MINUTES PAGE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION January 14, 2025 Members Present Catherine Grech, Secretary, District 1 Chris Adams, District 2 Jared Burner, Chairman, District 3 William Turner, Vice Chairman, District 5 Staff] Present Josh Hahn Cassie Richards Call to Order Chairman Burner called the December 10, 2024 Page County Planning Commission Regular Meeting to order in the Board ofSupervisors (BOS) Room located at thel Page County Government Center, 103 S Court Street, Luray, Virginia at 7:00 p.mm. The call to order was followed by The Pledge of Allegiance and a Moment ofSilence. Chairman Burner reminded all commissioners and speakers to please turn on and/or speak into the microphones. Mr. Hahn conducted an attendance roll call. Adoption of Agenda Ms. Grech made the motion to adopt the agenda, as presented, and Mr. Adams seconded the motion. Chairman Burner asked all those in favor to signify by saying "aye," and there were audible "ayes." He asked all those opposed to signify like sign, and there was no opposition voiced. Chairman Burner stated the minutes were adopted as amended. Public Hearing A. IBR Corporation: Special Use Permit Ms. Richards read from the staff report. IBR Corporation has filed an application for a special use permit to operate a riding stables/academies located at 2948 Oak Forest Ln., Luray, VA, and further identified by tax map number 50-(A)-65. This property contains 36.718 acres and is zoned as Agricultural (A-1). The applicant is proposing to operate a riding stableslacademies out of existing horse stables that is 3,000 square feet and (2) shelters that are 100 square feet. The applicant will offer horse training, trail riding, boarding, and grooming. Proposed parking for the business will be located at end of Oak Forest Ln. as shown on the plat provided. Section 125-10.D (26) ofthe Page County Zoning Ordinance states that riding stables or academies require a special use permit in the. Agriculture (A-1) zoning district. Staff! has attached a copy of Section 125-30.18 A & B (Riding stables or academies) of the Page County Zoning Ordinance, which include the supplemental regulations for this use. Ms. Richards referenced the agency comments and the Comprehensive Plan Review sections ofthe staff memo. Adjoining/adjacent property owners were notified as required by the Code ofVirginia. She noted that staff had received no comments. She noted that the applicant is present, should the Commissioners have any questions. She referenced the updated scope of activities and the parking plan, which now matches the parking plan map. Chairman Burner opened the public hearing at 7:04 p.m. Mr. Hahn indicated there were no speakers. Chairman Burner closed the public hearing at 7:04 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes-, January 14, 2025 Chairman Burner asked if there was any other discussion. Ms. Grech asked if there were any changes since the last meeting this was discussed. Ms. Richards indiçated the only changes were what she mentioned earlier. Chairman Burner asked for a motion to proceed. Ms. Grech asked for a motion to recommend approval of the special use permit to the Board of Supervisors, as presented in the packet. Mr. Turner seconded the motion. Chairman Burner asked for a roll call. The motion passed (4-0). Citizen Comments on Agenda Items Mr. Hahn noted nobody had signed up to speak. New Business A. Adoption of Minutes- December 10, 2024 Chairman Burner allowed some time for any necessary changes to be noted. Ms. Grech noted that that on Page 4, second paragraph, the word "were" was missing after "there." Ms. Grech made a motion to adopt the minutes as amended. Mr. Adams seconded the motion. Chairman Burner asked all those in favor to signify by saying "aye," and there were audible "ayes.' > He asked all those opposed to signify like sign, and there was no opposition voiced. Chairman Burner stated the minutes were adopted as presented. B. 2024, Annual Report Mr. Hahn briefly summarized the contents of the 2024 Annual Report, which was in the same format as last year. There were modest decreases in overall permits. He noted that the December numbers were higher than 2023. Complaints decreased in 2024. Business licenses increased again. He noted that he included a breakdown ofl how many of these were short- term tourist rentals. He referenced the division of land section. He noted that Ms. Grech had already pointed out an error in the column header for 2024 - it should not read through June, because the numbers reflect through the entire year. He referenced the rest of the report, including applications and ordinances reviewed by the Planning Commission and variances reviewed by the Board of Zoning Appeals. Ms. Grech was disappointed to see new 2024 residential units lower than 2022. Not by much only five. She stated this may have something to do with fact that we are in dire need of housing that is more affordable. There was a nice increase from 2022 to 2023, but that hasn't continued. Chairman Burner asked how much of that had to do with the development behind Wal-Mart. Mr. Hahn said that this 100 percent explains the spike in residential units in 2023. Ms. Grech asked ifthere were more to be built, and Mr. Hahn confirmed that there were more in the permitting process. Ms. Grech referenced that for business license reviews, 134 of 187 business licenses were for short-term tourist rentals, which comes out to 71.6 percent of all business license review. She stated this is a very significant point, which in her opinion justifies new rules that we are working on. That is significant growth. Mr. Hahn noted that these numbers only reflect those business licenses which require a community development review. He agreed with Ms. Grech that this may need to be clarified in the report. [Note: Subsequent to this meeting, Mr. Hahn determined this was not correct. The Zoning Office reviews all business license applications, sO no clarification was needed in the report.] Page 2 of5 Planning Commission Minutes- January 14, 2025 Ms. Grech noted that vast increase in 25-acre divisions and non-family divisions. This is a big issue. 25-acre divisions usually don't happen by themselves. They are accompanied by the non-family divisions, creating a multiplier effect. We need new rules. She asked Mr. Hahn if he had numbers going further back where he could create a chart. Mr. Hahn noted that Ms. Clatterbuck has kept really good records. Staff didn't start tracking non-family divisions from 25-acre divisions until last year, but it would be possible to go back and do that research. Ms. Grech thinks that if we are going to understand the magnitude oft the problem, we need to have data. Mr. Hahn agreed. Chairman Burner asked if we needed a motion. Mr. Hahn indicated no, but he would make the changes that had been discussed. Unfinished Business A. Proposed Rules of Procedure Amendment Mr. Hahn referenced changes to the proposed rules of procedure, which staff had introduçed at the December Regular Meeting. The only proposed change is still just on Page 5. He noted that the County Attorney had no issues with the proposed changes to the proposal. He noted that he struck the language regarding "in lieu of signing up to speak." > He thinks that language implied that it was ever appropriate for applicants to have to sign up to speak during public comment in order to speak on their application. He referenced new text since the previous draft: "When County staff introduces an application to the Planning Commission during a public meeting, after staff has provided a report, the applicant(s) shall have ten minutes to present their application. The Chairman may allow for more time if requested by the applicant(s)." He referenced the increase from five to ten minutes, also noting that the Chairman could increase this time, ifrequested. He also noted new language at the end: "Nothing in this section prevents the Chairman from allowing discussion between the Commissioners, staff, and the applicant(s) regarding an application. Chairman Burner asked for comments. Ms. Grech appreciated the change from five to ten minutes. Although she commends Mr. Hahn's efforts, she thinks it may be more confusing than it was before. She asked if the ten minutes includes work sessions, and Mr. Hahn stated yes, because we do sometimes introduce applications during work sessions. Ms. Grech asked ifthis document says an applicant would have ten minutes to speak during the introduction of an application. Mr. Hahn agreed, this was his intention. Ms. Grech stated that this document also seems to sayt the applicant has no otheropportunity to speak again until there is a public hearing, unless to answer questions prompted by the Planning Commission. Mr. Hahn agreed. Ms. Grech stated that at the public hearing, the applicant would again have ten minutes. Mr. Hahn answered that this was more of a minimum. Ms. Grech stated this was framed as a maximum, not a minimum. There was some discussion on this. Mr. Hahn stated that the true intent ofthe proposal was to guarantee the applicant time to speak outside of public comment, which they haven't always had. Ms. Grech stated that the way Mr. Hahn is explaining it, she is okay with, but she's not happy with the way it is expressed in the proposal. She recommended combining the language SO that it states "at the introduction or at a public hearing. There was some discussion about whether the applicant should be afforded ten minutes for any meeting an application is on the agenda. Chairman Burner stated that he didn't think it was necessary for the applicant to always have ten minutes every time it is on the agenda. Ms. Grech Page 3 of 5 Planning Commission Minutes- January 14, 2025 stated she agreed in principle, but imagine ifthe applicants plan has changed. Mr. Hahn stated that the language does allow for the Chairman to give time to the applicant to speak. Chairman Burner agreed, stating the last line covers this. There was some discussion about whether applicant's time to speak should be limited to after the public hearing. Chairman Burner stated that he agrees that it should be reserved for after the public hearing, as the point is to give the applicant time to answer questions/concerns raised by the public. If you're doing it before the public hearing, you're making a presentation. Ms. Grech asked ifit isn't also fair to say that the public, who have come to make the comments, needs to be informed of what the SUP is about, beyond what they may have heard from their neighbors. Isn't it fair for the applicant can give a presentation before the public comments, to dispel any misconceptions, and then to be able to correct afterwards, as well. Mr. Hahn stated that this is why he had that language last time. Chairman Burner stated he sees what Ms. Grech is saying, but it is their due diligence to research the subject they are going to be speaking on. He noted that when applicants step up to the podium, they are speaking to the Planning Commission. They are not speaking to the crowd. There was more discussion. Ms. Grech would also like to have the opinion of Economic Development, both Ms. Long and perhaps the EDA. She has heard from Economic Development that when certain uses are by SUP rather than by right, it is a discouragement to Economic Development. She wouldn't want this to become a further discouragement. Mr. Hahn stated he would work on language for the next meeting. Chairman Burner clarified that once they have final language, we will need to wait for 30 days. B. Zoning Subcommittee Report Ms. Grech noted the subcommittee met last week. They continued discussion about the organization of Article III. Staff recommended some changes in the sequence of the content of the article. They also discussed Article VIII, which relates to nonconformities. The next meeting is February 4. C. Comprehensive Plan Subcommittee Report Mr. Grech stated they are very excited, because the day after tomorrow, the subcommittee has invited the three town managers to talk about how we can better collaborate and coordinate zoning between the county and the towns. She doesn't think this has been done before. Mr. Hahn stated that perhaps not in the same way. Ms. Grech agreed. They are excited and have questions prepared. They are hoping this will help us revise how we define the growth tiers, because it would appear based on what Mr. Hahn has presented sO far that for some of the growth tiers, particularly for Luray, we may not be on the same wavelength with the towns. The next meeting is on January 16 at 61 p.m. Open Citizen Comment Period Mr. Hahn noted nobody had signed up to speak. Chairman's Report Chairman Burner had no report. Page 4 of 5 Planning Commission Minutes- January 14, 2025 Clerk's Report Mr. Hahn yielded to Ms. Richards, who also had no report. Adjourn Ms. Grech made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Turner seconded the motion. Chairman Burner adjourned the meeting at 7:30 p.m. Ahael L Buann Jarred Burner, Chairman Page 5 of5