Manassas Park hears rezoning request for Ivy Park townhomes as applicants offer proffers, buffer changes and parking waivers

Manassas Park planning staff and the applicant presented a rezoning and waiver package Oct. 7 for the Ivy Park site, a roughly six‑acre assemblage split between industrial and PUD zoning that the developer proposes to consolidate into a planned unit development for 86 townhomes.

Michelle Berry, the city’s planning and zoning administrator, told the governing body the parcels lie within the City Center Redevelopment District and that the application seeks multiple waivers, including permission for 100% residential use and a reduction of the required 40‑foot vegetative buffer to 20 feet adjacent to an existing industrial business park. Berry said the application includes “four affordable dwelling units and five workforce dwelling housing units” in the staff report and described standard provisions in the proposed license and proffer package.

The applicant’s team—represented by Jonelle Cameron of Walsh, Colucci—said the proposal provides 33.8 percent open space (about 2.1 acres), three on‑site green spaces, landscaping and a solid vinyl fence along the eastern and northern property lines. Cameron said the development would offer nine units the applicant described as affordable: “Of those 9, half will be made available to folks that earn up to 70% AMI … and half of those will be made available to people earning up to 80% AMI,” with the 80%‑AMI units first offered to qualifying city employees.

Cameron also said the applicant will “limit that time from 12 months to 6 months” for the proffered period to underground utilities if that change is desired by the governing body, and stated the team could make that change “this evening.” The staff report had described an approximately $1,887,000 cash proffer to the city, and a subsequent proffer of $15,000 earmarked for lighting improvements requested by nearby Belmont Reserve residents.

Council members and nearby residents pressed the applicant and staff on three recurring concerns: the reduced buffer between future homes and the existing Digital Park Business Center, storm‑water drainage capacity, and the community‑mailbox/parking layout. One council member recalled previous complaints about noise from tenants in the adjacent industrial buildings and said a buffer performs “a port between the industrial and the residential zone.”

A Belmont Station resident told the governing body she can “attest to the noise that comes from the Digital Park Business Center,” saying music, late‑night activity and dumpster noise are audible from the neighborhood and that a larger buffer or a masonry wall had proven effective on other adjacent developments.

On stormwater, staff said site‑plan review will include detailed storm‑drain capacity analysis and any required on‑site mitigation; the city’s site‑plan review is the procedural step where drainage and detailed utility layouts are resolved. The applicant said playground areas will be fenced and that mailboxes will be clustered; staff committed to provide the exact mailbox setback during the site‑plan stage.

Traffic consultants presented a traffic impact analysis that, under the required 2 percent annual growth assumption and inclusion of other approved or in‑progress local projects, shows intersections studied operating at the same level of service in the future as they do today. The applicant said it is providing 205 parking spaces versus the project’s required 201 spaces under current city rules.

Staff recommended approval of the rezoning application, the zoning waivers and the requested public‑facilities waivers, and noted the Planning Commission recommended approval of the zoning waivers and PFM waivers except for one item involving a reduced street width. No final rezoning vote was taken at the Oct. 7 meeting; the public hearing was closed and further consideration will occur after the applicant submits revised proffers and the final development plan for council action.

Why it matters: The site sits inside the City Center Redevelopment District, an area the city designates for higher‑intensity, mixed‑use redevelopment. The council must weigh tradeoffs—added housing and some affordable units, proffered funds and public amenities—against reduced buffers and other departures from standard development requirements that affect neighboring residents.

What’s next: The council closed the public hearing and asked the applicant to supply additional details in the site‑plan and proffer documents. Staff said items such as stormwater capacity, the mailbox cluster location and fence/wall details will be resolved through the site‑plan review and final proffer language prior to formal council action.