In Favor of Permeable Surface, Town Planning Commission Advances Reduction of Divisibility Per Lot

At a May 6 work session, the Town Planning Commission covered ground that included the subdivision ordinance, a review of the I-2 industrial zone, and an urgent need to bring the Town code into compliance with state code pertaining to the Town’s current disallowance of manufactured homes in any but the A-1 agricultural zone.

The Town Planning Commission met on May 6 for a work session. Royal Examiner Photo Credits: Brenden McHugh

Outstanding among concerns related to the subdivision ordinance was the degree to which the owner is free to divide the lot. Currently, the code allows a lot to be divided into no more than 8 smaller lots. Planning Director Lauren Kopishke feels this is too generous an allowance, as it opens the door to abuse, particularly with the development of townhouses. She expressed to the commissioners a preference for a reduction to allow no more than a 2-for-1 split. With a graduate focus in environmental planning, Kopishke is aware that when ground is disturbed and built upon, the available permeable surface for absorbing rainwater into the soil decreases. When development of greater density occurs, there is correspondingly even less permeable surface.

Flooding basements may be the consequence. As the Town’s planning director, Kopishke works at the center of a convergence between Town and County enforcement. Her job is not necessarily to regulate water but to honor the decisions that come from whatever inspections the County has undertaken in that regard. However, limiting the number of divisions per lot is something she can support while staying in her lane. The commissioners reflected on the arbitrary nature of picking a number between two and eight, while Kopishke affirmed that although she could settle for three, two would be ideal. Vice-Chairman Megan Marrazzo raised questions about whether this new restriction might be financially burdensome for a resident, especially as it pertains to hiring an engineer, and Kopishke confirmed that the cost will be immaterial, as a resident is likely to hire a contractor who wraps the cost of an engineer into the packaged deal.

Thus, the commissioners settled on “no more than two”. Conversations about the subdivision ordinance began with a special meeting of the Town Planning Commission on April 29, in which multiple concerns were addressed, such as the preservation of Front Royal’s character, insofar as the ordinance can be used to reinforce that value. Could the relatively higher downtown density serve as a model for other parts of Front Royal, welcoming chains but requiring them to maintain a certain Front Royal style? Kopishke is hopeful that guidelines can be adopted to that effect. At the May 6 meeting, the removal of off-street parking requirements at the planning level for the historic district was acknowledged, with the understanding that all of this still must be processed by the Town Council.

The commission delved into I-2 zoning, considering what might be the most appropriate by right uses: they identified gas stations as undesirable in that zone, due to the relatively smaller revenue such an establishment produces; they honored the presence of schools there, remarking that any removal would force a school like Chelsea Academy into non-compliance; and they did, indeed, remove “clubs” as a use, because words like that have a wide field of meaning, capturing the VFW but at the same time the undesirable adult entertainment variety of what it means to be a club. Town Attorney George Sonnett contributed to the discussion of noise, emphasizing that what is “annoying” or “disruptive” to some people is not to others, and therefore it is more appropriate and less arbitrary to regulate noise insofar as it has an “impact” on neighboring uses.

With other concerns, like setbacks and height restrictions for I-2, addressed, Commissioner Teresa Fedoryka then presented a recent state bill that created a non-compliance issue with the Town code. The Town currently does not allow development of manufactured homes in any district other than the A-1 agricultural district, and even there, some requirements are not aligned with the new state law. Acknowledging the need to allow manufactured homes where homes are developed, the evening’s business was completed, and the meeting was adjourned.

Watch the Front Royal Planning Commission Meeting of May 6, 2026.