Coraggio Consulting Loudoun County Board of Supervisors, Public Hearing, Wednesday, February 11, 2026 Date: Wednesday, February 11, 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/8113 Meeting page (Granicus): https://loudoun.granicus.com/player/clip/8113 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [00:01:56] Okay, thank you for everyone's patience. We are back and we are going to -- I'm going to call to order the February 11th, 2026 Loudoun County Board of Supervisors Public Hearing. Again, this room has a hearing loop. [00:02:11] If you need hearing assistance, please switch your hearing aid to the telecom mode. If you need a headset, we have those available as well. As a reminder to all members of the public this evening, you may sign up to speak on only the matters that have been advertised in this public hearing. [00:02:30] Due to the broadcast delay, any member of the public, if you're not in the boardroom and you wish to address the board on items one, two, three, and five, which are on the consolidated agenda, please call the number that you see scrolling across your screen at this time. [00:02:45] If you have signed up to speak, you are allotted two minutes, not two and a half, two minutes. If you're in the boardroom, we're going to ask you when your name is called, Please come to the podium closest to you. Either podium is fine. Please state your name for the record, and if you'd like, you can state where you live. [00:03:01] The timer on the podium will indicate your remaining time. When your time has expired, please yield the floor to the next speaker. If you're providing comments via the phone, I'm going to ask you to time yourself for two minutes because I don't want to interrupt your flow when you get to a minute and a half, but when you get to two minutes, I will stop you. [00:03:19] So go on and time yourself. When taking inputs for items, I will ask if there's anyone in the boardroom wish to speak. And then I will go to the moderator, who is Andy Paz today. And if there are speakers in the room, I'm sorry, speakers online, please, if you are online, please note that there's a slight delay between the broadcast and the boardroom. [00:03:39] Andy, can you hear me? Loud and clear. Wonderful. And one more time, pursuant to Virginia Code Section 2.2, that's 3708.3, and the Board of Supervisors' Rules of Order. Supervisor Letourneau requested to participate in this meeting by electronic communication. [00:03:56] A physical quorum of the Board of Supervisors is present in the boardroom, and we have made arrangements for Supervisor Letourneau to be heard by all persons in the boardroom. Supervisor Letourneau made this request within the required time frame, and the county attorney determined that the request meets the qualifications to participate remotely. [00:04:16] The Board will record in its minutes that he is participating from his home in Loudoun County due to medical reasons. Supposed to turn it, can you hear us? Yes, Madam Chair. Wonderful. Okay, so we do have four items on the consolidated agenda. [00:04:33] I will read the countywide motion. We have a motion, two motions in the Broad Run District, one the Catoctin District. So Ms. Glass and Mr. Kirchner, get ready to read a motion yourself in just one second here. But the first one is countywide, And it is about the proposed amendment to Chapter 860.02 of the codified ones of Loudoun County penalty for delinquency. [00:05:02] I move the Board of Supervisors approve Motion 2B for the adoption of the amendment to Chapter 860.02 as provided on February 11, 2026. Hearing item number one, staff report. Motion is made and seconded by Mr. Sains. [00:05:20] Any discussion on that motion? Anybody? Seeing none, would everyone please say aye. Aye. Nays. That motion will pass 9 to 0. I should say that the consolidated hearing is a consolidated hearing because there are no outstanding issues. The staff has recommended approval, the applicant has waived their presentation time, and no public speakers have signed up in advance for the consolidated hearing. Item 2 is a broad run district item. Ms. Glass. [00:05:51] Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that the Board of Supervisors approve Motion 2B for the approval of the proposed conveyance as provided in the February 11th, 2026 Public Hearing Item Number 2 Staff Report. Second. Glass made the motion. Who seconded the motion? Ms. Bridgman seconded the motion. All in favor say aye. [00:06:16] Aye. I'm sorry. Anyone want any discussion on that motion? I just want to tell folks what it is. It's the conveyance of these easements is to Loudon Water for Water Main, that will help them serve the Commonwealth Lofts attainable housing building. Thank you. Everybody good? I want people to say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That motion passed 9-0. [00:06:40] The check-in to see if I formally opened the public care and the consolidated agenda. If I did not, and I thought I did, I would do that now. I don't believe that I did, so now I do. I read all the stuff. Okay, item number three is also in the broad run district. Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that the Board of Supervisors approve motion to be for the approval of the proposed conveyance as provided in the February 11th, 2026 public hearing item number three staff report. Motion made and taken by Supervisor Sainz. Discussion on [00:07:17] that motion. Ms. Glass. Thank you, Madam Chair. This is an easement that will allow the construction of the trail on the east side of Loudoun County Parkway at the Marble Hood Drive and it will also have a crosswalk on the northern leg of of Loudoun County Parkway at the Marvel Head Drive intersection, and these are both proffered by Peterson and the Commonwealth Center. [00:07:40] Okay. Any discussion? Any other discussion? I want people to say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That motion passed 9-0. And finally, it is the Catoctin District, Mr. Kirchner. Thank you, Madam Chair. Pull this a little closer. I move the Board of Supervisors approve motion to be for the approval of the withdrawal of land as provided in the February 11th, 2026 Public Hearing Item Number 5, Staff Report. Motion to main, seconded with Supervisor Glass. Discussion on the motion. [00:08:07] Just to say, Madam Chair, this is a withdrawal, but the intent of the withdrawal, and I just want to thank our New Rockland and all the work they are doing to do this. I know that, you know, any landowner that owns land can choose to put them into homes. We continue to encourage those who have these large parcels of land to put them into easement. My understanding that is their plan by withdrawing this. We're very excited about this. I just want to personally tell the owner how grateful we are that you're doing this. This is a really big part and an important part of preserving Western London County is finding as many pieces of land that we can put in an easement, especially [00:08:46] since we don't have any sort of PDR program. So thank you very much. And we look forward to that, especially along the Route 15 corridor, which is obviously a very important scenic by the way. Thank you. Thank you. And I will associate myself with Mr. Kirsten's comments. Anybody else want to speak on this item? Honkably say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That motion will pass 9-0. That is the end of the consolidated agenda, so I will close the consolidated public hearing, the public hearing for the consolidated agenda, and I will go to items on the agenda that we actually will, we have speakers on and possibly we have motions, but staff will come to the table as well. [00:09:25] The first item we're going to do is the item in the Sterling District. As Mr. Sainz sent out today, it is the supplemental on item number four, resolutions of acceptance of new open space easements and the vision of open space easements. [00:09:41] Staff, would you come to the table? [00:09:57] Good evening. Good evening. Just a second. If there's other speakers on this item, would you bring those up to me right now, please? Thank you. All right. [00:10:13] We are ready when you are. Thank you, Supervisor Randall. I'll be brief. So Chair Randall and members of the board, tonight's item four, it asks you to do two things, accept new open space easements that have been offered by Loudoun Valley Estates and Loudoun Valley Estates 2. [00:10:38] and it asks you to designate those easements as substitute property under Section 10.1.1704 of the Virginia Code so that the State Corporation Commission may, if needed, order underground segments of the Golden to Mars transmission line while preserving permanent open space as is consistent with the 2019 general plan. [00:11:03] Staff recommends the alternative resolution provided as attachment 10 in the supplemental report. This would exclude pin number 122-497-166-000. [00:11:20] Now keep routes 3, 3A, and 3B viable and avoid the greater community impacts associated with a route 1F. and F stands for the word fail-safe, if the county refuses to allow Dominion access to county-owned land and the school board does the same and all of the easements presented were to be accepted, Route 1F has been suggested as a fail-safe option that would run right down the middle of Loudoun [00:11:54] County Parkway along the median. So, but return to the open space easements, we, again, they would provide some robust conservation protections as shown on attachment 5 of the supplemental report. There's, you'll see some river and stream corridor resources, so some of the new easements would also protect some river and streams, and I'm happy to walk through the map and answer questions and I apologize for not having the PowerPoint so I could put it on the screen, but we have it available. That is okay. Mr. Sainz, this is your district, would you like [00:12:31] him to walk through the maps yeah if there's a way to show them real quickly on the on the screen is possible there's not a way to show them on the screen oh if we don't have it then okay never mind then then that's okay that's what he says that's okay when anyone else mr mr laterno would you like to see would you like him to walk through you won't see it but would you like him to walk through the maps i only ask no i had a chance to review this before the meeting okay anybody else the staff okay all right wonderful do you have anything else no okay supervisors um i'm going to go [00:13:03] to Mr. Sainz first obviously for questions. Thank you Madam Chair. So yes technically we have three motions in front of us. We have a motion to forward to the to the next meeting. We have the alternative motion and then we have a motion well we have to suspend the rules and then vote for the alternative motion which is my preferred motion and then we have another motion which we could suspend the rules and then that's the the resolution to accept. I'll go to the county [00:13:35] attorney, if I may, Madam Chair? Sure. Mr. Rogers, would it be fair to say right now the SEC has been deliberating your office and others have been in constant communication with them talking about the issue at hand with Golden to Mars? So if we were to suspend the ruse and vote, as I said, I'm in favor of the alternative motion that would help with your conversation, deliberations with the SEC as they hear this case and then eventually make their determination? [00:14:07] Yes sir, this is a very time-sensitive matter and the reason that we as staff said that we were looking to say put it off was one it's not on the consolidated so you would have to suspend the rules and just in case any board members had any questions but our preferred option would be for the board to act tonight if the board members are ready. [00:14:29] All right, thank you. And then I would, yes, as I said earlier, I support alternative resolution for this and would like to suspend the rules this evening. This alternative resolution is to accept seven of the eight open easements. It keeps routes 3B, 3, and 3A feasible for overhead construction since the alternative resolution only accepts you know it only accepts open easements for seven excuse me and it makes routes one two five and five a invaluable route one f would still [00:15:07] remain viable this again as I said it allows us to continue work on underground routes as well so I think overall this is the the best option that we have that's in front of us right now and then And if you, you know, for those who have looked at the map, 1F that's now being brought up with all these easements is moving the overhead power lines from the right-of-way on Loudoun County Parkway to the median of Loudoun County Parkway, which I think is even, well, either one of those options is horrible. [00:15:40] So I think options 3B, 3, and hopefully as we continue our negotiations and conversations, we might get a hybrid of undergrounding and not undergrounding, and those are more possible with those options than the 1F. So I'm hoping we can come to a resolution and suspend the rules tonight and go with the alternative resolution this evening. [00:16:00] Thank you, colleagues. Thank you. Ms. Glass. Thank you, Madam Chair. I have a question regarding the, I know Supervisor Sainz wants to suspend the rules, but I wanted to know if we wait, if we wait till the next meeting, would that slow the county's efforts with the SEC? [00:16:24] Are you asking that question, Mr. Sainz? I'll ask Mr. Rogers. Mr. Rogers? It would delay the time when we would let the SEC know the county's position. But no, it should not affect the SEC's process. The briefs have been filed. I expect a six to eight week period before we get the preliminary decision from the SEC. It would just wrap everything up sooner. Okay. I ask that question because I haven't been able to schedule a meeting regarding [00:16:55] the supplement until Friday. So I'm asking if we could wait until I actually meet with staff regarding what was discussed. Okay. Mr. Letourner, do you have any questions? [00:17:18] Not questions, Madam Chair. I can speak on the motion, though, when we're ready. Okay. Mr. Crony? So 1F is a new option that I guess Dominion put forward. Was that put forward during the SCC hearings. Yes, it was. It was not introduced as an exhibit, but it was verbally described as an alternative as 1F, again, F being for fail-safe. And I'll add that Dominion says [00:17:51] that they spoke with VDOT, and VDOT is willing to work with Dominion on putting Route 1F in the median. So I think in my view, and I don't know if I'm correct in saying it, you know, The board did not approve Route 1 because it would have a significant impact on residents and the community. [00:18:14] It seems that 1F would probably be the same. Am I correct in saying that? Or maybe even worse? I don't know how you put that in the median. You're correct. The impacts are the same in terms of those impacts of the community. [00:18:29] And that's why Route 1 along Loudoun County Parkway was not identified as a preferred route. Route 3 that are mentioned here. those routes that have the least impact to citizens while they do come close to properties however again we're we're faced with a variety of selections of these routes and trying to choose the best which are the most the least impactful to the community. Right okay so did a residence aware of this 1F because I think we were clear that we don't support route one so I I feel like [00:19:02] this is like a something that was kind of put in uh without resident input or any i mean i didn't know about it till today to be honest till i read this packet yeah that that that's correct there really hasn't been an opportunity for the public to hear about this actually this is probably the first time i'm sure a lot of uh citizens listening in and watching now are here hearing about this But, yes, I agree that there's not been time for public input on 1F. [00:19:34] Okay. Thank you. Ms. Glass, is your light still on for a reason? Ms. Glass? Madam Chair. Your light is still on. I'm sorry. All right. So, Mr. Rogers, if a meeting is taking place at this time, depending on whether the motion to suspend the rules and vote happens, would you then go make contact and let someone at the meeting, SEC, or someone at the meeting know what the result of this meeting was? [00:20:08] Yes, Madam Chair. I did represent the county's position before the State Corporation Commission and told the Commission and Dominion that I would let them know as soon as the Board took this action. Okay. Thank you. So they would know immediately? Starting tomorrow. [00:20:24] Mr. Sands, we got a letter from Loudoun Valley Estates, I'm pretty sure the letter came in today, would you say that your position right now is supporting your constituents in Loudoun Valley Estates? [00:20:39] Yes, I believe it would be and if you allow Mr. Rogers, I'm pretty sure he's read that letter through and through and if I remember correctly, paraphrasing here, it does ask for immediate action for us to make a decision so that they can continue, again, as I said earlier, with the deliberations with the SEC. And again, at Loudoun Valley Estates, one, what was it? [00:21:01] One and two. One, two, and two and three. Yes, two and three, which are thousands of homes that are represented with those boards have all said the same thing that they would like for us to deliberate, make our decision sooner rather than later. Ms. Glass, with respect, [00:21:19] In fact, I understand, I hear you, and I understand that you want to have the meeting, and I normally, I am a pretty big stickler about not suspending the rules, but the district chair who has worked on this for a very long time has been speaking with the community, and the community wrote a letter today that we received, and so I think that I will be supporting that effort. [00:21:44] Was your light already on? It was, and I have a point of clarification. Yes, ma'am. Is the entirety of these proposed lines in Sterling or some of them in broad run? I think, I don't know, but I think the ones that we're talking about that are most impactful. [00:22:02] Do you know that answer? Well, without seeing the maps, Ms. Glass, do you know that answer? If I may, Madam Chair. I think it does. I believe it does. Okay, Mr. [00:22:18] Madam Chair, F is in broad run, but it's negatively impacting broad run. Right, yeah, I know that. Yes, Mr. Sainz. Thank you. So there are a few districts that are maybe impacted, especially if you look at Loudoun County Parkway. [00:22:35] Again, going down the median on one side of the street, yes, you have the Broad Run District on the side where Ashburn Station is, the many streets that are named after the Moore, Mr. Claude Moore on that side. But then on the other side, where the Loudoun Valley Estates residents are, those are in my district. [00:22:52] and then 3B, the schools, those are all majority of my district. The vast majority, the bulk is your district. Yeah, and there's a little spillage over into Little River and a little spillage over into Dulles. And the Loudoun Valley Estates constituents are all yours. [00:23:08] Yes, majority of it is mine, yes. All right. So we do have speakers on this item, and so we will go to our speakers now. I'm going to call you in advance. When I call your name, please come to the podium closest to you, And you will have two minutes if you state your name, if you don't mind, stating where you live. [00:23:27] And then after two minutes, you're going to release the podium to the next speaker. Our first speaker is Victor Block, followed by Vicky Hu, I think, and then Loratis Pak. Oh, you're the one that, yay, thank you. [00:23:46] Thank you. Ready when you are. All right. Thank you. I'm Victor Block. I'm president of the Loudoun Valley Estates HOA, chair, supervisors. Dominion is increasingly framing Golden to Mars as a problem created by Loudoun County. We don't have time tonight for the full record, but that narrative is not supported by the record. [00:24:06] I testified at the SEC hearing, and I listened to Dominion's witnesses. Dominion had the data. They entered into the load agreements with hyperscale data centers. Dominion knew this 8.3-mile segment was coming long before this board did and was ever asked to take a position and manage the sequencing of the reliability loop. [00:24:27] this timing crisis is not county timing it's dominion timing we're now seeing a familiar pressure tactic route 1f and i want to say this plainly route 1f is not on the table it is not proven it is not part of the notice application or the public routing analysis it is being floated as leverage once again if you don't approve this something worse will happen that is not planning that is pressure this part of dominion's playbook dominion's own data center practice leader has publicly described how they get involved on the front end and pre-qualified data center sites. [00:25:08] And I wish I had more time tonight, but I provided you pictures of Chino Hills, California. Those pictures are worth more than a thousand words. When the California regulator went out and saw the 500 kilovolt towers being erected, before they were even energized, he reportedly said, what have we done? [00:25:27] Then the towers were torn down and they put the line underground. Please approve the easements as prepared, all eight easements. Our community supports you, Loudoun supports you, and based on recent activity in Richmond and the public sentiment around the state, the state, the Commonwealth supports you. [00:25:47] We stand ready to provide any additional information or assistance the board may require. I really appreciate it, and honestly, if there are any questions, I'm more than happy to answer. I promise you I probably know as much as anybody in this room about power lines. Thank you. [00:26:02] Not a year ago. Thank you very much. thank you very much. Thank you very much. Vicky Hu followed by Marataz Ampok. Good evening. Good evening. My name is Vicky Hu and I have lived in the London Valley Estate for over 20 years. [00:26:24] I work at Toll Brothers developing this community I live in now and I fell in love with the communities. Beautiful surrounding, fresh air, kind neighbors, and all underground utilities. This reason leading me to buy my forever home here to raise my family and care for my elderly mother. [00:26:43] It was heartbreaking when I got a call from Dominion proposing to install a 185-feet tall port in my property, leaving a 500-kV wire only 60 feet away from my home. Our underground electricity group already supplies all the power we need. [00:27:02] We don't need any more electrical infrastructure, especially not an industrial size above ground power line. Dominion repeatedly claimed this power is for overall group reliability. When golden to mass, it's only intent to supply the power to the data center. [00:27:20] Today, I'm here to asking you to accept our open space easement to preserve our natural environment and save our homes from this in true 500 kV power line. You must put the people in our land we have been given with first because those are the things money can buy. [00:27:38] Supervisor, you have the power to block all six above Guanglu, which is affecting the three communities and 5,000 households. You have the power to negotiate with Amazon Data Center and Dominion because Amazon just purchased more land last November in Lisbon with $615 million. [00:27:59] dollars. They have the money. They didn't pay for their underground infrastructure. The data center received 1.6 billion dollars last year from the state. As a taxpayer and the rate payer, we have been getting the raw end of the deal when we are paid for all their expenses and the data center still demand more. Let's make things right for residents of Loudoun. The country and the whole is watching us while we're doing. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Hugh. Thank you. [00:28:29] Our third speaker, and if I've set your name incorrectly, please correct me, and you will be followed by Jeff Walsh, who will be followed by Philip Emanuel. Good evening. Good evening. My name is Maritess Pack, and I'm a homeowner of the Loudoun Valley Estates community. I'm also a mother of two young children, and I'm asking you to protect my children. These overhead transmission lines will be a 145 feet from my home, permanently changing the environment where my children live, learn, and play. [00:29:01] These routes already cut through long established neighborhoods, schools, parks, creating irreversible impacts to our families, which we call our home. But what keeps me awake at night is the potential health risk to my children. The magnetic field exposure levels associated with high voltage lines have been linked to an increased risk of childhood leukemia due to the close proximity, including my home and many of those homes that are within those distances. [00:29:32] My children spend most of their time at home, more than 16 hours a day. No parent should have to live with persistent fear about the possible long-term effects of their child's health, but we do have a choice. Underground alternatives exist, and they're designed to minimize health, community, and environmental impacts. [00:29:53] Loudoun County has already recognized that placing transmission lines underground near residential areas is an approach that avoids significant harm to existing communities. You have the authority tonight to send a clear message about Loudoun County's values. [00:30:09] Approving these open space easements as written can leverage to insist on infrastructure that protects our residents rather than exposing them from harm. Years from now, our children will live with the consequences of this decision. [00:30:25] I am asking you to stand for what is right, to stand for the Loudoun families, to stand for the children who cannot speak for themselves. Please approve these easements and help ensure that a path forward is one that prioritizes safety and responsibility with the long-term well-being of this community because no parent should ever have to question whether their home is still the safest place their child thank you thank you thank you uh jeff walsh you will be followed by philip emmanuel [00:30:57] good evening good evening i'm here to urge the board to approve the easements as originally proposed we must be clear about why this action is necessary pjm approved the golden to mars project in december 2023 yet dominion waited 15 months to file for state approval according to the scc staff. This delay effectively manufactured a timeline where overhead towers appear to be the [00:31:34] only option. Dominion acknowledged that of the components of the reliability loop, this segment, Golden to Mars, was their most complex, yet they sequenced it last. This urgency has been created by Dominion's own doing. These time constraints are impacting our own opportunities for discourse and decision-making here in Loudoun County. The county's position to not block Route 3 was originally stated a year ago, and now additional variations 3A and 3B are being [00:32:10] lumped in without time for due consideration. By approving these easements as originally prepared, the board will be taking a critical step to secure the county's property interests. I ask you to not let a utility's internal scheduling decision strip this community of its right to a better solution. [00:32:31] Please approve the easements as originally opposed so we can maintain our leverage and protect our residents. Thank you, sir. Philip Emanuel will follow what we have on the phone with us, Brian Turner. Good evening, Mr. Emanuel. [00:32:50] Good evening, Madam Chair, Supervisors. Let's talk about what changed since January 22nd, 2025. When you took action in January 2025, Dominion had not even filed its application. They were still months away from filing. [00:33:07] The evidentiary records did not exist. There were no sworn testimony, no cross-examination, no developed record that you could rely on. County staff did the best they could with the information available at the time, and much of that staff memo was largely based on info provided by Dominion. [00:33:27] And I want to be explicit about this. Route 3A and Route 3B were not on the table when you acted. Those options were not what the board weighed in January 2025. Even after that, Dominion was still making up routes and variants while the case was being litigated, including introducing new routing variations late during the hearing process. [00:33:51] Since then, a lot has evolved. Alternatives were tested, and what we learned, including about feasibility and about how this case was litigated, has developed since January 2025. Most importantly, undergrounding was shown to be technically feasible, so you are not bound forever to a preliminary indication of preference formed before the record existed. And if the board is being asked to stand by its January 22nd, 2025 action than stand by the whole action, not just the portion Dominion wants to quote. [00:34:30] On January 22nd, 2025, this board voted to advocate that transmission lines planned to pass closer than 500 feet from any residence or public school should be buried. If undergrounding is feasible and lines are now proposed dramatically closer than 500 feet in places the board shall align its position with the full record now before you. [00:34:54] Please approve the easements as prepared, and I have also provided, for the record, the Golden to Mars transmission line alignment from your action report of 2025. Thank you, sir. Thank you. And then on the phone, is Mr. Turner on the phone? [00:35:14] Yes, he is. Okay. Mr. Turner, we can hear you, hopefully. Hi, Chair Randall and members of the Board of Supervisors. This is Brian Turner. I apologize. I can't be with you in person tonight. [00:35:29] I'm in Richmond advocating for a few new circuit court judges, but I did want to speak briefly to two important agendas items today. First, if you indulge me, Chair Randall, and just briefly, I want to convey Lansdowne Conservancy's support for Agenda Item 6, the Arc of Loudoun's special exception at the National Conference Center. [00:35:50] The Arc of Loudoun is a tremendous organization providing vital services to our community, and the Conservancy fully supports the special exception before you. Second, Agenda Item 4, we are now on behalf of the HOA Roundtable in Long Valley States. [00:36:06] I want to express our strong support for entering into the proposed open space easements along the Mars to Golden Lines. Before addressing specifically the easements, I want to thank the county for its leadership and collaboration with the Coalition of Homeowners, the school board, local advocacy groups, working in concert to require dominion to bury a portion of the Mars to Golden Lines. [00:36:29] This has been a long, complex effort, and the partnership has been essential to the community. Entering into these easements will remove an obstacle to the undergrounding raised by Dominion by locating the existing easements away from the underground route and placing them on other comparable Loudoun Valley estate properties. [00:36:49] Importantly, the easements will also provide leverage to the county and the community if the underground route ultimately proves infeasible and an above-ground alternative must be negotiated. I do want to also state that Route 1F is not currently being considered by the Commission, and I'm not going to go into the record, but if you look at page 2383, line 6 through 14, you'll see that Dominion questions its witnesses, stating at this point the Route 1F is not being proposed. [00:37:18] So we would request that the board enter the easement as proposed initially and not enter the supplemental resolution that's been provided. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Turner. Thank you very much. I don't believe there's any more speakers. Any more speakers on this item? [00:37:34] No, there are no more speakers. Mr. Sains, I will go to you. Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that the Board of Supervisors suspend the rules. Second. Mr. Sains, make the motion. I second the motion of discussion on the motion to suspend the rules. [00:37:51] Mr. Turner, I'm sorry. I don't want to keep bugging you. I just can't see you, and I don't know if you want to talk or not. Yeah, I do support suspending the rules in that the 1F line proposal, although technically new, is something the board had previously considered and rejected. [00:38:09] Okay. All right. Thank you. Anybody else for suspension of rules? All right. Hold on, quickly say aye. Aye. Opposed? That motion will pass 9-2-0. Mr. Sanders, would you like to make another motion? Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that the Board of Supervisors adopt the alternative resolution for acceptance of the new open space easements and diversion of open space easements as provided in Attachment 10 of the February 11, 2026 Board of Supervisors Public Hearing Supplemental Staff Report. [00:38:36] Motion is made and seconded by Supervisor Brixman. Discussion on the motion, Mr. Sainz. Thank you, Madam Chair. First, we'd like to say thank you to the Loudoun Valley State residents for your continued efforts, collaboration with the county, with the schools. [00:38:55] This is definitely one item that has brought a lot of folks out. You've used your voice and advocacy. You showed up in, I don't know, bus lines at the SEC hearings here at Rock Ridge. [00:39:11] Then you went down to Richmond. You even took up speaking down at Richmond for other items. Ms. Hugh, thank you for speaking in regards to SB827. The other day you did a very good job when you spoke. We're here. [00:39:27] Obviously, we were here, as mentioned earlier, when the board first took our position, yes, we advocated for undergrounding, hybrid, as best as possible. And that's still our number one goal and drive to get to and try to keep away from homes and the schools as best as possible. [00:39:47] We also would like to thank Bob Brown, who is a resident of Loudoun Valley Estates and happened used to be an employee of the county and his family have done some good work as well and have countered some of the things that Dominion has come up with with all the different alternative routes. [00:40:07] And he's come up with a route 3B that is definitely better than what we got with 3A when that was thrown out by Dominion. So here we are today, but I think it's important that we vote on this motion And thank you again to the Valley Estates residents for giving the easements for these properties. [00:40:26] Because, again, we wouldn't be here if you guys didn't do that and come together and make that decision along with the county staff and attorney. So I believe this is the right approach. We will continue to talk with the SEC and keep advocating to get the best solution that we can for this unfortunate situation that we are in. [00:40:46] And we will hopefully come up on the winning end of this when it's all said and done. So thank you for your work, and we will continue to advocate as best as possible. Mr. Sainz, in your time, may I ask you a question? Yes, Madam Chair. [00:41:02] Why would you, having spoke to all your constituents, not go with what we have originally talked about? Originally, yeah. So why would you go with 3A, 3B, all of them versus what we had originally put forward? [00:41:22] We originally put forward 3 and 4 when we first started. And now we have 3. So when we put forward 3, and then the school system said no to giving property for 3, so then Dominion countered and came with 3A, which moved the lines closer to the homes. [00:41:41] so then we went back and again Mr. Bob Brown went and did his homework and thing in Kingswood 3b which moves it away from the homes a little bit further away and so that's where we're at today where 3b is being considered yes all right thank you Mr. Letourneau thank you just to ask Mr. [00:42:03] Sainz to the chair I just want to make sure so the motion that was made accepts all but one of the open space easements right and excludes the one that would prevent um one of the line threes from being viable correct from my understanding it would make uh one two five and five a and viable one f technically would still be on the table even though that's not our preferred route at all um so that's right but the the property that ends in six six zero zero zero maybe this is a question for staff is one that staff did not recommend that we accept because it would block one of [00:42:42] the Route 3s, and I just want to make sure that that, I think that's part of the motion. Yes, but I'm not sure if the staff can. Yes, you can absolutely answer that question. Supervisor Le Turner, you are correct. Okay, yeah, I support this motion. [00:43:00] I support the work that Supervisor Saints has done. As I've said before, I was the previous district supervisor for this community prior to the redistricting that happened around the 2020 census and so I do feel extra responsibility here and Supervisor Sainz and I have been in close contact about this. He's done an excellent job representing the interests of the community. I am frustrated that the continued push for lines going down Loudoun County Parkway continues to be on the table which the board has clearly indicated that [00:43:36] we do not support and that it's sort of as a zombie that resurfaces um i appreciate mr brown and i've had conversations with him about the the work that he's done um would certainly say we need to have all the elected officials in loud and in both elected bodies aligned on doing the best thing for the most residents that's what this board is doing has been doing and that's what we're doing tonight with this and we need to make sure that everyone is on board with that including in ashburn at their building as well so hopefully the residents will continue to to put [00:44:14] pressure there to try to come up with the best solution we can while still all of us advocating for underground lines as our first option thank you so um i would say you know when we have these discussions about undergrounding, the first response, we get lots of responses from Dominion, all the reasons it can't be done technically, which we know is not correct, because we've seen all the places where it's been done, especially outside of this country. [00:44:45] And then the second thing they talk about is how much it's going to cost, and I realize that. But I also did go see the pictures of Chino Hills, California, and they were startling. A picture was worth a thousand words. And how I would respond to that is that, and I say this quite a bit, a person's home is their largest investment. [00:45:05] And it is sometimes people are living in their retirement. And so, you know, whereas your home is not in dollar amounts worth what it would cost to underground, for you, for the person, for the resident, their home is worth that and more. [00:45:23] And so the idea that we would not do this because Dominion says it's going to cost too much when we have whole neighborhoods, whole communities that could significantly lose home value is kind of a no-brainer. [00:45:41] I mean, I don't get involved in kind of bashing large companies because that's just not helpful. But I do think that the Dominion would be mistaken to believe we would choose their finances over our residences because that just wouldn't happen. [00:45:57] Mr. Sains, my only question to you, my other question is, why do you want to leave 1F as an option in this motion? I'll go to staff on that if they want to answer it, but as we debated earlier, it's not a viable option, but I'll let them. [00:46:13] Somebody answer my question in 1 minute, 15 seconds. So because Route 1F does not cross onto any non-right-of-way, non-VDOT property, there's no land that can be conveyed to the county as an open space easement. [00:46:36] So basically, 1F is unblockable as far as the county's abilities under the Open Space Land Act. So that's why this resolution doesn't block 1F, it's because it... So we have no power to do anything with that, basically what you're saying? [00:46:55] Subject to check, yes. Subject to check, yes. Mr. Rogers, you want to add anything to that? No, that's correct. We just don't have the power to block 1F, and 1F is a half-baked option. Like you heard, it came up at the very last minute. 3A was proposed before the hearing, 3B was proposed before the hearing and introduced at the hearing. [00:47:15] One app is may not even be feasible. Okay. All right. Thank you. And, Mr. Rogers, you're going to be reporting out to the SEC now, basically, yes? I will report out to the SEC through Dominion tomorrow. [00:47:32] Oh, tomorrow. Oh, okay. All right. Thank you. Mr. Sands, would you like a closing? I'd just like to say thank you to the residents. Continue the work that you're doing. Thank you to the county. I'm going to thank you to Senator Senior Vasen, Delegate Singh for their work as well on this task here. [00:47:55] And we will continue to engage and hopefully get the resolution that we're looking for at the end. All right. Mr. Sands made the motion. Mr. Brickson seconded the motion. All the people say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That motion will pass 9-0. [00:48:13] Thank you, everybody. All right, we're going to go to the next item on the agenda tonight, which I believe is the Archibaldon. Would staff please come to the table? Although this one shouldn't be too hard. Ms. Max, you guys, there you go. [00:48:32] There you go. You're good right there. There you go. This is for the Archibaldon. Okay. I can't read who this is. [00:48:49] Can we come back to me? Good evening. [00:49:15] Good evening. How y'all doing? You okay? Yep. Okay. You ready? yes ma'am so are we all right good evening supervisors my name is wad out with the department planning and zoning here to present the application of loudon at the national conference center the subject property is located along conference center drive east of charlena beth drive in the ashburn election district the applicant seeks two minor special exception requests to allow a private school for up to 50 students and to eliminate the outdoor play area [00:49:52] requirement associated with the school. Minor special exceptions or not can proceed directly to the board for consideration. The school is currently operating at the conference center and has received temporary approval to do so. This request will allow the school to stay and operate within a portion of the existing conference center building noted in the pink area on the specs plat. Staff note that is separate separate from this request there is a a reason only application for the redevelopment of the entire conference center campus with multifamily dwelling that is under review. [00:50:32] The proposed school within the existing building is temporary until the site is redeveloped. Staff has not identified any outstanding issues pertaining to this request. The proposed school is compatible with the surrounding uses. [00:50:51] The subject site is surrounded by residential properties developed as the lands down on the Potomac subdivision with two public schools, the Riverside High School and the Belmont Ridge Middle School. [00:51:07] The traffic analysis anticipate that 124 additional weekday vehicle trips were generated from the proposed school. Given that this is a temporary use within the existing conference center and that the existing road network can adequately support the conference center operations, staff does not anticipate any adverse impact to the roadway network. [00:51:31] These use specific standards require a minimum of 75 square feet for outdoor play area per student or 3,750 square feet in this instance. Recognizing that the school is for temporary use at a conference center and there are existing amenities and pedestrian network on site, that staff is supportive of the applicant's request to eliminate the required outdoor play area for the school. [00:51:59] Staff has recommended conditions to limit the maximum number of schools to no more than 50 and to limit the hours operations in order to minimize the traffic congestion in the community and the two existing public schools. [00:52:16] Based on the consideration described, which further detail in the report, staff is recommended approval of this application subject to the conditions approval noted in report. is available for questions. Thank you. And before I go, Mr. Turner, first for questions. I will say that just as a point of fact, I live in Lancelin on the Potomac as the crow flies. The NCC is probably a five-minute walk from my house. Just put that on the record. Mr. Turner. I have no questions, Madam Chair. You have no questions. Does anyone else have any questions? I have no [00:52:53] questions, I have maybe a comment. What is going to happen with the NCC is still very much up in the air. We just heard from Beth Erickson let us know that the NCC, which I didn't realize this, is 79 percent of all of our conference revenue is housed at the NCC. So I know that there's been kind of a lot of rumors of this is going to happen and that's going to happen. Truly, we just don't know what's going to happen yet. And so I want to just, you know, kind of right now I support this, but also I want to just put all the other rumors to bed right now [00:53:30] because we just we have no idea and there's nothing there there's nothing that we that's we voted on yet which we are still not sure. So that in the record as well. Mr. Turner do you have anything for this before I go to the to the applicant? No. Okay we are ready when you all are. You have ten minutes you can sit there, stand at the podium. Great. We do have a presentation if staff could pull it up. Wonderful. [00:53:56] But it will be very brief. Okay. For the record, my name is Molly Novotny. I'm an urban planner at Curata Partners and pleased to be here with you with Lisa Max of the ARC and Tommy Roche of my office at Curata. None of us have ever met Lisa Max. She's never around. She's not part of the community. She doesn't say anything. We have no idea. And as you just sang her praises, I'm going to sing your staff's praises. Staff has been phenomenal to work with on this application, not just everything that WA has already presented, but your building and development staff. Evan Harlow, Grace Vanell, Eric Blankenship have just gone above and beyond to really help with this [00:54:34] application. And that's because it requires some site plan amendments as well in addition to this legislative application. But what I'd like to say is this is a great partnership between the ARC and the National Conference Center. I also represent the National Conference Center and Chair Randall, yes, we do have an application pending for that development, but that's still with staff. We've not brought that forward to the Planning Commission yet. Next slide. The ARC and the National Conference Center were able to partner up last summer and move over the Ability Fitness Center there. And then when everything kind of changed with the Aurora School, we were able to also accommodate them [00:55:12] within our space. Next slide. For the Aurora School. And so we're super excited that they're able to reuse this space that currently is really underutilized at the National Conference Center. There's no new construction that's needed. There's no new parking that's needed. This is just a way to use that space and really serve the community. As Wah mentioned, it's a private school use. [00:55:37] It's not a public school. They do not need a playground, which is why we've asked. Thank you For the modification to do a playground, there's ample outdoor space at the National Conference Center, but they also have lots of good interior space as well. It's about 20,000 square feet that they've leased, kind of shown here in purple. [00:55:56] It's, again, all interior space. There's really no impact to the community. And with that, that I think is the fastest presentation I've ever done. So happy to answer any questions. Wonderful. Thank you very much. [00:56:12] I will again go with Mr. Turner first. have any questions no questions all right mr turner do you have any questions no okay anybody else have any questions i think we do have one speaker on this item because mr mr turner brian turner has already spoke on the item out he i don't think he's on the phone anymore he's spoken the item already we have one speaker on the item if i'm reading the name right it's it's it's penny satches bro am i reading your name right pretty close okay um i just wanted to lay a marker here [00:56:47] and I don't want to sound like I'm against the school that's not it however we live next door to the playground the school bus has stopped at the playground that belongs to Lansdowne and they have used that and that is a private playground so what caught our attention is the fact that you are not wanting to put an outdoor play area at the NCC for this school so I just wanted to make sure we make it clear that Lansdowne is not taking on liability for these [00:57:22] children and the teachers that go out there with them, but they do come use the playground right next to the tennis courts. I'm right on Kip Hart. So that's our concern because we are in a society where people sue when somebody gets hurt, and that is a private piece of property. [00:57:45] So as long as there's an understanding that they will not be using it, and I see it every day when I'm working at my desk when the people are coming. So that's my only caution here. Ms. Brewer, are you speaking on behalf of the Conservancy? No, because they have a board meeting tonight. [00:58:01] I called to see who was coming. Okay. Because you keep saying they. You know, you said, so are you speaking on behalf of anybody? No, I'm speaking on behalf of myself. Okay. But I will, as I monitor other things that happen at that playground, I will let you know if, in fact, they go against this because it is a private playground. [00:58:23] So that's what caught my husband and I's attention. Okay. All right. Okay, thank you. Thank you. I think that's the, Ms. Brewer is our only speaker. So, Mr. Turner, do you have a motion? Yes, Madam Chair. I move the Board of Supervisors suspend the rules. [00:58:40] I will second that. I will second that. Discussion on the suspension of the rules and the reason for the suspension of the rules. Yes, Madam Chair. The arc is on a fairly tight timeline here. And we actually, thanks to staff who did a fantastic job, Mr. Rogers who did a great job. [00:58:57] We had one little hiccup we had to sort out, I think, yesterday, and we did that very quickly. But ARC is under a tight timeline, and it's very important we get this approved tonight. Okay. All right. Anybody else? All right. [00:59:14] A motion to suspend made by Vice Chair Turner. I second that. On purpose, they say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? The motion passed 9-0. Mr. Turner, would you like to make a motion? I move the Board of Supervisors approve Leji 2025-0061, the Archive Loudoun National Conference Center, Specs 2025-0146, and Specs 2025-0162, subject to the conditions of approval dated January 16, 2026, and based on the findings for approval provided as attachments 1 and 2 to the February 11, 2026, Board of Supervisors public hearing staff report. [00:59:48] Second. I'm going to take that second. I'm going to second that. Mr. Turner. No, I think I've said everything I needed to say. For some reason, if I can ask a question, Madam Chair? Sure. Staff, for some reason I had in my mind that one of these specs covered an outdoor playground. [01:00:06] Do I have that wrong? One respect is to eliminate the outdoor play area. Is to eliminate the outdoor play area? Yes. Okay. I have nothing else. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Letourneau? I'm supportive. [01:00:22] Anybody else? Ms. Bricksman? Thank you, Madam Chair. Just really happy to support this arrangement, and just want to appreciate the ARC. You're an important part of our community, and appreciate Vice Chair Turner for working with this organization and for the National Conference Center working with this organization, because you are critical to our community. [01:00:46] We really appreciate you, and I'm very happy to support. Thanks, and thanks for the short presentation. I would only say, in all seriousness, to the argument, especially to, to, to Lisa, who's now, you're now the new agent, Loudoun Human Services Network chair. Are you not this year? This is, you're, you're, you know, I have been watching you figure this out now for, I don't know, a long time. [01:01:13] you you're for gosh at least three years now your commitment to um to this population um you're explaining to people that that yes these are people who who are valuable beautiful special special people who live in our county but also come from other places too and that to a large degree it's um our arc is the only game in town for a lot of people and you have you know kind of set people down and walk them through that and why it's so important and that they did not have the ARC they would not have [01:01:49] anything and it and it would be hard to find it would impact what the parents could go to work it would impact how far people are driving it would impact the socialization that that the clients of the ARC is receiving you have been you have been consistent and dogged and patient and I do not believe we would here without you. And for for that I want to say thank you because the commitment to the population that you clearly love and serve has been so obvious. So Lisa, thank you so much. Would you like a closing, Mr. Turner? All right. [01:02:25] Mr. Turner made the motion. I second the motion. I want people to say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Aye. That motion will pass 9-0. Thank you. Supervisors, we have two more items both in the Sterling District. You want to keep Press it on, all right, yeah, we're good. [01:02:45] Let's do one more item, I know, I know, I know it's the whole dinner thing, but let's do, which one would take, and then we have speakers on Concord, so let's go in and do the Concord item, and Molly's sitting there already, so she's not gonna move, she didn't even get up, so let's do the Concord, and then we'll take a break. [01:03:25] No, I'm sorry, but that's not quite how that works. Good, good chance. Good, good, good, good try, though. Rashawn, everybody, we are ready when you are. Good evening. My name is Erin Fisher with the Department of Planning and Zoning. [01:03:53] I'm here today to present the application for Concord Industrial Park. One moment. It's frozen. [01:04:09] Oh, it's frozen. Okay. Ms. Brixford might get a wish. You might go on and take a picture. There we go. [01:04:37] Subject property is... Got it? Yeah? That's... Okay. Yes. [01:05:00] Okay. The subject property is 17.2 acres located at the terminus of Executive Drive west of Relocation Drive and south of the future Shellhorn Road north of Dulles Airport in the Sterling Electric District. The property is zoned planned development general industrial under the 1972 zoning ordinance and is located in the suburban industrial mineral extraction place type adjacent to the suburban employment place type. The property is currently developed with four flex warehousing buildings totaling 269 000 square feet staff notes these applications are [01:05:38] the first of an influx of applications within the route 28 corridor that proposed to convert existing flex warehouse to data center or industrial uses on the screen currently you can see concord industrial parks location relative to others staff has sought to analyze these applications holistically and consistently per the county's land use and transportation policies the application proposes to rezone the subject property from the PDGI zoning district under the 1972 zoning ordinance to the industrial park zoning district under the Loudoun County zoning ordinance to allow for multiple possible development options. The applicant requests a special [01:06:18] exception to increase the maximum floor area ratio permitted from 0.6 to 0.8 for data center use only and a special exception permit to permit a major utility use to establish a utility substation in the IP zoning district. The applicant also requests two minor special exceptions to address site constraints related to buffering and screening in the southeast portion of the site. The first would modify the use-specific buffering requirements for data centers to eliminate the berm where it would conflict with river and stream corridor resources [01:06:56] and easements associated with a county-owned stormwater facility adjacent to the site. The second minor special exception would eliminate the use-specific utility substation buffer in this corner of the site. Staff notes that the use specific standards for screening required for substations and data centers are similar in nature but are two different standards. As such, two minor special exceptions are required for a similar request in the same area of the site. The application was submitted in 2024 prior to board adoption of the data centers standards and locations phase one [01:07:31] comprehensive plan amendment and zoning ordinance amendment. This is why you do not see a special exception for data center use as part of the application. The applicant proposes six total development options. The development options include data center and substation uses and industrial uses like the ones currently found on the property. On the screen, you see the site layout for development options one and two for data center and substation use. They are the same as the other, they are the same other than the proposed square footage and FAR of the data center. [01:08:10] Options 1A and 2A simply rotate the building and equipment yard clockwise 90 degrees. The proposed substation occupies five acres on the east portion of the site. Two additional development options propose wholesale distribution, warehousing, and storage use, or flex building use. [01:08:30] At the July 10th planning commission work session, the commission forwarded the applications to the board with a recommendation of approval, contingent upon revisions related to the traffic impact study and other administrative clarifications. The applicant made these updates. [01:08:47] The application materials included in your packet are from a January 16th resubmission in which the applicant added the two minor special exceptions. The addition of the minor special exceptions required the applications to return to Planning Commission for consideration. [01:09:07] The commission held a second public hearing on January 27th and forwarded the applications to the board with a recommendation of approval subject to the January 16th proffer statement and contingent upon revisions, which included a request for a commitment to the continued use of the county stormwater facility for the site redevelopment, clarification of the special exception boundaries, and an increase in the substation's green wall height from 12 to 15 feet. [01:09:35] Due to the applications being double advertised, the January 16th resubmission was under staff review when the staff report and these slides were finalized. Now complete, the staff review finds the outstanding issues identified in this presentation to be resolved and identifies another outstanding administrative item the applicant additionally resubmitted the proffer statement and cdp on january 29th the submission has not been fully reviewed but staff has confirmed that it addresses the items the planning commission made its recommendation of approval contingent [01:10:06] upon staff has identified an item for board consideration related to compatibility and an outstanding administrative item to be addressed prior to board action. Staff raises for board consideration that the application proposes building heights, open space, and density that don't meet 2019 general plan policies. However, staff could support them based on the proposal's current compatibility with adjacent sites and appropriate mitigation commitments such as [01:10:42] enhancements to the open space provided, sustainability measures, and road frontage improvements. Staff notes the comprehensive plan amendment adopted on January 21st increases the building height envisioned by the general plan for this place type to 80 feet. The proposed industrial development options are now consistent with the policy, and the proposed 100-foot data center building height is now closer to the height envisioned by the policy. The county owns and operates a stormwater facility on the adjacent parcel to the southeast that provides stormwater [01:11:20] management for the subject site and has an active capital project to retrofit the facility to provide enhanced pollutant removal that is in the design phase. The project will contribute to meeting the county's municipal separate storm sewer permit obligations. To protect the county's investment, staff recommended and the applicant has now committed to the continued use of the stormwater facility for the site redevelopment. The special exception boundaries have been clarified on the January 16th submission of the special exception plat included in your packet [01:11:54] resolving this specific administrative item. However, staff continues to review administrative issues related to existing easements and future construction access in the southeast corner of the site. Staff will update the board on the status of these issues at a future business meeting prior to board action. The site is subject to multiple design commitments made by the applicant and staff recommends conditions of approval for the special exceptions, including limiting the FAR increase [01:12:29] to the data center and substation development options only, substation screening consisting of a 15-foot high screen wall with 95% opacity using earth tones, and planting content for the road and perimeter buffers to include 50% evergreen species to provide at least that much year-round screening from the road and surrounding properties. The Planning Commission forwarded the applications to the board with a recommendation of approval contingent upon multiple revisions, all of which the applicant has made in the most recent submission. Staff recommends the board forward [01:13:07] the applications to a future business meeting to allow the applicant to address administrative items. With that said, staff is happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much. Mr. Sainz, it's your district, sir. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, staff, for the presentation. The way the applicant presents this application right now, there's five or six options, I guess you could say, to choose from. [01:13:35] So if the board hypothetically was to approve this item, they could choose any of the five or six that are being proposed. Is that correct? Yes, that is correct, Supervisor Saint. [01:13:53] Okay. That'd be their election. Yeah, they can choose at their discretion. And, you know, correct me if I'm wrong, there's a few options for data centers, a few options for Flex Industrial, a few options for warehouse use, correct? Yes, sir. Okay. [01:14:09] All right. And then is it accurate to say if the staff can answer this question from hearing from Economic Development a few times, I'm sure, do you feel it's accurate to say there is a high market demand for Flex Industrial or a warehouse in the county? [01:14:28] Economic Development has made that conclusion, yes, sir. Okay. thank you mr letourneau yeah the applicant seeking an far increase is that tied solely to the substation um tied to the data center okay um but there is a open air substation also as part of the application correct for the data center options only for the data center option [01:15:01] yeah um staff kind of touched on the building height issue um is there does staff believe that a lower building height could help service transition to some of the lower lying buildings that are nearby um the zoning ordinance has a provision that will make the buildings kind of step from zoning districts adjacent to the site that have lower maximum building heights and that's [01:15:39] identified on the special cdps so there that will be addressed to some degree um as required as required by the zoning ordinance but if this is 100 feet what are the immediate buildings next door there was the data center that the board approved and the name escapes me that was up to 100 feet right next door yeah the aligned data center to the east is 100 feet and then to the [01:16:15] north the buildings are 24 feet and 20 feet but we have an existing application under review for data center that would also is also proposed at 100 feet but okay but it's only proposed okay thank you so oh i'm sorry mr crony yeah thank you chair randall and thank you for the presentation So, due to the grandfathering clause that the board approved March 2025, they're able to do data center at the lower FAR, am I correct? [01:16:55] By right. So, they're not required to develop per special exception. Right, but they're asking for an increase in the FAR. Correct. And an increase in the height. Correct. And the substation is in addition, because that wouldn't be grandfathered. [01:17:14] Correct. So the IP district that they're zoning to does allow data center by right, but the FAR and the substation do require special exception approval. Right. And both can be 100 feet. Am I correct? The substation and the data center. [01:17:31] Well, I don't think you want 100 feet substation, but I think the feet I saw was for both. Am I correct? So the substation we don't believe would be built to 100 feet. Yeah. The data center is 100 feet and the industrial, I believe, is it 70? Correct. Yeah, in the zoning district would allow 100 feet in the IP zoning district. [01:17:51] Okay. And there's four flex industrial buildings there now that would be potentially demolished. Correct. Okay. Where is the high voltage transmission lines? Where is that in the vicinity for infrastructure? [01:18:12] I do not know that off the top of my head. We do not have a graphic depicting that, Supervisor Carney, but we can get that information for you. That would be great, because that is infrastructure that's needed for data centers. I believe the applicant may have a graphic of that as well. [01:18:29] Okay, thank you. Yeah, I think my question's going to be for the applicant, so I'm fine right now. Speaking of, hello, hello. We are ready when you are. You have 10 minutes. You can stay there or stand at the podium. [01:18:47] Just let Marchant get my PowerPoint up. Fingers crossed. [01:19:16] Yes. Great. Good evening, Chair Randall, members of the board. Again, my name is Molly Novotny, urban planner at Curata Partners, and now I'm here with Prologis on behalf of the Concord Park application. A little bit about Prologis. They've been county landowners for 25 to 30 years. [01:19:36] They own over four and a half million square feet of development in Loudoun County, of which 10 data centers are part of their portfolio today. The number on the left side that I'm most proud of that I want to point out is $186 million of investment that Prologis has made in Loudoun County with new construction in the last year and a half alone. [01:19:56] What that equates to is 512,000 square feet of brand new Flex Industrial that they have either purchased or is under construction. Additionally, Prologis is a great partner in Loudoun County. I've listed just some organizations on which they partake. They were also a finalist in the Chamber Leadership Awards awarded just last month. The property before you is outlined in yellow. What we've done is we've really panned out here to show you exactly where this sits in Loudoun County. It sits in a very industrial area of Loudoun County. Dulles Airport is just to the south. It is surrounded by flex industrial data center warehouse sorts of buildings. And that's [01:20:36] because it's in the suburban industrial mineral extraction place type, which is one of your heaviest industrial place types. It's where your rock quarries go. It's where your heavy manufacturing go, where data centers are very appropriate uses. And that's because that's what's around here. Our property is outlined in that bright blue, and we are proposing a data center on the left side and a substation on the right side. You can see all of the data centers that exist today around the property. Everything that's in blue is industrial commercial. It's not industrial retail. It's not civic. It's not schools. It's not residential. It is industrial [01:21:12] commercial, warehouse, logistics, public facilities such as GSA facility, things like that. So panning out even further, what that means, I've got concentric circles here, half mile, three quarters of a mile, and a mile. As the crow flies, the closest residential to this property is over a mile away. [01:21:30] It's in the airport impact overlay district. You have no schools nearby. Panning now closer in, you can really understand what properties exist around us. What you see is all of these buildings around us, except for the one directly to our right, which is the Align Data Center, all of these buildings were built as industrial flex buildings. [01:21:53] Many of them have been converted to data centers. The difference between those buildings and our buildings is a shape. Those buildings are all straight rectangle buildings. Our buildings are 25 years old. And for some reason, somebody thought it was creative to kind of create this little boot at the end of those industrial buildings, a little architectural flair. [01:22:12] The problem is it creates a very inefficient layout inside for logistics warehouse users. It makes about a quarter of the building inaccessible for loading bays. It makes it very challenging for the interior space on those buildings. [01:22:28] This, Vice Chair Turner, last night, you asked what was the difference between old flex and new flex. This is old flex. Sterling Boulevard is planned to run directly north of this property. when it does it will make these four buildings non-conforming what that means rather than being set back 75 feet from the back of curb of sterling boulevard they'll only be 35 feet that leaves very little room for landscaping brings your parking very close to the road and leaves no room for a pedestrian facility the ip standards the district to which we're zoning to [01:23:03] are on the right side but the existing conditions is that middle column redevelopment wipes out all of those non-conformities and would build the building to those IP standards or beyond. So here's a picture on the ground. This is true old flex, 18 foot clear heights. What that means and why that's so important to flex buildings is they use the mass inside their building for storage. The more that they can fit inside the building, the more efficient they can be. [01:23:34] And that's because they want to stack things from floor to ceiling. On Concord, at Concord, we've got 18-foot clear heights, which means they can do three rows of crates, right? Think in your basement. How many crates of Christmas decorations can you put? These guys can put three rows. But at new flex buildings, they can put up to five rows. They're getting 60% more efficiency at a new flex building. Concord can't be retrofitted like these newer flex buildings. But Prologis has deeply invested in Loudoun County and currently has four new flex [01:24:10] buildings under construction right now. This is just west of Concord. This more than replaces the square footage that is built at Concord today. The first building is planning to break ground here later this quarter. We're very excited about this project. It is that new flex, 32 foot clear heights, 50 by 56 column spacing. You can see the truck base easily accessible for the entirety of each building. This image shows existing conditions in the middle column versus what a proposed redevelopment of Concord would be. We'll be able to more than double the open space. The zoning [01:24:46] ordinance today in the IP district requires 20% open space. We'll be at 22 at a minimum. We've got more tree canopy. Several NRT and comp plan goals will be achieved with redeveloping this site for data center. We've got shared use path, outdoor seating, all elements like that that will come with redevelopment. Supervisor Sains, you mentioned that there are several layouts for this board to choose from. I'm going to position it differently. We have one application that is requesting a data center development. We are a grandfathered case. Because we are grandfathered, [01:25:21] it means that we need to show on the concept plan exactly what development would look like. We obviously are here before you asking for a data center, and that's why we've shown this layout. For some reason, 10 years from now, 15 years, data center doesn't work. We would have to come back to this board to ask to do anything other than data center. [01:25:42] So we wanted to protect ourselves and the county from that situation, which is why we've also shown a layout for a wholesale warehouse and a layout for a flex building. But this application can't be parsed apart. Those three options are all concept plans woven into one application. [01:26:00] The minor special exception is just outlined here in purple. Staff did a good job overviewing it. We are just seeking relief from putting a berm in that area. That's because you can't put a berm in the RISCAR or on top of county easements. But the substation will be fully screened with a 15-foot-tall enhanced screen wall. [01:26:20] This was a request from the Planning Commission. We had previously committed to 12 feet. They've asked us to commit to 15. We've made that commitment. What the building will look like. This is an image of the building looking east. So the side of Sterling Boulevard is that long facade. [01:26:36] Your zoning ordinance requires 30% fenestration. We've committed to 35% fenestration. So we're exceeding your zoning ordinance standard. We've taken out all of the landscaping here because we really just want to show you the architecture of the building. Now I'm on the other side. [01:26:52] So now I'm looking to the west. What you see here, this is a picture that we had taken last week with the snow. You see the aligned data center directly to our east. That's a 100 foot tall building. When we build our data center, It will be here with this, the plantings here, this is at development. [01:27:14] So at planting, you will have a type three road corridor buffer all along the new Sterling Boulevard. I'm going to go back one slide to just point out the trees that you see in this image will all be removed as part of the Sterling Boulevard construction project. So with that, with the redevelopment of our site, new trees would be planted. [01:27:33] This is at time of development, time of install, five years, 10 years later. That's because we have committed to have 50% of our plantings be evergreen to really help screen the building and that substation on the eastern side of the property. Supervisor Tacroni, you asked where the transmission lines could come from. The areas in green here, these are existing or approved substations in the county already. Our substation is shown here in yellow. This decision is way above my pay grade, but one could surmise, these are transmission substations, one could [01:28:09] surmise that the power lines would come from these substations down Relocation Drive. We have highlighted or outlined in blue other property that Prologis owns. That would be the property impacted. There are no schools, there are no homes, there are no retail centers that would be impacted by these lines, but this is how one could route the transmission lines to the Concord site. [01:28:34] Staff went over the issues that they had previously identified. We're very happy that we resolved to all of those such that the Planning Commission recommended approval late last month 801 with that one being an abstention. And with that I just leave this image on the screen recognizing this industrial area of the county and I'm happy to answer any questions. Just going to leave that up there for us huh? Yep. Okay. Wonderful. Thank you very much. Mr. Sains let's go to you first for questions. Thank you Madam Chair. Good to see Ms. Novotny and your clients. Rapid fire here so [01:29:11] If you can try to keep your answers tight as possible, it would be greatly appreciated. Nobody is debating that, yes, this is definitely an industrial area, which obviously come with options of what you can do. Is the buildings currently now have tenants in them, yes or no? [01:29:29] There's 30% vacancy or short-term leases, but there are tenants in the buildings, yes. So those folks would be, and I'm assuming you have not renewed leases when they came up because you're coming up with this project. Would that be accurate to say? [01:29:46] Supervisor Sains, I'm Danielle Schlein. I'm the investment officer for Prologis. I've been with Prologis for 14 years covering this market. I'm very familiar with all of our customers and all of our buildings. We chose over five years ago to be very transparent with all of our customers and say the landscape in Loudoun County is changing. [01:30:05] At some point, your building could be... But yes, so yes, yes, the answer is yes. Yes, and they are aware of it. Thank you, ma'am. Yes, so they were not renewing leases because they knew this project was coming up. You still have tenants in it. Most likely, well, not most likely, they will be displaced no matter what you do, most likely. [01:30:27] Let's be honest, you're not making any heads or tails about it. You are looking to do data center here. You have pictures of data center. You didn't even present us the pictures of anything other options, so I think your first choice would be data center. As we know, and you rightly so, Pearl Lodgers has been in Loudoun County for some time. [01:30:45] You do some good work in Loudoun County. You highlighted one of your projects over by Loudoun Gateway, which is a great project. You could do, would it be yes or no, you could do a similar type of project, as you just mentioned, across from Loudoun Gateway station at this location. We would have to charge customers 50% more rent. [01:31:03] But you could do the project. To do that at this location. But you could do the project. are something similar to that fashion. And as I asked the staff earlier, the way you're presenting this application right now, you would be able to choose a la carte if we were to approve this application as is. Is that correct? If we approve what's being presented to us, you could choose out of those five or six options, whatever your preference is. Is that correct? Yes, there would be three development options. I thought there's five. Three types of uses. The data center could be in either two alignments. Okay, but you have data center, warehouse, flex industrial, those could be your [01:31:41] choices to pick from. Correct. Correct. Okay. All right. And I know there's been some hiccups with staff and getting some maps in order and proper language and all that stuff. And this has been deferred a few times. So now you're finally here in front of us in February. We're at the forward this over to the March meeting for board action. And I'll say the rest when we get to the motion. [01:32:05] Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Attorney, do you have anything? So explain the economics of why this location is so much more expensive to do a different use in. Sure. And the example that we had shown of Lockridge, that was a greenfield site, which means there were it was land that we could only have development and leasing costs on top of. [01:32:29] Here at Concord, we would need to have the detenanting and relocation costs, the demolition costs, as well as the lost income for the time that we would be detenanting as well as reconstructing the buildings. So on top of that, that would lead to a 50% increase in the costs for the customers when we went to release it. [01:32:48] Okay. I don't know if this is his question, although I'll let you address it. One of the frustrations I have is that the application came in after the county already secured right-of-way for Sterling Boulevard, which means I believe we paid you for some of that right-of-way, which, frankly, normally would have been part of a proffer negotiation. [01:33:09] So I don't know if there's any openness to discussing that further, but it kind of sticks in my craw a little bit. Yes, we could discuss it further. Okay, you're good. [01:33:27] Mr. Crony. So it sounds like you already have 10 data centers in this area, am I correct? Was there any discussion, because I do see, you know, I heard you that you want to get rid of the non-conformities, that you want to redevelop the site, was there any thought to proffer out data centers and substation, or is your, I know what Supervisor Zane said, you showed pictures with data centers and substations. Any thought of that? Because there [01:34:02] is a market demand for flex industrial and warehousing, and we have 200 data centers in the county. So was there any thought of proffering out those two uses? There was not given the location of this site with the compatibility of the other data centers in the area. There's also not a lot of visibility for or access from the site. Today, there's no visibility to this site. [01:34:28] And the access, even when Sterling Boulevard comes through, the access will not be from Sterling Boulevard. So it's not really an intuitive site for some of those other users. For the warehouse and the flex industrial, because you give those in the table, you give three and four as warehouse in FlexIndustrial. Right. So because it's a grandfathered use, if we didn't list those options, then we'd never be able to do them here if for some reason the market changes. So we wanted to provide that flexibility for those types of uses if data center does not develop here. [01:35:06] Our intention is to develop data center in a substation if the application is approved. Right. Right. I would also like to add the four buildings that Molly showed on Lockridge, Those are under construction, 282,000 square feet, and we do not have any leasing activity yet there. [01:35:23] So no lease is signed. For Flex Industrial? Industrial. Okay. Okay, thank you. I have to say I do appreciate you just stating what your intention is and not kind of playing that it could be this or it could be that game. Just stating what the intention is is good. [01:35:41] So thanks. Okay, we do have speakers on this item. We have three speakers. First speaker is Theo Stamatis, followed by Alan Sarafarin, followed by Emily Johnson. Good evening, sir. [01:35:57] Good evening, Madam Chair. Members of the board, for the record, Theo Stamatis, Loudoun County Chamber of Commerce. On behalf of the 1,100 Loudoun employers who are Loudoun Chamber members, I am here this evening to express our appreciation for the work that the applicant has done for the benefit of our Loudoun businesses and employees. [01:36:16] For over 25 years, Prologis has been acquiring industrial buildings in Loudoun County and operates 4.5 million square feet, including warehouses and data centers. Importantly, Prologis is investing more in the county and broke ground last year, last summer, on Prologis' Dulles Logistical Center. [01:36:35] Of course, as mentioned by Ms. Novotny, they'll be bringing to fruition the 283,000-square-foot industrial development in Sterling. Additionally, you'll find Prologis employees and financial support active in Women Giving Back, Mobile Hope, Loudoun Salvation Army, and so many more. [01:36:56] Prologis has repeatedly demonstrated its commitment to strengthening the fabric of Loudoun's community, and the Chamber was proud to honor them for their investments in Loudoun at the Community Leadership Awards last month. Ms. Novotny beat me to it, but I was going to say it first. [01:37:13] What we find compelling about Prologis' application is its strategic location, which is surrounded by industrial development. With no retail, civic, or residential uses nearby, this land west of Pacific Boulevard, north of the airport is the county's focal point for development to include warehouse distribution, wholesale distribution, data center, and flex building uses. [01:37:35] Madam Chair, thank you for considering the Chamber's views on this application. Thank you for your service and the board's service to our Latin community. Thank you, sir. Alan, I think it's Safarian, followed by Emily Johnson, and I'm sure you will correct me if I said your name incorrectly. [01:37:52] I apologize. Good evening. Good evening. No, that was actually correct. Oh, okay. Thank you for having me today. My name is Alan Safarian. I'm the owner and president of AAI Heating and Air Conditioning. We are a proud 17-year business operating in a Prologis building in Lowndes County. [01:38:11] AI is an industry leader that provides customized HVAC solutions to customers that range from retail, food stores, industrial, and data centers. We operate in Northern Virginia and Maryland. [01:38:29] We currently employ 38 people, including highly trained and certified HVAC engineers and technicians. The data center industry has created terrific opportunities for businesses like mine to provide HVAC to this growing industry. Shortly after COVID, we saw the need to expand quickly in Lowne County and connected with Prologis. [01:38:50] They have been terrific, partnered to allow my business to grow. We started with a month-to-month lease with flexibility while determining our future space needs. We now operate on a long-term lease agreement. Throughout our long relationship, Prologis has always been collaborative, partner, transparent, responsive, and committed to delivering services that help our company thrive in Lowne County. [01:39:13] My company and I first-hand experience with Prologis Investments and Operations in Lownd County, we support their efforts to preserve flexibility for data center uses in industrial areas such as this one, and are confident they will continue to support, accommodate industrial users like AAI as well. [01:39:32] Thank you for your time and consideration. Thank you very much. And the last speaker is Emily Johnson. We don't have any more speakers. We do have one more speaker. We have one more speaker after Emily Johnson. Good evening, everybody, for you. Hi, good evening, supervisors. My name is Emily Johnson on behalf of the P1 Environmental Council. [01:39:48] Concord Industrial Park is the epitome of a problem we have in Loudoun. Being the world's capital of something brings investment and even prestige, but it doesn't on its own invite balance. So we are relying on you to be that balancing force, evaluating this application in the context of our current economic portfolio, development patterns, remaining spaces, and future security. [01:40:07] Considering those factors ourselves, we don't support this rezoning, particularly the data center options proposed. Redevelopment of flex industrial space for data center use does not promote economic diversity and instead to places contributing loud and businesses who must search elsewhere, perhaps leaving the county or as we've seen in an active proposal, even embracing industrial space on well water. [01:40:28] The Planning Commission has seen support for that inappropriate rural rezoning from many Loudon business owners who need the flex operating space. One said, without access to local commercial space, it is becoming harder to grow, hire, and serve the community effectively. Another said, we are in urgent need of more industrial space. [01:40:46] If something doesn't change soon, I will be forced to make the tough decision of whether to move out of the county. Still another called for local business retention. And somebody else explained, Loudon risks losing companies that would prefer to stay and grow here. Please remember, the property you're talking about this evening has tenants, including a food bank, D.C.-founded security company, defense contractor, small health care company, specialty door constructor, and HVAC retailers, for some of whom it's their headquarters. [01:41:14] In fact, the applicant has requested to re-tenant the current structures between this application and construction. Re-tenant. Staff says they could support that given a shortage of industrial space available and have highlighted seven other properties that are following this redevelopment pattern. [01:41:29] Given how precious lower cost options are for flex users, we support the current use and are concerned about precedent tonight. These tenants and facility options are an important part of our existing economic ecosystem. While the applicant has spoken about moving tenants to newer flex industrial space, they just now talked about a 50% rental increase and haven't mentioned success keeping them in Loudoun. [01:41:47] We should be deeply concerned about that and question what we're getting in return. Thank you. Thank you. And our last speaker is Victor Block. Good evening, sir. Hey, hi again. Victor Block, Loudoun Valley Estates, HOA. [01:42:04] I don't have a prepared statement, but I just hope in the context of the discussion we just had, it sure seems like this will be fed by the gold and the Mars line. And I hope you all take that into consideration going forward as this project or any other projects come up. [01:42:21] We're going to probably need more power lines coming through where we are, and that's a real concern for all the residents that live where we live. So, thank you very much. Mr. Block, let me just answer your question right now. We, by law, are not allowed to take that into consideration. [01:42:40] We, as a board, did ask the General Assembly for the right to consider power and transmission generation, not so much the root, which is a question Mr. Crony asked, but power and transmission generation when making these decisions. This is our, I'm not sure if it's our first or second year of asking that. The General Assembly told us no on that. And so although we wish we could, we are not allowed to use that as one of our decision-making factors legally. I understand. I know we had that conversation i just um if there are anything that are us as a community can do to help support the [01:43:20] county in that in richmond we will continue to do so and we've been trying to do so so i promise we will continue to thank you sir thank you those are all of our speakers and so i will go to to mr sage for a motion thank you madam chair i move that the board of supervisors Ford Leji 2024-0002, Concord Industrial Z-Map 2024-0001, special exception 2024-0009, [01:43:53] special exception 2024-0040, special exception 2025-0153, and special exception 2025-0161 to the March 17th, 2026, Board of Supervisors Business Meeting for Action. Finally. [01:44:13] Motion is made and I will second that motion. Happy to second that motion. Mr. Sand, do you want to open? Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate the comments from our Loudoun Chamber and our business owner, Mr. Safran and his company. You're located in Sterling right off of Davis Drive. We appreciate your business and and employing your 38 employees and hopefully you're gonna be growing. [01:44:39] Just as you mentioned, yes, you do work for the data centers. I'm sure you can do work just the same for flex industrial and warehouse use as well and keep you guys actively busy as well on those projects. You know, as we mentioned, yes, these existing buildings are outdated and cannot provide for the needs of new warehouse users, distribution, flex business, But a new building could support those types of businesses and not remove businesses that had been in that location. [01:45:11] Some of them probably did stay in Loudoun, but some of them, I guarantee, probably did move out of Loudoun County. And if we continue, we will see more folks move out of Loudoun County, most likely, and lose a lot of good small businesses. And some might even shutter altogether. I would have supported this application if they withdrew the plans for a data center and substations. [01:45:31] But unfortunately, we could not come to an agreement on that thinking. So when this comes back, unfortunately, in March, I will be making the motion to deny this application. [01:45:47] For some of the reasons I just mentioned, I just feel we're going to be losing some tenants. We know you guys do good work in the community. You have demonstrated you can do new buildings, Flex Industrial Warehouse. And we know for a fact, we hear that every single day in finance, month after month from economic development, that we need more of these type of uses. [01:46:07] So here is a perfect example where we could put that into use and practice with this application. So when it comes back, if it's not changed, like I said, I'll be making the motion to deny. Thank you. Mr. Letourneau. [01:46:22] I will look forward to further engagement on this application. Obviously, it's a heavily industrial site with some unique circumstances as we've been hearing about tonight. So given the parameters of what the board can consider, I will certainly engage further with the applicant. [01:46:43] Thank you. Mr. Rogers, although I would much rather see this as a flex industrial building, flex industrial use, Because of the by-right nature that the applicant has a right to do, can we in any way do anything but ask them to make this flex? [01:47:07] Can we force them? Do we have any legal means at all to not allow them to use their by-right designation if they wanted to do data center? So the board's decision is whether or not to grant the rezoning, which they're looking to have which would allow additional uses on the site. [01:47:29] If the board were to turn down the rezoning, then they still have their by right use. Okay. And the by right use is the data center? That's correct. Okay. All right. Thank you. Should I get a closing? [01:47:44] All right. And this is coming to March, is that correct? This is March 17th. March 17th. Okay. Mr. Sains made the motion. I second it to send this to the March 17th meeting. I want people to say aye. Aye. that motion will pass nine zero thank you and I know we have one more and I'm so sorry to make you all wait but we've been the day since four o'clock we haven't had a break at all so we need to take a break so we can keep functioning for one [01:48:09] more item let's take a 20 minute break everybody okay everyone we are back and [02:21:13] we're gonna do our last item for the night just give me one second to tell you all something. Supervisors, before we do this last item, you're going to get, probably tomorrow, a message for a straw poll vote to support a budget amendment. It is a budget item from Reed and Boisco to fund SPARK operations through the state budget and to enable DBH [02:21:49] DS to continue contracting with SPARC at a level that is reflected by the actual cost of the services they provide. And so we want to be able to support Senator Boisco and, of course, Delegate Reed, and it's just for the state to continue to support SPARC. [02:22:07] Since it's not in our program already, we have to do a straw poll vote. I will send it out to everybody. I'll send you the whole bill so you can read it and know what it is. But we need to get it done before we come back on the dais and so when you see that, that's what that is. [02:22:23] All right. We're going to go to our last item. Hello, everyone. Our last item for tonight is the Dulles North item. I think Mr. Letourneau has dropped off. [02:22:38] Is that right? He's dropped off? Okay. Mr. Letourneau has dropped off. All right. So Dulles North item. Staff, we are ready when you are. Good evening. My name is Wada with the Department of Planning and Zoning here to present the application of Dulles North 3. The subject property is located east of Route 28 west of Shaw Road in the Sterling Election District. [02:23:01] The applicant seeks a special exception request to allow a one-story commercial office building on property zone PDIP under the 1972 zoning ordinance. Under the 7-2 zone ordinance, special exception applications that occur after the remapping of the PDIP zoning district can be directly be considered by the board. [02:23:24] The property is part of a land condominium. The proposed development will occur on the northern lot. The southern lots contain the existing Springfield Suite Hotel. The proposal will tie into existing pedestrian networks and meets the landscaping buffering requirements. [02:23:42] Staff has not identified any outstanding issues pertaining to this request. The property is located in the suburban mixed-use place type, which calls for office use as a core use. The property is also located along Route 28, which is planned for high-quality, high-intensity office development that takes advantage of the economic opportunities associated with the frontage of Route 28. [02:24:09] Office, commercial, and light industrial uses exist adjacent to this property. Staff finds that the proposal is consistent with the envisioned use outlined in the 2019 general plan. The place type recommends a building height of up to five stories. [02:24:27] The proposed office building features a masonry exterior and will reach up to a height of 35 feet, which is consistent with the existing office buildings in the area. And based on the consideration described, staff is recommending for approval of the application subject to conditions noted in the report would address building design and on-site amenities. [02:24:52] Staff is available for any questions. Mr. Sands, is your district? Thank you, Madam Chair. Just to clarify, this would be a one-story office building type use. Would that be accurate to paint it that way? That's correct, sir. Okay, thank you. Anybody else have any other questions? [02:25:18] Okay. The applicant, would you have a presentation? You honestly don't need one. We're good. No, I'm just kidding. Keep going. Team dropped off. Good evening, members of the board. My name is Ben Wales, land use planner with Curata. We're keeping you busy this evening. I apologize. [02:25:36] Here this evening, on behalf of the applicant, I'm with members of the applicant team. I do have a presentation loaded. Staff has covered all the topics that I was going to run through, so I'm happy not to go through that again. As staff has noted, it's a pretty straightforward application. [02:25:52] It's an office building in the Route 28 tax district. We have staff recommendation of approval, and we'd be grateful for your support. Thank you, Mr. Wells. Does anyone have any questions, Mr. Sains? No. [02:26:08] Thank you. I'm trying not to just smile. I'll sit down. I'm trying not to just smile up here. I see you guys smiling over there. Does anyone have any? Ms. Bricksman. Thank you. Can you confirm, please, that this office space will not have any amenities or a way to accommodate somebody or persons spending the night there? [02:26:35] Can you elaborate? Is there a particular concern you have for this site? I mean, it won't, but... Okay, that's all I need to hear. Okay. Yeah. Okay. You good? I'm good. You good? [02:26:51] I don't have any questions. And you may have a seat, Mr. Wells. Thank you. And there are no speakers. We have no speakers that I have down here, right? No speakers? No speakers. Anybody here want to speak on this item? [02:27:09] Seeing none, Mr. Sains, would you like to... Well, we could have done this before we went on break. I'm sorry. I am so sorry. I am really sorry. Mr. Sains, would you like to make a motion? I apologize to my colleagues. I probably should have advocated for this more in advance. But, yes, this is an office use, so I actually want to throw this out there and see if it sticks. [02:27:29] I move that the Board of Supervisors suspend the rules. Second. Second. Mr. Sains, may the motion to suspend the rules. I second the discussion on their motion of suspension. Seeing no, on paper, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? [02:27:44] That motion will pass 801 with Mr. Luterteau off the desk. Would you like to make a motion? Sure, Madam Chair. I move that the board of supervisors approve led G2025-0021 Dulles North 3 special exception 2025-0045 subject to the conditions of approval dated January 28, 2026 and based on the findings for approval provided as attachments 1 and 4 to the February 11, 2026 board of supervisors public hearing staff report. [02:28:11] Second. Discussion on the motion, Mr. Sainz. Thank you, Madam Chair. As mentioned earlier, this will be single-story office-type building use. So this will not be data center, won't be flex-industrial, which we need, but we do need this type of use as well in Loudoun County and the Sterling District of office-type use. [02:28:30] So we're glad to have this being proposed, and we will be glad to see when the dirt is moved and construction starts on this great project. Thank you. Staff, you're good. No issues? I will associate myself with Mr. Sands' comments. [02:28:46] Ms. Andrew in a closing. All right. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That motion passed 801. You're welcome. Thank you. Thank you. Supervisors, I think that's it. All right. We are adjourned. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Coraggio Consulting ยท aguyonx.com