Leesburg Planning Commission sends Greenway Manor rezoning to work session after traffic and buffer questions

The Leesburg Planning Commission voted Feb. 20 to send a rezoning application for Greenway Manor (TLZM 2018-00005) to a work session on March 20 so staff and the applicant can resolve outstanding transportation, phasing and proffer details.

Chris Murphy, senior planning project manager in Leesburg’s Community Development Department, told the commission the application proposes a concept-plan amendment and rezoning of two parcels totaling about 8.85 acres at the southwest corner of Greenway Drive and South King Street. The plan would reuse historic structures and add new construction to accommodate an indoor theater, office space, a K–8 school expansion, a place of worship, restaurants without drive-throughs, limited retail and a commercial inn. "Staff finds the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the land use vision for this property," Murphy said, while noting remaining concerns about the traffic impact analysis, phasing and some text corrections.

Applicant representatives said the project aims to retain the manor house and farm complex while adding new uses. The applicant described a three-phase build: a performing-arts theater and gallery clustered around the historic barn in phase 1; expanded school facilities in phase 2; and a 40‑room boutique hotel with ancillary services in phase 3. The applicant said the theater would be an enclosed, professionally equipped space seating roughly 300–350 people and that events would be indoors. "I just want this to be something when people drive by this, they're gonna say, 'woah. What is that? I wanna go there,'" the applicant told the commission.

Staff noted the town’s Board of Architectural Review reviewed the proposal and found the additions and new construction to be architecturally sympathetic to the manor and farm complex. The application also requests several waivers and modifications to buffer yard widths, front-yard setbacks and dumpster setbacks under the town's zoning ordinance; staff recommended granting the waivers provided certain landscape and screening commitments are met.

A recurring issue in staff review and in public comments was transportation. Murphy said the town transportation engineer has identified outstanding issues regarding project phasing, peak-hour factors and site access, and is working with the applicant’s traffic consultant to resolve them. Murphy added that the applicant’s most recent traffic projections showed about 30% less traffic than the 2012 approved concept for the site, but the engineer remains engaged to confirm model assumptions and turning-movement impacts.

Residents who spoke during the public-comment portion urged the commission to reject or delay the rezoning, citing noise, traffic and impacts on nearby wetlands and residential streets. "My home should be in all of those renderings. I'm right there," said Ashley Martinez, who said her house sits roughly 300 feet from the site and expressed concern about event noise and parking overflow. Other speakers voiced similar concerns about traffic backing up onto Greenway Drive and Mead Drive, impacts on a pond and wetland habitat, and the scale of commercial uses adjacent to established single-family neighborhoods.

The applicant and staff repeatedly told commissioners that public outdoor concerts are not part of the plan and that the theater would be enclosed and acoustically treated. Staff also noted the applicant has proffered operational controls — such as lighting standards, delivery and trash pickup times, and parking management measures — intended to reduce neighborhood impacts. Murphy said fiscal-impact modeling prepared in-house indicates the proposed development would be net positive to the town budget by an estimated $91,389 per year from personal property and BPOL taxes tied to the commercial inn and establishment uses.

After questions from commissioners about comparative traffic (projected traffic from this application versus the previously approved 2012 entitlements), wetlands mitigation, parking management and the specifics of proposed buffers, a commissioner moved to forward TLZM 2018-00005 to a March 20 work session with direction that the applicant work with staff to resolve outstanding transportation and proffer issues. The motion was seconded and the commission voted in favor to send the item to work session. The commission did not adopt the rezoning at the Feb. 20 hearing; the work session will allow staff and the applicant to provide additional studies and revised proffers for the commission’s further consideration.

Next steps: staff and the applicant will continue to reconcile the traffic impact analysis with the town transportation engineer, clarify phasing and the locations and scope of play/field areas for the school, refine buffer and landscaping commitments, and provide updated exhibits that show the proposed buildings in scale relative to adjacent homes. The commission asked that materials provided for the March 20 work session include clear slide numbers, a site circulation diagram, a parking-management plan (including proposed off-site parking and shuttle arrangements if needed), distance measurements between proposed buildings and neighboring houses, and an updated fiscal comparison using current-dollar assumptions versus the 2012 entitlement.

Votes at a glance: The commission voted to forward TLZM 2018-00005 to a March 20, 2025 work session for additional review; the motion carried (vote counts not specified in the hearing record provided).