The work session of the Stafford County Planning Commission of Wednesday, August 15, 2007, was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Chairman William Cook in the Board of Supervisors Chambers of the County Administrative Center.

Members Present: Cook, Kirby, Pitzel, Mitchell, Carlone, Rhodes, and Di Peppe

Members Absent:

Staff Present: Baker, Judy, Zuraf, Stepowany, Schulte, Schultis and Gregori

Declarations of Disqualification

None

UNIFINISHED BUSINESS:

1. Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan – Centreport Gateway – A proposed amendment to the Land Use Plan map component of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendment would redesignate Assessor’s Parcel 37-25 from Light Industrial, Suburban Residential, and Resource Protection land use to Urban Commercial and Resource Protection land use consisting of 51.25 acres, located on the west side of Interstate 95 separated in two parts by Centerport Parkway within the Hartwood Election District. The Urban Commercial designation would allow development of commercial retail and office uses. (Time Limit: October 16, 2007)(Deferred to the August 15, 2007 Work Session)

2. RC2700199; Reclassification – Centreport Gateway - A proposed reclassification from A-1, Agricultural to B-2, Urban Commercial Zoning District to allow for the development of a commercial office park to include a mix of offices, retail commercial uses, and a hotel on Assessor's Parcel 37-25 consisting of 51.25 acres, located on the west side of Interstate 95 separated in two parts by Centreport Parkway within the Hartwood Election District. The Comprehensive Plan recommends the property for Light Industrial, Suburban Residential, and Resource Protection uses. The Light Industrial designation would allow light industrial, light manufacturing and office uses. The Suburban Residential use would permit single family residential development at a density of three (3) dwelling units per acre. See Section 28-35 of the Zoning Ordinance for a full listing of permitted uses in the B-2 Zoning District. (Time Limit: September 18, 2007) (Deferred to the August 15, 2007 Work Session)

Mr. Zuraf stated there was a proffer change regarding access. He stated Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) would not break access on Centreport Parkway. He stated the applicant proposed access off of the Mine Road extension.

Frank Cox, The Cox Company, stated their view of access to the site was altered. He stated, in is opinion, this should be a dominate gateway property at the interchange and the Mine Road extension was essential to the development of the area. He stated there was a new plan for development of the property and the revised proffers incorporated comments from the Planning Commission. He stated there would be changes to the master plan, with access off of the Mine Road extension. He stated they had looked at different architectural styles and were committed to the design being a condition of zoning approval.

Mr. Di Peppe stated the recharge area of the aquifer runs through this section of the County and asked if it would be possible to get pervious materials for the pedestrian trails.

Mr. Cox stated the project was creating a site with high Economic Development potential. He stated parking garages would reduce the concrete area and there was the possibility of a water amenity on site if it passed the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). He stated, in his opinion, the best way to recharge groundwater was to slow the water down.

Mr. Di Peppe stated it was important to pay attention to recharge of the aquifer.

Mr. Cox stated they could commit to pervious pavement for trails, but not the parking lot.

Mrs. Kirby asked about the status of the Phase 1 Study.

Mr. Cox stated a copy was transmitted to staff.

Mrs. Kirby asked that 5 copies of the finished study be sent to Mr. Zuraf.

Mr. Pitzel asked about a possible pedestrian walkway under Centreport Parkway.

Mr. Cox stated there was not a pedestrian walkway.

Mr. Pitzel stated, in his opinion, the two properties should have a pedestrian connection or they would be very remote.

Mr. Cox stated the synergy between the two lots was lost because access was not granted off of Centreport Parkway.

Mr. Pitzel stated people would walk a quarter of a mile. He stated the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) would need to be completely redone.

Mr. Cox stated it was important to have the Planning Commissions input and the traffic generation would not be changing.

Mrs. Carlone asked if the applicant had spoken with the adjacent parcel owner.

Mr. Cox stated he was unsure if the applicant had spoken with Mr. Melrod.

Mrs. Carlone stated once the other projects start coming into Centreport Parkway the traffic density would increase.

Mr. Cox stated it would be economically impossible to do a bridge over Centreport Parkway. He stated, in his opinion, the money would be better spent for the County on the Mine Road extension.

Mrs. Carlone stated there are two streams which need to be looked at a little more closely. She stated the Planning Commission needed the architectural designs.

Mrs. Carlone made a motion to keep Items 1 and 2 in committee. Mrs. Kirby seconded. The motion passed 7-0.

Mr. Cook stated Items 1 and 2 would be discussed at the September 5, 2007 Work Session.

PRESENTATION:

Aquia Town Center

Ed Wisner, RAMCO Gershenson, stated there was a public forum in April to discuss the redevelopment of Aquia Town Center. He stated the site would be ground up development and redevelopment. He stated the site today was 36 acres with 300,000 square feet of single story retail, including a cinema at the rear of the site. He stated the intent was to demolish the whole site and redevelop which would then have 700,000 square feet of office space and 120,000 square feet of office over retail. He stated there would be a 60,000 square foot cinema. He stated they hoped to have the site open by spring 2009. He stated there was a large team including Brown, Craig, Turner Architects, Leming & Healy, Bowman Consulting, and Joe Besieger with RAMCO.

Bryce Turner, Brown, Craig, Turner Architects, stated the project was not just about the buildings, but everything around the development. He stated there would be 2 office buildings, state of the art cinema to anchor the development, retailers, and a feature restaurant around which the town square would be located. He stated the office building sits at the end of the street. He stated they were taking more traditional designs into consideration and there would be a lot of brick in the sidewalks, lamppost, and awnings to create a pedestrian friendly community. He stated there would be curved, arched tops to windows. He stated the site was continuing to evolve as they work with retailers and office tenants.

Mrs. Carlone asked how much acreage was in the Fairfax Town Center.

Mr. Turner stated it was 50 acres, all on grade with parking structures to be added.

Mrs. Carlone asked where the parking would be for the Aquia Town Center.

Mr. Turner stated they were currently studying three parking structures.

Mr. Pitzel stated the parking Mr. Turner showed on the slides was multi-level.

Mr. Turner stated yes.

Mr. Pitzel stated, in his opinion, they may want to consider making sure the cinema owner was THX certified.

Mr. Turner stated that was a great idea.

Mrs. Kirby asked if they had met with the current tenants.

Mr. Wisner stated people within RAMCO Gershenson had met with all the tenants, most personally or by phone and letters.

Mr. Di Peppe stated he was very excited about the integrated design. He stated the site was located in the middle of the recharge area for the aquifer.

Mr. Wisner stated there would be a major analysis into the recharge area and they would like to do some environmental friendly designs.

Mr. Turner stated every time they create a main street project there was the discussion of angle parking versus parallel parking. He stated, in his opinion, he preferred angle parking because there was a lot more parking area. He stated parallel parking on busy streets was not easy. He stated parallel parking keeps the buildings closer together and the street was not as wide. He stated they were trying to provide as much surface parking as possible.

Mr. Di Peppe stated when he was visiting a grocery store in Beauford, South Carolina and the parking lot was landscaped with a large of amount of shrubbery. He stated a small amount of attention can enhance the overall project.

Mr. Turner stated the bar was getting higher and they certainly want the site to be state of the art.

Mr. Cook thanked Mr. Wisner and Mr. Turner for their presentation.

ORDINANCE COMMITTEE:

Lifecare/Retirement Zoning District

Mr. Stepowany stated he had looked at certain items in the Zoning Ordinance as they pertain to a lifecare facility. He stated there was a section in the revised Lifecare Zoning District which would require a special exception for employee dwellings for watchmen, caretakers, and various other employees. He stated a transitional buffer would surround the entire community. He stated in Section 28.127 there were restrictions for signs. He stated there would be loading and parking requirements.

Mrs. Kirby asked how many dwelling units would be allowed.

Mr. Stepowany stated the number of employee dwellings was subject to a special exception or Conditional Use Permit.

Mr. Pitzel thanked Mr. Stepowany for including employee dwellings in the Ordinance.

Mr. Stepowany stated the current applicant did not want employee dwellings on site.

Mrs. Carlone stated she was concerned about the buildings being 75 feet in height.

Mr. Stepowany stated he discussed the issue with Andrew Milliken of Fire and Rescue Services and it was determined that the higher the height of a building the more strict the building regulations. He stated taller buildings were preferred because they are safer buildings.

Mrs. Carlone stated she was concerned about evacuation of the buildings. She asked if a church group could have a place of worship on the site.

Mr. Stepowany stated hospitals can have chapels. He stated places of worship would be an accessory use.

Mrs. Kirby made a motion to set Lifecare/Retirement Zoning Districts for public hearing. Mr. Mitchell seconded. The motion passed 7-0.

ADJOURNMENT

With no further business to discuss the meeting was adjourned at 6:45 p.m.