PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 22, 2025 FXBG 5:30 PM city of Fredericksburg Joint Meeting w/ City Council & Planning Commission Community Planning & Building You may view and listen to the meeting in its entirety by going to the Planning Commission page on the City's website: htps//wwwrepionalwehv.com/fredpe The agenda, staff report and associated documents are also available on the Planning Commission page: https//www.frederickurrasova/PlaningCommision PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS: CITY STAFF Susanna Finn, Chairman Mike Craig, Director Carey Whitehead, Vice-Chairman Josh Crump, Principal Planner Dugan Caswell, Secretary Bailey Thompson, Community Development Mary-Margaret Marshall Planner David Durham Josh Summits, Director of Economic Jane McDonald Development and Tourism Joseph Winterer Tanagra Cafferky, Administrative Assistant CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kerry Devine, Mayor Charlie Frye, Jr., Vice-Mayor Jannan Holmes Will Mackintosh Jonathan Gerlach Please note that the online video meeting is split into 2 videos of the Fredericksburg Planning Commission 1/22/2025. Item 1 is the 2 HR video and Items 2 - 14 is the 1 HR 29 MIN video. 1. PUBLIC INPUT SESSION ON THE PROPOSED TECHNOLOGY OVERLAY DISTRICT WITH THE CITY COUNCIL (5:30 - 7:30) [00:00:01 Joint Meeting with City Council and Planning Commission on the proposed Technology Overlay District (5:30-7:30). Regular Planning Commission Meeting to follow. Josh Summits, Director of Economic Development and Tourism for the City of Fredericksburg, presented a brief overview of the Technology Overlay District (TOD). The area is generally known as "Celebrate South" and discussion included: The City Council Work Session on January 14, 2025 Timeline of the TOD, including ordinances, recommendations, implementation steps and potential implementation schedule for the TOD. TOD infrastructure requirements The TOD's intent to help diversify the economic tax-base and job creation. The map of the proposed TOD area. Discussion points on water, noise, and building requirements Staff recommendations Under a UDO, Data Centers are considered an institutional use. Impact on agreements such as the 2005 Celebrate Virginia South Agreement Ms. Finn invited the public to approach the lectern for public input. (Attachment) Jason Towery, 5511 River Road, Fbg, VA 22407, lives next to the proposed site. Mr. Towery spoke about the scale and proximity of the Data Center to residential areas and how it could negatively affect property values. Mr. Towery suggested a height limit of 60 ft, buffer zones, protect the view shed from the river, protect the city's long-term goals, and consider long-term sustainability of major projects. Elizabeth Willis, 5515 River Road, Fbg, VA 22407, lives near the proposed site. Ms. Willis spoke about inadequate buffer zone next to residential areas, water usage issues, needing more information on noise levels, concern about views related to building heights, and the extra electrical infrastructure associated with a Data Center. Ms. Willis would also like more information on the possible new river crossing proposals for that area. Christi Carver, 111 Caroline Street, Fbg, VA 22401, spoke about the timeline of the project, concerns about water usage, and who will be held accountable for green goals. Julie Kay, 1616 Franklin Street, Fbg, VA 22401, spoke about how the city council passed the 100% Clean Energy Resolution five years ago and that this project does not align with the resolution goals. Ms. Kay noted that the Virginia legislature JLAR report said Data Centers should be in industrial zones. Ms. Kay requested more time for review. Paul Rabatin 805 Mercer Street, Fbg, VA 22401, shared a picture of Iron Mountain in Manassas, which has one of the largest Data Centers in Virginia. Mr. Rabatin spoke about the impact of electrical substations, data company servers as tenants, retaining ponds, and other considerations. Mr. Rabatin is not against Data Centers, but asks the City to consider these factors when developing policy. Brent Hunsinger, Friends of the Rappahannock, 3219 Fall Hill Ave, Fbg, VA 22401, spoke about how Friends of the Rappahannock is appreciative of incentivizing stormwater management including nutrient credits, reuse of water for cooling, and vegetative buffers. Mr. Hunsinger asked for clarification of the term "bridging water", actual amounts of water usage by the data center, and are accessory structures included in the "view shed". Max Steinbaum, 1701 College Avenue, Eagle Box 1043, Fbg, VA 22401, is a senior at University of Mary Washington and is president of Fredericksburg Trail Alliance. Mr. Steinbaum spoke about how the Data Center would be a clear demarcation of industrial use in an area known for its trails and scenic views of the river. He stated other sites in the city would be a better fit for a data center. Rich Conway, 5513 River Road, Fbg, VA 22407, lives close to the proposed data center site. Mr. Conway spoke about how the data center needs to be built on a larger piece of land and that the current proposed site is inadequate to meet the needs of a data center. Sue Sargeant, 1318 William Street, Fbg, VA 22401, spoke about the timeline of the project. Other jurisdictions give the public more time to respond. The data center would be adjacent to residential apartments. She also asked about quantifying the costs of a data center. John Walker, 5509 River Road, Fbg, VA 22407, lives close to the proposed data center site. Mr. Walker spoke about the height of a 90 ft building with air-conditioning units on top. Mr. Walker talked about a house bill introduced in the Virginia legislature restricting data centers being developed within a quarter mile of parks, schools, and residential. Anne Little, 726 William Street, Fbg, VA 22401, spoke about public input. Ms. Little talked about the project timeline and had questions about the Dominion Study, water issues, and tree canopy. Ms. Little mentioned an upcoming forum about data centers on January 29 at the Dorothy Hart Center at 6:30 pm. Paula Chow, 132 Caroline Street, Fbg, VA 22401, spoke about coordination between the locality and state legislators. Ms. Chow had questions about the closed loop system, water use, Al as essential services, diesel pollutants, and other effects on the ecosystem. Ms. Chow requested that a certain percentage of the tax revenue be set aside for affordable housing. Max Chabot, 920 Mercer Street, Fbg, VA 22401, spoke about the Al industry, which used to be known as Large Language Models or LLMS. Mr. Chabot would like to know what type of businesses will be using the data center. Mr. Chabot wonders if this type of building will still be useful 5, 10, or 20 years from now. Madeline Carolee, 116 Beatson Street, Fbg, VA 22401, spoke about the need for trees. Ms. Carolee plants trees along the Rappahannock River. Ms. Carolee wonders if the water usage by the data center during a drought will affect the natural growth in the area and lead to a greater chance of a wildland fire. Wesley Heard, 11702 Ravensclaw Lane, Fbg, VA 22407, spoke about surrounding jurisdictions and the statewide JLARC study. Mr. Heard also talked about diminishing returns of revenue of data centers for the city. Avery Labelle, 211 Hillcrest Drive, Fbg, VA 22401, spoke about how the project timeline. Mr. Labelle understands the city's need for revenue, of which this project would bring in a considerable amount of money, but would like the city to take more time to review the project. Troyann Cooper, 26 Sweetbriar Drive, Fbg, VA 22401, spoke about the project timeline and public input. Ms. Cooper wonders if such a large building will ruin the small town feel of Fredericksburg and quality of life. Margie Lucas, 1014 Black Oak Court, Fbg, VA 22401, wanted to know about power line placements that will be needed for the data center, whether it be for the Virginia South site or the Hilton site. Ms. Finn closed the public input section of the meeting and opened the floor to the Dais for questions and comments. Mayor Kerry Devine reminded the public to go to the City of Fredericksburg's website for updates. Mayor Devine spoke about water reuse systems, a future Dominion Power energy report, the project timeline, and future plans. Councilor Will Mackintosh and Mr. Craig discussed traffic impact comparisons of data centers VS. residential. Traditionally, data centers have much less impact on traffic than residential developments. Vice-Mayor Charlie Frye, Jr. commented that, in 2018, the city adjusted the tax rate to attract data centers. The TOD location discussion is the next part of that on-going public process at work. Vice-Mayor Frye ask staff for a general definition of what a data center is. Mr. Summits responded that data centers are generally larger, industrial buildings that house data servers. The information on the servers is proprietary to the service provider who lease or own the facility. Examples could be banking account information, national security level DOD log-ins, maps, etc. Councilor Jannan Holmes, Mr. Craig, and Mr. Summits discussed noise level studies in relation to the people who would be living near the data centers and what the buildings would look like. One of the provisions is that noise measurements could be taken anywhere, not just at the property line. A new noise study would be done each time a building is phased in. As to the look of the buildings, typically those would be include in a rezoning or site plan review. Councilor Jonathan Gerlach noted that data centers are coming to surrounding counties and the revenue from the data centers will allow the counties to pay higher wages for teachers, firefighters, police officers, and public safety workers. Fredericksburg needs to stay competitive in order to attract and retain those same employees. Commissioner David Durham requested rewording for noise ordinance to reflect the concept that noise level readings are done at the property line and surrounding areas with the understanding that maximum noise levels should not be measured just in surrounding areas. Commissioner Durham and Mr. Craig discussed future TOD redevelopment uses if one day data centers are no longer needed. Commissioner Durham commented that the Planning Commission only acts upon what the City Council has tasked it to review. Commissioner Whitehead requested that staff provide a comparison of the existing zoning and the TOD as it relates to by right development and the mitigating opportunities of both when considering the impacts to the area. Commissioner Caswell commented that information on the impact to the tree canopy, light pollution, noise levels, and viewshed is important to have when discussing the TOD overlay. Councilor Holmes, Commissioner Mary-Margaret Marshall, and Mr. Summits discussed the proposed 90 ft building height. The intent is for a 3-story building that provides a higher density campus and more taxable square footage. Equipment on top of the buildings are included in the site line views. The Celebrate Virginia South Agreement of 2005 that includes provisions restricting construction visible from the River would not be superseded. Commissioner Marshall and Mr. Summits discussed the residential Neon project. The Neon project would have added 771 residential units. Mr. Summits cited the work session presentation comparative slide that details all of the other project proposals in the area. Commissioner Susanna Finn and Mr. Summits discussed increasing the residential / environmental buffers while decreasing the street frontage in an effort to improve the view sheds and trails. Ms. Finn and Mr. Craig discussed building height comparison with surrounding counties. Counties have more land, sO the building heights are less. The city has limited land, sO higher building heights may be appropriate. Commissioner Finn reopened the floor for public comments. Hugh Nunn, 806 Lafayette Blvd, Fbg, VA 22401, spoke about including state legislators in these discussions and to help with oversight of data centers. Rebecca Towery, 5511 River Road, spoke about having parameters in place to protect the citizenry and the watershed. Christine Thompson, 438 Bridgewater Street, Fbg, 22401, spoke about data center's power usage and quoted from the Department of Energy's website on the subject. Councilor Gerlach requested staff to email the Dais the house or senate bill numbers that were referenced by the speakers. Charlie Payne, 725 Jackson Street, Fbg, 22401, represents one of the developers. Mr. Payne spoke about the tax revenue amounts of data centers in the counties to the north, Amazon's capital investment in Virginia, and how a data center could be built in such a way as to mitigate impacts on surrounding properties. See attachments for submitted public comment letters from: Hirschler - Charles Payne, 725 Jackson St, Ste 200, Fbg, VA 22401 John Walker, 5509 River Rd, Fbg, VA 22401 Max Steinbaum, 1701 College Ave, Eagle Box 9043, Fbg, VA 22401 Rappahannock HP LLC, James Oeste VP, 2 Righter Pkwy Ste 301, Wilm, DE 19803 Spencer Hanemann, 122 Forrest Ave, Fbg, VA 22401 Chairperson Finn closed the public input session. The Joint Meeting with City Council & Planning Commission concluded at 7:30 p.m. The Planning Commission Regular Meeting immediately followed. 2. CALL TO ORDER (Begin separate Regular Meeting) [00:00:01 Chairwoman Finn called the meeting to order at 7:42 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 htps/www.reglonalwebtvucom/redpc 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. DETERMINATION OF A QUORUM There were seven members in attendance of the meeting at the call to order. 5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA [00:03:17] Mr. Durham moved to place item 11. General Public Comment between item 8 and item 9 to allow the public to comment about other matters without waiting. Ms. Whitehead seconded. Amended agenda Motion passed 7-0. 6. WELCOME NEW PLANNING COMMISSIONERS [00:03:55] Ms. Finn welcomed new Planning Commissioners, Jane McDonald and Joseph Winterer. 7. DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL POLICIES, ORDINANCES, OR APPLICATIONS [00:04:18] Mr. Craig welcomed Planning Services' new Principal Planner, Joshua Crump. Mr. Craig noted that, in Planning Services, Kate Schwartz's position has now been elevated to Principal Planner of Historical Resources & Urban Design. 8. DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST OR DISCLOSURES OF CONTACT None. 11. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT [00:06:35) Ron Perry, 1032 Conway Road, Fbg, VA, 22405, owns 1213 & 1215 Snowden Street and runs a business in one of the buildings. Mr. Perry spoke about VDOT's plans for the Augustine Avenue, Route 1, and Snowden Street intersections, including the proposed partial closing of Snowden Street. Mr. Perry offered an alternate plan in which there would be a traffic light at Route 1 & Augustine Avenue, and, therefore, no need to close Snowden Street. Mr. Perry reviewed utility placements and sidewalk placements. Mr. Perry cited VDOT's response letter to him about the reasons behind the closure plans. Ms. Finn asked Mr. Craig for an update of VDOT's plan for the area. Mr. Craig reviewed the history of the area. When Route 1 was created, it ignored the grid pattern that was already in place. Route 1 was platted through the street grid, which lead to geometric and access management problems. The City has identified redesigning pedestrian access as a top priority through the Smart Scale process with VDOT as that section of Route 1 gets a redesign. Planning Services and Mr. Perry have been meeting about possible solutions for delivery trucks and customer access along Snowden Street. VDOT's responded that keeping Snowden Street open would be more expensive, has more environmental impacts, and is less safe for traffic. 9. OLD BUSINESS [00:15:34] (Attachment) A. Work session on Area 5 University / Central U.S. Route 1 Small Area Plan Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment. CPA2024-04 / ZMA2410-0006. Adopting Amendment to the 2015 Comprehensive Plan to adopt a New Small Area Plan for Planning Area 5 Rezoning 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 Planning Area 5 Bailey Thompson presented. (Attachment) Mr. Thompson noted that the changes to the text and maps are in green. Mr. Thompson recapped key Area 5 sites in the middle of the city, changes to the Transect Map to address a parcel that cannot be developed, proposed changes to various text, and proposed text changes to the shopping center redevelopments. Mr. Thompson asked the Dais for feedback on the proposed changes in order to prepare the final draft of the Area 5 Plan. Mr. Durham, Mr. Thompson, and Mr. Craig discussed the text changes to shopping centers redevelopments based on Rhodeside and Harwell's Fredericksburg Commercial Corridors Revitalization Study. The study looked at other successful redevelopments nationally and what Fredericksburg could learn from those vertical mixed-use projects. The discussion included building heights, core services, and daycares. Mr. Durham suggested wording in the form base code to reflect what the city's envisioned look of the projects would be. Ms. Whitehead suggested that, within the Small Area Plans, Neighborhood Conservation Districts should be made plural to denote the neighborhood differences, add examples to illustrate the differences, and note the special attributes of different neighborhoods. Ms. Schwartz said a Neighborhood Conservation District is akin to a residential Form Based Code. The key factor is that it is context based. The goal is how to incentivize preservation of existing structures while also understanding the value of having housing diversity. Ms. Finn requested that there be more descriptive elements added to denote what is special or unique to a particular neighborhood. Ms. Whitehead, Mr. Durham, and Mr. Craig discussed the terminology affordable housing" and how that might be attained within the city. Mr. Craig noted the City of Charlottesville's change to their form base code addressing this issue. Mr. Caswell and Mr. Craig discussed what could be built, by right, in a Commercial Highway zoned area including redevelopment of shopping centers. Mr. Durham and Mr. Craig discussed the "Village Transition Area" in the Comp Plan as it relates to the area between Route 1 and the University and how it might benefit university students specifically. Mr. Durham and Mr. Craig discussed VDOT's and the City's input process when developing street improvements. The City should have clear key attainable elements outlined before submitting to VDOT for project development. Mr. Durham requested that the post office in Eagle Village be added as an anchor element along with the grocery store and gym. Mr. Durham noted that former Congresswoman Abigail Spanberger sponsored a bill that was then passed in 2024 to rename the Eagle Village Post Office to the Gladys P. Todd Post Office. Ms. Finn and Mr. Thompson reviewed the proposed street and sidewalk improvements along William Street and campus access points to the University of Mary Washington. Staff noted that the February 12, 2025 Planning Commission Meeting will hold a public hearing on the Area 5 Comp Plan Updates. 10. OTHER BUSINESS [01:09:15] A. Art in the Streets Mr. Durham noted that he met with Mr. Caswell and Economic Development & Tourism Assistant Director, MC Morris, to discuss the "Art in the Streets" program. Ms. Morris also supports the Arts Commission. "Art in the Streets" basically paints art on street surfaces in crosswalks. Mr. Caswell has been invited to sit on the "Art in the Streets" committee along with other department representatives of the city. Ms. Finn appointed Mr. Caswell to the "Arts in the Streets" committee. Mr. Caswell noted the need to identify possible funding streams and materials for this project SO that Public Works can move forward with this project in a timely manner. 12. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS [01:17:441 A. Chairwoman Comments Chairwoman Finn noted: Commissioner Whitehead's reappointment to the Planning Commission B. Commissioner Comments Mr. Durham noted changes in the Planning Department Staff: New Principal Planner, Josh Crump Kate Schwartz, newly promoted to Principal Planner of Historic Resources & Urban Design 13. PLANNING DIRECTOR COMMENTS Bailey Thompson, Community Development Planner noted: On February 5, 2025 from 5-7 pm, will be the third Public Meeting for the Small Area Plan Area 8 Open House / Community Workshop will be held at the Mayfield Civic Association Building at 311 Glover Street in Fredericksburg. Planning Director Mike Craig noted: City Council approved the Jeremiah Community project. City Council approved the removal of the Railroad Station Overlay District. City Council began discussions on the proposed Technology Overlay District, which will also be on the Planning Commission agenda for the February 12 meeting. Upcoming Special Use Permit for a school located in the lower level of the Staples Shopping Center. Area 5 Public Hearing at the February 12 meeting. Setting up meeting dates for the Comprehensive Plan Update Committee Meetings. 14. ADIJOURNMENT Ms. Finn said the next Planning Commission Meeting is scheduled for February 12, 2025. at 6:30 p.m. Chairwoman Finn adjourned the meeting at 9:06 p.m. Aviph a David B. Durham, Chairman !. Fwblic Tput Sesbion MEETING SIGN-IN SHEET Meeting: Planning Commission Meeting Date: an. 221 2025 Facilitator: Community Planning and Building Place/Room: Council Chambers -City Hall Name Address Pwgy E-Mail (optional) Koh Caoay 5513 RveRd. 22407 ciegoiat2sgpailap 2 Suzane Eliebeth Willis 55K Aoverfd,Ebe 23497 esnudls MHlegmal.on 3 ToyRem A6En1 K [0 32 Conyey R Frd - Ro 9 mai.cm 4 RrryASSe Chusti GaI Danelnu - / SA. Dlaverby Net 5 Juhe C K6l6 Fonkms fissilfveferykee 6 fau/Rahakh 605 Monersk, Phkhoresla CPn 7 BanDvsny Fol Frends FEE Rappa 8 Max Srinkaum EX7 Colleche Eb mekstrlint a tred talsas 9 5sm TOWERYy 551 RIVEK Rb. asan tnoeryOgmnile < - 10 EBECC (( TMER rtooryeyites 11 Sue Sarlunt 1318 WILLIRn St 12 JHu WDREN 5509 RIVER LAD 13 Ann Litk 726 William 14 SApdar Paula Chow 132Caroline. St Fbal 22491 15 Max Chabot 920 Mercerst Fb6i 22401 16 Madelne Caroke 16 Beatsonst Fhaizzi 17 Wesly Heard 11702 Ravens Claokn, Fhy, 22407 18 Auy Labelle au HillczetDr Fby 2240/ Page 1 of 2 Name Address E-Mail (optional) 19 froyann Cooper 26 Swetbriar 0Efh 22405 20 Margie Lucas 1014 EkkOakctFb 22401 21 * Roy ferry 1032 Conway Rd,Fy ReyRm/53epail (acor dang 22 22401 Consest a 23 abaut Snovodarkd 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 Page 2 of 2 Charles W. Payne, Jr. D: 540.604.2108 cpayne@hrscheriaw.com Hirschler Hirschler Fleischer I hirschlerlaw.com 725 Jackson Street, Suite 200 I Fredericksburg, VA 22401 P: 540,604.2100 I F: 540.604.2101 January 17, 2025 Sent via email to: pietinegiadrichpage" Sent via mail to: Honorable Kerry P. Devine Mayor City Council City of Fredericksburg P.O. Box 7447 Fredericksburg, Virginia 22404 Sent via email to: riml@rndmdsbupage" Sent via mail to: Honorable Susana Finn Chairwoman Planning Commission City ofFredericksburg P.O. Box 7447 Fredericksburg, Virginia 22404 Re: Support for the City's proposed Technology Overlay District ("TOD") Dear Mayor Devine and Chairwoman Finn, I hope this finds you both well. As you may be aware, I represent the Silver Companies and its affiliated entities that own various parcels at Celebrate Virginia South ("CVS"). We also recently filed a proffer amendment application for the NEON project' for purposes of allowing the uses permitted under the proposed TOD to also be allowed on parcels GPIN# 7860-50-3126 & 7860-40-5307. I City Ordinance 23-20 approved on December 12, 2023 January 17, 2025 Page 2 Most recently (January 14), the City ofl Fredericksburg's Office of Economic Development presented at a joint work session for both the members ofthe City Council and Planning Commission an overview oft the proposed TOD, which encourages a data center campus on a portion of CVS. For the past several months, my client has aggressively pursued an assemblage of properties at CVS and has under control and now owns approximately 180 acres currently within the draft TOD overlay area. In this regard, we have worked closely with the City's Office of Economic Development to attract a hyperscale data center user to the City. As you may be aware, the Fredericksburg Region has become ground zero for new data center investment, including a commitment from Amazon to invest billions of dollars in new capital data center and infrastructure investment in our region. In 2023 alone, Amazon was able to obtain approval for over 20 million square feet of data center space in the region, and in 2024 other data center developers were able to obtain approvals for roughly 10 million square feet of data center space. There are also several by right projects underway and it goes without saying the market is prime for data center investment. The City should likewise benefit from these opportunities. For purposes of all of the foregoing, we believe time is ofthe essence to proceed forward with the review and approval oft the TOD. My client has engaged in a joint venture with a highly regarded data center developer that is primarily interested in a large uniform campus development, and we are confident that with this prospect the City has a unique opportunity to incentivize and attract a viable, data center investment to the TOD. It is our opinion, as provided more particularly below, that a larger campus (at least 150 acres) is the best opportunity for a uniform data center campus that respects and complies with the development standards established by the City, and is further incentivizes the data center developer to make the necessary capital investment in new and necessary infrastructure, and to limit the potential impacts of the proposed development. Allowing multiple campus center sites is not efficient, will deter "first in" infrastructure investment, and will increase the potential for greater impacts to surrounding properties and the environment. In support of our position, we provide the following comments on certain aspects of the TOD draft overlay district?: 1. TOD shall encompass a minimum of 150 contiguous acres in which efficiencies ofs scale and cluster siting may be realized. Comment: We wholeheartedly support this requirement. The data center industry has trended away from smaller real estate footprints near dense development to larger, industrial campus sites. In our region, Amazon' S average data center campus is roughly 2 We may have additional comments on the items listed herein and comments for those matters we have not addressed in this letter that will be included in the final TOD. January 17, 2025 Page 3 420 acres, and these campuses will be inclusive of not only of data center buildings, but also necessary public utilities, including reuse water systems and storage tanks, and multiple substation and transmission facilities. Larger campuses also allow for the ability to establish greater setbacks and buffering from adjoining properties in order to reduce visibility and any noise impacts. Without a larger campus, the City will significantly reduce its opportunity for new data center investment, and increase the probability of greater impacts from the electric infrastructure that is required for data center users. We also note that the December 9, 2024, Joint Legislative Audit & Review Committee ("JLARC") found that data center development should occur on larger tracts of contiguous land in order to allow for greater setbacks and reduction of noise impacts. I would also note the 150 minimum acreage standard is consistent with the City's long standing requirements under the PD-C District (which applies to all of CVS properties except for NEON site). In this regard, Section 72-33.2 A (2) oft the UDO provides in relevant part: "The district should be reserved for development on contiguous land areas of at least 150 acres under single ownership or control... Thus, we believe the 150 acre minimum acreage requirement is essential to incentivizing a viable data center project.3 2. Industrial Cooling Water. Reuse water systems (aka "purple pipe") were introduced to this region via many of the Amazon approved projects and the recently approved STACK infrastructure project in Stafford County known as the "Stafford Technology Campus". Basically (as many ofyou know), a reuse water system captures and treats wastewater, and then "reuses" it for data center cooling. There are many advantages of reuse water, including many environmental benefits (e.g. reduce and avoid immediate discharge of effluent water), and as an industrial cooling source versus the use of potable water or water drawn directly from the immediate watershed. Typically, the reuse utility system is financed and constructed by the data center developer (with support for obtaining adequate right ofway and permitting from the locality), and then eventually turned over to the locality for ownership and maintenance. Once the reuse system turned over to the locality, not only is it an alternative water cooling option, but also a new utility the locality can charge a user for use. In order for the developer to invest in such a system, there must be economies of scale and assurances that adequate wastewater will be available for the developer's use. Also note that industrial cooling typically occurs only during high (heat) peak periods, and not for those months that are cooler by average. In addition, potable water should be allowed for domestic 3 uphsmisisutiomasansishsamaastasadisu development January 17, 2025 Page 4 purposes, such as for drinking water, fire flow and normal operations of the data center facilities that do not include industrial cooling requirements. 3. Bridging Cooling Water. All of the regional projects that include a reuse system for industrial cooling, also include a temporary allowance of potable water ("Bridging Cooling Water"). This allows the projects to proceed at a lower scale until the reuse system is completed. The amount and capacity oft the Bridging Cooling Water are strictly described and limited in a water services agreement ("WSA") between the locality and the developer. 4. Setback Standards. We are supportive oft the minimum setback of 150 feet from residential uses and 100 feet from commercial uses. These standards exceed the setback standards in surrounding jurisdictions. However, we do not believe it is necessary to have 100 foot setback from an industrial use. As for setbacks between data center buildings and accessory uses, a minimum of25 feet could impact the ability to cluster a project. We defer to the City's fire code requirements for determining what the minimum should be between associated and similar data centers uses, and encourage a reduced setback between data center facilities. 5. Sound Standards. We generally support the noise standards outlined in the draft TOD. I would note the 55 dBA (night) and 60 dBA (day) should apply only ifthe data center use adjoins residential uses. As for adjoining commercial uses, we advise the standard should be higher --60 dBA (night) and 65 dBA (day). Both ofthe aforesaid standards are similar to other jurisdictions. If the data center uses adjoin other data centers, then we recommend there not be any per se maximum standard. As for "prominent discrete tone noise", we typically see requirements that for any source of sound that has a prominent discrete tone component, the maximum sound levels established by the City will be reduced by no greater than 3 dBA. 6. Building Heights. In order to ensure maximum development flexibility, we recommend the current draft height standard remain at 90 feet. This will allow for not only development flexibility (e.g. increased square footage), but also an opportunity for greater setbacks and buffering, and open space. Please also note that under the City's current PD-C District, the maximum allowable building height is 90 feet. 7. Electric Power Infrastructure. We understand many of the ongoing discussions regarding electric power and power capacity. It is certainly something the data center industry is well aware of and is extensively engaged in partnering with the power industry and federal and state governments to ensure adequate capacity today and into the future. Let's also not forget that power usage has increased across all industries, including the rise in electric vehicle demand. There are also on average at least ten (10) electronic devices in each of our homes, and residential power use is the greatest among all users consuming 38.4 % of all power January 17, 2025 Page 5 supply. Commercial users are the next larger consumer (35.4%) followed by Industrial users (26%)4. Data centers fall under the industrial use category along with manufacturing, production and logistics and distribution. Certainly, the increase in the data center markets are increasing pressure on power capacity. But we should not forget, data centers are a necessary technology infrastructure that touch every facet of our lives, government and economy. Ensuring that the TOD has access to adequate power supply is essential to success and a viable project. This will require a uniform approach to constructing electric infrastructure and quickly securing power load requirements from our power provider (first to power is first to market). Please also note that new electric infrastructure such as transmission facilities and substations must also be constructed and located within the TOD. To the extent this infrastructure can be efficiently sited and constructed, the less impact it will have on surrounding properties. Also ofrelevance, data centers are one of the main forces in the renewable energy markets. For example, the AES Spotsylvania Solar project generates 500 megawatts of power (Sth largest in the U.S. and largest solar project east of the Rockies), which is enough to power roughly 360,000 homes. However, the AES project solely generates renewable energy credits for three major cloud companies. As a glaring example of why this is important, Amazon, in 2024, reached its renewable energy goal of powering 100% of all of its operations via renewable energy credits. Clearly, the data center industry understands the importance of abundant, clean energy supply. 8. Economic Development. Staff's presentation regarding the economic and tax revenue benefits of data centers is spot on and should not be glossed over. It is a key motivating factor to attracting data centers to our region. It is also one ofthe most powerful economic factors driving Virginia's economy contributing $9.1 billion in economic input in 2024 alone. Roughly one million square feet of data center space, can generate $18-20 million in gross annual tax revenues, and 120 new high paying jobs. Not to mention the extensive benefits these projects have on our local construction and trade industries, including skilled workforce. In closing, we appreciate your time and attention to this matter, and look forward to working with the City on this historic economic development opportunity. 4 U.S. Energy Information Administration 2023 January 17, 2025 Page 6 Respectfully submitted, Charles w. Payne, Jr. cc: City Council City Planning Commission City Economic Development Authority City Manager City Planning Director City Office of Economic Development 18082023.1 045886.00001 John Walker 5509 River Road Fredericksburg, VA January 22, 2025 For Distribution: Comments to City of Fredericksburg Timothy J. Baroody, City Manager; Josh Summits, Director of Economic Development and Tourism; Mike Craig, Director of Community Planning & Building; and members of the Fredericksburg City Council for the January 22, 2025, Public Input Session On The Proposed Technology Overlay District with the City Council to the draft ordinance, Subject: Establishing the Technology Overlay District to encourage data center campuses and related uses in large assemblages of properties; amending generally applicable data center provisions in the Unified Development Ordinance; and zoning map amendment to designate part of Area 1 to Technology Overlay District As previously stated in my submitted written comments of. January 17, 2025, I am a homeowner in this area of the city surrounded by an area that is, or was, designated T-1 Preserved Open Space and T-2 Rural. My home is part of a small cluster ofhomes that include 5509, 5511, 5513, 5515, and 5517 River Road, I do not think the Zoning maps shown provide an adequate view of the amount of old growth forest that exists on these properties and or property perimeters which add to the rural nature of this area. My own property contains approximately 4 to 4 % acres of old growth forest in addition to the trees planted on the rest of the property. I am again repeating some of my previously submitted written comments of. January 17, 2025 for consideration by the City Council and the City Planning Commission. I do believe the City Council is trying to find new commercial sources of revenue to lessen the tax burden on its citizens and find better uses for the undeveloped areas originally planned for Celebrate Virginia South. Although I am not against data centers per se, I suggest City leadership slow down and carefully consider all of the impacts this will have. Perhaps the sudden speed at which the City Council and Planning Commission members are proceeding is driven by recently introduced 2025 Virginia state legislation, House Bill No. 1984, to restrict data centers from being developed within a quarter mile of parks, schools, and residential areas. During the January 14, 2025, City Council meeting it was mentioned several times the need for additional revenue to fix the City of Fredericksburg schools and the connection between data center development and city schools. I think issues with City of Fredericksburg schools are larger than a new source of revenue and would separate those issues from those of data center development. I understand the members oft the City Council and Planning Commission have traveled to Prince William County to see their data centers, I highly recommend the same travel to Loudoun County to visit the data centers along and in the vicinity of Waxpool Road and Route 28. In particular, visiting areas where these data centers meet existing residential areas to include Ashby Ponds, a retirement community and others. The average data center height in Loudoun County, a major data center area in the state, is 35 feet. In addition to the current area under consideration for data centers, I believe other areas should be considered including: the Belman Road area and the small area west ofI 195 and south of Route 3. What is the end ofl life of a data center and happens at the end of life? How will the city be impacted? Have these and other questions been considered? Paragraph 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment "may. justify the future vacation of portions of Gordon W. Shelton Boulevard to consolidate and maximize land use development potential." This seems to be counter to FAMPO desire for a new river crossing. Therefore, I suggest the City stop any further waste of Page 1 of3 John Walker 5509 River Road Fredericksburg, VA January 22, 2025 taxpayer dollars on the expenses and efforts on a new river crossing until the City can figure out exactly what they will have left for roads in this area. 1. Draft Ordinance Paragraph 1 C Permitted Uses. Sub paragraph (8) (c) "Sewage treatment plant, publicly or privately owned;" Please carefully consider the possible impacts and define how the City can manage outflows and spills from this in the future. 2. Draft Ordinance Paragraph 1 D Development standards. Sub paragraph (11) Building height. "The maximum height shall be no more than ninety (90) feet. The height limitation shall not apply to parapets, screening, spires, belfries, cupolas, roof-mounted antennas or communications towers, air cooling ventilation equipment, ventilators, or other appurtenances usually required to be placed on the rooflevel and not intended for human occupancy, which shall be subject to the exception stated in $72-82.6(B)()." A height of 90 feet, plus the additional allowed for air- conditioning equipment equates to a minimum of a 10 story building. This is grossly excessive, especially against existing residential housing near the stadium and other areas. This excessive building height seems to negate other requirements. I suggest a reduced building height the closer buildings are constructed to existing residential building. As stated previously, the average data center height in Loudoun County is 35 feet. Some of these Loudoun data centers are close to / abutting existing residential properties. I believe this to be a more reasonable height against the existing residential properties. 3. Draft Ordinance Paragraph 1 D Development standards. Sub paragraph (1) Rappahannock River viewshed. Principal buildings within the TOD shall not be visible to the naked eye from the Rappahannock River frontage regardless of season. " Buildings discussed may not be visible from the building's property river frontage, due to the existing topography of that area, but I think it will be hard to not see a 10-story building from anywhere along the river frontage. 4. Draft Ordinance Paragraph 1 D Development standards. Sub paragraph (2) Minimum setback requirements. (a) "Adjacent to residential zoning districts: minimum setbacks shall be 200 feet. "I consider this insufficient given a planned allowed building height of 10 stories and suggest 300 feet minimum. Again, I believe the maximum height against residential properties should be 35 feet. 5. Draft Ordinance Paragraph 1 D Development standards. Sub paragraph (2) Minimum setback requirements. (e) "Adjacent to residential uses: no building, parking, outdoor storage areas for collection of refuse, or loading area shall be within 150 feet of any adjacent property with existing or planned residential development or residential units within mixed use development at the time of site plan submittal." .] I disagree with allowing, trash sheds etc. to be closer to residential areas and seems in conflict with the setback requirements. 6. Draft Ordinance Paragraph 1 D Development standards. Sub paragraph (4) "Buffers associated with each phase or incremental expansion of a campus must be shown on a landscaping plan submitted with each individual site plan. Vegetation that will remain on and is within a landscaping buffer provided on an easement on adjacent property may be used to satisfy the requirements of this subpart. > Adjacent Property is not defined and requires / allows for adjacent property owners, including residential, to provide their own landscaping buffer. This should not be allowed. The only way adjacent property buffer should be considered is ift the adjacent property owner agrees in writing and it is recorded. As worded, the city is responsible for providing the buffer for river walk. Page 2 of3 John Walker 5509 River Road Fredericksburg, VA January 22, 2025 7. Draft Ordinance Paragraph 1 D. Development standards. Sub paragraph (6) Noise Any noise which emanates from operation or other activity associated with any data center or research, development, or light manufacturing facility, or their accessory uses will be limited to a maximum volume in A-weighted decibels of60 dBA during the day (7:00 a.m. until 12:00 midnight) and 55 dBA: night (12:00 midnight through 7:00 a.m.). Such levels may be measured at the campus boundary. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the following activities and operations are exempt from the restrictions stated in this subpart." as I discussed previously 60 dBA is sometimes described as a conversation. Left out of this description is that this is at a distance of3 feet. As described in the above this noise is louder and at the perimeter of the Data Center properties. 8. Draft Ordinance Paragraph 1 D Development standards. Sub paragraph (6) Noise (c) "Generator testing conducted between 7:00 a.m. until 12:00 midnight unless testing at a time outside of this range is required by the Department of Environmental Quality. 9 Having run an emergency diesel generator in my long ago past, I see no reason to operate this type of machinery at midnight or outside of normal working times for testing. The times should be modified to 8:00 AM to 7:00 PM. Sometimes, operators may be required to burn off old diesel fuel oil, in which case it can be planned, agreed to by the City, and residents notified ahead of time. 9. As I previously stated, there should be consideration to provide current residents of the area connecting trail or trails to the River Walk. This needs to be defined first. 10. "Prohibition of the use of potable water for permanent industrial cooling. ) This does not prohibit use of well water. Please add well water as a prohibition. For those of us who depend on well water, industrial use of well water sO close to our properties would likely force us off our properties. John Walker Page 3 of3 Hello and good evening. My name is Max Steinbaum, and I am Lu 1701 Cllegchvenue 1 Eosklounes Bs a senior at the-Univ FFC - oege 9043 Apentéand I am the president ofthe Fredericksburg Trails Alliance. Leamet te - dericksburglert - buEFERberA-OR my prioriy-lityartisegaETCONTRSTET pubil bedestrian ss-stS sasiycesibie-om. Campus phmiasisal-aamnt SEAEEIRII-TETeN rails-hadto wwhex a fitonc éffrsathmilhemantr, I - fellin love with the Quarry trail system tofkiko that features wonderful ridges that slope downwards to vernal pools and ruins ofthe old Rappahannock Canal system along the river's stellar rock garden rapids. Overtne Since-then, I have learned more about our region'ssubstantiatr historic and ecological significance as well as connecting with different community members and recreation groups that each connect with our trails in different ways. For these birders, naturalists, hikers, historians, families, bikers, fishers, kayakers, canoers, scuba divers, and many more, much like myself, this land is our local paradise, precariously placed at Fredericksburg's Urban / Wild Interface. I believe that fastracking a data center at this location feels like a step that minimizes this transition zone, becoming less ofa gradient and more ofa distinct border between industrial and recreational land that has been protected under perpetual conservation easement. ttappenis-that one of our trails that has already been straddling this line is on the chopping block. The environment Sdrroupdingthe Epiphany loop comprises of moderate slopes giving way to magnificent oak and beech trees and delicate hydric ecosystems surrounding Fall Quarry Run, not to mention housing some ofour network's most rewarding technical terrain. Additionally, Ridgeline trail is truly the gem ofthe Quarry system, carved on top of and into the ridge, this trail provides unmatched views of the Rappahannock amémapaiftemt.lomramt faunaof allsizes. A data center bordering Ridge potentially threatens this trail in two main ways: First, increased erosion and stormwater down the ridge can most literally eat away at trails and wash them down into the river below. Regarding stormwater management, Fred Trails supports the land use incentivization fyo bigy AMAtE ycoueil proposal submitted Friends ofthe Rappahannock. Second, I fear that the noise pollution could take away from the idyllic nature of the trail that makes it SO special to SO many. Ofcourse, there are other related concerns: ensuring the Rappahannock has enough water returned to it that is of proper temperature, ensuring that the agtuat Quarry maintains itself as a community recreation hub. As for protecting and maintaining your community's trail system, I have listed my concerns. L acknowledge the benefits that come with welcoming a data center to our locality and I hope that a mutually beneficial arrangement is reached with landowners, residents, utilities; developers, but also with the land that it will occupy. Perhaps a more stable placement like the recent proposals for the Hylton Tract a dhs may be more appropriate.. Regarding this location, please help Fred Trails become involved in the process by reaching out to troubleshoot access, potential effects, needed reroutes, etc,. Ifyou want to see what makes this land SO special to me and SO many others, please reach out and we are happy to take a hike with you. - Thank you for this time. RAPPAHANNOCK. HPLLC January 22, 2025 BY EMAIL TO: Tonya B. Lacey, Clerk of Council - For Distribution to Council tlacey@i fredericksburgvagoy Planning Commission PlanningCommissionMembers @f redencksburgva.gov Dear Madam Mayor, Members of City Council and Members of the Planning Commission: As the owner of a third of the proposed Technology Overlay District (TOD), we are an important stakeholder in the ongoing discussions about the proposed TOD ordinance. We previously provided comments to you in our January 7, 2025 letter, which was included in the Staff Report for City Council's January 14, 2025 Regular Session meeting (20467). We want to offer some additional input this evening. First, we agree with Staff's recommendation that 75 acres should be the minimum acreage for a data center campus in the TOD. We understand that Council's vision for the TOD is to have an interconnected data center campus. We are on board with the City's vision, and the 75-acre minimum will achieve that. Seventy-five acres will accommodate a multi-building data center campus with a substation. As you know, the City approved EDA funding for the Dominion power study for the TOD, and the EDA's written authorization to Dominion includes our property. Thus, the City has already deemed our site to be an important part of the City's vision for the TOD. Any minimum acreage greater than 75 takes our parcel out of the mix, which would be directly at odds with that vision. Once Dominion provides more details about the routing of power to the TOD, that will help inform all parties how the TOD could be built-out in a campus-like atmosphere. Second, we note that our engineering firm, which has substantial data center experience in Northern Virginia, has prepared conceptual layouts showing that on our property, we can build approximately 1.3 million square feet of data center and a substation. Based on the fiscal impact analysis presented by the City, our property would generate approximately $25 million in annual tax revenue to the City. We urge you to accept Staff's s reasonable recommendation of a 75-acre minimum. If you enact a minimum greater than that, one-third of the land within the TOD would not meet the minimum requirement. Good zoning practice requires a generally applicable, evenly applied, and fair ordinance that serves the stated purpose of promoting data center development in the TOD. 1 21 Righter Parkway, Suite 301, Wilmington, DE 19803 - Phone: 302.479.8314 - Fax: 302.488.0882 Thank you for the opportunity to continue to provide input. We appreciate your consideration. Sincerely, Q709 James H. Oeste, Jr., CSM Vice President of Real Estate Rappahannock HP LLC c/o Allied Properties CC: Timothy J. Baroody, City Manager tibaroody @ fredericksburvagov Michael J. Craig, Planning Director, Community Planning & Building mjcraig @ fredericksburgvagoy Joshua A. Summits, Director, Economic Development & Tourism jasummits @f fredencksburgvagoy Karen Cohen, Gentry Locke cohen@s gentrylocke.com John Yannacone, Manager, Rappahannock HP LLC c/o Allied Properties johnyannaconet @aol.com 2 21 Righter Parkway, Suite 301, Wilmington, DE 19803 - Phone: 302.479.8314 a Fax: 302.488.0882 From: Spencer Hanemann To: Planning Subject: [EXTERNAL] Renaming of Forrest Avenue Date: Saturday, January 11, 2025 7:51:45 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. To whom it may concern, I1 feel like the process of this name change has been in violation of the city addressing policy, and should therefore not move forward. As per your December 9th notification, this change was "formally requested" by the Memorial Advisory Commission. As per city code 10-292 this request is not within the roles and responsibilities of this commission and therefore the request should be considered a private request under the cities addressing policy. The city is however treating it as a city initiated readdressing which I feel is in violation of the addressing policy and city code. Since the Memorials Advisory Commission has not met the required burden of the private address request change, this should not proceed. If the intention of the city is to proceed with this change despite the violation, I would like to propose multiple name change options outside of the Forest Avenue name. R. Kirkland Avenue- Named for the "Angel of Marye's Heights" Sgt. Kirkland is already memorialized on the battlefield park and deserves recognition from the city for his heroic act of service during the battle of Fredericksburg. Chickadee Avenue- in recognition of one of the great natural creatures that we have here in our city, these birds are constantly present in our neighborhood and invoke not sentiment of racism. John Paul Jones Avenue- Named for the Revolutionary "Father of the Navy" that once called Fredericksburg home. Thank you very much for consideration of my concerns and the name change options that are more in line with what the Memorial Advisory Commission should have offered in the first place. Respectfully, Spencer Hanemann 122 Forrest Avenue, Fredericksburg 22401 Sent from Yahoo Mailf fori iPhone FXBG Area 5 Small Area Plan Planning Commission January 22, 2025 Bailey Thompson - Community Development Planner II FXBG Summary City of Fredericksburg Identify Area 5 Review Process Discuss Proposed Changes Next Steps FXBG Where in the City are we? City of Fredericksburg FaDCill Prince cess Anne N. Route 1 Celebrate Va. Central Park Hospital Cowan Downtown UrfversilyRoutel 1 Route3 South Dixon Braehead a Lafayette S.Routel FXBG Plan Timeline City of Fredericksburg Project Kickoff PC. Discussion Community Meeting PC. Discussion Community Meeting > #1 > #2 June 7, 2023 September 13, 2023 September 20, 2023 November 8, 2023 November 16, 2023 PC. Discussion PC. Discussion Community Meeting PC. Completes City Council Work Comment > Session Transmittal January 10, 2024 February 14, 2024 #3 February 24, 2024 April10, 2024 May 28, 2024 Area 5 Report Architectural Review PC. Concept Architectural Review Converted to Small > Board Discussion Discussion Board Discussion PC. Discussion Area 5 Plan September 23, 2024 September 25, 2024 October 14, 2024 October 23, 2024 City Council Architectural Review Initiation - Board Discussion > PC. PublicHearing A PC. Discussion November 2024 December 11, 2024 January 22, 2025 November 12, 2024 12, FXBG Transect Map City of Fredericksburg KEY - Civic 9 T-1 Preserved Open Space - 4 T-3E Sub-Urban Edge T-3 Sub-Urban T-4 General-Urban T-5C Core-Corridor T-5C Civic % T-4 7 T-1 Preserved Open Space S A Civic T-3E Sub-Urban Edge T-3E salam 9t T-4 T-3 T-3 Sub-Urban T-4 T-4 T-3 Civic S - T-4 General Urban Route3 St- Hasne T-5C Core Corridor Civic Civic T-3E T-4 Gray Ble Phaye and T-1 FXBG Proposed Text Changes City of Fredericksburg Emphasis on College Avenue's pedestrian traffic and Architecturall Eligible Resource UMW National Areas Register District neighborhood commercial opportunity on p. 11(5)-2 IL Potential Neighborhood ConservationArea S Village Transition Area Less defining symbol for Potential Neighborhood Su Conservation Area" on & p. 11(5)-5 7 & Text changes about Neighborhood Conservation Districts y to provide further clarity on p. 11(5)-6 Actions subject to review sauan St Emphasize on benefit of naturally occurring affordable housing Allow for context-Dased unit type/count Route 3 bne St. B a J Groy Ble and Phyxz 3 FXBG Proposed Text Changes City of Fredericksburg Area switched from T-5C to T-4 also transitioned from the "Brain Power District" to the "Village Transition Area" on p. 11(5)-7 & 11(5)-8 EeE 5 TWo new implementation steps on p. 11(5)-15 Neighborhood Commercial Overlay Commercial Corridors Revitalization Study & 4 S a & 7 - S o 4 - B % 5 Village Transition Area Brain Power District FXBG Next Steps City of Fredericksburg Planning Commission Discussion = Tonight Provide feedback on proposed changes to prepare final draft for continued public hearing Small Area 5 Plan Zoning Map Amendment Planning Commission Continued Public Hearing- Feb. 12 FXBG Zoning Map Zoning R-2 - RESIDENTIAL R-4 - RESIDENTIAL R-8 - RESIDENTIAL R-12 - RESIDENTIAL R-16 - RESIDENTIAL R-30 - RESIDENTIAL C-T - COMMERCIAL, / TRANSITIONAL OFFICE C-D - DOWNTOWN BUSINESS C-SC - COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER C-H - COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY CM - CREATIVE MAKER DISTRICT I-1 - INDUSTRIAL LIGHT I-2 INDUSTRIAL GENERAL PD-R - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT RESIDENTIAL 4 PD-C PLANNED DEVELOPMENT COMMERCIAL PD-MU PLANNED DEVELOPMENT MIXED USE PD-MC - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT MEDICAL CENTER Fxipce Land Use Map Future Land Use Civic T1 T2 T3E T3 T4 T4W T4M T5M T5 T5C T5W T6 Special District Low Density Medium Density High Density Planned Development Mixed Use Transitional Office General Commercial General Industrial Light Research & Development Institutional Parkland Preservation FXBG Form-Based Code City of Fredericksburg How zoning defines a Focus primarily on the "form" one-block parcel Relationship of the buildings to Density, use, FAR (floor-area ratio), setbacks, parking requirements, each other and the public realm and maximum building height(s) specified. Form and mass of buildings Scale and type of streets Where in the City? "T-5C Core-Corridor" designations How form-based codes within the Commerca-Hignway define a one-block parcel Zoning District Street and building types (or mix of a types), build-tol lines, mumbero rof "T-4M & T-5M" designations floors, and percentage of built site frontage specified. within the Creative Maker Zoning District Planned Development Zoning Districts y FXBG Form-Based Code City of Fredericksburg Primary Components: A) Public Component Between the street center line and the public right-of-way line B) Private Component Yards, building placement tools, and parking lot placement tools on private property C) Building Type Permitted Identify building types and frontages Setbacks, building orientation, transparency, mass, scale, and building façade activation FXBG T5-C Core Corridor Transect City of Fredericksburg Focus to retrofit and redevelopment of auto-oriented shopping centers into mixed-use nodes with human-scaled T5-C Transect Parcels urban streets Frontage B Frontage E Applies with redevelopment incorporating residential or mixed-use Bivd- Perl BA Sam Legal Application: a B Zoning Map Amendment to Apply T-5C transect on Commercial Highway Zoning District parcels For Small Area 5: Rezoning from Commercial Shopping Center to Commercial Highway Activation of T5-C Core-Corridor Transect FXBG T5-C Core Corridor Transect City of Fredericksburg Small Area T5-C Transect 6 Activation Future Land Use Civic T1 Special District T2 Low Density T3E Medium Density Small Area T3 High Density 3 T4 Planned Development Mixed Use T4W Transitional Office T4M General Commercial T5M General Industrial T5 Light Research & Development Small Area T5C Institutional 10 T5W Parkland T6 Preservation FXBG Zoning Map City of Fredericksburg Commercial Shopping Center (CSC) Small Area rezoning to 6 Commercial Highway (CH) Zoning R-2 - RESIDENTIAL R-4 - RESIDENTIAL R-8 - RESIDENTIAL R-12 - RESIDENTIAL R-16 - RESIDENTIAL R-30 - RESIDENTIAL C-T - COMMERCIAL / TRANSITIONAL OFFICE C-D - DOWNTOWN BUSINESS Small Area C-SC - COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER 3 C-H - COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY CM CREATIVE MAKER DISTRICT I-1 - INDUSTRIAL LIGHT I-2 INDUSTRIAL GENERAL PD-R PLANNED DEVELOPMENT RESIDENTIAL PD-C PLANNED DEVELOPMENT COMMERCIAL PD-MU PLANNED DEVELOPMENT MIXED USE PD-MC PLANNED DEVELOPMENT MEDICAL CENTER FXBG T5-C Core Corridor Transect = Area 3 City of Fredericksburg T-5C Transect Map Small Area 3 Required 4 parcels to be rezoned CSC to CH à ELMONT - Recommended in Small Area 3 Comprehensive T5C E % "von OR & & o Plan Amendment Approved as amendment to the Unified & 4 % Development Ordinance 3E ENTHE 6 Approved July 19, 2019 o e 6 PLANK RD EXISTINGZONING MAP PROPOSED ZONING MAP X E N GREENWAY E REZ ONING a E - , % 3 * - 3 ASE & - 3 E - a 3 ASSPME :t ai :: * * 4 5 W A E E May:36 2 4 a 1 ADMAME Ga , 80 S * FXBG T5-C Core Corridor Transect = Area 6 City of Fredericksburg Required 5 parcels be rezoned from CSC to CH Recommended in Small Area 6 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Approved as amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance Approved July 9, 2019 EXISTING ZONING MAP PROPOSED ZONING MAP T-5C Transect Map Small Area 6 CTY FREDERICH OF CKSBURG CITY FREDERICH OF CKSBURG VIRGINIA VIRGINIA Officialz lapor Zoning por fficial Zon ning ah à - 2 a a 2 - Logend April9/2019 * TS n FXBG T5-C Core Corridor Transect = Area 10 City of Fredericksburg Existing CH T-5C Frontage and Transect Map zoning November 28, 2023 Application of the T5-C Transect Frontage Types - Frontage E a Approved alongside Small Area 10 S Comp. Plan Amendment T-5C Transect N Feet - Approved Sep. 10, 2024 0 75150 300 Kind St. / Dunning Mills Rd. FXBG Neighborhood Focus City of Fredericksburg Neighborhood Conservation Districts: Architecturall Resource Areas Eligible UMW National Register District Building Width Averaging LI Potential Neighborhood ConservationArea S Village Transition Area Building Scale Minimum Façade Transparency Su Façade Features & Required 7 Context-Based Housing Arrangement & Review of Demolition y Pattern Books and Design Guidelines sauan St Vacating Old Right-of-Way Stubs for Pedestrian Connections and Open Space Route 3 bne St. B Work with Civic Uses to Reduce Parking Demand and a Increase Safety on Adjacent Streets J Groy Ble and Phyxz 9 FXBG Village Transition Area City of Fredericksburg Potential for Walkable Commercial, Entertainment, Dining, and Service Uses & 7 3 Character Structure Designations (more detail to come) Period of significance of 1946 (completion of the Route 1 Bypass) o C D & 2 X through 1974 (1973 oil embargo/general decline in new 6 R & S o a ha 3 construction in vicinity). & RRR 0 - Future Form Based Code potential: F Focus on Frontages C - a A a Shared Access and Rear Loaded Parking Village Transition Area Character Structure Transitional Zones (Height steps, Mass, Buffer, Alley) Evaluate "Pre-Approved Plans" for Historic Housing Types Built within Route 3 the Existing Lot Pattern - d 8 B FXBG 'Brain Power District I City of Fredericksburg Unique Economic Development Opportunity at the Confluence of the City's Two Major Institutional Partners (UMW and MWH) and the a Rk Power Substation Short-term Property Improvements to Encourage Façade and & Landscaping Upgrades SAeN Form Based Code Approach to Major Redevelopment: Re-establish Historic Block Pattern Focus on and Orientation Frontages Building Shared Access and Rear Loaded Parking Focus on Formal Open Spaces Including the Repurpose of the Antiquated Service Road a a I % S Brain Power District Village Transition Area Conceptual Block Pattern / Street Network Conceptual Formal Open Spaces FXBG Area 5 Historic Foundation City of Fredericksburg Architecturall Resource Areas Eligible UMW National Register District LI Potential Neighborhood ConservationArea S Village Transition Area Su Older Neighborhoods with an Established Form and & Pattern 7 & y Older (Typically) Non-Residentia Buildings that May Now be Considered Historic sauan St Eligible National Register District Centered on the University of Mary Washington Route 3 St. B bne a J Groy Ble and Phyxz 3 FXBG Character Structures City of Fredericksburg 24 designated buildings as Character Structures in the Local Historic & Inventory of Structures 7 1 3 Architectural Review Board Action on Nov. 12, 2024 5 o D & X C o . R & S o a ha 3 9 Benefits of Character Structure Designation & RRR 0 - F Qualification for exemptions in the International Existing - C a A a Buildings Code (IEBC) and Unified Development Ordinance Village Transition Area (UDO) such as parking requirements and interior modifications. Character Structure C Priority given to adaptive reuse where form-based code applies. Flexibility in site development standards. Route Policy language and documentation of resources provides - support for preservation in entitlement processes. d 47 6 FXBG Vehicular Mobility City of Fredericksburg College Avenue / US Route 1 / Eagle Village Drive Intersection 9 - Eagle Village Road Network Augustine Avenue Access / Crossing 1 E Route 3 E to US Route 1 N Ramp Rebuild (SmartScale Round 4) 3 SVla $ & Beverly Drive Access Management a Downtown Connector d Gny Pkny FXBG Bike / Pedestrian Mobility and Safety City of Fredericksburg Sidewalk Infill: Westmont Greenbrier Olde William William Street Corridor: 1 Reinstitute On-Street Parking 3 Traffic Calming (1200 = 1300 Blocks) Enhanced Pedestrian Corridor (to Downtown) 3 re e * Downtown Connector a - 6 - Rou a Beverly Drive Connector Neighborhood Traffic Calming: Stafford Avenue d Gray Pky College Avenue Keeneland Road - Hanover Street FXBG Linking the Uplands Open Space City of Fredericksburg Marye's Heights to the Battleground Athletic Complex Connections UMW Performing Arts Center 2) Rowe Street / Cornell Street Bicycle 3) Boulevard (The Heslep Amphitheatre Connection) Olde William Street Pedestrian Connection Expanding Alum Spring Park and Connecting Via Downtown Connector and William Street - Campus Walk FXBG Zoning Map Amendment City of Fredericksburg Rezone Commercial Shopping Center to Commercial Highway Adopt Form-Based Regulations T5-C Transect Parcels Frontage B Frontage E Public frontage (below) - complete BNvd- street with pedestrian orientation. Peri Gpa Gam Private - consistent frontage building envelope and parking / service located behind the buildings. FrontageB BPublic Component: Frontagel EPublic Component: Zoning Map Zoning R-2 - RESIDENTIAL R-4 - RESIDENTIAL R-8 - RESIDENTIAL R-12 - RESIDENTIAL R-16 - RESIDENTIAL R-30 - RESIDENTIAL C-T - COMMERCIAL, / TRANSITIONAL OFFICE C-D - DOWNTOWN BUSINESS C-SC - COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER C-H - COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY CM - CREATIVE MAKER DISTRICT I-1 - INDUSTRIAL LIGHT I-2 INDUSTRIAL GENERAL PD-R - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT RESIDENTIAL 4 PD-C PLANNED DEVELOPMENT COMMERCIAL PD-MU PLANNED DEVELOPMENT MIXED USE PD-MC - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT MEDICAL CENTER Future Land Use Map Future Land Use Civic T1 T2 T3E T3 T4 T4W T4M T5M T5 T5C T5W T6 Special District Low Density Medium Density High Density Planned Development Mixed Use Transitional Office General Commercial General Industrial Light Research & Development Institutional Parkland Preservation