Supervisors clear the roughly one-million-square-foot project; a separate motion on Mayfair Crown Road passes 9-0
LEESBURG, Va. — June 2, 2026 — The Loudoun County Board of Supervisors voted 6-3 Tuesday to approve the Valley Commerce Center rezoning, clearing the way for a roughly one-million-square-foot industrial development on Purcellville Road just outside the town of Purcellville and ending a fight that has divided Western Loudoun for more than a year.
Chair Phyllis J. Randall (At-Large), Supervisor Juli E. Briskman (Algonkian) and Supervisor Laura A. TeKrony (Little River) cast the three dissenting votes. The six supervisors in the majority were Sylvia R. Glass (Broad Run), Vice Chair Michael R. Turner (Ashburn), Caleb A. Kershner (Catoctin), Kristen C. Umstattd (Leesburg), Koran T. Saines (Sterling) and Matthew F. Letourneau (Dulles). The vote was bipartisan, with both the majority and the three dissenters cutting across the board’s usual divisions.
After the rezoning passed, the board took up a second, separate motion offered by Randall directing county staff to consider removing the collector-road status of Mayfair Crown Road in Purcellville, addressing a traffic concern raised by Mayfair residents. Seconded by Kershner, that motion passed unanimously, 9-0.
The outcome on the rezoning turned, as many had expected, on Kershner, whose Catoctin District includes the site. Supervisors traditionally give significant weight to the position of the member representing the affected district, and opponents had spent the run-up to the meeting urging residents to press him to vote no. He sided with approval.
The Application
The application, filed as LEGI 2023-0080, rezones approximately 117 acres at 17110 Purcellville Road from the Joint Land Management Area-3 district to Planned Development – Industrial Park. The applicant, developer Chuck Kuhn, brought the project to the county after two earlier attempts to annex the property into the Town of Purcellville were unsuccessful. Plans call for roughly 986,000 square feet of flex industrial space, scaled back from larger earlier proposals.
County planning staff had recommended denial, citing inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan and concerns that the project’s land uses and development pattern conflicted with the area’s place type. The Planning Commission disagreed, voting 6-2-1 in February to recommend approval, pointing to the county’s shrinking supply of industrial land and the value of keeping growing businesses in Loudoun.
The Case for Approval
Kershner argued the property sits within the Joint Land Management Area, not a rural policy area, and is surrounded by a mix of commercial uses. A by-right housing development on the same site, he said, would likely generate more traffic and draw more water than the proposed industrial project.
He also turned attention to the Town of Purcellville, criticizing the town for declining to review the project even as it confronts a recent credit downgrade from AAA to AA and a need for an estimated $2 million to $4 million in additional annual revenue. The board noted that Purcellville has a roughly $16 million resource request pending before the county and faces significant water-infrastructure and upgrade needs. The applicant has signaled a willingness to dedicate right-of-way for turn lanes and may again approach the town about annexation, which supervisors suggested could broaden the project’s benefits to the area.
The Case Against
Briskman said she could not support the rezoning because the property does not support the intended use and the project is not envisioned in the General Plan. She argued that a decade of rezonings — particularly for data centers — has consumed land that could have gone to housing or flex industrial development, narrowing the county’s options and pushing applications like this one toward sites she considers ill-suited. While she acknowledged the need for the type of space proposed, she maintained this was the wrong location for it.
Randall pushed back on assertions that the board has been rezoning land specifically for data centers, saying most existing data centers were established by right under 2003 zoning. She announced she would hold a data center town hall to correct what she described as factually inaccurate claims about that history. Randall also disputed the characterization of the property as farmland, noting the Comprehensive Plan identifies the area for residential use, and suggested the site — near existing industrial areas such as Mayfair — would be better suited to dense, attainable housing for seniors, veterans and people with disabilities.
Background
At an April 15 public hearing that stretched roughly three hours, residents from neighborhoods including Mayfair, Wright Farms and Chestnut Hills turned out in heavy opposition. Much of the debate centered on water: the project would draw from wells rather than public water, and opponents warned of impacts to groundwater and nearby private wells in a part of the county with limited monitoring. Supporters countered that the 39 homes allowed on the property by right could consume as much water as the industrial complex, without the same centralized oversight.
The application had been scheduled for an earlier business meeting before Randall deferred it to June 2, which advocates on both sides had framed as the final opportunity for public comment before the board acted.
