Board of Supervisors - workshop

All right, gentlemen, let's get ready. All right, gentlemen.

Good afternoon and welcome. Pennsylvania County Board of Supervisors work session Tuesday, July 2021, 2026. It is 4.30 PM. We're at 29, I'm sorry, excuse me, it's 39 Bank Street Southeast. I tell them Virginia 24531. Madam Clerk, would you call the roll, please?

Yes, sir. Mr. Bowman? Here. Mr. Brown? Here. Mr. Dalton? Here. Mr. Dudley? Present. Mr. Whittle? Here. Mr. Ingram? Here. Mr. Tucker?

Here. All right. Let's see. Any items to be added to the agenda?

Yes, Mr. Chairman. Yes, sir. I'd like to add on. and a discussion of temporary housing while active residential construction is occurring.

Can you speak into the mic for us, please?

I'd like to add to a discussion of temporary housing while active residential construction is occurring.

Thank you, sir. That's a motion. Somebody give him some support. I'll second. Thank you, Mr. Brown. Any discussion on the motion? Hearing none, please cast your vote electronically. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Are there any other additions to the agenda? Hearing none, I ask that you would consider a motion to approve the agenda.

I'll make that motion, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Dalton.

Thank you, Mr. Whittle.

Thank you, sir. Any discussion on the motion? Hearing none, cast your votes electronically, please. Thank you the motion passes unanimously. The citizens convenience all work session and committee meetings are now being recorded and can be viewed on the county's Facebook and the same YouTube location as the board of supervisors business meetings. Please remember that the board's work session is designed for internal board and county staff communication, discussion, and work. It is not a question and answer session with the audience. Accordingly, during the work session, no questions or comments from the audience will be entertained. Respectfully, any outbursts or disorderly conduct from the audience will not be tolerated and may result in the offending person's removal from the work session. As a reminder, all county citizens and other appropriate parties as designated by the board's bylaws are permitted to make comments under the hearing of the citizens section of tonight's business meeting. That moves us down to agenda item five, presentations. No presentations. This moves us down to agenda item six, staff, committee, and or constitutional office of reports. Code enforcement update, Mr. Arnor. Good afternoon, and thank you for being here.

Good afternoon, gentlemen. Nice to see everyone this Tuesday afternoon. This is a follow-up to the update that was given to the board at the November work session. And one of the main items that we discussed at that time was asking for the board's support to upgrade our part-time code enforcement officer position to a full-time position. You all, I'm so thankful and staff are very thankful that you all supported that. And so now I think it's fitting that we provide an update since april as of april the first uh we brought on board uh our the county's first full-time code enforcement officer a gentleman by the name of mark slater uh mark if you don't mind he's going to be presenting and part of this update here in a few moments but i'd like to just bring him up here to the front so we can all associate a face with the name Mr. Slater joined us from the city of West Palm Beach, Florida. Like I said, he started April 1st. You know, West Palm Beach, as you all probably are aware of where it's located, southern part of Florida along the Atlantic coast, over 100,000 people. He did government enforcement work for that municipality for approximately three years. So he's got some solid experience. and brought to us a solid understanding of best practices related to code enforcement, something that we've been welcoming with open arms. Since Mark's arrival, code enforcement has kicked into high gear. He averages about 20, citing 20 violations a month, and if we look at the violations that he's cited by type since April 1st, You see the predominant violation variety is what we call solid waste violation, which is essentially excessive trash or waste on a property. The next most common violation type is a zoning violation. That can come in a variety of forms, but it relates to a particular use not being allowed on the property based upon the regulations of that zoning district that the property is located in. Or it could be, too, that there's a special use permit on the property that the owner is not complying with the conditions of that SUP. And then the third most common violation type is an inoperable vehicle. So on screen, we look at the distribution of these violations by type, and then we also see the spatial distribution across the county's landscape. And you can see that for the reporting period here, basically three and a half months, pretty evenly distributed across the county with little pockets or clusters found in the more heavily populated areas. So say Mount Hermon, heading north along 29 with the town of Chatham, town of Gretna, town of Heard, and then also little clusters in particular neighborhoods we are finding. Another interesting data point that is a direct reflection of Mark's efforts is something called voluntary compliance. He brought that concept to us. And what voluntary compliance refers to is it does take, you might say voluntary compliance with a little nudge. They still get the notice of violation, but that's all it takes. And then the owner is complying with resolving the violation, whatever the issue might be. That obviously is greatly preferred because less intervention is required by the locality and by the staff to continue to ensure that compliance is met. Another variety, code enforcement, code violations, you all have heard staff talk about this before. You can also consider unsafe structures to be a type of a code violation. It's a violation of the building code, right? So here, since the last update in November, we have had two successful abatements. where the county had to get involved in remedying properties that were sited with unsafe structures. And that determination, while I think this example right here, it's of a burned down house on Ferguson Road, I would feel pretty confident, even though I know very little about the building code, I could probably say that looks to be an unsafe structure, but this is something that falls under the building officials' purview and does potentially require certification and training and all that to make that determination because they certainly might be of a more technical manner than what we might be seeing right here where pretty much the whole structure was unfortunately destroyed by fire. So this involves others in the building, or excuse me, in the community development office, like the chief building official. They go out, make the unsafe structure determination, give the property owner a set amount of days to remedy the problem. If no action is taken, we advertise in the newspaper for two consecutive weeks. If no action is taken then, we go ahead and contract demolition out, they pull a permit for demolition, and the cost of that demolition are then applied to the property in the form of a lien. So we have had two successful, they're almost nearly complete, not only at Ferguson Road, but also on Dry Fork Road. It does take some time based upon all the steps involved in the process and involving a third party to complete the demolition work, but it's nice to see when these properties finally are starting back at pretty much a clean slate like we see right here on Draft Work Road. There's still a pile of debris, but that's much more manageable and we're encouraged that this will be fully cleaned up in a short amount of time. One ask that we have of the board today is to, according to Pennsylvania County Code Chapter 17 Article 2 Section 3, when there is excessive garbage or refuse or litter on the property, when the Board of Supervisors deems it necessary, and after providing reasonable notice, have such trash, garbage, refuse, litter, and other like substances removed from the property. So on tonight's consent agenda, we have a resolution approving the abatement or remediation, removal of solid waste and excessive trash from these particular properties. At this point, I'd like to go ahead and turn it over to Mr. Slater. He's been the one that has been bird-dogging the code enforcement efforts in the hopes of seeking full compliance for these three particular properties. Sure, I'll be happy to take a question if it's for me, Mr. Bowman. Yes, sir, it is. Okay.

Mr. Chairman, can you hear me? Is this thing on? Okay, good. So I appreciate taking down the old structures, especially the ones that have been burned and things like that. I know the neighbors where I'm at, they appreciate that also. What is the next step? Once you put a lien on that property there, the county has cleaned it up, we put a lien on it, what's the next step in moving that property forward as far as putting it back on the tax rolls?

I'm not the treasurer, obviously. My understanding that this amount due would be also applied to the tax bill, just like real estate taxes are. And if they're delinquent on paying their current real estate taxes, then they may likely be delinquent in paying this lien as well. And so then there's a matter of time. I'd ask the current county administrator, who also was the former treasurer, if he's aware of that particular amount of time that it might take before the county can take additional action, which I'm thinking might be putting it up for auction or something like that. Mr. Shorter, do you have any further insights into that?

So it really depends on what classification it falls into. And there are two different types of sales that the treasurer can pursue, one through the judicial process, the courts, and one non-judicial. There are very defined criteria in which you can sell something non-judicially, which will speed up the process. It only has to be a year delinquent. It doesn't have to go before the judge and things of that nature. If it fits that narrow criteria without having a structure on it, that helps because it knocks it out immediately if it has a structure on it. That could happen if the taxes were delinquent. It could happen after the first year of delinquency of those taxes. If it does not meet the narrowly defined criteria to bypass the court structure, it has to be delinquent three years before you can start the judicial process, and that's lengthy within itself to meet all those hurdles and barriers and notices and court appearances. So really, it truly depends on whether or not it fits the criteria of a nonjudicial. Hopefully it would. That would accelerate it.

Okay, all right, thank you. And my last question is, who monitors this? Because this is not just a, okay, we tore it down, we cleaned up the lot, and we're moving on to the next one. Who actually starts the clock then for making sure this is taken care of? I guess the treasurer. Treasurer.

I'm going to just first of all address the question. Me, personally, have not had to address this before. So I'm in a bit of uncharted territory as far as how you might track that. I would imagine there's ways in our tax records that we can query out when a property is delinquent by a certain amount of time. But I think Mr. Shorter may have insights on this, not only from the county administrative perspective, but also the former treasurer. Mr. Shorter, do you have anything to add?

Yeah, so we wouldn't be able to actually sell the property just for the amount due for the cleanup. The only way the county could ever actually instigate something, it would have to be through the treasurer's office for delinquent taxes. Otherwise, just our lien sits on the deed. If until one day that deed wants to be transferred, then that lien will be there. If the owner of the property or anyone... keeps the taxes current, it will sit there in perpetuity.

All right. Good. Good. Thank you. Appreciate that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I'd like to bring up Mr. Slater. He's going to cover these three particular properties that I was referring to a minute ago where we're asking for the board's support to go ahead and initiate the process for

Good afternoon, Mr. Slater, and welcome to Pittsburgh County, and welcome to the team.

I'd like to thank everybody for this opportunity. So the first property is 2097 Orphanage Road in Danville. An initial violation... Well, I'd like to say this started off as a complaint, and... The property was cited on April 16th, and I followed up twice, April 27th and May 18th. And I spoke to the owner of the property. He assured me he was going to clean it up within the 30 days, and nothing was completed. So I also did a second letter on May 27th and followed up June 8th. And nothing was completed. And then I even posted the property on June 10th and did a follow-up on June 29th, and still nothing has been done. And as of yesterday, I did one last final inspection, and the property is still not in compliance with the solid waste chapter 9. Excuse me, chapter 17. All right, moving on to the next property, 220 Joshua Wood Road in Hurt. I did an initial, this also was a complaint from the neighbor next door. I wrote up a violation on April 23rd, followed up June 16th, and nothing had been completed. And I did a second letter of violation on June 17th. and then I posted the property the same day, and as of yesterday, nothing has been completed and I have not had any contact with the owner of the property. 1430 Cunda Flame. This property actually was sited last year in September by Dave Arnold, and they signed a certified letter on the property September 3rd, 2025, and I did a follow-up my second day here with the county, and I spoke to the owner, and she said she was in the process of cleaning it up. And I did a follow-up on May 15th, 26, and nothing had been completed. And I did a second letter, June 23rd, 26, and posted the property June 18th, and as of yesterday, nothing had been completed.

Does the board have any questions related to any of those properties that were just shown on screen and we're asking for the board's support on to initiate the cleanup process?

Mr. Chairman. Yes, sir. Mr. Arnold, if we approve this and given the authority, can we charge that person? Take them to court? Yes, sir.

Similar to what we were talking about with an unsafe structure, when it's demolished, this will be applied to the property and recouped via the tax collection process.

Okay. So what would it charge? What would we set it at for the first offense? I mean, then if you have to go back, are we just going to charge a certain amount to the property and collect it?

We would be applying the cost of whatever we pay for a third party to clean it up. Plus, we would want to recoup any ancillary fees, say, for disposal at the landfill. And all that would be applied essentially like a lien on the property or against the property.

Thank you, sir.

We'll add to that, Mr. Dalton. The initial cost will be funded by the dilapidated structures.

Okay. All right. Thank you, sir. Thanks, sir.

Mr. Whittle.

Mr. Arnold, that right there, what do you do when you're running somebody out there that really doesn't want you on their property when you send somebody a crew on that?

I caught a portion of that.

Let me rephrase. What do you do when you run into somebody that's combative when you get out there and they really don't want somebody on their property?

It happens. It's a good question. I'll speak from my own experience and then I'll also want Mr. Slater to weigh in on that. A lot of times the first site visit is kind of more of a recon visit, reconnaissance, just evaluating it. Then, you know, you may, if you see the property owner available, you may try to make contact with them. We have in the past, Knowing that a particular site, if we have some forewarning or knowledge that the property owner may be combative, we will be accompanied by law enforcement, the deputy. But also, like I said, I'd like for Mr. Slater to weigh in on that because I think he's also experienced that more than I have.

Yeah, I have a property that's been cited for excessive trash and inoperable vehicles. And I saw somebody on the property, and so I wanted to speak to them to see if they'll be willing to voluntarily comply with the violation. And he was friendly at first, but then when I started talking about the violation, he wanted to talk to me about it was his right in the Constitution to do whatever he wants with his property. And then I said to him that I'm not here to discuss the Constitution. I'm here to discuss this violation. And that's when he got a little upset with that. Then he asked me to leave, so I left.

I got one more question. If I can remember. Oh, my gosh. I'll maybe get back with you. OK. You just left me. I'm good. Thank you, sir.

Yes, sir. Thank you. Any additional questions? I guess what we need, we probably need to add a piece to our agenda tonight. Vote on it, Mr. Evans.

Mr. Tucker, we actually already have an item on consent agenda.

That is correct.

I apologize. We didn't jump the gun, but we were hopeful. We could always pull it if it did not have the board support.

Good enough, sir.

Good shape if you all are backing us on this. Yes, sir. On the request.

We want to make sure we can take action and move on. Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Donald. Mr. Chairman, I've got one more question.

Yes, sir. What if you gave them a contract showing them that it's going to cost them X amount of dollars to have this done, you know what I'm saying, something written out, because if you just say I'm sending somebody in and clean it up, and then they get a bill for $15,000, you know they ain't going to make it, you know what I'm saying, type of thing. So if you sent them a letter or something with just addressing it, you know, landfill feeds, your construction feeder, have the yard cleaned up. People out there, you're going to pay all day long to do what they don't want to do. And just give them a full warning before you go out there and just throw a bill on them for so much.

As part of the notification process, the final notice, it doesn't, as I understand, and Mark, please correct me if I'm wrong, it does not include the exact dollar amount, but it does let them know that this is approaching cleanup to be initiated by the county, but will be at the property owner's expense.

Is that right? Yes, Dave, that is correct. And we give them a fair amount. I give them at least 30 days and then additional. And then if they don't comply with the 30 days, then a second letter goes out. And I do post at my discretion. I post the property. Because a lot of these, some people won't get the certified letter, so I'm starting to post it on their mailbox, on the post of their mailbox. So I make sure that they try to get the proper notice before we do the cleanup.

Thank you.

Anything else, gentlemen? Yeah, Mr. English.

make sure understood what you said earlier as far as the the county code we're going to look at a revision tonight correct to be inclusive of some of what mark's trying to do is that right essentially what we're asking for tonight on the consent agenda is approval uh for the county to initiate cleanup of these three particular parcels okay okay now You bring up an interesting point. It could be, if the board has interest in it, the county could be amended to allow for expedition to expedite this cleanup process where administratively by staff, you know, we can go ahead after giving X number of notices to the property owner, we can go ahead and clean up the property. But in accordance with the current verbiage in county code, we see that it needs, the board needs to deem it necessary. And that's what we're asking through by formal resolution on the consent agenda tonight.

That's where I'm confused, because going back in time to the prior county attorney, I explicitly asked him these questions. And he said the code didn't allow for us to do that. And so if there was a misunderstanding of what was written, I'll understand that. I'll accept that. But if we need to look at changes in our county code to allow you guys to clean up these eyesores that we're all confronted with, whatever we need to do, and I think I told Mr. Evans some time back, if we have to get constructive or creative with our wording, by all means do so. But, yes, we absolutely need to address this forthwith because this has been going on too long. And I will tell you this, from my law enforcement side, you cannot put stuff on a mailbox post. It's still, according to the Postal Service, part of that federal structure as far as the mail goes. unless you have been forbidden to come on the property, you can always post on the door. That's what I'd recommend. If you've had trouble with somebody that wanted to argue with you about the Constitution, if you had to go back, I would see if somebody with the sheriff's office would go with you for your protection primarily. But you're going to have people that's going to reject a visit, and they're going to reject any kind of certified letter. So, again, you've got to get constructive.

Exactly, yeah. And we'll look into the legal attitude that we have and post it where it's best and most appropriate and obviously legal. Yeah. Thank you.

Yes, sir. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, sir. I think part of the process, the next piece on the comp plan is to take a look at – you know, those, uh, those, uh, policy pieces. So that might be one that we take a look at right now. You're just looking for the green light from the board to move forward on said pieces that you just went over this evening, uh, on consent. And certainly, I think everyone on this board is in favor of making sure that we keep our county looking great so we continue to be a great place to live and work and raise families, that sort of thing. So I'm good. Thank you, gentlemen, for all your work.

Thank you all.

Yes, sir. All right. That moves us down to 6B. Zoning ordinance proposed. Ms. Smith, did you make a little note about taking a look at changing that verbiage on the appearance of the property that we were just discussing?

Sorry, did I make a note about what?

What they just shared with you.

Yes.

Okay. All right. Good evening and welcome.

Thank you. So in the last two months, we've talked about the zoning ordinance amendments that are necessary to be in compliance with some recent changes to state code. Tonight, I would like to go through each one. I have a summary of each one and then also a proposed red line language. And then with the board's direction, we'll hold the public hearings. that are required at next month's the August Planning Commission meeting and then the August Board of Supervisors meeting. As a reminder, most of the ordinance changes that we need to make are pretty outlined in the legislation. There are a couple where we have a little bit more latitude or the opportunity to be a little more flexible or creative and I'll outline what I've done with those. So the first is related to House Bill 277 for wireless facility modifications. This establishes mandatory local procedures for reviewing modifications to existing wireless facilities. The revisions that are proposed for the zoning ordinance are an update of definitions and full replacement of 35-128, which is the wireless telecommunications facilities section. And it was rewritten to modernize and also to be compliant with the new state code. So I'll be happy to entertain any questions or comments or thoughts you might have on that one.

What is a wireless facility? What are you talking about?

Cell tower.

Thank you, sir.

We'll move on to House Bill 876, temporary wireless support structures. This bill requires that we have provisions in the zoning ordinance allowing for temporary wireless support structures under defined conditions. So here again, there are some updated definitions proposed and adding the regulations from the legislation for temporary support structures. Thank you. Questions or comments on that proposed language? The next one is House Bill 655, Senate Bill 346 on manufactured housing regulations. This is one of the pieces of legislation where we have a little more opportunity for flexibility and decision. in how it's applied. This is, as a reminder, the requirement that anywhere, any residential zoning district where you allow Site-built homes, you have to allow manufactured homes without any additional review process or standards. Also as a reminder though, this does not address deed restrictions in any way. Deed restrictions can still say that you can't have a manufactured home in that neighborhood or that community. Those are civil and aren't addressed in the zoning ordinance. So here again, we've updated some definitions. We've added manufactured homes as a permitted use in the applicable zoning districts and removed it as a special use permit use in the districts where it does currently exist. And then to address the board's concern, as we discussed at the last work session, I have put in the language proposal for minimum dwelling size for the R1 zoning district of 1,200 square feet. And that language includes that it's 1,200 square feet of enclosed heated living area. So it does further define what that area is. For the re the residential estate zoning district that minimum square footage requirement is proposed at 1,800 square feet And I did not propose any minimum for the RC one zoning district Where manufactured homes were already permitted by right? Happy to answer any questions or mr.. Chairman I have a question yes, sir, mr.

Bowman all right I Thank you, Kelly. I appreciate the work you put in here under Section 35-294, permitted uses. Within the residential planned unit development district, the following uses are permitted. You add it in. under the bullet there, manufactured home in accordance with Virginia code 15.2-2290. I don't have access to that. What does that say? What does that code say?

That's the new language in the code that says that in order to be considered as a manufactured home that's consistent with site-built homes, it has to be converted to real property. It has to have a certificate of occupancy date within five years of installation. And it can only be on an individual property, not in a mobile home park. So this is the requirement that it be a newer model home, and that the transportation system be removed, that it be converted to real property through the tax office. doesn't technically have a permanent foundation. That language used to be in the code, but that's been removed and replaced with these other three criteria.

So, you know my objection to having manufactured homes in established neighborhoods. If there is a vacant lot there and you have stick built homes, brick, you know, that kind of stuff. Is this saying this is allowed now?

We have to allow it in any residential zoning district as long as it meets those three criteria in the state code. Now, I did not propose a minimum dwelling size in this zoning district because typically this is a more thought-out project that a developer or a property owner would seek a rezoning to this zoning district and generally those are going to have deed restrictions but certainly I'm happy to add in a minimum size or even architectural standards or other items that might be still compliant with the state law but understanding the concerns.

Will homeowners associations have any bearing on this?

So if they have deed restrictions in place, then those will stay. If they don't have them in place, they certainly can still put them in place. The deed restrictions are separate, though, from the zoning ordinance. So the county can't enforce deed restrictions, but they certainly can be there.

I'm not saying this was hidden in there. You've got it redlined in there, but it's one of those things that, to me, it just pops right out there. And that's the reason I'm asking this question here, because there are a number of established neighborhoods that have vacant lots within them, and if somebody, and again, for clarification, sells their vacant lot, then they could, or somebody, a buyer, could opt to put a manufactured home on that. In between... you know, two established homes that I'm just going to say the assessed price may be over $500,000, whereas this one may not be $500,000. So I'm looking at consistency here more than anything else and making sure that these neighborhoods stay the way they were developed without having manufactured homes placed in there.

So I think there's a couple things that I can do to address your concerns when I come back next month with the proposed ordinance language or for the public hearing. We can do a couple different things. Since the residential plan development district is relatively small land-wise as far as the number of properties, I do think that's an opportunity for maybe some more discussion Specific architectural standards rather than just a minimum square footage requirement sure I would obviously want to take a look and make sure that having architectural standards is not going to create an unintended consequence of Saying somebody's site-built home that they want to build doesn't meet those architectural standards But I can certainly do that.

Okay. Good. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. Thank you Anyone else?

All right.

Okay. Next is House Bill 1463, non-conforming manufactured homes. This amends the non-conforming use provisions to ensure that manufactured home parks may replace old units with new HUD code compliant manufactured homes, regardless of prior occupancy or vacancy. We have added new provisions to Section 35-166, which is the restoration or replacement section of the nonconformity division. We've updated some of the language in 35-166 and then also added cross-references. I'm happy to entertain any questions on this section or comments.

Any questions? Keep it rolling.

OK. The next one is House Bill 1212, small lot residential zoning district requirement. And this one is a new one, because I discovered this bill after coming before you last month. This requires that any locality with a population of 5,000 or more residents establish at least one zoning district allow single family dwellings on lots no larger than 3,000 square feet. So what I've done is proposed some language to create this zoning district, but we will not have any properties within this zoning district unless a property owner comes forward and wants to rezone to this zoning district. It does require that the land be served by public water and public sewer, that it will not be within a designated floodplain, and it will not apply to any historic district. The number of permitted uses is very limited, and special use permitted uses are actually not included because of the specific nature of the district. Any questions?

All right. Questions, gentlemen? All right.

Okay. The next one is House Bill 711, Senate Bill 347, local regulation of solar energy facilities. This is another one where we have some flexibility, and this is also proposing not only changes to the zoning ordinance but also a comprehensive plan amendment. It adds utility scale solar as a special use permitted use in all the zoning districts except for residential. That is a requirement of the legislation. It removes the 2% cap on utility scale solar and the five mile separation requirement that are currently in the zoning ordinance. It adds in all the other language required in the legislation. And then what I actually did was took that entire section and proposed a rewrite to make it a little more readable, a little bit more enforceable, a little bit more understandable. So you'll see the zoning ordinance amendment and then also the comprehensive plan amendment, which adds advisory siting policies for utility scale solar. aligns plans, policies with long-range land use goals, and ensures consistency with updated zoning standards and the SEC reporting requirement.

Any questions? I have a quick question. This special use permit on these solar farms, that gives us the ability to actually control the profits. Is that correct?

Yes, it does.

Okay. Just want to make sure.

Next is battery energy storage projects as accessory to solar facilities. This designates battery energy storage projects as a buy-right accessory used to any parcel with an approved special exception for commercial solar facilities. We've added some new language declaring co-located battery energy storage projects as a permitted accessory use, establishing site plan review requirements, safety standards, decommissioning requirements, and also added a few definitions.

Okay. Any questions?

And our last one is high energy use facilities. This legislation established statewide requirements for reviewing rezoning, special exception, and special use permit applications for high energy use facilities. We added a definition of high energy use facility, created a new section establishing site assessment requirements, incorporated resource-based supplemental assessment requirements, and defined the geographic scope of additional requirements. This is mostly language that was required under the state law.

Any questions for Ms. Smith? Nice. All right, wonderful. Thank you so much, ma'am. We look forward to you coming back.

Thank you.

All right. That takes us down to agenda item 6C. I didn't get all of Mr. Whittle's motion. Read that for us, Madam Clerk.

That's going to be to discuss the temporary housing while active residential construction is occurring.

Thank you. All right. Mr. Whittle.

Yes, sir. I'd like to get... Dave to come up here and give us a little verbiage on this thing. Thank you, Dave.

Yes, sir, Mr. Whittle. Just to bring everybody up to speed, Mr. Whittle and I spoke. He contacted me within the past couple of days regarding an interest in the possibility of our zoning ordinance being amended to allow a property owner to temporarily occupy an RV or a camper when situations are occurring where their property is under construction to build a new home or an extensive renovation or remodel. So this Our conversation happened since the agenda was advertised, which is why he added it to the agenda this afternoon. And initially, I reside in a neighboring county, and I thought that particular neighboring county had this in place. When I spoke with their director of community development yesterday, I learned that, no, I was misinformed. So they don't, that particular neighborhood county, which is Franklin County. However, to our east, I checked with county staff, our chief building official, Otis Vaughn, and he informed me that, why, yes, Halifax County does have temporary housing as an option in certain zoning districts in Franklin. that respective jurisdiction. So there's a lot to research here. As Ms. Smith just stated in her update, you always want to check for unintended consequences. So we don't have this all fleshed out. I would certainly, myself, would need to use our resources, use our subject matter experts. Notably, this falls under the zoning administrator's preview, Ms. Smith, so we want her perspective on this. Mr. Vaughn and potentially other localities as well to ensure that if the board is interested in Considering something like this that we have well thought out amended language for an update to the zoning ordinance, but I will While we're all here together at least read what Halifax County has for their temporary housing definition and their zoning ordinance the means of using dwelling, camper or recreational vehicle for temporary use while construction or renovation of a unit on the property. Temporary quarters shall have approved septic and well installed and shall be unhooked of all plumbing and electrical prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for a new or renovated dwelling. So that basically means Once you get your permanent residence fully constructed or completely renovated and the CO has been issued, you now have to disconnect and no longer use your camper or RV as a temporary residence, right? But there's other considerations here. It could be the amount of time that you would allow, as you all are probably familiar. We have something similar to this when a residence is destroyed by, like, an act of God. such as a fire, and they have an active permit on the property to rebuild that residence. So you see some parallels, and I think there's a requirement in our current zoning ordinance that requires that the camper RV be connected to well and septic. That's just being responsible, being environmentally safe, and that sort of thing. And also have an electrical connection, too. Those are some of the additional considerations that would have to be fleshed out. But Mr. Whittle, does that give some perspective to what we were talking about?

That's right on key there. Yes, sir. Thank you.

Thank you. I guess at this point, is there interest from the board for staff to research this and come back with some drafted language?

Yes.

Yes, sir. I would like some more research. I think it would be a good thing. Myself, I agree with you. We can get everything ironed out. Thank you.

Yes, sir. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is like deja vu, all these topics coming up that have some age on them. If you recall, when we were having this vigorous discussion about people that had been displaced due to something of their not own, as you said, an act of God, whether it be a fire, a hurricane, et cetera, I was very much a proponent of allowing them to live in a camp until they got to home restored as it was. and then some board members wanted all these ridiculous restrictions one of which is make sure the taxes were paid i won't even go a step further there was another case of somebody moved into our county bought 25 30 acres of land wanted to live in in the center of it while they built their home i would have a problem with that so i would love to see us have a vigorous conversation and get this worked out where it doesn't keep coming back up Personally, I just, you know, you go back to landowner, homeowner rights, sometimes government is way too intrusive. And as far as the you know, the considerations, the health consideration, environmental, you know, if you've ever owned a camper, you know, they're pretty solid nowadays as far as being able to live in them. And putting these restrictions on, okay, you can stay here six months, but then you've got to move it one lot over, I think it's ridiculous. And I think we can do a better job of making it easier for our citizens and just business-wise in general. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Anyone else?

All right. Mr. Arnold, can you have your team to bring some additional information to our next work session? Please, sir. Be glad to. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Arnold.

Thank you. All right. That moves us to agenda item seven, any business meeting discussions. Board members? Hearing none, Mr. Evans, would you read us in the close, please?

Yes, Mr. Chairman. There are two matters designated for closed session this afternoon, which are, first, consultation with legal counsel employed or retained by a public body regarding specific legal matters requiring the provision of legal advice by such counsel. Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed permit the closure of a meeting merely because an attorney representing the public body is in attendance or is consulted on a matter. Legal authority Virginia Code section 2.237.11a8, subject matter is jail, courthouse, litigation, River Street, landfill contract. Purpose, consultation with legal counsel and legal advice and discussion regarding the same. Second matter is discussion concerning prospective business or industry or the expansion of an existing business or industry where no previous announcement has been made of the business's or industry's interest in locating or expanding its facilities in the community. Legal authority, Virginia Code, section 2.237.11a5. Subject matters, unannounced perspective, businesses and industries, purpose, general economic development project updates. Mr. Chairman, now it would be appropriate to entertain a motion, second discussion, and vote on closed session.

Thank you, Mr. Evans. I'll entertain the motion to go into close.

Mr. Chairman, I'll make that motion.

Thank you so much, Mr. Bowman.

I'll second it.

Thank you so much, Mr. Dalton.

Any discussion on the motion? Vote electronic, please. All right, motion passes unanimously. We're going into close. Thank you, sir. Let's come to order. Mr. Evan, would you read us in, please?

Yes, Mr. Chairman. Be it resolved that the Pittsburgh County Board of Supervisors work session held on July 21st 2026, the board hereby certifies by a recorded vote that to the best of each board member's knowledge, only public business matters lawfully exempted from the open meeting requirements of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act and identified in the motion authorizing the closed meeting were heard, discussed, or considered in the closed meeting. If any board member believes that there was a departure from the requirement of the act, he shall so state prior to the vote, indicating the substance of the departure. The statement shall be recorded in the board's minutes. We will now have a roll call vote regarding to certification of closed session. Mr. Dalton. Yes. Mr. Dudley. Yes. Mr. Brown. Yes. Mr. Bowman. Yes. Mr. Whittle. Yes. Mr. Ingram. Yes. Mr. Tucker.

Yes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Evans. I'll now declare that we are adjourned. We're going to take a pause for the calls. We'll be back in seven to ten minutes.