City Planning Commission Votes to Recommend Removal of Railroad Station Overlay District
Majority of public comments heard Wednesday were in opposition to removing the overlay district.
By Adele Uphaus
MANAGING EDITOR AND CORRESPONDENT
Email Adele
The Fredericksburg Planning Commission on Wednesday voted 4-to-2 to recommend the repeal of the Railroad Station Overlay District.
Commissioners Mary Margaret Marshall and David Durham voted against the motion. City Council will consider the Commission’s recommendation at an upcoming meeting.
The RSOD in its current form has been in place since 2013 and applies to 13 parcels on Charles, Frederick, Sophia, and Princess Anne streets near the train station. It limits building height to 40 feet, adds a 10% open space requirement, and does not allow the option of a special use permit.
When a special overlay district was first implemented in this area in 1991, it covered a larger area and the purpose was to encourage infill development around the train station, according to a memo prepared for the Planning Commission by planning department staff. It was more permissive than the underlying Commercial Transitional zoning and increased the allowed residential density.
These measures didn’t produce any infill development, so in 2010, the city proposed changing the underlying zoning from Commercial Transitional to Commercial Downtown, “as an additional step to encourage infill,” Mike Craig, director of planning, said during a presentation given at Wednesday’s meeting.
This move was deferred “in deference to compatibility with the neighborhood” of Darbytown, Craig said. It was brought back in 2012, at which time the overlay district was expanded, the underlying zoning changed to Commercial Downtown, and the purpose of the district became to “provide a zone for uses permitted in the commercial downtown, but in a built environment compatible with existing structures in the nearby residential district,” he said.
The RSOD was modified again in 2013 when Council adopted the Unified Development Ordinance. Its purpose is to “provide for a transition between downtown and residential areas south of downtown.”
There has been no infill development in the area since the RSOD has been in place, according to the memo. Two recent adaptive reuse projects in the area—the Frederick Street Lofts property and the Janney-Marshall building—were removed from the overlay district in 2017 and 2019, respectively, so they could proceed.
In 2020, Council approved the Small Area Plan for Area 7, which includes Darbytown. The plan states that RSOD is “incompatible with recent adaptive reuse projects” and that the “mix of zoning and overlay districts within the area should be replaced by a new form-based code (neighborhood commercial and residential) that will permit compatible infill while serving as an appropriate transition in intensity from the Downtown to the adjacent neighborhoods.”
Craig said the “why” behind proposing removal of the overlay district is that “people have been looking to promote infill in this area since 1991.”
“This is some of the most valuable land in the city,” he said. “If you put additional uses here, whether residential or commercial, it’s walkable and has synergy with downtown.”
If the overlay district is removed, the underlying Commercial Downtown zoning will apply. This zoning permits townhomes and multifamily units at 12 and 18 units per acre respectively. The overlay district permits 8 townhome units per acre.
According to the staff memo, there are four vacant lots within the overlay district and two lots with parking lots large enough to accommodate infill development. Under the overlay district, between one and three townhomes per acre could be constructed on these lots. If the overlay district is removed, between two and five townhomes could be constructed, per the CD zoning.
Craig said the adjacent neighborhood already has greater density than what would be permitted if the railroad overlay district is removed, and he noted that the entire area is still under the Old and Historic Fredericksburg Overlay District, which means any development would be subject to review by the Architectural Review Board.
This, combined with the review by Planning Commission and City Council required by the special use permit process, “provide the regulatory framework that is appropriate here,” Craig said.
Neighborhood opposition, some support
Residents who spoke during Wednesday’s public hearing were overwhelmingly opposed to the removal of the overlay district, however. They expressed concern about the effect of increased density on neighborhood character and with potential worsening traffic.
Cathy Herndon, who lives in a two-story historic home within the overlay district, said the building next door could be redeveloped into a 50-foot structure.
“It would be like living in New York,” she said. “I feel like that’s too much. I don’t understand why the Commission is looking at what developers want to do but [not thinking] about the effect on people living there.”
Another resident of the neighborhood said Darbytown “is experiencing clear signs of development fatigue.”
Eric Marshall said the neighborhood isn’t interested in “more townhouse monstrosities which stick out like a sore thumb and do nothing for the affordable housing problem.”
Staff also read aloud 14 letters from members of the public opposing removal of the overlay district.
But speaking in support of removing the overlay district was David Frazier, who said he “would enjoy more development to encourage younger families” to move to Fredericksburg.
“I think we need more of that,” he said.
Commissioner comments
Durham said he is “concerned about the appropriateness of the encroachment of [Commercial Downtown zoning] into the neighborhood.”
Commercial Downtown zoning permits 12 single family attached units per acre by right, as compared to eight single family attached units per acre under the overlay district.
“For me, a vote to recommend removal of the RSOD without addressing the underlying zoning is an error,” Durham said. “What I’m suggesting is the likely development that will go into any of these empty lots is residential. And then it’s the question of what is the appropriate density in this area?”
Marshall, who lives in Darbytown, reiterated the concerns of her neighbors.
“People in Darbytown are frustrated because the impacts of development in the city … are in their front yard, side yard, and backyard,” she said. “Nowhere else in the city have there been multiple developments so close together that have impacted quality of life and safety. We can’t park. We can’t walk.”
At the request of Commission Chair Susanna Finn, staff confirmed that the work of an ongoing downtown traffic engineering study—which is recommending converting one-way downtown street pairs into two-way streets, among other traffic calming and pedestrian safety measures—will continue regardless of whether or not the overlay district is removed.
Adam Lynch, who made the motion to recommend removal of the overlay district, said the city “should be encouraging dense new development in this area.”
He acknowledged that new residential development is not likely to be considered affordable, but said that any “new development, even if it starts out as non-affordable, improves affordability in your city relative to doing nothing at all.”
Durham offered a friendly amendment to Lynch’s motion that would also recommend rezoning the lots south of Frederick Street from Commercial Downtown back to Residential, but Lynch did not accept the amendment.
Local Obituaries
To view local obituaries or to send a note to family and loved ones, please visit the link that follows.
Support Award-winning, Locally Focused Journalism
The FXBG Advance cuts through the talking points to deliver both incisive and informative news about the issues, people, and organizations that daily affect your life. And we do it in a multi-partisan format that has no equal in this region. Over the past year, our reporting was:
First to break the story of Stafford Board of Supervisors dismissing a citizen library board member for “misconduct,” without informing the citizen or explaining what the person allegedly did wrong.
First to explain falling water levels in the Rappahannock Canal.
First to detail controversial traffic numbers submitted by Stafford staff on the Buc-ee’s project
Our media group also offers the most-extensive election coverage in the region and regular columnists like:
And our newsroom is led by the most-experienced and most-awarded journalists in the region — Adele Uphaus (Managing Editor and multiple VPA award-winner) and Martin Davis (Editor-in-Chief, 2022 Opinion Writer of the Year in Virginia and more than 25 years reporting from around the country and the world).
For just $8 a month, you can help support top-flight journalism that puts people over policies.
Your contributions 100% support our journalists.
Help us as we continue to grow!
