Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Setbacks And Industrial Uses topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission directs staff to draft ordinance amendments on R‑8 setbacks, meat processing/storage in M‑1 and sign rules
Summary
The commission unanimously approved a motion directing staff to draft zoning ordinance changes covering reduced setbacks in the R‑8 district, special‑use rules for meat processing and storage in M‑1, and updates to sign regulations; commissioners debated why window/opening rules appear in zoning rather than the building code.
Commissioner Kettler moved and Vice Chair Porter seconded a motion directing staff to prepare draft zoning ordinance amendments covering three topics: (1) setback provisions in the R‑8 district, (2) allowing meat processing and storage facilities in the M‑1 industrial district (with appropriate special‑use conditions), and (3) updates to sign regulations. The motion cited public necessity, convenience, and good zoning practice and referenced Code of Virginia §15.2‑2286 for ordinance initiation; the Planning Commission voted unanimously to authorize staff to develop the drafts.
A substantial portion of the discussion focused on the R‑8 setback language, which contains provisions addressing openings and windows. One commissioner raised the concern that some of the matters in the zoning text—such as allowable window locations and openings—appear to overlap with the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code. That commissioner, who identified themselves as an architect, said: “I would argue that it should never have been there in the first place,” urging the commission to avoid redundancy between zoning and building codes.
Ton Dang responded that proposed language would require compliance with the building code and that the local fire department had requested special‑use conditions to address fire protection where reduced setbacks are proposed. A Fire Department representative said the department was uncomfortable with allowing reduced setbacks without additional fire protections and that the proposed compromise is the reason some opening restrictions were included in the special‑use framework.
The motion instructs staff to prepare draft ordinances for public hearings and recommendations. Commissioners expressed readiness to review drafts in detail once staff returns with concrete language and analyses.
What happens next: Staff will draft the proposed ordinance language and present it for public hearings and Planning Commission recommendation, per state code and local process.
