Okay, I am gonna call to order the regular town council work session
for monday, february 2nd. And ms. Chris, can we do a roll call?
may your here, vice here. Council.
here, here, here,
here. All right. So we, um, this is our work session. We
have four new business items and one unfinished
before close. So our first new business item is a special use,
uh, permit application from gary bunch to allow an automobile garage
general repair shop at three west 14th street. And ms. Kaki is going
to present that to us.
um, is it up there,
this chair stiffer than fall by?
so this is for a, this is a special use permit
for a, um, a service station
at, uh, three west 14th street. Um,
so the applicant is proposing to expand
the existing use and all, all this special use permit is doing
is permitting that. And then, um, bringing them, just
bringing this new use into compliance with the code. Um,
I'm just trying to get to these, get to the, so those are the site. All
right. So this is the site from 14th street.
this is the site from the corner and then up on north royal avenue.
um, planning commission recommended approval, um,
with three conditions. So in staff, strongly support condition number
one, that the entrance off of 14th street shall be removed
and replaced with, um, curb and gutter that the work shall
be conducted within an enclosed building and that all outdoor storage or display
will be screened to obstruct its visibility from any public street. Um,
so the applicant is aware of these conditions
and I don't think anybody spoke in opposition at the public hearing.
so can you go back to the pictures for me? Yeah. To that first one.
so is it that right there that the entrance they would ask to close off
so that, so nobody's not gonna be coming around that curb and trying to go in? Correct.
so they would have to enter it from northbrook extended north royal extended. Right. It
close up an entrance to somebody's business. Well, they have two entrances
now. And when we're looking at this from a safety perspective, you're putting,
it's a, it's one less, um, opportunity for people to pull
out into. Hold on one second. On one second.
14th and, and north row. I'd have to pull some stats.
I know there's been some that guardrails been replaced. Yeah, guardrails have, but
yeah, I don't believe , I have heartburn with,
with, with, was taking away one of, one of their permanent entrances.
been there for 50 years or more. Okay. So that was my first
question. So that, that's what that first condition that planning commission would suggest
is to, to, to no longer have that. Right. And then the
second one is that all work would be done inside, but their garages
anyway. So, okay. The tires you wouldn't see anymore. Right. So we wouldn't have the
tires outside and you wouldn't have people working on vehicles outside
of the shop. And I think what's happened now is that their, their
business is doing well and they have expanded outside of the original
structure and they need to make it bigger, but to enlarge it, they need to come into compliance.
um, but when they do this, uh,
expansion, we would be looking at site circulation and,
and how they're utilizing it. Staff would be reviewing it. Public works would be
looking at that. So energy services to make sure they don't need any upgrades.
um, we didn't make that recommendation lightly that you close off an
entrance. And the third thing that I, I just,
when I was looking through the things that said is, um, a display
shall be screened. Yeah. So are they talking about like a big tall, like
a, like a green? I've seen like what, which that's would've said one of
the, the net fences. That's what I was asking. Leave that to
wrong direction. There you go. That one
there. So what, so
the, I mean, it's not there now. I know that.
right? I'm just saying like, so all outdoor storage display shall be screened to obstruct its
visibility from any public streets. So that's within our zoning
ordinance. When we look at these, when we're analyzing whether or not these uses
are informing or not, um,
this is one of the conditions that staff looks at. Like, are you screening your display areas
properly? Um, can you gimme just example?
I get what al I get what outdoor storage would be like those tires, right?
that would be, that would be something they would I get that. So
the actual, what would a display be? What do you mean about a display? She'll
be screened. Um, what's like a, I think a display is like
a sign, but maybe I'm no like screen the tires. So you can't
see it. If there's gonna be , it's merchandise. Any merchandise or, um, items
that you have outside, we would require some that of screening potentially.
um, so like they had a collection of signs maybe
for their, for their business. It's a display area. So, um, at the,
uh, martin shopping center, I mean they have that outdoor
display area. Um, that one is exempted into
the shopping center code or ordinance, but um,
or like where they're selling stuff outside, is that what you're telling me? Right. So like their
nursery, their nursery stock thinking they have a fence around that. They're screening
that display area. Okay. I just can't imagine what they'd be. I can't, I
I mean I, it would, I know that there's, that they sell cars.
I get that. I'm just saying. But that wouldn't be there. That would be up into
the original. That's all like tires. Tires, yeah. Put tires out
there to sell. Probably. Um, the only reason why I
was saying that, like I think about like a screen when they said to
obstruct its visibility from any public street or whatever. I just wonder if a
big large screen would be more, um, typical.
we're looking at fencing more obstructive than, than okay, so fencing,
is that what you're saying? So typically when we see screening, we think of like a privacy fence
or um, like some kind of wall. Like, um, like when we require
that dumpsters get closure screens, if there's some type of opaque you
can't, okay. Worse than screening. I was just thinking all going down
the highway and you see the screens in front of the residential areas so you don't see them.
mm-hmm . That's a screen. Yeah. I just was thinking
from that corner and going up north royal behind it, and now there's houses
that are over there. I just was thinking like, I actually think it
would look a lot worse to like, have big tall screens
going along there. 'cause it's kind of an open area there. But anyway, that, that's all. I just,
those were my questions is what exactly there too, right? What,
what exactly were we, what exactly would the town
want that to look like and, and what they would,
and I imagine they're asking the same thing. Like what would that look like? So anyway, sorry.
those were my only questions. Y'all feel free to, I just wanted to make sure so
that to to to prevent right. Turn
into it. To right turn into it. They, they would injure from north
royal and make a left turn into a right north people coming out of it and trying to make a left and
cutting across. And so you've got people coming around, um, going towards
the bridges. You can't make a left out there. But I, I know what you're saying. Yeah, because there's a median
there. I I, that wouldn't be happening. Pulling in
a right end would happen, but a left out. Well, a right out would
be too. But anyway, up. Sorry, I asked
all my questions. Anybody else have any questions? Would
you consider a ride out only instead of removing their entrance
ride out would allow you to go up, uh, west on 14th street?
you mean when painting it or putting up a signage? You put sign? Well, I mean, if you
the right turn, put the concrete thing there, you can only go one way. That's right.
I mean, couldn't even, that's gonna cost the town money, right? I do not undersigned for that matter. If you just wanna make it an exit.
they had that at mcdonald's. Yeah. Where you had to go right out, you're
gonna on south street and there were still people that will pull out or, or there at the, um,
go left intersection at riverton, like where you're supposed to go up on the stars
road and come and people still would try to make it. I mean, I think it's gonna be
congested with, with people trying to get in or them trying to get their cars in
and out way. If we take that exit, take that exit off the property away from 'em, that
just doesn't make, I mean I doesn't make sense to me. It's already there.
my gosh. It was there when it was a tasty freeze there. I do you also have an
entrance right next to it, if I'm remembering
properly with the in there. So you've got
an exit here, that's the one they're trying to take out. Right? But then you've
got these here. So when we're looking at like new development
up there, you've got hotel, hotel. No, there's no other.
that's the hotel though. You can't go in into the hotel, you can't get into the hotel's.
not saying, I think she's saying there's three exits all on top of each other. Yeah.
if you have three cars pulling out of their back to back to back. So these are too
close. So these don't typically meet distancing standards that we have.
so this is our opportunity to get rid of one
problem entrance. Sorry, I, I counsel can, I can't agree with that.
actually. It looks like the way this, that if you blow that up,
it sh shoot, if you blow that up, it shows
a, um, a cut and a medium there where you could cut
out and try to make a left hand turn lane. So oh yeah. That's why I said why
not make it a right. Only I guess there is, there isn't there? Um, I definitely
would not because you want people, you wouldnt make a west in intersections more so than just
dark out the middle. There's just not a lot of distance when you're coming around this
curve to where this entrance exit.
yeah, this shows there is a cut. If, if this is a
current picture, I don't know. I mean, I'll look at on the way home the right, but it looks like there's a
break there in the corner. There is,
yeah. I've actually, I've actually pulled up north road turn right and then make u-turn
right there. . But none of this is compliant. The the
distances between here are not compliant with at least be without standards. Now there
are roads, but typically we have been making the recommendations
lately that development follows without standards. Especially
with these , it's, it's impo. It's, it's very, very difficult at best no matter what
happens to make a left turn out of there anyways, even from north royal avenue,
I , I don't even like to make a left out coming out. I usually, if I'm
there in north royal, unless I see a big gap, I'm just like, I just make a
right and go up and turn around. I go up right now seven
11, but, but I turned left
out of that north rail tonight and got here. . There you go.
um, are there, um, I, I have
something, um, I noticed that
I think it was three parking spots, um,
are required. Is that, so we, right now,
uh, parking is calculated based on the square footage. So,
um, once they do the, once they know the size of their building, we'll recalculate based
on their new floor area.
okay. My, my, I guess my concern is when you look at it,
um, from the, the gis viewpoint,
where the end of the building is going to be, typically
these places can get really busy if they're, if they're,
if they do good work. Right. And, um,
I'm just a little bit concerned about vehicles
parking on north row extended as
overflow mm-hmm . Um, that's going on.
and they're allowed to well, I know, I know they're allowed to. I'm I'm just saying
that, um, uh, do you mean that's
already a congested area that backs up to they be able to make it
a left hand turn to get onto
14th? Well, at, uh, 14th street and I mean, they've got some space
back here. Um, you, you gotta see
it during the day. Lauren, how long has it been open and operating
as shop a mechanical tire shop now? Probably, can
I answer that question for you or yeah, hold on one second. Oh, okay. I can, it's
okay. I don't dunno the answer. I know, I just feel I know I'm gonna, I do, I just wanted,
we're we're asking good questions, but it's not like it's changing use
entirely. Like I've gone there in the last year and had my vehicle worked on,
and I grew up, at least I grew up by the vfw. It's,
it's, that's been there for at least 15, 20 years. So we have a already
existing business owner, which we recognized before this very council for
their commitment and dedication to operating in this community trying to expand,
said successful business to a building that was operating under the same use
premise. So I think it, it'd be a disservice to
add any more hurdles and unless we're sending it back to planning commission,
it's the job of this council to determine what conditions we're gonna place on it at the public hearing
or at the regular council meeting rather. So
here, ms. Fine. Yes. How long has I, I know it was a jiffy lube
for a long time. That's been quite a few years. Yeah. Yeah. We probably purchased
it 25 years ago. And this,
uh, they are actually our tenants, um, renters and
they have been there 15 to 20 years, the same family. They work
very hard and they have, they need more space.
so us jointly together have decided to ask for
this request and then like she said, uh, if we'll
go through the proper steps, but to try to put another building up for them. Okay.
so that it will be enclosed and they'll
have, you know, adequate room for their services. Okay.
so, but for the last 25 years, it's being used in
the same capacity, just not as large of a business
yet. Because if you expand, then it's, the idea is to have more business right.
for them, for them to have more business and more space for what they already have. Gotcha. And
our code distinguishes between service stations and repair shops.
so that's, it's, they're technically changing. That's why we're bringing in compliance
because it's still listed as the, um, sorry, the service station,
which is where they do the oil changes and automobile. Right. But a repair
shop is different than a service station isn't not very interesting. They would
be too different. Two, everything. All right. I, I just brought up the,
I just brought up the parking, uh, issue. If
it's, we all know that it's been there for, for, for
years and nothing has changed that that intersection has not changed
in like 50 years. So there are more houses. There
are houses or, and there's, there's also a base cam
down there, the, the canoe place now. And, uh, in
the summertime it's gonna be busy given, uh,
we're gonna have more water when it's all melts.
so, um, I'm just saying that my point was,
um, you know, if there, if you end up having overflow
parking on the street, you already have, you're gonna have a narrow
street with the cars parked on the street. That's all I'm saying. And
so if there, if, if the thought process is that beyond
the end of their building, uh, you
might restrict some parking up there. That's all 20 street
that the one one or the 1 3, 5, 7 and nope, go
back to picture. Sorry. So that where it says 1, 1, 5, 7, 1, 3, 5, 7, 1, 3, 7, 1,
are those those two new houses that are there? Okay. That's what, which they could go out and park on the
street if they wanna have a birthday party or, yeah. Yeah.
but also if they can't provide adequate parking, we wouldn't, like, I wouldn't
be able to issue them their, their plan permit. So we
will be evaluating it. There. Are you watching the state though? You know, the state's coming down the
scene? I know, I saw that. I was actually happy about that. I understand that we, but
we already have that on south royal avenue. Okay. So
I mean, but uh, it is what it is. I mean,
I don't want to restrict a business, but at the same time I want,
I want to take as much safety measures as possible.
there was a time when down, um, by
where the old bfw was and they thought, we thought the rail
trail was coming through that particular area right there, that street.
there was a lot of talk about. Um, but that's where people would
like, end up down there and that we would have like bus like that there
would be like kind of transport, not the trolley, but something like that back and forth. But
to be quite frank with you, the mysteries and stuff on the rail
trail, I don't even know if that's, uh, I'm, I'm not as optimistic as I
once was, um, about that. But so are
there, so, so ms. Is here as
staff. She's presented, um, the information she shared,
what the planning commission's suggestions were
and, and what's happened. Is there other questions from council
about this application, this site? Anything having
to do with this? I just think we need to do something so they don't lose that
interest. Point out the front and make a right. You know, we can put sides like, look, we got up on
south street right. Turn only, it'd be up for council to make that condition
when we approve it versus, yes. Yeah. Yeah. And, and
that's not, like, that's not what we've, we don't make that decision here.
the thing is, do we have more questions about this? And then, um,
do we have more questions for staff? Is there further questions you all want
answered? And if the answer to that is no, then
it is, are you ready to put it on, uh,
a, a, a meeting that's ready to well, I'm ready to add it to february. The
way I see it is you have an existing business for more than two decades, not just a couple of
years. Improving the aesthetic, improving the use, improving
and increasing the tax revenue in the community. I mean, to me
it's a no-brainer. Yeah. And, and, but it does sound like it'll, they're
gonna enlarge the business, but that aspect of it will be handled by the planning
and zoning department anyway. Yeah. That part is is
enlarge the, so they're gonna put, they're basically gonna put a storage facility, the buildings yeah. To help them.
oh, I'm sorry. I put, she said the building is to store what they have
to give them more space to work. Right. Gotcha. To try to get some of the,
and we could ask mrs. Bunch, I mean, she's here, but you go by and you see 'em working
outside a lot and see they're full on the inside. So this
would get some of that work inside. So when it's six degrees out,
they can be inside changing tires, brakes or whatever, instead
of having 'em jacked up out there in the asphalt. And, and in condition number two,
if the council chooses, all work shall be conducted within an enclosed building that
will keep it in the enclo building. So it has to be,
I mean, but yeah. Right. No, to me, if we tell 'em they got, they gotta put curb
and gutter anywhere. Make a, it's just an undue ship. They're gonna spend money
to put that in. I don't know that they would, would they be responsible to
financially put the in? That's what,
okay. I just didn't know if that was something they would do
or we would do. Right. I mean, if it's a safety issue,
that's a bdot thing, you know, it wouldn't be us. We would leave
it as is. Right. We wouldn't be responsible to pay for that. Right.
it's a safety issue that was warranted. I mean, we could do it. I do believe we also have
opportunities we can do like, uh, share of that cost
as well. Okay. I was just curious. 'cause I, if it would be a, another
situation, we wouldn't, you know, like we're not telling the hotel to close
their entrance or, or like you said, there, there are a lot of entrances off of
that street, like into that one and into the hotel, into the gas station and
into the chiropractor office and all this. So the question is,
is this council ready to put it on now, ms. Presley,
do we have enough time? Mm-hmm . Okay. All right. So is everybody
good with putting this on the february? And it would have to have
a public hearing, right? It's public hearing. Yeah, that's, I just wanna make sure, that's why I was asking. We have
enough time to advertise, right? So there will be a public hearing. Mm-hmm . You have the
sign up there from the planning commission, public hearing. Did anybody comment to the
planning commission hearing? She said no. I, I'm sorry I missed that somehow, right? You
said no, no one came. Yep. Okay. All right. So that's
item two. Ready. So that's
our first public hearing for february . February what? February 20.
what is it? 23rd 16th. Seven third. Yes.
all right. And if anybody has any questions between now and then too,
you can reach out to, uh, staff or the applicant.
um, b2b, social use permit, application
from property connection and all c to allow an automobile parking lot, commercial tow
yard on a vacant lot on kiler street. And lauren will also be presenting
that o um, just our definitions
did not exactly define a tow yard in the zoning ordinance.
um, but where this use fits in is that it's, um,
the mobile parking lot commercial one, it would be, um, using
a lot for the storage of six or more vehicles, um,
that are not for sale. So, uh, the applicant here
is proposing to utilize this vacant lot, um,
off of kibbler street for a tow yard. They're
proposing to add a fence as part of it. And this
is in the floodway, not just the flood zones, but the floodway.
um, and I assuming you all remember, there
was an alley vacation at the, on the street at two 19.
so you should be familiar with this area. Um,
uh, the royal examiner's offices are here. So it is this
property. Um, here's sixth and commerce is
to or for sale, but we're just looking at this piece here.
where was the alley vacation? We've done so many out here. Up here. Up here. Okay. So
you vacated that portion of the alley here. We had, um,
you've got two residential structures on one lot, which is the same
property owner. So this lets them utilize this back lot here.
well, I had some, I had some, I have two questions. I think.
um, one was in the language, in the summary, it said they
had permit the entered park six or more vehicles, but not wrecked vehicles.
but then if you go down to the staff recommendations, then it says
number four, rector damaged vehicles shall not remain on site for a period longer. So
you're telling me you can't have 'em, but then you can have 'em. So which one is
it? So, um, in the, in chapter 1 58, it states
that you can't have them, but because they're operating a
tow yard, essentially our thought was is if they
need to, if they get called to tow these vehicles or there's some issue with the vehicle,
they can leave it there, but then they need to remove it within 48
hours. So then that, the 48 hours was my second issue. Because
if somebody is in a serious wreck mm-hmm . 48 hours is very,
is a very short period of time to figure out where your car is, where
it's going and all of that. So I don't, I don't know that that's
feasible. And I don't know that you can police it. You know, if
insurance, the insurance company actually, so when,
like if there's a wreck and they take the car to wherever it is, which this
would be like a tow yard, then the insurance company is the one that comes
in and determines where they're gonna move it to. Or at least that's what happened to us.
if you're laid up in the hospital, you're not the one dealing with your vehicle
typically at that point. And they have to move it because otherwise only, I'm only
are they on a, are they on a period on a 48 hour period too? Well, the thing is,
they wanna move it to a lot that
is cheaper. At least that's, I'm just my experience. When my daughter's
car was totaled, they, and we had it done midway
and um, they had to, they went in and got it and they
didn't come and get it quick enough. And when I say that is because
they, they charge for it. They charge forever. Storage fee. Yeah.
they charge the storage fee for it and the insurance company wants to come and get it and get
it to wherever they don't have to pay well or wherever cheaper. And I guess,
I mean, that's, that's so, but, but I'm like you 48 hours seems
quick. It is, but I get that you don't, I get that. You don't want it
to be, you don't want it to become a junkyard. And this would be
complaint based. I mean, if somebody complains that there's these vehicles there for, you know,
a week on end, right? Mm-hmm . We'll go
out there, but but's this was just to get them. Yeah,
that's what I'm saying. Who's gonna enforce a our zoning
zoning enforcement, right? I mean, I mean that, that's, that's
well and fine. That the, the question is, is if it's a wreck
vehicle because of its location near the, the
creek, I don't want fluids leak leaking
onto the pavement, down into the, or into the, uh,
whether or not it's a pavement or, or it's gravel.
the gravel, it, it'll, it'll sink into the, the groundwater
and then find its way in. So that, so you're saying four
eight hours is a good thing? Yeah. If you can manage it,
the be off, but, but well, true.
that's you gotta get rid of.
yeah, you gotta get rid of
what, what is the zoning in this area? Uh, I think this is c
one. C one. Yeah. But remember have
two or three houses, residential houses. The two houses that are adjacent
to it predate the zoning ordinance, which is how they ended
up on the same lot. So this is cattycorner across the
street from the one that we sold two feet of kibbler street to, right? Yeah,
yeah, yeah. Because the person yeah. Built it wrong.
no, that, that with, that was two 19. Two 19 was the one
we, two 19 was the one where they put it too close to the street or
whoever the excavator was. I mean, so these are legally nonconforming uses.
two houses are on the same lot. Which ones are leak
residential. Yeah. And I will say
that that was what I recall. The other issues
we've had with this street, as I recall the complaint was that
there was residential back there, but they
were like, those two structures were built in the forties before we had
adopted his zoning ordinance. And they've been used as such ever since. Lauren,
you said flood way and flood something else
can, I'm just curious, could you define the difference between those?
so you've got the flood way, which is where you have waters, like you're, we're
anticipating like the waters moving through. And then you've got the flood plain, which may flood depending
on the severity of the, the the rain
event or the, so what's the, what's the one that's more serious? This is, this is floodway.
so this is the creek, this is the channel. So if it floods,
it's like mor right on the creek. It's more often
versus more serious. Is that what I'm hearing? Right. Well we had that,
well it earlier last year, and we had to go in there and make repairs to kibbler
street where the creek backed up and flooded.
and the neighbor, none of the neighbors minded? Well, the, they, it is them.
they own it. Oh, the two houses are the people that are
bunk. I'm assuming there was four. Sorry, just outta curiosity.
are it, is that already, is this already happening? And this is just a,
to try to fix it? Not here. There's another, um, towing facility. Um,
yeah, I thought there was nearby. Okay, so
one is independent of the other. Where's the other one?
aaron's where it's, I believe
it's just north. It's on these properties by east seventh street.
well, marta motors on the other side of that, right? Yeah. I
think believe there's ability, there's a buffer, a little bit of a buffer between marlow.
think there's like a use, there's one where the alley where they wanted to be able to
come down and come to the side. That's this, that's
the same one. Yeah. That's, that's only street. I have it on the plat.
yep. So you've already vacated everybody, uh, created.
yeah. There's polygraph. Mm-hmm . Yep.
I would like to see, I would suggest a paved surface
as opposed to gravel. So it, yeah, whether if there
are any fluids or whatever it can, it'll, it'll roll, roll in
the direction away from the, uh, away
from the body of water. Yeah. I mean, did mar the motors have any issues
when we had the last, um, the last flood
leaking? No, I don't know about fluids, but they, they had some cars. They had to, but
typically you've got enough notice you can remove the vehicles and you can, it's not
outside of your purview to potentially request or condition
like management plan be submitted to staff that explain how if the need had
to, yeah. How are you getting these vehicles out? Are security side
problem is if they're wrecked vehicles. , that's why we're saying don't
have wrecked vehicles. Okay, because I was gonna say like marlon motor, that's different.
like they can get in the car and move a car. That's true. They're every
gets in at three o'clock in the morning. Yeah, but I'm saying though that they're,
they have the ability to move a working vehicle versus
if this becomes like a tow yard. Um, but
they're towing them there, so they should be able to tow them out. True. That's true.
when we do this and we put the notice out to, do we go across the
creek? Did they get notified as well? We, we do immediately adjacent. So,
um, well go back. Okay, my question is
on the east side of the creek, you got two
big buildings there. So were they notified of this? 'cause they all have a,
well, they would've been there. Their property lines are touching. So here's the creek. The creek is
actually running through their properties. They would've been notified that the ones the
business, right? The one with the red roof. Isn't that the business? Mm-hmm
. I don't know what the other one is now. Well, there's no, the
parking lot, the concrete, it's just that concrete pad, the big, that
was the building where it worked out.
counsel, the question is, do you all have more questions about this?
um, do you want to move it forward?
do what is your prerogative about this
particular, this particular application at this time?
okay, well, you know what? Here's the six minutes and nine and
I'm not feeling like everybody's totally, nobody's jumping on this
really like, yep. Let's move it on to the february meeting. So should
we move this to, should we, I won't say
table it, but bring it up again as old business or what,
what is your prerogative? Can we move it to our next work session
and revisit it? Yeah, that's, that's fine. Maybe get more information on it because
I, I be honest, I did not prepare for this. I haven't,
I've driven by there many times, but I'd like to look at
it again. So yeah, I,
I'm okay with it. If we change, if we change number four
under the wreck vehicle for, well that's, that's what
would happen that night. I mean, uh, number three. Sorry. You want it pave?
yeah, I want it pa okay. Well, like I said, that would be something that
would be part of the motion that night. If that's, if that was the condition you
wanted. Yeah, my question. Okay. I I'm hearing nobody
else say anything. Uh, so I'm gonna go with what glen said, which is, we'll
put this one next week's work session. I will say this though,
to put it on next week's work session. If there are questions that
you have, please get with staff
and ask the questions so that when we bring it back next week, you
know it, let me ask this is one week and up or should we move it to the march work
sessions? I don't think one week is enough that I would take one
thing. Is everybody okay? Yes. Mr. Petty.
this requires a public hearing. So if,
if you could talk about it next week, or if you wait till the first march meeting,
you need time to advertise it for a public hearing anyways, so
it doesn't matter if you hear it next week or the first week in march. If
you delay this, the next public hearing available will be the end. End of march. March. Okay. I got so
you have time if you would like extra time. So here's what we're gonna do, mr. Petty,
you and I, when we make the agenda for next week, we're gonna see how hard it is.
if it's not real, real hardy, then we'll put it on that one. If it's, if we have
a lot of items, then moving into march isn't gonna, it's not gonna affect
the, um, how long this takes her. Correct. Okay. Is that good? I,
um, oh, two my concerns again, were the 48
hours, but also I get about the rec vehicles. But
when you say damaged, if you're towing my car, it's got damage of some
sort. So I, I don't know that that term is gonna work.
I think that's out of our code. That's why we stated it that way. But we can
think about that. Look at that. Yeah, I can chime in at this point. The
the code is imperfect. Okay.
we're in the process of a complete review and revamp
of the zoning ordinance. Um, the zoning administrator
came to me for help on this app as to what
the proper use was given the application.
and, and I'm not addressing the conditions the pc put
on there, but it, it was, it's an imperfect
solution to address the application and that includes some of
the definitions. So, okay.
okay. All right. You'll see this again. Counsel. Uh, item
two c is a special use permit application from
h-a-m-l-l-c, front royal virginia on behalf of the, is it boise?
I saying that right? Rosie. Rosie
bo. All right. I'll just say be a family. Lc etal
to operate a shopping center in the c one zoning district on south street.
but yeah, this was interesting. ,
I keep it by saying it's fairly simple, but, um, this shopping center
was constructed in the sixties, early seventies when
it opened seventies. And that predates the definition of shopping center
in our ordinance. So we traced it back to, it looks like the late nineties,
19 98, 19 99 is when shopping center appeared in the zoning ordinance.
from that point, this was a, you know, legally non-conforming
use. There have been additions, alterations, expansions of this
shopping center, at which point in time it should have gone through the special
use permit process to bring into compliance. And it did not.
so at this point in time, this is to bring this shopping center that's
already in use into compliance. What, what, what predicated
this tonight? I mean, I'm just curious, did they want to expand something
again and then we were like, wait, hold on. Or was it something that you just
had known it was out of compliance and so the, I'm
just wondering what made them, the tenants reached out. So, um,
the, I guess the property owner, that family trust,
they're looking at potentially down the line, selling the
property to a new management company, something like that. So if that happens,
right, they want clean title. Clear title. Gotcha. Uh, that makes sense.
I just was, I just thought it was really odd. Like what, what made us revisit
it right now? Since it's been there since the seventies. It's probably getting vdo
a print attention. 'cause of the vdot thing. Yeah. Yeah, that was, that's
what I was wondering too, like was there something block, okay, um, I have a
question on this too about language or, well, somewhere,
I can't put my hand on it right now. Right? So we couldn't do outdoor, oh there
it is. Um, outdoor activities. No, no it's
not on this page. Uh, somewhere it
lists like what the activities are that you can do. And it said number one,
this is straight from our code. So recording parking spaces, spaces
show or may obstructed and reserved solely for parking purposes. Whether use
including storage, loading or outdoor activity shall be permitted within the designated parking
areas. So when we have some, well, okay, I guess you can argue when
we have the, you know, thanksgiving bus collecting the
food, I guess it scouts scout the boy scout. Well they're on the grass.
no, no. They have, they usually have something set up there too where they collect the
money, the shredding, the shredding truck. I mean there's all kinds
of out outdoor activities and like what
were we trying to like avoid what was, what was happening there? We doing
that because we do outdoor activities on time there. Bring the bell. Are
we trying to, are we trying to get, I mean, what were we trying to
say? We, we didn't want to have, 'cause we have cloud work activities.
I don't know that it's, we said it now. I think what she's saying is it's
in the code. It's in the code and it's just like what george said, this might be
one of those areas that when we rewrite it, we take that
language out, we address it. But you know, we have people that come with neat
trucks that really shouldn't be just selling their,
there used to be a thing set up there where you could drop off shoes and clothing. Like one
of those, like what I'm talking about. And long before
you were here and you were born, you were here, they had a photo
thing there. Remember that little tiny photo thing through mr. Po? Do you remember that? And
you'd pull up and you'd hand over your film and then you come back a few days later and,
and that was literally in the middle of it. Like amber's laughing. She never heard of that.
she said before you were born. I know it was before she was born because I wanna
say I was in high school and you could do that. So, and loading. I mean how can we
have not have loading there? We've gotta have, you can't use the parking
store so you can't do it out where everybody's parking. You've got pedestrians going.
that is what the back of the shopping center is for, is for your loading areas. So
we have designated zones for that. We're not talking about
rule king putting their farm implements and all that stuff. No, that's exempt
under our code. Okay. That's the next another section of zoning. Well I was afraid that was maybe
what, so at this point in time they've submitted their, the
striping plan, they just had the parking lot retried,
I think it was like in december. Mm-hmm . Um, they
didn't stripe the rear of the facility. They have adequate parking
per this plan. Staff wasn't going to make them because they have
adequate parking. Do any additional,
the back's getting crowded back there. 'cause I think of martin's, I think
martin's is doing like renovations and I don't know if they've taken stuff out
and they have all these like tractor trailer, like the containers back there that
weren't there before. Yeah, in the back. Yeah. Um, if you, you're
coming down the side like, um, if you pull into the martin's closest to
the keller building and you go up through there and go round back, I just know,
'cause I take stuff back to the hospice drop off and, and it's like, boy that got
narrow real quick. But I imagine once the renovations are done at martin's that that
will open. Yeah. But
so the other thing was the quest, the sign thing. Can you
explain that? So the billboard and off premises signs, which apparently this
one has been there a very long time are not permitted in our code. So the applicant,
since the planning commission meeting has reached out to the property owner
and staff and said that they have an annual lease that renews june 1st
of every year. So they're negotiating that with the property owners. Then
this will be removed prior to june 1st. They
will, regardless of how this goes. Wow. I thought that
that had to be in violation. I mean all of 'em in town were taken down
years ago. Yep. That's the only one that really is left. And I think they were permitted
like one change or like they had a grace period, but
at some point it's just kept going. People move on and you'll lose track of it
and then it's another one of those enforced but not are they
okay with that there? I mean they know that that's gonna come down. That's the only one
though. That's the one that we know. No, no, no. I'm talking about the other conditions.
there was some something else. Other condition was just that they comply with our parking standards essentially.
oh, not that big sign. That's the one I thought it was. I thought
look at was this, I was like, I thought
got those signs. I thought that that's permitted. No, it's that, that giant
air serve sign on mountain road right down
all the frontage up to re mount. Right. So off premises sign. So this ground
mount sign is telling you what is on the premises, what es are there.
the other one is just air serve is not located in that shopping center. Right.
I gotcha. And they couldn't like fitness evolution couldn't put it
up there either. Right? The billboard on that billboard because even, even though it's a business in
there. All right counsel, you're still
utilizing the, the, the, the
east side directly across the building
as there garden center I guess? Yes. This is still the garden
center area and I think that there's farm products further back
and into the rear of it. That is not an
issue. Mm-hmm. Okay. Counsel,
are you all feel comfortable enough to put this
on the february 23rd regular meeting with the
public hearing or do you have more questions to
postpone for the law? I go forward. I'm good. Is everybody good? I'm good. Yeah. Okay.
public hearing for that. Alright, thank you.
and then item 2d is a request to vacate a portion of the unimproved
low lane between braxton road and lot 27 a. Mr.
pe this is you. So there's no picture of that up here. We don't have any pictures of
that. I don't, don't have a picture. It's in your packet. I, that's got, I got lots of questions on
this. Just, just curious. I'm, I just, I I think we
all became curious of this one, uh, as it came up. It was not something,
um, I think it came to planning first. Uh, you know,
the applicant had this lot that what was assumed to be landlocked
until they discovered low lane next to the, the
lane connects singular to this property essentially.
um, so they've requested that low lane
be vacated. Uh, staff comments are provided.
they did, uh, in the survey attached,
uh, provided adequate, um, 20 foot sanitary sewer
easement. The storm sewer easement is 20
foot in their property and in the right of way until it
meanders off of low lane. So they have
illustrated that they would dedicate those easements otherwise,
uh, I think counsel was, or counsel, I apologize. The staff was
okay with it. Essentially, you know, if we were develop low lane,
we would be developing a driveway to a parcel essentially.
but is this over here then? So, so it's
right here, right? Correct. Okay. But if you come down braxton road,
so it would literally be, it's just that one little
slip that's but what's this over here then? That, that's a gis
it's if you look the color there is like the roads that
gray, that's actually nothing. If you look at the picture to the left,
you'll see that low lane is on the other side of racks then. Right. It's
just grass or sewer line runs through. So, so we own
this, we own that. They own this.
they own the property. Yeah. Mm-hmm . That is just amazing. So, and
this, uh, I I, they got it through an auction. They got it through a
tax auction from the county. So the, the
property that it's immediately behind, this was a piece of their property
originally. They subdivided it off in the seventies and then something
happened. But they didn't pay taxes on that parcel, that third
launch, um, as far as 10 11 was auctioned off
and he purchased it. But he can't construct a dwelling unit on it without
building there a public road. Yeah. So,
you know, I grew, well you wouldn't know that. So I grew up on mine street. Right. That's
why I'm, I mean I I honestly, I'll have to get
somebody to take me out there. I I, the reason why I'm saying that is is that that
10 11, right? Right. Because ram's living 9 25, 10 11,
um, I'm assuming is um,
I mean I know who owned it and that that particular 10 11
for years grew an entire garden in their front yard and
it fed their, it was the vegetables that they used at their restaurant
here in town. But it literally drops off like,
I mean drops off behind it and it drops off and goes down.
right. And so I guess what's behind 10 11
is that drop off. I, there is no way a house could be
put there. I cannot even, I mean it 'cause it goes like this.
it it, yeah. Anyway, so who so challenge
what? It's a challenge. Yeah. I would say frank, solid bill 10
11 does, um, but does it ends there at that property? Does
our line continue? That is your line. Yeah. Mm-hmm .
so there's, we have a right of way behind these other houses.
so also what may make it more difficult, you can't build on our
right of way or sewer. I geographically I'm, yeah, I'd
have to go to see it. So if you notice in the survey, so the sewer
line, the existing 20 foot storm sewer easement yep. It has a
deed book reference. And that's because it's going through the parcels. Right.
once it exits the parcels, it then entered low lane, which we already own. Right?
so there's no easement. It's in our property. So that's why they would be dedicating a
proposed sewer line easement to if we were to vacate.
and does the owner realize the approximate
cost again, with our new method for calculating this,
we haven't shared anything at this point until we've got this, this is to advertise for the public
hearing. After this is initiated, we would share all the
information. So the idea is that they
would want, that, they would like for the town to vacate that.
and then obviously except right, they wanna be able to purchase it so that they
can access that lump of land right. Between between 10 11 and 2 27
polk. Right. That's the idea. So just outta curiosity,
so once we vacated it, that would be it's all
on them, right? Right. They would so it wouldn't even be a private street.
it wouldn't be low lane anymore. Driveway. Driveway. So they'd be responsible for
that. So this little green patch right there,
who owns that? That was, it's to the, uh, mr.
ms. Kane right down the corner. Well then why is that black line there
in they here too? I mean I, I really have been looking at these pictures because
they, it is like two parcels. They have like a small little section.
it is best to look at the survey. You can see that, um,
it has the text map eight a and they also own lot nine
unknown on the little people. Yeah. And that, and that's what I was gonna say.
like that's not, that's my question because the same people have lived at 2 29
pretty much my whole life. Or at least since I moved in the neighborhood. So I,
that's why I thought that was I when it said owner unknown, 'cause I'm pretty sure they're
the only owner that's ever owned it. Um,
the boy and the survey says proposed wanda boy,
west richard br drain, easement drain.
yeah. There's an existing storm drain. There are the little gray things. What
that is that what the little gray things are? Little square.
the little gray things. They're the houses. They're the structures like within the yellow
and the green. Oh, the little gray ones or sheds? Yeah. Oh,
those are, it's like I said, it's the gis it's not
always perfect. You can't use it as, but if you look at the aerial image
to the left of it, you can can see there's a little shed back there. Yeah. So,
so whoever owns 2 31 polk and whoever
owns 2 29 polk. Right. You're I'm just asking. So
the patch behind the pink line, right? Mm-hmm
. They, they own whatever is butted up to that. We don't own that. We don't
own any of it. I mean I, it says that they own it, but we don't. I thought I know
it. We don't own it. The smaller of the two says owner unknown. Mm-hmm
. Behind lot alone. And there's a wire fence
along.
my concern is we go too far down the rabbit hole and we say it's gonna cost
8,000 or $10,000. Oh, I don't want to do that. And
we've spent time and effort. I think this is, if you were,
we may, they've applied for the application. You have to go to the
public hearing. Gosh, yeah. It's, I, once they've
submitted the application, that's the, so where we're
going to get to that first public hearing and the applicant, the applicant
owns that package. Does the applicant own 10 11? No.
no, they just owned 20, they just owned that empty
blob there. Lot 27 a one on me. Show that. Right. Okay. Okay.
sorry. I don't, I don't see the benefit. Talented.
I own, own it. I mean, I mean
I don't think, I think it's alan.
yeah. As long as I I'm just saying viewers in this case because of the, a
bloody properties so unknown owner right here, you know
lauren lot 27 a one. I
mean little wayne, you believe that it's, I guess it's large enough to
maybe a spot where somebody, well my kids play here, you know, or gonna oh
that's, you would think that, but not really because I'm telling you
it's out of a yeah. I I just don't have the concept. A square
foot, I mean the house siting process
and the ation. We'll go through our office, we'll review that to make sure it's appropriate.
I mean, I walk back here, obviously
dropped off. I know who owned originally two king.
tell him with the slopes
and stuff. Go to london there and get some properties. Get some . Alright, so the question is
that, that it sounds like from what you said, regardless at this point it's
has because they've applied, we have to go to the public hearing and then we'll hear
what the public has to say and right. That's the idea.
I don't get public hearing. I mean I personally think that we would get between
now and then. Okay. So if everybody's okay with this, this could be a public hearing on
february 23rd. And that's where you, similar to today, you have
option to deny point viewers or to adopt an ordinance?
well, if nobody from the public shows up to complaint, maybe like, like bruce, maybe it
is a slam dunk. You know, I don't know. I mean it's just saying you have a sign out in
lower lane or whatever it's called the public hearing. We
haven't ever, you're letting us know tonight. Yeah. They
won't have it for, but they go to public hearing. I thought, I
thought you guys put it up when you had a public hearing. We don't have a public hearing for
this. This, this is not land use. Not land use. Okay. We're the only ones
decide to add on the straight moment. Okay.
yep. Okay. Item am three as unfinished business. A request
to reinstate two readings for public hearings. I certainly did enjoy going
back and reading the minutes and stuff like that. 'cause it was like a blast from the past.
I can remember all of those discussions. Also, you could see where,
um, where some of the, you know, um,
historical changes. Well that, that and that. And who
was in fa more, you know, I, I mean there, there
I will say one thing you could tell for read in a minutes, there was some objections to it for
concerns. But it's just one of those things. 'cause I admit
I voted for it. But I look back and, you know, you live and learn sometimes you
do these things and you think unintended consequences sometimes.
but anyway, so thoughts on this.
so don't we have, it says joe petty beside of it, but it's not you. I don't know why
it says you don't. We have the opportunity to keep the public hearing
open for the next mark. And we have a case by case
basis if we, we can't make up our minds or something, we just leave the public
hearing open and we take it up at the next meeting. Yep. If that's what
member makes, then we're gonna do two readings on everything. So it's
two months. It's longer. I'm just thinking,
do we, do we need that when we could leave,
leave it , but it would have
to be a vote to, a council member would have
to make the motion to leave. Well, not even, it's not
even making a motion. It's a, some kind of something we squeeze in there at the end.
I can't close the public hearing. We have to leave the public hearing.
somebody on council has to say, once the public's done talking
that they wanna leave the public hearing open and they have to name the dates. Right.
that's, that's how we've done it in the past. Right. It have to a date certain. Yeah. Yep.
and doesn't it have to have a majority vote for that? It really should be the next
regular meeting. Right. But doesn't, it doesn't, there have to be a
majority people, so you have to make sure that every, the majority
of counsel agrees that it needs to have a second night
to contemplate it. I guess basically a second in the case. You're
presenting right now a second opportunity for the public to come right.
and express their views. Right. I'm all for having
two, I mean, I don't mind having two public readings and two public input
sessions, but the part that I raises my eyebrow
is having the two, you know, the not the first non banding vote and then the second
vote for it. I don't, I think that throws a lot of confusion out. I mean, if I'm a, if
I'm an applicant coming in here and, you know, and if I get a, a, an affirmative vote,
even though it might be do non-binding the first time and then I get
another hearing and then all of a sudden it's a no, and I'm, it's, to me, it just,
again, I, I having one vote, I, I fine, but I,
I, I don't like the idea of having two separate votes, even though one might be non-binding.
to me, it just adds confusion. I mean, not just to the public. I think it adds confusion
to the applicants as well. It's how the town of front royals governing body
operated its entire existence up until three years ago. So,
um, with that being said, it's not something that I proposed because we can't make
up our mind at a meeting and need to leave it open. I proposed it because a lot
of constituents asked for me to ensure that I fought to bring this back.
because what happens is we learn brand new information.
tina's handed pamphlets of papers and pictures and letters and
petitions, and they're passed down the diocese. Well, I'm supposed to be pretending to
listen to this speaker, but I also have to read this entire three page article
before they're done speaking, and then we have to go to make a decision. Or there
are people who don't know about the public hearing until the press writes
about it from a meeting, and then they're like, well, I wish I would've known that.
so I could have been a part of that. I've heard that too, but I've not heard people say two votes. So
how tina how many years did we do that? I, I know you said the
year you said it was, it was before 1993. So since before, so we
did two readings since before 1993. This is the way the government had always operated. It
was changed because there were council members who didn't want to have
as many council meetings. That is the entire reason it was changed,
was it not? So we didn't have to meet as often. Well, I think,
I think, I don't want to, I don't want to summarize things, but you can read the
minutes becky and take from it what you, to your point,
new information comes to us. Yeah. We leave them, you know, in light
of new information tonight. We need more time
to do that, and we leave the meeting open. I mean, I, it's political then, because
if you've lobbied your votes beforehand, which happens on this council in council's
previous, you call people and say, what do you think about tonight? How are you gonna vote? I know I'm gonna vote. And then
you hear all this new information. So you've already decided you don't wanna leave it
open at that point. It takes the politics out of it. It is the
standard practice for this governing body to hear the information, process
the information, and then take decisive action on it. It can't be
something that I have to have enough lobbied votes to keep it open.
that becomes very political. I, I agree again, but
I have not heard anybody say like the voting part of it. I personally,
I mean, I heard, I've heard more people say that they would love to have two public hearings,
but I don't, that's how the two public hearings always worked. They always had a vote. You had
to vote most times. Always. Don't they? It's one public hearing. One
public hearing. One public hearing. Yeah. The, the vote happens, the two readings
of it. Mm-hmm. I think the, I the school does it this way. What it happens
at the second reading then, if you're not having the public hearing for warren input or public
comments come before it mm-hmm . Okay. I, I don't know.
yeah. The school board does do two readings. Well, yeah, I
two votes though. Hold on. Actually no,
no. If the second reading I'm talking about, you all said public comments would
come before it actually, no. Right, tina? Because
if there was a, it would be a business item at the second reading, so we would get, okay.
I didn't, that, that was one of the reasons why too, we changed the order of
business, not this group, but before was because it, public comments used to be
to get less, like the first thing and the second thing. Okay. I'm sorry. Yeah, that's correct.
and I, and I do understand, and, and councilman would I, I feel like
maybe that was the meeting you weren't here for when we discussed this maybe, but,
um, I, you know, the tricky part is, is that there are some things
that really are, I won't say simple,
but they're, they're easier that you're like, really? It doesn't, it wouldn't need
a second reading. As I said, ms pre and I, we've had this conversation how
there are items that really don't need a second reading that,
you know, but, but mr. Son said there's no way for us to, to
like basically put things on the agenda that says this thing needs two
readings. This thing needs one reading or whatever. We have to do it uniform one way
or the other. Um, but then there are other items where,
you know, it is a lot. I mean, I, I, I will, you
know, there have been times where I felt like there was a lot of information
that was shared and,
and, and the vote was gonna be taken. And that's true. You have to be decide.
and I would, I understand what you're saying about we can leave the public hearing open. That's true. That's
absolutely true. However, you can only do that
if the majority of the people on the council agree with you to leave it open.
do you know what I mean? So, for example, you know,
two people were like, oh my gosh, that was a, in their head, there was a, that
was a lot of new information, you know, know, I don't think I'm really ready to make a
decision yet. But the other four people are like, I'm ready to make a decision. So they don't wanna
leave the public hearing open, then you gotta make it right, mr. Sauna.
I mean, that's, that's the down motion requires a motion to pass. Yeah. That's the downfall
of, so the other thing is, if I may mm-hmm . So there's leaving the
o uh, public hearing open in the case of well,
leaving it open, uh, closing it and postponing
action. Uh, these are under robert's rules, right.
uh, and there's also reconsideration.
now that's very restricted.
it has to be at the next meeting. You can't, yeah. It also has
to be somebody that voted against it in the first
place. They're the only people that can bring it up for a reconsideration. Correct?
yeah. Correct. I don't know that, I don't know that I've ever been. So those are addressed in robert's
rules. But each of those, in the case of reconsideration,
you have to have a majority vote just to put it
back on the table. Right. And then discuss it, and then another
vote if you're gonna, well, another, so it's two votes for
a reconsideration. First one is to actually agree to reconsider,
and the second vote is on the merits. So
leaving public hearing open, uh, or
closing it and postponing action to another date, certain
or reconsideration. Those are all addressed in robert's rules.
there's no way to get public input on this part. This I, I'm just, as
we're all sitting here talking about it, there's no way to get public input
on this unless we put it on an agenda rate. We, this I it
requires an ordinance for yeah. But we could bring it to the february 23rd meeting
under public comments. Under public hearing rather,
and say, receive public input for considering two readings.
it requires a public hearing for you to do this. 'cause we have to amend your orders amending the
. But could we receive public input? Like we've done, we did that.
we did that one other time. I think it was an alley thing. There was a time where we said,
let's receive public input, but we didn't take action on it because this was
the most asked thing the last time I ran, was to bring back two readings. But
see, I never heard of anybody asking for two different votes. That's how it always has been.
read the minutes. We've always voted twice when there were two readings. You have to take action.
but the school board doesn vote, vote the way the town is. You're
not voting twice, only two votes. You're voting to close the public hearing. You're
not voting, approve or deny. It sounds like,
of all sounds like comment. It doesn't sound like we're ready. So
I've been on council two years. Can you gimme some examples of why we
needed this? Well,
yeah, I was gonna say, I would love to, amber was the one that brought it up at the last meeting.
I mean, I brought it up before, obviously I said that, but when she brought it up
this time was like, just some time, for example,
some public hearings where while we're at the public
hearing, I'll give you an example of one that was before any of y'all were here.
we came to a meeting and we thought it was, I thought, this is an easy issue.
this isn't big deal. I got to the meeting, there was like 21 people in the back of the
room, and I was like, what are all these people here for? And it was,
um, about, about zoning this piece of land. Um,
and one of the ladies stood up and said, there's actually a cemetery
back there. And anyway, long story short,
um, uh, there was no time to,
to collab. Is that, is that true? Is
it not true? We're not allowed to have discussion on the ballot. Yeah. It wasn't like that. And so the
public brought information, staff didn't seem to know anything about it
or whatever, and, and the vote was taken. Take example, leaving the meeting. Yeah, yeah,
yeah. It should have been. But, but people weren't doing that
much. And the only way to have left that open would've
been if the majority of the council members said,
yeah, I agree. We should hear it. And I don't know that,
I don't know that it's an item that you can,
um, what's the word I'm looking for? Rally to be able
to be like, counsel, I think we should leave this public hearing open. We've never done it that
way. It's been more like somebody just makes the, makes the suggestion.
I think we should leave the public hearing open. And there isn't like a motion and a
discussion. Correct. Mr. Sonnet, when somebody says, let's leave
the public hearing open. It's not like, then it moves into a discussion
where we all discuss why we should think we should leave it open. It's just a
yay or a nay parliamentary. That's a nuance I'd have to look at. But I think
I'm just saying we haven't the, that, that might be a nuance in robert's rules. But I think
if you still have a discussion on the motion, right? Have motion, have a
discussion on the motion. But some motions you don't have discussion procedure prohibits
discussion amongst the members of this council. If the people on this council
were to read robert's rules of order and understand it, we are not allowed
to engage in back and forth dialect. The person who makes the motion gets the first
to speak to the motion and add discussion. Each person gets to add discussion.
there should not be two times speaking, there should be no back and forth. There's no rebuttals
in robert's rules of order. It's very uncomfortable. But this is the way the government was intended
to operate. Also, as I'm looking back through here, there's been multiple,
multiple public hearings since october, 2025 until february 2nd, 2025
that we've discussed. We had six public hearings tonight. Not a single
speaker showed up to a single one of those. They wake up tomorrow morning
and they see on the royal examiner in the northern virginia daily, the six public hearings
that had not a single speaker that were all passed unanimously. And they're like,
well, I wish I would've known because the weather, the ice, whatever the case may
have been, they didn't come to a work session at the town hall. That's done deal.
that's, we changed town code tonight. It's done deal . So I'm
just saying, I'm sorry that you guys haven't gotten that same feedback. I know, and
I think you have experienced it as well. There is a large majority of
this community who rallied and asked me, if you're reelected,
will you be a proponent for two public hearings? And the name and sake of transparency
in the front royal government?
how can you, I don't understand how you can process that information while someone's
standing at a podium speaking to you and say, you truly gave it a thought.
or if they said, ride by and look at x, y, z this time of day,
now I'm gonna make my decision, or I'm gonna leave the public hearing open and hope
that four other people are just as confused or passionate about the issue as me.
that's where it becomes political because your friend applies for an alley vacation. It
seems like a slam dunk. Nobody shows up and opposes it. You vacate this
alley and then you look back and somebody tried to leave it open and you were like, well, I knew enough about the
matter, but why can't we just do it like the school board, just do
two readings and then and a vote. I mean, wouldn't that serve the same?
I mean, I I'm all for it too. I'm just saying, iiii
kind hear what you're, it's confusing if they don't have to take a vote after the first
reading and a vote after the second reading. Why? That's all I, that's all I'm saying.
I mean, why, why? I mean, that's, that's, do we, go ahead. Well, I, I just have one comment, and
this is not from one or the other, but the one question I would say is also
thinking that we have a work session ahead of time and, you
know, that's an opportunity for, but it also creates a little confusion
because there are times where we don't allow the public or even the applicant
to speak at that time. So, you know, it's just staff talking
to, so if, if it were to go this route of having, you
know, a public hearing and then a later vote, you know,
I would like to look at that process as well as how much is given, how much
information is given at the work session where the public doesn't
have the opportunity. 'cause then we give it, and then we're hearing it sometimes for the first
time as well at the public hearing that was put on the spot.
so it's, so it's, you know, land use goes through planning commission. We have
a little bit more background, but then it's almost as if we're talking about
it a few times before the public gets that chance. I'd like to think about
how the work session element plays into then the two readings.
because I do think the meetings, you had two regular meetings when you had
the two, and now we have two work sessions that are regular. But the thing about a reading is,
I, I don't think, because I did serve at the time before,
um, we still had the, we still had the presentation
by staff at the work session. The, the
readings were, and the opportunity at the public comment
or whatever. Um, but, but
we didn't go into it blind. Like we at least had knowledge about what the,
what the issue was, and then the public spoke on it.
um, so I, I don't, I don't know, I don't know that
I would wanna do away with discussing it at the work session first, or at least hearing
about it on the work session. And that's something I like, you know, is about how, how
that is displayed and how it's discussed. And if it's like, like the item earlier,
if it's more about we need to talk about this more, we'll kick it to another work session or otherwise
the application is complete, everything is here, we go to the public
hearing and allow the public that opportunity. Um,
and I'd just like to also figure out that process as well. Not,
not to take away from the open discussion. It's just talking about
it two or three times the public hearing. Usually by the time it goes to the public hearing, they have
had the opportunity if they wanted to, if the work session right. But then
also they, um, they hear what
it is that's being like, not proposed, but what
the options are. Because if you look at the agenda, it'll say on there, like
this motion, sometimes the motions get changed, but at least they get an idea
of it. Instead of, I, I don't, it doesn't sound like,
it doesn't sound like we have enough answers to questions yet to, to
move this to any particular direction. Um, we can bring
it up again or, or, you know, I'm fine with letting it die. And me being the only
one who was a proponent to reinstate amber, you're not to reinstate the way
it was before I was speaking. I am looking to reinstate. I never
asked for two votes. I asked to reestablish and reinstate the way the town of
front royal governed. With that being said, I am fine that I am
the minority in that. With that being said, put yourself in the
public's position before you were elected to this council and think if you understood
and fully could digress what a public hearing mattered
or if you read about it, then you were like, man, I wish I would've known about that sooner.
or if you were on vacation and you couldn't attend the public hearing and
you were like, if only there was a second opportunity to have the public's matters be heard.
I never said I wanted two votes. I said I wanted to reinstate the way the town of for royal governed
when I sat here with scott lloyd, joe mcfadden, chris holloway, lori cockrell,
and zach jackson. And that is the way in which it operated. I did
you want, did you wanna offer something? Well, first of all, to
mr. Wood's point, I haven't heard one complaint
from anyone okay. Okay. About how things are rolling right
now. Okay. I mean, I, I can't speak for anyone else
on council here, but I haven't heard one complaint come
from the firm about how lori and I both have.
so I'm not a liar. So I I'm not, I'm not calling
anyone liar. Okay. But, but I'm, I'm just saying I haven't heard
a complaint, uh, to that point. The,
the thing is, do do we
as a whole get the information out
to the public? I mean, I mean, do we really,
I mean, are are signs, for example, for our,
um, public hearing, public hearing, public hearing signs, they're
minuscule. I mean, and they're very low. And
if you know, you, you know, the gentleman talked
about the small signs of the earlier
today, but, uh, that, that's another point. Do,
do we get the information out so that the public knows a lot of times
the public, that's why they don't show up to meetings because they don't know.
so, um, you know, that's an, I'm flipping the chart here, you
know? Mm-hmm . Um, that's, I'm just throwing that out there.
no, I gotcha. And the thing is, you can provide information, but you can't make people
read it. Um, I understand newspapers or most
people, they get everything from online. But I will say one thing
about what you just said, every person on this council got the same email
that I did. I'm trying to think which month it was. There was
a lee, I know exactly who the lee, I remember her name, but it was something
we voted on. It wasn't the a du, it was the something else.
and she emailed a very long pointed email about
that. We had voted on that. And that, you know, she was upset about it.
um, and the thing was, in my head,
I said, well, you could have come and spoke,
but she didn't. Right. And so, so to me, those
are the, those, those are the situations like a
situation like that where other people that have said to me too, like that, that,
that, you know, you wanted to get the most public input as you could or whatever.
so that is a time when everybody in here got that same email. Again,
it's not our fault that somebody didn't read the agenda
and know what was on it, but I think it is true that
sometimes people read the after the fact
and, and then say, oh, like, I wish I'd
known that. Now abutting property owners get, get letters about something happening.
but like, for example, something that happened in my neighborhood years ago and it, I did,
I wasn't the abutting property, but it sure impacted my street.
and I, I wasn't paying attention and didn't know about it until it was all said
and done. So anyway, josh, go ahead. You, you had something else to say and then we'll move on. Well, what I'm
saying is, is that, you know, amber, you're not a minority. 'cause I said it too. I, I've
said people ask me if I would be in favor of bringing back two readings, and I
am. So for you to say that you're in a minority, okay, there must be three of us here. At least. I
I, I'm getting, I don't think anybody's gang it up on you or anything like that. I, I don't think anything of,
okay, well, all I'm saying is, is that, and you just agreed too,
that you never asked for having two votes. And that's all I'm saying is that I'm for it.
I just don't, I just don't, I just think having two votes is confusing. It's that simple. That's all
those two votes we discussed that at the last george legal
one vote, right? No, according, but you're not taking affirmative
action on the action item at the first public hearing reading.
if you guys wanna go back and watch our last work session so we can expedite this process. George
gave legal advisement at that work session where we asked these same exact
questions on why it was required that we took two votes. It wasn't two votes to approve
or deny. It's to move it forward. Yes.
yeah. Anyway, but I, but I do, but I do understand
what you're saying. 'cause I know in the past with other governing bodies,
it, if people flipped their vote, I'm not saying flip their vote,
but that was the impression, tina, you know, is that the first night they
heard the reading, they said, yeah, you learned information and then before the information, and then before the second
one when they said no, people were trying to figure out, well, what changed their mind
or whatever. So what is it, mr. Petty? Petty, I might
say , not perry. Perry petty might called folks.
she called him petty. What'd you say? No. Anyway,
um, what does the county do? So it's
been a while since I've been there, . Um, but how it would work is obviously,
so what we would do with land use, um, is that the first meeting
of the month, they would consent item, request for advertise
all the items. And so they wouldn't even discuss them. However,
if there was something of substance, they would pull it from consent to discuss it.
and if they felt it would go to work session, they kicked to a work session. Otherwise
they'd request to advertise. It's authorized. And then
especially land use, like I said, it's already gone through planning commission. It's already had
a public hearing. You know, it's, and if it's, hopefully
planning commission has vetted it and they've work session them and discuss them.
by the time it gets to, um, counselor of the board, they would then authorize
the advertisement. They would go to the public hearing. If they,
and then they had the options, they would hear the public hearing and they would either vote. And
if you've watched a lot of the short term rentals, nobody shows up routine.
the more comprehensive ones. They've either kicked them to planning commission, they
have delayed them. And even, I believe it was the
linden sheets, they reconsidered that brought it back and devoted the other way.
right. I mean, they, but they authorized to advertise at the beginning, or at least when
I was there. I can double check. And then the end of the month, it is that first meeting
considered a meeting or a work session? It's a regular meeting. Okay. And
I, I have to have, did you have to go to work session 12 or one?
it is not, they, they will, they have in the past. So when I first started,
we didn't have work sessions. It was just two meetings, and then they added
the work sessions. Okay. And then they added more work sessions. Gotcha. But they,
uh, they had a work session in between that they would discuss bigger
items that they felt they needed to discuss. Okay. Larger rezonings
or other land use that where they've gotten lots of emails or comments, but
most of 'em, they were just . I don't wanna say routine,
but all right. Well, I'm get it's unfinished business and I'm gonna
move on. But I am gonna say this, I'm sure that people will
see in the press now that we discussed this, and maybe people will get input, maybe
other council members will get input. Yay, nay. And, and we can decide in the
future if we wanna bring it up again. So, all right. The next item is number four,
closed meeting. And I will entertain motion. I move the town council,
convene a closed meeting pursuant to 2 2 7 1 2 3 7 2
of the code of virginia for the following purpose. One, pursuant to section 2.2
dash 37 11, a eight of the code of virginia consultation with legal counsel,
employer retained by a public body regarding specific legal matters requiring
the provision of legal advice by such counsel. More specifically, a, the insolvency
and disposition of assets of the industrial development authority of the
town of front royal, and the county of warren, virginia. And b, the amendment to voluntary
settlement agreement between the county of warren, virginia and the town of front royal
virginia regarding the compromise for pilot meals and lodging taxes entered into
april 11th, 2008. Second admission, second roll
call council wood. Yes. Ice call? Yes. Council.
council. Yes. Council king brown. Yes. Counsel?
yes. Anyone need a restroom? Right. Okay.
if not.