[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6492088,"mediaKeyId","5506656-623536d0a4474bbcd117d51c0d6bce61","parentId",5506656,"title","Purcellville officials, residents oppose Valley Commerce Center; planning commission sends application to work session","audioSeconds",3054,"startMs",4135000,"endMs",7189000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5506656-623536d0a4474bbcd117d51c0d6bce61&start=4135&end=7189","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5506656-623536d0a4474bbcd117d51c0d6bce61/thumbnail_4135000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6492088/Virginia/Purcellville-officials-residents-oppose-Valley-Commerce-Center-planning-commission-sends-application-to-work-session","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6492088-dcfbfe0ded37522336a0881f03d3706e/orig.mp4?Expires=1770711165&Signature=FXTSdKG5mkSd7hBmPnEWi4sXo4y~k~Lxl2S4xXHtHtUXpaK0ZMnRJKP4mvXKiwCofjflML4VUQzsQJJLIAv4kU0JJ1qSpjQHhLuAOCLR5qMk-o-qyBECVuJK3At2m8y3x5zWnPSr~zGpaA7hibtVNAt5m54ZgSsX0OFg0BLfUOPSLUm-OygsJrmzTClMTfAqbHWcgNOgQY3onZBnUN4P9VK0fUcNUnUkcRO~VDhPagchjTsi7FuUvJfaDW7ZsXRciAagL-oIAcvfwuMjghqKXtx8WdZ9dvRnk40P8vYXNIeUW1OdA~klcB1-zKg3-AsLgiFqwuoPDG~tS9zXShCrrg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Loudoun County","date","2025-07-29T00:00:00Z","article","The Loudoun County Planning Commission on July 29 voted 8-1 to send the proposed Valley Commerce Center rezoning in the Purcellville JLMA to a planning commission work session after a long public hearing period that drew elected town leaders, dozens of residents and several business proponents.

The applicant seeks to rezone roughly 117 acres in the Percival (Purcellville) JLMA from JLMA-3 to a Planned Development Industrial Park (PDIP) and to modify zoning standards to permit on-site wells and septic instead of central utilities. The planned development concept shows a mixture of flex/industrial buildings, roughly 1,300,000 square feet of total industrial area (applicant-supplied upper bound) with landscape buffers, proposed traffic mitigation proffers and a plan to reserve right-of-way for the Percival North Collector Road (PNCR) alignment.

Staff opposition: County staff told commissioners the proposal was inconsistent with the 2019 General Plan’s “rural neighborhood” place type that covers the JLMA north of Route 7, arguing the plan anticipates low-density residential, rural economy uses and agricultural transitions rather than large-scale industrial development. Staff also flagged long-term groundwater reliability questions in the applicant’s hydrogeologic report and remaining transportation, heritage-resource and tree-conservation issues. Staff recommended the commission not forward a recommendation of approval to the Board of Supervisors.

Public comment: The hearing saw more than two dozen speakers. Purcellville Mayor Christopher Bertot, Town Council members and the town vice-mayor urged denial, saying the plan conflicted with town and JLMA land-use guidance. Nearby residents said a large industrial park would increase truck traffic and noise on narrow, two-lane Percival Road, threaten groundwater and disrupt a neighborhood that borders the site; several speakers cited town council’s January rejection of an annexation request for the same land. Supporters, including small-business owners and commercial brokers, said the county needs more local flex/industrial space for contractors, trades and storage and offered design concessions the applicant proposes (landscaped frontage and lower building massing along Percival Road).

Traffic and water: The applicant proffered off-site fair-share contributions (roughly $130,000 combined) for traffic signals at local intersections and proposed a production well that it says can deliver 52 gallons per minute. County consultants questioned the long-term sustainability of on-site well production and potential drawdown impacts on neighboring wells; the applicant said it had offered to monitor nearby wells but that some neighbors declined to participate. Commissioners pressed both staff and the applicant on water reliability, road alignments for the PNCR and the project’s scale.

Outcome: Vice Chair Miller moved to send the application to a planning commission work session for further study. After commissioners summarized questions for staff and the applicant — including building envelopes, groundwater risk, scale and visual buffering — the commission voted 8-1 to schedule a work session (Commissioner Jasper opposed).

Why it matters: The Valley Commerce Center illustrates the tension that can arise where county-level economic-development goals and JLMA/town/neighborhood place-type guidance differ. The work session will focus on groundwater reliability, design commitments to reduce visual and noise impacts along Percival Road and refined traffic mitigation proposals.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Loudoun County - Planning Commission Public Hearing","oneSentenceSummary","The Loudoun County Planning Commission on July 29 deferred action on the proposed Valley Commerce Center — a 117-acre industrial rezoning north of Route 7 in the Purcellville JLMA — and voted 8-1 to send the application to a planning commission work session after hours of public comment and staff concerns about land-use consistency, groundwater and transportation.","taxTitle","Loudoun County, Virginia","taxId",5640,"location","Virginia","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6492093,"Planning commission splits on early withdrawal request for Oak Hill Farm; sends item to work session",2018,1737000,3755000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5506656-623536d0a4474bbcd117d51c0d6bce61&start=1737&end=3755","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5506656-623536d0a4474bbcd117d51c0d6bce61/thumbnail_1737000.jpg","/articles/6492093/Virginia/Planning-commission-splits-on-early-withdrawal-request-for-Oak-Hill-Farm-sends-item-to-work-session","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6492093-138d9b4d7b28f9bd441b927595803f85/orig.mp4?Expires=1770711165&Signature=YkWqysyFL2utOqBlbeJhVL3NburTkDsl2SzPfln9hzTV4p9wEgsZ~SyxuNiSYlvNpeotRxA-8noGXB8PpYdIvHBrFocZP2A7TDPIbBrZYLHgfhbPdF-YchYPF4XCk6XRJWotpBuRX6xaL9TUK99jnjDz8uHUMofIQOujfaFDJRVyBEI3JqFK2qfr-YTK0y9BZAXTgCkJ5tfQo5nDvpnKPI2sUZT9dBreGlAHwLtBu5jNp0EcoTek2DjY35lk-m8-7omj7OIiSkDeViTR2WbXzT7y13YGoS-rGmF4bIlSrBGfmPMZ2fezSTKTasOjTGkcNNoi5ORdATarxDOOcWLRqQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Loudoun County Planning Commission on July 29 considered an early withdrawal request from the New Oak Hill Agricultural and Forestal District that would allow a 1,233.08-acre parcel to be removed from the AFD at the owner’s request. The landowner has said the withdrawal would facilitate an intended sale to a conservation fund and potential transfer that could support establishment of a state park.

Staff explained the statutory withdrawal pathway under Virginia law and noted the Agricultural District Advisory Committee and staff support the request as written, because of the conservation objective and because another landowner indicated willingness to add acreage to keep the district intact. Commissioners pressed staff and county attorneys on contingency issues: whether rollback taxes could be owed, whether a county purchase commitment would change the economics, and what would happen if the General Assembly or the state later declined a park designation.

A number of commissioners voiced concern that removing the parcel earlier than the district’s planned expiration would expose the county and neighboring residents to potential interim subdivision or cluster development before a state designation could be finalized. Several commissioners asked whether a deferred effective date, a Board-level condition or a legal instrument could reduce that risk.

Commissioner Dale Jasper moved to recommend approval of the early withdrawal to the Board of Supervisors; that motion failed in a recorded voice vote. A later motion, made by Commissioner Myers and amended by Vice Chair Miller, asked that the commission forward the application to a work session so county attorneys, the conservation fund or applicant representatives and staff could answer outstanding logistical and legal questions. The amended motion to send the matter to a planning commission work session carried 8-1 (Commissioner Banks opposed).

Next steps: the item will return to a planning commission work session where staff, county attorneys and the applicant have said they will present additional detail about the purchase arrangements, rollback tax exposure, possible timing options and whether safeguards can be drafted for the Board of Supervisors’ consideration.

Why it matters: The case illustrates tradeoffs when landowner tax and gifting incentives intersect with public conservation goals. Commissioners at the hearing balanced the applicant’s stated conservation purpose against community concerns about an interim development risk if the county or state process did not complete as hoped.","The Loudoun County Planning Commission delayed a formal recommendation July 29 on an early-withdrawal request for the 1,233-acre Oak Hill Farm AFD, voting to send the item to a work session after several commissioners expressed concern about interim development risk and fiscal questions related to the sale to a conservation fund.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6492098,"Planning commission recommends renewal of six Agricultural and Forestal Districts",816,809000,1625000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5506656-623536d0a4474bbcd117d51c0d6bce61&start=809&end=1625","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5506656-623536d0a4474bbcd117d51c0d6bce61/thumbnail_809000.jpg","/articles/6492098/Virginia/Planning-commission-recommends-renewal-of-six-Agricultural-and-Forestal-Districts","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6492098-486ebfeb4678950fe556bd6b3c3ce110/orig.mp4?Expires=1770711165&Signature=kjMUNNKc5uNRsyghFJEnAqxIyyqaLwN02zoM4zpnv6C2N~8nJLuWtEnBgzvGdVYK2vgGzMWQU3l4UYphivVhI99XDs8U9hAlZkJ-VgZrq6RaM3xDVA20fEL~RMErI7CSEZkaVCs-crhaGTtoTdFENUH8vBa1Hoe0dgBzWy6CR8gcp2u3py8izuWSIy6VojZJusiQl8EeD6g4mBDDv3fqv9kMBfyHz9-owrWD6zatSbLtpDkDgwFMRTKrmLykB8moTc7iVYvKltASGEnshOsq~2z9HyeVL2pGvyiPixGaPWwRVE2w3z2X~ys-gG968NlmbrSiaqPhir3dOP0B2LpE4A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Loudoun County Planning Commission on July 29 recommended four-year renewals for six Agricultural and Forestal Districts (AFDs) covering parcels across Little River and Catoctin election districts.

Staff presentations described each district’s parcel count, acreage and renewal status. The six districts under review were: Chrysalis Vineyards/Loxley Estate (4 parcels, ~411 acres), New Hughesville (10 parcels, ~400 acres), New Mount Gilead (63 parcels, ~1,100 acres), New Rockland (5 parcels, ~600 acres), New Upperville (62 parcels, >6,000 acres) and New ALDI (22 parcels, ~1,600 acres). The Agricultural District Advisory Committee recommended renewals for all six districts and staff supported four-year renewals with conditions on minimum subdivision sizes that vary by district.

Commissioners moved through each district individually. There was no public comment on any renewal item. For each district the commission voted to recommend renewal on a four-year cycle with conditions (for example, minimum lot or cluster limitations and continued conformance with county zoning). All motions recorded carried unanimously (9-0).

Staff noted that renewal rules are governed by the county’s codified ordinances and cited the state code provisions referenced in the staff report that govern AFD review and renewal requirements. Staff also explained that applicants for parcels of 5 to 20 acres must submit renewal applications while other parcels qualify for passive renewal by right.

The Planning Commission’s recommendations now go forward to the Board of Supervisors, which will take the final action on renewals and any associated conditions.

Votes at a glance (planning commission recommendations to Board of Supervisors):
- Chrysalis Vineyards / Loxley Estate AFD — recommended renewal for 4 years (vote 9-0)
- New Hughesville AFD — recommended renewal for 4 years (vote 9-0)
- New Mount Gilead AFD — recommended renewal for 4 years (vote 9-0)
- New Rockland AFD — recommended renewal for 4 years (vote 9-0)
- New Upperville AFD — recommended renewal for 4 years (vote 9-0)
- New ALDI AFD — recommended renewal for 4 years (vote 9-0)

Community relevance: the renewals preserve agricultural and forestry land use programs that affect landowner tax assessments and subdivision rights in rural parts of the county. Planning staff will prepare the recommendations and conditions for the Board of Supervisors’ review.","Loudoun County Planning Commission voted to recommend four-year renewals for six Agricultural and Forestal Districts (AFDs) at its July 29 public hearing, with unanimous votes on each renewal after brief staff presentations and no public comment.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Purcellville officials, residents oppose Valley Commerce Center; planning commission sends application to work session

Planning commission splits on early withdrawal request for Oak Hill Farm; sends item to work session

Planning commission recommends renewal of six Agricultural and Forestal Districts