Kline/Stanley Martin Project
Below is the latest version of the project as presented to LOCCA at their July 2018 meeting:
| kline_presentation_for_7.26.18_locca_pelt_community_meeting.pdf |
Below is the version of the Kline Project as presented at the March, 2018 MIDCO meeting.
| kline_presentation_for_3.14.18_community_meeting.pdf |
The Planning Commission recommended denial of the Kline Project in November. Supervisor Nohe released the following letter afterwords on November 19th:
Dear neighbors-
I am writing today to provide follow up information about the proposed Kline Property zoning, about which you have contacted me in the past. I want to thank all of the citizens who have written to me and my colleagues, attended a community meeting, or who spoke at the Planning Commission earlier this week. I want to assure you that your comments were heard and that they had a substantial and important impact on this proposal.
Last Wednesday evening, the County Planning Commission voted to recommend that the Board of County Supervisors deny the proposed zoning application in its current form, and specifically to deny the request that the County’s comprehensive plan be amended. The motion to recommend denial was made by my appointee to the Planning Commission, Alex Vanegas, and he did so based on the conversations that he and I had in advance of the meeting. Alex and I agree that the current proposal is not a good fit for the parcels at the corner of Prince William Parkway and Liberia Avenue, and that it does not make sense for the Board to amend the comprehensive plan at this time.
This case was expected to be heard by the Board of County Supervisors in December or January, but I have spoken to the developer and explained to him that I do not want for this case to be scheduled for a Board meeting in its current form. I feel that this would not be a good use of the community’s time or of the Board’s agenda because I feel confident that it would not be approved by the Board of County Supervisors, and that I certainly would not be able to support it. He has agreed to defer any further action on this case, so I do not anticipate that there will be another public hearing in the immediate future.
I anticipate that the applicant will now take some time to re-evaluate their proposal and consider their options. I have explained to them that any future proposal for rezoning will need to be consistent with the county’s comprehensive plan and must take seriously the concerns raised by citizens, such as yourself, and the Planning Commission. I can state with some certainly the owners of the Kline property still desire to sell their land, and it is important to note that state law does protect the landowner’s right to sell or develop their land, so long as any rezoning proposal is consistent with the County’s comprehensive plan. If the applicant chooses to substantially amend their proposal, it is likely that any new plans would have to be reviewed again by the Planning Commission before coming to the County Board, so there will be plenty of advance opportunity for citizens to review and comment on it.
Once I have more information about what the next steps will be, I will reach out once again to provide you with an update. In the meantime if you have any questions, or if my office can assist you in any other matter, please do not hesitate to contact me at any time.
Yours-
Marty Nohe
MIDCO 10/4/17 response to some misleading and/or false claims that have been made regarding the Kline Stanley Martin project:
- “The density for this project is considerably lower than what’s outlined in the county Comprehensive Plan.” This is an unfair comparison because it refers to an extremely unlikely scenario. It assumes that every use category allowed under the Comprehensive Plan would be built to the maximum individual levels allowed. A project proposing that would likely never see the light of day because it is a misreading of the intent of the plan. The maximum densities are listed category by category but no project is expected to maximize every category.
-
- “The proffers proposed for this project are significant and a project coming later wouldn’t be expected to provide these proffered monetary offsets.” There are two problems with this scenario. First, if adequate offsets aren’t provided, the project shouldn’t be approved and allowed to be built; and second, the general assembly is expected to roll-back the recent proffer changes and enable sufficient proffers again.
- “Another developer could propose an even denser development.” A developer can propose anything, but we rely on our leaders to ensure that only the projects that work for the community are approved. This defeatist approach is exactly what has led to our current overcrowded highways, schools and reduced quality of life. If the precedent is set that the community and leaders expect a certain level of compatibility and quality in new projects, these unacceptable proposals will cease being proposed in the first place.
- “Under the county’s current plans, the section of the site closest to the Liberia-Parkway intersection is designed to be a mixture of retail space and apartments, with the rest designated for larger lots for single-family homes.” According to the Comprehensive Plan, this property is intended “to provide for areas of low- to mid-rise offices (including government offices, particularly those for Prince William County agencies), research and development, lodging, and mixed-use projects planned and developed in a comprehensive, coordinated manner.” In contrast, this developer plans a gas station, CVS, drive-thru fast food and a storage facility, all uses not recommended here, which is why they have to have special exceptions before they would be allowed.
- Regarding the expected additional 15,000 vehicle trips per day: “No single development really moves the needle [on traffic]. If these homes don’t get built, some other ones will.” This kind of thinking keeps us behind the curve on solving traffic congestion. Possible future improvements to Rt. 28 could somewhat address current gridlock situations, but approving tens of thousands of new vehicle trips project by project every year will soon overload even those improvements. Each project does matter, and we can’t continue to use possible future road improvements to avoid making the hard decisions now if we are ever to ever to get ahead of the congestion problem.
As we move forward to the public hearings and final decision it becomes even more important to be sure we’re operating from an accurate knowledge base. Our intention is to address inaccuracies so residents and leaders can make decisions based on good planning and not unfounded fear or misleading claims.
Project Information
A developer has proposed a new project for the Kline farm area, which is a 100 acre property on the left of Prince William Parkway as you approach Manassas from the east. A project called the Pyramid Center was proposed here a few years ago and was roundly rejected by the community. This latest proposal for the property involves about 400 housing units including town houses on the middle portion and 442,000 square feet of commercial development on the western area. The current Comprehensive Plan recommends that the 100 acre project be divided into a 40-acre semi-rural residential (SRR) area and a 60 acre area nearer Manassas that would be for commercial uses and is designated Community Employment Center (CEC). The CEC designation would allow business and retail use, strip shopping centers, etc. The 40-acre SRR area is currently planned for larger lot homes with an average density of 2.5 acres per home. The unfortunate juxtaposition of intense commercial uses right next to semi-rural housing that the Comprehensive Plan recommends here is problematic, as detailed below, and is really the only reason a plan like this could even be considered by the county.
There are two important points to remember regarding this proposal:
1. The applicant is asking the county (and the community) for a significant change to the county Comprehensive Plan that guides development (a Comp Plan Amendment, or CPA). This is a major change and would result in much more housing density on the forty acres of land currently planned for large-lot development (SRR). This proposed change requires public hearings for a reason- so residents can help decide if such a major change is appropriate and acceptable to them. The community has a voice in this and should exercise their right to be heard and decide how this property is developed.
2. Instead of reducing or changing that incongruous 60 acres of CEC, this new application would actually spread the CEC classification over the entire 100 acres in order to make the area a Center of Community, which would allow higher housing density across the entire parcel. This includes many more homes on the forty acres currently planned for large lot homes. We feel one better way to address the incongruity in the Comprehensive Plan would be to provide the transition to lower density within the existing sixty acres of CEC near the City Of Manassas and retain the SRR designation on the forty acres that is bordered by the existing semi-rural community. No CPA would be needed for this. Probably the best way to deal with the incongruity in the Comprehensive Plan would be to reduce the 60 acres of CEC in this area during the next Comprehensive Plan update. We already have too many strip shopping centers in the area and sixty more acres featuring 442,000 feet of commercial space in this location is not needed. What is needed is to change the Comprehensive Plan to reflect the reality of current and future market conditions and community desires.
More info on the Kline Project is available below. You can contact the Planning Commission and/or the Board Of County Supervisors to make your opinion known. Planning Commission: http://www.pwcgov.org/government/dept/planning/Documents/2016%20PC%20Contact%20Listing%20Website.pdf
Board Of County Supervisors: http://www.pwcgov.org/government/bocs/pages/bocs-contact-information.aspx
| midco_kline_information_packet-4.pdf |
| post-sub_review_package.pdf |
| kline_overview_picture_macro.docm |