Residents urge delay on Millers Landing rezoning until water, fire-safety and access issues are fixed

Mark Miller, representing his family, told the Loudoun County Commission workshop he and his siblings applied to rezone just over 5 acres near Millers Landing from R-2 to R-3 to create five home lots. "My siblings and I own some property down in Millers Landing," Miller said, and described a plan for two upland lots and two lakeside lots with a short extension of the existing paved road and a cul-de-sac.

Neighbors and public commenters urged a pause on additional approvals until safety and infrastructure issues are resolved. "My concern tonight is specifically about the safety and infrastructure sufficiency," said Savannah Berg, a Blue Heron Drive resident, who said the neighborhood currently has a single access point serving about 48 homes and that adding the previously approved 22 lots — plus the proposed five — could leave the area with about 70 homes on a one-mile winding road. Berg called for a "no until these things are worked out."

Several speakers, including a former fire captain who lives in the area, described recent firefighting challenges tied to low hydrant pressure and reliance on drafting. One commenter said a recent flow test showed an older requirement of 500 gallons per minute (gpm) had been met at a particular hydrant (measured at about 530 gpm), but that the city standard had been increased to 750 gpm and the current infrastructure would not meet the new standard. "We always say BTUs versus GPMs," the former firefighter said, noting a large house would need greater flow to be fought safely.

County staff explained a jurisdictional difference: the city adopts Appendix B of the fire code (which sets flow requirements tied to building size) while the county generally does not because many unincorporated areas lack hydrants. Staff noted subdivision standards require domestic water service where available and that utilities (LCUB/LUB/TASK) determine where service is provided. "The county has no utility services of any kind," a staff member said, adding the county cannot compel utilities to extend service beyond their service rules.

Supporters and some nearby residents urged pragmatic solutions: Keith Bell, who lives adjacent to the parcel, said the land could already be developed under R-2 with three or four homes and argued the change to R-3 might add only a small number of lots. He suggested the HOA discuss landscaping that blocks sight lines and other localized fixes.

The commission and staff emphasized the workshop is informational and that formal actions will appear on an upcoming agenda. Planner and staff comments indicated several technical issues — hydrant spacing, required flow, master-meter arrangements and road width — will need to be resolved before final approvals. Chair and staff confirmed the rezoning request will return for formal consideration at a future meeting after further coordination with the applicant, the HOA and utility providers.

The workshop closed the public-comment discussion and the commission moved to other agenda items.