet another traffic light? Is it wise to add a sidewalk along the parkway? I mean, seniors will be breathing unhealthy exhaust fumes. I'm not sure seniors really want a walking trail that's open to the public, encircling their development. I mean, that would be my opinion. And I don't understand how banning left-hand turns off the Prince William Parkway at a major intersection like Liberia Avenue could help anybody. Why would all left-turn traffic from northbound PW Parkway be forced onto a new four-lane road so close to Liberia? And this will add more traffic noise and exhaust fumes inside the senior development and possibly back up traffic in both directions of the PW Parkway. I don't understand this talk of a pedestrian crosswalk from the other entrance of the development across Prince William Parkway at Hinson Drive without adding yet another traffic signal at Hinson Drive and the Parkway. I mean, that doesn't seem safe for pedestrians to cross five lanes of traffic without a light. I don't understand the outdoor brewery and amphitheater, which usually has loud music. Does that make sense for a senior development? Maybe it will drown out some of the noise from traffic, but I don't know that it's a draw. Since the development will hook up to water and sewer across the street near Liberia Avenue, it's going across six or more lanes of traffic. What kind of a traffic and unsafe mess will that make? I really think we all need to know how many fatal accidents have already taken place on the PW Parkway and Liberia Avenue. We need to find out the exact number because it might be considered reckless and negligent to add even more traffic on those already overcrowded and unsafe roads. I don't know if the city of Manassas has weighed in, but they're right across the street. I don't know if anyone's reached out to Fairfax Water about this project. They have been warning or at least urging Prince William County to proactively protect the drinking water for Fairfax County and Prince William County, which is in the Occoquan Reservoir. And they said, one of the ways to do that is to be very careful about land use and the dense developments don't help. they just add to the polluted runoff that goes right into the Occoquan Reservoir. How often are ambulances needed for emergency medical services and senior housing? Will they be able to access the development quickly if Buckle Hall Fire Department uses the first entrance to the development across from Henson Drive? Will we need a traffic light there at that intersection. That'll be an additional light on the parkway. Having one of the development entrances across from Hinson Drive will make traffic on the parkway more dangerous because there'll be stacked lanes for turning left. It now becomes a four-way intersection at Hinson and the parkway. And how are we, who live off Hinson, going to make left-hand turns onto the parkway with all this additional traffic? It's already almost impossible. By law, developers who are very powerful lobbyists are not required to study impact of traffic except for roads bordering their development. No wonder we have ever increasing gridlock. If this development does not attract enough seniors, I understand the county can lift the age restriction as they did with the marquee luxury apartments outside Heritage Hunt. Is it possible this development is a bait and switch? I don't know, but would seniors who already bought a home there feel betrayed if the age restriction was lifted after they bought their homes? Since the county is in the first year of a three-year study of groundwater in the mid-county area, which probably has about 8,000 wells, doesn't it make sense to first get the results of that study before building a huge development that could endanger wells for at least a quarter of a mile radius and possibly more? And also, you know, when Stanley Martin had a problem in Loudoun and a bunch of homes flooded seriously, some people had to leave their homes. He said it was not the builder's fault. It was the county's fault for approving the development. Do we want to take the chance with that here if there's damage? So at the very least, the developer should post a bond or put money in escrow. At least it would be a goodwill gesture and give assurance to the surrounding community if anybody has problems with their wells or with the blasting that is going to be going on every day and by the way everything our next speaker is going to be robert marshall hi can you hear me

Yes. Oh, thank you. My name is Robert Marshall. My wife is Kathy Marshall. We live in Cole District. I strongly urge a delay at a minimum, if not a denial, for the following reasons. There's a lack of sufficient hard data regarding mid-county groundwater, including the aquifer in the vicinity of the climb form. This strongly argues for a rezoning delay. For example, Stanley Martin Selma Estates development at Loudoun was built using incorrect FEMA designations of a floodplain. When the mistake was corrected, it turns out that 25 already built Stanley Martin Homes, which had been experiencing flooding since 2013, were redesignated into an accurate floodplain area, necessitating flood insurance. Selma residents, and I'm quoting Loudon now, 12 to 2019, quote, have faced repeated flooding since 2013 with stormwater flowing through windows and doors into basements. Chad West told supervisors that the flooding had devastated his family financially and emotionally and put their lives at risk when on multiple occasions water flooded his house in a matter of minutes. In particular, he said, the flooding nearly killed his elderly mother. You can put Check that out for yourself. There are thousands of Prince William neighbors who rely entirely on private groundwater from underground source of drinking water, an EPA designation. And it has to be done in an appropriate area of review. These are federal regulations. The baseline that Stanley Martin has is 800 feet, which is 520 feet shorter than the quarter of a mile, which itself may not be sufficient if other characteristics are present. Ammonium nitrate fuel oil explosive and other construction blasting chemicals have nitrate residues that migrate easily in soil and water. Nitrates are highly soluble. They're immobile and fractured bedrock, persistent and harmful to infants and pregnant women. Fractured bedrock aquifers, like in Prince William County and Mid-County, transmit contamination as far as 1,000 to 3,000 feet, according to typical blasting studies, and fracture connectivity zones. Okay. The area of review requires expansion beyond a quarter of a mile when groundwater vulnerability exists, fractures exist, multiple wells are present and aquifer is vulnerable and contaminants are mobile. Yet Stanley Martin only wants 800 feet. Baseline testing, well testing is not negotiable and must be required for all wells within the area of study to look for nitrate, nitrite, ammonia, turbidity, total coliform, specific conductance, volatile organic compounds if diesel contamination is possible. The testing must be independent and paid for by builders. A post-blasting monitoring program for all wells must be done. A financial insurance mechanism must be done to protect homeowners who may experience some kind of damage. The blasting plan demonstrates compliance with EPA's no-endangerment standard for underground drinking water. Next, Prince William County groundwater includes an area of Klein Farm, which has not been completed. It'll take three years. Stanley Martin knows the hydrological group E has poor groundwater potential because they identified the area as hydrological group E. Stanley Martin has assumed water recharge rates without testing an aquifer, which outside the zone of known influence for the area. Stanley Martin seriously underestimates the ANFO blasting nitrate contaminants, how far they can travel. Public health implications for ANFO blessing are serious, resulting in blue baby syndrome, miscarriages, and babies that have other difficulties. I did a search at EPA and found about 15,000 articles available on this topic. You ought to go try it yourself. Finally, we are in a situation where even though the Public Works Department asked for a study of mid-county, we're now starting it in 2026, which takes three years. Hydrological Group E tends to have moderate to poor water bearing burden, which is around a climb, thick to cover of overburden, Groundwater tends to be predominantly there, and this is a water table octifier separator. Those are conclusions from a local person on the Sustainability Commission. Stanley Martin assumed water recharge rates, which are not reliable. Stanley Martin contradicts, or at least does not concur in congruence with, a 2016 Dignan Road Study, which had U.S. geological authorship, talking about groundwater flows of 1,000 to 2,000 feet. They did an 18-month survey. And in the survey, they found amphipollutants present from 2009 road cut. That's five years later. So going at a six-month out study is highly inefficient. Blasting is intrinsically dangerous, according to two decisions of the Virginia Supreme Court. There are unanswered questions that must be answered before any consideration is met to approval. Will Stanley Martin, will Prince William require Stanley Martin to undertake hydrologic mapping, conduct structure surveys of buildings, require vibration monitoring, and be in compliance with all U.S. EPA regulations, or will the building?

Thank you. Your time is up.

Good evening. We have no more speakers.

Thank you. Are there any other speakers who would like to speak in person?

Okay. I'd like to invite the applicant up if you want to respond to any of the comments that you've heard. Also, I'd like to close the public hearing.

So I was keeping track of the comments that were being made, and one of the predominant ones, and the ones that we just heard sort of summing up some concerns, has to do with well water availability in the properties across the street. There was a hydrogeological study that was done for this project back at the beginning of this process. And one of the things, the principle things that's very important to understand is that one of the conclusions was that this property is in a different aquifer from the properties that are on the other side of Prince William Parkway. Prince William Parkway, as many roads do, tends to follow the ridge line, and the watershed is going in different directions. I have a map here that I was prepared to put on the copy stand, but I guess the copy stand is at the back of the room, or I'm not sure how to use the copy stand anymore. But I do have something showing how the watershed splits, but Think it's probably adequate to explain that if you if you look at the the map the water the Prince William Parkway is roughly the watershed the Reverse of the shed and the water from this community Hinson Knolls are for Hinson Knolls is is flowing in the direction that I'm tracing with the cursor the water from the this site is going in the opposite direction in this way. And if you look at the topo maps and the streams in this area, you'll see that as well. And the streams that are on the surface tend to also replicate the aquifers that are under the ground. In addition, there is very little anticipated impact from this development because of stormwater management requirements that are emphasizing since 2016, I'm sorry, yeah, 2016, that emphasize groundwater recharge. And so the stormwater management designs that we're developing to at this point in time are designed in a way that encourages the groundwater recharge to go back, stormwater to go back into the ground. And that's the reason for a lot of the stormwater retention ponds that you see around the county. Much more stringent than it was 20 years ago. And finally, as a part of the agreement or the concern previously, Stanley Martin had agreed to to go 800 feet across the street into the Henson-Knowles community and also to the south, any properties that are on wells, and do an evaluation of those wells prior to beginning construction. And then to check them again after construction if the property owners feel that there is some implication that there is a problem that may have evolved during the development of this property. The applicant has been made aware of a comment that the phasing trigger for the follow-up inspection would be better served by being after the base layer of impervious area is applied, generally the paving areas, the base layer of paving. And they're willing to agree to that. And we have drafted a proper revision that will make that change because we understand the reason and understanding or the the concern that is going into that. And so they've gone out of their way to try to address this issue, but it's an issue that keeps returning. Also, I heard some discussion that was confusing floodplains with groundwater and aquifers. A floodplain and aquifer are two very different things. They don't really interrelate in the way that was implied. There was a property in Loudoun County that Stanley Martin purchased after plan approval. And there was an engineering error in the plans that were approved by Loudoun County. And there was a flooding issue, but it was not at all because of any negligence or effort or lack of effort on the part of Stanley Martin. It was actions that were taken prior to them owning the property. And so that issue was described here sort of out of context in a way that doesn't really apply to this case. There was a lot of discussion about the cut-through road, which is interesting because I don't look at this as a cut-through road. I see this as a bypass road. It's a bypass lane that is taking a significant amount of the traffic out of this intersection here and bringing it through and over to the other side of Prince William Parkway. It's not as if that road is cutting through the neighborhood. The neighborhood is down here. This is the residential neighborhood. Over here you have a commercial use. Cut through is not really the right descriptor for this. But there's also concern about pedestrian crossings, and pedestrian crossings have to be approved by VDOT. And there was concern about the safety of pedestrians. Again, Stanley Martin has agreed to making some revision to the proffered conditions that will put greater emphasis on pedestrian activity in this area. perhaps flashing lights or whatever VDOT will approve. Again, those all have to be approved by VDOT. Already the proposal includes quite a bit of language there about high visibility crosswalks. So already they're doing something that I've not really seen done anywhere else in the county with the use of high visibility crosswalks. But I also want to point out that the county has a trail that runs along Prince William Parkway and then crosses over the parkway and then runs down the other side of the parkway through this intersection. And so crossing highways is a part of, a natural part of having multi-mobility opportunities throughout the county. And so it's to be expected that people will have to cross highways, that motorists are going to have to be careful, that pedestrians need to be careful. But this situation that's being described here is truly no different than you have many, many places throughout the county. And so I think that they've made a reasonable effort through the high visibility crosswalks, through an additional proffer that they're offering as of today that would provide for flashing lights if that's acceptable to VDOT. But the crossing points will be presumed to be at the major intersections where there will already be traffic signals. There's not gonna be the interjection, as one person suggested, of another traffic signal in the middle of this road. That doesn't really forward the mobility intentions of the transportation plan. There was talk about the speed of traffic going through there. I think that it is readily noticeable with the high visibility crosswalks again and also the distance that you're talking about moving between these two intersections that traffic is not going to be moving at a high at a high speed through that area. There was a question about noninvasive plants. There's already a proffer in the conditions that says that they will use native species and noninvasive plants will be prohibited in the property. There was a comment about the blue silo. The blue silo is a steel silo. It's a harvest store. It's different than the concrete silos. It is presumed to be less structurally sound. They tend to rust and weaken over time. And as much as that individual, like the blue harvest store, it is quite likely that it is not going to remain. Unfortunately, it's a different animal from the other silos. But Stanley Martin is going to do a structural evaluation of the concrete silos, and if they can be preserved, they will be. So I mentioned already the hydrogeological study that was done. We have an 800 foot distance that was mentioned at one time as a 500 foot distance, but it's an 800 foot distance for doing those evaluations. They're fully committed to following through with that. It is legally enforceable through the proffered conditions, and I think that that is a reasonable precaution that's being taken at this time. If you have any other questions for me, I'll attempt to answer them. I hope that I touched on the things that were brought up during the public testimony that

needed to hear more about thank you we will now hear from staff thank you I don't have anything specific unless you have any questions for me okay okay thank you for now

All righty. We'll now take questions from the dais. Commissioner Sheik. All right.

Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. If we can talk to the staff about transportation with the new road which will be connecting Parkway, eastern leg to the western leg, will it be possible to have speed tables there?

That would be up to the discretion of VDOT. Basically, any traffic calming like that needs to go through them. I anticipate that, similar to what the applicant said, the speeds on this roadway will not be significant. There's very little space to accelerate before you reach the next intersection.

And what are the speed limits set to begin with?

I am not sure of that at this point. I would need to look at the typical sections that were designed for this roadway and get back to you. That would take a few minutes.

Okay. And my last for this round, what are the safety measures applicant or whoever will be building or managing this road? I'm sorry? Any safety measures. I heard flashing beacons. I heard other stuff. What will be installed as a safety measure?

We do not know what would be installed at this point. Anything would be up to VDOT because it is going to be a VDOT-maintained roadway. All right. That's it for now. Thank you.

Commissioner Kerr?

Yes, thank you. This would be a question for staff, I think, not on transportation, but on the CPA itself in terms of the parks and open space. And I guess my question would be, I don't know if we have a map of what the current conditions are, but I guess my question, yeah, that's perfect. On the left, what exactly was planned or is planned kind of south of Buck Hall that's parks and open space?

I would defer that question to David.

There's an existing conservation easement on that portion south of Buck Hall Road.

Okay, so across all three of those parcels? Yes. Okay, that makes sense then. in terms of the traffic and transportation um so i guess this is my big big struggle point with this is that you know i i i guess i don't know what to call it a cut-through road a bypass road you know in my view i mean I kind of view it as, I guess, a bypass, which in case in which, you know, a lot of these traffic calming measures don't exactly make sense. But then at the same time, we also have a pedestrian community right next door and commercial on the other side. So I guess I'm just trying to resolve, like, what... I don't know. For lack of a better word, like, what are we trying... to do with this road obviously get the traffic off but i mean there's a lot of concerns about the pedestrian connectivity which i think are warranted but if we add a lot of those measures in i'm worried that's going to kind of defeat the purpose of what we're trying to do with that right and and it is a question of balance and what what our priorities are right now

Before I answer that in further detail, I did want to get back to Commissioner Shake's question. It's designed as an MC1 with a design speed of 35 miles per hour. So it's not a 55 mile per hour roadway like the rest of the parkway. Ultimately, the plan that we're looking at in front of us tonight is more of a bypass, eliminating the left-hand turns from the westbound parkway to the southbound parkway significantly improves future conditions at that major intersection just by removing that one movement from it. That said, that also requires us to not turn it into a raised roadway, traffic calming type of roadway. We do have the high visibility pedestrian crossings at each end of this quadrant roadway at its intersections with the parkway. They will have pedestrian signals there as well. Those are both, at least on the southbound south parkway, there's a shared use path on that side. So, you know, we have, it's a pretty wide crossing there. And, yeah, there needs to be some balance between, you know, what this road is trying to accomplish. Right now, as we're looking at it, it is a bypass road to remove left-hand turn movements at Parkway and Liberia. improve the future traffic conditions of that intersection. But it still has pedestrian accommodations so that the residents can get across it to the mixed use. And honestly, off-site too. I would imagine many people would be walking to shop at Harris Theater or to other restaurants along that corridor.

Okay. Thank you. And just my last question as a follow-up. So I know we're talking about what the Quadrant Road – I believe in the traffic impact, most of those intersections, I think it said were a D or better at this point in terms of level of service.

Under future conditions with development?

Yeah, including the quadrant road.

Yes, that's correct. The lowest one is the Parkway-Liberia intersection, which is an LOSD that is still considered acceptable per our comprehensive plan. Without this quadrant roadway, In other words, future conditions and, in fact, existing conditions without development is already an LOSF overall. And there are multiple movements that contribute to that. The westbound left is probably the biggest. The southbound left is a considerable one, too, that has actually improved by removing the westbound left because you're removing one entire phase of your signal cycle there. So, um, yeah, that's that, those are the latest numbers, uh, as far as the TIA.

Okay. Great. Thanks. Yeah.

Thank you. So a lot of the questions I'm going to be calling somebody else up. Thanks though.

Yeah.

A lot of the concerns that we heard tonight and also that I've been receiving via email have to do with the blasting on site. Is there somebody on staff here that could speak to that specifically? There's a lot of concerns with what are the restrictions on this and just.

Good evening, madam chair. I'm Matt Smolsky. I'm the assistant chief department fire and rescue. I'm also the fire official. Uh, I'm not sure what the total concerns are or the questions you may have. I do not have a presentation or anything, but we do have a comprehensive, uh, program that incorporates everything to ensuring the qualifications of the blaster to falling through on site. doing a pre-site inspection and a follow-through all during the activity of the blasting that's going on.

I think people are concerned about damage to their homes or to their wells, things like that.

We've had over the years, I've been on the job for a few years, and we've had, I would say, very little experience with actually damage. We do have code requirements. Houses and structures within so many feet of the blasting can have a pre-blast survey, which is conducted by the blasting company, but that requires the blasting company to go in a person's house. A lot of times people don't like that, but it's very important if they do have any concerns that they should take that opportunity. So that ensures the homeowner and the blasting company or the general contractor, whoever's responsible.

So if there are people that live close to this site prior to construction starting, how would they reach out to the county in order to ensure that they got an inspection, let's say?

Well, it's up to the blasting company, too, and we would follow through at the time of application. Okay. The blaster has within 100 feet of a blasting site, not the site itself, but of the blasting site.

Okay.

And I have no idea at this time where the blasting will occur on site, if blasting will be even required. I'm sure some will be.

Okay. All right. Thank you.

Yes, ma'am.

Commissioner Moses. Thank you. Thank you very much. This is a transportation question also. Okay. Thank you very much. So there's been a conversation about keeping the left turn at Liberia as well as having this bypass road be maintained. Is there a way to limit truck traffic on the bypass road?

There could be. We could signalize it a certain way if we maintained lefts at Liberia. and the parkway. That was studied in one of the previous versions of the TIA. The split in left-hand turns using the quadrant roadway and using the existing intersection were, I believe, 75-25 respectively. We thought that was a little aggressive. We think people, you know, human behavior, we're used to what we are already doing. We think it'd be close to a 50-50 split between the new roadway and the existing left-hand turn lane. So overall, that might not help matters much at the existing intersection as far as the level of service. However, I think there probably could be a way to limit truck traffic going through the quadrant roadway if we kept the other left-hand turn lane open. That's a discussion we would obviously need to have with VDOT.

And based on your expertise, even though it might not help the level of service for the Liberia intersection, does it help with the traffic traversing through the quadrant road in terms of not having truck traffic there?

I think we'd have to do more analysis, honestly. In my opinion, it might help a little bit, but until we do an actual 50-50 split in the TIA, we would have to see how much of a delay that traffic would have in that corridor.

And we know the Quadrant Road is pretty close to that Liberia intersection. Would this... be a better option, and I know then it would really be a cut-through road if it were moved east on the parkway?

I'm not sure if it would make any significant difference in the numbers.

Okay. That's my three. I'll be back. Thank you. Commissioner Ross?

Thank you, Chair. Let's stick with you for a brief. Just along the same lines as what Commissioner Moses Ned was discussing, and the applicant will probably want to weigh in as well, is there the ability to leave the left turn lane at Liberia as is and wait, keep the monies in escrow, until we've had some experience with how the traffic flows, and then decide whether or not we should shut down that left turn lane at Liberia? Seems possible to a layman.

I'm not sure. I think that you'd be doing an entirely new traffic impact analysis at that point because a significant number of trips using this development are using that quadrant roadway to access their units and all that as well. So that could have downstream effects on every other intersection that's being studied. I would imagine it would require an entirely new TIA.

Well, okay, thank you. I think we would have facts on the ground. We wouldn't even necessarily need a study. Let me ask the applicant what they think of the possibility. I would frame this as spending the money later rather than spending the money now.

Good afternoon, Commissioners Truitt, Young, Stanley, Martin, Holmes. I don't know the answer. We could escrow. We have escrows out for a variety of different things. But I think to provide a little bit of context, an interesting question was asked of me yesterday, just how close these homes are to this bypass road. And for context, I thought, well, what does it look like up and down the parkway? Obviously, this road would take some of the traffic, similar to what the parkway traffic would be, but not the full extent of what the parkway traffic would be. If you go down Prince William Parkway to the Coles Run Manor subdivision that was developed right about 20 years ago, I guess, by Beezer Homes and Stanley Martin Homes further down, those homes are just shy of 100 feet. They're actually closer than these homes are to the bypass road. And the buffer is the same. And if you drop by, it doesn't feel bad. I mean, I think everybody looks at a plan and they say, okay, this seems like it's really close by. It's just not. It's not as close as one would think. And the buffer, the 30-foot landscape area, will provide, obviously, protection because we do have empirical data of what it does look like just down the road of a similar situation. I mean, as far as that doesn't answer your question about whether or not the left-hand movement being built later, I think the discussion is somewhat unnecessary. The goal has been, since I've been working on this project, well, the goal used to be let's just not make the intersection worse. And we found a way to make it better. I think we should, for the good of the area, make it better. and not get too wrapped around the axle on the what-ifs of what people are used to. People change. People go in different directions. You give them a path, if it makes it better, people will start using it. As evidenced by the University Boulevard jug handle, which, by the way, I thought was absolutely ridiculous when it was built, and it's really not terrible to go through, now that I understand it.

Okay, yeah, my motivation was thinking that we could make Liberia better by reducing the amount of time dedicated to left turns. Without completely eliminating them.

I mean, I don't know that you're getting as much bang for your buck as you should be.

Understood.

So it's kind of like, why are we doing it if it's not really helping?

We've spent enough time. I'll let somebody else. Thank you.

Commissioner Stein?

As a multi-user of that interchange, this is an outstanding solution to significantly reduce the congestion on that main intersection. And I strongly advocate for having eliminated those left turns on the main intersection. So I'm glad you're going down that pathway. I mean, we want all the trucks to go on the bypass road that are going on the parkway. I mean, that's what it's designed to do. But I guess my one question is for the bypass. Does it, when you're coming north and making a right, Does that need to be four lanes going north? I mean, I don't understand it. You have one lane going in and suddenly there's four lanes and there's, you know, it's like eight lanes that got across to get to the business. I can't, can that be one lane coming in and goes to two lanes as it approaches the light?

Our typical section MC one includes, um, you know, two lanes in each direction. I would have to take a look at the traffic volumes to see if that could be reduced at all, but typically we don't do that. We keep it consistent on both sides. We think there's going to be the same amount of traffic volume going northbound through the Quadrant Roadway as the southbound and thus necessitating the two.

Yeah, I understand the two left turns coming in, but there's not two right turns coming in. So can that expand once you pass that crosswalk so that it narrows the amount of distance that a pedestrian or someone trying to make a left out of this development can make? Or is it some way we could have it where you can have the laneage but maybe just block it off for travel use or something like that? So to improve that left turn for these users coming out.

Okay, yeah, I think I see what you mean here. We'll have to talk more with the applicant about what we can do in that area.

Okay, I just think that if we can make that smaller, because you always have a right turn in, anti-left turn, two lanes, and just their ability to make that smaller or make some pedestrian refuges if they want to walk refuge area, if they want to walk across. That's the only area I'm concerned about is how do they get to that business where they assume that they have to drive there. Okay.

All right, thank you.

Good evening, and thanks, everyone, for the presentations. I have one comp plan question and maybe two, one transportation question and a site question. And this is for staff. So this is my second meeting, but I've noticed we've already reduced density from the MU zone on a couple of projects. And I'm just curious, is this a sort of trend that's been happening? And Is it time for us to revisit that zone? And what's driving that sort of reduction of the MU3 zone? I'm just curious more about from a land use planning perspective.

I can start. Tanya Washington, planning director. It's very case specific. So I would not say that there is an overall trend where we need to rethink the MU classification. It's very case and site specific.

Yeah, I was just wondering if the market or other factors are driving down sort of the demand for mixed use versus, I know there's a demand for housing, but wasn't quite sure if there's also sort of market forces that are driving down.

I mean, happy for staff to add to that, but there are other applications that still seek that type of classification. So, again, I think it's more case specific.

Yeah, I think this is a... Down planning, if you will, that's 10 years in the making. It's been real contention in this case since the beginning is how much density.

In other words, this is not a good example of down zoning.

I would say a good answer to that question. Her name is Supervisor Vega.

Okay. Got it. My transportation question, and maybe this has already been studied, so... We talked a lot about that intersection in Lafayette. What are the impacts to the other two intersections east of the property, the Meyer intersection?

To the intersection, I believe it's at... Is there going to be any degradation in level of service? Yeah, let me take a look at the TIA results for that one real quick.

One at Hinson, I believe?

Yes, Hinson's one of them. That is... going from a future level of service B to level of service A with the improvements. And I believe that is the easternmost intersection studied. Because we don't anticipate any impacts to the intersection further east than that.

Thank you. My last question, maybe this would applicant. So we talked a lot about the trees and protecting the trees on site now. But at the end of the day, it looks to me, at least, that the proposal is going to be a net increase in tree canopy and vegetation overall. And do we know what that net increase is, roughly?

It's a net increase, but we do not have a number. I'm happy to get back to you.

Thank you.

Staying on transportation, hopefully one last time. The left turn now on the bypass from Prince William County Parkway, can you look at the exhibit showing the taper and how many lanes will it be to make a left turn?

Under the proposed... That's correct. We have it on the plan here. I do not know the numbers off the top of my head, but we do have the plan. It's a 400 foot storage and 200 foot taper.

Is it similar to the existing left turn on Liberia Avenue, or is it a higher number or a lower number?

I believe it's a higher number. George Phillips from our office can speak to that as well.

No, I was just going to say that there will be dual left turn lanes. It's the same as what's going into the existing southbound Prince William Parkway.

And the taper is still the same length as current left turn or...

We'll have to take a look at that. Yeah, I don't want to give you inaccurate information, so we'll take a look at what is out there today and get back to you.

Thank you. I'm going to shift gears for just a bit. We heard a lot about water well monitoring, and there was a comment from the Civic Association about installing a well monitoring system on site, even though the rest of the county has totaled two. Any thoughts or comments on that? If applicant will be willing to do it or if it's not possible, is it possible?

I apologize, commissioner Sheik. I was looking at trees, trying to find the number for that. Would you mind repeating the question for me, please?

Sure. No problem. There was a comment earlier about installing a well monitoring system on site, even though county has only two existing, and this will be the third one. If you agree, uh, can you talk about it? If that's something applicant will be able to do, Stanley Martin can do this, or if they cannot, the reason, et cetera, we, uh, so we did a pretty extensive hydrogeologic study on the property already.

at a pretty significant cost to answer these questions. We don't perceive there's an issue with the... We did go through and offer to do the well inspections 800 feet within the property line, not because we think it's going to change anything, but it makes people feel better, and we're willing to do that. When it comes to drilling wells on the property for this hydrogeologic... or this monitoring study that we don't know anything about, I told... Mr. Jeter and I actually, Commissioner Justice, that we'd gladly provide the property. If they wanted to put a couple of wells in or if somebody wanted to come drill a couple of wells, we'd give them the space to do it. It's just not something we want to participate in as far as actually drilling the wells.

i think that's my three for now so i'll i'll be back okay commissioner here thanks um i'm gonna thanks i'm gonna circle back to transportation and kevin this might this might be what commissioner shaikh was getting at but um so if if we're going west on the parkway and current conditions we take the left to kind of go south on the parkway you know those so take this my kids go to school this direction so you know i'm very familiar stuck in this traffic all the time and like the issue there is that those two left turn lanes they have a very short taper which then spills into like the the the actual traffic trying to right through traffic thank you george um so i think that would be interesting to know if those two lanes taper onto the quadrant if that's going to be extended because if that's going to be the same taper length um for those turn lanes and i worry we're going to run into the same kind of situation there.

Okay, I can give you the numbers that Commissioner Shake asked for. The existing left turn lanes have 350 feet of storage and a 300-foot taper. We're going to 400 feet of storage and 200 feet of taper. It seems like it's kind of a wash, right? The difference is that the reason the cars are spilling out of those turn lanes into the through lanes right now is because of all of the different cycle phases at Parkway and Liberia. We are basically eliminating all but two phases of this left-hand turn. When the left-hand turn is red at the new Quadrant Roadway, that means eastbound Parkway traffic is green. When eastbound traffic goes red, the left turns have, they don't have to wait for anything else. Right now, those left hand turns have to wait for not only through traffic on the parkway going into Wellington, but also through traffic going northbound on the parkway onto Liberia, Liberia southbound onto the parkway, as well as the left hand turning movements from southbound Liberia onto the parkway. and northbound parkway onto Wellington. With the parkway being north and east legs, it's kind of, I hope you're following, because it is kind of a funky intersection. But just by eliminating those phases, we can have, you know, the same amount of cars go through there with the same amount of storage and not have that problem anymore.

Okay. And will those lights on the quadrant road be timed in such a way that when you're making the left onto the quadrant road, will it be timed to then you will kind of be timed up to make the left to continue on the Parkway South?

That would be the goal. VDOT maintains the timing of the intersections and it won't just be those two intersections that are timed. It'll be the main parkway, Liberia intersection, as well as other ones in the vicinity to make sure they're working as efficiently as possible.

Okay, perfect. And then my last question, so if someone is on the parkway now and they're trying to get to Hastings, so what is going to be the preferred route to get to Hastings? You know, there's a lot of traffic then that makes that left turn and immediately gets off at Hastings. So I don't, I mean, now I guess they can make the left on the quadrant, the right on the Parkway North, and then a left onto Hastings. That's all of a sudden three signals for those people. Or if they just go straight through the Liberia Parkway intersection, you know, there's kind of a cut through behind the shopping center, but I mean, that is like a cut through with condos, the shopping. I don't think that road is built necessarily for that additional traffic, much less I believe that that's the city.

Yeah, the traffic consultant did study that movement as a result of an inquiry from the city of Manassas, since this is their roadways and their signals out on that side of the intersection. And they found that there would be no significant impacts to either of those movements. Uh, you're right that it's saying that, um, those travelers could either take the quadrant roadway, make a right and make a left on Hastings or go through the main intersection to make a left further down. Right. Okay. Thanks.

So my question is going to be for the applicant. I'm going to go back to the well situation. So when you came back up to answer questions, that everybody had, you said that you had a paper that you could share that shows the topography that wasn't in the presentation? Because I think it was Mr. Marshall that mentioned that if groundwater vulnerability exists, what actions are being taken in advance. I know that you talked about a study being done. I just want to expand on all that. Can somebody turn on the projector?

That's oriented better. Is this on? Yes. So you can see the drainage divides in the property of the Prince Way and Parkway and then through the center of the property and which way water flows across the property. Hold on.

Somebody needs to turn the mic on. It's on? Am I just not close enough to it? There we go.

Odd that I don't know how this works. So you can see the drainage divide in the dash lines along Prince William Parkway and through the middle of the property and where water breaks with the different drainage divides. And that was our point is that even with the different strata of material underground as you go through different stratas, as you get down to bedrock, which is where water's moving around, it's going to follow generally the path of the surface topography.

Okay.

So this was all, like I said, studied pretty extensively in 16 when we did the hydrogeologic study to answer this question. It's been asked and it's been answered at this point. I understand people's concerns and that's why we felt like the testing of wells within an 800 foot parameter perimeter from the site would pick up enough homes that there would be any indicator of a real problem I mean obviously if there's a situation where a number of wells are having problems that are within that 800 foot range and then there's a well that's a thousand feet away that has a problem it's kind of going to point to us we don't think that's going to be the case so I've got one question left I have some other questions on the well situation but

there were changes made to the proffers today regarding wells. Can you share what was added to those proffers just so everybody's clear?

Well, one of the questions came up in the mid co meeting, I think by Mr Harris, who's sitting over there, uh, about, The original proffer was drafted that we would offer the community of people that had their wells tested, the way the process would work, before we start grading activities, we send letters to the people within this perimeter and offer to test their wells. They have us come out, we test the wells, and it sets a baseline for how their well is operating, both from a production and a water quality standpoint. uh we had originally said that after we finished grading the site moving all the dirt that we would give the community six months of uh after that oh thank you sherman uh we would give the community or those people whose wells have been tested six months to uh ask us to come back out and test their well again mr harris pointed out that it might be better to do it within six months after the impervious materials of the paving were put down so we changed that to base paving Instead of grading if that makes sense, okay, so it gives a longer time a much longer time.

Yes. Yes Okay, thank you Yes chief Smolsky Uh

People are concerned about the residue that might be left to reaction products after a blast, whether it's ANFO or some other material that's used. Does the county's supervision of a blast site include checking to see whether or not contaminants are left behind CONTAMINANTS, ENOUGH CONTAMINANTS TO BE WORRIED ABOUT?

NO, MY OFFICE DOES NOT DO THAT. OUR PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY IS THE SAFETY AND USE OF THE EXPLOSIVES.

DO YOU KNOW IF ANY AGENCY, ANY GOVERNMENT AGENCY PERFORMS THOSE CHECKS?

NOT ON A ROUTINE BASIS.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

YES, SIR.

COMMISSIONER SCHEIFLER.

ONE LAST QUESTION FOR KEVIN. I still think one of the benefits of the quadrant road is you actually can sync all the lights up together on Liberia, whereas right now I think some people, I think they have it synced up where you make a left on 28 on Liberia. You can almost make it the whole way down to this light, but this light has so much congestion that you're not able to do that. My concern here is these two lights are going to be VDOT lights, and the main intersection, Hastings, are city of Manassas lights. Yes. Are there situations where are they the same system or I'm just concerned about. Them communicating correctly.

I believe they do communicate to each other, but I'll get an affirmative answer.

I wasn't sure if there are other areas in the county where this happens, where they have to have these synced up because again. I'm not sure if the late Jackson line is connected to these ones as a frequent user of this. So if you could get that information, that would be useful to understand just to make sure because this is going to be a great project if they all can sync together correctly. Sure.

Thank you.

Supervisor?

Just had one transportation question. Do we have an ETA on the VDOT review?

It should be in the next few weeks.

Thank you.

Commissioner Moses then.

Not transportation this time. Thank you. Mr. Patrick, my question is about buffers. You mentioned, and maybe it's you, Truett, I'm not sure, because you gave the, descriptor of driving down the parkway and that's what these homes, you would experience driving through this road, you would experience that kind of feel in terms of how far the homes are. But could you talk about what those actual buffers are? along that road as well as along the parkway. I know there's a 50-foot buffer, but that's pursuant to a waiver. Is that correct? No, ma'am.

The 50-foot buffer is a HCOD buffer. The one along the parkway. And how about on the road? It's a 30-foot buffer landscape area along the road, and it's not subject to a waiver.

Okay. And... And you're saying that the ones that are coming up the parkway are less than 30 feet?

They're 30 feet also, but the homes are closer to the parkway than these homes are.

Okay. All right. Thanks. I just needed some clarity on that. I wasn't quite understanding.

All right. Could I answer the tree question?

Sure.

I've been advised that there's a net increase of 145,000 square feet of tree canopy or 3.3 acres over the property.

Thank you for that.

Commissioner Ross. Let's see. What was I going to ask? Oh, David, please. Mr. McGinnigan. You mentioned that there's a conservation easement that protects the three long rectangular lots to the sort of southeast of this property for parks and open space.

Mm-hmm.

Who owns that easement? Is the county a party to it, or do you know if there's a third party? It's a third party. But it's someone other than just the homeowners, parcel owners?

Yeah, it's a land trust would be the third party.

Okay, thank you. That puts me at ease a little bit. Thank you, Chair.

Commissioner Shea?

Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. Another question about water well, I heard that there was another condition added which will be after the grading, you will be extending the warranty on the water testing or the well testing?

Yes, rather than having the

Testing the the secondary testing being done after grading we're going to do it after the paving is installed Because that would be when the impervious area is actually on the ground No, is there a way to extend this post complete construction because we had another applicant Few weeks ago and Commissioner Ross asked the question After the construction a lot of time that's when the problems start happening sometimes so can it be extended completely post construction and

No, we've kind of gotten to the point where we think that for what we're doing here, taking it to when the impervious area, when the roads are constructed on the project is a reasonable time frame, and it's six months after that. I don't want to have a tail end of trying to get off bond, which is a long, extensive process in Prince William County, and then having this issue be out there much further than that, if that makes sense.

Kind of. I mean, Stanley Martin has been around for a long time, and it seems like it's going to continue to be around for a long time in the county. We are, yes. So time is not that much subjective to this construction only. That's why I wanted to make sure, since Stanley Martin is there, the bond can be extended. Sure. I mean, it's not a very difficult thing. If it was a one-time shot and this was a one-time developer, then I agree with you.

No, I mean, but from a project to project, we have a management process of managing these projects and having what would effectively be a tail of having this obligation that lasts longer after we get off bond is problematic. So we limit it to six months after the pavement has been installed. Thank you, sir. Commissioner Ross, you had asked about whether or not anybody was testing – you know, post blasting would be doing any testing. We, oddly enough, we are with the well testing. So that's, we're already doing well, you know, well testing around the homes that effectively does the same thing that everybody seems to be concerned about. So.

Well, if I may, there's a concern that immediately after blasting you might detect that there was residue that would need to be cleaned up. Then it would seep into the groundwater system, spend a year traveling, and then show up in somebody's well later. I don't honestly know the speed at which groundwater travels to these wells.

Right.

That was the point I was getting at. And I'm willing to investigate more to see if it's a real concern or not. I plan to. Thank you.

Thank you. My next question is for the staff. I wonder if it goes to planning director. But on the application page 14 paragraph B, there is a maximum sales price. And then if the county cannot find anyone for ADUs, then the units will be sold at market rate. Has there been incidents like this in the past where, I know our ordinance is very new, where we will not be able to find any qualified candidates for ADUs?

So I'm pulling up the specific language, and the staff can correct me if I'm wrong, Scott, if you can take a look at it. So we have two ways to get affordable housing in a county. One is through the comprehensive plan affordable housing supplement, And that is what has been up until December 1st, that is what the county has been a mechanism for us to get a lot of the affordable units. And oftentimes you'll see that type of language and a process that relate to the bonus density that they get through the comprehensive plan. The affordable dwelling unit ordinance works differently in terms of if an applicant, and that's the law that went into effect in December. If an applicant chooses to use the provisions in the Affordable Dwelling Unit Ordinance, that ordinance specifies that that unit has to be affordable for a minimum of 15 years, up to 50 years. So it works very differently. So that type of language wouldn't apply in those types of instances.

Interesting. And the burden falls on the applicant to locate the qualified candidates for ADUs, correct?

I believe that is.

If it's okay, we just had a really extensive study with the housing folks at the county, and I can kind of explain how the process works in the context of the proffers here, because they're similar to our Bradley South community that we're preparing to open. The burden is on the developer to qualify people, but the county recently has set up a group of a team, effectively, to help with that. So they have a lot of other responsibilities, but one of the things they do is setting up a website where they list all the projects and homes that are available through ADUs by proffer, and they also help qualify people. So instead of a potential purchaser having to go through four different communities and talk to four different salespeople, they can go get pre-qualified at the county and show up with a certificate from the housing office, and it automatically qualifies them into the system. So we think we've got it worked out to where it should be pretty efficient.

Sounds good. Thank you so much, sir.

All right. This question might be for staff. One of the concerns came up about speaking of the requirements. Would the applicant be able to change from 55 plus in this community for some reason later on? I just heard that concern from one of the speakers.

Not without a proffer amendment approved by the Planning Commission, I mean by the Board of County Supervisors with recommendations from the Planning Commission.

They would have to go through this process all over again. It's not something they could do in the background quietly.

That's correct. Require a public hearing.

Would you like to add something? Well, I just mentioned that there is the project, actually, Mr. Patrick has it beautiful, 55 plus apartments over on Noble Pond, I think, near BJ's. However, when I went there, because they had not identified or didn't have the requisite number to reach capacity of 55 plus that it had been opened. And so when I saw kids and families, and so when I asked, I inquired about it, and they said, yes, this is what we did. Now, I don't know if that's a special situation. It may be different. Or maybe I didn't see that project come back to us. So...

Yeah, so I'm not sure. So there's the distinction between the rental projects that have been brought up tonight that are owned by one entity that have been converted in some way or another. I don't know the specifics, but in a situation where we sell homes in a community, there are property ownership documents that are recorded against the property, and those don't get changed without the owners in the community, which in this case would be like 240 individual people, changing them. So it, it, I guess in theory it could be done with a proper condition amendment, but there would be nothing in, uh, the bylaws of the neighborhood that would allow for it to happen without having everybody in the community get together and go do it with the board.

Okay. That's helpful.

And so, yeah, if I can also just add, um, the proper is specified that the, uh, It specifies that this is a 55-plus community. And so because of that, in order to change any provisions in the proffers, that requires a proffer amendment, which goes through the same public hearing process as a rezoning application.

Thank you. And I think it's something probably worth noting in the future. When we get rental projects like that, the expectation is that it's 55-plus because it can't be proffered because it's not a... a fee project that maybe there needs to be something stronger in there so that people can actually live where they thought they were renting into. So that's just a thought aside from this project.

But I did have one question. Can I pick you up? Yes, go ahead.

All right. And it was just a follow-up. And probably to staff. So we heard that the six months which is when the impervious surface would be put down, is sufficient. What is a homeowner's recourse within the county if a year later they discover that they're having issues with their wells? Because the applicant has said, you know, we've done enough. Do they go back to the applicant? Is there a recourse with the county? What would they do?

So the property is being rezoned and purchased by Stanley Martin Homes LLC. It's not a single purpose entity. It's not what a single purpose entity is usually used to protect against future litigation in situations like this. We don't do that. Stanley Martin Homes owns all of our assets. Runs about, I think, $3 billion through that company annually. Again, as Commissioner Sheik mentioned, we're here. We've been here. They would have recourse with us, honestly, if they felt like they were harmed in some way. And they're right. I mean, they would litigate against us. And that would be, you know, they would litigate against the property owner or the developer, which would be Stanley Martin Homes. I don't know what the recourse would be with the county. I couldn't speak to that. I just only know what I would expect from them if there was an issue.

Well, thank you.

Thank you for that. Is there any recourse with the county, or is it strictly with Stanley Martin in this case?

Not that I know of. It's a private, legal, civil matter at that point.

The only things that are within a county's purview to enforce are what are in the proffers.

Commissioner Carroll.

Thank you. This is probably for staff, potentially transportation. But I know a lot of speakers spoke about that kind of parcel that's no longer included in the application. And seeing the comp plan mixed use, I would also tend to think that something commercial is going to come in on that corner, which would then drive kind of additional vehicle trips on like the Quadrant Road intersection. Is there, I guess my question would be, what level of trips would that intersection like cause a signal to be needed?

Without knowing exactly what kind of use would go in there, we're not sure. And how they would access it. Based on The Prince William Parkway being a corridor of statewide significance, VDOT controls access to it pretty tightly. That being in between the quadrant and the main intersection with Liberia, this is not with 100% certainty, but I would imagine that VDOT would not allow an access through there without some sort of exemption, which they do grant from time to time. So they would be potentially accessing it through this property. There was no inter parcel connection that I know of that was proffered as part of this rezoning.

They have their own access to that.

Yeah, they, there, there is a, there is a driveway there for the existing use. Yeah, that's right. Yeah. Okay.

Is there any consideration for inter parcel connection to that, to the parking lot there?

I don't think we asked for it because it's not a compatible use. So if there was to be a land use change in the future, then we could look at it as part of that rezoning case or anything else that comes through.

Okay, thanks.

Any other questions? No? Okay, so since this is in the Coles District, I'm going to turn the chairship over to Commissioner Mosesnett.

Okay, we received the presentations as one presentation, but we will take a vote on the comp plan amendment and then the rezoning separately. And so with that, I will... Turn it over to commissioner justice. You are the commissioner record.

Thank you. I'd like to close the public hearing.

The public hearing is closed.

Perfect. Before I make my motion, uh, and I'm going to have some additions to my motion, but I just, I appreciate everybody that's worked on this project for many, many, many years, uh, long before I became commissioner. I know when I first saw this project and all its iterations, it's shocking how much it's changed over time. I think one of the submissions, it was over 500 homes. I understand the concerns about eliminating open space, but Supervisor Vega and I spent countless hours mitigating all the different concerns and making sure that we had a really really good product really good community i know we touched a little bit on the commercial portion of this property but we also pushed so that it wouldn't be just another strip mall we wanted something local we wanted something that not only this community but the surrounding community could go to take their kids to have a place to hang out outside so that they had a sense of place there. Um, you know, going to single family detached, uh, that was another big push from us. And we're thankful that the applicant worked with us on that and reduced the density as much as they did. We had some very tense meetings. I know that the last meeting where the project was completely done, Supervisor Vega and I took a pen and started drawing Xs. So we took the density down even further than what it was gonna be. So anyways, we've worked a lot on the project. So with that, I'd like to make a motion to approve And this is going to be for the comp plan amendment, CPA two zero two five zero zero zero zero five Klein property. And just a quick question for director Washington. What I make the same, the, the set of items to add like to the motion are mostly for the rezoning. So I don't need to state those twice. Correct. It's stated for the rezoning. Just for the rezoning? Yes. Okay. So that's my motion to approve. And that's for the proffers dated March 25th, 2026.

The proffers don't apply to the CPA.

Oh, the proffers don't apply. Sorry. My apologies. Second. Second.

Okay. It has been properly moved by commissioner justice and seconded by commissioner shake to approve, uh, item 10 item 11 E CPA 2025 0 0 0 0 5 Klein property. Madam clerk, would you please call the roll?

Vice street justice. Yes. Commissioner Carol.

No.

Commissioner Moses name.

Yes.

Commissioner Ross.

Yes.

Commissioner Shaikh?

Just a quick statement before I also vote for it. I have also worked on this development through the non-profits for a very, very long time. I would have personally preferred the ball field. All those parents were really looking forward to that space because they lost their space. And our youth need housing. I know we are building 55 plus to mitigate schools and we saw our school's population is declining. And increased density also called for increased ADUs. Our county's workforce, they need housing. Our police department, they need housing within the county. And unfortunately, going to a lesser version of this development really pushes us back. In last year, we only approved 3,600 houses. We have a shortage of 30,000 houses in the county. I have no other thing but to say yes, so at least something is being developed. But I would definitely prefer something with more amenities for our young people, for our individuals who are starting life, for them to have. So in future, I definitely would appreciate something like that. But my vote is yes. Thank you.

Commissioner Scheifler?

Yes.

Commissioner Sharman? Yes. Motion carries.

Thank you. We will now take a motion on item 11F, rezoning 2016-00021. I'll turn it over to you, Commissioner Justice.

Thank you. I'd like to close the public hearing.

The public hearing is closed.

I would like to make a motion to approve rezoning REZ-2016-00021, Legacy at Kline, with the proffers dated March 25th. 2026 the original number I had was 17 but there were proffers added today correct that's correct okay okay and I'd like to add the following to my motion as far as the bypass or whatever we're calling that VDOT and Prince William County DOT continue to work together to get a final plan as far as the two left turns We would like to push for no trucks on the bypass, a pedestrian signal to the commercial from the residential. And I'd also like to add that it sounds like Stanley Martin will provide space for the monitoring wells.

Second. It has been moved by Commissioner Justice and seconded by Commissioner Shake to approve the rezoning 2016-00021 Legacy at Kline. Madam Clerk, would you please call the roll?

Vice Chair Justice? Yes. Commissioner Carroll?

Yes. There's a lot of... Things that I'm pleasantly surprised with, and I do appreciate where we started 10 years ago and where we came from today. And when we met last week, I kind of echoed what Commissioner Shaikh said. I almost would have liked to seen something a little different here. But I think this is a happy median for the area, for where we are. But what I can't get over, and based on my questions tonight, I'll happily be proven wrong if the board approves it 10 years from now, but I just am not convinced that that quadrant road is going to fix anything, and I see a lot of headaches down the road on that. So based on that, tonight I'm a no.

Commissioner Moses, then?

Yes.

Commissioner Ross? Yes.

Several of the residents' concerns involved scientific topics, a considerable number around groundwater. I volunteered to one person that sent me an email today to dig into that with him between now and whenever the board hears this matter. So it's not that those concerns are being ignored. It's just I got the email from that person within the last 24 hours, and I'm not smart enough to answer all of those scientific questions in a 24-hour period. So I'm going to vote yes with that commitment to work with any residents that want to contact me.

Commissioner Shaikh?

Still a yes.

Commissioner Scheifler?

I'll just say, of all the planning cases I've reviewed, this project provides the greatest transportation benefit to the surrounding community. And I strongly support removing left turn lanes at the main intersection that connect to the two sections of the parkway. And I just applaud the applicant for putting in this quadrant road. I think it's going to be a good asset for the community and help improve traffic flow in the area. So I'm yes.

Commissioner Sherman?

Yes.

Motion carries.

All right. Thank you. I'll turn it back over to Vice Chair Justice. Thank you.

Well, the condition she added to the motion was just to continue to think about it.

Thank God I'm chair.

All right, on to... Can you guys be quiet as you leave the chambers? Thank you. We're still conducting county business. On to item number 12. We're going to go to 12 a, does anybody have old business?

Old business. Um, yes. So, uh, we did not have our bylaws work session tonight. Um, and I, I saw tears, uh, karma come across via email from, uh, commissioner Blake. Um, I would like to say, well, one it's new business. Uh, so this is my last commission meeting. Um, the, uh, the new Woodbridge supervisor is poised to select, um, and appoint a new commissioner. It's been my honor to serve. That would have been new business, but in the vein of old business, um, I've been working behind the scenes as I promised I would do on the bylaws. And so what I have on a thumb drive because my computer crashed, which is why I was late, um, to leave as a parting gift. are revised bylaws which take into consideration the comments from Mr. McGettigan, as well as the work that you tried to do and prepared these because they align closely with our closely aligned counties that are similarly situated in Fairfax and Loudoun, and also maintain some of the integrity of our former bylaws, but update them in a way that reflects, I think, what will be very, very useful. Along with that, we also agreed that we would take that very useful approach Statutes reference that you prepared and have that as a handout. in our new commissioners booklet. So those are the two things that I leave with you. And I'll provide that to Ms. Pena so that she can get it out to everyone to review when you do have the work session that I won't be attending, which is a good thing. So thank you very much. I appreciate it. We'll come back to new business and I'll say my thing.

Okay.

I just want to say thank you and those weren't tears because we weren't having the work session. They were tears because you're leaving.

Anybody else have old business?

Yeah. Real quick. I know the last meeting we had held the PFR case that we denied and for everyone on the diocese awareness that did appeal that. I was hoping staff and I know Tony just left but I was hoping there could because you know there was a lot of emails before that hearing a lot of people spoke at that hearing and I'm still getting questions on like what that process looks like from here on out is there anything staff can speak to on kind of what those next steps are obviously it's out of our hands but just to make sure I'm providing accurate information the chair of the board of county supervisors is working with

the county attorney's office, the county executive and staff to determine what the exact process is. The board has some options in terms of how they can act on the petition to appeal. The one thing that is certain is that it was submitted last Friday, which was March 20th, and the board has to act on the petition to appeal within 60 days.

Okay, thank you. And is that appeal going to be uploaded to Intergov in depth?

It was submitted to the clerk of the board, and so we would need to find out exactly how the public can get access to it.

Any other old business? On to new business. Commissioner Sherman, new business?

No, I don't have any new business.

Commissioner Shanks?

I guess I will say my thank yous in the commissioner's time. Okay.

Commissioner Carroll? Commissioner Moses? Anybody else?

Commissioner Ross? Commissioner Scheifler?

All right. Now we're going to move on to commission members' time. We'll start with Commissioner Scheifler.

I just want to thank Commissioner Moses-Ned and all she's done. I think coming on the board two years ago, I think you definitely set a great example for how to conduct business and the professionalism that I definitely took note of, you know, how you've been able to conduct yourself. And, you know, you're a great example as I started on the board.

So I just thank you for that.

You will be missed.

Yeah, well, as I said before, it's my last day. I thank everyone. You all have been great colleagues. And not only that, great friends. We haven't always agreed, but we've always done it in the most professional way possible. And that has been all that I asked. Thank you to staff. couldn't have made this journey as serving as first member vice chair and then chair and stepping back to membership and you all have helped me along the way the entire time so thank you so much for many of you i'll see you again maybe we'll get together whether it's at black sheep on that side of the county or or maybe over in stonebridge on this side of the county because of the work that we've done here we've got some great spaces and some more that are coming online. So I'm excited by the work that you all will continue to do. You're in good hands. I know Commissioner Brown is not here tonight, but Commissioner Justice will also keep the ship steady. So thank you all very much. Ms. Pena, what can I say? As you know, you've done a fantastic job and I appreciate it. Like I said, from leadership to membership, you have been just a real wealth of knowledge to say you came after all of us and have, well, other than Commissioner Sherman, but other than that, but just being able to help us along the way. So thank you, thank you. And thank you so much, Director Washington. You stayed.

We told her there was going to be cake.

No, I meant like when she came on board, yeah, we had had a journey with planning directors, and so we had that conversation at the beginning, and she stayed. So thank you very much. Thank you all.

Yeah. Thank you. You've been a wonderful mentor. You'll definitely be missed here. You have wonderful insights on projects. I know a lot of times you bring things up that you bring light to things. So thank you. Thank you.

Yes. No, definitely thank you. You will be missed so much on this board or commission. You were definitely one of the voices that I always looked up to when I was out there and hearing your thoughts and comments. I think it would be remiss not to mention, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you were the chair during the Digital Gateway hearing that was the 24 hours. So I think somewhere there is a Hall of Fame, I think, with your picture on it. But you'll definitely be missed. And thank you. Thank you for everything.

My sentiments are also similar to everyone else. Thank you for your service. We really appreciate it. I know you had, I have known you for almost, I want to say for a long time now, because when I came and speak on that side, 2017 or 2019, you were also on the board at that time, on the commission.

My first commission meeting was December 19th, 2018. It was one of those 3 a.m. hearings on Ray's regard. the bane of my existence. So, yeah. Yeah. Thrown into the fire. Yes.

Our hearing, I was here till 5 a.m. that night. Yeah. But always appreciate your patience and your knowledge and your dedication. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner. You're one of the very, I think, since I've been on this board, the fewest absences have been you. Not that I take any pride in my own...

Well, thank you.

But thank you so much for your service. And we definitely, I'm glad to hear that you will stay engaged. I would love to hear from you on your thoughts. Countywide, please stay engaged and please help us also navigate these. That is the plan. Thank you. Thank you.

I'd just like to say thank you for your service. Even though we physically overlapped, two meetings, but I virtually, we overlapped a lot. I watched a lot of the hearings and I, and I will say I'm taking a lot of lessons from your example. Um, hopefully to match your sort of insight and intellect as, as we continue to, um, make this County better. Thank you.

Vice chair justice. If I may cut into commissioner's time. Sure. In this instance, I also just want to say on behalf of the planning office, we very much will miss you. And we very much appreciate the eight years of service on the Planning Commission as chair and as a member of the commission. Just to echo, I concur with all the comments that have already been made. And again, we definitely wanted keep in touch with you as you transition out of this role and anything that we can do to continue to support you as a resident, let us know.

All right.

And with that, a motion to adjourn?

Motion to adjourn. Second. So moved. There we go. Second.

Second. Do you need a second to adjourn?