Coraggio Consulting Loudoun County Board of Supervisors, Public Hearing, Wednesday, January 14, 2026 Date: Wednesday, January 14, 2026 Place: Board Room, First Floor, Government Center, 1 Harrison Street SE, Leesburg, Virginia Length: 2h 29m (video) Official meeting video (county, Granicus): https://loudoun.granicus.com/player/clip/8093 Meeting page (Granicus): https://loudoun.granicus.com/player/clip/8093 Machine transcript (speech-to-text) produced by Coraggio Consulting. Not an official county record. Names and numbers may be misspelled; check the video at the timestamp before quoting. Speech-to-text: whisper.cpp, model large-v3-turbo. Produced 2026-10-10. Timestamps are [HH:MM:SS] into the meeting video. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [00:04:22] Good evening. Ladies and gentlemen, Loudoun County. I call to order the January 14th, 2026 Loudoun County Board of Supervisors public hearing. This room has a hearing loop. If you need hearing assistance, switch your hearing aids to the telecoil mode. If you need a headset, we have those available as well. Please see the clerk to request one. As a reminder to all members of the public addressing the board this evening, you may only register to speak on matters that have been advertised for this public hearing. Due to the broadcast delay, any members of the public who are not in the boardroom wishing to address the board on items one two three or four which are on the consolidated hearing agenda please call the number scrolling across your screen at this [00:05:01] time pursuant to the recently adopted rules of order all members of the public who have registered to speak will be allotted up to two minutes if you are in the boardroom we ask that when your name is called come to the podium and state your name for the record the timer on the podium will indicate your remaining time when your time is expired please yield the floor to the next speaker if you are providing your comments via phone i ask that you use a stopwatch to track your time i will monitor your time in the boardroom as well and notify you when your time is expired when taking public input for items i will first ask if there's anyone in the boardroom wishing [00:05:35] to speak then i will go to the moderator and ask if there are any speakers via online please note there is a slight delay between the broadcast and the boardroom please join me colleagues in the pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all the board will hear the following items as a consolidated hearing as a reminder the items are being consolidated [00:06:11] consolidated because there are no outstanding issues staff has recommended approval the applicant has waived their presentation time and no public speakers registered in advance to speak to the board item number one allegy 2025-0009 review and renewal modification or termination of the new hillsboro agricultural and forestal district that's in the catoctin district item number two allegy 2025-0010 review and renewal modification or termination of the new oak hill agricultural [00:06:44] and forestal district little river district item three allegy 2025-0011 review and renewal modification or termination of the beaver dam valley agricultural and forestall district catoctin and little river districts and item number four legy 2024-0016 commonwealth center motor club zcpa 2025-0007 specs 2024-0026 specs 2024-0027 specs 2024-0029 and specs 2025-0133 and that [00:07:21] is in the broad run district and i'll just make a note that when you make that motion supervisor glass use the consolidated motion sheet not the item in the in the in the computer are there any members of the public in the boardroom tonight wishing to speak to the board regarding a consolidated hearing item seeing none moderator are there any speakers on the phone wishing to speak regarding a non-con i consolidated hearing item no chairman turner seeing none i close the consolidated public hearing board members please refer to the document entitled consolidated [00:08:00] hearing motion sheet that is placed at your deus seat and we'll start with item number one alleged 2025 000 review and renewal modification or termination of the new hillsboro agricultural and forestal district that is in the catoctin district supervisor kirschner you can make the motion yes i move the board of supervisors approve motion to be for the approval of the renewal as provided in the January 14, 2026 public hearing item. Number one, staff report. And a second by Supervisor Sainz. Discussion on the item? No discussion on the item? All in favor, please say aye. [00:08:34] Aye. Any opposed? That motion will pass 4, 5, 6, 7, 0, 2, 7, 0, 2. I'm sorry. Oh, that's right. supervisor eternal and chair randall are off the desk i am that motion will pass 702 item number two alleged 2025 0010 review and renewal and modification or termination of the new oak hill agriculture and forestall district that's in the little river district supervisor to crony here motion i move that the board of supervisors approve motion to be for the approval [00:09:14] of the renewal as provided in the january 14th 2026 public hearing item two staff report motion made second by supervisor briskman that was you right yes yeah comments opening comments no no comments all those in favor please say aye aye any opposed that motion will pass 702 with supervisor Letourneau and Chair Randolph the dais. Item number three, allegy 2025-0011, review and renewal modification or termination of the Beaver Dam Valley Agriculture and Forest Hill District. [00:09:50] That's in the Catoctin and Little River District. I will let you guys fight it out as to who would like to make the motion. I'll make it. That's fine. That was a tough fight. I move the Board of Supervisors approve motion to be for the approval of the renewal as provided in the January 4th, 2026 public hearing item number three staff report and i will give that second to supervisor crony since she lost the fight um any discussion on the motion the only thing i'd say is these are all renewals um i always look at them and see if they're renewals or they're removing them and i just want to say i appreciate those who own these various district these various pieces of property when they renew them and put them back into the um agricultural and forestal district continue to [00:10:29] keep them in that sort of use that's all thank you okay thank you uh any other discussion seeing none. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That motion will pass 7-0-2 with Supervisor Lieutenant General and Chair Randall off the dais. Item number four, Leji 2024-0016, Commonwealth Center Motor Club, ZCPA 2025-0007, Specs 2024-0026, Specs 2024-0027, Specs 2024-0029, and specs 20, 25, 0, 1, 3, 3, and that is in the broad run district. Supervisor Glass. [00:11:08] Thank you, Vice Chair. I move that the Board of Supervisors approve motion to be for the approval of the zoning concept plan amendment, special exceptions, and minor special exceptions provided in the January 14th, 2026, public hearing supplemental item number four, staff report. [00:11:24] Motion made. Is there a second? Seconded by Supervisor Briskman. Any comments, Supervisor? Yes, thank you. I have met with this developer several times, and this is going to be an amazing application, an amazing development. [00:11:41] We're going to see a luxury car club, there's going to be a restaurant, and there's going to be a facility. I know we have the Tally Ho, but we will also have a venue in the Broad Run District where we'll have concerts, and I'm so super excited about this. [00:12:00] The owners have proven themselves to be valuable community partners, and they have chosen to locate this project here in Loudoun County in the Broad Run District, and I am really excited. Thank you. Thank you, Supervisor Glass. Any other comments? [00:12:16] Seeing none, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That motion will pass 702 with Supervisor Letourneau and Chair Randall off the dais. First item up for action is item number 5, LEGIE 2024-0018, West Belmont, ZMAP 2024-0003 in the Ashburn District. [00:12:36] Members of the public wishing to address the board regarding this item who have not already done so, please call the number scrolling across your screen. I will now turn the time over to staff for any updates and a presentation. [00:13:19] Good evening. Thank you. My name is Allison Britton, I'm with the Department of Planning and Zoning, and I'm here today to present the West Belmont application. As of 5:00 p.m. tonight, staff has received 27 additional public comments, six in support, 21 in opposition, with primary concerns for density, public facilities, and transportation. [00:13:40] The subject property is 27.36 acres, located on the southwest side of Belmont Ridge Road, or the southeast side of Belmont Ridge Road, the southwest side of Portsmouth Boulevard, and bisected by Winkle Drive. There are two existing access points from the site from Portsmouth Boulevard, and it is in the Ashburn Election District. [00:13:57] The property is zoned currently, planned development housing three, and part of the Belmont Green community. It is located in the suburban neighborhood and suburban mixed-use place types of the suburban policy area. The applicant's requesting to rezone the subject property from commercial uses to residential and commercial zoning districts for the development of up to 318 total residential dwelling units and 11,000 square feet of commercial uses. [00:14:26] It is broken up into seven different land bays, the applicants requesting additional modifications to yards requirements to modify unit mixes in the SCN 8 and SCN 16 zoning districts to allow single-family dwelling units to be accessed by private roads, to eliminate buffering between residential and commercial uses, and between different types of uses. [00:14:48] The applicant has proffered to unit sizes as listed here, which equates to about half the proposed units being below the county average housing unit size. Additionally, the applicant has proposed 43 total affordable housing units, which is four more multifamily stacked units than the zoning ordinance would require. So back to unit sizes. For single-family detached units, the applicant is proposing at least half be up to 2,975 square feet. For single-family attached, [00:15:23] half would be no larger than 1,950 square feet with at least 25 less than 1,700 square feet. And then overall, the applicant is also proposing at least 75% of the units no greater than 2,200 square feet and 20% no greater than 1,900 square feet. Here is the primary concept development plan. On the bottom left side in peach are the proposed single-family detached units. [00:15:54] in the middle in blue purple are the proposed single-family attached units at the top and in the top right corner in pink are the proposed multi-family stacked units and then in magenta kind of in the center adjacent to the existing gas station is a proposed 2,500 square foot community building so just a little bit of background this property is a like I said a portion of the larger Belmont green community it was originally rezoned in 1988 and subsequently amended through 2004. And here is the approximate overlay of the subject area on the original plan. [00:16:32] It's not exact, but identifies approximate areas, and the subject property was designated for commercial office and church uses. Here is the proposed vehicular and pedestrian circulation plan with the new additions highlighted in orange sidewalks, magenta multi-use paths, and the dark purple are additional crosswalks. All the other features shown on this graphic are currently existing. Overall the plan is consistent with a large majority of the 2019 general plan and the 2019 county-wide transportation plan specifically with respect to densities, design [00:17:09] guideline, compatibility, natural resources, transportation, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, attainable housing, and public schools as well as fiscal contributions. However staff raise for board consideration to areas. As previously identified, the property is in the suburban mixed use and suburban neighborhood place types, but it meets the criteria to be evaluated under the suburban compact neighborhood place type, such as the provision of additional affordable housing that exceed regulatory requirements, proximity to public facilities, and other design criteria. [00:17:46] To further the anticipation of additional units exceeding the requirements in the SCM place type And in consideration of the CPAM 2024-0001, staff would recommend the applicant provide five additional affordable units for a total of nine affordable units. [00:18:05] The 2019 general plan anticipates 5% public civic space for the underlying place types that this property falls in. In consideration of this application on its own merits, staff find the applicant is not meeting that 5%. They are proposing a 2,500-square-foot community building, but staff recommend additional public, civic, more usable space for residents. [00:18:36] The Planning Commission forwarded the application to the board with a recommendation of approval, and staff can support board approval but raise for consideration the two elements previously mentioned. I do have transportation available as well for questions, and I am happy to take any questions. [00:18:52] Thank you. Thank you very much, colleagues. Questions, comments? Supervisor Glass. Thank you, Chair. And thank you for the presentation. What type of additional housing diversity would staff like to see at the site? Staff would recommend, the policies would recommend kind of a range. So I guess staff wouldn't necessarily propose like a prescriptive type of housing, but at least additional, approximately five additional units. [00:19:28] okay okay thank you supervisor to crony uh thank you vice chair turner uh so i know the light tech building was removed um during the planning commission work sessions how many units did that anticipate or how many units was being proposed for the light tech it was 60 yeah it's 60 60 Wow. Okay. And 44 are being proposed now, right? There are no multifamily attached units currently [00:20:03] proposed. Okay. But it's 44 ADUs, correct? Yes. Okay. So was it 60 plus 44 at that time? Or what was being proposed with the LIHTC? Or was it just the 60? It was, there were two alternate proposals that the applicant was pursuing, but for that option, yes, it was just the 60 LIHTC building at that time. Okay, so the church site has been removed and replaced with residential, correct? [00:20:40] And what is the acreage that's proposed for public civic use now? Currently, it is just the 2,500 square foot community building for public and civic use. There are other open space uses that would be for community residents but that's the type that would be more general. Okay so that that's like an HOA building? Correct. Okay but okay. So I understand that there are some private [00:21:14] streets with belmont green um four of them i guess um that the hoa maintains will all of these have direct connections to west belmont uh i believe it is unclear at this time and i will let the applicant maybe answer that question but i will note that the applicant has proposed as part of this application two different concept plans one that does not utilize internal private streets and one like I have shown. [00:21:43] So I think the applicant has a graphic of that in their presentation. I'll ask that for the applicant. And then also there was a horrible accident at Portsmouth and Claiborne yesterday. I think that's the area. What is being proposed to ensure safe crossing from one side of the community to the other on Portsmouth? [00:22:02] Here is maybe the best graphic, and it's a little difficult, I recognize, to see this. This is also, I believe, one of the graphics in the staff report. But the applicant is proposing at least two additional crosswalks along Portsmouth Boulevard, one kind of parallel to Belmont Ridge Road, and then one to connect the commercial center. [00:22:22] They are also, right, actually, and maybe a third one, I believe, where it intersects Winkle and Portsmouth. Okay, I might ask that question, too. Thank you. Thank you. Sure. Supervisor Saints. [00:22:39] Thank you, Vice Chair Turner. Okay, yeah, we did receive a letter from the HOA through their, yes, attorneys. One of their issues was there was not enough open space for activities and, you know, and the like. [00:22:56] And then the other issue, as Supervisor Tacroni did mention in her comments, that their Belmont Green is opposing using use of its private streets. So can you clarify if that's accurate, their interpretation of these streets, that those are theirs and then that developer cannot use those streets? [00:23:15] Is that accurate or no? - As far as the information I have, those streets are private and they are maintained by the existing HOA, but I would have to defer to the applicant for any kind of additional information about the use of those streets and if that's been something further explored. [00:23:33] And then with respect to your open space comment, I've pulled up a graphic that shows areas of open space and it breaks down the type of open space that's proposed as the general plan would consider it and then the overall amounts. Does that answer the question? [00:23:50] So what is, let's see, does my little pointer work? What is this open space here? That area is a mixture of active and passive recreation open space area and that is where the community building is also proposed. [00:24:07] So majority of that space might be taken up by the building. I wouldn't characterize, maybe I wouldn't say majority of the area. I can go back to this graphic here that maybe shows it a little bit better. [00:24:24] The green area being the open space area. And then that magenta box is here. Yes, it is right at that corner. Yes, right there. That is the proposed community building. And all this is going to be open space? - Correct. [00:24:40] - Okay, all right. And we don't have anybody, staff, or anybody to clarify the private streets issue? - Yeah, I would say what I can offer is just that it is privately controlled. - The applicant can answer that. - So I would defer to that. [00:24:56] - I wanted to hear from a county official or VDOT. Okay, is there any chance we can get a clarity from VDOT or somebody on the streets? - To clarify, Supervisor, is your question whether the community is required to allow the use? [00:25:17] Sure, happy to try to follow up with additional information. - No offense, yes, we have the applicant who's saying we can, then we have the HOA and their lawyer saying no, they can't. So can we get somebody from the county or VDOT to- - Understood, yes. - Clarify that for us, thank you. [00:25:33] All right, and I have questions for the applicant when it's their time, thank you. - Thank you, Supervisor Richmond. - Excuse me, so just to follow up on that, which streets do the HOA say that the developer can't use? Is it Winkle? No, ma'am. It is down here with the Beau Fonds. Those? Yes. It's the connections down on the south side of the property primarily. Okay. Is it true that if the applicant wanted to change the product, they would not be [00:26:08] permitted to change or increase density at this point in the application process? Like, would they have to go back to square one if they wanted like for example if they wanted to put the light tech building back in would that be like a new application uh no ma'am it would not be starting um all the way over from the very beginning but it would need to be properly advertised and heard again by just the public hearing or by planning commission as well like by us or by planning commission as well um i'm not fully sure of if that um i would expect that because that is a [00:26:46] substantial change um and what the planning commission heard did not include that component that you need to be heard again what if what if for example i know that um staff is concerned about the land bay with the single family detached um what if for example they wanted to make those duplexes instead of single family detached would that force them back into um planning commission and force them back to square one? [00:27:16] So, for example, could they do a little bit more density and not have to go back? I would have to kind of consider that. Mr. Rogers? [00:27:32] If the application changes to create a more dense application, it would need to go back to the Planning Commission and would need to be re-advertised. For LIHTC, that would not need to go back to the Planning Commission if it does not re-advertise. Oh, because it was on the original application? Right. Oh, interesting. [00:27:49] Okay, well, that's fascinating. and the LIHTC building was proposed it was by the road correct it was in that land day yes ma'am it was in this land bay okay okay oh well that's interesting okay but say they wanted to make much smaller units and make the single family detached duplexes and not increase the density and just have more green space could they do that in other words to make them more affordable presumably if it is [00:28:24] not an increase in density yeah i believe that is the case um as far as a policy consideration is concerned this area anticipates a range and they are on the small end of their range so from a policy and we're okay oh okay they're at the small end and this is suburban compact or sorry this is the suburban policy area yes ma'am right okay thank you thank you um uh allison um charter oak is supposed to be brought up to vdot standard but in my discussions with the applicant and with the community, there's kind of a question mark in everybody's mind about who's responsible for raising Charter Oak to VDOT standard. Can you enlighten us on that process? I have Marie Pham, [00:29:03] and I believe she will have the answer to that question. Okay. Oh, is she on the line? Yes. Okay. Yes. Would you like me to respond, Vice Chair Turner? Yes, please. Thank you. Okay. So if Charter Oak needed to be brought up to current VDOT standards, that's something that the applicant would be responsible for looking at at least their portion if the entire length of that road needed to be brought up to standard due to their application. I think they would need to work with [00:29:35] the other property owner there to get that taken care of. Is that by code? So if the applicant's development encroaches on any portion of Charter Oak Road, they are then legally required to bring to vdot standard as part of the development i wouldn't say that um they're private streets right now if they intend to keep them as private streets i don't know why they would need to bring them up to current vdot standards okay interesting um i think that's all i have questions i have for [00:30:14] staff um any other questions for staff okay the applicant you have 10 minutes uh good evening vice chair turner members of the board of supervisors my name is colin gillis i'm an an attorney with Curata Partners. I'm here tonight on behalf of the West Belmont application. I'm hoping if we can pause my time until the deck comes up. Excellent. We're really proud of this application. And just to reiterate what Allison already said, we came out of the Planning Commission [00:30:50] with an 8-1 recommendation of approval. Next slide. I realize I don't have the clicker. So a little bit of history here. This property is home today to an underutilized and not very vibrant shopping center. This is a site plan as it was originally envisioned in the late 2000s. A Bloom anchor grocery center, a CVS that was open and then closed, a Wachovia that became a Wells Fargo also closed, McDonald's that never actually built, a Taco Bell that never actually built. [00:31:23] To say that this is not a vibrant shopping center and likely will never be given the fact that we're 17, 18 years past this is an understatement. You can go to the next slide. And this is a picture of what those those buildings look like today and I'd like to say that this was at six in the morning it's not it's in the middle of the afternoon not really heavily trafficked it is serving a purpose but not highest and best use you can go to the next slide and I think it's with this in mind that the board of supervisors in 2019 re-designated this property for suburban mixed use next slide you can see that the suburban mixed use place type y'all are familiar with it this is one Loudon, right? It's dense development. It's five stories, FAR of a 1.5, minimal open [00:32:02] space, building heights that are tall, dwarfing the neighboring Belmont Green community. And we think that this, for the reasons that the shopping center isn't successful, we also think that this wouldn't be successful, to say nothing about what we think is incompatible with the existing community. Next slide. But the board, in their wisdom, when they adopted the comp plan, also allowed for the alternative development plan of suburban compact neighborhood, and that provides for a variety of different product types, complementary retail and service uses, 15% open space, which is more than what's called for under the suburban mixed-use place type, and roughly 8 to 24 dwelling units to the acre. You can go to the next slide. And that's what you see here. You can see a vibrant [00:32:42] environment with a predominance of residential, which obviously we need in this county, and a certain amount of additional complementary retail. Next slide. And Allison already showed you the variety of different products, so I won't go through this. But what we have done is really located these products so that they can be adjacent to similar product types. Supervisor Brissman, to your point about the single-family detached houses, we've located them there to be adjacent, those 20 units adjacent to existing single-family detached houses within Belmont Green. You can go to the next slide. Big picture about this project. Up to 318 residential units, which is roughly 40 units fewer than what we presented to the Planning Commission. [00:33:22] That was based on negotiations with the Planning Commission. We're providing 44 ADUs, which is 44 ADUs more than is required by the ordinance, which generates about 13.8, almost 14% affordability for this project. We're also introducing about 11,000 square feet of commercial uses, proffering design guidelines. [00:33:40] Design is very important to our neighbors. We've worked with them. A number of amenity areas, trails, sidewalks, crosswalks, crosswalk warrant study for Portsmouth, two new bus stops and bus shelters on Portsmouth, and a warrant study for a signal at Portsmouth and Nightwatch. You can go to the next slide. So let's talk about that commercial. 11,000 square feet of neighborhood-serving commercial floor space. This is on the north side of Portsmouth. So as between those two blue boxes, what we're talking about tonight is the blue box on the right. The blue box on the left side of Portsmouth on this image is actually the sheets that you all approved under your last term. It under construction right now. We like this as a bookended approach to retail development in this [00:34:18] area. And lest we we had a robust conversation at the planning commission about could we support more you just recently completed a study that showed that this part of the county is well over retail. This is appropriate neighborhood serving and we know that it will be supported and will be vibrant. Next slide. Design. We know design is really really important. So you can see these homes. These homes are similar to what exists today in the belmont cream neighborhood we presented these to the community worked with the board on and the community on on these designs this is the detached next slide this is the attached unit so again something that's pretty traditional next slide [00:34:57] and then we have our multi-family stacked units these are and i want to reiterate this given the heat around this topic these are back-to-back townhomes they are not two over two stacked townhomes they are back-to-back townhomes and each one of these units has integrated garage and parking and driveway spaces for each of the units next slide and the commercial itself which fronts on belmont green melbert ridge road you can see is quite attractive and will be home to probably three or four retail tenants next slide allison already talked about our commitment to smaller units i want to draw your attention to the language that's highlighted 20 of our units will be [00:35:33] be smaller than 1900 square feet and 75% of all of our units will be smaller than 2200 square feet so as you all have talked about making sure that that when we build units that they are long-term affordable relative to other units we're making that commitment with this project you can go to the next slide so parks and open space we worked with the planning commission to increase the amount of open space on the project from four acres to five acres a 25% increase this shows you all that open space. What does five acres of open space represent, five plus acres? It represents 19%. [00:36:05] Per the comp plan, the requirement is only to do 15%, so we're 4% greater than what the comp plan would require. Allison shared with you the exhibit, and we're also doing a community building. Keep going. Vehicles, vehicle trips. So we're talking about roads. We'll talk a little bit about the private streets as we go further, but just big picture. This was approved for a massive shopping center and it was generated anticipated to generate over 12 000 daily trips you can go to the next slide this proposal with the residential here will significantly reduce the amount of transportation and traffic impact on the roads 75 fewer daily trips about 70 fewer am peak hour trips and more [00:36:44] than 75 fewer pm peak hour trips this is a very reduced density and less impact and keep going Additionally we worked with the community on some improvements. I'm going to fly and happy to talk about this after if you want to improve some traffic connections for folks accessing Belmont Station Elementary School. You can go to the next slide. We've also added what I think is an innovative proffer which is calling for no construction traffic on our site for an hour before school opens and for an hour after school gets out. That's an innovative proffer in my years of doing this. Keep going. [00:37:19] Crosswalks. I know Allison did a great job of showing you the slides. I know it was a little hard to see into the bright lights in this room, but this gives you a good picture of the existing and proposed crosswalks. This is the pedestrian connectivity and safety that will exist after the development of this project. I know we're going to talk about some other crosswalks this evening, but I wanted to just at least show you that leading into tonight, we've got significant numbers of crosswalks. You can go to the next slide. Schools. Oh, I'm sorry, parking. So one of the other things that's obviously important to this community and to this board is parking. We're providing plenty of parking and actually going over and above the 2023 standards, which were in [00:37:56] and of themselves even more than what we had under the old ordinance. You can keep going. Schools. Schools have plenty of capacity. This development at full buildout will generate approximately 129 school-aged children. So you can go to the next slide. And you might think, well, can we handle those kids? Well, these kids would go to the Belmont Station Elementary School that you saw in some of my slides, and in 2031, 2032, that school would only have utilization of 63%. Putting kids into the school makes it so that those kids can have better access to resources, a fuller capacity. You've got more constant access for the sort of therapists, [00:38:35] et cetera, that might be needed, and so we think that adding kids to an underutilized school is a great, great idea. Next slide. Same thing with regard to the middle and the high school. Those schools are only utilized in the out years at 73 and 81 percent. So really, really underutilized and plenty of capacity. You can go to the next slide. So Allison raised a couple of issues. We went off of the issues that were identified in the staff report. So the first one has to do with the unit types and modifications. So for the suburban compact neighborhood, Allison's asking for and staff is asking for a mix of units in those two land bays. Land bay three was where we had our LITEC building and it was separate a separate land bay unto itself when we filed the application [00:39:14] because we need to dedicate the parcel for for Virginia housing purposes. Land bay six all single family detached so that we could give commitments and assurance to the folks who live at Belmont Green that this was always going to be single family detached adjacent to their single family detached homes. When you look at the project as a whole though you can see that it's a diversity of product. You've got attached multi-family stacked and detached and so we respectfully want to follow this plan as opposed to mixing within the lamp page you can go to the next slide with regard to public and civic space supervisor Sains you asked the question what's happening with that big open space up behind the community center and so this is an illustrative of how [00:39:52] we envision that space being utilized you can see dog walk area play area fitness equipment you've got sports courts civic lawn pollinator garden and the community building there so there's a lot of different uses that are in there and we think it's really well utilized in in this regard we understand that there's not going to be a church built on this property but that said we think that it's this is a better utilization and achieving more of the county's objectives to provide for more housing and more housing affordability than than continuing to hold a four acre church site that hasn't had any demand you can go to the next slide we're also doing a [00:40:30] $25,000 contribution to Beth Miller Park at the request of Parks and Rec you can go to the next slide. And then I have a number of slides, I know I'm at time, on the zoning modifications. I'm happy to answer whatever questions you all might have about the zoning modifications, but bottom line, all of our zoning modifications are intended to create this sort of a vision that we think seamlessly integrates with our neighboring community and creates that sort of environment. [00:40:54] And I know that I did not get to questions about the private streets, but I'm happy to answer those too. Thank you, Ms. Gillis, and thanks to the applicant for the discussion that's about to Sue. Questions for the applicant? Thank you Vice Chair Turner, thank you for the presentation. Why was the LIHTC removed instead of, yeah, I know that was originally and why did you take that out? We didn't want to take it out. We had a number of community meetings and our neighbors were were concerned about the height of [00:41:32] building relative to the height of their homes and there was there was a lot of there was a lot of interest in removing that from not only the adjacent community but some of the members of the planning commission and so and so we ended up taking taking the light tech building out after discussions with the with the district supervisor and commissioner so why did you not keep the number and that was at 60 was at 60 or 66 whatever it was 60 yeah 60 yeah um throughout the project then so when we switch from a light tech product which obviously is is a different sort of financing [00:42:10] vehicle and allows for long-term rental income to that property and we switch into an adu model those though each one of those adu lots in the market is is conveyed at a zero cost zero revenue to the developer. And so what we had to balance was the ability to increase, do more than what the ordinance required at 44 ADUs, while at the same time taking the hit that the LIHTC building was not going to any longer be a source of revenue. And so that's what it is. Is that each and every one of those things? Thank you for the explanation. I can't remember if your company was [00:42:44] the representative or not, but I recall another application. They still believe they're doing LITECH, but it's not in a four-story building. It's smaller. It's one-story units or so. So why can't you do something similar like that in this one and still have that high number? Because I'll just be honest, I'd rather see the LITECH. That'll help me get to hopefully a yes for this application, but as of right now, it's a no for me. I appreciate that. So yes, we were involved in that application that had single-family detached LITECH units. That was a parcel that was much, much larger than [00:43:23] this and was able to be done in a different form and fashion. That was also in the transition policy area. That was 300 units over a roughly 100-acre piece of property. This is a 27-acre piece of property, and doing something similar to that in this scenario is difficult, if not impossible. [00:43:42] The other thing that's required for a LIHTC building is that whereas ADUs are required by ordinance to be dispersed throughout the community and you have to you can't they can't be next to each other they can't be across the street from one another lie tech requires them to be all in my time runs out real quickly do you have a support from the hoa as of right now or no you got the letter today we're working with that letter i believe still says they're not supportive of it but right thank you uh supervisor crony oh thank you vice chair turner so um i'd like to get some [00:44:17] clarity on the use of the private streets that the HOA maintains? Yeah so those streets and streets that are internal to our project and our property are actually subject to a shared maintenance agreement and so and that has been in the been recorded in the land records for a couple of couple dozen years and so they have use of our private streets and we have use of their private streets um as a as as part of that now we hear them that they don't want us if we get residential here to use those private streets and we appreciate that and we're happy to have that [00:44:55] conversation with them um we've had conversations and and you know we'll continue to do that that's why as allison pointed out we have an alternative cdp but it seemed premature to have that conversation before we were finally arrived on a full on a full application here okay so thank you for that so the draft CPAM for the suburban compact neighborhood envisions either 17.5 percent [00:45:26] affordability for single-family units 13.75 percent for multi-family units or two percent unmet housing needs units in addition to the zoning ordinance minimum requirement. [00:45:45] So staff is recommending that the applicant provide five additional units as affordable for a total of nine additional units above the zoning ordinance requirements. And I'm here to ask, would you be willing to do that? Yeah, we're having a hard time making the numbers work. [00:46:02] And for whatever it's worth, when we were at the Planning Commission in November, the Planning Commission asked staff what's that more number and staff didn't have a number the first time that we heard about what that number of nine is is when the staff report was published and so we know that CPAM has not been approved it will likely be approved a week from tonight but but we're in the process of figuring that out it's going to be it's going to be difficult to be honest it's going to be difficult to get to that nine number and had we known that that nine number was going to be the thing maybe we would have had a different conversation and not not throwing away the the light tech building but we are where we are tonight and this is this is where [00:46:41] we are and have worked in good faith with the community with the planning commission with the district supervisor to get to this project where it is tonight and we're hopeful that you will support it um the port portsmouth uh boulevard crosswalk so um i'm also asking if instead of providing um 80 000 in lieu of construction if you could just make a commitment to to build that crosswalk i would assume you know we've had so many issues with pedestrian safety in our communities lately so i would like a commitment to build that crosswalk we want to commit to you to build that crosswalk it's a vdot road and so vdot has to allow us to build that crosswalk and that's the [00:47:20] only reason why the eighty thousand dollar contribution is there is that if vdot says you can't build it as much as i'd like to go and be the mask marauder and build it we can't do it so that's why we get what that's why we have it we would love your help in convincing vdot to let us build it we're not trying to not build it we're trying to make sure that you know if it doesn't get built we give you the money so that maybe you're more successful with with vdot in a couple of years okay thank you uh super rose glass yes thank you was that um when you were talking about the crosswalk is that the one um the southwestern leg of portsmouth boulevard and belmont ridge [00:47:58] road intersection is that what would i missed it um supervisor to crony no she was asking for i thing. She was asking for the intersection, I believe, where the road crosses Portsmouth for the entrance to the Sheets on the south side and on the north side. [00:48:17] Okay. So I'm going to ask for another crosswalk where I just said the southwestern leg of Portsmouth Boulevard and Belmont Ridge intersection asking if you are willing to proffer to construct the missing crosswalk. We're in the process of investigating whether or not that's possible in that location and we're happy to get back to you on that. Okay also and as we're all aware I hope we are that of the Stonebridge High School student that was sadly hit and killed yesterday while walking walking to school at Claiborne Parkway and Portsmouth [00:48:51] Boulevard. So as part of the safe passages to school pilot program developed through the joint committee, the need for crosswalks on the north and south legs of the Portsmouth Boulevard and Chesterfield Street intersection that were identified as the third most important of crosswalks. [00:49:10] And I'm asking if you're willing to proffer to construct these missing crosswalks. Yes, we're willing to proffer to construct that missing crosswalk in that location. But we would like regional transportation credit for constructing that, given the fact that it is off-site it is regional it was identified separate and apart from this application and additionally we're making regional transportation contributions pursuant to the old number which is twice as much as what the number is today so we're giving a six thousand dollar per unit contribution as opposed to what what would be expected today of three thousand uh okay i will talk to the supervisor [00:49:49] that's in this district about that thank you thank you supervisor briskman thank you i i would support you getting the credits for for doing the sidewalk so I think if it ever comes to a vote um on the uh we thanks for the briefing that you gave me the other day thanks for your presentation today the one suggestion I had um and I'll just put it on the record here this you had identified as pickleball courts and this is sport courts yeah um so and what I recommended because i have had the two of you right now in this conversation we're gonna have [00:50:26] a match i have had um uh a number of complaints in my community when the pickleball courts are too close yeah so i'm not an engineer but my recommendation was that you make these your sport courts and move these as pickleball courts like as far away as you can we can do that if you guys are okay with that yeah okay yeah sorry we didn't have a chance to update our illustrative that's okay that's okay i'm just or get rid of them again my time um so um on the density and [00:51:02] we had this conversation as well the other day um we are in a housing crisis and the general assembly has recognized we are in a housing crisis nationally many have recognized that we are in a housing crisis not just in loudon county i know i'm preaching to the choir amen but across the nation so um i have a lot of difficulty with the fact that that light tech building was taken out i have a lot of difficulty honestly and lightning might strike me but i have a lot of difficulty even building single family detached in a suburban compact neighborhood at this point [00:51:39] in loudon county i mean we are we have so much single family detached that's part of the reason nobody can afford to live here i know that's a blanket statement a lot of people can't afford to live here so um i'm i'm leaning more towards supervisor sayings on um on where i might fall on this because i and i think that you can put the light tech back in the staff said you can put it back in i know that you worked with the community and they don't love it but yeah i'll let i'll let you make it the one thing i will say and you may have seen me um go off to the side and talk with [00:52:15] leo rogers um it we cannot put it back in and go right to a vote we would have to re-advertise this for a public hearing because it was not advertised for this evening and that increased density was not advertised. Okay. But just for us, not for the planning commission. The planning commission did, did review it with the increased intensity. Okay. So do you have, we haven't talked about critical action dates around here in a long time. We don't have them anymore. Oh, okay. Maybe that's why. Okay. Okay. All right. So, okay. Okay. I'm, that, that might be my request. That is my request. Thank you. [00:52:52] Thank you, Sir Rez Burtzman. Really quickly, I'll address some of the larger issues in my comments around the motion. Just a couple of requests. In your proffer on parking additions, the language currently reads, when off-lot parking spaces are required for a residential unit by section 7.0611 of the zoning ordinance, such requirements shall be increased to at least 0.65 spaces. I know you meet that. I'd like to request that the language there have the addition of the phrase non-dedicated so it reads when non-dedicated off-lot parking spaces are required [00:53:28] and the rest is the same if you can do that. I didn't think it was that big a deal. The curved parking space, parallel parking spaces on I think it's Winkle. Winkle, that's right. We know that's your property. I talked to you earlier today about that. How do you, if that property is used and they want in access to that piece of land how do you propose to create access to their piece of land on from your property or do you have to i mean my expectation we can't do a turn in apparently you can't turn in off of belmont ridge road right we will provide them that will be provide them access i mean that section of winkle is a private street as well [00:54:08] that's one of those streets we're talking about here right um we'll provide them access to their property there okay um uh i know where basically you positioned yourself i had a community meeting with the community the other night i've talked with you several times and i know your position is right now that you would like to use the private roads but you are prepared with an alternative proposal not to use the private roads i personally told the community meeting the other night that i i don't agree with them not opening those private roads and i think the majority of people in Belmont Green will want to use those private roads. They are not going to want them [00:54:48] blocked off. But the HOA was pretty firm on they want them blocked off. And you have an alternative if they do that. What is the legal mechanism that we can lock in the alternative? And I'm not saying you have to do it. I'm saying what is the legal document that will say the HOA has forbidden you from using the private roads? And secondly, is that legal? And then how do we get that in the proffers. So, um, I'll say it like this. If you're, if you have an, if you have a driveway that goes across your neighbor's property, right. And you access your driveway by driving across their [00:55:23] property. The question is, is what's the validity of that document that gives you the right to drive across your neighbor's property. So ultimately I appreciate that request to ask staff to go in and dig in and ask VDOT, et cetera. The reality is that it's a property rights question. And that's why it hasn't been resolved yet. It's a property rights conversation, and we want to continue to see if there are ways to resolve it. I got 10 seconds. Thanks. Because of blasting, can we give the homeowners an option to get on a list to give them prior notification prior blasting? We talked about that. Absolutely. And then do you want to talk about the other crosswalk? That's right. And there's a couple of extra crosswalks I asked you to put in in light of the tragedy that happened [00:56:01] yesterday or the day before. So can you just explain what those crosswalks are? Yeah. So there two crosswalks they are off-site to this property um and they and i don't have my notes in front of me but maybe ben will turn them on but we are prepared to do a warrant study and to supervisor to crony your point we have to do the warrant study because it's not a private street on a public street if they're warranted we will build them we'll take we would like to take credit against our regional transportation contribution because these are regionally serving and regionally important and we will absolutely build them and so if they're not warranted however we'll just make our regional transportation contributions and would not like to make a cash in lieu because if [00:56:40] they're not warranted if this board isn't willing isn't able to get the vdot to let those crosswalks be built it's probably unlikely that they'll ever be able to be built those two intersections are very close to one another and sometimes vdot looks at these things and trying to obviously balance the interests of people driving and and not creating excess conflicts and so we just haven't had the conversation with vdot but yes we're prepared to do that warrant study and if warranted install them. Okay thank you. I'm going to go to a motion. I move the Board of Supervisors forward LEGIE 2024-0018. I'm sorry I knew I was going to forget that. I put it in my brain I was going to [00:57:17] forget that. Are there any members in the board room tonight that wishing to speak to the board regarding this public hearing item? And I think we have a number of speakers on West Belmont. Let me call and if you could come to the podium. The first speaker I have from this application is Paul Serrano. Are you Mr. Serrano? I am. I'm Paul Serrano. Thank you very much, [00:57:52] supervisors. I am a resident of Ashburn District. I've been there for almost 15 years, and I rise in support of the zoning amendment with respect to Belmont West. I travel Belmont Ridge Road frequently and Portsmouth Boulevard occasionally, and I can observe many of the things that have been mentioned in the discussion of this item and I have always observed that the existing development property is so insignificant [00:58:26] that it's it's practically invisible to a regular passerby I support the concept of mixed-use community to better you use the space available I've seen projects such as Goose Creek Village and Loudoun Station creating a vibrant atmosphere that benefits both community residents and visitors. [00:58:48] The carefully constructed plans for Belmont West offer a similar vision for the future. And I think it's important to keep in mind the need for affordable housing in Ashburn. The Belmont West proposal meets those needs with development that is practical and appealing to a diverse community. [00:59:10] For these reasons, I think it's a no-brainer. I urge the board to move forward with a proposed zoning amendment. Thank you, Mr. Brown. Next speaker is Mitchell Turner, followed by Richard Buck, followed by Chris Phillips. No relation, I don't think. [00:59:30] Good evening. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is Mitchell Turner. I live actually on Charlestown Pike, and so why do I care about this? Well, I have 11 adult children, and one of them has already had to go to West Virginia to be able to find a place to buy a house. [00:59:48] And I've got another family, young family, that's trying to relocate within Loudoun. And, of course, they can't find places to do that. Certainly, that's anywhere near affordable. So this has already been addressed by one of the supervisors. [01:00:05] This addresses something that is, yes, it's a national problem. We're certainly feeling that pain here. We do need more places to live in Loudoun. And being out in the West, I do appreciate the way the Board of Supervisors over the years has kept, you know, the densities, working on those densities, and approved projects for development in the Leesburg area, even to replace farms, which, you know, people may go up in arms about that. [01:00:36] But, you know, you have a development, development, development, development surrounding a farm, it makes sense to put the housing, more housing there near the schools, near the retail and all that. so um you know this this this solves that problem it's already been developed it's it's not like it's it's open land or anything like that but you know if it's not used well and we see those empty parking lots i you know i i am out west so it's not my problem but i would think people would be don't want the crime and just junk that comes when you have unused space out there so it really [01:01:11] needs to be developed you're recycling land that was already approved for development and and now we're going to put it to a good use where where people can make the most of it uh and then you've got the the walkable retail uh and and just the community it fits in with the surrounding community so i hope the board approves it so we can get some more houses in the county thank you thank you very much uh richard buck followed by chris phillips followed by brian burtons richard richard buck [01:01:50] going once going twice so thank you for the opportunity to speak um i'm i'm here in support of the proposal i think that it's unfortunate that the shopping center has not been a success or at least a complete success but i think it's an opportunity for the county and the board and certainly all of us to support housing. [01:02:21] We have a bit of a problem in Loudoun County. We have a, I just learned the other day, we have a three-year backlog for affordable housing. I think a development like this or a redevelopment like this would be an ideal opportunity. [01:02:39] I've driven Belmont, I've only lived up here for about five years, but I've driven Belmont Ridge Road through the Gloucester intersection. know the area I don't think it will be that disruptive I was encouraged to see the the school situation so I think there's not so far from what I've seen tonight I don't see a reason not to proceed with the program and I would encourage everyone to support it thank you and thank you sir next up is Chris Phillips followed by Brian Burton's followed by Michael Overson good evening [01:03:19] I'm Chris Phillips. Members of the board, thank you for letting me speak tonight. I'm requesting that you approve the rezoning application for the Belmont Green proposal for several reasons. Affordability, as has been mentioned from the dais, is obviously the topic for the day, and the West Belmont project increases housing affordability in Loudoun County. [01:03:47] It's simple, basic economics that scarcity is the enemy of affordability. And this project takes already commercially developed land and adds to the county's housing stock, including low-cost housing. [01:04:04] That, and it also provides the commercial space, which it's currently zoned at. I would like to address the question. I don't know the proper terminology, but there was apparently something that was in the original proposal that added even more low-cost housing. [01:04:22] And I would urge you all not to let the perfect be the enemy of the beneficial. What this development does not do is create new development. It rather repurposes a strictly commercial property to incorporating housing as well. [01:04:39] And as we've all acknowledged, housing is in great demand in Loudoun County. Decades ago, a prior board downzoned all of western Loudoun County, effectively limiting new housing in western Loudoun to only the very wealthy by eliminating smaller lot sizes. [01:05:01] While this proposal does not right that mistake, it at least adds to the county's housing stock within an economic reach of average residents of the county, and I have a couple of daughters, while maintaining our economy by providing commercial redevelopment as well. [01:05:22] I urge you to approve this proposal. Thank you for your attention, and have a blessed and safe new year. Thank you, sir. Next up is Brian Burtons, followed by Michael Overson, followed by Jessica Farb. Good evening, board. [01:05:38] I just want to say I appreciate all that you guys are doing. It's a real great time commitment to suffer through the community, and it's all it's redevelopment. I do support this application. It's a redevelopment of a faltering commercial lot. [01:06:03] It's making sense. It's adding to the current housing stock, and I really appreciate you all. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Mr. Michael Overson, followed by Jessica Farb, followed by John Loop. [01:06:26] Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair, honorable members of the Board of Supervisors. My name is Michael Overson, and I have the pleasure of representing the Belmont Green Community Association, Inc., which is an association composed of 792 households that live directly adjacent to this development. [01:06:44] The applicant has worked as indicated with the community and some significant changes have been made to this application in direct response to community member feedback. One of those changes was the removal of the LIHTC building, which again, it wasn't an issue of whether we want affordable housing. [01:07:00] The community very much supports affordable housing. The issue was with the configuration of the building and the fact that all of the affordable housing dwelling units were being segregated into one building rather than being integrated into the rest of the community. It was a significant step to move past that LIHTC building, and we are hopeful that the Board of Supervisors won't move backwards on that issue, considering that there is still a significant amount of affordable housing being offered here. [01:07:25] The two issues I submitted my letter this morning, the two issues raised in that letter are still significant issues to the community. The first being a lack of significant, meaningful open space A lot of the open space that's being counted here, 5.3 acres of open space, but more than half of it is not really usable. [01:07:44] It's sort of leftover setback area. And the reason that matters to the community is Elmont Green, which is a very architecturally unique and very quintessential American neighborhood in terms of design, has some very special public or community green spaces of its own. [01:08:01] And if there is not enough open space in this development, there is going to be a financial burden on our community in terms of maintaining its own green spaces. So that's the reason they're concerned there. The other major concern has to do with the private roads. And I'll say very quickly that there is an agreement from 2006 that says that if the private roads are going to be used, the commercial private roads are going to be used by the community and vice versa, that there's going to be a contribution obligation. [01:08:27] That's all that agreement says. There's no easement. There's no reciprocal rights of use. and the community is very much within its legal rights. And considering the traffic safety concerns in this area and in their neighborhood, the community is very much within its right to say that they don't want those private streets to be changed in this significant way. [01:08:46] So we're requesting, again, not that the application be opposed, but that these significant concerns of the community be taken into effect. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Next up is Jessica Farb, followed by our final speaker, Mr. John Luke. Good evening, Supervisors. [01:09:02] My name is Jess Farb, and I'm privileged to be the president of the Belmont Green Homeowners Association, representing 792 households today. I've lived in Belmont Green for over 23 years, and I really appreciate the opportunity to address you all tonight. Before I go on, I do want to express on behalf of the HOA on the record, I want to offer our deepest condolences to the family and friends of Kalina Yu at Stonebridge and in the larger Ashburn community, given the tragedy yesterday. [01:09:29] As many of you know, and I think Mike Robertson already covered this, as well as the applicant, this is a very diverse, wonderful community. We have a variety of housing types already in existence. A great number of recreational spaces and pocket parks and mature trees that we're really proud of. And we're adjacent to several Loudoun County schools, Belmont Station, Trailside, and Stonebridge. [01:09:50] And we're also very lucky to have a Montessori school located within the community. I'm not here today to express the community's absolute opposition to this application, unlike the previous application that was submitted several years ago. We understand that eventually this site is going to and should be redeveloped. [01:10:05] But what we want is the best plan for everyone, and the developer has been mostly responsive to our input, including eliminating the LIHTC building, which we, along with the Planning Commission, agree is not a great fit as constructed the height of it, which has been discussed. But I do want to share and underscore a couple of the concerns from my community members for the board as you consider next steps for the application. [01:10:27] First and foremost, we continue to have concerns about the impact this development will have on traffic and safety. We can measure traffic and trips quantitatively and meet the regulations and requirements, but that isn't capturing the on-the-ground lived experience. We've already expressed that we prefer not to open our private roads, especially Middlebury Street, which is currently a dead-end, essentially creating a cul-de-sac atmosphere where there are basketball hoops and kids' bikes parked right on the street. [01:10:53] So we think the developer's alternative plan is a better option to address this concern. We also have concerns about having the adequate green space for our neighbors so that they don't need to utilize our space. And I think our attorney already covered that. But I do want to express our appreciation to the applicant for working with us on the design and trying to match the neighborhood up as best we can between the two partials. [01:11:15] So they have been very willing to work with us on that, and we do appreciate it. Thank you for your time. Thank you, Ms. Farrell. And finally, our last speaker. Well, we have to check the online, but Mr. Loop, John Loop. good evening chair and member of the members of the board my name is john loop and i live in belmont green the neighborhood immediately adjacent to the proposed development in the ashburn district i want to begin by being very clear about where i stand i'm not here to oppose the rezoning or the broader development i understand the support the county's need to expand housing options including more compact residential communities growth is part of living [01:11:54] in loudon county and i recognize that reality my concern tonight is much more narrow and i believe very reasonable. My neighborhood was developed in the 1990s and is served by a combination of public and private HOA-maintained roads. These roads receive no state or county maintenance and were designed specifically for internal neighborhood use. My home is located at the end of Middlebury Street, a private dead-end street by design, which limits traffic and creates a safer environment for families. I have six children between the ages of 7 and 15. Like many parents in my community, I value the predictability and safety that comes with a true dead-end road. [01:12:33] It's not just a convenience, it's a fundamental design feature that shaped how this neighborhood functions. The developer has requested permission to connect the new development, approximately 318 dwellings, to our private roads. Importantly, Curata Partners and Public Neighborhood Meetings with Belmont Green indicated these connections are not necessary for the success or the functionality of their project. [01:12:57] That matters. Private roads like ours were not engineered, funded, or maintained to absorb traffic volumes associated with hundreds of additional homes. Increased daily traffic would accelerate deterioration and shift long-term maintenance and replacement costs directly onto existing homeowners, costs we never agreed to assume for regional connectivity. [01:13:20] There is also a broader policy issue at stake. Loudoun County has long recognized the distinction between public road networks and private neighborhoods infrastructure. respecting that boundary has provided predictability and fairness for homeowners across the county allowing private roads to become connectors please wrap it up if you could thank you my request tonight is simple and specific i respectfully ask the board to deny any approval that permits the new development to connect to existing private neighborhood roads while allowing the project to proceed using alternative access already identified that approach balances growth and responsibility thank you mr thank you for your time and [01:13:57] consideration are there any other speakers in the room who would like to speak on this application moderator do we have any speakers online that would like to speak we do not vice chair turner thank you with that i will go to mo i hereby declare the public hearing closed and i will go to a motion i move that the board of supervisors ford legy 2024 0018 west belmont zmap 2024 0003 to the second board of supervisors meeting in february 2026 for action i heard a second over [01:14:31] here from supervisor glass um opening comments um i think i think i knocked on probably half the doors in this neighborhood in 2015 when i first ran for the board of supervisors and i can tell you i have said before in the past this is one of my favorite neighborhoods it's a neoclassical design they have pocket parts all through it and at that time the community was with one voice don't build to the density that you're planning on building and that was 10 years ago that we started this [01:15:05] process or was it 2019 i'm 2019 okay so we've been at this for six years um i have when we first started talking about the light tech and removal light tech building yeah i had some concerns with that but the community was adamant that they want it and if you see this application it transitions nicely board uh the county staff agrees that the transition is is nicely done between the existing community and the new community the road the private roads frankly is not an issue i've had multiple conversations with the community and with the applicant and the applicant is basically saying to the hoa it's up to you whatever you guys decide [01:15:43] we can go either way um on the light tech building just to jump back really quickly yes we're losing 60 units in the light tech building we preserve 44. i like to look at it by the fact that we're adding 344 is it new homes 3 8 318 318 new homes that has been an empty parking lot for the last 10 years so we're we're gaining a lot of new homes yes we are i think 5 adu short but that's by the definition of suburban compact neighborhood that is going to pass five days from now not by the current definition of suburban compact [01:16:23] neighborhood um and so i am especially impressed with the below average size on the floor plans and that half of these units are under the average floor plan for the county so i think we gain a whole lot in affordability with that and i'm willing to bend on the adu number i understand the public and civic space is an issue i think this is laid out very nicely and i'm willing to bend on the public civic space the fact that the county staff is recommending an approval despite those two issues is open space and public and civic space i think those are the two issues i'm [01:16:57] yeah close enough um but but the fact that the county staff supports it and it came out of the planning commission with that eight one we rarely see a perfect application but this has been in the this piece of land has been in my judgment underutilized in a county that's got a housing crisis for a very long time and we have finally if you if you take the the private road issue out of the letter we're down to just open space in the letter from the community and we heard hoa representatives say they generally support this application i think this is a good application it's not perfect few are but i think it's a good application um other comments anybody [01:17:38] thank you um vice sir turner i apologize for being here late um from another meeting but So I apologize if this question was out. I'm actually going to use my time to ask the applicant a question. So are there any plans or has been discussion about what will happen to the existing tenants in the shopping center? [01:17:56] Yeah. We are introducing 11,000 square feet of commercial in the northeast. And our expectation is that we're going to work with those tenants to the extent possible and keep them. That makes our life so much easier. There are tenants that they've got to prove. The baseball facility is not going to fit in 11,000 square feet. [01:18:12] No. And the baseball facility won't fit. you're right. But there's been dialogue with that. That's an important facility for the county. Like I know we I know that the shopping center has under underperformed, say the least. But if you're in the sports world, you know, that's the best facility. Well, arguably one of the two best facilities of its kind and a unique facility that only has been open a couple of years and they put a lot of money into. So I'd really hate for that to just. Yeah. So the challenge that we have and And the benefit that that tenant has is that they are literally a subtenant to the Bloom and only paying operating expenses of that property. [01:18:50] And so they're not paying the same rate that another retail tenant would. We're happy to work with them and figure out if there's a way to get them in someplace else. They're probably not going to be here, but we've got relationships with our tenants. We want to keep the ones who can and want to work with them. Yeah, no, you're right, but they put a lot of money into improvements for that facility. [01:19:09] Obviously, when you convert a grocery store to an indoor baseball facility, it's not an expensive thing. If you haven't ever been in there, it's really impressive. So I'm going to ask you, knowing you and knowing what you're about, let's go above and beyond. There's a limit to how much flex space is here. [01:19:25] They came from a flex property on Red Brum. They moved to get more space at a more affordable rate, which they did. So if this is going to happen and move forward, I would hate. This is one of the things. People come from all over, like not just Loudon, spend money for that facility. [01:19:42] So let's really go the extra mile to try to help relocate them. We're happy to help relocate them, work with you, and also work with economic development to see if there's a solution at hand. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Chair Turner. So I do appreciate that you're doing some smaller unit sizes, but I will say some of the square footage, like 2,975 square feet, similar size homes at 3,000 square feet start at a million in Loudoun County. [01:20:16] And I know you're doing 50% at a maximum of 1,950 square feet. Similarly sized townhomes at 1,900 square feet start at 730,000. So I don't really consider either of those prices affordable. [01:20:33] And I also would like to make sure that the basements are not included in the square footage that you're talking about or attics, habitable attics. I forget what they're called because that certainly will add to the square feet. [01:20:50] It's okay. I'm just putting that out there. There are no basements. But as kind of something that I know staff is asking for and that I would like to see is going to that nine additional above the zoning ordinance requirements. I understand the LIHTC is not what the community wants. [01:21:08] I hear that from the community because of the height. But I do think we need to kind of push for more affordable because even the smaller square feet for the units, the unit size are still going to be, frankly, not affordable for a majority of our population. [01:21:33] So I just would ask that you kind of look at that again. I know you said you might go back and look at some things, but I would ask for that because I hear you that the LIHTC might not be feasible. So that's all that I would ask. Thank you. Thank you. [01:21:50] Supervisor Umstadt. Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. I tend to agree with Supervisor Tacroni on a number of her points that unless a unit is designated as affordable, a smaller size isn't necessarily going to make it sell at an affordable price. [01:22:11] I do appreciate the posture the applicant was in with a neighboring community that did not want the LIDEC building. And I think although it's tempting for a board that is dedicated to more affordable housing, it's tempting to ask you to go back and try to fit that back in. I think that is unfair to the neighboring community and i do appreciate your being responsive to their concerns because in the end they're the ones who are going to have to live with this um if i fully appreciate [01:22:51] their point on the private streets and their desire that those not be opened up to additional traffic normally about 60 percent of hoa fees go to doing road improvements so it is a big hit on a neighboring community if those streets get opened up if as the representative however of one of the representatives who came came to represent the the community if he is correct and there is a mechanism for compensating the existing community for additional traffic [01:23:32] i think that has some merit um as you know i'll be looking at the full costs on the operational expenses of the schools but um your your your desire to make those adjacent single-family detached homes fit in with the style of the existing neighborhood i think is a really great idea and i do appreciate the amount of care you put into that supervisor glass thank you vice chair first i just want to extend my condolences to the family and friends that [01:24:11] lost the their friend loved one from yesterday i believe as you all hear us speak on the dais about the concern for safety. You have pedestrians who live in our county, and what we're trying to do is to make sure that we have safe passages. And I thank the applicant for your going and listening to what we are asking regarding crosswalks, and hope that you all consider the things that we've [01:24:47] been asking for. Thank you. Supervisor Kershner. Yes, thank you, Supervisor Turner. I want to I associate largely my comments with Supervisor Turner, what he said earlier. I think what we do kind of miss in some of these comments and kind of drilling down is that we have had this vacant piece of land here for a long time. [01:25:07] And it's really not serving the community a whole lot in terms of one of the needs the community has, which I think has been reiterated up here a lot, and that is available housing. I know that there was a comment made in terms of, well, maybe this isn't, this is not the kind of affordable housing. [01:25:23] But the question is, certainly I think with the property sizes as it was laid out by the applicant, it's more affordable. And I think that's very, very important. And I probably think these houses will probably be snatched up pretty quickly, which means it's supplying. It may not be supplying at 30% income here in Loudoun County, but it's going to supply homes for a lot of folks. [01:25:44] I really want to praise the applicant for working with the community. It doesn't sound like everything is fully satisfied. But like they say, when you're in court and both parties are not happy, that means you probably came to a pretty good outcome, which I have found in litigation often, or settlements anyway. [01:26:00] But I appreciate you continuing. Please continue to work with them in anything that can reasonably be accomplished. I kind of agree with the community that maybe LIHTC wouldn't be the best option here. And so if there is a way to provide a few more affordables, I understand the economics of it. [01:26:18] So that's not going to prevent me from obviously supporting this as I see the application right now, unless I hear something differently. And then finally, I agree, I just share my sentiment for the U family and the loss that we had yesterday in this community. It certainly reminds us of the importance of safety that we have when we're putting these communities together as a supervisor. [01:26:38] And so thank you for your consideration of those crosswalks and whatnot. Thank you. Thank you. Supervisor Briskin. Thank you, Vice Chair Turner. Staff, I have a quick question for staff, if that's okay, and you may not be able to answer it tonight, but do you know how many LIHTC buildings we have in the county and where they are? [01:26:55] I can happily follow up with that information. Okay, okay, I'd love to get that information, and maybe if there's some in the pipeline. I think there's at least one being built in my district and one in the pipeline in my district, if not two in my district. The goddess of land use is nodding her head, so I must be correct. [01:27:17] Listen, I think that we all want affordable to be dispersed to the best of our ability, but we also need to remember that LIHTC buildings are not the projects of 30, 40, or 50 years ago. LIHTC buildings, we now require them to use the same materials, the same finishes, the same interior amenities. [01:27:43] These folks in the LIHTC building will have access to the public spaces, the community house would, I should say, would have if that LIHTC building were to be built. As I said earlier, we are in a housing crisis, and legislators who have the ability to take away our local authority are thinking about it because they believe that localities are not building enough housing and we're not building enough affordable housing. So, I mean, and there's [01:28:21] a Pew article from July that indicates in larger cities, in larger jurisdictions that built at least 10 percent, increased their housing stock at least 10 percent since 2017, saw the prices of homes and the prices of rents drop significantly. In Austin, Texas, it dropped about 12% for the older homes because people were able to move out of their older homes and move into something else, whether they're aging or whether they're, you know, kids and people are retiring [01:28:56] and the kids want to buy something. In a number of the other jurisdictions, those older homes and units decreased in cost by more than 5% or 7%. And the decrease in cost even for what they call the class B and the class A dropped. [01:29:16] The price has dropped. I know we can't build our way out of this. That's not the only solution. But supply and demand is real. Supply and demand is real. And 60 units is a lot. [01:29:33] And so I'm not sure how I'm going to come down, you know, at the end when we actually vote on this. But right now I would like to see at least you guys get those five ADUs in there, if not the LIHTC building. Thank you. Thank you, Supervisor Breslin. [01:29:49] Closing comments. We're talking about 16 units here. We're not talking about 60 units. We're talking about 16 units. The LIHTC building went away with 60 units, and they were placed with 44 units. [01:30:06] and supervisor turcrony makes a good point that the prices on the reduced floor plans are still high welcome to loudon county that's just reality we're creating 318 new homes on a piece of land that has basically for residential purposes remained fallow for a very very long time and we have gone from fierce united community resistance to putting residential on this spot to what i would have to consider to be probably a b plus in community support for this this neighborhood and so i really implore my colleagues not to throw the baby out with the bath water i [01:30:43] think this is a good 80 85 solution and i'd really like to ask them to consider the support of what we gain rather than focus on what what we don't have um motion was made and seconded by i can't remember who seconded this motion sylvia did that's right thank you very much motion made and seconded to move this to the February the business meeting in February 26th for action all those in favor please say aye aye any opposed that motion will pass 801 thank you all very much appreciate it [01:31:19] uh 727 do we want dinner move on we can finish i think pretty early i i hear move on okay let's move on. Item number six, CPAM 2024-0005, the electrical infrastructure CPAM. If we can have relevant parties come forward, that'd be great. Members of the public wishing to address the board regarding this item and who have not already done so, please call the number scrolling across your screen. I will now turn the time over to staff for any updates and presentation on the [01:31:54] CPAM on electrical infrastructure. When you are ready, staff, you may begin. Good evening. We have a brief presentation we'll be sharing. Good evening. I'm Pat Giglio with the Department [01:32:34] of Planning and Zoning. Also with me this evening is Dan Galindo, Director of Planning and Zoning, as well as Paul Vernon, Project Manager with Kimley Horn. The Electrical Infrastructure Comprehensive Plan Amendment proposes map and policy amendments to the Loudoun County 2019 General Plan related to the preferred location, siting, design, and aesthetics of high voltage transmission corridors and electrical infrastructure. [01:32:58] During tonight's meeting we'll present findings from the electrical infrastructure CPAM policy research memorandum prepared by Kim Lee Horn followed by an overview of the proposed electrical infrastructure amendments to the 2019 general plan that are included in your packets. The Board of Supervisors initiated and approved the project plan for the electrical infrastructure CPAM on December 3rd 2024. On July 17th, 2025, county staff and the consultant provided the board with a project update. [01:33:32] A community information meeting was held at the Douglas Community Center in Leesburg on July 23rd, and the county also maintained an online comment form on the project webpage during the summer where the public provided input on the draft amendments that are included as attachment seven. Other public comments and letters have been received to date on the CPAM and are also included in the project file on Landmark. [01:33:55] County staff also facilitated meetings with county committees, referral agencies, Dominion Energy, and the Piedmont Environmental Council to gather additional input to further refine the draft amendments. On October 28th, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the Electrical Infrastructure CPAM. [01:34:12] One member of the public spoke in support of the proposed amendments. The Planning Commission suspended the rules and approved the draft amendments at the meeting 801. [01:34:30] So the Electrical Infrastructure CPAM is divided into two phases. Phase one is focused on strengthening and developing additional policies to guide the development of high voltage transmission corridors. Phase one also includes a mapping component that identifies all existing and approved high voltage transmission corridors as a feature of the 2019 general plan and a preferred location for the development of new transmission lines within the county. [01:34:59] Phase two of the CPAM is focused on proactive long-term planning for potential new transmission corridors to address anticipated local and regional electric demand. Phase two is scheduled to begin this spring following the completion of phase one and the adoption of the draft amendments. [01:35:16] So at this point, I will turn it over to Paul for his overview of the policy research memo and the regulatory review process. - Thank you, go ahead. - Thanks, Pat. As Pat said, we're here to review the findings and the observations of the policy memo and discuss the proposed draft amendments the 2019 plan. We're not going to talk tonight about any individual transmission projects, but we are here to talk about how the proposed draft amendments to the general plan can help guide future decisions. The map to the right on this slide, which is a little difficult to see, [01:35:54] and Pat will bring this up again later, I think, shows the location of existing and approved high voltage transmission corridors across the county today. the 500 kVs depicted on this map in red and the 138s and the 230 kVs depicted in blue. [01:36:11] In this work we thought it was really important not to think in isolation but to remember that we're part of a much larger system. There's power coming to Loudoun County from other places and sometimes going through Loudoun County to other places so it was important for us to think about you know kind of a much broader network in terms of producing this work. This slide shows different corridors and infrastructure in various land use settings. On the left, the 230 kV monopole transmission located near Dulles Trade Center. In the center, an underground 230 kV line with [01:36:49] its transition station. And on the right, a high voltage lattice H-frame towers with 500 kV and 138 kV near Levittsville. Together, these images demonstrate the transmission infrastructure and corridors vary widely in form and footprint and visual impact depending on voltage location and whether those lines are overhead or underground. It was important for us to recognize and discuss the difference between policy and regulation in this work. Policies in the comprehensive plan express the county's vision and goals. They help guide decisions but don't carry any any [01:37:27] legal force. Regulations by contrast are enforceable with specific standards and requirements and are mandatory. For transmission infrastructure, that regulatory control lies with the SCC, the State Commission Corporation. And it's important for us to note here, this work is policy, not regulation. Electrical demand across the United States has grown. [01:37:51] We all know this. And in Loudoun County, it's different. That growth rate is based mostly on increased demand for data center growth, with Loudoun County being the largest data center market in the U.S. You can see from this graph a couple of jumps from 2018 to 2023 about a 230 percent increase and then a projection to 2028 to 240 percent which isn't an additional 10 percent it's another 240 percent. In terms of priorities the theme here was balance you know trying to be considerate of many different points of view. Residents concerns both in the east and the west [01:38:30] urban suburban and rural and understand the balance and interconnection between meeting electrical needs balancing economic growth and preserving community character um we took a look at the complexity of the regulatory bodies and their roles in this work the map on the right is the pgm service area excuse me the pennsylvania new jersey maryland interconnection again this is that same issue about thinking about the work not in isolation but to remember that we're part of a much larger system breaking these governing bodies down FERC is an independent [01:39:09] agency that regulates the transmission and wholesale sale of electricity FERC plays a major role in maintaining the reliability and efficiency of the interstate transmission network pjm the regional transmission organization that coordinates the movement of wholesale electricity which is concerned about grid management planning expansion and transmission reliability The SEC, which has the regulatory control over public utilities, but the SEC considers land use decisions in the review process when requested, which we'll talk about a little bit again. [01:39:41] Dominion, in addition to generating electricity, is responsible for operating, maintaining the transmission infrastructure. They coordinate with PGM in reference to functionality and stability. Dominion also ensures that the infrastructure of the grid meets safety, reliability, and environmental standards. But important, you know, Dominion is obligated by the Virginia State Code to serve customers when power is requested. So transmission lines that are proposed in Loudoun are often driven by power demands and requests. For Loudoun County, you know, controls zoning and develops comprehensive plan which guides land use decisions, [01:40:18] but the county does not have necessarily a direct role in citing development nor selection of the location of transmission lines, and as we said before, the SCC has the exclusive authority to approve this work. This slide emphasizes that the decision-making power is centralized or concentrated at the federal, regional, and state levels. Counties in Virginia have limited formal authority, even though these projects do impact local communities. FERC plays a limited but potentially significant role in approving transmission corridors when states fail to act [01:40:53] obstruct projects in federally designated National Electric Transmission Corridors and IETCs. In those cases, FERC can't exercise backstop sighting authority, including the power to approve routes and grant imminent domain. This allows FERC to override local decisions on transmission projects, further reduces decisions by local governments, but local participation in public review is still enabled. As we stated before, the SCC has the ultimate authority. It's a multi-year process involving multiple stages of review, oversight, public engagement, and the [01:41:32] SCC issues a final order based on need and environmental impact. The SCC does look at a range of factors in the approval process, cost impact of ratepayers, reliability and grid resiliency, impact on scenic, historic, and environmental resources, and consideration of comprehensive plan when requested which is why we're doing this work in the first place to amend the 29th general plan to give a greater level of influence to the county in the process and i'll send it back to pat so as highlighted in the presentation and in the cpam memo in your packet prepared by kimley horn it's anticipated that additional high voltage transmission lines will [01:42:11] be required to address existing and projected electrical load growth in the county the map and text amendments proposed with the electrical infrastructure CPAM build on the existing policies in chapter 6 and 7 of the 2019 general plan. The slide on the screen identifies key topics that are addressed in the CPAM including the efficient use of existing transmission corridors, minimizing impacts through compatible siting and design, recreational and natural areas within transmission corridors, and community outreach with which will be described in the following [01:42:44] slides. So the draft policies continue to support the construction of necessary electrical infrastructure to ensure the structural integrity and reliability of the county's electrical network to serve existing businesses and residential uses while supporting economic development. The policies support the incorporation of new technologies to increase efficiency and optimize the capacity of existing transmission lines over the construction of new transmission lines. The policies include guidance on techniques to minimize the impact of transmission corridors on the built and natural environment. These include locating and expanding existing transmission [01:43:24] corridors near compatible uses in areas planned for employment and industrial uses and avoiding when possible urban centers, mixed use and residential developments, towns, villages, and rural landscapes. The policies continue to encourage the undergrounding of transmission lines where feasible to minimize impacts on existing communities in sensitive, rural, and historic areas. [01:43:46] The policies support the use of siting and design techniques to soften views and minimize the visual impact of overhead transmission lines on adjacent uses. The policies promote reconductoring, voltage conversion, and grid-enhancing technologies to better utilize existing transmission infrastructure and increase the efficiency and capacity of the network. [01:44:08] The policies support local electric generation, energy storage, and the integration of renewable energy to enhance the reliability of the electrical grid while minimizing the need for additional transmission lines within the county. The policies also support building passive trails and restoring natural habitat for native plants and wildlife within transmission corridors. [01:44:32] The policies support ongoing education and collaboration with electrical providers in the community when considering the expansion or the establishment of new transmission corridors to minimize community and environmental impacts. The amendments also call for the county to develop policy positions and legislative priorities to advocate for state legislation for electrical infrastructure through the board's annual legislative program. [01:45:00] The policies propose the inclusion of an electrical infrastructure map identifying all existing and approved high voltage transmission corridors as a feature of the 2019 general plan. The adoption of the electrical infrastructure map in combination with the policy supporting the co-location of transmission lines in existing corridors provides clear policy guidance to locations where the county would anticipate and support the co-location, expansion, and development of high voltage transmission lines. [01:45:28] Provisions within state code direct the state corporation commission to consider guidance within a county's comprehensive plan when requested by the jurisdiction during their review of transmission line projects. So while the county has no formal role in the approval process for transmission lines the inclusion of the proposed policy amendments and electrical infrastructure map in the 2019 general plan serve as a guide to improve the county's ability to influence the location development and management of high voltage transmission corridors and electrical infrastructure. [01:46:01] So the Planning Commission, at their public hearing in October, approved the draft text and policy amendments and forwarded the item to the board with a recommendation of approval. Staff supports approval of the CPAM and is available for questions. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. [01:46:20] Supervisors, do you have questions of staff on this item? If you do, please turn your lights on. Supervisor Kearney. Yeah. Thank you, Vice Chair Turner, and thank you very much for the presentation. So one of the slides was kind of shocking to me. [01:46:36] and I'm going to bring it up if I can find it, from 2023 to 2028, you're expecting a 240% increase in electricity demand, correct? Do you know how many substations we need for that? [01:46:56] So that information is actually outside of the purview of this particular CPAM. I know as part of the data center CPAM, they are actually looking at substations as part of that. So that information should be available there, but I do not have that information off the top of my head. [01:47:14] Yeah, because I think I brought up perhaps we should identify the location of future substations because they do have a direct impact on the community when they're not provided by developers. Because a lot of them aren't provided on the sites of the data centers of the high load user. [01:47:31] Right, so that topic will be addressed as part of phase two of the data center CPAM. Okay, so Dominion, I'm in support of passive trails on the right-of-way, but Dominion, I read this very long letter from Dominion. [01:47:49] They said that it's a conflict, that we would ask for trails when we're also asking for co-locating on existing corridors and expanding existing corridors and maximizing existing corridors. [01:48:05] they said it'll be difficult for them to do both. And so I just wanted to bring that up and what's the solution there? So what I can say is in all of these transmission corridor projects, we have discussed with Parks and Rec about the incorporation of trails into where it is feasible. [01:48:26] And so the one thing that these policies do put us as identifying it as a priority for the county. So that's the one reason why those policies are there. But we will continue working with Dominion to try and do that and create more complete trail networks. [01:48:43] Yeah, and I'll just say Morrisville to Wishing Star, they said they probably wouldn't be able to do it because they're expanding and they're wrecking rebuild and they need to optimize that right of way is what they said. So I did have another question. [01:49:04] Yeah, phase two. Do we have to do a map with phase two? Because I do have concerns identifying greenfield roots, new lines, and putting them on a map regarding property values. [01:49:20] So do we have to do a mapping exercise in phase two? We're beginning the scoping part of that, and Paul can provide a little detail of kind of our thoughts. Yeah, for the phase two work, we're not anticipating putting lines on the map that say here and not here. [01:49:36] But we're re-scoping some of that now and we're working with some of our folks that actually do line placement and we've put kind of a susceptibility strategy together to think about where they might be more likely and or less likely. [01:49:55] What are the zones or areas that should be sort of specifically excluded just to kind of get an understanding of where the direction of things might head. But in terms of putting actual lines on the map, you know the line's going to go here or not go here that's not going to be a product of the phase two work thank you very much thanks for clarifying that supervisor i'm sorry uh thank you mr vice chair um first i really appreciated the briefing um that was fantastic both tonight and and then [01:50:26] previously i very much appreciate the chart on page 13 of the presentation tonight the governing responsibilities and review and in every single category loudon county has a minor influence if any and i think that's a point that we don't make often enough as board Because I think the public thinks we can stop a line anytime we want to. [01:51:04] And the fact is, we really can't. So that was helpful. Going to Supervisor Tacroni's question about trails. What kind, if I just wanted to walk the three miles from the Potomac down to the substation where the 514 line, is is going to start what kind of property rights does dominion have to keep me off of there [01:51:35] i don't need an asphalt trail i'm not even sure i need a um mulch trail but do i even have the legal right to walk among these towers or are we going to be defining trails as something much more formal and is that why dominion is saying no and if we didn't define it as as a formal asphalt trail would they even permit the public to walk along their right of way i think in all [01:52:15] those situations it's a case-by-case basis as you're aware and as you've pointed out there's numerous portions of those easements that are part of hoa property and as part of those those are those HOA trails that are there. The objective is to really interconnect those to create a more robust trail network in the future. And so with that, to give you a definitive answer on that, again, I would defer to our attorneys. I would have, and also with our Parks and Rec Department as we work together with Dominion to try and develop those. Final question. Last night, [01:52:52] Supervisor Turner and I attended the Dominion Community Outreach Forum on the 514 line. And one of the questions I asked Dominion, one of their engineers, was if Pennsylvania holds to its promise to build more power plants, to provide power along transmission lines to data centers in southern Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia, Is there anything we can do to say no to a whole additional transmission line corridor through Loudoun? [01:53:28] Once again, that decision is a decision by the SEC. And so, once again, these policies are really meant to provide guidance should we consider future routes. The one thing, and we've had these discussions, is we don't know the technology moving forward. [01:53:49] And one thing we really stressed in some of these policies and supported was using new technology to better increase the capacity within our existing lines to use those transmission corridors to their fullest extent before considering any new corridors. [01:54:07] And I know there was conversation in some of your other board meetings about high voltage direct current. That is one means of delivering a large amount of power and it's generally an underground approach, but that may be a solution to that need for high demand power here in our area. [01:54:27] - Thank you. - Mr. President Turner. - Thank you. So many of our existing corridor lines don't really have a lot of room for expansion, just because of development that's happened on both sides. [01:54:43] So what do we think is left in terms of capacity that we can actually address here? As we've said, you know, we're seeing a lot of the, what Dominion calls wreck and rebuild projects. And so that's putting additional, taking down the old lattice towers, placing. [01:55:00] Going with pyre. Right, and going with, you know, going with monopole construction to get more in those particular corridors. So that would be the approach moving forward. But, you know, again, not being a transmission engineer, I couldn't tell you what the crystal ball is. But that's also something we can look at in the phase two work also. [01:55:19] I mean, phase two is clearly where the action is here. So you said that we weren't going to be identifying new corridors or new lines in response to Supervisor Coney. But don't we kind of have to or this exercise isn't going to be that useful? I think it's going to be useful to the point of, you know, electric transmission perhaps coming from other locations, right? [01:55:42] Identifying where those points of entry might potentially be to the county. But then, I mean, I thought that the idea here was for us to have an idea of where we would want those things to go if they're going to come. I mean, look, I get it. Like, politically, for us up here to have to sit there and look at a map of the county and say, oh, yeah, this is where new transmission line is. [01:56:03] It's not going to be fun for anybody. But it's also probably a responsible thing to do because we know that they're coming. And if there are places that are better than others, I would much rather map that out in advance than be stuck with Dominion having done that and identified something and then we're reacting. [01:56:19] So talking about mapping in reference to susceptibility, rather than there, say, being a fine pointed line on the map, we'll be able to perhaps suggest places that might be more likely and less likely in kind of zones of influence versus exactly where they're going to go because we're not going to know the answer to that question. [01:56:41] Our folks that are doing GIS mapping and doing routing work now will help us fine-tune what that mapping can look like. So it's not going to be a line on the map, but it should be. An area on the map. Yeah, I mean, I guess what I'm encouraging is that you do that. Like, we be bold here even though it's going to be painful because in the long run. [01:57:01] Now, the final question would be, and I think some of my colleagues are hitting at this, How much can we really influence the process? Now, I will say in our experience with the county attorney, who's extremely experienced working with the State Corporation Commission, I do think that especially Dominion would prefer to work with the county than not, you know, and have the county oppose something. [01:57:24] So from that standpoint, can we at least expect, and it's not going to be, you know, we don't have approval authority, but can we expect that to matter in the process if there is a defined area that we prefer? I would certainly hope so, thinking that the exercise is starting to do some work for those bodies and agencies ahead of what's going to happen. [01:57:47] So, you know, information from the community, understanding, you know, susceptibility and where it might be a good idea or not a good idea, you know, that should hopefully start to set the stage for where things can happen and also start to set expectation in reference to, you know, residents and business owners and the community understanding what the future might potentially look like. [01:58:10] Thank you. Supervisor Kirshner. Thank you, Vice Chair, and thank you for all the work that you have done to this point. I agree with Supervisor Armstead. This has been a really good presentation and I think a really good start to a really, really, really important process. [01:58:27] Although I agree with Supervisor Letourneau and Supervisor, I'm going to say that how much influence this has is somewhat limited. But I think we have to do as much as we can as supervisors, and obviously why this CPAM was started to really have an influence in the process. [01:58:43] I think that's what our constituents expect of us, and I think that is our responsibility. As to the kind of the – I would agree with Supervisor Letourneau. I think as much as we can define the preferred corridors obviously puts us in a much more influential seat when this comes to the SEC. [01:59:01] It is a painful thing. And it sounds to me like that is something kind of generally we can gauge or talk about from what I understood. I also have another question from a constituent who wrote to the board recently. He was on the Rural Economic Development Council. [01:59:18] And obviously a lot of concern that the CPAM could threaten rural businesses, property rights, et cetera. But he did know in the letter, and I thought it was worth the question to ask, that, you know, here in Loudoun, we've already funded an engineering study for the HVDC alternative for the Aspen Gold Line. [01:59:35] And we've incorporated data from other HVDC corridors in the future. The question is, are we going to incorporate that data for those corridors in the future? And is there something that we are contemplating or could contemplate as part of this CPAM? So you said high voltage direct current is what you were referring to? [01:59:55] Correct. The newer technologies. Correct. And so right now we have policies that already, what's being proposed is supporting undergrounding within existing transmission corridors. And that's exactly the type of applications that are being brought forward with the HVDC so that you use those existing easements in order to do that. [02:00:14] So, without saying, the existing policies already address that. We do not, as far as the policies go, we do not differentiate between direct current or alternating current. They are all transmission corridors and transmission lines as it's addressed in this. [02:00:33] That's fair. Okay. To another part of your question, in the Phase 2 work, we'll also have stakeholder engagements, So we'll be talking to Dominion and others while we're learning about, you know, susceptibility at the same time. [02:00:50] So it won't be done in a vacuum. Right. We'll have those stakeholders at the table when we're learning what the next steps are. How many other counties have undertaken a similar process to what we're doing in terms of their? In Virginia, three others, I believe. Okay. And haven't found many elsewhere in the country. [02:01:08] So we're at the cusp. Okay. Well, it would make sense. We're at the starting line. So thank you. Supervisor Glass. Thank you, Vice Chair, and thank you for the presentation. So I was looking at the table about the different strategies that we have, and the first one, the first strategy was to co-locate and use existing and approved corridors for transmission line expansions. [02:01:35] And the second one says that we support avoiding visual impacts in environmental resources and view sheds. So I'm looking at what we are actually in now. So is there any language in the CPAM that contemplates or advocates for routes that affect the least number of homes? [02:02:02] So let's say one of the existing corridors is down a roadway versus going up the floodplain. So would we look into if it affects like the least amount of homes? [02:02:23] So I think where you're, the conversation you're having is really more on the case by cases evaluation. When we look at applications that are brought forward and examples of what you're talking about is, they call them constraints. [02:02:40] And so once again, what we see is identification of three or four proposed routes. And then along with that, it calculates the amount of environmental effects, the amount of residents that are nearby. And with that information, and you've been part of that process for Golden to Mars, when we presented to the board those same exact constraint maps. [02:03:01] And based on that, the county makes those educated decisions to advocate for a particular route that may be the less impactful on a community. And so that's how that information is used. Our policies, though, are that higher overarching hierarchy of defining and guiding where we would anticipate those and where we would support those. [02:03:23] So clearly with these policies, we call out our employment areas and our industrial areas as those areas where transmission corridors are compatible with those type of uses. So I hope that answered that question. [02:03:39] I believe you did. Thank you. Thank you. First of all, the briefing was terrific. The concept is terrific. I really applaud staff for what they've done here. I think it's really leaning forward. I think it's exactly the right thing that we need to do, as you show in your slides, what is becoming a very increasingly constrained and saturated power grid environment. [02:04:04] As she has wanted to do, my chief of staff has gone through this with detail and come up with two things that I missed that I would like to bring to your attention. The first thing is broadly, and I'm just going to say, I don't think you're going to be able to capture the notes fast enough, but you'll have to go back and review the tape because there are specific paragraphs. [02:04:22] Strategy 6.1, subparagraph E, says, when feasible, construct new electric transmission distribution lines within and along existing utility, metro rail, and road rights-of-way. I really, really want us to get rid of road rights-of-way. [02:04:39] That is basically a blank check to put power lines next to any road in Loudoun County. I really would like the road right-of-way removed from that paragraph. Utility right-of-way, fine. rail right away fine but i'd really like to get the road right away out of that sentence number two in strategy 6.2 the rest of these have to do with what i consider to be and i don't mean this pejoratively but equivocating language we're writing a statement of where we what our preferences are what we want them to do so i would like to not uh leave a back door to dominion and to the scc to go in the back door with that equivocating language so an example in strategy 6.2 subparagraph [02:05:19] b locate new transmission quarters and electric facilities in areas planned for commercial or industrial uses mixed use and residential areas should be avoided strike out the words and only be considered when other non-residential areas are not available no that's equivocating language period after should be avoided make the statement of how we feel as a county um in subparagraph d um there is a phrase in there that says uh new overhead transmission corridors to avoid and it says right now end or minimize community and visual impacts get rid of [02:05:56] end or minimize so it reads corridors to avoid community and visual impacts to urban centers Subparagraph E, cross out the word when feasible, supporting undergrounding of high voltage electric transmission lines when feasible. I could easily see them deciding in 100% of the cases it's not feasible. [02:06:15] I don't want to give them the opening. This is our statement of where we should be. So support undergrounding of transmission lines to minimize community impact. Three is in strategy 6.3, get rid of prioritized placing transmission lines underground and just change it to place transmission lines underground when proximate to urban centers, et cetera. [02:06:36] Subparagraph A, get rid of when feasible. Subparagraph B, get rid of when feasible. It's a more definitive statement of the county's preferences. And I think it's important. I really like your point, which I hadn't even considered, that when we say undergrounding, we're not addressing HVAC or HVDC. [02:06:56] We're addressing all of them. I had a long discussion last night with Dominion about the HVDC line coming into Mosby substation in the south and coming into, I think, Dobbs in the north. And I am out of time. I am starting to ramble. Thank you very much for that. I'm my own worst enemy when it comes to talking. [02:07:14] Anyway, if you could include those, that would really appreciate it. Good catch. Okay, we have some members of the public that would like to speak on this issue. So I will open the public hearing. Are there members in the boardroom tonight wishing to speak on this item? [02:07:34] And I believe the first speaker I have on my list is Teresa Giorzi. Okay, next speaker is Ms. Tylee Ulmer. Thank you. [02:07:50] Followed by Emily Johnson and Alfred Giorzi. Hello, my name is Tylee Ulmer, and I'm here to deliver the following printed letters with associated attachments to the Loudoun Board of Supervisors from property owners in the Lovitzville area in opposition to the electrical CPAM for your verification that the letters and attachments have all been uploaded and entered into the administrative record for the electric infrastructure CPAM. [02:08:16] I got Teresa Giorzi's January 13, 2026, eight-page letter with attachments to the Loudoun Board of Supervisors opposing the CPAM. Alfred and Irene Giorzi's, January 11th, 26th, 130-page letter with attachments to the Board of Supervisors opposing the CPAM. [02:08:34] Robert Case, January 6th, 2026, a two-page letter to the Loudon Board of Supervisors opposing the CPAM. Stephen D. Goodyear, Lark P. Goodyear, and Amy Goodyear, January 6th, 2026, a five-page letter to the Board of Supervisors opposing the CPAM. [02:08:51] Justin Wish, Longstone Farm, January 5th, 2026, a five-page letter to the Loudoun Board of Supervisors opposing the CPAM. Lorraine Lamb, Eagles Nest Veterans Equine Therapy, January 6th, 2026, a six-page letter with attachments to the Board of Supervisors opposing the CPAM. [02:09:10] And then my letter, dated January 4th, 2026, a 113-page letter with attachments opposing the CPAM. I've got a few seconds left. Things I'd like the board to consider is that this defined area that they're discussing puts a target of diminished value on all said area. [02:09:30] And two, maybe put some surplus money towards underground costs for the future. Thank you very much. Thank you for your help. And who would I need to give this to? Over here to a clerk would be fine. Next up is Emily Johnson, followed by Alfred Giorzi online. [02:09:48] Good evening, supervisors. My name is Emily Johnson on behalf of the Piedmont Environmental Council. We reiterate our appreciation and support for this item, and we're grateful for the space we had to give comment at the Planning Commission in October and in a meeting with Pat and Teresa in August. We also stand by earlier comments laid out in our August letter and emailed today for your reference, which tweak the plan's language to more specifically delineate environmental protection under the strategies. [02:10:12] Improper sighting of transmission lines and substations can cause habitat loss, landscape fragmentation, erosion, invasive species susceptibility, floodplain degradation and harm to waterways or sensitive habitat like wetlands so it's important especially in phase two on routing that the plan specifies what it means to ensure compatibility with the natural environment. For example the second strategy of this plan needs just one more action that mimics the language used for community and visual impacts to call for the use of transmission design and route alternatives to avoid environmental impacts such as to environmental overlay districts like steep slope areas, conserved land like easements or parks, water resources like [02:10:48] floodplain or waterways and so on. Enumerating the types of areas is important as it ensures the actions carry out as is ensuring the actions carry out the overarching strategy. And for the map we ask simply that the two miles of underground 230 kV line between Percival and Leesburg mentioned in the text of the plan be visually differentiated. Voltage level and underground or above ground placement are the driving factors for what kind of infrastructure becomes part of the landscape. Therefore indicating the placement of the underground segment on the map whether by line or color more fully conveys our existing network shows undergrounding precedent and helps [02:11:23] inform co-location opportunities if for example hvdc networks are extended lastly we encourage you to prioritize this amendment project and begin action on phase two as soon as possible as the timeline already extends well into 2027 and may not be as proactive as we should be with forthcoming utility plans for more transmission lines and over 50 substations if we delay too long the locations and projects will already be determined without our guidelines. Thank you. Thank you very much. [02:11:48] We actually have two other speakers present who will speak and then I'll go to Alfred Giorzi online. Next up will be Amy Goodyear, if she's in the room, followed by Alex Lee. Yes, that's right. [02:12:06] Good evening. Thank you very much. My name is Amy Goodyear. First, I want to say I strongly oppose Loudoun County Board of Supervisors, CPAM, on the electrical infrastructure and its designation of transmission corridors anywhere in Loudoun County. [02:12:24] Further, I oppose the infrastructure maps, phase one, and the county's designation of approved high voltage transmission corridors as a preferred location for development of future transmission lines. I do understand what you're trying to do, but you are also speaking out of both sides of your mouth, quite frankly. [02:12:42] On one hand, you're saying that you have absolutely no power, but on the other hand, you're saying, well, we need to do this so that the SEC will listen to us. So which is it? You're doing it because you have no power or you're doing it because you want to be listened to? I would hope that you'd want to be listened to, but as a landowner and somebody who has lived in Loudoun County since 2008 when my son was born, I've seen many changes. [02:13:08] I moved to Lovettsville after I got divorced, and our home became our sanctuary. My kids named it their happy house. We live on seven acres. We have deer. We have a little stream. You continue this transmission corridor, you are going to be putting 765 kilovolts right over my house. [02:13:29] I won't have a house. It will not be the happy house any longer. And I understand I'm one person on seven acres, and you are trying to think about the whole entire county but quite honestly loudon county has written a check it can't cash you have promised all these ai data centers that they can come in here and that they can do this but you can't provide the infrastructure the only answer to this is to put everything underground that is the only answer here put it underground for everybody not just the urban areas where there's a lot of people [02:14:05] but even in western loudon because western loudon you all in waterford you're going to be looking at those huge monopoles. You're going to see them as you drive through Waterford. Thank you very much, and I do appreciate your time. Thank you. Next up, Mr. Alex Lee, followed by Alfred Giorgi Online. [02:14:25] So I strongly oppose the CPAM because if you really think about, if you want more homes because the housing prices keep on going up, we have less houses. And if you want to build houses, you need room you can't have room if you keep on building power lines everywhere you keep on reducing the amount of houses which is completely contradicting the whole entire point of building more houses if you just remove them all the only way to really fix this if you still want to go on [02:15:02] with the data centers which there's absolutely way too many of what you need to do is put everything underground completely underground from where all all the way over where the mountain is all the way through. That will allow you to have both the power lines and the houses without having to deal with losing both. And overall, with how many data centers there are, if you look at how AI is expanding, the bubble's going to pop soon. It's just a matter of time. If you keep on predicting [02:15:40] stuff that might or might not happen, you might spend billions of dollars putting all these lines data centers in on something that might not even happen if you really think about it why would you spend so much money on something you don't even know a hundred percent is going to happen you might lose billions of dollars because of this it overall just doesn't seem overall at all of a good idea to do any of this so i overall putting all of the power lines all underground and all the [02:16:18] the ones that are still up to be put underground so then you can have best the best of both worlds while having extra houses lower housing costs more people so yeah your time's up sir thank you very much uh online we have mr alfred giorzi um mr giorzi can you hear us yes i can you're you you are up sir mr turner members of the board i live in uh loversville on winter road opposite [02:16:52] the Potomac-Edison substation. The Dobbs line is to the east, but not continuous. I found the staff recitation very equivocating. On the one hand, you want to state what the policy is, and on the other hand, you agree that the SEC has exclusive authority to cite transmission lines. So why do we need a transmission corridor? Well, what you're saying to the utility companies is, site your line here and not anywhere else in the county. So you are [02:17:29] doing indirectly what you can't do directly. There is a solution to the energy crisis, which was created by the Virginia Clean Air Act and the development of data centers. You must underline underground hvdc technology you have one in southern uh southern loudon the mo at mosby president trump has recently said if you haven't seen what he has said that the tech giants must [02:18:02] pay their own way to power data centers according to the companies sucking every drop of electricity possible from America's grid must pay their own way. Underground the lines on state roads, county roads, not private property, and stop raising the cost of electricity by approving overhead lines. If you want to accommodate power to the data centers, undergrounding is the only [02:18:36] way because there should be no opposition. You must make the data companies pay. For example, in Frederick County, Virginia, Nextera had a $400 KV line. It's now $800. [02:18:53] Mr. Giorzi, your time is up. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Thank you. Any other comments online, Andy? No, we do not. Okay. Thank you. With that, I will go to a motion. I move the Board of Supervisors forward CPAM 2024-0005 Electric Infrastructure to the Second Board of Supervisors Business Meeting in February 2026 for action. Second by Supervisor Kirshner. Comments? Seeing none. Let me make an [02:19:25] opening statement. I should do that. Again, I think we make pretty clear in our recommendation that wherever possible, underground the lines. I think we leave that open. What I was going to say And my last comment was at the Dominion open house of the community meeting last night. [02:19:44] I actually had a whole team of Dominion engineers there. And I suggested, how are you going to get the HVDC line to Mosby out to Data Center Alley with the use? The answer I got from Dominion a few weeks ago when I asked that question was, we're going to convert it to HVAC and move it onto the existing overhead infrastructure. [02:20:01] I didn't get into details about whether the existing overhead infrastructure can handle 760 kV converted to AC and the existing grid. My bet is it probably can, but that's for Dominion to figure out. My idea was to move the HVDC in the existing rights-of-way underground. [02:20:18] It only takes a five-foot trench for two gigawatts of line there and back. And I was informed by the Dominion team that there is currently no technology that can step down the 765-volt HVDC when it arrives at the terminus where the data centers are. [02:20:35] So they have to step it down so that the data centers can access that power. And right now, there's no technology that can do that to the extent that you'd have to step it down on-site where the data center is. I question that. [02:20:50] Not that I doubt that. I'm not an engineer. But I think where there's a will, there's a way. And we certainly have a whole lot of will right now. So that's what's going on with HVDC right now. Wrap-up is I think this is a very good effort. I think this makes a lot of sense. And it's basically stating to the SEC, and again, we have limited influence on their decision-making, but we are allowed to voice an opinion. [02:21:17] And this opinion says, if you're going to put lines in, put them in where we've already established the rights of way and whenever possible underground, I think that would be perfect sense. I think it's a good initiative, and I appreciate staff's work on this. Other comments? Supervisor Kirshner. Thank you, Supervisor Turner, and thank you for the comments that came. [02:21:33] I'm a little confused by some of the comments that were made, And I know there were some letters that were put forward. Some of the folks I know, I'm going to look at those. The whole point of the CPAM is really to do everything we can as a county to have an influence on this process. [02:21:48] And I think one of the speakers said, well, either you don't or you do have influence. And I think Supervisor Turner said it well. When we have the CPAM, we have preferred quarters, and we have preferred plans, that gives us a form of a seat at the table of the SEC. [02:22:04] But we are not the ultimate decision makers. So the CPAM is actually a really good thing as far as I see. It's an attempt to reach in and have some influence through the process with the SEC. Because if we do nothing, then we're kind of running in front of the ball. [02:22:22] And that's really the purpose of the CPAM. So we're trying to accomplish many of those things. I agree. Obviously, we would want to bury. I'm sure that's going to be a significant part of our policies as we accomplish this, whether that's available or not, whether we get the HVDC technology and step down, as Supervisor Turner mentioned or not, you know, that is a technological thing. [02:22:46] But we have a lot of power coming online and obviously using existing quarters, which we have done to date so far as much as possible by wreck and rebuilds and whatnot, and our work, our fine work by our staff and this board with the SEC and the influence we've been able to have. [02:23:03] But this is just an attempt to have more. So for those of you who oppose it, I'm going to read your letters really carefully because I kind of want to understand what the opposition really is because this is an attempt to have as much influence on the process as we can for our constituents and for our Loudoun citizens. [02:23:19] Thank you. Thank you. And if I could take a moment of personal privilege, I don't think I closed the public hearing on this item, so without objection, I will close the public hearing. Thank you. Supervisor DeCroene. Thank you, Vice Chair Turner. So I think I understand what the speakers are saying. [02:23:35] They're saying that co-locating transmission lines in one area really impacts a few of the residents because, you know, you're concerned about your property values and your quality of life because there could be expansion of the utilities in those areas. [02:23:58] I think I get that. I do want to say that, you know, I am all for undergrounding. all for new technologies, new innovations. The board is gonna be voting on doing an energy innovation forum at the next board meeting on Tuesday, which will be looking at new innovations, which will take us kind of forward, if you will, about ideas and what's possible in the future. [02:24:27] So we are looking forward, and we will be trying to do as much as we can to minimize impacts, you know, our CPAM, this CPAM, this electrical infrastructure CPAM, supports integrating electric generation and energy storage facilities behind the meter with existing and new developments to reduce the need for electrical infrastructure. [02:24:54] So I don't know what that looks like, but I think this action will be something that we explore with the data center location and standards phase two that we're working on and bringing the experts together at our energy innovation forum to talk about what's possible. [02:25:16] I know that I wanna look at substations and how we can improve the design of substations because those are part of the picture of transmission lines, especially with high load users. And that'll be part of my understanding the data center uses or location and standards phase two. [02:25:38] So I just want to let residents know that we are doing a lot of other initiatives to really be innovators in energy and innovators as much as we can to reduce the impacts of overhead transmission lines. [02:25:57] Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Reza-Luterno. Thank you. Yeah, just maybe in regard to the public comments tonight. So where the lines actually go is not the issue right now. It's whether the county should have a process by which we try to have influence on the process that is used to decide where the lines could go. [02:26:16] And what I would say to that is we have not done that previously, and so we have ended up with lines where the power company decides they should go. Not where we decide, not where residents decide they should go. And so we have, obviously, several highly controversial projects, one of which has generated probably more public input than anything in history in Virginia, which continues in Richmond right now with thousands of residents involved. [02:26:40] That doesn't seem, you know, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and then expecting a different result. So what we're trying to do is do something different and get ahead of it instead of reactive to it. Because whether anybody up here wants a data center or not, they're coming. [02:26:56] Most of them that were built in this county were built by right without anybody up here ever voting for them. And whether we want more power lines or not, they're coming, whether we want them to or not. We don't get to decide that. We don't get to decide no. So we can try to influence the process or we can try not to. [02:27:11] We can just sit back, relax, and let Dominion come in and decide where they're going to go. That doesn't seem like a great idea. So opposition to the CPAN is saying to do that. That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. So I think we should move forward with this and try to do something a little bit differently. If it doesn't work perfectly because we aren't the final deciders, so be it. [02:27:31] But I think it has to work better than what we're doing now. Thanks, Supervisor Letourneau. I have no closing comments. The motion was made and seconded by Supervisor Kirshner. All those in favor, please say aye. Any opposed? That motion will pass 801. [02:27:46] And if I can indulge with my colleagues and our viewing audience for just a second. This week we had a real, real tragedy occur and we lost one of our treasured community members, a member of the Loudoun family, one of my constituents, Ms. Kalina Yu. [02:28:04] We are in the process. I know we are receiving emails of crosswalks and things that we can do. We're all in the process right now of racking our brains to see what happened, how we can avoid it in the future, and what steps we can take to avoid it. But I would just like to ask for the indulgence of everyone here and everybody watching to express our deepest and most profound sympathies to the family of Ms. Yu and let you know that our prayers are with you and we are with you as a community and we embrace you and we'll do anything we can to ease your pain going forward. [02:28:42] And with that, I would like to ask for a moment of silence. [02:28:55] Thank you, colleagues. And with that, I adjourn this public hearing. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Coraggio Consulting · aguyonx.com