A year later, little has changed in Rush River Commons’ quest for approval to develop a second site in the Town of Washington.
At its meeting Monday, the Town of Washington Planning Commission voted against the development plans expressing the same chief concerns it shared Oct. 28, 2024 and at hearings since then — that the building concept is just too big, and whether a community center and more office space is what the community wants or needs.
Several commissioners proposed in their discussions that what the community needs, and wants, is more affordable housing, and posited that although the ability to include housing in this second development phase may have been bargained away in negotiations with the county, the issue is pressing and should be revisited.
“Chuck [Akre] in 2020 did a huge listening tour, and he talked to everyone about what was needed, but 2020 is five years ago … yet, the vision of what the community needs has stayed at offices and community center,” Caroline Anstey, chair of the Planning Commission said. “The one constant from 2020 — when you did your listening tour — and today is that the number-one priority remains affordable housing.”
Rush River developers worry that that ship has sailed.
“It’s very difficult to amend an existing order. I can’t tell you it’s impossible, but I can tell you it’s more than a year’s process,” Rush River Commons’ attorney John Foote said.
The Rush River Commons team has been seeking approval from the commission of its Planned Unit Development (PUD) application that requests more flexible zoning rules — specifically it wants to use the same PUD application approved for the first development site for the second one. The issue was tabled last month after the commission asked for more detail and some revisions to the application.
The Rush River Commons phase two proposed development is on 3.9 acres where Warren Avenue meets Lee Highway, adjacent to Rush River’s phase one development on Leggett Lane containing the Rappahannock Food Pantry, an office building and affordable housing units.
Town Council to decide Nov. 10
The commission voted 3-0 Monday to recommend denial of the application to the Town Council. Commissioner and Town Council member Drew Beard abstained from the vote, and said he will be discussing and voting on the issue again in a few weeks when the Town Council takes it up Nov. 10.
Representatives for Rush River Commons, led by engineer Stephen Plescow, presented revised plans for the second site — which include a 9,000-square-foot office building and a 12,000-square-foot community center — arguing the project meets town goals for economic vitality and community engagement.
The commission expressed concerns last month about the impact on the capacity of the town’s wastewater system, landscaping, the gateway to the town and its viewshed and adherence to the Comprehensive Plan. Plescow said the amended application and design minimizes visual impact at the town’s gateway and that sewer capacity and landscaping concerns raised in September had been addressed.
The commissioners seemed still uneasy about the size of the structures, and how the new buildings would conform with the town.
“We don’t want to look a gift horse in the mouth, but the horse has to fit in the stable,” Anstey said, noting that while the generosity of the Akre family, the project’s backers, was appreciated, the development must still conform to the town’s needs and surroundings.
Commissioner Jeanne Kauffman said she participated in early listening sessions on the development, and recalled people liking the idea of a community center, small shops or a farmers’ market, but the main need was for more housing.
“I never heard anybody ask for a 9,000-square-foot building or a 12,000-square foot-building. Now that’s not to say that people didn’t think of a community center, because at that time, I think that was a concept that was appreciated, but the main call was, as Caroline said … for affordable housing,” Kauffman said. “I understand from the annexation in the way it went, that that’s at this point in time, not going to be an option for Rush River two, but that was the loudest voice of those meetings that I participated in.”
In 2023, the town and county entered a voluntary settlement agreement where the county allowed about four acres — the future home of Rush River Commons II — of land to be annexed into the town limits. In that agreement, it was explicitly stated that the second phase of the Rush River development could not include any residential housing without the “express approval of the county’s Board of Supervisors.”
In an interview Tuesday, Plescow said “the county was pretty clear” that it did not want any housing included in phase two.
“It’s a big process to unravel the court decision … So it doesn’t make sense,” Plescow said. “I don’t know how you go back and say, ‘We want something different.’ It’s not practical.”
During the meeting, Plescow encouraged the town to pursue affordable housing in other areas, and agreed there is a need for it.
Anstey also asked why, after several years of critique on the size of the buildings, the square footage of the plans had not been scaled back.
“It was a year to this date that we met here to discuss the plan, but even before then, the Planning Commission certainly has said over and over and over again, ‘it’s too big,’” Anstey said.
Plescow defended the phase two conceptual designs, and acknowledged that the design team had not reduced the size because it reflected what they wanted to build, and the team believed those sizes were justified and appropriate. “We’re not going to build an office building that we don’t think we can fill,” he said.
At its Nov. 10 meeting, the Town Council will make the final decision on the application.
