Town Planning Commission scrutinizes requests on changes to its function, downtown residential zoning parameters

One thing was perfectly clear from a nearly two-hour, Wednesday evening, June 30th work session discussion of the Front Royal Planning Commission – and that is that there is very little clarity, or direct communications from the Town Council and staff to the town planners about desired changes to downtown zoning codes regarding the development of apartments, or for that matter changes to the planning commission’s role in the rezoning and permitting application process.

One immediate sign of that lack of communication was the absence of any representative from the council or the town administrative or legal staff to answer questions.

The 7 p.m. work session in the second-floor meeting room at Town Hall had a one-topic agenda:

“Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment #FRZORDAM 2519-2021 initiated by a resolution of the Front Royal Town Council. The purposes of the proposed amendments are to change the use regulations of the C-2 Downtown Business District pertaining to the administrative permitting of residential units and the special use permitting of apartments by Town Council.”

Present for Wednesday’s Town Planning Commission work session from bottom left, Commission Chairman Doug Jones, Commissioners Josh Ingram (green shirt), Darryl Merchant, the Planning Department’s Mr. Do-it-all Chris Brock at the far end of the table, Department Planner/GIS Coordinator Alfredo Velasquez, and Commissioner Will Gordon. Also, present remotely was Commissioner Connie Marshner. Absent were any council, town legal or administrative staff representatives. Below, the work session agenda. Royal Examiner Photos by Roger Bianchini

Of the apartment development ordinance proposal originally presented to the planning commission, Royal Examiner’s Stephen Sill (out of town Wednesday) wrote of the commission’s June 16 meeting: “The amended ordinance mainly rescinds or loosens some restrictions on developing apartments in the Downtown Commercial District (C-2) … In this meeting, the commissioners were presented with a revised version of the ordinance text change. Where the first draft of the ordinance allowed for the conversion of existing commercial or residential structures to increase the number of dwelling units to not more than 8, applied exemptions for minimum lot size, building height, parking space, and other restrictions to the entire downtown business district, the new version restricts those exceptions to properties fronting East Main St. from Royal Avenue to Happy Creek, Chester Street from E. Main St to E. 2nd St, and E. Jackson St from S. Royal Ave to Church St.”

Two weeks later the commission reviewed further tweaks to the proposal made by planning staff based on previous commissioner comments. Present for the discussion was Chris Brock, the Planning Department’s Deputy Zoning Administrator/Code Enforcement Officer, who is also currently tasked as the Interim Planning & Community Development Directors in the wake of the dismissals of Planning Director Jeremy Camp and Community Development Director Felicia Hart as part of then Interim Town Manager Matt Tederick’s early-2020 downsizing of town staff, including several department heads. Planner 1/GIS Coordinator Alfredo Velasquez joined Brock at the meeting.

Town Planning staffers Chris Brock, left, and Alfredo Velasquez, were present to answer questions on the planning department side of the Historic Downtown apartment ordinance proposal and two related resolutions sent to the planning commission by the town council for approval.

But two weeks on questions remained about, not only staff-suggested changes but portions of the original document. How apartments were defined as to size, ground footprint, “conversion” of existing structure parameters versus new construction, parking availability, and maintenance of the district’s downtown commercial presence, were all cited as matters of concern in the proposal sent by council to the planning commission for approval.

“But again, having no contact with council on this, and no (planning) director (who has traditionally been the commission’s liaison to the town’s elected officials) I don’t know what the answer is to that,” Commissioner Darryl Merchant said of one of his questions on parameters of the draft apartment ordinance proposal.

Connected by phone, Commissioner Connie Marshner wondered at wording indicating apartments as small as 250 to 300 square feet would be allowed. Whether apartments would be allowed on the first floors was also a concern as the impacted area is the center of Front Royal’s Historic Downtown Business District, where apartments above existing first-floor businesses along East Main Street have been the traditional residential presence. – “I thought our intent was to create commercial opportunities,” her colleague Merchant said of the potential of first-floor apartments being facilitated in the downtown commercial center by the proposed ordinance changes.

Merchant also wondered at vagaries surrounding parking requirements and waivers for downtown lots – the posted two-hour downtown parking restriction has been traditionally not enforced for business and residential tenants.

As to legal implications of some of the ordinance sections, Merchant bemoaned the absence of town legal staff to address questions. He also pointed to the lack of operational Town recording or live broadcast equipment in use for the planning commission work session – “They use it for council work sessions,” it was observed.
Reading text from the ordinance draft, Merchant referred to “word games” he interpreted as creating more vagaries around regulations, in this case to “minimum lot sizes” as applied to “conversion” of existing commercial structures to apartment uses.

Darryl Merchant, foreground, led commission questioning of detail vagaries and what he believes are mistaken assumptions on the council side about the planning commission’s function. From left, Will Gordon, Chairman Doug Jones, and Josh Ingram ponder what has been presented to them for approval.

“We want to avoid unintended consequences,” Merchant told his colleagues. While not addressed directly Wednesday evening, whether council-proposed changes could impact zoning permitting for a 60-unit apartment proposal at the old Murphy Building property at the intersection of East Main and Church Streets, which the commission just learned of from applicant Bill Barnett at their previous meeting, may have weighed into the “unintended consequences” discussion. “Dogged by the details: Town Planning commission mulls zoning and ordinance changes while waiting for a new Planning Director”

Oh, and then there’s this

The extensive discussion without any answers from the council-administrative-legal side of town government led to an examination of a second, related council resolution regarding proposed changes to the planning commission and planning department side of the permitting and zoning equations.

“Do we wish to make the changes council wishes us to make?” Commission Chairman Doug Jones asked in introducing those proposed changes contained in a council resolution forwarded to the commission. A copy of that resolution included in the agenda packet was dated April 26, 2021. The council resolution on proposed zoning code changes related to permitting of apartment development was dated February 8, 2021.

At issue for commissioners was not the fact, that as noted the planning commission is essentially an advisory body to council on permitting and zoning issues with some approval authority based in existing town codes and zoning ordinances, but that somehow the proposed changes would make the review system more efficient, streamlined or clear in its intent. Might it not achieve the opposite, some wondered.

“What we do is make sure that the applications before us comply with our code to the letter. And some people apparently don’t like that. The whole premise of this thing is based on their interpretation or their feeling that there’s some conflict – there is no conflict,” Merchant stated, adding pointedly, “I am very opposed to that premise (of a conflict in the roles of the planning commission and council). All we do is a review and make recommendations.”

“If that’s the intent … to make things smoother for somebody, wouldn’t that add another layer?” Commissioner Josh Ingram asked after hearing from Planner 1/GIS Coordinator Velasquez that the day-to-day operations of planning staff wouldn’t be significantly impacted by the council-sought changes throwing authority to the town manager or his designee, and away from the Zoning Administrator or Planning Director.

“What it says right now is that if a zoning request is denied – we have a Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) already. So, there’s just another layer being added,” Ingram reasoned of existing permitting structures and processes versus what has been sent to the planning commission by council for approval of adjustments to that structure.
Relevant passages (with underlining added) of town council’s April Resolution on “Planning Commission Authority” include:

“WHEREAS, Chapter 148, Section 515 of the Town Code regulates the submission and review of Major Site Development Plans as identifies the Planning Commission as the approving authority for such plans that are required as part of the zoning approvals for select uses allowed by right and allowed by special use permit by the Zoning Administrator and Town Council, respectively, pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 175, Zoning; and,

“WHEREAS, to make Town Code better organized and efficient to use, all zoning application requirements, processes, use and development regulations, and the like, such as zoning based site sketches and plans, parking and loading requirements, and other zoning related requirements as may found in Town Code Chapter 148 should be moved to Chapter 175 Zoning; and,

“WHEREAS, it is found that designating the Planning Commission with the authority to approve Major Site Plans may interfere or conflict with the powers of the Zoning Administrator and even that of the Town Council in the review and approval of their respective zoning applications as well as adding time and cost to the zoning review and decision-making process of both forms of permit approval; and,

“WHEREAS, the Town Council desires to designate the Town Manager, or his designee Deputy Zoning Administrator (Director of Planning), as the Zoning Administrator and remove the Director of Planning from this official authority” leading to the payoff paragraph:

“NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Council of the Town of Front Royal, Virginia, in the furtherance of promoting the public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and for good zoning practice does hereby initiate amendments to Chapter 148, Subdivision and Land Development, to change the review and approving authority, and all other matters related to the processing of Major Site Development Plan Applications in their entirety from the Planning Commission to the “Town Manager” charged with the administration of Chapter 148. Moreover, all references to this change as contained in Chapter 175, Zoning, as well as all other approval authorities related to required development plans and plats as required by the Zoning Ordinance are to be amended accordingly by either deletion or changing such authority from the Planning Commission to the Town Manager, or his designee as the Zoning Administrator as deemed most clear and appropriate.

Since none of the main players, nor any players, from the Council-Administrative side – a trio of which are pictured here in the town council work session file photo – were present to address their questions, the town planning commission was left to wonder at impacts from proposed downtown residential zoning ordinance changes and a related request they approve the removal of themselves from the Town’s by-right use permitting process.

With Chairman Jones slated to speak with private sector consultant Cody Christensen of RK&K (Rummel, Kelpper and Kahl), described as a “code writer” the next morning by phone, Marchant suggested that Merchant, who had raised the most detailed questions on the draft, participate in that call with Chairman Jones seeking some legal and policy clarification on the draft ordinance. Merchant agreed to do so at his colleagues’ request.

Stay tuned as these proposals with implications, not only on permitting of future downtown residential apartment proposals but any by-right re-zoning application in the Town of Front Royal, progresses – maybe next time with video broadcast and recording equipment in place.