Jan 15, 2025 Planning Commission

[00:00:02]

8 25.

[1.CALL TO ORDER]

OH, EXCUSE ME.

PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE.

FIRST IN A MOMENT OR SO, , I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAGS OF THE UNITED, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS.

ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY, JUSTICE FOR ALL.

ALRIGHT, ROLL CALL PLEASE.

MR. LANGLEY.

HERE.

MR. HAYES.

HERE.

MR. SIMMONS.

HERE.

MR. TUCKER? HERE.

MR. CUNNINGHAM? HERE.

MR. HARLE? HERE.

AND MR. TUSS HERE.

SEVEN MEMBERS ARE PRESENT.

ALRIGHT.

NEXT IS THE

[4.APPROVAL OF AGENDA]

ARE THERE ANY CHANGES OR CORRECTIONS THAT NEED TO BE MADE TO THE AGENDA AT THIS TIME? STAFF HAS NO CHANGES.

MR. CHAIR.

ANY BOARD? ALRIGHT, SO MOVED.

SECOND.

SECOND.

ALRIGHT.

ROLL CALL.

MR. SIMMONS.

YES.

MR. CUNNINGHAM? AYE.

MR. LANGLEY AYE.

MR. TUCKER? YES.

MR. HAYES? YES.

MR. HARLE? YES.

AND MR. TUS? YES.

SEVEN MEMBERS PRESENT.

VOTING ON.

ALRIGHT.

Y'ALL WERE

[5.APPROVAL OF MINUTES]

REGULAR MEETING MINUTES.

ARE THERE ANY CORRECTIONS THAT NEED TO BE MADE TO THAT? IF NOT, I'LL ACCEPT A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES.

SO MOVE.

SECOND.

SECOND.

ALRIGHT.

MOTION'S BEEN MOVED.

AND SECOND ROLL CALL PLEASE.

MR. HAYES? YES.

MR. LANGLEY? YES.

MR. TUCKER? YES.

MR. HARVILLE? YES.

MR. CUNNINGHAM? AYE.

MR. TUS? YES.

AND MR. SIMMONS? YES.

ALL MEMBERS PRESENT ION.

ALRIGHT.

NEXT

[6.ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN FOR 2025]

I KNOW EVERYBODY'S GONNA BE HAPPY TO SEE ME STEP DOWN AND YES.

BRING IN SOME FRESH BLOOD.

YES.

UH, I KNOW WE KIND OF GO IN ORDER AND I CAN'T REMEMBER IT.

IS IT MR. HARWELL? IT'S MR. HARWELL.

MR. TURNER.

NORMALLY AT THIS TIME, MR. CHAIR, YOU TURN IT OVER TO MR. BASSETT AND HE DOES DO WELL.

I'LL LET MR. BASSETT DO IT THEN.

HOW ABOUT THAT? , TAKE IT AWAY, MR. BASSETT.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU MR. CHAIR.

A AS THE CHAIR INDICATED THIS TIME FOR, UM, ELECTING A CHAIR PERSON FOR OUR CALENDAR YEAR, UH, 2025.

DO WE HAVE NOMINATIONS FOR A CHAIR? I NOMINATE MR. HARVE.

I'LL SECOND THAT.

OKAY.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR MR. HAR FOR CHAIR FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2025.

OKAY.

NOW WE WILL CALL FOR THE VOTE.

MR. CUNNINGHAM.

AYE.

MR. TUCKER? YES.

MR. LANGLEY? AYE.

MR. SIMMONS? YES.

MR. HAYES? YES.

MR. HARVILLE VOS? YES.

OKAY.

CONGRATULATIONS MR. HARVILLE, TO YOU AND MR. TUS.

I'M SORRY.

I'LL TURN THE MEETING OVER TO YOU, MR. HARVILLE.

CONGRATULATIONS, .

I WAS GONNA SAY THAT I WASN'T HAPPY TO SEE MR. TIMMA GO , BUT NEVERTHELESS, WE HAVE TO MOVE ON.

WE UNDERSTAND.

BUT HE GONE .

I, I SEE.

I HAVE A GOOD SUPPORTER AND A GOOD LEADER TO LEAD ME THROUGH THIS, MR. TUCKER.

THANK YOU, SIR.

NICK

[7.ELECTION OF VICE CHAIRMAN FOR 2025]

LARRY, IT'S MR. HAYES.

GENTLEMEN, IT'S MR. HAYES.

IS THE RESOLUTION NEED TO BE READ AS PRESENTED TO US? I'M SORRY.

I MEAN, IF I'M MAKING A MOTION, IT'S NOT NECESSARY.

OKAY.

MR. GURLEY MIGHT LIKE YOU TO DO IT, BUT, UH, MR. GURLEY, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S OKAY.

, IT'S GONNA BE, I'M GONNA PUT IT IN THE MINUTES ANYWAY.

OH, OKAY.

ALRIGHT.

WELL, I, I KNOW NATE.

UH, MR. SAM HAYES AS THE, UH, VICE CHAIR.

I SECOND MR. CUNNINGHAM? AYE.

MR. SIMMONS? YES.

MR. TUCKER? YES.

MR. LANGLEY? AYE.

MR. TUS AYE.

MR. HAYES? YES.

AND MR. HAR AYE.

SEVEN MEMBERS PRESENT VOTING.

AYE.

LOOKS LIKE THE NEXT ON, ON THE, THE RESOLUTION GOING MOVE FORWARD, RIGHT? YES.

OKAY.

[8.DETERMINATION OF MEETING SCHEDULE FOR 2025]

I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THAT.

UM, MR. CHAIRMAN, I, GOING BACK, I GUESS I STARTED THIS BALL ROLLING LAST MONTH AND YOU, YOU ALL THE, THE LANGUAGE IN HERE WAS INTENDED TO COVER THE CONVERSATION THAT WE DISCUSSED LAST MONTH, RIGHT? I THINK IT DOES.

MR. HAYES? UM,

[00:05:01]

YES.

YES.

SO MY QUESTION WAS, AND, AND I I'M FINE WITH IT BY THE WAY, BUT, AND I APPRECIATE YOU DOING THAT FROM JUST MY PERSONAL OPINION.

UM, THIS HOPEFULLY IT WON'T EVEN COME UP.

HOPEFULLY IT WON'T EVEN BE AN ISSUE.

BUT THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD ON IT IS, IS DID YOU, UH, WERE YOU, WERE YOU IN, WERE YOU INTENTIONAL WITH THE SEVEN DAYS? I, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, DOES IT HAVE TO BE AS MUCH AS SEVEN DAYS? I'M THINKING MORE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, FOLKS THAT HAVE TO COME TO THESE THINGS.

ARE THEY GONNA, IS IT BETTER FOR THEM TO COME THE NEXT DAY? I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE SCHEDULING OF THE ROOM.

YOU KNOW, I JUST, I WAS JUST CURIOUS ABOUT THE SPECIFICS AROUND THE ONE WEEK.

THAT'S ALL.

AND I MEAN, THERE'S NO STATUTORY REQUIREMENT, BUT, UM, IT DOES MAKE IT EASIER FOR, FROM PLANNING, FROM ROOM PLANNING, THAT, THAT TYPE OF THING.

AND CAN'T REALLY SPEAK FOR THE PUBLIC, BUT MAYBE MORE CONVENIENT FOR THE PUBLIC.

BUT, UM, LIKE I SAID, I'M FINE WITH, I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF IT WAS ANYTHING, YOU KNOW, INTENTION WAS, WAS THERE ANY INTENTIONALITY IN THAT? THAT'S ALL.

SO MR. MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY RESPOND TO, AND MM-HMM .

MY CELL PHONE IS NOT PICKING UP THE INTERNET IN HERE, BUT THERE IS A PROVISION IN THE VIRGINIA CODE THAT ADDRESSES THAT.

AND I CAN'T REMEMBER WHETHER IT SAYS TO PUT IN THERE TO BE CONTINUED OR WHETHER IT SAYS SEVEN DAYS.

I'M I RIGHT.

I DON'T REMEMBER.

AND MY CELL PHONE'S NOT COOPERATING.

I, I DID TAKE NOTE THAT THERE'S A BILL IN THIS GENERAL, IN THIS, UH, GENERAL ASSEMBLY, IF I READ IT CORRECTLY, THAT ALLOWS FOR COMMISSION MEETINGS TO BE, UH, COMPLETELY VIRTUAL.

IF IT GETS PASSED, WE CAN ALL DO IT IN OUR PAJAMAS OR SOMETHING, I GUESS.

YEAH.

, I, I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THAT MYSELF PERSONALLY, OTHER THAN SITUATIONAL, YOU KNOW, SOMEONE'S MAYBE GOT THE FLU OR SOMETHING, BUT THEY STILL WANT TO PARTICIPATE.

BUT I THOUGHT THAT BILL WAS KIND OF INTERESTING.

ALRIGHT.

IS IT NECESSARY TO SAY THIS RESOLUTION OR JUST SAY, I MAKE A MOTION.

WE PASS THE RESOLUTION PRESENTED TO US.

THAT'S, THAT'S FINE WITH THE REGULAR MEETING DATES AS PRESENTED ON THE RESOLUTION, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

THAT'S FINE.

THAT'S GOOD.

ALRIGHT.

THAT'S MY MOTION.

SECOND, MR. TUCKER? YES.

MR. CUNNINGHAM? AYE.

MR. TUS? AYE.

MR. SIMMONS? YES.

MR. LANGLEY? AYE.

MR. HAYES? YES.

AND MR. HARPER? YES.

SEVEN MEMBERS PRESENT VOTING.

AYE.

AND JUST MR. CHAIR, JUST A LEGAL, LEGAL THING IS THAT, UM, I KNOW MR. LEY KNOWS THIS, THAT THIS, THIS SCHEDULE HAS TO BE PUBLISHED IN NEWSPAPER AT A MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS BEFORE THE FEBRUARY MEETING.

SO THE VIRGINIA CODE SAYS THANK YOU.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

NEXT, UM, I'M GONNA OPEN THE, UM, SESSION WITH, ON, UH, FOR THE CITIZEN'S COMMENTS.

NO, MR. CHAIR.

THERE IS NO ONE.

OKAY.

THEN WE'LL CLOSE THAT SECTION AND WE'LL MOVE ON

[10.PLAT REVIEW]

UM, MR. BASSETT? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

UH, AS WE'VE DISCUSSED AT PLA MEET PAST MEETINGS WHERE WE'VE HAD A PLAT REVIEW ON THE AGENDA, UM, THIS IS THE PLAT REVIEW, UM, FOR YOU ALL.

UH, TO GO OVER THE, UH, THE SUBJECT SUBDIVISION OF THIS PROPERTY.

UH, IT'S TAX MAP PARCEL 66 DASH TWO.

YOU CAN SEE THEY HAVE DIVIDED THE PROPERTY INTO, UH, FOUR DIFFERENT, UH, PARCELS.

ONE OF THE PARCELS BEING THE REMAINDER OF THE, UH, PARENT TRACK.

AGAIN, TAX MAP PARCEL 66 DASH TWO.

THE, UH, SUBDIVISION ITSELF IS A BY RIGHT DIVISION, MEANING THAT THEY MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS FOR DIVIDING A PARCEL UNDER ITS CURRENT ZONING OF A TWO AGRICULTURAL GENERAL.

UM, GIVEN THE MAXIMUM DENSITY PROVISION IN THE A TWO ZONING DISTRICT, UM, GIVEN THE ACREAGE OF THE PROPERTY, THEY ARE ALLOWED, UH, TO DIVIDE THE PROPERTY INTO THESE FOUR PARCELS.

UM, SO LONG AS EACH PARCEL HAS A MINIMUM OF THREE ACRES AND, UH, 400 FEET OF ROAD FRONTAGE AT THE BUILDING SETBACK LINE, WHICH ALL THESE PARCELS DO.

UM, SO AGAIN, IT IS A BUYRIGHT DIVISION AND THEY DO MEET ALL THE, UH, ZONING REQUIREMENTS AND SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS TYPE OF DIVISION OF PROPERTY.

[00:10:09]

UH, ANY COMMENTS YOU MAY HAVE? AGAIN, UM, IT, IT IS THE BUYRIGHT DIVISION OF THE PROPERTY.

YOU SAID THREE.

SO IS IT, IS IT A IT'S NOT A FAMILY, IS IT FAMILY SUBDIVISION? IS IT, NO, IT'S NOT A FAMILY DIVISION.

SO I THOUGHT IT WAS FIVE, NOT THREE.

SO HOW CAN IT, HOW CAN THAT BE? I, I'M NOT NO, I THOUGHT IT WAS LIKE TWO FIVES, TWO 20 AND THEN THE REMAINDER? NO, WE HAVE THE MAXIMUM DENSITY PROVISION THAT'S BASED ON OH, OKAY.

UM, WHAT WE TR ALWAYS TRADITIONALLY HAD THAT THE MAXIMUM DENSITY PROVISION WAS BASED ON, ORIGINALLY THE COUNTY WOULD ALLOW TWO THREE ACRE DIVISIONS, AND THEN THE REST OF THE DIVISIONS HAD TO BE 20 ACRES IN SIZE.

SO THE MAXIMUM DENSITY, AGAIN, PROVISION OF IN THE A TWO ZONING DISTRICT WAS BASED ON THAT TRADITIONAL, UH, DENSITY THAT WE ALLOWED IN THE COUNTY.

SO IF YOU HAVE 26 ACRES, YOU CAN HAVE FOUR, UM, THREE, THREE DIVISIONS.

IF YOU HAVE 48 ACRES, YOU CAN HAVE FOUR DIVISIONS.

UM, SO LONG AS EACH DIVISION IS THREE, A MINIMUM OF THREE ACRES SIZE.

SO, SO WHERE, WHERE AM I GETTING THE FIVE FROM? IS THAT JUST IF YOU HAD FIVE, YOU WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A MINIMUM OF 148 ACRES.

GOTCHA.

GOTCHA.

SO ONCE YOU GET OVER 48 ACRES FOR EVERY PARCEL THEREAFTER, YOU HAVE TO HAVE AT LEAST A HUNDRED ACRES OKAY.

FOR EACH PARCEL OVER THE 48 ACRES.

SO, SO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, I, I'M GUESSING NOBODY GOT CALLED ABOUT THIS.

NO, I GOT CALLED.

SO IT WAS RIGHT DOWN THE ROAD FROM ME.

BUT, UM, MY, MY MY MY POINT I'D LIKE TO MAKE HERE IS, AND I MENTIONED THIS TO MARK BEFORE THE MEETING, IT'S REALLY NO, TO ME, THERE'S NO VALUE IN US SEEING THIS.

THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN RECOMMEND DECIDE ON.

MARK REMINDED ME THAT WAS JUST KIND OF, I WOULD SAY, IN MY OPINION, OUR KING LANGUAGE IN THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, I WOULD LIKE US TO CONSIDER ASKING THEM TO CLEAN THAT UP SO WE DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT.

I MEAN, YOU, HAMPTON WOULDN'T HAVE TO COME HERE.

YOU KNOW, IT, IT'S, I MEAN, IT'S, IT JUST IS WHAT IT IS.

RIGHT? RIGHT.

I I, I SAID THE SAME THING MONTHS AGO WHEN WE HAD ONE OF THESE THAT IT, I MEAN, IT'S JUST LISTENING IS ALL IT AMOUNTS TO, UH, AND IF IT'S A BUY RIGHT AND EVERYTHING FALLS IN LINE, I DON'T FEEL LIKE IT REALLY NEEDS TO COME HERE.

SO, MR. CHAIRMAN, THAT'S JUST MY RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE'VE CONSIDER ASKING THEM TO JUST CLEAN THAT UP.

SO JUST DON'T HAVE TO BOTHER WITH IT.

I MEAN, IN THIS CASE IT WAS KIND OF NICE.

I KNEW ABOUT IT, BUT THEN I HAD TO ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS.

BUT REALLY IT'S NOT ADDING ANY VALUE.

IS THAT DOABLE? YES, WE CAN WORK ON THAT.

WE'LL WORK ON THAT.

OKAY.

IS THERE ANY FURTHER STEPS IN THIS PROCESS? DO WE NEED TO, WE NEED TO VOTE ON IT? NO.

NO, THAT'S ALL.

MR. CHAIR.

OKAY.

THANK YOU, SIR.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

YOU MAY, I KNOW YOU MAY WANT TO STEP THERE, BUT ANYWAY, WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO

[11.PUBLIC HEARING]

UM, AT THIS POINT, I THINK I NEED TO READ THE PUBLIC HEARING STATEMENT.

SEE YOU, SIR.

TAKE CARE.

HOW YOU GONNA LEAVE US, SIR? I WILL.

I MEAN, I STAY, YEAH, THAT WASN'T IN THE BYLAWS.

I THINK THEY MISSED THAT LANGUAGE.

OKAY.

SO I'M GONNA READ THE PUBLIC HEARING STATEMENT.

THIS PUBLIC HEARING COMMENT TIME IS PROVIDED FOR CITIZENS TO HAVE THEIR VIEWS HEARD.

YOUR COMMENTS DURING THIS TIME MUST BE CONFINED TO THE MATTER OR CASE THAT IS LISTED ON THE AGENDA, AND THEY SHOULD NOT BE CUMULATIVE OR REPETITIVE.

YOU ARE ASKED TO ADDRESS THIS PERMISSION WITH CHORAL LOUD, DISRUPTIVE, OR AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR TO INCLUDE OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE SHALL BE AVOIDED.

ALSO, AVOID WORDS OR ACTS TENDING TO EVOKE VIOLENCE OR ARE DEEMED TO BE A BREACH OF THE PEACE.

PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS TIME IS NOT INTENDED TO BE A QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD OR A TIME FOR DIALOGUE WITH THE COMMISSION MEMBERS OR STAFF, MR. PASTOR.

OKAY.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

AS YOU INDICATED, UH, THIS IS REZONING CASE P DASH 25 DASH TWO.

UH, THE APPLICANTS ARE HERE THIS EVENING TO REPRESENT, UH, THE CASE.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THEM AFTER OUR STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION, UH, PROPERTY LOCATION.

AS YOU CAN

[00:15:01]

UM, AND ALL THE ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS THAT WE SENT, UH, ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER LETTERS OUT TO ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN THE HATCHED AREA, UH, WITH THE, UH, PINKUS COLORING THERE.

UH, BASICALLY, UH, THE PROPERTIES, UH, SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR THE REZONING THIS EVENING.

UH, ONE OF THE PROPERTIES, UH, THE PROPERTY OFF OF, UM, INWOOD AVENUE, UH, IS ADJACENT TO, UH, COMMERCIAL BUSINESS.

AND IT'S ALSO, UH, ZONED COMMERCIAL.

THE REMAINDER OF THE PROPERTIES ARE CURRENTLY ZONED R ONE RESIDENTIAL LIMITED, AND THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE ALL OF THE, AGAIN, PROPERTIES HIGHLIGHTED IN THE GREEN COLOR ON THE, ON THE MAP, UH, FROM R ONE AND C TWO, UH, BUSINESS GENERAL, UH, TO THE RU RESIDENTIAL URBAN ZONING CLASSIFICATION.

UH, AS YOU ALL I KNOW, WE'RE PROBABLY WELL AWARE, THE RU ZONING CLASSIFICATION DOES ALLOW FOR, UH, NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS, UH, TO BE LOCATED ON WHAT WOULD BE BASICALLY TWO OF THE EXISTING LOTS, UM, ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, UM, WHICH WOULD BRING THOSE, IF TWO LOTS ARE COMBINED, YOU WOULD GET A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT MINIMUM, UH, WITH A LOT WIDTH OF OF 50 FEET.

UH, THE PROPOSED, UH, PROPERTY, UM, IN PROPOSED DWELLINGS WOULD BE SERVED BY PUBLIC WATER AND SEWER FROM THE DEWIN COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY.

UM, IN THE RECENT PAST, THERE HAVE BEEN, UH, FIVE PREVIOUS AND SIMILAR REZONING CASES, UM, THAT YOU ALL HAVE, UM, RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.

UH, SINCE THE RESIDENTIAL URBAN ZONING CLASSIFICATION, UH, WAS MADE PART OF THE, THE ZONING ORDINANCE, UM, ALLOWING PEOPLE AGAIN TO DEVELOP, UH, AT LEAST, UH, IF YOU HAD TWO LOTS, YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO DEVELOP THOSE, COMBINE THOSE TWO LOTS, AND DEVELOP THOSE FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING LOT.

AGAIN, JUST WANTED TO NOTE THAT A MAJORITY OF THE EXISTING HOMES IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD ARE SITUATED ACROSS PROPERTY LINES AND THE REMAINING VACANT LOTS DO NOT ACCOMMODATE FURTHER DEVELOPMENT ON THEIR OWN INDIVIDUALLY.

THE RESIDENTIAL URBAN ZONING CLASSIFICATION WAS ADOPTED WITH AN INTENT OF ADDRESSING THESE TYPE OF NONCONFORMITIES AND ISSUES IN THIS GENERAL AREA.

THE SUBJECT REZONING REQUEST WILL ALLOW A NEW DWELLING THAT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE SIZE AND CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT.

AS YOU CAN SEE, IF LOOKING AT THE, UH, LOCATION MAP, UH, UM, OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF THE EXISTING HOMES ARE LOCATED ON, UH, TWO, TWO OF THE 25 BY 100 LOTS.

SO AGAIN, WE FEEL LIKE IT, IT DEFINITELY FITS IN WITH THE SIZE AND CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT.

UH, THE PROPERTY UNDER REVIEW AND THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN IS WHAT WE CALL LOCATED IN THE TOWN CENTER AREA, AND THE GENERAL AREAS EXPECTED TO ACCOMMODATE FUTURE MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.

UM, LOOKING AT THE PURPOSE FOR THE RESIDENTIAL URBAN ZONING DISTRICT, IT STATES THAT IN GENERAL, THE RESIDENTIAL URBAN ZONING DISTRICT ALLOWS SMALLER LOT SIZES AND SETBACKS THAN THE COUNTY'S OTHER RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS GIVING AREA ZONED ARE RU A MORE URBAN FEEL.

THE DISTRICT REGULATIONS ARE DESIGNED TO REFLECT THE URBAN NATURE OF SUCH NEIGHBORHOODS AS CHARACTERIZED BY DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS, SITUATED ON SMALL LOTS WITH NARROW YARDS AND MODEST SETBACKS.

THE DISTRICT REGULATIONS ARE INTENDED TO ENCOURAGE CONTINUED IMPROVEMENT AND EFFICIENT USE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS AND THEIR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WHILE ENSURING THAT INFILL DEVELOPMENT SUCH AS WHICH IS PROPOSED HERE, WILL BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE ESTABLISHED CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT.

WE FEEL LIKE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS

[00:20:01]

AS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE TOWN CENTER AREA, WHICH ALLOWS FOR SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED AND ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR THIS GENERAL AREA.

WITH THE PROPERTY BEING LOCATED IN THE EXISTING WEST PETERSBURG NEIGHBORHOOD AND HAVING ACCESS TO THE DIMITY COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM, THIS GENERAL AREA MAY BE CONSIDERED A RESIDENTIAL GROWTH CENTER.

UM, LOOKING AT PUBLIC UTILITIES, THE SCHOOLS, UH, PUBLIC SAFETY, WHEN WE DISCUSSED THIS AT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING, UM, THERE WERE NO, UH, IMPACTS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP, UM, THAT, UH, WOULD BE NOTED AS PART OF THE, UM, PROPOSED REZONING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS EVENING.

TRANSPORTATION, UH, TRANS NO TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS, UH, WERE NOTED AS PART OF THE REZONING.

OF COURSE, THEY WILL REQUIRE, UH, RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAY ENTRANCES THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE, UH, APPROVED BY VDOT AT TIME OF BUILDING PERMIT.

STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THIS EVENING IS FOR APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST TO REZONE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, GIVEN THAT THE REQUESTED ZONING CLASSIFICATION RESIDENTIAL URBAN IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING ZONING PATTERN IN SURROUNDING LAND USES.

ADDITIONALLY, THE R RU ZONING DISTRICT WAS CREATED TO ACCOMMODATE FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE EXISTING LOTS WITHIN THE URBAN AREA, INCLUDING THE WEST PETERSBURG NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE REQUESTED ZONING CLASSIFICATION RESIDENTIAL URBAN RU CONFORMS TO THE UNDERLYING USES RECOMMENDED FOR THIS GENERAL AREA SET FORTH IN THE TOWN CENTER AREA OF THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE AS PART OF OUR PRESENTATION.

MS. CHAIR, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. PASSER, IF YOU DON'T MIND? UH, YES.

MR. IFF, IS THIS GOING TO BE THE LAST OF THIS? I MEAN, ARE THERE MANY MORE? LOTS THAT WILL BE, I, THERE'S ACTUALLY AN INDIVIDUAL WHO IS REQUESTED, UH, TO, UH, COMPLETE A ZONING APPLICATION AND REZONE, UM, SOME ADDITIONAL LOTS.

UH, OKAY.

SO THERE'S MORE TO COME ON YES.

IN THIS AREA? YES.

AND JUST HOW FAR DOES THAT, UH, URBAN AREA, THE ARE U AREA ENCOMPASS? IS IT JUST WEST PETERBURG OR IS IT NO, THERE ARE ADJOINING NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE, UM, IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WE, WE'VE RECOMMENDED FOR THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT.

OKAY.

OFF OF, UH, FRONT ROAD, UH, SIMMONS AVENUE.

SO THERE ARE OTHER AREAS OUTSIDE OF THIS THAT WERE RECOMMENDED FOR THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT IS, UM, IS THIS AN AREA THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DURING, AT ONE TIME AND WE STARTED IT AND THEN THEY DIDN'T WANNA YES.

YES.

AS A BLANKET? YEAH, WE, WE DID, WE HAD MEETINGS WITH, IN THE WEST PETERSBURG COMMUNITY AND, UM, THE COMMUNITY INDICATED TO THE, TO THEIR, UM, BOARD MEMBER WHOSE DISTRICT THIS IS, THAT THEY DID NOT WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A, A BLANKET REZONING OF, OF THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO WE'LL JUST COME BACK TO A PIECEMEAL YES, BUT I WILL, HOW OLD IS THE INFRASTRUCTURE UP THERE IN THAT AREA? AND ARE WE SURE THIS TYPE DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO WATER AND SEWER'S GONNA BE ABLE TO CAPABLE TO THE HAMLET? I CAN'T ANSWER YOUR QUE.

I CAN, WE WILL FIND OUT, UM, AND REPORT BACK TO YOU THE AGE OF THAT INFRASTRUCTURE, SOME OF THAT IN THE PAST WHEN WE, UM, GOT A GRANT TO DO, UH, UTILITY AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS IN THAT AREA MM-HMM .

WAS UPGRADED.

I DON'T KNOW, UM, TO THE, YOU KNOW, EXTENT IF IT WAS THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD OR JUST A PORTION OF IT, UM, THAT WAS UPGRADED.

BUT THERE WAS WORK DONE IN THE LATE NINETIES, EARLY TWO THOUSANDS UPGRADING SOME OF THE UTILITIES IN THE AREA.

OKAY.

UM, SECOND PART OF THAT, WHENEVER WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT AT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING, WHEN WE THESE REZONINGS COME UP FOR DISCUSSION, UH, THE WATER AUTHORITY HAS NEVER RAISED ANY CONCERNS ABOUT THE WATER OR SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE

[00:25:01]

WELL, TO MR. LAND'S POINT, UM, I GUESS ONE WAY I LOOK AT THAT IS IN THEORY, YOU COULD HAVE A LOT MORE HOMES THERE AND ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON HERE, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE LESS, I MEAN, THERE ARE 14 LOTS HERE.

INITIALLY I THOUGHT THERE WERE, THIS WAS GONNA BE PLANNED FOR FOUR, BUT THAT MAY NOT BE RIGHT.

IS IT, IS IT A PLAN FOR MORE THAN FOUR OR, UM, THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE TO OKAY, THAT'S FINE.

YEAH.

BUT I MEAN, BACK TO THE POINT THOUGH.

I MEAN, IN THEORY YOU COULD JUST, YOU KNOW, PUT A WHOLE BUNCH OF STUFF THERE, BUT THERE NEVER HAVE BEEN ANY CONCERNS RAISED BY THE WATER AUTHORITY WHEN DISCUSSING THE POTENTIAL FOR DEVELOPMENT IN THIS AREA.

NO.

OBJECTION.

I WOULD THINK THAT THE WATER AUTHORITY I WOULD ALREADY HAVE THE MAIN ALREADY IN PLACE FOR RIGHT, YEAH.

TAP INTO IT.

RIGHT.

EXACTLY.

AND THEY DO REVIEW THIS WHEN YOU GET 'EM, RIGHT? YES.

WE TALK ABOUT 'EM AT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETINGS.

YEAH.

YES.

OKAY.

AND THEY ALSO, UH, WHEN THEY FILE FOR A BUILDING PERMIT, THEY HAVE TO PRESENT THE WATER AND SEWER AVAILABILITY LETTER.

OKAY.

FROM THE AUTHORITY.

SO, MR. BASSETT, I SEE A COUPLE OF THOSE, UH, ME BEING COLORBLIND AND ALL, THEY LOOK YELLING TO ME A LITTLE SQUARES THAT, THAT STAND OUT.

OKAY.

UH, YEP.

SO IF, IF, IF THIS, I SEE ONE BIG SQUARE DOWN ON THE LEFT OR A RECTANGLE, AND I SEE A BIGGER SQUARE UP THE TOP RIGHT IS ALL THIS WILL, WILL WHAT WE DO IN CHANGE AND THERE'LL ONLY BE ONE HOUSE ON EACH ONE OF THOSE.

THAT'S WHAT I INDICATED TO MR. HAYES.

THE APPLICANT'S GONNA HAVE TO ANSWER THAT.

I'M, I'M NOT ALRIGHT.

POSITIVE ABOUT THEIR DEVELOPMENT OKAY.

PROPOSAL THAT THEY'RE CONSIDERING.

AND, AND IF IT IS CHANGED OR IF WE VOTE ON THIS, HOW DO WE MAKE SURE IT'S DONE THE WAY, HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S ONE HOUSE ON IT AND NOT FIVE WHO'S GOING TO, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? I MEAN, WELL, HOW ARE WE GONNA MAKE SURE THAT THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN ONE WAY? WOULD IS THAT THE MOST YOU COULD GET IS ONE HOME PER TWO LOTS? SO THE, MY I I BELIEVE THERE'S 14 LOTS, SO I THINK THE MOST YOU COULD GET WOULD BE SEVEN.

OKAY.

INDIVIDUAL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

SO DO WE HAVE, UH, THE APPLICANTS TO HAVE TO SAY SOMETHING, SPEAK TO YOU, MR. BASSETT.

NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE, SIR.

TO, AND, AND THIS IS NICK HILL.

NICK HILL.

WE NEED YOUR ADDRESS AS WELL.

SORRY? WE NEED YOUR ADDRESS.

ADDRESS.

YES.

UM, SO, UH, LIKE MY MAILING ADDRESS OR LIVING ADDRESS, IT'S, UH, 1 0 8 3 7 CHERRY HILL DRIVE, GLEN ALLEN, VIRGINIA 2 3 0 5 9.

OKAY.

YOU? AND SO, UH, WHEN IT COMES TO THE QUESTIONS THAT, UH, YOU GUYS HAVE HAD MR. BUTCH, UM, WITH THE TWO BIGGER SQUARES, SO WITH THE ONE ON THE, UH, ON THE BOTTOM LEFT, THERE'S ACTUALLY SIX LOTS THERE ON TWO OF THE LOTS IN THE MIDDLE.

THERE'S A HOUSE ALREADY SITTING THERE.

AND THEN THERE'S TWO LOTS ON THE RIGHT SIDE AND TWO LOTS ON THE RIGHT, ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE HOUSE, WHICH WE'RE PLANNING TO COMBINE AND, UH, DO SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

THE ONE'S IN THE, UH, IN THE MIDDLE OF THE, OF THE DIAGRAM, THERE'S A HOUSE THERE CURRENTLY.

AND THEN, UM, THE, THE BIGGER SQUARE ON THE TOP RIGHT THERE, WE'RE PLANNING TO DO, UH, TWO, TWO HOMES OVER THERE.

AND, AND I DIDN'T EXACTLY UNDERSTAND THE FIRST ONE.

YOU SAID THERE'S ALREADY ONE HOUSE IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT RECTANGLE.

CORRECT.

AND YOU'RE GONNA PUT ONE ON EITHER SIDE OF THAT? CORRECT.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

I'M JUST CURIOUS, WHY DO YOU HAVE TO TOUCH THE ONE IN THE MIDDLE THEN? SO, UM, SO, SO THEY ARE BOTH SEPARATE LOTS.

WE JUST WANTED TO COMBINE THOSE BOTH AND THEN MAKE IT ONE LOT, EVEN IF THERE IS A HOUSE ON IT.

OKAY.

I BUT YOU, BUT YOU OWN, YOU OWN THAT HOUSE.

YES.

OWNED EVERYTHING.

YEAH.

I GOT, WE OWN ALL THOSE LOTS.

SO TO BE CLEAR, THE TWO SMALLER RECTANGLES, UM, ONE HOUSE, EACH OF THOSE, THERE'S ALREADY A HOUSE ON ONE OF THEM.

I, I GOTCHA.

YES.

SO TWO, THREE, LOOKS LIKE, UH, FIVE NEW HOMES.

FIVE NEW.

RIGHT.

OKAY.

[00:30:01]

THANK YOU.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

YEAH.

YEAH.

THAT'S ALL.

ANY MORE QUESTIONS? THANK YOU, SIR.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

I I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SHARE ONE ITEM RELATED TO WHAT YOU ASKED HIM ABOUT THE EXISTING HOMES.

UM, HE TOUCHED ON THAT AND WE TALKED ABOUT THAT WITH HIM AS A STAFF.

UM, THEY DID WANT TO INCLUDE THOSE, WHICH IS GREAT.

UM, BECAUSE IN THE LONG RUN IT'LL PREVENT THOSE FROM BEING NON-CONFORMING, THE EXISTING HOMES.

IT WOULD MAKE THEM MORE CONFORMING, UM, BY HAVING THOSE REZONED THIS EVENING AS WELL.

THANK YOU.

MR. BASSETT.

IS ANYBODY READY FOR OUR RECOMMENDATION? YOU GOTTA HAVE CITIZEN COMMENTS OF, I'M SORRY.

PUBLIC HEARING.

I'M, I'M SORRY.

UH, UH, CITIZEN'S COMMENTS OR YOU DID THE PUBLIC HEARING STATEMENT ALREADY, RIGHT? I HAVE JUST CALL WHOEVER'S.

DO WE HAVE ANY CITIZENS THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, COME UP AND SPEAK ON THIS MATTER? NO.

NO.

MR. CHAIR? WE DO NOT.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

SO NOW WE'RE READY FOR, UM, A RECOMMENDATION.

ALL RIGHT.

I'LL GIVE YOU ONE.

BE IT RESOLVED THAT IN ORDER TO ASSURE COMPLIANCE WITH VIRGINIA CODE SECTION 15.2 DASH 2 2 8 6 A SEVEN.

IT IS STATED THAT THE PUBLIC PURPOSE FOR WHICH THIS RESOLUTION IS INITIATED IS TO FULFILL THE REQUIREMENTS OF PUBLIC NECESSITY, CONVENIENCE, GENERAL WELFARE, AND GOOD ZONING PRACTICE.

I MOVE THAT REZONING P DASH 25 DASH TWO BE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.

SECOND, MR. SIMMONS? YES.

MR. CUNNINGHAM? AYE.

MR. LANGLEY? YES.

MR. TUCKER? YES.

MR. TUS? AYE.

MR. HAYES? YES.

AND MR. HARVILLE? YES.

SEVEN MINUTES PRESENT.

VOTING IP 25 DASH TWO HAS BEEN RECOMMENDED TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WITH AN APPROVAL.

THANK YOU, SIR.

WE NOW MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM

[13.NEW BUSINESS]

MR. PASS IT.

UH, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR.

UM, AT OUR DECEMBER MEETING, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU RECALL, BUT WE HAD TALKED TO YOU ABOUT, UH, MR. CULBERT HAD, UM, DRAFTED A, UH, ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, UH, FOR, UM, SELF STORAGE FACILITIES.

UM, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT IN THE PAST WITH YOU ALL.

AND AGAIN, AT YOUR DECEMBER MEETING, WE INDICATED THAT, UH, WE WOULD BRING YOU THAT DRAFT ORDINANCE.

UM, SO THAT WAS INCLUDED, UM, IN YOUR AGENDA PACKET AND MR. CULVER'S, UH, HERE THIS EVENING, JUST TO GENERALLY PRESENT THAT TO YOU ALL AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU ALL MAY HAVE RELATED TO THAT.

THANK YOU.

MR. CHAIR.

PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS, UM, LIKE MR. BASSETT SAID, WE HAD CONVERSATIONS AROUND THE USE REGARDING A MINI STORAGE, SELF STORAGE FACILITY.

UM, FOR SOME BACKGROUND CURRENTLY THE COUNTY ALLOWS THESE THROUGH A, UH, ZONING INTERPRETATION UNDER THE USE WHOLESALE BUSINESS AND STORAGE WAREHOUSES, UM, WHICH IS BUYRIGHT AND, UH, M1 AND AND B TWO REQUIRES A CUP.

UM, WHAT WE HAVE, WHAT STAFF HAS DONE, IS WE HAVE DEVELOPED A NEW USE TITLED THE SELF STORAGE FACILITY.

UM, IT'S DEFINED AS A BUILDING OR GROUP OF BUILDINGS DIVIDED INTO SEPARATE COMPARTMENTS DESIGNED TO PROVIDE RENTAL STORAGE SPACE.

EACH STORAGE SPACE SHALL BE ENCLOSED BY WALLS AND CEILING AND MAY HAVE A SEPARATE ENTRANCE FOR LOADING AND UNLOADING OF STORED GOODS AND SHALL NOT BE PREFABRICATED STRUCTURES ARRANGED ON A LOT THE CONDUCT OF SALES BUSINESS OR OTHER, ANY OTHER ACTIVITY WITHIN THE INDIVIDUAL STORAGE UNITS OTHER THAN STORAGE SHALL BE PROHIBITED.

UM, WE HAVE PROPOSED, UH, THIS USE IN BOTH B TWO AND B ONE, BOTH REQUIRING A CUP.

UM, I'M HERE TO HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, DISCUSSION ON THIS.

UM, WE FEEL THIS ADDS MORE CLARITY, UM, TO THE TOPIC SINCE WE HAVE, UM, YOU ALL HAVE HAD A CASE REGARDING THIS IN THE LAST YEAR.

UM, IT IS A VERY POPULAR USE AS PEOPLE, UM, HAVE STARTED TO DEVELOP THESE MORE

[00:35:01]

SO HAVING SOMETHING MORE CLEAR IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE, UM, A CLEAR DEFINITION, CLEAR USE, UM, WE FEEL THIS IS A GOOD, GOOD PATH FORWARD.

SO OF COURSE THIS IS ONLY CONDITIONAL USE IN WHAT AGAIN? UH, IT'S ONLY ALLOWED BY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IN B TWO AND B ONE.

I MEAN M1, EXCUSE ME.

M1.

OKAY.

SO NOW IN M1 YOU WILL HAVE TO GET A CONDITIONAL USE CORRECT.

PERMIT PERMIT TO PUT ONE UP.

YEAH.

CURRENTLY IN M1 IT'S BY RIGHT, RIGHT UNDER THE INTERPRETATION.

UM, THIS ESTABLISHES THE NEW USE AND IT'S A CUP AND BOTH B TWO AND M1.

OKAY.

SO JUST OUTTA CURIOSITY, HOW MANY DO WE HAVE NOW THAT ARE ALREADY DONE AS BY? RIGHT.

AND M1? I WOULD VENTURE TO SAY NONE.

WOULD YOU AGREE? MARK? ANY SELF STORAGE? IT'S M1.

I THINK THERE MAY BE ONE THAT WAS DONE PROBABLY 30 YEARS AGO NOW, UP OFF OF, UM, WEEKLY ROAD BEHIND THE BURGER KING.

THE BURGER KING THAT'S ON ROUTE ONE.

IN BEHIND THERE.

THERE IS A MINI STORAGE DEVELOPMENT THAT I THINK CAME IN UNDER THE M1 ZONING DISTRICT THAT THE ONLY OTHER ONE WE HAVE.

UM, ACTUALLY OFF OF AIRPARK DRIVE, THAT'S THE PROPERTY THAT'S UNDER THE, UM, AIRPORT AUTHORITY THAT'S OWNED M TWO.

UM, THERE IS A MINI STORAGE FACILITY BACK THERE.

IF YOU GO TO UM, DRIVE DOWN AIR PARK DRIVE ON THE RIGHT THERE, THAT PROPERTY'S ZONED M TWO.

SO THOSE ARE THE ONLY TWO THAT I CAN THINK OF.

SO M TWO WOULD CONTINUE TO BE BY, RIGHT.

UM, I'LL LET YOU ADDRESS IT.

I'M SORRY MAN.

UM, WHAT'S ALLOWED IN M1 IS ALLOWED IN M TWO BECAUSE THIS IS A CUP AND M1.

IT SHOULD BE A CUP AND M TWO.

IS THERE, IS THERE ANYTHING IN THERE ABOUT, UM, CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS? WE DID NOT PUT ANYTHING IN ABOUT CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS.

UM, WE FELT THAT THE CUP PROCESS COULD ADDRESS THAT.

OKAY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WE, THAT WE VOTE ON OR, UH, NO, WE WOULDN'T VOTE ON THIS.

IT WOULD JUST, WE WOULD NEED TO BRING IT BACK UP UNDER A PUBLIC HEARING FOR A TEXT AMENDMENT.

I SAY MOVING FORWARD IF YOU ALL ARE OR IF YOU ARE OKAY WITH MOVING FORWARD, ARE WE IN FAVOR OF MOVING FORWARD? YES.

YEAH.

YEP.

ALRIGHT.

YOU'VE SPENT TIME ON THIS, HAVE YOU? LITTLE BIT , I'M GOOD WITH.

SO YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT DOING THAT NEXT MONTH, I GUESS? MOST LIKELY, YEP.

NEXT MONTH.

ALRIGHT.

THANK YOU SIR.

THANK YOU.

GOOD HONOR.

WE WANNA MOVE ON TO

[14.REVIEW OF BY-LAWS]

YOU GOT ONE OTHER ONE, DON'T YOU GO AHEAD.

UH, NUMBER TWO.

IS THAT IT? OKAY.

I'M SORRY.

YEAH, ANOTHER AMENDMENT WE HAD, WE HAVE, UH, ONE MORE, UM, PROPOSED DRAFT OF AN AMENDMENT TO DISCUSS.

UM, RECENTLY, UM, COUNTY STAFF, UM, WE, UH, WE TOOK AN INDIVIDUAL TO COURT OVER A ZONING VIOLATION.

UM, MR. JURY, UH, WHEN HE PURSUED, UH, THE DEFENDANT, HE PURSUED UNDER, UH, THE COUNTY CODE SECTION 22 DASH 19, AS WELL AS THE CODE OF VIRGINIA STATE SECTION THAT I DON'T HAVE ON TOP OF MY HEAD RIGHT NOW.

UM, WHAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU IS AN EDIT TO THAT SECTION OF THE, OF THE COUNTY CODE.

UM, WE, WHEN WE WENT BEFORE THE JUDGE, UM, WE WERE HOPING FOR AN ABATEMENT.

UM, THE JUDGE HAD A HARD TIME, UH, JUSTIFYING THAT SINCE THE COUNTY CODE DID NOT, UH, STATE THAT IT COULD BE ABATED BY HIM.

UM, THE STATE CODE, HOWEVER, DOES CLEARLY SAY THAT HE COULD.

SO IT WAS A DIFFERENCE IN THE TWO.

UM, WE DID END UP GETTING THE RESULT WE WANTED IN A KIND OF TURNED AROUND WAY.

UM, GO AHEAD.

PRAIRIE BASIN.

SAY THIS AGAIN.

GO AHEAD.

PRAIRIE BASIN .

OKAY.

BUT, UM, THIS, THIS EDIT, UM, IS TO BE MORE ALIGNED WITH THE STATE CODE, UM, TO ALLOW FOR, UM, ABATEMENT OF ZONING VIOLATIONS THROUGH THE COURTS COURT SYSTEM.

AND MR. DREWRY CAN ELABORATE.

YES.

UM,

[00:40:01]

BUT, UM, BUT THE JUDGE DID BRING THAT UP.

UH, I WAS TRYING TO PROSECUTE UNDER THE VIRGINIA CODE AND, AND THE COUNTY CODE WASN'T IN ALIGNMENT WITH IT.

SO HE WAS QUESTIONING IT AND HE HAD A RIGHT TO, TO QUESTION IT.

WHEN WE GO TO COURT ON, I SAID WE, THE COUNTY GOES TO COURT ON CODE ENFORCEMENT.

WE'RE REALLY NOT LOOKING TO, UNLESS THEY'RE REALLY, REALLY BAD ACTORS TO DING THEM WITH A FINE.

AS MUCH AS WE JUST WANT THE ACTIONS STOPPED.

AND AGAIN, COURT ACTUALLY ASSISTED WITH THAT AND CAME UP WITH A NOVEL APPROACH TO GET PAST HIS CONCERNS.

BUT WE WANT CLEAN THAT UP.

AND WHAT'S HE HAD PRESENTED TODAY IS, EVEN TO ME, IT'S A LITTLE BIT AMBIGUOUS, BUT IT'S EXACT LANGUAGE AS VIRGINIA CODES.

I DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN DO TOO MUCH ABOUT THAT.

BUT, BUT AGAIN, IN CODE ENFORCEMENT AND MATT, YOU CAN CAN TALK A LITTLE BIT TO THAT ABOUT THAT TOO.

BUT AGAIN, WE'RE JUST LOOKING FOR IT TO STOP IF YOU UNDERSTAND ME AND, UH, AND WITH A BAT OF FINES IF NEEDED.

SO, SO THAT'S THE REASON WE WANT TO CLEAN THIS UP SO IT'LL BE CLEAR THAT THE JUDGE CAN, UH, CAN ABATE IT.

AND I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THE FEW TIMES, AND YOU MIGHT CAN TALK TO THAT TOO, THAT THIS ISSUE HAS EVER BEEN BROUGHT UP, BUT WE'LL DO AWAY WITH IT NOW.

SO WHAT WAS THE CODED, UH, LANGUAGE THAT YOU USED IS SPECIFIC TO THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS OF THE FINE? OH, SAY THIS AGAIN.

IN OTHER WORDS, YOU SAID YOU, YOU, FOR THE ORDINANCE, YOU SAID YOU USED THE LANGUAGE FROM THE STATE CODE, RIGHT? YES.

SO I'M, I'M JUST CURIOUS, WAS THE STATE CODE LANGUAGE THAT YOU USED, WAS IT SPECIFIC TO THE AMOUNT OF THE FINES OVER IN COURT OR IN THIS NO, THE LANGUAGE IN HERE, LIKE A FINE, NOT MORE THAN A THOUSAND DOLLARS.

THAT, THAT'S VIRGINIA CODE.

OKAY.

I WAS CURIOUS.

YEAH, I ASSUME THAT, YES.

IN OTHER WORDS, THIS THIS, THE NEW LANGUAGE IS THE VIRGINIA CODE.

GOTCHA.

EVEN THE FINES, EVERYTHING.

SO HE, WE WANTED, I, I HAPPENED TO BE THERE THAT DAY WHEN THIS WAS ALL GOING ON, BUT WE RUN INTO IT A A LOT TOO, IS WHEN THE CODES DON'T WORK ITSELF.

COUNTY CODES IS ACTUALLY SUPPOSED TO BE THE SAME AS THE STOKE, UH, STATE CODE.

IT CAN BE MORE STRING.

IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE MORE WEAKER.

THE STATE GO.

THAT'S HOW IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE WROTE.

AND SOMETIMES WE DON'T CATCH UP BECAUSE RULES AND THEY CHANGE STUFF AND WE DIDN'T KNOW THEY CHANGED IT UNTIL YOU GET PRESENTED TO IT.

SO WELL ON A LOCAL GOVERNMENT LEVEL, YOU WISH THEY WOULD ONLY HAVE A LEGISLATIVE SESSION EVERY FIVE YEARS.

UHHUH, , THAT EVERY YEAR.

CORRECT.

SERIOUSLY.

'CAUSE THEY JUST GO IN THERE AND A LOT OF TIMES THAT CHANGES MAKE IT WORSE AND AMBIGUOUS AND IT'S, YOU KNOW, HAVE YOU THANKED, HAVE YOU THANKED THE CITY OF RICHMOND FOR GIVING YOU FOUR DAYS LAST WEEK? I UNDERSTAND.

SO THIS IS ALL VIOLATIONS.

IF SOMEBODY STARTS CLEARING A LOT OR DOING SOMETHING LIKE THAT AND Y'ALL GO IN AND SAY YOU'RE IN VIOLATION BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T GET YOUR PERMITS AND EVERYTHING, THIS ALL APPLIES TO THAT.

IT COULD, IT WOULDN'T APPLY TO THAT BECAUSE THAT'S UNDER, UM, ENVIRONMENTAL.

THIS WOULD ONLY BE ZONING VIOLATIONS.

SO, UM, FOR EXAMPLE, THE, THE INSTANCE WHERE, WHERE THIS CAME TO LIGHT, WE HAD SOMEONE OPERATING AN ILLEGAL SHORT-TERM RENTAL BUSINESS.

UM, HE WAS, UH, NOTIFIED HIS VIOLATION MULTIPLE TIMES.

UM, HE REFUSED TO STOP.

SO WE HAD TO GO TO COURT AND WE WENT TO COURT TO ABATE THE VIOLATION TO GET IT TO, TO CEASE.

UM, AND THIS IS WHERE THE CONTRADICTION BETWEEN WHAT WE HAD IN OUR COUNTY CODE, WHAT, WHAT WAS IN THE STATE CODE, WHICH WAS WHAT'S LED TO THIS.

SO IT WOULD ONLY BE THE ZONING VIOLATIONS, UM, ALL ANY KIND OF LAND DISTURBANCE STUFF THAT WOULD FALL UNDER, UM, THE ENVIRONMENTAL CODE.

BUT ANY ZONING, ANY CODE ZONING CODE VIOLATION YES.

FALLS UNDER THIS BROAD.

WELL PLEASE TELL ME.

WE'RE GONNA CHANGE ALL THAT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL AND EVERYTHING.

SO THE CODES MORE, I MEAN, FOR THE FINES ARE MORE STRICT.

I, I THINK THAT WE ARE UP TO DATE ON THE, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL STUFF BECAUSE THE STATE OF VIRGINIA, MOST OF THOSE, THEY'VE GOT A MODEL ORDINANCE THAT THEY MAKE US FOLLOW.

SO.

RIGHT.

YOU ALL JUST WORKED ON THAT.

YEAH, WE'VE, WE'VE, YEAH, BECAUSE IT USED TO BE, IT WAS EASIER TO PAY THE FINE THAN TO COME GET THE PERMIT.

I DON'T, I DON'T THINK IT'S THAT WAY ANYMORE.

I BELIEVE IS IT UNDER AN ACRE IS 16 HUN? 16,000 AND OVER AN ACRE IS 32,000.

I NOW THAT'S, I'M NOT SURE THAT'S MORE LIKELY.

MATTHEW.

I BELIEVE I BE, IT'S SOMEWHERE ALONG THAT LINE.

OKAY.

UM, AS WE KNOW, WE,

[00:45:01]

YEAH.

OKAY.

GOOD.

THAT'S ALL I NEED TO HEAR IN, IN FACT, I'LL, I'LL SAY, AND THE VIRGINIA CODE IS, I DON'T KNOW, IT'S JUST STRANGE SOMETIMES BECAUSE SOME OF THE, A LOT OF THESE THINGS, AND I HAVE TO READ THIS TOO, A LOT OF THESE EACH DAY IS A VIOLATION, RIGHT? CORRECT.

AND IT CAN RACK UP PRETTY QUICK AND SERIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, AND SO I READ IT AND YOU COULD FIND SOMEBODY $250,000 FOR SOMETHING FAIRLY MINOR, BUT, SO SOME OF 'EM WILL REALLY FALL IN AND OTHER ONES ARE JUST A HAND SLAP.

I WOULD AGREE.

ISN'T THAT HOW IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE WITH THE UNINSURED MOTORS THAT IT'S EVERY DAY YOU DON'T HAVE INSURANCE IN, YOU'RE DRIVING? I DON'T KNOW.

I BELIEVE THAT'S ONE OF THOSE, BUT NOBODY EVER ENFORCES IT.

YEAH, WELL THEY LET YOU PAY THE ONE THE FIRST DAY, THE $500 FOR NOT HAVING IT AND THEN NEVER GET BACK UP WITH YOU EVEN WHEN YOU HAVE ACCIDENT.

WELL, FOR THE MOST PART, I THINK THAT SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE FROM A COUNTY ANGLE, WE, WE ARE ANGLING TO GET SOMEBODY TO STOP SOMETHING.

MM-HMM .

CORRECT? YEP.

AND, AND IF YOU LOOK AT THAT CODE WHERE IT TOOK OFF, $10 AIN'T MUCH.

ESPECIALLY IF I'M MAKING A THOUSAND DOLLARS A NIGHT, I'LL GIVE YOU $10.

, SAME THING WITH THIS.

YOU'LL PUT IT OUT AND WE'LL HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ON IT ALL.

YEP.

CAN WE MOVE FORWARD WITH IT? OKAY.

ALRIGHT.

THANK YOU SIR.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

UH, I NOTICED THERE'S A COUPLE IN THE, IN THE, IN THE, UM, SEATS.

UH, I DON'T WANNA MISS OR IGNORE ANYONE.

ARE WE OKAY? YES, WE'RE OKAY.

I'M FINE.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO THE REVIEW OF, OF BYLAWS.

UM, IS ANYONE READY FOR THAT PRESENTATION? WE DID SAY WE COULD WAIVE THIS AND WA WAIT IT AT HOME.

I THOUGHT WHICH ONE? WE DID IT .

I CAN'T EVEN SEE IT.

RIGHT.

YOUR, YOUR REVIEW, WE'VE DISCUSSED PREVIOUS ORGANIZATIONAL MEETINGS JUST MEANS YOU ALL REVIEWED THE BYLAWS AND YOU MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE ANY RECOMMENDED CHANGES OR, SO I MAKE A MOTION WE KEEP THE CURRENT BYLAWS.

I'LL SECOND IT.

MR. TUSS? YES.

MR. CUNNINGHAM? AYE.

MR. HAYES? YES.

MR. SIMMONS? YES.

MR. LANGLEY? YES.

MR. HORRIBLE.

YES.

MR. TUCKER? YES.

SEVEN MEMBERS PRESENT VOTING.

UH, THANK YOU.

YOU FORGOT ME MAN.

WE'RE MOVING ON TO ITEM 15.

REVIEW CODE OF ETHICS AND STANDARDS OF CONDUCT.

MR. CHAIRMAN, I THINK WE ARE REVIEWED IT MYSELF HOME THAT I, WE MOVE FORWARD MR. SECOND.

I'LL SECOND IT.

DO WE NEED A VOTE MR. LEY? UH, NO.

MR. CHAIR.

ALRIGHT.

OKAY.

THANK YOU SIR.

WE'RE MOVING ON

[16.COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS]

HAPPY NEW YEAR GUYS.

.

YEAH.

I HAVEN'T SEEN Y'ALL SINCE THE YEAR CHANGED EXCEPT ONE OR TWO OF YOU.

WELL, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING.

OKAY.

IF NOBODY HAS ANYTHING, I MOVE.

WE ADJOURN.

UH,

[17.PLANNING DIRECTOR'S COMMENTS]

YEAH.

YES.

MR. CHAIR, JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THE, UH, THE TWO ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS THAT MR. CULBERT OUTLINED FOR YOU THIS EVENING.

UH, WE CAN GO AHEAD AND ADVERTISE THOSE FOR PUBLIC HEARING AT YOUR FEBRUARY MEETING.

AND THEN WE, ALMOST POSITIVE WE MAY HAVE, UH, ONE OTHER REZONING AGAIN, AS YOU MENTIONED IN OUR PREVIOUS PUBLIC HEARING THIS EVENING, I THINK IT WILL BE A REZONING, UH, PROPOSED FOR, UM, THE WEST PETERSBURG AREA.

AGREE UNDER THAT RU ZONING CLASSIFICATION.

THANK YOU, SIR.

YOU WELCOME.

YEAH.

WHO SAID THAT? JUST NOW, BUT YOU CAN DO IT AGAIN.

OH NO, THEY OVER THERE GOT SIDEBAR CONVERSATION OVER THERE.

OH, I'M, I DON'T WANT OH, I'M, I'M SORRY.

SORRY TO BREAK IN MR. CUNNINGHAM.

MR. CULVER'S REMINDING WE, WE MAY HAVE ONE OTHER REZONING PROPOSED FOR, UM, FOUR 60.

UM, THERE'S AN EXISTING RESIDENCE, UM, WHERE THE

[00:50:01]

UM, SO THEY'RE ASKING, MAYBE ASKING AT NEXT MONTH'S MEETING TO REZONE A PORTION OF THAT PROPERTY, UM, TO R ONE RESIDENTIAL LIMITED, UM, SO THAT THEY CAN SELL OFF THE HOME ON A, UM, ONE AND A HALF ACRE, APPROXIMATELY ONE AND A HALF ACRE, UM, PARCEL.