Planning Commission

PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 24, 2024 6:30 PM Supplementary Meeting You may view and listen to the meeting in its entirety by going to the Planning Commission page on the City’s website: https://www.regionalwebtv.com/fredpc The agenda, staff report and associated documents are also available on the Planning Commission page: https://www.fredericksburgva.gov/241/Planning-Commission MEMBERS CITY STAFF David Durham, Chairman Chuck Johnston, Director Susanna Finn, Vice-Chairman Mike Craig, Principal Planner Mary-Margaret Marshall, Secretary (absent) Kelly Machen, Zoning Administrator Kenneth Gantt Tanagra Cafferky, Administrative Assistant Adam Lynch Carey Whitehead Dugan Caswell 1. CALL TO ORDER [00:01:14] Chairman Durham called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. in Council Chambers and explained meeting procedures for the public. Members of the public were invited to attend or access this meeting by public access television Cox Channel 84, Verizon Channel 42, or online at https://www.regionalwebtv.com/fredpc. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. DETERMINATION OF A QUORUM [00:03:54] There were six members in attendance of the meeting at the call to order. Mary-Margaret Marshall absent. 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA [00:04:16] There were no changes to the agenda. Mr. Lynch moved to approve the agenda, Mr. Gantt seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 5. DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL POLICIES, ORDINANCES, OR APPLICATIONS None 6. DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST OR DISCLOSURES OF CONTACT [00:04:42] None, but Mr. Lynch noted that his wife is a nurse at Mary Washington Hospital Center and Mr. Durham noted that his daughter is a nurse at Mary Washington Hospital Center. 7. OLD BUSINESS None 8. PUBLIC HEARING – New [00:06:09] (Attachment) A. RZ FY24-0005 - Zoning Map Amendment (Rezoning) – Mary Washington Hospital proposes a rezoning to build a 6,000 square foot addition to the “Snowden House” (2600 Mary Washington Boulevard), convert it into a residence and meeting / events center, demolish the day-care center building at 1100 Sam Perry Blvd and construct in its place a 2 story medical clinic, and build a new 3 story office / training / conference center between the day-care center site and Snowden House. Ms. Machen presented, which included the staff recommendation of approval. The presentation included the history of the site, including the 1991 rezoning, and the proposed GDP Amendment as well as the medical offices & supportive services components of the institutional uses of the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Machen reviewed the Snowden House site section of the plan inclduing that the Sam Perry Road was originally built as a private road for the Snowden House, parking demand, and the historic smokehouse building on the Snowden site. The presentation included a review of the proffer statement and proposed transportation changes, including sidewalk and stop sign placements. Ms. Machen reviewed the environmental impact of the project, including bio-filter placements for Snowden Pond and a specimen tree that will need to be removed. Ms. Machen said the project will be in three phases: 1. Construct the 3-story Conference Center and Snowden House addition and install the Bio Filters placements. 2. Work on the Bio Filters and Utility connections. 3. Closing of Kid Station Daycare in order to begin demolition of the building and then construct the 2-story medical clinic. Ms. Machen concluded her presentation. Mr. Durham opened the floor to the commission for questions. Mr. Caswell asked what changed from the 1993 GDP. Ms. Machen said the 3 story conference center would be a substantial change and the Snowden House addition would double the size of Snowden House. Ms. Whitehead and Ms. Machen discussed the traffic study as it pertains to the intersection with Snowden House and the Snowden House Office Park. Mr. Lynch and Ms. Machen discussed the differences between a proffer statement and a UDO. A proffer statement allows for more flexibility of use. Mr. Lynch asked how the Snowden House is listed. Ms. Machen responded that the applicant has requested that it be a residence with event space. Mr. Lynch asked if the city will replace in like the magnolia tree that is planned to be taken down. Ms. Machen said the city will replace the tree in like. Mr. Lynch asked about the excess parking at the site. Ms. Machen responded that all parking is institutional use. Ms. Finn and Ms. Machen discussed the daycare’s operating hours and changes to the playground during phase one and two of the three phases of the project. Mr. Durham and Ms. Machen discussed Sam Perry Blvd. The road was originally a private road that had set-backs. The road is now city owned and does not need separate zoning. The changes to the parking lot are listed in the staff report as part of the rezoning. Mr. Durham asked if the Snowden House Office Park is not part of Mary Washington Healthcare Center (MWHC). Ms. Machen responded that is correct and that it is privately held. The access road for Snowden House has an easement through the office park property. Mr. Durham, Mr. Craig, and Ms. Machen discussed the traffic impacts of the project and how it pertains to the Area 5 Study. Mr. Craig said the city could make changes to College Avenue across from Eagle Village Drive. Mr. Craig said Eagle Village Drive is a privately owned road and that any changes to that road would need to be worked out between the shopping center and MWHC. Mr. Durham noted that this GDP is different from the 1993 GDP and that a daycare center is not listed as part of the plans in the new GDP, only that it is listed as a possible use in the proffer statement. Mr. Lynch requested that the city look into possibly taking over the right of way of Eagle Village Drive, since it is an important connector in the area. Mr. Durham closed the commissioner question period. Mr. Durham invited the applicant to come forward. Dr. Summer Hughes, Chief of Staff of Mary Washington Healthcare Center (MWHC), presented. Dr. Hughes said the changes to the campus would help facilitate increases to the Graduate Medical Education program and to allow for event space. Dr. Hughes said the daycare will remain open during the first part of the construction phase, but the daycare would eventually need to relocate off campus. Mr. Durham opened the floor to the commissioners to ask questions of the applicant. Mr. Caswell and Dr. Hughes discussed safety measures for the daycare during construction. Mr. Caswell asked about the offices at the Fall Hill site. Dr. Hughes responded that some of the administrative staff at the Fall Hill site will eventually occupy some offices in the newly constructed buildings as the Hospital phases out the Fall Hill location. Mr. Caswell and Ms. Hughes discussed why other sites on campus were not considered. Dr. Hughes said development of this particular site was part of the long-term plan for MWHC. Ms. Whitehead asked if the new conference center would be for internal use only. Dr. Hughes responded that the center would be for internal use only. It would not be rented to outside users. It is meant to be used as a meeting space, a training simulation space, and an education space. The campus concept is that the doctors in the residency program would go back and forth between the hospital and the training center throughout the day. Dr. Hughes said the participants in the Graduate Medical Education program would park nearby in the hospital’s parking garage. Mr. Lynch inquired if there is an overall projected plan of the entire campus available to view or to read given the shift away from a daycare center, and the hospitals real estate portfolio. Discussion included potential land transfers, the Moss Free Clinic, and Mary Washington Hospital’s strategic growth plan. Mr. Lynch asked how the Snowden House would be used. Dr. Hughes said Snowden House would be used by the hospital for gatherings and community engagement. Mr. Lynch and Dr. Hughes discussed the daycare use. Mr. Lynch asked if MWHC has met with the surrounding owners or businesses about improving the area during construction. Mr. Gantt noted that the hospital is a major employer in the area and it should seek input from the community. Mr. Gantt and Dr. Hughes discussed the daycare use and communications on the plan to remove the daycare use moving forward. Ms. Finn asked if Kindercare is aware of the three phase plan for the site and that Kindercare will need to find another location off campus once phase 3 demolition of the site begins. Dr. Hughes responded that Kindercare is aware of the plans for modifying the space and that the hospital does not know of Kindercare’s relocation plans. Ms. Whitehead asked if December of 2025 was a firm end date for the daycare to close. Dr. Hughes said the December 2025 date is a target end date rather than a firm date. Mr. Gantt asked if Dr. Hughes knows what percentage of the children that attend the daycare are children of hospital staff and how has the hospital engaged with those parents affected by this closure. Dr. Hughes said that there are teams that have worked with staff to find alternatives. Mr. Durham and Dr. Hughes discussed the potential uses of the Snowden House. Mr. Durham asked, based on the plans submitted, if Snowden House will be used as a residence. Dr. Hughes responded that is the intent, but has not been determined who will occupy the house. Mr. Durham asked why the proffer statement include a possible use of a daycare Mr. Durham asked if Kindercare was aware in 2021 that their lease would be short term. Dr. Hughes responded that that is correct and that Kindercare has not said what their future plans are. Ms. Finn asked about staffing levels in the old and new building. Ms. Finn reiterated that the center would have an educational focus. Mr. Durham closed the question period. Mr. Durham opened the floor for public comment. Hannah Fallon (1813 Genther Lane) spoke about the loss of the on-site daycare. Olivia Fallon (1813 Genther Lane) attends Kids Station Kindercare and spoke about how naptime would be affected by the noise and dust during construction. Debbie Gervin (612 Hawke Street) wrote about Mary Washington’s tax exempt status, employee salaries, the day care use, and the hospital’s future development plans. Joseph Wilson (1003 Black Oak Court) wrote about the daycare use and the need for a plan to replace the daycare. Nathan and Merdith Veldhuis (728 Lee Ave) wrote about the removal of the daycare and the construction impact on the daycare operation.  Paul Fallon (1813 Genther Lane) wrote about the loss of the daycare use and the phased timing of the hospital’s construction plan. Joe Snyder (902 Marye Street) wrote about the loss of the daycare use and its impact on the broader community. Teagan Snyder (902 Marye Street) wrote about the loss of the daycare use and its impact on the broader community. Claire Dormer (3000 Barrington Road) wrote about the loss of the daycare use, open space needs for child development, and finding a future location for daycare uses. Aaron Frank (2634 Caroline Street) wrote about construction phasing, child safety, and potential shared parking on the campus. Mr. Durham closed the floor for public comment and asked the commissioners for comments or questions. Ms. Whitehead asked what action options the Planning Commission can do. Mr. Durham explained the process. The Planning Commission has 100 days to make recommendations. Theoretically, the Planning Commission can keep the hearing open until May. Mr. Lynch said he needed more information and more answers to the questions asked of the applicant. Mr. Lynch requested that the applicant bring more representatives to answer the commissioners’ questions. Mr. Durham asked the commission if they want to delay. Mr. Gantt said MWHC did not involve the community. Ms. Whitehead said the public should be given more opportunity to comment. Mr. Johnston clarified the choices available to the commission. Dr. Hughes said she would be able to come back in two weeks. Mr. Durham continued the public hearing to May 8, 2024. 9. OTHER BUSINESS None. 10. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT None. Subject: Mary Washington Hospital Rezoning Comments David, I hope all's well. I'm touching base with you in advance of this evening's PC hearing regarding the Mary Washington rezoning. I'm typically reluctant to get involved with zoning matters in the City although my two kids both school at Kids Station so I'm compelled to share my thoughts with you. Ultimately many parents understand that Kids Station is moving to a new location - this is a decision outside the scope of land use review - but the zoning process provides an avenue by which to mitigate impacts of incompatible construction on a sensitive use. Here are some suggestions to improve the project. I appreciate your consideration. Phasing The phasing of construction directly adjacent to outdoor play areas is antithetical to many City goals regarding safety. MWHC may indicate that phasing construction is a preferable option to closing the daycare earlier to allow for construction. The second phase of development is only needed for parking and stormwater management; seemingly a shared parking agreement to use existing parking across Sam Perry Blvd could be used in lieu of needing Phase 2, or this could reduce the scope of Phase 2 as to further distance construction from daycare activities. While the staff report reviews timing for the phasing, the commitment is loose for timing in the GDP. Timing construction is a difficult exercise, but it's important that this issue be daylit given the nature of the existing use. I'd recommend this timing be tightened and/or notice be given to Kids Station prior to the commencement of each phase. The GDP is slightly ambiguous with how and whether construction equipment will access Kids Station during Phase 2. I recommend adding a note that construction access must utilize the access in Phase 1 so that there is no mix of construction and day-care drop-off traffic in Phase 1. Parking At 64,100 sf (excluding 6k snowden expansion) the project will be parked at almost 4:1,000 - that's high for office use. The staff report references that the TIA reduced VPD by 50% due to pedestrian trips; this should be reflected in the parking tab as well with a commensurate reduction. The parking count exceeds City requirements but more importantly there is shared parking available across Sam Perry Blvd in the sparsely used edge of the parking lot under common MWHC ownership. This would provide design and environmental benefits and ease the impact to Kids Station during construction if it can reduce the intensity of a second phase of development. MWHC should reduce parking to the 203 required (or less), and particularly eliminate the parking adjacent to the RPA. Thanks, Aaron Frank 571-334-5375 aarofrank@gmail.com April 24, 2024 Public Hearing - MWHC Application Planning Commission Members, My name is Debby Girvan. I reside at 612 Hawke St in the city. I am also a business owner and former member of the Fredericksburg City Council. During my term on Council, we voted unanimously to approve tax-exempt status for Mary Washington Healthcare. At that time, CEO Fred Rankin based the tax exemption on the many ways the hospital supported the community through financial and in-kind donations. Today, I regret that vote. A recent article shared by FXBG Advance reported after the withdrawal of support for the Moss Free Clinic, MWHC’s community donations total only $300,000 per year while the number of executives and related salaries has skyrocketed. They report the CEO’s salary is $2.4 million - a $600,000 increase in two years. The plan before you represents misplaced priorities and the absence of essential services we need to preserve quality healthcare in this region. MWHC promised Kid’s Station would stay in its current location until a replacement daycare center was found and opened. But current plans schedule demolition of the playground this August and the daycare center building next year with no commitment for a replacement. At best MWHC’s promise is disingenuous. The plan makes it as difficult as possible to keep the current daycare center open with no viable alternative for the children. Even if they started today, it’s not likely a new daycare center could open before the scheduled demolition. For 30 years, Kids Station has been a recruiting tool to attract the best doctors and nurses to Fredericksburg. It’s the only center that accommodates the unusual work hours of doctors and nurses and is the only subsidized daycare option. Even though there was a waiting list of 50 families, MWHC told its board of directors that the center was underutilized and no longer needed - recommending its demolition. I’m not sure how they could be that misinformed. There has been a national and regional daycare crisis for years. In the 28 years we’ve lived here Kids Station has always had a waiting list. If parents and the community had not organized a protest, the center would be closed next month, leaving many hospital employees, including doctors and nurses, unable to work without care for their children. The only guarantees in front of you are they will deprive the children of safe, outdoor play and leave hospital staff, doctors, nurses, and other healthcare providers without childcare options. This makes our region’s nursing and doctor shortage an even bigger and longer-lasting crisis. This is a community hospital - owned by the community. As a tax-exempt organization, every one of us has a right and responsibility to question how this organization spends its money and whether it meets its obligations to put the health and welfare of the community first. The hospital cuts incentive programs for patient service, pays its staff less than other facilities, and cuts funding in other essential areas. Another priority in this plan is to spend millions of dollars for a conference and party center while converting the Snowden House to residential use. Why won’t they reveal who will live in this multi-million dollar mansion? If MWHC wants to operate like a private, for-profit corporation they can relinquish their tax-exempt status, pay their share of taxes, and compete in a free market economy like every other business in this city. The community deserves more transparency about this plan and its impact on our region’s health care. I urge MWHC to host a town meeting where community members are fully informed about short and long-term plans for the hospital campus and provide an opportunity for the public to ask questions of the CEO, executive management, and board members. I request that the Planning Commission place this entire application on hold until the new daycare center location is identified with a signed contract for its construction. Your votes on this application are not just about land use and building plans. How you dictate the terms of any approval will have an immediate and lasting impact on our region’s healthcare for years to come. Submitted by: Debby GIrvan 612 Hawke St Fredericksburg VA 22401 debbygirvan@gmail.com 540-809-8196 Joe Snigier 902 Marye St, Fredericksburg, VA 22401 April 24, 2024 Fredericksburg Planning Commission Supplementary Meeting April 24, 2024 RZ FY24-0005 - Zoning Map Amendment (Rezoning) As a resident of Fredericksburg and parent of 2 children who attend Kid’s Station, I oppose rezoning. Mary Washington Hospital should not be allowed to demolish a facility that provides essential services for the community to build in its place non-essential medical and training facilities unless there are provisions that require Mary Washington Hospital to provide a permanent home for Kid’s Station on campus of similar square footage, similar green space, and facilities with a similar lease rate. There are 3 pillars supporting my position: 1. The hospital had the foresight 3 decades ago to identify that childcare was essential for the community and its employees and erected Kid’s Station. Since then the need for care has only grown greater. a. The city has seen a high rate of population growth since Kid’s Station’s inception. The city will explode to more than 40,00 in population with fewer childcare slots now available. b. The number of Mary Washington Hospital employees who rely on care provided by Kid Station for their jobs has grown since Kid’s Station was created. c. Other area institutions that rely on care like the University of Mary Washington have grown and those staff need care for their families. d. When it was announced Kinder Care was closing families scrambled to find alternative care and found a shortage in the region with waitlists, some longer than 1-year. Without care, many in our community will drop out of the workforce to care for their children. e. Hospital systems across the country are doubling down on childcare with significant investment, as a means to retain and grow a quality workforce and support the host communities where they operate. This is done either  as a public/private project with a national childcare provider like Kindercare/Brighthorizons, etc., or in-house. There are significant tax benefits at the federal level to encourage this. Hospital admin journals publish on the need for childcare as part of master planning all the time. Why would MWHC abandon childcare when there’s overwhelming evidence that more childcare is the current best practice? 2. The proposed land use is inferior to its current state and is of less benefit to the community. a. The zone change under the code of VA Article 7 15.2-2284 would require reasonable consideration for the existing use and character of the property and trends and current requirements of the community. The current use is a daycare center that benefits hundreds of families. There’s a trended shortage of daycare. The proposed is a lesser use. b. It’s hard to argue that a parking lot, training space, and offices for corporate services will provide a more meaningful impact on the community than a daycare center that directly serves members of the community. c. The Mary Washington Hospital campus is large. Is there no other plat that could be developed for their non-essential expansion? 3. There’s precedent for communities to hold development projects to a higher standard and offset any negative externalities that they create. a. Mary Washington Hospital presumably is not subject to local Real Estate Taxes. In FY23 the 503(c) organization would see a tax benefit in excess of $1 million. The GAO published a report last April that found that non- profit status hospitals are falling down on their community benefit requirements. On a quantifiable basis, MWHC isn’t likely giving back to the community at the rate that it should be. Now they want to take more and offer less. b. When a new development proposes a project that would put stress on community services like sewer, traffic, and law enforcement it’s common practice to require developers to pay for those infrastructure upgrades. Why not require Mary Washington Healthcare to provide a suitable space for the displaced childcare center as a pre-requisite for zoning approval? c. The current phased approach Mary Washington Hospital proposes is troublesome. It’s a phased push-out of the daycare. It does not address community concerns of the displaced childcare seats. If MWHC is committed they would submit planning documents detailing a new child  care space as part of the proposed build-out. Just because “child care center” is listed as used on the zoning application doesn’t mean MWHC has an intention of doing that. That’s not a sufficient response on MWHC’s part to the community concern. d. Do we really think it’s wise to have an active construction project while a childcare facility operates just feet away? If it doesn’t conform to safety standards will the project be forced to pause or will the daycare be forced to close early? I don’t have faith in Kindercare or Mary Washington Hospital to do the right thing if left to their own accord. The recent closing announcements showed us a PR ping-pong match of blame vs real concern for the community at large. Public support for Mary Washington Hospital’s proposed project is low. Support for Kid’s Station is high (more than 1500 individuals signed a petition to keep it open). I do have faith though that this planning committee and the city council will do the right thing for the community and deny the zoning change as it stands now unless provisions are included that require MWHC to build out comparable space for child care services to replace what is lost. With those provisions, I would support the project as it would result in a net benefit to the community. Sincerely, Joe Snigier Nathan and Meredith Veldhuis, 728 Lee Avenue, Fredericksburg, Va. 22401 Subject:[EXTERNAL] Stop proposed construction at Kids' Station--TO BE READ AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING (04/24/24) Dear Planning Commission: Please don't approve MWHC's plan to begin construction at the Kids' Station site while Kids' Station is still operating in its current space. The children need a safe space conducive to learning, resting, and playing in order to learn, thrive and for their emotional and physical health. The children’s being forced to occupy a space essentially within construction site presents many concerns that this commission should consider and also with which to be concerned. Simple examples include the children’s ability to play outside, the children’s ability to nap at the appropriate times without having to deal with the inherent noise that comes with the proposed construction, the children’s opportunity to learn--uninterrupted--in a safe and secure space they have long called their own. This council and commission serve the city of Fredericksburg and its constituents, and it is their duty to them to act in their best interests. The proposed plan begins construction on the property while the childcare center is still operational. Environmental safety concerns are obvious and of paramount importance. Under the current proposal, Children will have to be subjected to breathing all manner of debris and dust that the construction will churn into the air right outside their doors. The loud construction noise is not good for their learning, their necessary rest time during the day, or their sense of security. Importantly, it must not be ignored that there will be inherently increased risks of safety and security with the rotating door of construction workers that would be on the property with zero mention or consideration of increased security protocols to ensure our children's safety. Further concerns include questions like where are they going to be parking? Children require outdoor space to play and learn. That is simply fact. Children are not machines. Removing their outside playgrounds and play spaces, forcing them to remain indoors 5 days a week, 8+ hours at a time is unconscionable. A far better option for all involved is for MWHC to construct its desired clinical space on some of the other undeveloped land on the campus--there is plenty to choose from where these immediate and significant concerns do not exist. Children are our greatest assets, and this proposal ignores that basic tenet. If the city is intent on allowing MWHC proceed in kicking Kids' Station out of its current space, we urge you to not allow plans to move forward until a new center that is equally or better equipped to serve our community's families (including MWHC staff who rely on the center so they can work) and similarly situated in proximity to the hospital is not only explicitly planned but is fully functional and operational. MWHC provides critical services to this community, in return makes money from this community, and with that comes a responsibility to be a good corporate citizen. The city council and planning commission, as public servants, must consider how this proposed plan impacts ALL constituents, including the families and children of Kids' Station who have long occupied the space and whose needs must be given paramount priority when considering MWHC's plans. Do not permit MWHC to proceed as it has planned. Require it to find alternative routes to work towards their desired goals that will not have such a damaging impact on the children of Kids' Station and the families who have heavily relied upon its unparalleled services for so very long. Please confirm receipt of this email and confirm that it will be read at tonight’s Planning Commission meeting. Sincerely, Nathan and Meredith Veldhuis Nathan J. D. Veldhuis Senior Litigation Attorney Whitcomb I Selinsky, P.C. 910 Little Page Street, Suite A Fredericksburg, Virginia 22401 T: (804) 773-4699 F: (804) 877-1798 nathanv@whitcomblawpc.com https://www.whitcomblawpc.com/ Public Comments for the Planning Commission Supplementary Meeting of April 24, 2024 Submitted by Paul Fallon, 1813 Genther Lane, Fredericksburg VA 22401. Good evening, Chairman Durham and Planning Commissioners. I have had two children attend Kids’ Station or Kindercare over nearly a decade. The younger child will graduate from Kindercare next month, and looks forward to soon attending Kindergarten at Hugh Mercer, so my family personally will face no childcare crisis. But I write out of concern for other families, both current and future, as well as for the teachers and staff at Kids’ Station. As the April 19 Memorandum by Kelly Machen and Mike Craig states, in 1993 the General Development Plan included a building in the plans designated as a daycare. I am upset by the removal of the daycare from the GDP. Machen and Craig wrote that a daycare “has been added as a use to the proffers, which allows for it to move into any of the buildings in the rezoning area, even if it is not shown on the GDP.” But a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. There is not a guarantee of a daycare even if one is proffered. Furthermore, Kindercare has been looking for a suitable alternative in the area, including the hospital campus and in the Fredericksburg area, and did not find a viable one. The idea that a daycare could just move into “any of the buildings” is ludicrous because there are state requirements must be met. It is further upsetting that Section 8 of their memo states that Phase 1 will begin this August with removal of “approximately half of the playground” while Kids’ Station remains open. Yes, kids can play on half a playground while construction equipment passes by. They can learn social skills and have story time with the backup beeps and diesel fuel of heavy equipment just out the window. In Phase 2, the remainder of the northern playground will be taken away from Sept. 1, 2025 to Dec. 1, 2025, when Kids’ Station may continue to operate with construction encroaching like high tide. But in Phase 3, which also starts Sept. 1, 2025, the daycare will be demolished. Kelly Machen’s Technical Review Comments to Summer Hughes dated March 19, 2024 note that “Child Care Center uses are in high demand in the City and are extremely valuable where workforce is concentrated.” And yet, the City, hospital staff, and the community will lose a much needed and high-quality child care center if the Planning Commission approves this. Listing child care only as one possible use is far weaker than the proffer of 1993, when there were 10,000 fewer residents in the City alone. I urge the Planning Commission to put the brakes on Zoning Amendment RZ FY24-0005 and the associated GDP and timetable until there is a firm childcare alternative in the hospital area. The proposal is a huge step backwards in terms of the Community Benefit Strategy of Mary Washington Healthcare. MWHC still has undeveloped areas on its campus, and has no problem opening many facilities around the region to serve the community. This plan, however, fails to argue for the necessity of a two-story medical clinic to replace Kids’ Station, rather than be located elsewhere or integrated into the footprint of the 3-story office/training/conference center. Thomas Moran 810 Wolfe St Fredericksburg 22401 Good Afternoon Chairman Durham and Planning Commissioners. My wife Sarah and I have two young children who attend Kids’ Station or Kindercare over the last 4 years. We are writing out of concern for both our family as well as other families, both current and future, as well as for the teachers and staff at Kids’ Station. We have submitted detailed summaries of how this impacts the wider community (including children with disabilities like our daughter and would gladly provide that as written correspondence again. As of the April 19 Memorandum by Kelly Machen and Mike Craig states, in 1993 the General Development Plan included a building in the plans designated as a daycare. I am upset by the removal of the daycare from the GDP. Machen and Craig wrote that a daycare “has been added as a use to the proffers, which allows for it to move into any of the buildings in the rezoning area, even if it is not shown on the GDP.” But a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. There is not a guarantee of a daycare even if one is proffered. Furthermore, Kindercare has been looking for a suitable alternative in the area, including the hospital campus and in the Fredericksburg area, and did not find a viable one. The idea that a daycare could just move into “any of the buildings” is ludicrous because there are state requirements that must be met.It is further upsetting that Section 8 of their memo states that Phase 1 will begin this August with removal of “approximately half of the playground” while Kids’ Station remains open. Yes, kids can play on half a playground while construction equipment passes by. They can learn social skills and have story time with the backup beeps and diesel fuel of heavy equipment just out the window. In Phase 2, the remainder of the northern playground will be taken away from Sept. 1, 2025 to Dec. 1, 2025, when Kids’ Station may continue to operate with construction encroaching like high tide. But in Phase 3, which also starts Sept. 1, 2025, the daycare will be demolished.Kelly Machen’s Technical Review Comments to Summer Hughes dated March 19, 2024 note that “Child Care Center uses are in high demand in the City and are extremely valuable where workforce is concentrated.” And yet, the City, hospital staff, and the community will lose a much needed and high-quality child care center if the Planning Commission approves this. Listing child care only as one possible use is far weaker than the proffer of 1993, when there were 10,000 fewer residents in the City alone. It's hard to understand why resident's wishes and concerns aren't being more transparently recognized and consideredWe urge the Planning Commission to put the brakes on Zoning Amendment RZ FY24-0005 and the associated GDP and timetable until there is a firm childcare alternative established in the hospital area. The proposal is a huge step backwards in terms of the Community Benefit Strategy of Mary Washington Healthcare. MWHC still has undeveloped areas on its campus, and has no problem opening many facilities around the region to serve the community. This plan, however, fails to argue for the necessity of a two-story medical clinic to replace Kids’ Station, rather than be located elsewhere or integrated into the footprint of the 3-story office/training/conference center.Thank you for your consideration. Thomas and Sarah Moran Good Afternoon Chairman Durham and Planning Commissioners. My wife Sarah and I have two young children who attend Kids’ Station or Kindercare over the last 4 years. We are writing out of concern for both our family as well as other families, both current and future, as well as for the teachers and staff at Kids’ Station. We have submitted detailed summaries of how this impacts the wider community (including children with disabilities like our daughter and would gladly provide that as written correspondence again. As of the April 19 Memorandum by Kelly Machen and Mike Craig states, in 1993 the General Development Plan included a building in the plans designated as a daycare. I am upset by the removal of the daycare from the GDP. Machen and Craig wrote that a daycare “has been added as a use to the proffers, which allows for it to move into any of the buildings in the rezoning area, even if it is not shown on the GDP.” But a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. There is not a guarantee of a daycare even if one is proffered. Furthermore, Kindercare has been looking for a suitable alternative in the area, including the hospital campus and in the Fredericksburg area, and did not find a viable one. The idea that a daycare could just move into “any of the buildings” is ludicrous because there are state requirements that must be met.It is further upsetting that Section 8 of their memo states that Phase 1 will begin this August with removal of “approximately half of the playground” while Kids’ Station remains open. Yes, kids can play on half a playground while construction equipment passes by. They can learn social skills and have story time with the backup beeps and diesel fuel of heavy equipment just out the window. In Phase 2, the remainder of the northern playground will be taken away from Sept. 1, 2025 to Dec. 1, 2025, when Kids’ Station may continue to operate with construction encroaching like high tide. But in Phase 3, which also starts Sept. 1, 2025, the daycare will be demolished. Kelly Machen’s Technical Review Comments to Summer Hughes dated March 19, 2024 note that “Child Care Center uses are in high demand in the City and are extremely valuable where workforce is concentrated.” And yet, the City, hospital staff, and the community will lose a much needed and high-quality child care center if the Planning Commission approves this. Listing child care only as one possible use is far weaker than the proffer of 1993, when there were 10,000 fewer residents in the City alone. It's hard to understand why resident's wishes and concerns aren't being more transparently recognized and considered We urge the Planning Commission to put the brakes on Zoning Amendment RZ FY24-0005 and the associated GDP and timetable until there is a firm childcare alternative established in the hospital area. The proposal is a huge step backwards in terms of the Community. Benefit Strategy of Mary Washington Healthcare. MWHC still has undeveloped areas on its campus, and has no problem opening many facilities around the region to serve the community. This plan, however, fails to argue for the necessity of a two-story medical clinic to replace Kids’ Station, rather than be located elsewhere or integrated into the footprint of the 3-story office/training/conference center. Thank you for your consideration. Thomas and Sarah Moran Mary Washington Hospital Rezoning Planning Commission April 24, 2024 Issue • Should the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of the rezoning to amend the Mary Washington Hospital PD-Medical Center Proffers and General Development Plan as proposed? • Staff recommends approval, with a recommendation that the Dovetail recommendations regarding the smokehouse be addressed prior to the City Council public hearing. • A formal structural assessment of the Smokehouse be conducted by a professional to ensure that it is in fact too unstable to endure proposed construction efforts on the site. If it is too unstable and demolition and reconstruction is warranted, intensive-level documentation of the interior and exterior, such as HABS, is recommended prior to demolition. Background • Rezoned from R-4/R-8/C-T to PD-MC in 1991 and amended 1993 to add parking, loop road, and stormwater • Current request focused on ~16 acre portion • Would amend the GDP and proffers to permit: • 6,000 sqft addition to the Snowden House at 2600 Mary Washington Boulevard (event space/residence) • 2-story medical clinic (24,500 sqft) at 1100 Sam Perry Boulevard, replacing the Kids’ Station KinderCare • 3-story office/training/conference center between the Snowden house and the proposed medical clinic • 54% office/33% training/13% conference • Relocate offices from Fall Hill Existing GDP Proposed GDP General Development Plan Existing Conditions General Development Plan Proposed Conditions Comprehensive Plan • Described uses: medical center campus includes closely related medical offices, diagnostic laboratories, pharmaceutical centers, special patient care units, and associated housing units • Area 4 Opportunity: Support the continued development of the MWH Medicorp/Mary Washington Hospital medical campus and surrounding supportive services Unified Development Ordinance • Generally meets PD-MC District requirements • Exception for parking setback from public road to match current conditions • Sam Perry was built as private road (10 foot setback/landscaping) • Public road setback is 30 feet • Parking requirements met • 227 spaces proposed on-site • 203 spaces required (218 if +15) • 15 additional required if the Snowden House addition is calculated as assembly, separate from residential use (2 spaces vs 17 spaces required) Proffers • Proffers substantial conformance to new GDP • Proffers uses: Child-Care Center; Single-Family Detached Dwelling (Snowden House); Hospital; Medical Laboratory; Medical Treatment Facility; Pharmacy; Offices; Heliport; Assembly Hall; Parking Garage • Child-Care included as a permitted use, but not shown on GDP allows use within any existing building • Snowden House proffers remain, adds use description as residence with event space for Mary Washington Healthcare • Removes road proffers that have been completed Historic Resources • Snowden House and dependencies are important historical features • Potentially eligible for the National Register of Historic Places as an example of the Colonial Revival style for its 1926 reconstruction • Dovetail study performed: • No further archeological study is recommended • Snowden House alterations generally meets secretary of the interior standards for rehabilitation • Recommends formal structural assessment of smokehouse to verify it’s too unstable to survive construction and intensive documentation prior to demolition Public Facilities & Fire Safety • No identified concerns with water/sewer • Existing pump station along Mary Washington Boulevard for hospital • Additional fire hydrants proposed and the site must meet all fire code requirements • Auto-turn shows site access Transportation 11 Intersections analyzed Transportation • 1,020 VPD Existing • 1,730 VPD Proposed • VPD reduced ½ for pedestrian trips for office/training uses (419 VPD) • GDP Sidewalk plan shows crosswalks (6 existing and 2 proposed) and internal sidewalk connections between buildings/parking areas Transportation • Stop signs proposed at entrances • Additional signs proposed at Mary Washington Blvd entrance due to reduced throat length/reduce potential conflicts • Turn lane warrant for same entrance showed need for a taper, but existing turn lane sufficient Transportation • Existing/Proposed capacity at intersection has overall LOS ranging from A to D • Some changes anticipated at individual movements, but no overall change • Project’s contribution to traffic at the intersections is less than 3% of total traffic • All outstanding technical questions have been answered at this time Environmental Phasing Sept 2025-Dec 2025 Aug 2024-Dec 2025 1 2 3 Sept 2025-Sept 2026 Kids station to remain through Phase 2 Conclusion & Staff Recommendation • Recommend approval of the rezoning, with a recommendation that the applicant address the Dovetail recommendations for the smokehouse in the proffers prior to the City Council public hearing. • A formal structural assessment of the Smokehouse be conducted by a professional to ensure that it is in fact too unstable to endure proposed construction efforts on the site. If it is too unstable and demolition and reconstruction is warranted, intensive-level documentation of the interior and exterior, such as HABS, is recommended prior to demolition. Questions? Planning Commission April 24, 2024