Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning 3430 Fall Hill topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission recommends approval for 3430 Fall Hill rezoning and special exception, with conditions
Summary
The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend City Council approve a rezoning and special exception for 3430 Fall Hill (Gray Star Development), subject to proffers, timing commitments and further conditions on building materials and parking design.
Get email alerts on the Rezoning 3430 Fall Hill topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Fredericksburg Planning Commission voted 7–0 to recommend City Council approve a zoning map amendment and a special exception for a mixed‑use project at 3430 Fall Hill Avenue, a proposal from Gray Star Development that would rezone approximately 34.724 acres and would include commercial space and more than 600 residential units across townhouse and multifamily product types.
The application, introduced by planning staff at the June meeting, requests a rezoning of 34.724 acres from R‑2 (Residential) to a mix of Commercial Highway (CH) for about 9.5 acres and Planned Development Residential (PDR) for about 25 acres. The applicant would build up to 50,000 square feet of commercial space (anchored by a proposed specialty grocer), approximately 240 townhouse/“2‑over‑2” ownership units and 365 multifamily rental units. The applicant also asked for a special exception to exceed Commercial Highway parking minimums (the application showed 412 commercial parking spaces, about 186 spaces above the minimum requirement for the CH portion), citing the anchor grocery tenant’s projected draw.
City planning staff summarized the proposal’s consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and the Area 1 small‑area plan, the planned Gordon Shelton Boulevard extension through the site, proposed open space and buffers, and a cash proffer package to offset public‑services impacts. Staff said the applicant’s cash proffers total roughly $6.2 million and reflected school and public‑safety mitigation as described in the staff report. Staff also recommended conditions: dedication of right‑of‑way for Gordon Shelton Boulevard and construction timing for traffic signal and turn‑lane work; public access easements over private lanes (Islip Lane and Shadmore Drive) to preserve future block connectivity; and participation in a future pro‑rata sewer capacity program for downstream improvements.
The applicant team, represented by attorney Charlie Payne for Gray Star Development and Will Douginson, a civil engineer with Bowman Consulting, described the project as an infill mixed‑use development intended to provide housing variety and a specialty grocery not currently available within 30 miles. Payne said the development would include formal open space, a 10‑foot shared‑use path along the Gordon Shelton Boulevard extension and a compact block and street grid with sidewalks and traffic calming. The applicant proffered a limit that no vinyl siding would be used on multifamily building exteriors and offered to limit vinyl on townhouse facades to locations not facing public roads; the applicant also proffered at least ten studio units and limited the number of three‑bedroom multifamily units.
Public commenters raised concerns about school and service impacts, the adequacy of proffers relative to project scope and fiscal‑impact assumptions, and whether a proposed grocery would draw regional traffic rather than primarily serve new local rooftops. Two members of the public asked the commission to re‑examine the fiscal‑impact assumptions and consider a larger proffer. Staff responded that school capacity exists under current attendance patterns, that the applicant’s proffered $6.2 million corresponds to the city’s cost models, and that the applicant committed to participate in any forthcoming pro‑rata sewer capacity program.
After discussion, Planning Commissioner Mary Margaret Marshall moved to recommend approval to City Council with staff conditions and two additional elements: (1) direction for the applicant to consider building‑material choices (the commission requested the applicant further consider vinyl usage on side facades) and (2) for staff to draft a condition addressing parking‑area surfacing/landscape strategies (for example, bioretention/bioswale and pervious surface treatments) to reduce stormwater, heat‑island effects and site runoff where feasible. The motion passed 7–0.
