Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Draft Area 5 small‑area plan presented, ARB to recommend character‑structure list
Summary
City planning staff presented a draft Area 5 small‑area plan that frames a 'Brain Power District' near UMW and the hospital, proposes transect and frontage changes, and outlines mobility and historic‑resource actions; the ARB is expected to recommend 22–23 'character structures' for the local inventory.
City planning staff on Oct. 23 presented the draft Area 5 small‑area plan and asked the Planning Commission to forward the draft to City Council for initiation of the public hearing process.
Bailey Thompson, community development planner, described Area 5 as a crossroads that includes the University of Mary Washington campus and the College Heights neighborhood. Staff proposes a mix of transect designations, a T5C frontage map for core corridor redevelopment, and two land‑use focus areas: a village transition area (walkable commercial and mixed uses) and a so‑called 'Brain Power District' — an economic development zone framed to leverage proximity to UMW, Mary Washington Hospital and a power substation.
Kate Swartz, senior historic planner, summarized work by the Architectural Review Board and staff surveys of mid‑20th‑century commercial resources along Route 1. Using Department of Transportation guidance and National Register criteria, staff identified 32 candidate buildings for further evaluation; the ARB is on a path to recommend 22–23 of those as 'character structures' to add to a local inventory. The designation would be an incentive tool — not a regulatory overlay — to promote adaptive reuse, parking flexibility and targeted code relief in identified places.
Mobility and parks elements of the draft include targeted intersection improvements on College Avenue/Route 1, sidewalk infill in Westmont and Greenbrier, a proposed downtown connector to tie Alum Spring Park to the university, and multiple shared‑use path concepts. Staff noted ongoing coordination with VDOT (for projects such as a Snowden Street/Route 1 change) and with UMW on campus connectivity, but clarified the university is state property and not subject to the city's entitlement process.
Public comment included a detailed statement by Sue Sargent of College Heights praising the plan’s attention to historic neighborhoods and urging careful treatment of the downtown connector and Elm Spring Park. Two written commenters raised traffic safety and pedestrian issues; staff clarified Snowden Street changes are being led by VDOT and the city is awaiting follow‑up documentation.
Next steps: staff will transmit the draft to City Council for initiation (staff referenced Nov. 12 for initiation and Dec. 11 for the Planning Commission public hearing). The ARB will finalize its character‑structure recommendations and staff said a T5C frontage zoning map amendment will proceed in parallel.
"We identified a period of significance starting in 1946 and assessed building types that tell the story of postwar commercial development," the historic planner said; the ARB expects to take action at its Nov. 18 meeting and the panel's recommendations will be included in the public‑hearing materials.
