Planning Commission

PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 12, 2025 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 (Vacant), Chairman Mike Craig, Director Carey Whitehead, Vice-Chairman Josh Crump, Principal Planner Dugan Caswell , Secretary Kelly Machen, Zoning Administrator David Durham Kate Schwartz, Principal Planner – Historic Resources Mary-Margaret Marshall & Urban Design Jane McDonald Bailey Thompson, Community Development Planner Joseph Winterer Tanagra Cafferky, Administrative Assistant 1. CALL TO ORDER [00:00:01] Vice-Chairman Carey Whitehead 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 [00:03:18] There were six members in attendance at the meeting at the call to order. 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA [00:03:38] There were no changes to the agenda. Mr. Caswell moved to approve the agenda, Mr. Durham seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 5. DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL POLICIES, ORDINANCES, OR APPLICATIONS [00:04:09] A. Election of Officers Former Chairwoman, Susanna Finn now has a seat on City Council. The Planning Commission Chairman seat is now vacant. Ms. Whitehead asked the Dais for nominations for the Chairman position. Mr. Caswell nominated Mr. Durham; Mr. Winterer seconded. Ms. Marshall nominated Ms. Whitehead. Ms. Whitehead declined the nomination. Ms. Whitehead called for a vote to appoint David Durham as Chairman. The vote was 4 ayes – 1 nay – 1 abstention. Motion passed 4 – 1. B. Planning Commission Capital Improvement Plan Committee Mr. Craig gave a progress update of the CIP Committee which is comprised of Ms. Marshall, Ms. Finn, and Mr. Craig. Ms. Whitehead will replace Ms. Finn on the committee. The committee will meet with the Finance Director on April 9, 2025. C. Update on the Downtown Traffic Engineering Study [00:08:38] (Attachment) Mr. Craig gave an update of the Downtown Traffic Study. Discussion included traffic flows on the different portions of the street under study, the December 18, 2024 community meeting, and survey responses from that meeting. The update also included a recap of the January 30, 2025 Rising Sun Neighborhood meeting. Discussion included ancillary traffic counts, weekend traffic, one to two way conversions, and traffic safety. Additional traffic counts are being planned. The Pathways Committee met in January and February of this year. Highlights included support for curbside extensions for better pedestrian visibility and support for bike lanes as part of traffic calming measures. The next step in the process is to complete Concept Development and will include cost estimates of proposed traffic measures. Mr. Craig concluded his presentation. Ms. Whitehead opened the floor to the Dais for questions. Mr. Durham and Mr. Craig discussed timed loading zones, two-way conversions and other types of traffic calming measures such as round-abouts and bump-outs, and the cost of improvements. Discussion included an on-going project at the Charles and William Street intersection as it relates to street and sidewalk changes at that intersection. Ms. Whitehead discussed survey responses including the perspectives of residents and business owners. 6. DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST OR DISCLOSURES OF CONTACT [00:32:03] None 7. OLD BUSINESS None 8. PUBLIC HEARING [00:32:46] 1. Special Use Permit SUP2500-0009 – 400PA, LLC requests a Special Use Permit for a residential density of 36 units per acre. The applicant proposes to construct 5 townhouses, in addition to 3 existing units on the property. (Attachment) Kelly Machen presented. The presentation included the previous application on the property in 2023, the current Commercial Downtown District zoning requirements and infill development guidelines as outlined in the Comprehensive Plan, Fire Department requirements, developer improvements to the sidewalk & street, and frontage requirements. Ms. Machen then introduced Kate Schwartz to provide additional information about the applicant’s submission. Kate Schwartz, Principal Planner of Historic Resources and Urban Design, outlined the Architectural Review Board (ARB) process in the Historic District. The mass and scale of the project was approved by the ARB in July of 2023. Discussion included an appeal of that decision that was upheld by the City Council and is pending in the Circuit Court. Ms. Machen resumed reviewing considerations of the project as it relates to infrastructure elements of the city. Ms. Machen said that staff recommends approval with conditions. Approval with conditions of the SUP for a density of 36 units per acre: • The Property will be developed and maintained substantially in conformance with the Generalized Development Plan. • The applicant shall install an automatic sprinkler system in each newly constructed residential unit in accordance with the requirements of the City Fire Marshal or otherwise meet the requirements of the Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code. • All trash cans and recycling bins serving the five new dwellings must be screened from view of any public right of way or otherwise kept inside the residences at all times unless set out for pick-up in accordance with City Code. • Each existing mature tree shown on the applicant’s Generalized Development Plan that is removed or destroyed during construction, or that dies or is in decline (as determined by the City’s Arborist) within 7-10 years of the date construction begins on the five new dwellings, shall be replaced with a minimum of two new trees (following the city’s tree planting standards), planted in a suitable location (confirmed by the Development Administrator) on the Property. • A painted crosswalk shall be provided across Frederick Street along the southern intersection of Princess Anne Street and Frederick Street.  • The HOA shall require residents of the townhouse units to utilize garage parking spaces (City Attorney to review legality) Ms. Machen then concluded her presentation. Ms. Whitehead read into the record the email received by the Planning Commission prior to this public hearing from Kelly Lackey, Attorney for the City of Fredericksburg, in reference to the lawsuits related to this project. Ms. Whitehead opened the floor to the Dais for questions or comments. Ms. McDonald asked staff to review the value of the property noted in the prestation for a possible typo. Ms. Marshall and Mr. Craig discussed the City Attorney’s letter. Discussion included short-term rentals in the area and permitting for those uses. Mr. Durham discussed the pedestrian network in the area including crosswalk striping at a nearby intersection. Ms. Marshall and Ms. Machen discussed alleyway dimensions of the project. The applicant, Jimmy Whitman, approached the lectern to answer questions. Mr. Durham discussed the projected ownership status of the project. Ms. Marshall discussed the current application vs. the previous application. Discussion included required submission timelines and aspects of the plan intended to accommodate existing trees by moving the line of the building and by adding a permeable sidewalk. Ms. Whitehead, Mr. Whitman, and Ms. Machen discussed the project’s unit count and on- street parking. Ms. Whitehead opened the public hearing to the public for comment. Denise Malczewski, 220 Princess Anne Street, Fredericksburg, VA 22401 spoke in opposition to the application citing various completed projects in the area that have impacted the quality of life. Mo Deadman, 214 Princess Anne Street, Fredericksburg, VA 22401, spoke in opposition to the application citing loss of parking spaces and that the proposed townhouses do not meet the criteria of affordable housing. Adam Lynch, 1108 Sophia Street, Fredericksburg, VA 22401, spoke in favor of the application citing the benefit to the city by way of additional tax base and infrastructure improvements of the sidewalk and street made by the developer at no cost to the city. Sue Sargeant, 1318 William Street, Fredericksburg, VA 22401, spoke in opposition to the application. The recent removal of the Train Station Overlay District has now opened the area up to build taller buildings. The increase of development will only contribute more to the problems of blind spots and speeding in the area. Anne Little, 726 William Street, Fredericksburg, VA 22401, spoke about the aesthetic aspects of the project including building materials. Ms. Little also suggested that the tree monitoring be for an extended period of time. Hamilton Palmer, 401 Charles Street, Fredericksburg VA 22401 spoke about the potential damage to the roots of the shade trees between the two properties if the project moves forward. In order to help preserve tree canopies throughout the city, Mr. Palmer requested that no building be constructed within the root zone drip-line. Ms. Whitehead requested that the public comment letters be read into the record. Adam Fried, 425 William Street, Fredericksburg, VA 22401 wrote in favor of the application citing the need for housing near the train station and improvements to the sidewalk. Andrew Mercer, 2614 Caroline Street, Fredericksburg, VA 22401 wrote in opposition to the application citing the increase to population density and loss of the tree canopy. Brian McDermott, 1107 Princess Anne Street, Fredericksburg, VA 22401 wrote in favor of the application citing need for housing in the city, especially near the train station, for the commuting population and beautification of the area. Charles McDaniel, 133 Caroline Street, Fredericksburg, VA 22401 wrote in favor of the application citing the recent residential additions near the train station have improved the quality of life in the area. Fitzhugh Johnson, 512 Lafayette Boulevard, Fredericksburg, VA 22401 wrote in favor of the application citing planned residential urban density surrounding the train station. Paula Chow & Ed Sandtner, 132 Caroline Street, Fredericksburg, VA 22401 wrote in opposition to the application citing the City’s denial of the previous application and on-going legal dispute of the project. Robert Thomas, 809 Brompton Street, Fredericksburg, VA 22401 wrote in favor of the application citing that the city needs density in the downtown area. Sandra Howson, 817 Weedon Street, Fredericksburg, VA 22401 wrote in opposition to the application citing that the developer should follow the City’s existing rules. Stewart Engel, 303 ½ Caroline Street, Fredericksburg, VA 22401 wrote that the City needs to address the parking issue. Lissah Michalski, 316 Frederick Street, Fredericksburg, VA 22401 wrote in opposition to the application citing the personal impact of recent residential development on the block. Charles Bumbrey & Arleatha Copeland-Bumbrey, 315 Princess Anne Street, Fredericksburg, VA 22401 wrote in opposition to the application citing numerous traffic accidents, lack of residential parking, commuter use, and speeding all within the immediate area of the application site. Ms. Whitehead closed the public hearing to public comments and opened the floor to the Dais for questions. Mr. Winterer and Ms. Schwartz discussed vinyl siding. Vinyl siding goes against material standards in the Historic District. All material specifications would be part of the second public hearing process. Discussion included fire access, sprinkler suppression systems, and power lines. Mr. Durham discussed the SUP process. Discussion included the Comprehensive Plan and UDO requirements related to trash screening. Ryan Foroughi, Engineer of Record for Bagby, Foroughi, & Goodpasture, 262 New Hope Church Road, Stafford, VA 22405, representing the applicant discussed the trash receptacle location and treatment. Mr. Durham discussed garage parking, the existing three residential units on-site, and the location of crosswalks adjacent to the site. Ms. Marshall discussed existing parking regulations in the area, traffic and safety issues, affordable housing, the cost of housing around the train station area, and community outreach for the project. Ms. Whitehead discussed the existing residential use on-site and the calculation of height guidelines in the historic district. Discussion included railroad safety, parking requirements, trash removal, and fire access. Mr. Caswell motioned to recommend Special Use Permit SUP2500-0009 with conditions. Mr. Durham seconded the motion. Ms. Whitehead opened the floor to the Dais for discussion of conditions. Ms. McDonald requested including the crosswalk as a condition. Ms. Marshall stated that she does not approve of the application because it does not contribute to the affordable housing stock for the city. Mr. Caswell requested modifying the condition related to existing tree protection five years to ten years as well as a recommendation that the applicant will stripe a crosswalk across Frederick Street. Mr. Durham discussed affordable housing, regulations and the resulting size of residential units, and how to ensure residents park in their garages instead of using them for storage. Discussion included the location and screening of the trash receptacles. Mr. Winterer asked if the townhouse residents that have their own private parking spaces would be excluded from requesting parking permits for the area. Mr. Durham said that those residents could apply for parking permits. Ms. Marshall noted that that area has high parking demands and that there are commercial businesses in the area, so parking cannot be strictly residential. Ms. Whitehead asked staff if there is an update to the Parking Committee’s review of sight-line traffic improvements. Mr. Craig said the Parking Committee met on Monday and reviewed the City of Alexandria’s “daylighting” along with recommendations from our city’s ongoing Downtown Traffic Study. Ms. Marshall said there has been many recent residential developments in the immediate area and that the residents feel that City Council is not considering the on-going issues of safety, parking, and traffic when approving projects. Ms. Whitehead noted that the Planning Commission has to balance differing interests when advising the City Council. Ms. Whitehead summarized the additional conditions to the recommendation. • Additional crosswalk on Frederick Street • Seven to Ten Year Arborist Review • Technical modifications in the draft resolution and GDP to show the actual conditions for trash, fire apparatus, and density level as related to parking spaces. Mr. Caswell motioned to recommend approval of Special Use Permit SUP2500-0009 with conditions recommended by staff except as modified in the Planning Commission’s discussion. Mr. Durham seconded the motion. Ms. Whitehead polled the commission. Ms. McDonald voted Yes. Ms. Marshall voted No. Mr. Winterer voted Yes. Mr. Durham voted Yes. Mr. Caswell voted Yes. Ms. Whitehead voted Yes. Motion carries 5 – 1. 2. Area 5 University / Central U.S. Route 1 Small Area Plan [02:44:02] (Attachment) A. Comprehensive Plan Amendment – The City of Fredericksburg proposes to amend the City Comprehensive Plan to adopt the Area 5 University / Central U.S. Route 1 Small Area Plan. B. Zoning Map Amendment ZMA2410-0006 – The City of Fredericksburg proposes a Zoning Map Amendment to rezone approximately 13.2007 acres of land from Commercial Shopping Center to Commercial Highway and to apply form-based regulations to the parcels located west of Emancipation Highway, south of Eagle Village Drive, and north of Snowden Street, including: GPIN Address Acreage 7779-56-1112 1245-1293 Emancipation Hwy 11.7881 7779-56-4361 1201-1223 Emancipation Hwy 1.06 7779-56-4020 1209 Snowden St 0.2114 7779-55-3945 1215 Snowden St 0.1412 Bailey Thompson presented. Mr. Thompson reviewed the various aspects of Area Five, the timeline of the small area plan process and text changes to better communicate the plan for the area. Mr. Thompson noted the change in wording from “Brain Power District” to “Brain Power Area”. Mr. Thompson noted traffic improvements along Route One such as closing u-turns and adding service alleys. Mr. Thompson noted possible trail links to better facilitate pedestrian and bike usage. Staff recommend approval of an amendment to the 2025 Comprehensive Plan to adopt a new small area plan for Area Five and to recommend approval of amendments to the official Zoning Map. Ms. Whitehead opened the floor to the Dais for questions. Mr. Durham discussed the Parks & Rec Department access changes to Alum Springs Park and mobility issues along William Street between College Avenue and Washington Avenue, including an adjacent retaining wall on University Property. Ms. Whitehead thanked staff for their work. Ms. Whitehead opened the public hearing to the public for comment. Ron Perry, 1032 Conway Road, Fredericksburg, VA 22405, owns the businesses along the 1200 block of Snowden Street. Mr. Perry spoke about how VDOT’s redesign of Snowden Street would negatively impact his businesses, hinder access to the shopping center for large delivery trucks, and suggested alternatives to the proposed plans. Sue Sargent, 1318 William Street, Fredericksburg, VA 22401, is President of the College Heights Civic Association. Ms. Sargent thanked staff and consultants for the inclusion of the association in the Small Area Plan report process, including the recommendation to nominate the College Heights neighborhood to the National Register of Historic Places. Ms. Sargent also noted the Historic Fredericksburg Foundation Inc.’s (HFFI) help with identifying twenty-four character structures in the area. Daniel Perry, 909 Ficklen Road, Fredericksburg, VA 22405, spoke about retaining access to the back of the Snowden Street buildings. Ms. Whitehead asked if there were any written comments received. No written comments were received. Ms. Whitehead closed the public hearing and asked the Dais for comments and questions. Mr. Caswell discussed access along Snowden Street. The plan includes “a service alley to serve commercial buildings both internal to the site and those that front Snowden Steet.” Ms. Marshall and Mr. Craig discussed VDOT’s funding process including project identification, design, and project administration. Mr. Durham asked Staff about the Dominion power easement for delivery trucks behind the Eagle Village Shopping Center. Mr. Caswell discussed the intent of the By-Right R12 Commercial Highway zoning district areas in the Comprehensive Plan for re-development with mixed uses of retail and residential. Discussion included the current regulatory framework, the regulations impact on redevelopment and specifically how they relate to townhome development, formal open spaces, taller heights, larger floor area ratios, and units per acre. . Ms. Whitehead thanked Ms. Schwartz for her work on the language in the Neighborhood Conservation District for the compatibility of context appropriate infill development and emphasizing naturally occurring affordable housing. Ms. Whitehead asked the Dais if there was a motion on the floor for a vote. Mr. Durham motioned to adopt the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Area 5 University / Central U.S. Route 1 Small Area Plan. Ms. Marshall seconded. Motion passed 6-0. Mr. Durham motioned to recommend approval of Zoning Map Amendment ZMA2410-0006. Ms. Marshall seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 9. OTHER BUSINESS None 10. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT None 11. ADOPTION OF MINUTES [03:33:40] November 13, 2024 Agenda Minutes – Regular Meeting No corrections submitted. Minutes were therefore deemed adopted. 12. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS [03:34:26] A. Chairman Comments Vice-Chair Whitehead: • Commented on the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee work and how it relates to the Comprehensive Plan. • Reminder about the March 20, 2025 CSX Public Meeting at the Mayfield Community Center arranged by Virginia House Delegate Joshua Cole. B. Commissioner Comments Mr. Caswell gave an update of the Asphalt Arts Project Meeting, which was attended by representatives from the Arts Commission, Economic Development, Public Works, Main Street, and Planning Services. The pilot project would be at a less traveled intersection that could be closed to traffic for a day without major impact on the traffic pattern. The next Arts Commission Meeting will discuss site selection. Mr. Durham said the City Council approved on second read the Technology Overlay District. At that City Council Meeting, the Chair recognized and thanked the Planning Commission’s work in making recommendations for changes to the draft Technology Overlay District ordinance. Mr. Durham thanked Vice-Chair Whitehead for her work running the Planning Commission Meetings as acting Chairman. 13. PLANNING DIRECTOR COMMENTS [03:43:47] From: Adam Fried To: Planning Subject: [EXTERNAL] Request for Approval to build 5 townhomes adjacent to 400 Princess Anne St. Date: Wednesday, March 5, 2025 11:06:58 AM Attachments: image001.png 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. To Susann Finn, Chair of the Fredericksburg Planning Commission: I have known Mike and Jake Adams and their team for over a decade. I live in the bank and condominium building they constructed in 2016 at 425 William St.. My father-in-law lives in the condo building the Adams team completed a few years ago near the train station on Frederick St. I feel the Adams team has improved our City of Fredericksburg with lovely residences in addition to our family’s homes. I encourage the Planning Commission to approve their request to build 5 townhomes on an existing parking lot behind and beside their building at 400 Princess Anne Street. These homes will provide needed housing near our train station. They will help improve the neighborhood by providing brick sidewalks and street lighting. They will bring homeowners to the area instead of commuters and they will promote the council's goals of creating a more walkable City. This project is creating density where it should be, in close proximity to our transportation hub, the train station. Thank you in advance for considering this request. Best Regards, Adam Fried From: Andrew Mercer To: Planning Subject: [EXTERNAL] Reject 400 Princess Anne Street townhouse project for a Special Use Permit (SUP) Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2025 7:54:46 AM 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. Good morning, Please reject the 400 Princess Anne Street townhouse project Special Use Permit (SUP). The increased population density and removal of tree canopy will not benefit the city. Thank you, Andrew Mercer 2614 Caroline Street Fredericksburg VA, 22401 From: Brian McDermott To: Planning Subject: [EXTERNAL] Project at 400 Princess Anne street Date: Tuesday, March 4, 2025 8:17:59 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. Dear planning commission, I am writing this email in support of the proposed townhome project at 400 princess Anne St. This project provides some answers to issues facing our city not the least being The NEED for more housing downtown especially in the area close to the train station that serves our Fredericksburg commuting population. The proposed townhomes will beautify the current property and enhance that entrance to our downtown. Sincerely, Brian McDermott Sent from my iPhone From: Arleatha Copeland-Bumbrey To: Planning Cc: Tonya Lacey; Kerry Devine; Charlie L. Frye, JR. Subject: [EXTERNAL] Fredericksburg Planning Commission: SAY NO to adding 5 additional townhouses overcrowding the downtown train station area! Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2025 11:45:17 AM 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. HOMEOWNERS Charles Bumbrey Jr Arleatha Copeland-Bumbrey (Peaches) 315 Princess Anne St Fredericksburg, VA 22401 Dear Fredericksburg Planning Commission: Please VOTE NO to adding 5 additional townhouses overcrowding the downtown train station area! 1. I have two questions.... a. Is the City of Fredericksburg going under? Answer: NO b. Is the city financially in need of FIVE MORE townhomes. Answer: NO If not, could you please be considerate of ALL the city's downtown residents/ homeowners, especially the ones most negatively affected by this build? Please think about the tax paying residents that you are HURTING the most before counting tax revenue. 2. I respect the need for city growth, the need for modernization and the need for additional new housing BUT not behind and beside 400 Princess Anne St. It's not needed there! 3. This new development is a bad idea and will create more chaos in this area via increased traffic congestion, more accidents and increased pedestrian safety concerns. 4. I live across the street ( One house from the intersection of Princess Anne St and Frederick St ). In the last 5 years, we have had AT LEAST 15-20 accidents at that very corner that has resulted in damaged and totalled cars, personal property damage and caused injuries. This includes damage to three of my cars! NOTE: The drivers were non-residents of this downtown street. Their speeding and inattention was because they are not invested in the neighborhood community. They did not care who was affected by their carelessness. They just wanted to "get home!" Part of this danger is due to the increased traffic after many commuter trains arrival between 300-630pm, many vehicles speed to take a "shortcut" to get to Route 3 and then hop on the interstate. That corner becomes a virtual highway trying to get to the highway. Also, many vehicles make illegal U-turns ( everyday ) to get to the train station parking lot. 5. Many non-residents of the street will park on the 200-400 block of the street, effectively taking spots from homeowners and residents. If I arrive home after 8pm, I have to pray that there is a spot for me. Many nights, I have had to park in the lot next to the train or even the parking garage due to lack of parking. I'm afraid many times because of the dangers of having to park so far away from my house. 6. SPEEDING is a big problem between the train station and heading to Charles St. The removal of 17 more parking spaces will likely increase the anxiousness of many drivers and possibly get more people hurt by increased carelessness! Fighting for a parking spot is not fun! It's a problem, this has been voiced, but unfortunately the City will not even agree to pay for and install a Speed Table Bump to slow traffic down! It is definitely needed at the corner of Princess Anne St and Frederick St., if not other areas of downtown. Commuters and visitors need to respect our neighborhoods and understand that safety matters!! 7. The total disregard for the safety and well being of of those living and owning in this area doesn't seem to be a concern for many. Only the profits that can be made. There are absolutely other areas in the city that can be used for development! Please go there and leave our little part of the city alone! 8. Also, there are other city residential neighborhoods that have "Residents Only" parking signs on the streets. WHY can't the homeowners between the 200-400 block of Princess Anne St have this same courtesy? Make the visitors park in the parking garage that was built for VISITORS! Give your downtown residents some peace of mind. GIve us the same safety and concern for pedestrians, children and property that you would want and DEMAND if this was the street you lived on. Thank you for your time and hopefully thank you for listening to a homeowner that will be directly and negatively affected by this build. From: Charles G McDaniel To: Planning Subject: [EXTERNAL] New Townhomes Date: Thursday, March 6, 2025 2:52:24 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. I am writing concerning the proposal to build five townhomes on an existing parking lot behind 400 Princess Anne Street. I have lived at 133 Caroline Street for over 62 years, and I have seen many improvements to this part of town. The recent addition of apartments, townhomes and condos to this area near the train station has made noteable differences in the quality of life in the area. I am very supportive of these changes and want to urge approval of this project. Charles G. McDaniel Charles McDaniel Chairman 800.476.6683 888.834.2121 540.220.8245 Cell 703.441.2590 Fax hilldrup.com Facebook  | LinkedIn | Twitter |  Instagram From: Fitzhugh Johnson To: Planning Subject: [EXTERNAL] Townhouse Project - 400 Princess Anne St Date: Tuesday, March 4, 2025 9:38:02 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. To Whom it May Concern: I am writing to share my support for the proposed townhouse development at 400 Princess Anne St. As a young professional, I witness many of my peers unable to find housing in Downtown Fredericksburg. It makes a lot of sense to me to strategically place density surrounding the train station. I think that this will support the council’s goal of a more walkable urban sprawl. I am familiar with the developers and know that their craftsmanship will be something that Fredericksburg will be proud of. It will be a clean product built to sustain the test of time. As I understand it, this development will also benefit the neighborhood by providing brick sidewalks and additional street lighting. I ask that you please support this project. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. Regards, Fitzhugh Johnson III c. 540-623-4565 o. 540-372-7675 512 Lafayette Blvd. (Suite A) Fredericksburg, VA 22401 Lissah Michalski 316 Frederick Street Fredericksburg, VA 22401 To the Planning Commission: I am unable to join tonight’s meeting in person, but I want to register my concerns about the proposed SUP at 400PA. I am the owner of one of the smallest properties in the vicinity of the property in question, and this project threatens to turbocharge a problematic development pattern that further threatens the character of this important and highly unique block. The decision to dismantle guidelines that govern development in the immediate area surrounding my property removes an important safeguard against further development that is wildly out of scale, and disproportionately in favor of only development interests at the expense of a much broader cross-section of the community that you represent. This is a call for a more measured and participatory approach to one of Fredericksburg’s most valuable and prominent gateways. Doesn’t such a high-profile area deserve much more discussion and more scrutiny? There have been challenging and sometimes bewildering and difficult conversations at the ARB and City Council over the last many months related to a proposal for these luxury high-rise townhouses. In those hearings, the neighbors and sometimes even the boards and councilors have struggled to understand the developer’s proposal and potential effects on the surrounding neighborhood. The community has been resoundingly and overwhelmingly opposed to these measures and proposals. Now the developer wants to go above and beyond the allowances granted by the removal of the RSOD. This is adding insult to injury. Approving this measure would not only undermine the community’s concerns on scale, density, and height - it would openly and directly exacerbate them. To grant developers the right to build even more massive 50-foot structures directly across from my small duplex and so close to other critical historical resources would further erode what is left of a rare and irreplaceable historic context. To get a sense of what might be possible, I invite the Commission and community to take a look at my property from the west side of the 100 block of Charles Street, where massive luxury townhouses now loom over my back patio and the other small, historic property at 317 Charles Street. These luxury townhouses were built by the owner of the 400 Princess Anne Street property, and do not belong in a historic district. This area has already had significant development in recent years. 28 residential units have been built within 300 feet of this project, including the conversions of the Janney Marshall warehouse to 12 apartments and the conversion of a warehouse into 10 residential units, 2 commercial units plus 4 townhouses. Both of these conversions were granted SUPs to save historic buildings. This project would be a new build and should be viewed very differently as a result. This property is also very close to the CSX train tracks and will be even closer when the third track is eventually added. What is the proximity that CSX recommends for new building to be constructed? I asked this question during a recent City Council meeting and still await that answer. The developers are touting the financial advantage that more residential units bring to the city. In reality, the cost of city services per resident exceeds the property tax gains. Mayor Devine talked about this last month and stated that each new resident in the city costs the city $4,000 in city services each year. That’s at least $20,000 of added expense that must be borne by the taxpayers in this tiny parcel alone. I urge you to say no the SUP and have developers follow the rules - rules that have already been imposed against the will of the neighbors. Rules, I might add, that are currently being challenged in at least two active court cases against our city. From: Paula Chow To: Planning Subject: [EXTERNAL] Comments on 400 Princess Anne St. Date: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 5:35:46 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. Dear Planning Commission, We submit the following concerns for denial the SUP on 400 Princess Anne St. for the Planning Commission meeting of March 12, 2025. We are residents of Darbytown. We enjoy our neighborhood, including coffee clatches at 25°30° Espresso. We argue for denial of the SUP. There are multiple concerns but we will focus on a few. What is the goal of squeezing in a housing building that will damage two mature trees, be only affordable for upper income folks and decrease parking availability? This density, because of size, scale, location and affordability should not be a credit for developers. Nor should it be allowed to be built. The City Council once denied this in Sept. 2023. Is the developer's tactic to keep knawing away at the City Council until they vote to approve an SUP? What has changed are the members of the City Counci but the issues have not changed. Currently, there are two court cases involving this area. The Planning Commission should defer any decision until the settlement of such court cases. Approving an SUP will further complicate the issues and cost the City money. While the developer has sunken money into this proposal, it is not the City's responsibility to assure that the developer recoups his investment. The City's responsibility is to listen and understand the neighborhood's legitimate concerns. This is the historic district. We are the ones who live here and make it a viable community, not the developer. We do not need luxury housing, quite the opposite, with 65% renters. Please give serious consideration to these issues. Thank you. Paula Chow Ed Sandtner 132 Caroline Street Fredericksburg, VA 22401 From: Rachel Sargeant To: Planning Subject: [EXTERNAL] PUBLIC COMMENT 3/12/25 Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2025 2:27:02 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. My name is Rachel Sargeant. I live in Ward 3. 22401. I am writing about the 400 Princess Anne project. There are two court cases pending on this project. One by Hamilton Palmer. The other by Lawrence Fisher who owns the Pump House at 301 Sophia St. Wait for these court cases to be ruled on. Again, why do you have to rush these projects through? Developers can wait. Thank you for your consideration. Rachel Sargeant From: Robert Keith Thomas To: Planning Subject: [EXTERNAL] 400 P A Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2025 8:29:53 AM 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. I request that the planning commission support this special use permit. The city needs density in the downtown area. R Thomas 809 Brompton st. Freds. VA 22401 From: Sandra Howson To: Planning Subject: [EXTERNAL] SUP Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2025 9:25:34 AM 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. I am asking the Planning Commission to deny the request for a SUP for the 400 Princess Anne St. Townhouse Project and require the developers to follow the City’s existing rules. Thank you. Sandra Cash Howson 817 Weedon St. Fredericksburg, VA 22401 Sent from my iPhone From: Stewart Engel To: Planning Subject: [EXTERNAL] 400 Princess Anne St. Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2025 11:34:34 AM 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. You must address the issue of PARKING. -- Stew Engel stew@infionline.net Fredericksburg, VA 22401-6011  Downtown Traffic Engineering Study Update March 12, 2025 Outline • Public Outreach to Date • Ancillary Traffic Data • Next Steps - Concept Development and Cost Estimate  1. Princess Anne Street / Caroline Street North 1 3 2. Amelia Street / William Street 2 4 3. Princess Anne Street / Caroline Street South 4. Prince Edward Street (traffic calming) Public Outreach to Date • Community Meeting - December 18 • Rising Sun Neighborhood – January 30 • Pathways Committee - January / February Community Meeting – December 18 • Community Meeting with 75 +/- people and follow up survey that received 142 submissions. • Broad support for pedestrian improvements (increased signage, lighting, and updated pedestrian signal timing) as well as general traffic calming. • Support to use Pitt / Sophia as an on-street separated bike path with one travel lane directed south. Community Meeting – December 18 • Questions about one-way to two-way conversion including traffic flow, delivery trucks, backing out of driveways, access to the Train Station, and increased difficulty in crossing the street with two-way traffic. • 29% of respondents did non-support conversion (including the 6 respondents from outside 22401) and 18% supported conversion. • Some respondents questioned the need for improvements or asked if more traffic enforcement and/or police presence would be sufficient to calm traffic. Rising Sun Neighborhood – January 30 • Desire for traffic calming with issues cited such as speed and volume. Questions about weekend vs. weekday traffic numbers. • Questions about one-way to two-way conversion including traffic flow, delivery trucks, backing out of driveways, opening driver-side car doors, changing from side by side to head on traffic, and increased difficulty in crossing the street with two-way traffic. • Follow up requested. Follow Up – Northern Areas of PA / Caroline • Traffic counters deployed on Caroline Street from Friday February 28 to Sunday March 2 and Princess Anne Street from Friday March 7 to Sunday March 9. • Caroline Street (Northern Area) – Weekday Average Daily Trips (February 2024): 4,315 Weekend Average Daily Trips (February / March 2025): 3,535 Peak Study Day --- Wednesday --- 4,421 vehicles • Princess Anne Street (Northern Area) – Weekday Average Daily Trips (February 2024): 5,990 Weekend Average Daily Trips (February / March 2025): 5,623 Peak Study Day --- Saturday --- 6,337 vehicles Follow Up – Northern Areas of PA / Caroline • Traffic counters deployed on Caroline Street from Friday February 28 to Sunday March 2 and Princess Anne Street from Friday March 7 to Sunday March 9. Southern Areas of PA / Caroline • Similar questions about weekday vs weekend traffic. Ancillary weekend counts to be collected. Here is the data from January 2024. • Caroline Street (Southern Area) – Weekday Average Daily Trips (February 2024): 2,301 vehicles Weekend Average Daily Trips : TBD Peak Study Day (so far) --- Wednesday --- 2,312 vehicles • Princess Anne Street (Southern Area) – Weekday Average Daily Trips (February 2024): 2,719 vehicles Weekend Average Daily Trips : TBD Peak Study Day (so far) --- Tuesday --- 2,728 vehicles Pathways Committee – January / February • Support for recommendations on pedestrian signal / signage and detailed comments about improving curb extensions. • Detailed comments provided on bicycle connections regarding Sophia Street, the interface of the bike lane in the northern area and the future Bankside Trail, and reducing travel lanes to provide for separated bicycle lanes. • Support for traffic calming measures on Prince Edward, Sophia, and Caroline (north of Amelia).  Next Steps – Concept Development and 1 3 Cost Estimate 1. Princess Anne Street / 2 Caroline Street North 4 2. Amelia Street / William Street 3. Princess Anne Street / Caroline Street South 4. Prince Edward Street (traffic calming) 400 Princess Anne Street Special Use Permit Planning Commission Regular Meeting March 12, 2025 Overview • Issue • Shall Planning Commission recommend approval of the Special Use Permit (SUP) for a residential density of 36 units per acre? • Request • SUP for density to construct 5 townhouses (8 units total) • No change to existing commercial or 3 existing units • Second request for same project • No change from previous request, except no longer within the Railroad Station Overlay District • Planning Commission Recommended Approval with conditions in 2023 • City Council voted to deny the project on second read Location Land Use General Development Plan • 5 townhouse units • Existing commercial to remain (3 units) • Public Improvements: • Brick Sidewalk • Street lights • Street trees • New sidewalk ramp • Striping on Princess Anne Street • 3 administrative site plan exceptions (landscape, alley width, lot frontage) Zoning and Current/Proposed Conditions Standard Current Condition Proposed Condition Commercial Downtown District Mixed-use Commercial Single-family Attached Use By-right with 3 dwellings and Commercial 12 units/acre (single-family attached) Residential 18 units/acre (multifamily) 14 units / acre (3 units) 36 units / acre (8 units) Density 36 units/acre (mixed-use within OHFD) Any density by SUP Nonresidential 0.27 0.27 3.0 FAR Open Space Estimated 2,955 sqft 12.7% or 1,219 sqft None Height 18.83 feet 32 feet (roof deck) 50 feet Comprehensive Plan • Train Station District in the Area 7 Small Area Plan • Infill is a priority in the district and for existing parking lots • Recommends enhanced pedestrian access, applicant proposing: • Brick sidewalk on Princess Anne Street • Street trees/lights along Princess Anne Street and Frederick Street • Improved handicapped ramp at the western corner of Princess Anne Street/Frederick Street with a shift in the location of the fire hydrant • T-4 General Urban Transect • Consists of a range of uses • Focused on infill and redevelopment, while limiting conflict between proposed new development and surrounding neighborhoods Zoning District • Commercial-Downtown (C-D) Zoning District • Purpose of district includes redevelopment within the historic district • Emphasis on pedestrian access • C-D Criteria for Density: • The City Council shall consider, in addition to other relevant factors, whether the proposed development includes appropriate provisions for archaeology, historic interpretation, or enhanced open space. • Extension of Downtown Streetscape along Princess Anne / Frederick & improved public frontage • 12.7% open space provided (not required) • Design intended to protect existing trees • Will need to meet Archaeology ordinance (Phase 1A minimum) Special Use Permit Considerations Parking • 14 spaces to be replaced with 10 garage spaces • 8 required for new unit, none required for existing building • One space in front of existing building • Two large parking lots within 1/8 mile • Adjacent to bus stop and train station • Adjacent on-street parking limited and nearby on-street parking is by permit Special Use Permit Considerations • On-street parking occupancy • 47% Day Frederick Street and Princess Anne Street South Street Category Total % • 60% Night Frederick On-Street Spaces 14 - Street Daytime Spaces Occupied 6 42% Night time Spaces Occupied 8 57% % of Curb line Precluded from Parking (LF) 177 35% Princess On-Street Spaces 78 Anne Street Daytime Spaces Occupied (public-0%) 38 49% South Night time Spaces Occupied 47 60% % of Curb line Precluded from Parking (LF) 199 15% Total On-Street Spaces 92 - Total Daytime Spaces Occupied 44 47% Total Night time Spaces Occupied 55 60% Total % of Curb line Precluded from Parking (LF) 376 21% Special Use Permit Considerations Fire Department Access • Alley standard minimum is 24’ (proposing 22’) • Administrative site plan exception can reduce width with sufficient fire access • Fire access depends on need for tower truck access, which depends on building height and suppression systems • Project intends to install sprinkler systems on units • Proposed condition would require sprinkler systems on all units unless Fire Marshal requirements are otherwise met (eliminate need for tower truck access) Special Use Permit Considerations Landscaping and existing trees • New Landscaping • Street trees on Princess Anne and Frederick • Tree/Shrubs along back • Alternative Landscape Plan requested for landscaping around the alley • Reduction/relocation to property line requested to preserve existing trees • Design includes pervious sidewalk on western portion of the site • Fencing proposed along alley • Proposed Condition to replace any of the trees on the site that die within 5 years with 2 new trees. Special Use Permit Considerations Lot Frontage • UDO requires that no more than 25% of lots may front on an “alley”, unless modified by administrative site plan / subdivision exception • Project has 50% of lots front on an alley • Modification of this standard is a relatively common way to provide homeownership opportunities in the Downtown • City examples where greater than 25% of the lots front on an alley: • Riverview (46%), Federal Square (75%), Amelia Square (32%), and College Hill (45%) Special Use Permit Considerations Refuse: • Proposed condition requires that all trash cans and recycling bins serving the five new dwellings must be screened from view of any public right of way or otherwise kept inside the residences at all times; • Applicant includes new screening / relocation of existing trash to back of property. Special Use Permit Criteria Impact on Historic Districts • Development Review started with ARB • Site planning, scale, & massing approved by ARB in July 2023 • Conceptual approval is for a 3-story building with a flat roof, in accordance with District standards and guidelines • Detailed architectural design to be considered in a public hearing as a later step, after site plan approval Special Use Permit Criteria • ARB approval was appealed The COA is for a three-story, to City Council and upheld flat-roofed building with the building envelope as shown. • The Council decision was appealed to Circuit Court and is pending Proposed Street Views Special Use Permit Considerations Other • The applicant estimates the value of the property upon completion to be $3,2000,000, with an increase of $24,989 in annual tax revenue • Not proposed to meet affordable housing standards, but will add infill housing within a walkable/transit adjacent area • Density estimated to generate 2 students (using City Capital Impact Study) • Sufficient water/sewer capacity to serve project Conclusion & Recommendation • Approval with conditions of the SUP for a density of 36 units per acre: 1. The Property will be developed and maintained substantially in conformance with the Generalized Development Plan. 2. The applicant shall install an automatic sprinkler system in each newly constructed residential unit in accordance with the requirements of the City Fire Marshal or otherwise meet the requirements of the Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code in order to provide sufficient fire access to the site. 3. All trash cans and recycling bins serving the five new dwellings must be screened from view of any public right of way or otherwise kept inside the residences at all times unless set out for pick-up in accordance with City Code. 4. Each existing mature tree shown on the applicant’s Generalized Development Plan that is removed or destroyed during construction, or that dies or is in decline (as determined by the City’s Arborist) within five 7-10 years of the date construction begins on the five new dwellings, shall be replaced with a minimum of two new trees (following the city’s tree planting standards), planted in a suitable location (confirmed by the Development Administrator) on the Property. 5. A painted crosswalk shall be provided across Frederick Street along the southern intersection of Princess Anne Street and Frederick Street. 6. The HOA shall require residents of the townhouse units to utilize garage parking spaces (City Attorney to review legality) 400 Princess Anne Street Special Use Permit Planning Commission Regular Meeting March 12, 2025 Area 5 Small Area Plan Planning Commission March 12, 2025 Bailey Thompson – Community Development Planner II  Summary • Identify Area 5 • Staff Recommendation • Review Comp Plan Amendment • Review Zoning Map Amendment • Discuss Proposed Changes • Staff Recommendation  Staff Recommendation Planning Commission Public Hearing – Tonight • Amendment to the 2015 Comprehensive Plan to Adopt a New Small Area Plan for Planning Area 5 – Recommend Approval • Amendments to the Official Zoning Map to Rezone Approximately 13.2007 Acres of Land Located in Planning Area 5 from Commercial Shopping Center to Commercial Highway and to Adopt Form-Based Regulations, as Recommended in the Draft Small Area Plan for Area 5 – Recommend Approval Next Step: City Council Public Hearing Where in the City are we?  Plan Timeline Community Meeting Community Meeting Project Kickoff P.C. Discussion P.C. Discussion #1 #2 June 7, 2023 September 13, 2023 November 8, 2023 September 20, 2023 November 16, 2023 P.C. Completes City Council Work P.C. Discussion P.C. Discussion Community Meeting Comment Session Transmittal January 10, 2024 February 14, 2024 #3 February 24, 2024 April 10, 2024 May 28, 2024 Area 5 Report Architectural Review P.C. Concept Architectural Review Board Discussion Discussion P.C. Discussion Converted to Small Board Discussion October 23, 2024 Area 5 Plan September 23, 2024 September 25, 2024 October 14, 2024 City Council Architectural Review Initiation P.C. Public Hearing P.C. Discussion P.C. Public Hearing Board Discussion December 11, 2024 January 22, 2025 March 12, 2025 November 12, 2024 November 12, 2024  Transect Map T-4 T-5C Civic T-4 T-1 Preserved Open Space Civic T-3E Sub-Urban Edge T-3E T-3 T-3 Sub-Urban T-4 T-4 T-4 Civic T-3 T-4 General Urban T-5C Core Corridor Civic Civic T-3E T-4 T-1  Historic Foundation & Neighborhood Focus Neighborhood Conservation Districts: • Character provided for the College Heights, Westwood and Westmont neighborhoods • “Focus on the form of high-quality urban neighborhoods while providing a venue to achieve modern housing goals” • “Actions that would be subject to NCD review may include new construction, large additions, demolition, and changes in unit type or count” Eligible National Register District Centered on the University of Mary Washington  “Brain Power Area” Unique Economic Development Opportunity at the Confluence of the City’s Two Major Institutional Partners (UMW and MWH) and the Power Substation “Due to the area’s unique location and disposition, consider taller heights, larger floor area ratios, and units per acre metrics than the typical Commercial Highway zoning district.” 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 Direct Response to Citizen Comment: “Facilitate a service alley to serve commercial buildings both internal to the site and those that front Snowden Street.”  Village Transition Area Potential for Walkable Commercial, Entertainment, Dining, and Service Uses Character Structure Designations (more detail to come) • Period of significance of 1946 (completion of the Route 1 Bypass) through 1974 (1973 oil embargo/general decline in new construction in vicinity). Future Form Based Code potential: • 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  Character Structures 24 designated buildings as Character Structures in the Local Inventory of Historic Structures • Architectural Review Board Action on Nov. 12, 2024 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.  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/Bicycle 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  Zoning Map Amendment • 4 parcels at 13.2007 acres • Rezone Commercial Shopping Center to Commercial Highway • Adopt T-5C Form-Based Regulations  Proposed Text Changes Text changes about Neighborhood Conservation Districts to provide further clarity on p. 11(5)-6 • Character of the neighborhoods • Actions subject to review • Impact on affordable housing Emphasis of the Brain Power Area’s specific location on p. 11(5)-8 • Route 1 and not adjacent to residential neighborhoods Expanded text on the pedestrian and bicycle network along the William Street corridor on p. 11(5)-12 Updated Brain Power Area implementation step on p. 11(5)-15 • Evaluate Unified Development Ordinance elements: height, floor area ratio, units per acre • Incorporated of service lley to serve redeveloped internal and Snowden Street commercial properties  Staff Recommendation Planning Commission Public Hearing – Tonight • Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Chapters 10 and 11 of the 2015 Comprehensive Plan to adopt a Small Area Plan for Planning Area 5 – Recommend Approval • Official Zoning Map Amendment to rezone approximately 13.2007 acres of land located from Commercial Shopping Center to Commercial Highway and to adopt form- based regulations, as recommended in the draft Small Area Plan for Planning Area 5 – Recommend Approval Next Step: City Council Public Hearing Zoning Map Future Land Use Map