Planning Commission

PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 23, 2024 6:30 PM Regular 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, Chair (remote) Mike Craig, Director Community Planning & Building Susanna Finn, Vice-Chair Kelly Machen, Zoning Administrator Mary Margaret-Marshall, Secretary (absent) Bailey Thompson, Community Development Planner Dugan Caswell (remote) Kate Schwartz, Senior Historic Resources Planner Kenneth Gantt Tanagra Cafferky, Administrative Assistant Adam Lynch Carey Whitehead 1. CALL TO ORDER [00:02:14] Vice Chair Finn 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 [00:05:15] There were four members present in chambers and two members, David Durham and Dugan Caswell, attending remotely for a total of six members in attendance at the meeting at the call to order. Ms. Finn declared that a quorum exists. 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA [00:10:20] Ms. Whitehead motioned to hold item 8 before item 5. Mr. Lynch made a friendly amendment to move item 5 after item 8. The amendment was accepted and seconded by Mr. Lynch. Motion passed 6-0. 6. DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST OR DISCLOSURES OF CONTACT [00:11:41] Mr. Lynch stated that Fifteen Minute Fredericksburg, which is an organization of which he is a volunteer, has submitted a letter supporting the Jeremiah Community and that he is participating in the public hearing process transaction based on his ability to do so fairly objectively and in the public’s best interest. 6. OLD BUSINESS None. 7. PUBLIC HEARING [00:06:40] 1. Jeremiah Community & Virginia Supportive Housing Project. Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Special Use Permit, and Vacation of right-of-way request associated with an institutional housing project. • Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Amendments to Chapters 10 and 11 of the City’s Comprehensive Plan propose to adjust the boundary of the T-1 Preserved Open Space Transect Zone by changing a portion of T-1 to T-3 Sub-urban Transect Zone, and to permit the vacation of the Roffman Road / Bakersfield Lane rights-of-way for institutional housing. CP2024-0005 • Zoning Map Amendment (Rezoning). A 25.92-acre rezoning from R-2 Residential to Planned Development-Residential (PD-R). ZMA FY24-0006 • Special Use Permit (SUP). A SUP for institutional housing containing 109 single/two-unit designs to be managed by Micah Ecumenical Ministries and 80 units within a multi-unit building design to be managed by Virginia Supportive Housing. SUP FY24-02. • Vacation of Right-of-Way. A vacation of a 1.289-acre portion of the undeveloped right- of-way connecting Roffman Road and Bakersfield Lane, located between GPIN 7860-90- 3994, Central Park Townhomes, and Park Commons Townhomes. VAC2405-0002. Ms. Machen presented the revised application for Jeremiah Community. The application now included a Comprehensive Plan Amendment related to the location of T-1 preservation transects and the designation of Roffman Road / Bakersfield Lane rights-of-way. The presentation included the analysis regarding transect locations and the applicant’s exploration of potential right-of-way locations. The presentation also discussed updated proffers to include additional phasing, technical updates to the access pattern, site specific environmental features, a tree study, pedestrian facilities, trash locations, and the definition of homelessness. The staff recommendation is for the Planning Commission to recommend approval of the Comprehesnive Plan Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment, and Special Use Permit to City Council and to find the Vacation of Right-of-Way in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan as proposed to be amended. Planning Commission discussion included the limited changes to the proposal, the exploration of including a public right-of-way, and the unique nature of institutional housing uses. Ms. Finn invited the applicant to come to the lectern to provide comments or information about the application. Meghann Cotter of Micah Ecumenical Ministries, Inc. (Micah), Julie Anderson from Support Works Housing, and Eric Fletcher from Mary Washington Healthcare provided information on the Jeremiah Community application. Information included the scope of supportive services, the needs of the homeless population, the continuation of existing services, the operation of the health center, adjustments to the plan to be more environmentally sensitive, and the economic benefits of housing. Ms. Finn asked the Dais if they had questions for the applicant. Discussion included the operation of Micah’s downtown location, vehicular access and parking, and the timing of supportive services. Ms. Finn opened the floor to the public for comments. Sam Shoukas, 125 Princess Anne Street, Fredericksburg Va 22401 spoke about the George Washington Regional Commission’s work on housing and homelessness, supportive services, and how to provide care for the homeless population. Jan Urquhart, Spotsylvania Va spoke about Micah Ministries and support of the Jeremiah Community. Anne Little, 726 William Street, Fredericksburg Va 22401 spoke about the number of units proposed, requirements for entry, and public support of the proposed project. Joel Griffin, 913 Caroline Street, Fredericksburg Va 22401 spoke in support of the Jeremiah Community. Frank and Maureen Widdick, 119 Caroline Street, Fredericksburg Va 22401 wrote in opposition to the Jeremiah Community project. Planning Commission discussion included the regional homeless population, transience and turnover at the proposed Jeremiah Community, affordable housing, and the level of planning for institutional housing. Ms. Finn closed the public hearing. Mr. Durham made a motion to recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Mr. Lynch seconded the motion. Discussion included the language regarding the Roffman Road connection. Ms. Whitehead made a friendly amendment that the Commission recommends approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment with the understanding that staff would make minor amendments consistent with the Commission’s dialogue at its October 23 meeting. The amendment was accepted. The motion passed 4-1 with Mr. Gantt voting no and Mr. Caswell being momentarily disconnected and unable to vote. Mr. Lynch made a motion to recommend approval of the zoning map amendment and special use permit. Ms. Whitehead seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-1 with Mr. Gantt voting no and Mr. Caswell being momentarily disconnected and unable to vote. Mr. Caswell made a motion to recommend approval of the vacation of right-of-way and a finding that it is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Whitehead seconded the motion. Discussion included the process on vacation, the role of conditional zoning, and the outcome of any potential change in the development plan. The motion passed 5-1 with Mr. Gantt voting no. 5. DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL POLICIES, ORDINANCES, OR APPLICATIONS [01:56:22] A. Election of Officers Mr. Durham nominated Susanna Finn as Chair and Mr. Caswell seconded. Ms. Finn was elected Chair 5-0 with Ms. Finn abstaining. Mr. Durham nominated Ms. Whitehead for Vice Chair and Ms. Finn seconded. Ms. Whitehead was elected Vice Char 5-0 with Ms. Whitehead abstaining Ms. Whitehead nominated Mr. Caswell as Secretary and Mr. Lynch seconded. Mr. Caswell was elected Secretary 5-0 with Mr. Caswell abstaining. B. Area 5 Small Area Plan Update (Attachments) Bailey Thompson, Community Development Planner, and Kate Schwartz, Senior Historic Resources Planner, presented the draft Area 5 Small Area Plan. The presentation included the an overview of the planning process, review of several community meetings, types of Transects, neighborhood and historic resources issues, concepts like the Brain Power District and the Village Transition Area, Historic Resources and the Architectural Review Board’s review of the plan, and various walkability upgrades including linking Area 7 and Area 5 through the Upland Open Space. Planning Commission discussion included the identification and designation of historic resources, the University’s inclusion in the planning process, transportation planning and funding, appropriate land use on College Avenue, neighborhood serving uses in Eagle Village, utility capacity, east-west mobility connections, and the future of US Route 1. 9. OTHER BUSINESS None. 10. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT [02:51:05] (Attachments) Ms. Finn opened the floor to the public for comments. Sue Sargent, 1318 William Street, Fredericksburg Va 22401 spoke about the Area 5 Small Area Plan including transportation improvements and neighborhood issues. Roy Perry, 1032 Conway Road, Stafford Va 22405 wrote about the treatment of Snowden Street in the City’s on-going SmartScale project along US Route 1. Brent Tuchler, Brent Street, Fredericksburg Va 22401 wrote about the Area 5 Small Area Plan including noise from traffic and neighborhood issues. Planning Commission discussion included the City’s SmartScale project along US Route 1 and the public meeting held on September 25. Ms. Finn closed the floor to public comments. 11. ADOPTION OF MINUTES [03:03:25] A. March 27, 2024 Supplementary Minutes B. March 29, 2024 CIP Committee Minutes Ms. Finn asked if any commissioner had comments that would preclude the minutes being adopted. None responded. Ms. Finn declared the minutes adopted. 12. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS [03:04:31] A. Chairman Comments It was noted that the Small Area 8 Community Meeting would be held November 9 between 10 and noon at the Mayfield Civic Association Building. B. Commissioner Comments Ms. Whitehead discussed a potential site visit to a data center. Mr. Craig gave a brief overview of the Status of Land Use Annual Report and CIP Committee work in anticipation of an upcoming joint worksession with the City Council. Discussion included the area plan process and the general Comprehensive Plan update, transportation funding, economic development, and improvements in the public right-of-way. Mr. Caswell gave an update on street art within the public right-of-way. 13. PLANNING DIRECTOR COMMENTS [03:06:54] Mr. Craig discussed the on-going shift of Planning Commission appointments from October to January to coincide with the change in City Council elections, the on-going efforts to rename Forrest Avenue, the upcoming review of the Railroad Station Overlay District, and the regional housing conference. Ms. Finn thanked Mr. Gantt for his two terms with the Planning Commission. Mr. Gantt said it was a privilege to serve and thanked the Commissioners, Staff, and the citizens for their participation in the process. Jeremiah Community & Virginia Supportive Housing Project Rezoning Special Use Permit Vacation of right-of-way Comprehensive Plan Amendment Planning Commission October 23, 2024 Location Applicants: Micah Ecumenical Ministries Virginia Supportive Housing R-2 to PD-R Mary Washington Healthcare  Issue • Shall the Planning Commission recommend to City Council approval the Jeremiah Community proposal, which includes: • Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) to permit the vacation of right-of-way for institutional housing and to modify the T-1/T-3 Transect Boundary • Rezoning of 25.92 acres from the R-2 Residential District to Planned Development-Residential (PD- R) • Special Use Permit (SUP) for institutional housing (189 units) • 109 units with single-unit and two-unit design • 80 units within a multi-unit building design • Vacation of existing right-of-way of 1.289-acres unbuilt portions of Roffman Road and Bakersfield Lane, and determine if the right-of-way vacation is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan (in accordance with Virginia Code §15.2-2232) Project Updates • Applicant explored feasibility of shifting existing ROW, but is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment based on project needs • Due to uncertainty of future construction needs, Public Works needs 15 feet of buffering on both sides of the ROW • Location of Virginia Supportive Housing in T-1 Transect also in consideration • Revised phasing and proffers • Addressed technical comments Current Comprehensive Plan Area 2 Small Area Plan Proposed Comprehensive Plan Area 2 Amendment • Add Text in Area 2 Plan under T-3 Transect and Wicklow/Roffman Connection descriptions that permits the vacation of the vacant Roffman Road / Bakersfield right-of-way for an institutional housing proposal with limited vehicular traffic (no map changes) • New market focused development behind the Central Park townhomes should complete the existing right-of-way linking Roffman Road and Wicklow Drive. Consideration can be given to alternative access patterns including the vacation of the vacant portion of the Roffman Road / Bakersfield right-of-way for institutional housing proposals that will have limited vehicular traffic. This will create a further connected community. Proposed Comprehensive Plan Area 2 Amendment • Applicant request modifications because: • The proposed project is consistent with the purpose/intent of the July 2022 Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the Applicants • The amendment would permit the construction of housing units necessary to address homelessness in the community • The amendment would allow for the convenient placement of supportive services • A substantial number of the residents will not likely own vehicles and the project design is for a pedestrian friendly, walkable environment • All roads will be accessible to city fire and rescue • The applicant will construct improvements to the remaining sections of Roffman Road • All other possible avenues have been exhausted to address the Roffman Road ROW and they have been determined to not be feasible from a development or zoning perspective Proposed Comprehensive Plan Area 2 Amendment Transects • Shift T-1/T-3 boundary to include the proposed Virginia Supportive Housing Building into the T-3 Transect • T-1 boundary is not based on site specific data • T-1 intended to preserve steep slope, wetlands, streams, resource protection areas, and tree canopy connecting these features Proposed Comprehensive Plan Area 2 Amendment • Applicant provided site specific steep slopes analysis to support CPA request: • Majority of the project is on slopes flatter than 25%, with 6.78 acres of steep slopes in the 25.92 acre rezoning area • Proposed building is outside of RPA, stream buffer, & wetlands • 50’ buffer is proposed around the northern wetland area Proffers • Phasing modified from 4 to 2 phases • Phase 1 (north side): Added timing for Community Center and Support Services • No residential occupancy until Community Center is on the property and prepared to make supportive services available to residents • Temporary community center (may be within temporary structure for the 1st 40 units). • Phase 2 (south side): Added/clarified timing of improvements • Roffman Road improvements required prior to any occupancy in Phase 2 • Internal road connection between Phase 1 & 2 required prior to any occupancy in Phase 2 • Kept ability for non sequential phasing, upon request, to allow for the Virginia Supportive Housing building to be constructed prior to Phase 1 • Improvements still required prior to occupancy • Some potential ambiguity in the statement that the community center will be “prepared to make supportive services available to project residents” prior to resident occupancy. Proffers • Added approximate size of community buildings & medical office in proffers to reflect what’s shown on GDP • Listed uses to be within the community center • uses listed previously without delineation between community buildings • Proffered definitions for homeless, low-income persons, and persons at risk of homelessness • Proffered Exhibit C – detailed list of support services to be made available on site or in partnership with community organizations • Proffered at least 25% open space Response to Technical Comments • Internal access addressed (20’ roads proposed): • Fire Marshal approval required for final road design • Roads to be all weather, required weight rating, and level design • Road to be privately maintained • Internal sidewalk connections made • Open space delineated/updated to show 8.72 acres of open space with 3.52 formal open space [6.48/3.25 required] • Additional refuse location shown • Lot dimensions updated: 3 proposed, all with frontage [4 proposed previously] • Modified GDP details on parking, building height, labeling, boundary information, & use term for consistency/clarification Conclusion • There are 4 major requests under consideration: CPA, ZMA, SUP, & VAC • Additional modifications to City standards requested are for the private roads internal to the project that would not meet typical curb/gutter/on-street parking standards and a modified approach to the arrangement of adjacent sidewalks Staff recommendation: • The Planning Commission should recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, the Zoning Map Amendment, and Special Use Permit to the City Council, subject to City Council’s acceptance of the proposed proffers and phasing plan • The Planning Commission should determine that the proposed VAC is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan subject to City Council’s approval of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and recommend that the City Council should approve the VAC subject to City Council’s approval of the proposed CPA Questions? Planning Commission October 23, 2024  EXISTING SUPPORT SYSTEM Spiritual Care Basic Needs Street Church Mail Gifts development Identification Accompanying people through life Community Meals/SNAP/Pantry celebrations and losses Phone Hygiene: laundry/shower/clothing Shelter: Cold Weather and Hesed House Community Resources Department of Social Services Income Development Department of Motor Vehicles Mainstream employment assistance Germanna Nursing Students Disability and veteran’s benefit assistance Fredericksburg Christian Health Educational Pursuits Rappahannock Community Services Board Customized Employment Resilience Counseling Rappahannock Community Services Board Probation and Parole Legal Support/Legal Aid Volunteer Liasons for problem solving Housing Health Care Housing Location Medical Respite Care Furniture assistance Health Navigation and Screenings In -home professional support for more than 160 people Community-based partnerships with housed in their own apartments throughout the region medical and mental health providers  A NEW RESPONSE TO HOMELESSNESS NOW JEREMIAH COMMUNITY Case managers spend bulk of their time Case managers spend bulk of their time traveling from house to house supporting people Housing market lacks units for the Added availability of units that cater to the volume and unique needs of the chronic unique needs of the chronic homeless homeless Consolidation of support services in proximity Neighbors become isolated and struggle to the place people live for loss of community Expansion of organic support, including others who have shared homeless experience, church/community members who choose to be in relationship  PROPOSED JEREMIAH SUPPORT SYSTEM Spiritual Care Basic Needs/Community Resources Street Church ON SITE Department of Social Services Gifts development Department of Motor Vehicles Accompanying people through life Germanna Nursing Students celebrations and losses Fredericksburg Christian Health Empowering leaders Rappahannock Community Services Board Nurturing Community Resilience Counseling Rappahannock Community Services Board Probation and Parole Volunteer Liasons for problem solving Meal/Pantry Partners Income Development Legal Support/Legal Aid Connection to community resources ON SITE Mainstream employment assistance Disability and veteran’s benefit assistance Educational Pursuits Health Care Customized Employment Health Navigation and Screenings Jobs created ON SITE ON SITE medical and mental health providers Maker’s Space Medication Management Opportunities for other purpose/skill development activity In-home care for activities of daily living and skill building Housing Housing ON SITE Property Management Housing Location/Placement 24-hour monitoring Furniture assistance Neighborhood watch ON SITE AND In-home professional Regular inspections support for people housed in Jeremiah Community CRISIS CARE STABILIZATION CARE Case Management Street Outreach Community-based Survival Assistance medical/mental health Winter Shelter In-home Care Community Meals Property Care Connection to Resources Financial Assistance Respite Care Customized Employment Health Navigation Benefits Assistance Housing Location Street Church Move-in assistance Gifts/Skill Development Mainstream Employment Empowering Leaders Assistance Nurturing Community  BEING PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD Community Health Center Shared Projects Shared Resources Spaces A full service medical center Identification of community Bringing in community will be provided on site for needs and working together partners that can address Buildings and green spaces Jeremiah tenants and the to advocate, improve, and needs of Jeremiah tenants we create can be used to greater community collaborate on community and the existing support the needs of existing issues neighborhood neighborhood  PROGRESS REVIEW Site Selection Environmental Fire/Safety Evaluated 17 sites for development Reduced area of disturbance, Updated design to provide 20' wide potential, cost, proximity to shopping, protected key trees, buffered streams all-weather surface road with turn transportation, jobs and avoided existing stormwater around loop features Proffers Planning Commission Questions Comprehensive Plan Definitions of the target population, Fair Housing, bike parking, trail Attempted to relocate rather than vacate Roffman Road Improvements, detailed connections, traffic impact, memorial Right of Way, but ultimately could not description of supportive services, garden, capital impact achieve without a 90-foot thoroughfare; connection between phases, open Adjusts T-1 transect slightly to space and architectural features. accommodate apartment building  COMMUNITY BENEFIT Cost Savings Better Care for People WITHIN OUR REACH A COMMUNITY WHERE NO ONE HAS TO SLEEP OUTSIDE Economic Development Impact • Fewer unhoused people in downtown business district • Expanded affordable housing options • Workforce development for people with special needs and housing insecurity • Investing resources in previously divested corridor Please read these comments at the 10/23/2024 Planning Commission Public Hearing 10/23/2024 FROM: Frank and Maureen Widic 119 Caroline St Fredericksburg, VA 22401 TO: Planning Commission, Public Hearing PLANNING@FREDERICKSBURGVA.GOV SUBJECT: Comments on Jeremiah Community & Virginia Supportive Housing Project We do not support the Jeremiah Community & Virginia Supportive Housing Project comprehensive plan amendment, rezoning, special use permit and vacation of right-of-way request associated with this institutional housing project. It seems that this project requires too many “significant exceptions”, at its current proposed site. It’s like trying to fit a round peg in a square hole. Additionally, there is the human impact of this project. This housing project seeks to impose the placement of 189 institutional housing units in an already severely stressed housing area known as Bragg Hill. In effect, the project will place 189 homeless individuals into an area ill-suited for dealing with individuals suffering from drug or alcohol addictions and/or mental health issues. Current Bragg Hill housing area residents deal with a shortage of affordable housing, unemployment, underemployment and a shortfall of reliable work opportunities, the type that would provide consistent income to support rent payments, food and basic needs. The addition of these 189 housing units could be significantly detrimental to the stability of the lives of existing families, including over 1,000 young children living in this area. Although the Jeremiah Project, spearheaded by Micah Ecumenical Ministries, is a notable endeavor, the placement of this project for the city’s homeless on a thirty-two-acre parcel near Roffman Road and Bakersfield Lane is a disaster in the making. The moral issue we face is that of providing support to those in need. The citizens of Fredericksburg and surrounding communities must acknowledge that we have a moral obligation to assist the homeless by providing for their basic needs. This can best be accomplished by placing the housing project in an area of the city that is better suited to deal with the issues of creating a safe, healthy community for unhoused people, while limiting the impact of such housing on the neighborhood in which it is placed. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Frank and Maureen Widic Jeremiah Project Area 5 Small Area Plan Planning Commission October 23, 2024 Bailey Thompson – Community Development Planner II Feat. Kate Schwartz – Senior Historic Resources Planner  Summary • Identify Area 5 • Review Process • Transect Map and Land Use Focus Areas • Review Historic Resources Map • Review Mobility Maps • Review Uplands Open Space Expansion • Next Steps Where in the City are we?  Plan Timeline Project Kickoff P.C. Discussion Community Meeting #1 P.C. Discussion Community Meeting #2 June 7, 2023 September 13, 2023 September 20, 2023 November 8, 2023 November 16, 2023 P.C. Completes City Council Work P.C. Discussion P.C. Discussion Community Meeting #3 Comment Session Transmittal January 10, 2024 February 14, 2024 February 24, 2024 April 10, 2024 May 28, 2024 Architectural Review Architectural Review Area 5 Report Converted P.C. Concept Discussion P.C. Discussion Board Discussion Board Discussion to Small Area 5 Plan September 25, 2024 October 23, 2024 September 23, 2024 October 14, 2024  Transect Map T-4 Civic T-5C T-1 Preserved Open Space T-4 Civic T-3E Sub-Urban Edge T-3E T-3 Sub-Urban T-3 T-4 T-4 T-4 Civic T-4 General Urban T-3 T-5C Core Corridor Civic Civic T-3E T-4 T-1  Neighborhood Issues Neighborhood Conservation Districts: • Building Width Averaging • Building Scale • Minimum Façade Transparency • Required Façade Features • Context-Based Housing Arrangement • Review of Demolition Pattern Books and Design Guidelines Vacating Old Right-of-Way Stubs for Pedestrian Connections and Open Space Work with Civic Uses to Reduce Parking Demand and Increase Safety on Adjacent Streets  Village Transition Area Potential for Walkable Commercial, Entertainment, Dining, and Service Uses Character Structure Designation (more detail to come) Form Based Code: • Focus on Frontages • Shared Access and Rear Loaded Parking • Transitional Zones (Height steps, Mass, Buffer, Alley) Evaluate “Pre-Approved Plans” for Historic Housing Types Built within the Existing Lot Pattern  “Brain Power District” Unique Economic Development Opportunity at the Confluence of the City’s Two Major Institutional Partners (UMW and MWH) and the Power Substation Short-term Property Improvements to Encourage Façade and Landscaping Upgrades Form Based Code Approach to Major Redevelopment: • Re-establish Historic Block Pattern • Focus on Frontages and Building Orientation • Shared Access and Rear Loaded Parking • Focus on Formal Open Spaces Including the Repurpose of the Antiquated Service Road  Area 5’s Historic Foundation Older Neighborhoods with an Established Form and Pattern Older (Typically) Non-Residential Buildings that May Now be Considered Historic Eligible National Register District Centered on the University of Mary Washington  Character Structures Benefits of Character Structure Designation • Qualification for exemptions in the International Existing Buildings Code (IEBC) and Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) such as parking requirements and interior modifications. • Priority given to adaptive reuse where form-based code applies. Flexibility in site development standards. • Policy language and documentation of resources provides support for preservation in entitlement processes. Historic Context Guiding questions: • Is the building visible and/or accessible from Route 1? • Did the occupant or business represent a significant trend in postwar consumerism? • Did construction of the commercial property contribute greatly to early suburban expansion or influence overall development in Fredericksburg and the surrounding region? • Did the commercial property introduce new commercial types to this suburban location? • Does the commercial property demonstrate strong associations with social and demographic changes? • Is there a concentration of postwar commercial properties that collectively demonstrates a distinct and unified grouping of postwar commercial properties that is important within the local and regional context?  Historic Context Period of significance of 1946 (completion of the Route 1 Bypass) through 1974 (1973 oil embargo/general decline in new construction in vicinity). Identified structures are representative of mid- 20th-century commercial architecture. Mostly commercial structures, some residential included where they have been repurposed for commercial uses OR are separated from neighborhood environments. Area demonstrates shifting patterns of commercial development post WWII, Fredericksburg’s turn away from the historic downtown, and introduction of broad corporate commercial trends. Historic Context Colonial Revival Colonial Revival Minimal Traditional Commercial Commercial Industrial & International BUILDINGS NOT RECOMMENDED FOR INCLUSION  1962 Aerials NORTH SOUTH  1963 Aerials NORTH SOUTH  1971 Aerials NORTH SOUTH  1980 Aerials NORTH SOUTH  Vehicular Mobility College Avenue / US Route 1 / Eagle Village Drive Intersection Eagle Village Road Network Augustine Avenue Access / Crossing Route 3 E to US Route 1 N Ramp Rebuild (SmartScale Round 4) Beverly Drive Access Management Downtown Connector  Bike / Pedestrian Mobility and Safety Sidewalk Infill: • Westmont • Greenbrier • Olde William William Street Corridor: • Reinstitute On-Street Parking • Traffic Calming (1200 – 1300 Blocks) • Enhanced Pedestrian Corridor (to Downtown) Downtown Connector Beverly Drive Connector Neighborhood Traffic Calming: • Stafford Avenue • College Avenue • Keeneland Road • Hanover Street  Linking the Uplands Open Space Marye’s Heights to the Battleground Athletic Complex Connections UMW Performing Arts Center Rowe Street / Cornell Street Bicycle Boulevard (The Heslep Amphitheatre Connection) Olde William Street Pedestrian Connection Expanding Alum Spring Park and Connecting Via Downtown Connector and William Street Campus Walk  Next Steps • City Council Initiation – Nov 12th • Planning Commission Public Hearing – Dec 11th From: N. Tuchler To: Planning Subject: [EXTERNAL] Area 5 Date: Wednesday, October 23, 2024 1:31:00 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Brent Tuchler 10/23/2024 Dear Planning Commission Members, Thank you for your commitment to shaping our community’s future. I am writing to address several key points related to our neighborhood comprehensive plan that I believe are essential for enhancing our quality of life. First, I advocate for the installation of noise cameras at major thoroughfares to tackle the issue of modified vehicles revving excessively. Virginia’s noise threshold is set at 85 dB at 50 feet, and it’s vital that we enforce this standard to maintain a peaceful environment. I also support the re-work of the pedestrian wall on William Street, which will improve safety and accessibility for all residents. If park amenities are upgraded, I urge you to ensure that the bathrooms do not include auto-toilets or hand dryers, as these can be disturbing to children. I strongly oppose the construction of new apartment buildings or condos within established neighborhoods. We have ample opportunities to revitalize empty dormitories and crumbling shopping centers for additional residences. Furthermore, I call for traffic calming measures along Blue Gray Highway east of Route 1, including reduced speed limits and flashing signs, to enhance safety for all users. Lastly, I request the installation of “No Engine Braking” or “No Jake Brake” signs approaching the descent of Route 3 west of Route 1 to further reduce noise pollution. Thank you for considering these important measures to improve our community. I look forward to seeing positive changes that will benefit all residents. Sincerely, Brent Tuchler From: Roy Perry <royperry1955@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 11:16 AM Subject: [EXTERNAL] changes at Snowden Street West CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. In reference to: 1213-1215 Snowden Street closing. Thank you for your time ! I am in favor of some of the changes but not all. I clearly see that closing the left hand turning lane onto Snowden, northbound, is necessary. You are crossing southbound traffic onto route 1. However, closing the right turn lane onto Snowden going Southbound makes no sense at all. Your plans to close Snowden St. from Rt. One will all but destroy the 3 minority businesses who are there in operation. As stated, by one of your representatives, "people follow the path of least resistance." Your design will restrict the flow which could make these businesses lose customers and look toward other businesses to deal with. I appreciate the fact that there has been a turn-around included at the end of the street instead of the original design of all grass. -However, will the turn-around be large enough to accommodate a 56 foot tractor trailer (not Box truck) such as a UPS or even Fire truck, to make their deliveries and to be able to exit Snowden St? -Will there be customer parking access while trucks make deliveries especially since there is no parking in the turn-around? -Say a truck did park in the turn-around long enough to make a quick delivery, how would a parked car be able to get off Snowden? -What happens if a tractor trailer (once on Snowden) realizes he can't turn around and has to back out of Snowden onto Augustine Ave. to exit? Did you take this into consideration? This does not solve the non-existent Snowden St. problem, it creates unwarranted Snowden St. issues. There has never been an accident on Snowden St. on record (with all deliveries inncluded). How can you improve a 100% record? Also, I am concerned about what appears to be a 110 to 120 degree right hand turn from the new merger onto Augustine Ave. Will a 56 foot tractor trailer be able to make that turn? This will not only affect deliveries to Snowden Street but also to Giant Supermarket or any other store in Eagle Village Shopping Center for that matter. 1. I am asking that you consider extending the merging lane and utilize the Emancipation bypass so that it includes Snowden Street. This will allow for the natural flow of traffic going South to continue and the ability to take a right onto Snowden. Those who wish to turn right on Augustine will be able to at the end of the merger. This gives 2 sources of exit off of Rt. 1 so to not bottle up Augustine Ave. 2. As for the sidewalk, money can be saved by doing away with the dangerous sidewalk next to merging traffic going around the carwash and Augustine. The same goal can be accomplished by running the sidewalk from the College Ave light (as proposed) to the existing Snowden Street sidewalk 1/8th the distance that already runs to Augustine Ave. and the Shopping Center. A painted crosswalk can be painted on the street at the end of Snowden to cross the street to the other side. Thanks for your time and consideration Roy B. Perry 1032 Conway Road Fredericksburg, Va. 22405 Royperry1955@gmail.com