Lynchburg hears heavy public comment before Feb. 12 hearing on zoning limits for abortion clinics
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
The Lynchburg City Council is scheduled to hold a Feb. 12 public hearing on ordinance O‑26, a proposed zoning change that would require abortion clinics to meet the same permitting and location rules as other businesses and could impose a 1,000‑foot buffer around schools, churches and residential zones. Callers both supported and opposed the measure at length.
The Lynchburg City Council will take public testimony Feb. 12 on a proposed zoning ordinance, listed as O‑26 on city agendas, that would subject abortion clinics to the city’s zoning and conditional‑use rules and limit where they may operate within Lynchburg.
Perry Payne Milner, a Lynchburg resident who opened the recorded comments, asked the council to weigh restraint and fairness while noting a recent statewide change: “Last weekend, Governor Spanberger signed a Virginia constitutional amendment protecting reproductive health care statewide,” he said, and warned that “extending the buffer for abortion clinics from 500 feet to 1,000 feet is not a neutral land use adjustment.” Milner argued the larger buffer would effectively bar clinics from much of the city.
Supporters of the ordinance told the council the rule would protect schools, churches, parks and neighborhoods from protest activity and preserve community character. “It will keep protests from being in our city,” said Susan Stoll, a caller who gave a Lynchburg address, summarizing a frequent rationale offered by callers. Student voices also supported limits on clinic locations to protect campuses: “This amendment is reasonable and fair,” said Alexander Locke, a college student.
Opponents said the proposal would restrict lawful medical services and could reduce safety and access. Mike Little, who identified himself as a Lynchburg resident, urged the council to vote no and said the planning commission — which he noted was appointed by the council — had recommended a no vote after study. Little warned that pushing clinics away from hospitals and existing medical clusters could pose risks to patients in emergencies.
The ordinance under consideration would amend the Lynchburg City Code to require public notice, a conditional‑use review and an explicit council vote before an abortion clinic could open in certain locations. Multiple callers used the council’s agenda numbers or the label O‑26 when referring to the measure; several callers named a 1,000‑foot buffer in their remarks.
Neither the council nor staff took a vote in the recorded comments. The Feb. 12 public hearing will give council members a formal opportunity to hear testimony before any final action. The planning commission’s published recommendation and any staff reports related to O‑26 will be part of the official record ahead of the hearing.
What happens next: the council’s Feb. 12 public hearing on O‑26; if the council schedules a vote it would follow the notice and procedural requirements set by city code. The record of callers will be included with the hearing materials.
Reported by an attendee of the Lynchburg City Council public comment line; no formal vote was recorded in the provided comments.