Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

[Music] [Music] [Music] down. Down. [Music] [Music] I'm in the

[Music] Hey. [Music] Hey. [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music]

call to order the Lynchber Planning Commission meeting for Wednesday, September 10th, 2025. First order of business is the approval of the April 9th minutes. It's been a while since we've met. Does anybody chance to look over those? motion. Make a motion. Okay. Second. All right. All in favor? I. All opposed.

Great. All right. And we're now going to be hearing some public comment. Petitions open to public comment. Petitions or their representatives will be given 10 minutes to present their petition. Subsequent individual citizens wishing to speak will be allowed a maximum of three minutes each and representatives of an opposition group will be allowed a maximum of 10 minutes. At the end of the public hearing, there will be an allowance of three minutes for rebuttals. Right. Our next order of business is to hold a public hearing on the petition of Dio Rentals LLC for a conditional use permit in a B5 general business district to allow the use of an existing structure as a multifamily dwelling with four units at 11:15 Y Street. Mr.

Chair, good to be back with you, Planning Commission. Um, this petition uh is for a conditional use permit as stated uh to allow the use of an existing structure as a 4-unit multif family dwelling in a B5's general business district. The structure currently has three units. The property is zoned B5 and has been zoned that way since 1978. In this district, multif family dwellings are permitted upon approval of a conditional use permit from council. Our future land use map recommends neighborhood commercial use for the subject property. Um, it consists of 2400s acres and contains a two-story woodframe structure constructed in approximately 1905 and has 2700 square ft. Uh, and as I mentioned, currently contains three existing dwelling units. Uh, the CU petition here is for that fourth unit that they are seeking. Um, in summary, the proposed multif family dwelling should have a limited impact on the surrounding area. There we go. Um it would be located within an existing residential structure adjoined by single family detached and attached residential uses. Um as you can see on this slide um there are a number of residential uses on this block as well as a small group of four row homes located just adjoining the property. Um the use as proposed would blend with the existing uses on the street. Approval of the CUP would allow for an additional residential unit without altering the zoning and this would preserve the opportunity for future commercial uses to occupy the space which would be more closely aligned with the future land use map designation for commercial. Uh all residential units should be made to comply with the applicable building code requirements and this is reflected in the recommended conditions in the report. The planning division recommends approval of the petition.

Great. Thank you. Is there anybody here to speak for this posi petition? Anybody speaking on behalf? You represent the group. Okay. Please come.

Good evening everyone. Um, good evening y. I'm um, this is my first time doing the uh court hearing. So, I'm sorry for the logistics. Um, but the property has been idle for a long time and has was overgrown with weeds and grasses and, you know, a lot of illegal occupation uh and activities happening in the property. So, um we spoke with the neighbors. Everyone is in agreement with you know the reuse of the property for a multi-unit family. And there's a big parking space in the back that will accommodate anyone who is residing at the home. Great. Anybody here to speak in favor of this petition? Okay. Anybody here in opposition to the petition? Have we had any emails, voicemails? Okay, great. At this point, the public hearing is closed, so we can go ahead and discuss. Any questions? It's three units and you just want to convert it to four.

Is there anything else in the building?

You you referenced the parking lot. I'm assuming just as an anecdote that that you you you have permission to use that lot for this. The parking lot is actually in the property but behind the house. That's that's on the property. Yeah. Okay. In the backyard. I got you. Okay. Thank you. And we're in compliance with the three. Um I believe they're probably non-conforming. Um meaning sort of the grandfather term that people use. Um yeah.

Yeah. and they they have um submitted well there you can see in the packet they've uh contracted with an architect to get the building plans um drawn up to be in compliance with with building code at this point. Um it did appear that um some work had taken place maybe without a permit a couple of months ago. Um so they were placed under stop work order and advised that they need to get this conditional use permit in order to get that fourth unit. Um, so they have put construction on pause and are seeking this and then we'll go through the proper building permit procedure. Any other questions or comments?

I'm sure you can have a seat. That's fine. Thanks. Anybody have a motion? Motion to approve. Motion to approve. Second. Second. All right. Any other comments before we vote? All right. Let's go on ahead and vote. All in favor of the petition say I. I. All opposed? No. All right. It's great. Thank you. Moves on forward to city council. Thanks. Have a good day. Good luck.

All right. The next item we will be hearing is the petition of Mary Janes LLC to reszone approximately 37,000 of an acre at 826 Keer Street from I2 Light Industrial District to B4 Urban Commercial District to allow for use of an existing first floor as retail and the addition of a second floor for use as short-term rentals. So if you

Thank you again, Mr. Chair. Um, as mentioned, this property is currently zoned I2 Light Industrial District and has been zoned that way since 1978. A restaurant formerly operated in this building as a non-conforming use. Uh however, the restaurant discontinued for a period of more than two years and um in order to go back to a similar uses that um a reszoning is necessary. Our future land use map recommends employment to uses for the property. These are intended to include uses like manufacturing and large scale office. Uh but restaurant and business service uses are also appropriate as they can serve those more intense employment uses. The property is currently vacant and uh in poor condition. Reszoning the property would allow for reuse. If approved, the owner plans to use the building as a gift shop serving coffee with some light food options and uh as well as an addition of a second story containing two small short-term rental units. The B4 Urban Commercial District permits these uses. Um given its proximity to Keer Street station um as well as Amtrak. Um this is uh I mean sorry Amtrak and our our transit system. Um this property is well positioned for redevelopment and could serve as a nice amenity for nearby transit users. The planning division recommends approval of the resoning petition.

Great. Thank you. And who is here to speak on behalf of the petition? Great. Please come forward. state your name sign there on the forum and tell us a little bit more about it.

Good afternoon. My name is Casey Service. I'm the architect for the project. Um and Rachel covered pretty much all of it. It's a the footprint of the existing building is just under 1,200 square feet. And while it's not quite property line to property line, that's just about what it is. There's a little bit of a backyard and a sideyard. Um so even the employment, the future land use, uh other opportunities in the flume um are uh for larger properties that wouldn't fit into this small parcel and we're sort of landlocked between the transit um station, everything. So, we feel like this is the best potential use. Um, and getting the second floor out helps us to sort of recoup some of the cost of bringing the first floor back into a usable condition.

Might want to stay there for a second. Anybody here to speak in favor of the petition? Any opposition? I imagine there's no emails or anything like that. So, I think we can close the public hearing and address any questions to you. I think it's a really interesting proposal. One of the one of the neater ones we've seen in a while of reusing some property.

Um, Our plan is to go to city council next month and then once the you know knock we get approval there and I'll dive into finishing up the drawings and start construction hopefully end of the year beginning of next and then it's you know it's only 2400 ft so shouldn't take too long. So the bottom unit is going to be you being one business or two different

business and it is one business now, right? Um we sort of see it almost as like a gift shop side and a coffee shop side, but it'll all be open. Um looks like a second level in the drawing, but we're adding a second level because the roof is collapsed. So we have to re the roof and so we're proposing to add a second level. Structurally, it's not a huge leap to go one more story on the existing. What are you planning to do with the exterior? I mean, is is the whole building going to be congruent?

Yeah. Our our plan is to we these are very sort of gestural. We haven't sort of, you know, really dove into it, but um the train station across the street has similar awnings to what we're showing here. Um the one half of the existing first floor is already stuck out. So I think right now we're leaning towards doing doing a similar treatment downstairs and then we'll explore different options for upstairs to help sort of bring it all into one cohesive as far as appearance or the railroad station.

Yeah. I mean, yeah, I don't I mean technically I guess because we're asking for the B4 reszoning. Yeah, there are there are some requirements before for the way it looks. Um yeah, we discourage corrugated metal and you know that sort of thing. Um, but it is pretty flexible brick, glass, you know, some some metal was fine.

Yeah. Were you How many units will you have up there? Just two. It's two onebedroom 600 foot units um that you'll just access from the backside off of the side. That's on the fourth floor. right next to the gym. Rachel, do you if it was just short-term rental request and no retail, would it be the same petition or would it be something different? Um, that's an interesting question. Um,

I don't think short-term rental is in I2. We went through pretty like line by line the I2 options and none of them really fall in line with what this building is current the reason I'm asking it's actually

while she's looking that up the other interesting thing is if you go on Google Street View I was checking to see when the roof collapsed and you can go back in time if you go through on the land you look down on it. You can watch it slowly coll not permitted in. Yeah. Yeah. So the reason I'm asking because we have seen examples where the retail has been part of the petition to get the petition pushed through and then it's not never open. Nothing's in the retail. Mhm.

And so basically it was done so that we could get the the residential or short-term whatever they were asking in the upper floors. And so there's no way for the city if this thing were to never open on the first floor, we have no recourse, right? It would be considered um or legitimately if it did go, you know, all intentions were solid but it went out of business on the first floor,

what would happen then? I mean that's um that's something we're actually looking at with the you know um I can't recall the date but um planning commission updated or um instructed staff to look at B4 ground floor residential uses and and promoting commercial downtown uh in our B4 district on the ground level. Um, and that is kind of a a discussion point of well, you can require it or prevent residential on the ground floor, but that doesn't necessarily mean the retail space is always going to be rented out. Um, I mean, yeah. So, if if there were if there were to be a condition added or something like that or even a profer and they said, "Well, it will be retail on the ground floor." It's

there's no guaranteed, right? You can't force someone to stay open if they're going out of business. I will say anecdotally, um, you know, it seems like, uh, something that Amtrak users would certainly like. Um, Oh, I love I love the idea. I think it's a perfect spot. We got the comment from the transit folks, too, that they were they constantly get that request. No, I think so, we're finger and and to be, you know, up front, our initial when I first talked to the owners, their initial thing was to add a second story and just do it all as a restaurant.

And as we were thinking about it, it's almost sort of the opposite of what you were saying where we're adding the short-term rentals so that there's some potential like long-term, you know, mix of use so that at least the building is bringing in some income, right? No, I'm just the architect for the project. Is there somebody already in mind to occupy this space? We've started having discussions with people. Yes. Okay. So they're not they don't technically have a stake in this in other words. No, the owners of the the building have the stake in this part and they're looking for an operatorial reality what Dave is saying.

Sure. There are some coffee shops that have closed downtown. This would be a perfect spot for them. And again, I'm just bringing that issue up because we have discussed it in other situations and I think it's worth being aware of that. Yeah. Um there is that possibility seen that happen. Some of it intentional, a lot of it not intentional. It's just the facts of businesses. So,

you know, the good thing about the B4 zoning is that it is so flexible um in terms of the allowable uses and um you know, there's there's no parking requirement. I think it's an ideal thing in this case because it is I mean it's a postage stamp of a property, you know, so it's not like we have to worry about, you know, we zone we reszone it to be four and it opens up all these uses and a hundred people are coming there every day now. I mean, I think any business is going to be successful and um it's certainly going to be an improvement over what's there now. And I think the it's obviously free parking all around it. There's no reserve parking dedicated to that.

Yeah. There so like right now the transit station is all signed as no parking, but from what we can tell it doesn't look like they're really using that building that's there anymore. It's really just used as the the hub. So I think if it came to it. I think there's potential. Well, there's on street park. Talk to them and then all the on street parking is like there's some of it across the street is uh zonas no overnight, but you know for the two short-term rentals there's enough space right. Well, and if someone's coming in on the train, they don't anyway. Exactly.

I guess your building there on the street as you come down. Yeah, it's amazing number of people. I went by there either Friday night, Saturday night, the lot there was full. So, a lot of people are riding. I I think there's a lot of business opportunity. Even if someone did fail, there'd probably be somebody else who' be like, I want to I want to have a go at it. A bike shop or something like that. Yeah, that's a nice idea. Is there a motion? I'll make a motion to accept. Okay. All right. Any other comments? All right. Let's go ahead and vote. All in favor of the petition say I.

I. All opposed. It's unanimous. Thank you. Good luck at city council. Thanks for coming and seeing us. We have one more thing. Next, we're going to hear the petition of Martin Ridge Homes LLC to reszone approximately 1 and 6800s of an acre located at 663 Leisel Road from R1 low density residential to R4C highdensity residential district conditional to allow for 14 town homes. So who's going to present that? Great. Thanks.

All right, members of planning commission. The purpose of this petition is to reszone approximately 1 and 6800 acres from R1 low density residential district to R4C highdensity residential district conditional to allow the construction of 14 town homes located at 663 Leville Road. The comprehensive plan future land use map recommends a medium density residential use for a majority of the property. The other portion of the property adjoining Burton Creek is recommended for resource conservation use. Medium-density residential areas are characterized by small lot single family detached housing, duplexes, and town houses at densities up to 12 units per acre. Where neighborhoods exist, infill development should be at a compatible density and housing type. In addition to residential uses, they may include public and institution uses compatible in scale with single family residential homes. The subject properties were annexed into the city in 1976 and the existing R1 lowdensity residential district zoning was established in 1978. The property is bound to the north and east by single household uses and to the west across the road by residential uses. The 14, excuse me, the 14 proposed town home units would become part of a town home development to the south, which was approved by city council on May 27th, 2025. The development is not yet under construction. Beyond that, the development is bound to the south by town home style apartments. If the petition is approved, the existing one-story single family dwelling would remain. The remainder of the property would be developed as 14 town home units with six two-story units and eight singlestory units. The proposed development should have limited impact on the surrounding area. Substantial compliance with the plan has been profered and other profers include for sale units and exceeding parking requirements. The existing single family dwelling is proposed to remain in the additional 14 town home units access and associated parking would tie in with the previously approved town home development to the south. Residential

uses adjoin the property on all sides. And as shown, the concept plan includes the required 20 foot vegetative buffer adjoining the R1 lowdensity residential district to the north. The proposed development density for the 15 dwelling units located on the subject property would be 11.29 units per acre, which would be below the density threshold as recommended by the future land use map up to which is up to 12 units per acre in the medium density residential category. Additionally, work is not proposed in the flood zone, which is consistent with the flume recommendation for resource conservation in that area. The technical review committee reviewed the petition on August 19th, and comments were minor in nature. The planning division recommends approval of the petition. Thank you.

Thank you. Who's here to speak on behalf of the petition? Please come forward, state your name, and sign in, please. All right, my name is Jake Leonard and I'm here with Nixon Land Surveying representing Martin Ridge Home. So, thank you, Mr. Chairman and board members for your time tonight and thank you Rachel and your team for all your work on this um so far last time and this time. So, just a quick kind of history on this project to bring everybody up to speed on why we're just now asking for this resoning request for this parcel. So, as most of you are already aware, city council recently voted to approve the resoning of 665, 667, and 669 Leville Road from R1 to R4. With our client planning to build a town home development on we've combined these three parcels into one for a 54 unit town home development. Our client had been trying to acquire 663 next door for years, but were unable to do so. Um, the owner, I believe is the owner's father or grandfather, actually lived in the house, and he didn't want to make them have to move, so they wouldn't sell. Um, days after we uh got 665, 667, and 669 reszoned, they were contacted by the owner of that home saying the tenant had passed away and they were now able to acquire this parcel. So that's why we're now bringing this to you for asking uh reszoning of this parcel to add it to that town home development. So we take this 1.6 acre parcel, leave the existing single family residential dwelling and add more units behind it. So I know one of the big issues uh your board had last time was protecting residential single family. So we have actually profered substantial compliance to incorporate the existing single family home into the plans here. Uh it would get a new

concrete sidewalk going over to the sidewalk you'll see on the plans and a few parking spaces there. Which brings me to my next benefit of adding this is uh the entrance. So we actually would be removing that existing driveway and combining that traffic into our new proposed entrance for safety on Leisville Road, removing an access point. Um, and then the third benefit would be actually adding eight singlestory units that we've actually had people reach out to us and asked for. We had phone calls from elderly people when the last resoning went through and was in the news and stuff, they saw and called us asking begging our client to build them a one-story unit because apparently the elderly and handicapped people are having trouble finding those. So, we'd like to build eight eight single story and then six more identical to the other units below it. then it actually lowers our total density calculation um as opposed to the last plan. And so the density calc of this new portion would be 11.29 dwelling units per acre which is below the the flume. So in conclusion, I think this is an opportunity to make an already nice proposed development even nicer while protecting the single family dwelling um adding more traffic safety by taking away an access point on Leville Road and providing singlestory housing for people who need them. So, thank you for your time and look forward to hearing your thoughts and comments on this.

Great. Thank you. Right. Is there anybody here to speak in favor of the petition?

Please sign your name. You know how we do this. Hello, gentlemen. Chairman, thank you all for the time to um come and speak in favor of this project. Um, I'm working with Jacob and Martin Ridge Homes on this project. You know, when Mr. Martin contacted us um about the purchase of this property and adding to this project u days prior to that, we I had four different folks contact me about wanting asking the question, are any of these development developmental town houses single story? Um, the ladies, an older lady asked, "Is it going to be single story?" It'd be he'd be a hero if he would make sure some of these properties had singlestory dwellings on it. Slab slab on grade housing. Um, and if you look at the pictures that you see on the the bottom left corner, that's an example of the onetory units. That's at Lakew Walk in Campbell County. It's a really nice uh retirement style home. Um, and they are beautiful. Those actually have on them. These will not have garages on them, but we felt like if we if the client was going to move forward with this type of project and include this in this development, it would just tie right in great and help you all and the city feel better about what we're doing. Um, like Jacob said, the entrance uh closure of the house does protect and help Leisel Road. Um, you know, right now the basic way way this is going, we we're going to be shutting down at least three driveways along the road and have one access point instead of three based on the original development design. So, I feel like this project moving forward is going to be better for this area. Um, and I know Mr. Woodson had a lot of concerns about the con uh the traffic along Leal Road coming in and out of

here. As before, we still have a right in right out only entrance shown or a pork chop style entrance shown, which is what our intent is to force those folks to go to the right instead of t cross and leave road and going left towards Green View Drive. Um, anyway, I'm here to help technically with other other questions y'all might have. Um, if you have any, please let us know. Um, but I hope uh I hope you all will vote to support this as the planning department has requested approval. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else here to speak in favor of the petition? Anybody here in opposition of the petition? Okay. And have there been any emails?

I don't know. I have on some business with Nixon right now who's advocating for the project. So I don't know if that counts as a conflict or not. Not necessarily principles. I'm putting in a bid that you'd like to disclose. They are bidding a portion of the contract. So, but again, is it related to this petition? It's a North Carolina.

He wouldn't have known. May not like what I have to say. you it's it's fair to say I have this I'm I'm revealing this but I can still be impartial in my consideration and that's one approach or you could or you could or you could recuse yourself if there's no obvious issue I recuse myself okay will unfortunately I'm so sorry beforehand.

Well, we've we've asked for support and opposition have heard none. So, we're going to close the public hearing and, you know, begin with questions. U I I think first of all, Rachel, when we when we heard this, I think the planning commission voted against the initial petition. Correct.

Planning commission did um planning the staff also um recommended denial. That was prior to the addition of their profers um which clarified that they would be doing town homes for sale and um since R4 also allows apartments, you know, they profered basically the site plan which limits the density to the number of units that are shown and it is going to be town homes um for sale, not apartments which R4 also permits. So um yeah and Eve you said this what was what was the by right density

well the density recommended by the 12 units per acre up to 12 units

they're looking at just this single entrance exit turn to the right on Leville which If I'm coming out of there, frankly, if I need to go downtown, I thought I was going to be seeing a lot of U-turns right there in the middle of Leville Road coming out of there. Just initial thought. So, is that the only entrance or exit for all 68 units?

Leville Road. There'll be no entry into Leville Road from this petition here. It'll be a shared interest. It'll be sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh shared with the other property that you is purchasing. And if one of you might want to come forward that way public can hear your comment.

We we have pretty much doubled our parking area on this project. Now, um this property that you're reviewing now is going to be part of and combined with the original zoning request. They will share the exact same entrance on Tlesal Road. So, um, no concern of a second entrance, which is only be one entrance into all of the property. So, uh, which is a positive because we're getting rid of the other homes, going to get rid of the other other, um, dilapidated homes, I might add, and the other driveways that service them. So, that that'll be a benefit. Um, it will also allow for us to have a longer taper for our entrance into it, which makes it safer along uh, Leville Road. And, uh, what else can I tell you? I mean, we're also leaving the existing home there, which is a nice feature because it it's actually a very nice house, very well taken care of house.

Could would you refresh us as to where the entrance had been on that plat, the original? Yeah, actually that one thing I forgot to say. Thank you. Uh actually by if this gets approved, one thing allows us to do is shift the entrance up to be straight across from north north street for safety which before we weren't quite able to do by the time we added the 20 foot vegetative buffer on the north side. So this actually would allow us to slide it up straight across from north street which would be safe for entrance. So this if this is not approved they still can't adjust the entrances.

Um correct. I mean they don't they wouldn't have this extra room to work with. Um so the the entrances the driveway for the the driveways for the single family would be closed but the right in right out would not be located directly across from North Street which ideally you have entrances lined up with other entrances or other streets just to reduce conflict points.

But why couldn't it still be shifted if this is not approved? There would have to be a 20 foot vegetative buffer between this existing property line because this northeast 663 would still be R1. So we have to have 20 foot vegetative that 20 foot allowed us to pull that entrance up and make it a more engineering safety concerned design. Um I think I think it makes sense to pull it north and towards the house street. Question. How is trash removal handled here or is it what is it planned for the uh city to come by and pick up or is there going to be we we will we will end up with dumpster designs on here. Okay.

Um we're not going to rely on um now I will tell you on the HOA documents that my clients put together. They do have a requirement for personal pickup but they're also going to provide a dumpster pad individual dumpster pad. Now that was not profered but I do know that's one of the things I've discussed Mr. Mark. So there is an HOA. So there is an HOA. Yes.

And uh Rachel, I just I have one question uh for the city. Uh when the city says they recommend accepting the proposal or uh you know following through with this, does that mean for example that the water department has reviewed the loading, the increased loading on domestic water and sewage and yes says that's okay. Um yeah, the technical review committee is made up of uh representatives from various departments, police, fire, water, engineering, trash, um and others. And um now they don't get into as detailed of a review as they would with a site plan, right?

Um but that is the purpose of of having everyone on that meeting is to identify any kind of showstoppers or big issues that might prevent this development place once they get to the site plan phase. So yes, they have been consulted on this.

Can you remind me of why the house's single unit is remaining? It's it's in pretty good shape and they really didn't want to tear it down. They they they felt like they could leave it there either as a as a rental or for sale. Either one. Um they I believe what Mark told me was he was going to sell it as an individual lot and it will be the property you see there. Um, so he didn't want to destroy it, you know. I think and it did and and I'll tell you something, it didn't give us any benefit to try to put more units in there coming back towards Louis Road and by having the home there, it just it just anity that could stay and be be profitable.

So if it comes up for sale, you all will try and buy it and add it to this. It's going to be it's going to be like it is. I mean, we're going to we're going to redo the property like we show on our site plan. So, they're going to have access to the parking lot and use it as a parking area for the house. Is the house the land that the house is on, is that going to be zoned R4 also or? Yes. Yeah. Yes. R4. It's all part of the exact same everything here. Yeah. So, so if you sell it, it'll be sold as R4. It can be sold as R4 once it's reszoneed. Okay.

Yes. Does the profer though follow follow that land like if you you profer to develop it as you are does that mean that that will house will stay that way? Yes. So what we've done is substantial compliance to the site plan.

So what our site plan shows today that you're going to approve with a new sidewalk down to the proposed sidewalk. That's how we have to build it per the site plan. So yes that home state You know, we've been getting signals from the council about projects like this that have been I feel somewhat negative, like we don't want more more of this. And that I think was one of my my thoughts on my my vote against this the last time. But obviously there's a difference in thought, but I also like that there are some single family I mean single floor units. I have a a lot of elderly I mean a business serves a lot of elderly people and those places are really popular. I think we have a need for more of that kind of development. So I I I lean towards really liking this and probably will be supporting it.

Okay. The reason if I recall uh this this didn't pass the city recommended this last Is that right? Ra um planning staff recommended denial prior to them submitting profers. So that's what went into the report. We talked about it here. I mean the the original 54 units. Mhm.

Yeah. They did not have profers when we wrote the report. They submitted them after. I believe what we discussed here was that we would planning staff would lean towards approval um with the addition of the profers because it gave clarity on what they intended to actually build. uh planning commission recommended denial and then ultimately city council approved it. Planning Commission has recommended denial these things in the last couple years for the reason the lower twothirds of the city have been inundated with urban density thinking and if you live in the lower two there's all the all the property you want to develop ever up in the northern part of the city area chances of developing that or get ready for a fight lower twothirds of the city we are about out of space and the evidence that out of space is that we're having to do more and more of this come reszone areas that are otherwise R1. Uh city council's take on that has been to deny to not reszone uh any more R1 into multif family. Uh and if you live in the city as as I do, uh you will have experienced the traffic on Timberlake on the weekends or during rush hour or on Wards Road or 29 South coming out of the city any or Candler's Road, it's getting worse and worse and worse. So while I'm certain, uh to me this goes against the very thing we're trying to do and And not to disparage any of the work you guys have done, done fine work, but the thinking that puts this into into place kind of puts the city's staff in some cases at odds with city council. City council recommended don't do it. The city is recommending do it. Uh but then sometimes the city will go ahead and say yes. So regardless of whether it comes out of here, you get a obviously a second swing at doesn't.

you know, and who knows what the city council is going to do, but but for my part, I because I live in the city and I'm experiencing this every day, I I can't personally see playing a part in putting any more of this uh in the areas that I live in. While we've got parts of the city that are completely undeveloped like this and they're getting single family housing,

here's something I want to point out and I pointed this out to city council last time. For single family residential developments to happen in the city, this is just me dealing with it for the past 30 years. And forgive me, Rachel. The the ordinances required to build single family residential developments in the city of Lynchburg are so strict.

Curb and gutter streets, sidewalks, street lights. Those three things alone, the cost to develop for single family residential, you're not going to build a home that can afford the infrastructure and sell it. So something I recommend to y'all is to possibly the ordinances and figure out something that can become a better fix for the ordinances. I don't want to call it a deregulation. I'll call it that.

It can be, but at the end of the day, for single family residential to be built, and you're want to know why you're seeing townhouse developments come to y'all, it's because of that reason right there. People can't afford to build single family residential developments with the amount of stringent. Now, you're an MS Ford entity. Storm water requirements, that's going to happen no matter what. That's going to drive your cost up. But the ordinances need to be looked at as a requirement for street design, sidewalk design, sidewalk requirements, street light requirements. That's driving your cost up for single family residential. And when that happens, you get this.

Yes. And it's by design because it's a matter of thinking in city planning. And it's not just going on here. It's going on over the country to create to bring people into the cities, create urban density. And so these kind of regulations are often implemented to do exactly what you're talking about. It's not by accident, you know, and it's done the guys of beautifification.

Let's let's talk about this individual property by itself. Let's say this entire track of land was all one track to build the infrastructures based on the city requirements. They would have to get a certain number of houses to make it affordable. Put those infrastructures in. This piece of property alone could not afford to do that. you couldn't do. That's why this townhouse development design does work from a cost standpoint and they're able to sell for 220 to $300,000 town houses and make it work.

We have a lot to talk about like what Chuck's saying, the the lack of single family development. I don't think this is the that everything hinges on this one project, but I think it's a there's a lot of really good points and we in comprehensive in the way we even use our lot sizes and things like that need to be addressed as well. But um I I do want to stick with this one thing uh you know and get an answer for that. So

well I mean I think everyone knows Mr. R1 second to Chuck maybe. Um if this and I voted strongly against this original proposal and if this were to come before us like that one with just this addition, I would still be voting against it. But that proposal has been approved. It's happening. And if we can make it better and if we can make it safer and I I'm being consistent because I've done that before. There was a similar situation in the development behind the Kroger on Timber. I voted against it and they came back with some revisions and I supported that. So in this case, u I don't like the big project, but if we can make that big project a little bit better, then I'm going to I'm going to support that. So I'm trying to be consistent in why I'm supporting that and not going against previous votes. So my takehome is I'm I'm supporting this and I'm calling it a reision, basically a revision But I'm still glad to have you, Chuck, express your opinion and and and stay strong because

Yep. And I think that's good. I think it I think it's important to send a message to council that we are still taking that seriously. Uh the what's going on with the R1. So any other comments? Make a motion to approve the petition. Okay. Second. Second. Okay. All right. All in favor say I. I. I. All opposed. Nay. All right.

51. Thank you. Good luck at city council. Thanks for bringing that to us. And seems like we're in a kind of in a lot of issues. Not Not just that, but also some of the things I've been seeing lately. There's been some questions and you know, one of the things I've been uh talking to some people about was battery storage and we ran into that in in uh in reszoning and you know, thinking about planning and now we have this data center question because of the building downtown.

Yeah. But not only that, you just Caroline County approved a 670 acre. I know we won't have anything that big in Lynchburg, but do we have any plans like for how to address this? Because I think Pennsylvania County, they're get they're up in arms about whether to do this or not. They've got one approved data centers and and so there was one that was somebody had noted that a building had been bought downtown by a company like a data center.

I don't I don't I don't know enough about it. But that is one of the hot topics I think right now around the state. Apparently like over 30% of all data centers in the world are in Northern Virginia and they're spreading out. So do we have any power issues? Yeah. Yeah. And and water. So do we have any any

thoughts or is there something that staff should be doing to consider this before we do have a proposal come up and we're all like, "Oh, what do we do? We got the batteries, you know, because we were kind of at a loss at that point." Um so we do have data center uses um allowed in certain districts in our zoning ordinance um including commercial areas. So um if and it's never really come up for us. Um usually when you think of a data center you think of um miles and miles of open land and uh thousands and thousands of square feet of basically warehouse space. Um but if it is something that is of concern to the commission um you could direct staff to you know pursue potential uh you know to kind of do an analysis of where we are with our zoning ordinance. Um because although it is a listed use it's never really come up for us. Um, and it certainly hasn't come up in the context of today's data center. Um, with the, you know, the power usage and other utility impacts that they may have. Um, so if that's something of concern to the planning commission, you could instruct staff to potentially, you know, kind of do an analysis of where we are and potentially bring back um, recommendations on, you know, if we think we need any adjustments, we could do, you know, kind of presentation to let you know where we are and maybe what localities are doing to give themselves um you know more leeway about where these go or don't go. Um if that would be helpful to the commission.

What do you all think? Your thoughts need something. It would be nice to have some position from the city or some definitely some discussion about it. What what what the discussion would be isending. Well, no, but but you know there's been we've had multiple counties now Yeah, ahead of the game. And then the things we ran into with battery storage, you and I talked about that. That's one of those things that, you know, there's some opinions, but there's people who know better who can inform us. That's what I thought of was that when that battery storage came before a lot of us, it was just a new topic. We didn't know what to do.

So, I think I think this type of uh data storage facility is also a new topic for us. I would welcome educated. There's a half a million square feet on the expressway that's up for lease. I mean, it's that's kind of that would be a building that you could see the owner saying, "I'm going to do this." I think it's I1 or I2, whatever that it's where the um Meredith Bird, I can't think what the last company that was in a big printing company. Yeah. Or Donnelly. Yeah. And Yeah. And that's a that's a big building. And that's the kind of thing like well what's going to happen if

you know we don't want to be caught right this this is not impending at the moment it's certainly going to appear at some point in the near future and we don't want to get caught look in the wrong direction on these things and get caught. So yeah Tom I mean you brought it up but not to put you on the spot but I guess what would the expectation be for the discussion or really see what other what other people are

doing and what they're thinking about it and what kind of things we'd have to confront. You know, it's funny because you hear about, you know, so I I teach in a college and I had students we talk about AI and students this year they were like and up in arms they're like well it kills our water sources. it's, you know, bad on electricity and you know, the whole data center thing came up and then you see it in the news and I'm like, well, water is one of our I think one of the great things we have here. What's the name of the re the regional economic development authority? Is that so? Yeah, LBA. Yeah,

just the Lynchburg economic development with them about this because it would affect probably the surrounding counties. I would think those having come in should be one who recruit. Well, the timing is right because we're working on the comp plan. Yeah.

Okay. So, did I hear um maybe someone wants to make a motion to instruct staff to maybe do an analysis of our current zoning regulations around data centers and potentially initiate an update to the code if if we feel like it's needed. I I would make a motion. I'll make a motion if uh the city staff could could put together a short report or like I don't know five pages or like a 30 minute hour presentation on on data centers and and what what other what other communities are doing um and what we need to be considering and prepared for if someone were to bring that to us. Okay.

Yeah. I don't think we quite hit a point someone wants to disagree where we're ready to pre the zoning question. We don't have enough that would key back to what Tom's talking about. So maybe learn a little bit more about it so that we can think about if we're going to zone where these things because they're there I mean they are currently allowed by our zoning. So um that's a possibility what would it fall under? I think it's actually allowed in all of our business districts, which would be kind of concerning because B1 is supposed to be more, you know, limited, small scale, you know, versus B5, which is Yeah. And these things can range in size.

Rachel, does city have a zoning for power generation facilities or agricultural? Uh, do you mean like solar farms? Uh, could be a solar farm, but could be like just small power like somebody wanted to put a large uh diesel generator somewhere. Do we have I mean I'd have to comb through our list of approved uses and see if that falls under like a utility or like a power generation or or that sort of thing. Yeah. So, is there like, you know, when we do uh cell phone antennas, you know, a lot of times it's conditional use

thing like being able to hear a proposal and and not greenlighting anything that that could major ramifications without us hearing it. Yeah. And you know you Chuck, you have I mean you have experience in that stuff. You know what I'm saying? Only explain just I happen to be in that industry. Right. So I think I think that it would be good to I mean I'd entertain a second motion on that. Yes. A second. Okay. Yes. Right. So all in favor of moving that forward say I

to actually a proposal. Yeah. Just to actually get us some information so that we could understand these things. Yeah. And and to be clear, you know, I'm not going to I mean, would can we look at as part of that presentation, do you think it would be appropriate to get some staff recommendations on areas that we feel like may need addressed? Obviously, the presentation doesn't change the zoning. We still got to schedule public hearings and all that sort of thing. Okay. Yeah. Okay. And I and I agree with Tom. The cell phone powered analogy is a great one. I mean, just just that it has to come forward.

We approved most cell phone applications that come before us, but it's nice to hear about them and see what's being done and they're usually better as a result. Let's go ahead and vote because we didn't formally vote. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. Great. Thank you, Rachel. Thank you, guys. upow as a generator, you know. I'm not sure kind of like the one further. Um I'm not sure if that is uh usable, active. Yeah,

pretty sure it is. I think it's a private company. or whoever used to own it, sold it to a private company like based in Bean or something. Eagle Eagle something and I think they have rights to Scots Mill Dam and a couple dams along the river. So, they're selling power back. They're generating power there. Okay. All right. Put my stuff away. That doesn't mean we're over until someone makes a motion. I was going to say All right. A motion that we are done. All right. All right. Hearing no opposition, we will adjourn. Thank you guys.