Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-09-26 Planning Commission Minutes/ Town of Pulaski Planning Commission Meeting Municipal Building, Council Chambers March 9, 2026 Chairman Meyer called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. and asked for a roll call. Jeremy Clark- Aye Benjamin Linkous- Absent Kevin Meyer- Aye Terry Hale- Aye Amilyn Turcotte- Aye Review and Approval of Minutes February 9, 2026 Meeting Minutes The motion was made by Mr. Hale and seconded by Mr. Clark to adopt the minutes as written. The motion passed unanimously. Public Hearing- NA Old Business Temporary Housing/ Shelter definition Emergency Warming Station Definition The discussion begins with Mr. Clark referencing previously prepared materials that outlined different zoning distinctions and conditional use standards. The third page of the referenced material included standards related to contemporary housing and services for children, as well as information about emergency shelters. These documents were being used as a comparison point for the locality’s current zoning language and definitions. Mr. Clark then reviewed a proposed definition of temporary housing or shelter, described as a facility providing short-term residential accommodations, sleeping quarters, and supportive services to individuals or families experiencing homelessness or housing instability. Such facilities may operate continuously for extended periods, longer than what would be typical for an emergency situation. The group compared this description to their locality’s current ordinance language and began considering whether changes were necessary. Chairman Meyer noted that the town handles similar facilities as warming stations, which are only briefly defined in the zoning ordinance. The language consists of just a couple of sentences and does not specify operational details such as the maximum length of stay or the services provided. These specifics are instead determined during the special exception application process when the governing body reviews the applicant’s operational plan. Chairman Meyer noted that this approach has worked adequately so far, as only one warming station has been established in the town and no other organizations have requested approval for similar facilities. However, they discussed adding clarifying language stating explicitly that warming stations are permitted only through a special exception process. This change had previously been discussed but had never been formally implemented. Implementing such a change would require a public hearing, followed by review and adoption by the town council through the ordinance process. Mr. Smythers, Zoning Administrator, reviewed the ordinance, noting that warming stations as accessory uses to houses of worship are allowed if they meet building and fire codes, serve Pulaski County residents, and operate from 6:0 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. Chairman Meyer emphasized adding language clarifying the need for special exception approval for each facility proposal. Overall, the board agreed that the current definition largely works but could benefit from clearer language about the approval process. Attention then shifted back to the broader concept of temporary housing shelters, which some organizations are reportedly interested in establishing in town. Chairman Meyer reviewed the proposed definition and discussed whether the description of services should be expanded. One suggestion was to include additional wording describing supportive or related services. However, he cautioned that creating a detailed list might unintentionally restrict what operators could provide. If the ordinance listed specific services, it might imply that those services were mandatory. To avoid limiting potential operators, the group opted for a simpler definition, stating that the facility provides short-term residential accommodations and supportive services. Leaving the definition broader would allow flexibility while still describing the core function of the facility. The participants agreed that temporary housing shelters should also require approval through a special exception process. This would allow applicants to describe their specific operational plans, such as services provided, staffing, and operational rules, and allow the governing body to evaluate each proposal individually. The discussion then turned to where such facilities should be allowed within zoning districts. Chairman Meyer suggested limiting them to areas where houses of worship are located, since churches often operate these types of programs. Others proposed allowing them on any property owned or leased by a church. The group generally agreed that churches wishing to provide such services should be able to do so, though participants were uncertain whether the use should extend to all zoning districts. There was some hesitation about allowing such facilities in commercial areas, though the special exception process would provide oversight regardless of the zoning district. Mr. Smythers was tasked with determining which zoning districts would be appropriate and updating those sections of the ordinance accordingly. Chairman Meyer reviewed additional language from the reference document that described the purpose and operational characteristics of temporary housing shelters. He questioned whether details such as operating schedules or maximum durations should be written into the ordinance. One suggestion was to specify that shelters could operate for up to 180 days, corresponding roughly to a seasonal period such as October through March. However, concerns were raised that including strict operational requirements, such as 24-hour staffing or continuous operations, might unintentionally create burdens that some organizations could not meet. For example, some shelters might require residents to leave during the daytime due to staffing limitations. Because operational models could vary, participants agreed that these details should remain flexible and be evaluated through the special exception application process rather than codified in the ordinance. The group acknowledged that, regardless of zoning language, building and fire code requirements would still apply to any facility providing overnight accommodation. These codes would address safety considerations such as occupancy, supervision, and facility operations. Therefore, the zoning ordinance did not need to regulate those aspects in detail. Chairman Meyer noted that some facilities might eventually operate on a 24-hour basis, allowing residents to remain on site and keep personal belongings there. However, they agreed that these operational decisions should be handled on a case-by-case basis during the approval process. The conversation then turned to a pending state legislative proposal that could affect how local governments regulate housing or service programs operated by churches. Participants referenced a Virginia Senate bill that would potentially allow certain uses by religious organizations by right, significantly limiting the ability of local governments to regulate them through zoning. They discussed how such legislation could remove or reduce the locality’s role in reviewing or approving these types of projects. Chairman Meyer noted that the bill might allow churches or certain nonprofit organizations to develop housing on tax-exempt property without the typical discretionary zoning reviews. Mr. Smythers attempted to identify the exact bill numbers and referenced Senate Bill 367 and Senate Bill 388, which appeared to involve provisions related to development on property owned by tax-exempt organizations. The language he reviewed suggested that zoning ordinances would have to allow housing development on property owned by certain organizations without requiring discretionary approval processes. However, there was uncertainty about whether the legislation would apply only to new construction or whether it would also affect the use of existing buildings. Because the legislation had not yet been finalized, participants acknowledged that its implications remained unclear. Despite the uncertainty surrounding the state legislation, the group agreed that they should proceed with updating their local zoning definitions and approval process for temporary housing and warming stations. They noted that the state legislature might still amend, table, or pass the bill at the last minute and therefore, local planning efforts should continue rather than wait for the outcome. The group decided to move forward with preparing ordinance language that would allow these uses through a special exception process and schedule a public hearing to consider the proposed changes. In closing, participants discussed the next procedural steps. Mr. Smythers would draft the updated ordinance language for review and prepare the necessary materials for a public hearing. The draft would also be shared with the town attorney, Scot Farthing, to ensure legal compliance before moving forward. Once the language is finalized internally, it will be circulated to the group for review as soon as possible so that the process can proceed efficiently. The group confirmed that they were generally satisfied with the proposed definition for temporary housing and shelter, but agreed to make several small adjustments. They decided to include a stipulation that the facility could operate for up to 180 days and that approval would be required through a special exception process. Chairman Meyer suggested removing the phrase “sleeping quarters” from the definition to keep the language simpler and avoid unnecessary specificity. Instead, the group agreed that details such as sleeping arrangements and other services should be described by the applicant in their special exception application. After the phrase describing supportive services to individuals, they planned to add language stating what the services would be, “as specified in the application for special exception.” This would allow applicants to clearly describe what services they intend to provide without forcing all facilities to meet identical requirements. Participants emphasized that requiring specific amenities, such as a full kitchen or the ability to serve multiple daily meals, could make it difficult or financially impossible for some organizations to operate a shelter. For example, some providers might only be able to supply snacks, breakfast items, or meal vouchers rather than full meals. By leaving the definition flexible, the town could still evaluate proposals while allowing organizations to offer services within their capacity. The board discussed additional wording changes related to the operating period of shelters. They decided to remove references to operating 24 hours per day, as some facilities may not be staffed continuously. Instead, the definition would state that shelters may operate continuously for up to 180 days or nights, allowing flexibility depending on how the program is structured. With these adjustments, the board felt confident that both the temporary housing shelter definition and the small revision to the warming station definition were ready to move forward. They agreed that both items could be included in the same public hearing notice, allowing the planning body to address them together during a single hearing. Participants agreed that the proposed ordinance changes would be brought forward for a public hearing, likely scheduled for either April or May. The exact timing would depend on how quickly the town attorney could review the drafted language. Once reviewed and finalized, the ordinance amendments would be formally advertised and presented for public comment. New Business Zoning Amendment, Rural Residential The commission had expected Steve Semones to attend and discuss a potential zoning amendment related to rural residential zoning, but he was unable to attend due to another commitment. It was explained that he would likely meet with the town council first and then present the proposal to the commission at a later meeting, possibly the following month. Even though the presentation did not occur, Mr. Smythers wanted the item to remain on the agenda so members would be aware of the upcoming issue. The discussion briefly touched on the fact that the town currently does not have a zoning district specifically allowing new farms. The closest applicable district is rural residential, but it includes several restrictions, such as limits on large animals, that can make traditional farming difficult. Chairman Meyer recalled that the town may once have considered or had an agricultural zoning district, but it was removed or never implemented due to the limited amount of undeveloped land available within town limits. Much of the available land was either already developed or located on steep mountain terrain, making agricultural zoning impractical. Examples of small-scale farming activities in town were mentioned, such as a small horse area located across from the YMCA near the former bowling alley site. While such uses exist, they operate on limited land within the constraints of the current rural residential zoning rules. Staff Report Mr. Smythers provided updates on other planning and zoning matters. Work is continuing on proposed zoning ordinance changes related to a new permit that would have no associated fee, though the draft language has not yet been finalized. He indicated that they still need to consult with the town attorney and make several adjustments before bringing the proposal to the commission for review. Additionally, Mr. Smythers reported ongoing communications with developers. While no formal application has been submitted yet, a rezoning request is expected soon for a property located below Calfee Ballpark. The developer intends to move forward with the request but wants to complete other ongoing development projects first. The property mentioned was confirmed to be located near Cintas. Other Business Chairman Meyer then addressed another administrative matter. Mr. Schrantz, who had been serving as vice-chair, stepped down and would not be returning in the near future unless he moved back to the area. As a result, the commission needed to elect a new vice chair. Because one commissioner was absent, members briefly considered whether to wait, but ultimately proceeded with nominations. Mr. Hale nominated Mr. Clark as Vice-Chairman and Ms. Turcotte seconded the motion. Jeremy Clark- Aye Benjamin Linkous- Absent Kevin Meyer- Aye Terry Hale- Aye Amilyn Turcotte- Aye Commissioner Comments Members discussed whether there were any upcoming issues requiring additional research. Mr. Smythers indicated that no immediate research assignments were needed beyond the items already discussed. However, the board members were encouraged to review the rural residential zoning language in preparation for the anticipated amendment discussion when it is formally presented. Mr. Smythers also mentioned that Balzer and Associates would likely be involved in bringing forward a new zoning ordinance change request in the future. Reminder of Next Meeting Monday, April 13, 2026 at 6:00 p.m. Adjournment With no further business, Chairman Meyer asked for a motion to adjourn the meeting. The motion was made by Mr. Clark and seconded by Mr. Hale to adjourn the meeting at 6:33 p.m.