Planning Commission
Regular MeetingPetersburg, VA · November 2, 2023
Minutes
City of Petersburg
Planning Commission Special Meeting
November 2, 2023
Minutes
The City of Petersburg Planning Commission meeting held on Thursday, November 2, 2023, was
called to order by the Chair, Mrs. Tammy Alexander, at 6:30 p.m. A roll call was completed by
Ms. Michelle Murrills.
Members Present: Ms. Tammy Alexander, Chair
Mr. Fenton Bland, Vice Chair
Mr. Thomas Hairston
Mr. Michael Edwards (attended virtually)
Dr. William Irving
Ms. Marie Vargo
Mrs. Candace Taylor
Members Absent: Dr. Chioma Adaku
Dr. James Norman
A Quorum was established by Ms. Murrills.
Others Present: Ms. Naomi Siodmok-Planning Director, Ms. Sandra Robinson, Ms. Michelle
Murrills, Mr. Sued Shah, Mr. Joe Battiston, Mr. Ken Pritchett, Mr. Jasper Lewis, Mrs. Sandra
Lewis, Mr. Ray Rivera, and Mr. Eric Walker.
3. Adoption of the Agenda:
Chair Alexander called for any changes to the agenda. Director Siodmok wanted everyone to
know that item 2023-ZTA-01 has been removed from City Council’s next agenda. And as such,
1
she said that after the public has had their input that the Commissioners could then just table
it. Chair Alexander then asked Director Siodmok if she wanted them to go ahead and vote on it
and it gets to City Council when it gets to City Council. Director Siodmok then said that that
sounded much better especially since there was a quorum tonight. Since there were no
changes, Commissioner Edwards moved for the approval of the agenda; Commissioner Hairston
seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
5. Public Hearings:
Chair Alexander read the notice of a public hearing as follows:
2023-SUP-08: A Public Hearing and consideration of a request from Sayed Shah Owner,
representative of S Sha Properties LLC. To obtain a Special Use Permit as provided for under
Article 23, Supplementary Use Regulations-Special Uses. Section 4 Special Uses Enumerated.
Item (22) of the Zoning Ordinance to establish Stand-alone used vehicle sales not associated with
a new-vehicle dealership or not located upon the same parcel as such new-vehicle dealership, if
located upon parcels of less than one care in area, such to be permitted within the B-2 and M-1
zoning districts only. The subject property is located at 112 N Crater Road and is further
identified as Tax Parcel #012110010. The Comprehensive Plan suggests this area is appropriate
for commercial and residential uses. The property is zoned B-2, General Commercial District.
Director Siodmok made the presentation.
This is a request by Mr. Sayed Shaw to obtain a Special Use Permit to establish a stand-alone
used vehicle sales location at 112 and 114 N. Crater Road. The Code does require that someone
looking to have a used vehicle dealership on their property and their property is less than an acre
then it must come before the Planning Commission and City Council for a Special Use Permit in
a B-2 and M-1 zone district. The two parcels are about a 1/3 of an acre in size. The site is zoned
B-2 General Commercial, which allows this use with a special permit, and it is recommended in
the Comprehensive Plan. So, both the zoning and the land use recommendation are consistent.
The Department of Planning & Community Development recommends denial of the requested
Special Use Permit because of public safety concerns. The applicant has not made clear that the
site can accommodate the use. The lack of space may impact the safety on N. Crater Road. The
Planning Department has not received any site plan or anything from the applicant.
Chair Alexander then asked the applicant to step forward. Mr. Shaw then said that he wanted to
start another used car lot like the one that he owns at 210 W Washington street (he also owns one
down in Maryland). He showed pictures of what he had planned and how he would be able to
park 50 cars. He had a site plan made, but he was not able to get it from the planner before the
meeting. He said that on his lot on Washington street held 80ish cars. He said that he was so
busy that he wanted to expand his business. Mr. Shaw said that he had expected to have the site
plan the day before, but it was not ready yet and that he expected it next week. He did plan on
having the front of the building be parking for his customers and the back would be his vehicle
stock. Each car dealer is supposed to have the parking spots always delineated. Commissioner
Irvin then asked if perhaps the Commission should table the motion until Mr. Shaw gets his site
2
plan. Chair Alexander then asked if there was anyone there to speak for or against the Special
Use Permit. No one spoke. Chair Alexander then said that they could table the whole discussion
and have the public hearing at the next meeting. Commissioner Irvin made the motion to table
the request and Vice-chair Bland seconded it. It was unanimously passed, and Mr. Shaw was
told to bring in the site plan.
Chair Alexander then moved on to the next hearing.
2023-ZTA-01: A Public Hearing and consideration of a resolution presented by the City of
Petersburg Planning Department to amend Article 24 Nonconforming Uses and Article 25
Supplementary Height, Area and Bulk Regulations, as set forth in the Zoning Ordinance of the
City of Petersburg, to allow the rehabilitation and continuation of residential structures with five-
units or less, development of nonconforming lots, and existing neighborhood commercial
structures with a certificate of nonconforming use/structure.
Director Siodmok made the presentation.
This request is so that the city can allow the rehabilitation and continuation of residential
structures with four units or less, the development of nonconforming lots, and the reuse of
existing neighborhood commercial structures with a certificate of nonconforming use. The
reason for this is because there is a lot of new interest coming into Petersburg these days for
development and redevelopment of existing properties. If the existing properties do not meet the
current zoning and are empty for more than two years, it is subject to meeting the current code
which is that all structures will need to be developed into single family homes. So, if you have a
duplex, and it has been unoccupied for over two years then you come before us and want to do
redevelopment and you want to improve your duplex, but since it has been unoccupied for more
than two years…you now must meet the single-family home requirement. In changing this
language, we now allow for duplexes, tri-plexes, and quad-plexes to be able to be rehabilitated.
Also included in this is the unoccupied retails spaces that are also in our neighborhoods. These
structures, if they sit unoccupied for more than two years, also then must be turned into single
family homes. Also included would be some low-density residential that has been operating for
more than three years (illegally) with no known violations or complaints.
Here are some examples of what we are talking about…
1. 1138-1140 West High Street – though the Architectural Review Board required the
second door to remain to respect the historic structure, the functionality of the building
was required to operate as a single-family home.
2. 932-934 Priam Street - project is on hold due to inability to rehab and maintain a duplex.
3. 1004 McKenzie Street - project is on hold due to inability to rehab and maintain a duplex.
4. 1009 W High Street - project is on hold due to inability to rehab and maintain a duplex.
5. 622-624 Independence Ave - project is on hold due to inability to rehab and maintain a
duplex.
6. 719 High Street - if this were ever to be vacant for more than two years it would not
come back.
The benefits of changing the zoning ordinance for residential properties are:
3
1. Supports the rehabilitation of blighted properties.
2. Affordable by design.
3. Creates housing opportunities for diverse residents with different price points and needs.
4. Makes ownership more affordable and makes building equity accessible.
5. For renters, it makes the community associated with the single-family neighborhood
more attainable.
The benefits of changing the zoning ordinance for commercial property are:
1. Supports the rehabilitation of blighted properties.
2. Provides neighborhoods with easy access to services.
3. Reduces vehicle trips.
Staff recommends that these types of amendments be approved.
Article 24 nonconforming uses Sec. 9. Establishment of nonconforming rights, certificate of
nonconforming use. The first thing that must be done is to establish a Certificate of
Nonconforming Use. This is for some specific uses for people to come into the Planning Office
and provide us with evidence that this structure should remain a duplex or whatever. The
information that might be collected for the Certificate would be:
1. Survey of the property.
2. Building permits.
3. Evidence of a structure being there before.
4. The intent of the owner for the use of the property.
5. Evidence of current use that has been operating for more than three years in case of
existing operational structure.
6. Citation of violations.
7. Supporting documents.
8. Anything that shows evidence that this structure should remain a duplex or whatever it
was originally intended for.
This Certificate of Nonconforming Use is only specific for a few things. We are looking at
specific buildings which are two-, three-, four- family dwelling units creating opportunities for
these structures to not only retain and be approved but also to be expanded as long as they meet
the setback requirements on the site. Same with the neighborhood commercial sites. We are
making it that one can come to get a Certificate of Nonconforming use as well and also get an
exception from the parking standards as well. We want those uses to be community serving. One
will be able to come in and not have to provide a significant amount of parking for a structure
that never accommodated parking in the past. We are adding language in here that is saying that
if you a lot of record that doesn’t conform with the dimensions required of the code the lot width,
the lot area, you can still develop that lot. This will allow opportunities for people who have
homes and lots that have been in existence way before the zoning ordinance that was created in
the 70s to be able to use their lots and develop their properties.
Chair Alexander then opened up the hearing to the public.
4
Joe Battison, Chairman of the Architecture Review Board. This has been brought forward
mainly because of the multiple requests that we would have from property owners some wanting
to buy multiuse properties in Petersburg and some already having bought property in Petersburg,
not knowing that they could not continue the building as the duplex that it was originally built as.
We, by the guidance of the Parks Department of the Interior and the DHR, are required to inform
them that they have to keep the doo-rs to show that it was originally a duplex. Some of the
people that came before us only purchased the buildings because they planned on living in one
portion and renting the other one out as that is the only way that they could really afford it.
Others were buying a duplex because they couldn’t handle a structure of that size being turned
back into a one family structure. It is very burdensome to take some of these older buildings that
are so large and to make them into one family homes when they were never intended to be one
family homes. The layout inside gets destroyed to be able to do that, they take out stairwells and
if you are familiar with historic districts and so forth, the Department of Historic Resources
considers staircases to be some of the most important parts of a historic structure in a historic
district. By making them go from a duplex to a single-family home actually tends to rip out a lot
of stairwells which we then cause a lot of damage to the historic district by not having something
like this. Some of the homes were actually converted into one family homes because of the
ordinance. We are working with a couple of people with their properties, and they didn’t have
the time to go through the process of what we are doing right now. They actually had to finish it
because they had people buying the homes. I am really hoping that this gets sent on to City
Council because I think that it would be the best thing for the historic district. I am only
speaking for the historic district. The rest of the city might fall back under the old rules or might
not. That is up to you guys as to how you see fit. Whether you blanket the whole city or just the
historic districts.
Mr. Ken Pritchett, 1113 Overbrook Rd., I am a realtor and I have been an advocate for
something like this to happen for a couple of years. Especially in the last year as I have had a
couple of clients that had this gone through, they would have had more houses completed, if they
didn’t have to change a duplex to a single-family. So, I am all in favor of you all approving this
because I think that it will speed up the renovation and rehabilitation of quite a few of the houses
in here and especially on West High Street. Of course, I realize that this would apply throughout
Petersburg. I am really hoping that you all in the Planning Department and the Planning
Commission vote to approve this.
Mrs. Sandra Lewis, 1009-1011 W High Street, we were in the process of working on our
property when we applied for a permit that was held up. We were unable to get anyone to come
in and work on the property during the time that was Covid. The Trade People were occupied
with other establishments. But our property was occupied the whole time that we owned it, we
owned it for 30 some years, until Covid. We purchased it back in 87. We had both sides always
occupied by tenants. And the last tenant of 1009 was a resident for a little over 30 years. And by
being occupied we were not able to get in and make any repairs until after she moved. So, then
we went in and tried to assess what needed to be done. So, with plaster walls we were trying to
find someone to come and fix the walls. I am sure you can imagine by being occupied by
someone for over thirty years, it was a little rough. And that is when Covid occurred. And then
the tenant on the other side, 1011, decided to move out. So, then we decided that we needed to
just gut everything because then we were having people come in and telling us that this and that
all needed to be done. The electricity needed to be updated. And this is where we are now,
5
trying to get the building done so that we can move on. The people that we had lined up to do
the work, now because of the holdup of Covid, couldn’t come and we are now at
Mr. Ray Rivera and Mr. Eric Walker, 915 W Wythe Street, we bought that property there with
the intention of renting that property. It is zoned multi family. We were not aware that because it
has been vacant for some time, it now has to be single family home. We also own the property at
730-732 Rosen Street. That is property from 1929. It is zoned R-3 multifamily. We have spent
$150,000 so far on this property. Unfortunately, it was in very poor condition when we bought
it. After we bought it, we found out that although it was built as a duplex and is in a multifamily
zone, we are not allowed to have it be a duplex and instead we have to change it into a single-
family home. We have never changed the original structure we have never changed the original
footprint from when it was built in 1929. All we are asking is to be allowed to use the property
as it was built in a multi-family zone. I do feel as investors, we have invested in other cities and
counties. We just redid a house much like this in Richmond and had not problems doing a full
renovation and within months had two houses available for two great tenants that were in need of
affordable housing. Another aspect of it is, as investors, there are many things that we have to
look at and pay attention to, including high interest rates. As an investor, there are many things
to think about. Including the cost of heating, cooling, insurance, etc., and with the housing
shortage and the need for affordable housing these houses would be perfect, but no investor will
buy them and fix them up and plan on renting them long term (like more than ten years) if they
have to just make them a single-family home. If this does not pass, then investors will be
looking to invest in other areas and other cities.
Ms. Michelle Murrills, 131 S Market Street, I bought my house because I enjoy living in a very
old house. I come from a place where the oldest house, there is one, is from 1915 and that is it.
Otherwise, the oldest houses are from the 1930s. My house, here in Petersburg, was built in
1795. But I appreciate all the work that the Architectural Review Board does to keep everything
looking so cute and historical. And I think that it is dumb that you are forced to have a duplex,
in a multi-family zone, as a single-family home. If you want it as a single-family home great and
wonderful, keep that fake door and do whatever you want. But it is dumb that you want it as a
duplex, it is historically a duplex, it is part of the historical fabric of Petersburg that it is meant to
be a duplex, it is the right zone, and yet you are not allowed to have it as a duplex. Not only that,
as has been stated, there have been many times that someone buys a duplex because you would
assume that it is a duplex (changing nothing structurally) but halfway through fixing it, you get
told nope sorry you cannot have a duplex. So, I think that this is very important. I also think that
the fact that there are a lot of small, little commercial buildings (there is one over on Willcox
street right now that is about to collapse upon itself because you can’t do anything with it.) It is
NOT a single-family home; it is a store front. And yet you can’t have it as a storefront because it
has been thirty years since anything was in it. We talk about not only how we are a food desert
but also people would like to be able to have laundry mats, and get their hair done, and buy new
clothes without having to go to Colonial Heights or Hopewell or elsewhere. Our historical
neighborhoods should be able to stay the way that they were originally meant 50, 100, 200 years
ago. So, I think that this is very important for that.
Chair Alexander then closed the public hearing when no other person came forward to speak.
Commissioner Hairston then made the motion that the Commission accept the recommendations
of the Staff and Commissioner Vargo seconded it. Then Director Siodmok stated that there is
6
something new now. When the Planning Commission makes a text amendment it has to come
from City Council or the Planning Commission. So, it must say that the Planning Commission
would like to propose an amendment… Commissioner Hairston changed his wording to the
Planning Commission would like to make a motion that the recommendations from the staff be
accepted. Seconded again by Commissioner Vargo.
A vote was then taken.
It was 5 to 0 with Commissioner Irvin abstaining. Motion Passed.
Chair Alexander then said that it was to be sent on to City Council. At that point Director
Siodmok stated that it was supposed to be on the next City Council meeting Agenda but that it
had been taken off and more discussion on their end would be needed. But the goal is as soon as
possible, to try and get it back on their agenda.
7. OLD BUSINESS
There was no old business.
8. NEW BUSINESS
There was no new business.
9. ANNOUNCEMENTS
Director Siodmok again reminded everyone of the Comprehensive Plan joint meeting with City
Council on November 20, at 6 pm in the auditorium. It will be about land planning and land use.
10. ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Irvin then asked for adjournment at 7:31 seconded by Commissioner Vargo.
7
Agenda
Public Notice
City of Petersburg
Planning Commission
Petersburg Public Library
201 W Washington Street
Petersburg, VA 23803
Thursday, November 2, 2023
6:30 PM
If you would like to make a comment during the public comment period, please mail your comments in
writing to the Department of Planning and Community Development, 135 N Union Street, Petersburg,
VA 23803 or email them to pcd@petersburg-va.org.
Should you have questions or concerns, please contact the Department of Planning and Community
Development at (804) 733-2308, or via email at pcd@petersburg-va.org.
City of Petersburg
Planning Commission Meeting Agenda
Thursday, November 2, 2023
6:30 PM
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/84050435790
Meeting ID: 840 5043 5790
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Adoption of the Agenda
4. Public Hearings
2023-SUP-08: A Public Hearing and consideration of a request from Sayed Shah Owner,
representative of S Shah Properties LLC. to obtain a Special Use Permit as provided for under
Article 23, Supplementary Use Regulations-Special Uses. Section 4, Special Uses Enumerated.
Item (22) of the Zoning Ordinance to establish Stand-alone used vehicle sales not associated
with a new-vehicle dealership or not located upon the same parcel as such new-vehicle
dealership, if located upon parcels of less than one acre in area, such to be permitted within the
B-2 and M-1 zoning districts only. The subject property is located at 112 N Crater Road, and
further identified as Tax Parcel # 012110010. The Comprehensive Plan suggests this area is
appropriate for commercial and residential uses. The property is zoned B-2, General
Commercial District.
2023-ZTA-01: A Public Hearing and consideration of a resolution presented by the City of
Petersburg Planning Department to amend Article 24 Nonconforming Uses and Article 25
Supplementary Height, Area, and Bulk Regulations, as set forth in the Zoning Ordinance of the
City of Petersburg, to allow the rehabilitation and continuation of residential structures with
five-units or less, development of nonconforming lots, and existing neighborhood commercial
structures with a certificate of nonconforming use/structure. Old Business
5. New Business
6. Announcements
Joint Planning Commission and Council Meeting on the Comprehensive Plan Update –
November 28th at 6 PM in the Petersburg Library Auditorium
7. Adjournment
City of Petersburg
Department of Planning and 135 N. Union Street, Room 304
Community Development Petersburg, Virginia 23803
804-733-2308 srobinson@petersburg-va.org
To: Chairman Alexander and Members of the Petersburg Planning Commission
Through: Naomi Siodmok, Director, Planning and Community Development
From: Sandra A Robinson, Zoning Administrator
Date: November 2, 2023
SUBJECT: Case 23-SUP-08
112 and 114 N. Crater Road
Tax Parcel: 012110010; 012110009
23-SUP-08: Request by Sayed Shah, owner, representative of S Shah Properties LLC., to obtain a Special Use
Permit as provided for under Article 23, Supplementary Use Regulations-Special Uses. Section 4, Special Uses
Enumerated. Item (22) of the Zoning Ordinance to establish Stand-alone used vehicle sales not associated with a
new-vehicle dealership or not located upon the same parcel as such new-vehicle dealership, if located upon
parcels of less than one acre in area, such to be permitted within the B-2 and M-1 zoning districts only. The
subject property is located at 112 and 114 N Crater Road, and further identified as Tax Parcel #012110010 and
012110009. The Comprehensive Plan suggests this area is appropriate for commercial uses. The property is
zoned B-2, General Commercial District.
I. APPLICANT’S PROPOSAL
An application for a Special Use Permit was submitted to the Petersburg Department of Planning & Community
Development on September 11, 2023, by the applicant Mr. Sayed Shah. The application includes the operation
of a used automobile dealership. The subject property had been utilized for auto related businesses and
transportation service activity (taxi) for years; however, the property has remained vacant for an extended
period. Prior to the current owner’s purchase of the property there had been many inquiries regarding the
permitted uses allowed, mainly auto related uses, such as a vehicle tow lot, used car lot, and the continuation of
taxi stands.
Use of the property for auto sells and related uses are permitted by right, if located on parcels greater than one
acre in area. Should a parcel be less than an acre, the individual would be required to obtain a Special Use
Permit for the establishment of a used auto sells business. According to the City Assessor’s Department
information the subject parcel is .335 acres. There have been several approved Special Use Permits granted in
the past for properties in the vicinity of the subject parcel, the most recent would be 944-946 E Wythe Street,
Chris Faraq, owner (Case 22-SUP-02) on September 1, 2022, and located in a B-2, General Commercial District.
Wilson Rivera, Owner of Midnight Towing and Recovery, located in a M-1, Light Industrial District at 709
1
Bollingbrook Street, and Eldrika Whitaker, Barely Used Cars & Trucks, 2306 E Washington St, located in a B-2,
General Commercial District.
II. ZONING AND NEIGHBORING USES/CHARACTER
The subject property and all surrounding properties along N Crater Road including those properties along Taylor
Street to the southside of Cherry Street and taking in Little Church St, E Wythe Street, N Little Church Street, and
Crater Rd to its intersection with Bollingbrook St. are zoned B-2, General Commercial District.
Subject properties are highlighted in yellow in the zoning map above.
The subject property and surrounding properties have been the location of automobile sales and service
establishments over several decades. The area has seen a shift from new auto sales to used auto sales and
repair businesses to include towing and auto body shops, collision, and painting businesses. New car dealerships
have relocated outside of the city to highly visible locations off Interstate-95, along Temple Ave in Colonial
Heights, VA and at the Walthall Exit within Chesterfield County, Virginia.
The subject property has one structure located on it which was built as a single-family residence along N Crater
Rd. There are scattered residences located along this commercial corridor. In addition to the residential
structures, there are several businesses located along N Crater Rd. Those business activities to name a few are:
Motel 6, community convenience stores with the sale of gasoline on each corner of Crater Rd and Washington
Streets, four used car lots in the immediate area along E. Washington St., Quality Moving & Self-Storage
Company, VAMAC, at the Intersection of Taylor Street and S Crater Road. The surrounding area also consists of
business offices for auto repair/garage services, tire sales, and wheel alignments. The applicant has places of
business in other areas of Virginia which he states are auto sales related.
2
The general area is comprised of vacant, dilapidated hotel/motels and several service stations/ convenience
stores along Washington, Wythe Street, and the Crater Rd corridors. The subject location and request for a SUP
appears to be for the expansion of services within the community, the area currently is and always has been
utilized for the purpose of automotive related uses and activities. In researching the area, staff believe that this
site does NOT have adequate space for the owner to position vehicles for sale on the lot, accommodate
employee parking, nor accommodate ingress and egress. The lot is very narrow and was cluttered with vehicles
upon staff posting of the SUP signs. The property appears currently to be utilized as a vehicle storage lot.
The above image is of the Future Land Use Map in the Comprehensive Plan, which supports commercial uses.
III. ZONING ORDINANCE (SPECIAL USE PERMIT)
Article 23 of the Zoning Ordinance provides that “certain uses may be desirable when located within the
community, but that these uses may be incompatible with other uses permitted in a district, certain special uses
listed in Section 4. When found to be in the interest of the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of
the community, may be permitted… Before (the use is allowed), preliminary plans in sufficient detail, and a
statement as to the proposed use of the buildings, structures, and premises, shall be submitted to the Planning
Commission. The Commission shall hold a public hearing as provided for in Article 28, and shall review such
plans and statements and shall, after a careful study thereof and of the effect that such buildings, structures, or
uses shall have upon the surrounding territory, submit a recommendation to the City Council within thirty (30)
days following said hearing. Following receipt of the Commission’s report, the city council may permit such
buildings, structures, or uses, where requested, providing that the public health, safety, morals, and general
3
welfare will not be adversely affected, that … ample safeguards will be provided for the protection of
surrounding property, persons, and neighborhood values.”
IV. RECOMMENDATION
The Department of Planning and Community Development recommends denial of this used car dealership. The
applicant has yet to show that the site can accommodate a used automobile dealership. Staff are working with
the applicant to get information on ingress and egress, vehicles turning around, the number of vehicles
anticipated on the lot, and how the current state of the lot will be addressed.
V. EXHIBITS
1) Presentation
2) Resolution
3) Applicant’s Petition
4) Adjacent Property Notification
4
2023-SUP-08
Request by Sayed
PLANNING Shah to obtain a
COMMISSION Special Use Permit to
NOVEMBER 2,
2023
establish stand-alone
used vehicle sales
located at 112 and
114 N Crater Road
Background
Applicant: Sayed Shah, owner, representative of S Shah
Properties LLC.
Request: A Special Use Permit for the operation of a
used automobile dealership.
Code Requirement: Per Article 23, Supplementary Use
Regulations-Special Uses. Section 4, Special Uses
Enumerated. Item (22) of the Zoning Ordinance to
establish stand-alone used vehicle sales not associated
with a new-vehicle dealership or not located upon the
same parcel as such new-vehicle dealership, if located
upon parcels of less than one acre in area, such to be
permitted within the B-2 and M-1 zoning districts only.
Location 112 & 114 N Crater Road
Zoning B-2, General Commercial
Comprehensive Plan Commercial
Recommendation
The Department of Planning & Community Development,
recommends denial of the requested Special Use Permit for
the following reason:
Public safety – The applicant has not made clear that the site
can accommodate the use. There are concerns that the lack
of space may impact the safety on N Crater Road.
A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF A PETITION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AT 112
AND 114 N CRATER ROAD PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS 012110010 AND 012110009 IN
THE B-2, GENERAL COMMERCIAL, ZONING DISTRICT FOR STAND-ALONE USED VEHICLE SALES
NOT ASSOCIATED WITH A NEW-VEHICLE DEALERSHIP.
WHEREAS, the City of Petersburg Zoning Ordinance establishes zoning districts and permitted
uses within each district; and
WHEREAS, the properties are located at 112 and 114 N. Crater Road, Tax Parcel Numbers:
012110010 and 012110009, respectively; and
WHEREAS, the properties are in the B-2, General Commercial, zoning district; and
WHEREAS, the City received a petition submitted Sayed Shah, owner, representative of S Shah
Properties LLC., to obtain a Special Use Permit as provided for under Article 23, Supplementary Use
Regulations-Special Uses. Section 4, Special Uses Enumerated. Item (22) of the Zoning Ordinance to
establish stand-alone used vehicle sales not associated with a new-vehicle dealership or not located
upon the same parcel as such new-vehicle dealership, if located upon parcels of less than one acre in
area, such to be permitted within the B-2 and M-1 zoning districts only.
WHEREAS, the proposed use of a used car lot falls within the requirements for a SUP under
Article 23; and
WHEREAS, the City’s Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Plan designates the property as
commercial; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has concerns with safety on N Crater Road due to site
limitations that have not been addressed with preliminary plans in sufficient detail as to whether the
site can accommodate a used vehicle sales dealership; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of Title 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, as
amended, this is a public hearing to consider denial of the SUP, and the public hearing was advertised,
in accordance with applicable laws.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Planning Commission does hereby recommend denial of
a Special Use Permit for 112 and 114 N. Crater Road.
City of Petersburg
Department of Planning and Community Development
135 N Union St, Room 304
Petersburg, VA 23803
(804) 733-2308
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 2, 2023
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Planning and Community Development
RE: 2023-ZTA-01: A Public Hearing and consideration of a resolution presented by
the City of Petersburg Planning Department to amend Article 24 Nonconforming
Uses and Article 25 Supplementary Height, Area, and Bulk Regulations, as set
forth in the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Petersburg, to allow the
rehabilitation and continuation of residential structures with four-units or less,
development of nonconforming lots, and existing neighborhood commercial
structures with a certificate of nonconforming use.
SUMMARY: This text amendment is proposed to support the rehabilitation and continuation of
existing residential structures (duplexes, triplexes, and quadplexes) and existing neighborhood
commercial structures. This amendment also supports the retention of residential structures
with more than one unit that have existed for over three years without violations. These
approvals would be through an administrative process that requires supporting documents for
the applicant to receive a certificate of nonconforming use. This text also makes existing,
nonconforming lots developable and structures on nonconforming lots open to expansion.
BACKGROUND: The City of Petersburg has seen an influx of building permits to renovate
existing structures that have been vacant for years and do not conform with the existing zoning
designation. Per Article 24, Section 3, If any nonconforming use is discontinued for a period of
two years … it shall lose its nonconforming status and any further use shall conform to the
provisions of the zoning ordinance.
With that, existing duplexes, triplexes, and quadplexes have been required to reduce their
density, most often to single-family, to be suitable for redevelopment. This has put some
renovations completely on hold, which has stifled the removal of blight, and has required other
structures to become single-family homes.
Some properties that have not been able to renovate to their existing density within the past
year include the following:
- 932-34 Priam Street (This project is on hold due to the inability to rehabilitate the
duplex)
- 1004 McKenzie Street (This project is on hold due to the inability to rehabilitate the
duplex)
- 1009 W High Street (This project is on hold due to the inability to rehabilitate the
duplex)
- 1138-1140 West High Street (Required to look like a duplex per Architectural Review
Board, but operates as a single-family home per zoning)
- 622 – 624 Independence Avenue (This project is on hold due to the inability to
rehabilitate the duplex)
- 1002 High Pearl Street (Required to block one of the doors to operate as a single-family
home)
This article also impacts existing commercial spaces in residential areas that have been vacant
for over two years. This text amendment seeks to allow neighborhood commercial uses within
existing commercial structures through the application for a certificate of nonconforming
use/structure.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommend approval of the proposed text amendments.
ATTACHMENTS
Presentation
Resolution
Article 24. Nonconforming Uses – Revised.
Article 25. Supplementary Height, Area, and Bulk Regulations – Revised.
2023-ZTA-01: A Public
Hearing and consideration of a
resolution presented by the Planning
Department to amend Article 24
PLANNING Nonconforming Uses and Article 25
COMMISSION Supplementary Height, Area, and
MEETING Bulk Regulations, as set forth in the
Zoning Ordinance of the City of
NOVEMBER 2, Petersburg to allow the rehabilitation
2023 and continuation of residential
structures with four-units or less,
development of nonconforming lots,
and reuse of existing neighborhood
commercial structures with a
certificate of nonconforming use.
Request
2023-ZTA-01: To allow the rehabilitation and
continuation of residential structures with four-
units or less, the development of nonconforming
lots, and the reuse of existing neighborhood
commercial structures with a certificate of
nonconforming use.
Background
With new interest in Petersburg, homes that have sat vacant
for years are attracting attention for rehabilitation.
If these structures do not conform with use and lot
requirements (e.g., the building is a duplex, but does not
have the required lot frontage for a duplex per the code),
then the structure is considered nonconforming.
Per Article 24, Section 3, - If any nonconforming use is
discontinued for a period of two years … it shall lose its
nonconforming status and any further use shall conform to
the provisions of the zoning ordinance.
In this example, the home would have to convert to a
single-family residence.
Impacts
With staff review and the proper documentation, this
language could offer nonconforming use certificates to
support:
• Rehabilitation of existing low-density housing (duplex –
quadplex).
• Rehabilitation of existing neighborhood commercial
structures.
• Continuation of low-density residential that has been
operating for more than three-years without violations.
•Development of nonconforming lots for all uses.
Purpose
Examples
1138-1140 West High Street
(Before)
Example - 1138-1140 West
High Street (After)
1138-1140 West High Street
Though the Architectural Review Board required
the second door to remain to respect the historic
structure, the functionality of the building was
required to operate as a single-family home.
932-934 Priam Street
Project is on
hold due to
inability to
rehab and
maintain a
duplex.
1004 McKenzie Street
Project is on
hold due to
inability to
rehab and
maintain a
duplex.
1009 W High Street
Project is on
hold due to
inability to
rehab and
maintain a
duplex.
622 – 624 Independence Ave
Project is on
hold due to
inability to
rehab and
maintain a
duplex.
719 High St
If this were
vacant for two-
years, it could
not come back.
Purpose
Benefits
Benefits - Residential
•Supports the rehabilitation of blighted properties.
•Affordable by design.
•Creates housing opportunities for diverse residents
with different price points and needs.
•Makes ownership more affordable and makes
building equity accessible.
•For renters, makes the community associated with
a single-family neighborhood more attainable.
Benefits - Commercial
•Supports the rehabilitation of blighted properties.
•Provide neighborhoods with easy access to
services.
•Reduces vehicle trips.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the proposed text
amendment to Article 24. Nonconforming Uses and
Article 25. Supplementary Height, Area, and Bulk
Regulations.
Proposed
Language
ARTICLE 24.
NONCONFORMING
USES
Sec. 9. Establishment of nonconforming
rights, certificate of nonconforming use.
Any person having a legal or equitable interest in a
nonconforming use that is addressed in this section
may apply for a certificate of nonconforming use by
complying with the procedure set forth in this
section. Upon issuance, a certificate of
nonconforming use shall be evidence that the use
designated therein is a legal nonconforming use at
that time.
Sec. 9. Establishment of nonconforming
rights, certificate of nonconforming use.
1. Application. Any person having a legal or equitable interest in a
nonconforming use may file an application for a certificate of nonconforming
use on a form approved by the Preservation Planner and Zoning
Administrator.
2. Nonconforming use establishment.
a. Where an application seeks a certificate of nonconforming use to
establish the legal nonconforming status of a use, the Zoning
Administrator and Preservation Planner may issue or deny such
certificate upon review of:
i. A certified survey,
ii. Building permits,
iii.Evidence that the structure was built with the express intent of this
nonconforming use and has not been significantly altered from that
nonconforming configuration since construction.
iv.Evidence that the current use has been in operation for more than
three years,
v. Citations and violations,
vi.Supporting evidence such as photographs, Sanborn maps, assessors’
records, and the like, and
vii.Other documentation that is deemed necessary or sufficient.
Sec. 9. Establishment of nonconforming
rights, certificate of nonconforming use.
3. Eligible nonconforming use.
a. Single-, two-, three-, and four-family dwellings nonconforming as
to use as established in Appendix B. A single-, two-, three-, and
four-family dwelling nonconforming as to use which has received a
certificate pursuant to this section, shall not be subject to the
termination of legal nonconforming use provisions of Article 24
Section 3. Additions to the structure associated with these uses
are permissible so long as current use, height, and yards are not
made to be nonconforming. If substantial alteration of a single-,
two-, three-, and four-family dwelling results in demolition of the
structure to include the foundation, the entire structure shall be
subject to requirements applicable to a new structure. Should, at a
minimum, foundations remain, the structure may be rebuilt to
substantial conformity of that which was demolished.
Sec. 9. Establishment of nonconforming
rights, certificate of nonconforming use.
b. Neighborhood commercial establishments nonconforming as to use
and parking as established in Appendix B. Neighborhood commercial
establishments nonconforming to use and parking that have received a
certificate pursuant to this section, shall not be subject to the
termination of legal nonconforming use provisions of Article 24 Section
3 but shall continue to be subject to the requirements that the structure
shall not be enlarged, altered, or relocated in such a way as to increase
use and parking nonconformities. The existing commercial floor area is
not to be expanded, but is permitted to be utilized by the Retail,
shopkeeper, and commercial office uses as outlined in Appendix B Article
18.1 Section 2. (b). Neighborhood commercial establishments that
receive a certificate are further not subject to the parking requirements
as outlined in Appendix B Article 19. Any residential components of
these commercial establishments issued a certificate would be subject
to Section 9.3.a. above.
Section 10. Permitted changes to
nonconforming lots.
1. In any district, permitted structures may be erected on any
nonconforming lot of record; provided that said lot is in separate
ownership and not of continuous frontage with other lots in the same
ownership which could be combined with said nonconforming lot to
provide one or more lots which would comply with applicable set back
and yard requirements.
2. 2. In any district, existing permitted structures may be enlarged on
any nonconforming lot of record; provided that it is in separate
ownership and not of continuous frontage with other lots in the same
ownership, and provided that the setback and yard requirements are
met.
Section 10. Permitted changes to
nonconforming lots.
1. In any district, permitted structures may be erected on any
nonconforming lot of record; provided that said lot is in separate
ownership and not of continuous frontage with other lots in the same
ownership which could be combined with said nonconforming lot to
provide one or more lots which would comply with applicable set back
and yard requirements.
2. 2. In any district, existing permitted structures may be enlarged on
any nonconforming lot of record; provided that it is in separate
ownership and not of continuous frontage with other lots in the same
ownership, and provided that the setback and yard requirements are
met.
Article 25.
Supplementary
Height, Area, and
Bulk Regulations
Section 3. Modification of area
regulations.
3.6. Lot area. Where a lot was of record prior to the application of zoning
regulations and restrictions to the premises, and if such lot does not
conform to the requirements of such regulations and restrictions as to the
width of lots or lot area per family, the provisions of such lot area per family
and lot width regulations and restrictions shall not prevent the owner of
such lot from erecting a one-family dwelling or making other improvements
on the lot; provided such improvements conform in all other respects to the
applicable zoning regulations and restrictions. However, this section will not
apply if the lot or lots in question were contiguous to another lot or lots of
record owned by the same person at the time the more restrictive
regulations became in force.
A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO AMEND ARTICLE 24 NONCONFORMING USES
AND ARTICLE 25 SUPPLEMENTARY HEIGHT, AREA, AND BULK REGULATIONS, AS SET FORTH IN
THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PETERSBURG, TO ALLOW THE REHABILITATION AND
CONTINUATION OF RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES WITH FOUR UNITS OR LESS AND EXISTING
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES WITH A CERTIFICATE OF NONCONFORMING USE
AS WELL AS DEVELOPMENT OF NONCONFORMING LOTS.
WHEREAS, the City of Petersburg Zoning Ordinance includes both Article 24. – Nonconforming
Uses and Article 25. - Supplementary Height, Area, And Bulk Regulations; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of these sections are to regulate uses and lots; and
WHEREAS, The City of Petersburg has seen an influx of building permits to renovate existing
structures that have been vacant for years and do not conform with the existing zoning designation;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission seeks to support the rehabilitation of existing, low-density
housing to support affordable housing by design, create housing ownership and rental opportunities,
make low-density communities accessible to all, and make building equity accessible; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission wishes to support the rehabilitation of existing
neighborhood commercial structures to encourage the rehabilitation of blight, provide neighborhoods
with easy access to services, and reduce vehicles trips; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission seeks to allow the continuation of low-density residential
that has been operating for more than three-years without violations to preserve housing diversity;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission wishes to support the development of nonconforming lots
for all uses to reduce barriers to redevelopment on account of lots being created prior to the
establishment of the zoning ordinance; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of Title 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, as
amended, this public hearing was advertised, in accordance with applicable laws.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval
of a resolution amending Article 24. – Nonconforming Uses and Article 25. - Supplementary Height,
Area, And Bulk Regulations as indicated in Exhibit A.
Appendix A
PART II - CODE
APPENDIX B - ZONING
ARTICLE 24. NONCONFORMING USES
ARTICLE 24. NONCONFORMING USES
Section 1. Purpose and intent.
The purpose of this article is to regulate nonconforming uses in a manner consistent with sound planning and
zoning principles, and in conformity with state law. The general intent is that over time, nonconforming uses will
be discontinued in favor of uses conforming to the zoning ordinance and the zoning map.
Section 2. Term defined.
The term "nonconforming use" shall mean any use, lot, building or structure that was lawful on the date of
enactment of the zoning ordinance, or amendment thereto, which has been continued although otherwise
unlawful by such enactment or amendment. Any use, lot, building, or structure that was lawful on the date of
enactment of the zoning ordinance, or amendment thereto, shall remain lawful and shall not be a "nonconforming
use."
Section 3. Termination of nonconforming uses.
A nonconforming use may continue as it existed when it became nonconforming, provided that it may not be
changed, replaced, relocated, expanded in any manner, nor structurally altered, except as provided for in this
article.
1. If any nonconforming use is discontinued for a period of two years, or for a period of less than two
years if authorized by Virginia law, it shall lose its nonconforming status and any further use shall
conform to the provisions of the zoning ordinance.
2. For the purposes of this article, cessation of a nonconforming use for the aforesaid period shall be
conclusively presumed to establish discontinuance. The possession of a business license to conduct
business upon a property shall not itself constitute proof of business activities on the premises.
3. Operation of only an accessory or incidental use to the principal nonconforming use during the two-
year period shall not have the effect of continuing the principal nonconforming use.
Section 4. Destruction of a nonconforming use.
No building which has been damaged, by any cause whatsoever, to the extent of more than fifty (50%)
percent of the fair market value of the building immediately prior to damage, shall be restored except in
conformity with the regulations of this ordinance, and all rights as a nonconforming use are terminated. If a
building is damaged by less than fifty (50%) percent of the fair market value, it may be repaired or reconstructed
and used as before the time of damage, provided that such repairs or reconstruction be substantially completed
within twelve (12) months of the date of such damage.
Section 5. Intermittent use.
The casual, intermittent, temporary, or illegal use of land or buildings shall not be sufficient to establish the
existence of a nonconforming use, and the existence of a nonconforming use on part of a lot or tract shall not be
construed to establish a nonconforming use on the entire lot or tract.
Petersburg, Virginia, Code of Ordinances Created: 2023-07-19 15:09:01 [EST]
(Supp. No. 18, Update 2)
Page 1 of 3
Section 6. Existence of a nonconforming use.
Whether a nonconforming use exists shall be a question of fact and shall be decided by the Board of Zoning
Appeals, after public notice and hearing, and in accordance with the rules of the board.
Section 7. Nonconforming uses not validated.
A nonconforming use in violation of a provision of the ordinance which this ordinance amends or repeals
shall not be validated by the adoption of this ordinance.
Section 8. Permitted changes of nonconforming uses.
A nonconforming use may be changed, altered, repaired, restored, replaced, relocated, or expanded only in
accordance with the provisions of this article and subject to the appropriate approvals (including, among others,
verification of the nonconforming use by the Zoning Administrator, site plan approval, and building permit
approval) otherwise required by law.
1. A nonconforming use may change to a conforming use.
2. A nonconforming building or structure may be repaired, provided such repair constitutes only routine
maintenance necessary to keep the structure in the same general condition it was in when it originally
became nonconforming.
3. A one-family residential structure which is nonconforming with respect to rear yard area or front, rear,
or side yard setback requirements, but which otherwise conforms to the use requirements of the
district in which it is located, may be expanded so long as additional nonconformities are not
introduced. New or expanded residential accessory uses may be permitted subject to the provisions of
the zoning ordinance, provided that all new or expanded accessory structures and uses shall meet all
current zoning requirements, including height, yard requirements, and setbacks, for the zoning district
in which located. In no case shall a nonconforming single-family dwelling be modified to accommodate
additional dwelling units.
Section 9. Establishment of nonconforming rights, certificate of nonconforming use. Formatted: Indent: Left: 0", First line: 0"
Any person having a legal or equitable interest in a nonconforming use that is addressed in this section
may apply for a certificate of nonconforming use by complying with the procedure set forth in this section. Upon
issuance, a certificate of nonconforming use shall be evidence that the use designated therein is a legal
nonconforming use at that time.
1. Application. Any person having a legal or equitable interest in a nonconforming use may file an
application for a certificate of nonconforming use on a form approved by the Preservation Planner and
Zoning Administrator.
2. Nonconforming use establishment.
a. Where an application seeks a certificate of nonconforming use to establish the legal
nonconforming status of a use, the Zoning Administrator and Preservation Planner may issue or
deny such certificate upon review of:
i. A certified survey,
ii. Building permits,
iii. Evidence that the structure was built with the express intent of this nonconforming use
and has not been significantly altered from that nonconforming configuration since
construction.
iv. Evidence that the current use has been in operation for more than three years,
Created: 2023-07-19 15:09:01 [EST]
(Supp. No. 18, Update 2)
Page 2 of 3
v. Citations and violations,
vi. Supporting evidence such as photographs, Sanborn maps, assessors’ records, and the
like, and
vii. Other documentation that is deemed necessary or sufficient.
3. Eligible nonconforming use.
a. Single-, two-, three-, and four-family dwellings nonconforming as to use as established
in Appendix B. A single-, two-, three-, and four-family dwelling nonconforming as to use which
has received a certificate pursuant to this section, shall not be subject to the termination of legal
nonconforming use provisions of Article 24 Section 3. Additions to the structure associated with
these uses are permissible so long as current use, height, and yards are not made to be
nonconforming. If substantial alteration of a single-, two-, three-, and four-family dwelling results
in demolition of the structure to include the foundation, the entire structure shall be subject to
requirements applicable to a new structure. Should, at a minimum, foundations remain, the
structure may be rebuilt to substantial conformity of that which was demolished.
b. Neighborhood commercial establishments nonconforming as to use and parking as
established in Appendix B. Neighborhood commercial establishments nonconforming to use and
parking that have received a certificate pursuant to this section, shall not be subject to the
termination of legal nonconforming use provisions of Article 24 Section 3 but shall continue to be
subject to the requirements that the structure shall not be enlarged, altered, or relocated in such
a way as to increase use and parking nonconformities. The existing commercial floor area is not
to be expanded, but is permitted to be utilized by the Retail, shopkeeper, and commercial office
uses as outlined in Appendix B Article 18.1 Section 2. (b). Neighborhood commercial
establishments that receive a certificate are further not subject to the parking requirements as
outlined in Appendix B Article 19. Any residential components of these commercial
establishments issued a certificate would be subject to Section 9.3.a. above.
Section 10. Permitted changes to nonconforming lots.
1. In any district, permitted structures may be erected on any nonconforming lot of record; provided that
said lot is in separate ownership and not of continuous frontage with other lots in the same ownership which
could be combined with said nonconforming lot to provide one or more lots which would comply with applicable
set back and yard requirements.
2. In any district, existing permitted structures may be enlarged on any nonconforming lot of record; provided
that it is in separate ownership and not of continuous frontage with other lots in the same ownership, and
provided that the setback and yard requirements are met.
Created: 2023-07-19 15:09:01 [EST]
(Supp. No. 18, Update 2)
Page 3 of 3
PART II - CODE
APPENDIX B - ZONING
ARTICLE 25. SUPPLEMENTARY HEIGHT, AREA AND BULK REGULATIONS
ARTICLE 25. SUPPLEMENTARY HEIGHT, AREA AND BULK REGULATIONS
Section 1. [Purpose.]
The regulations set forth in this section [article] qualify or supplement the district regulations appearing
elsewhere in this ordinance.
Section 2. Modification of height regulations.
(1) The height regulations as prescribed in this ordinance shall not apply to:
Belfries;
Chimneys;
Church spires;
Conveyors;
Cooling towers;
Elevator bulkheads;
Fire towers;
Flagpoles;
Monuments;
Ornamental towers and spires;
Smokestacks;
Stage towers or scenery lofts;
Water towers;
Tanks.
(2) Public, semipublic, or public service buildings, hospitals, institutions or schools, when permitted in a district,
may be erected to a height not exceeding sixty (60) feet, and churches and temples may be erected to a
height not exceeding seventy-five (75) feet, when the required side and rear yards are each increased by at
least one foot for each one foot of additional building height above the height regulation for the district in
which the building is located.
(3) Manufacturing buildings located in the "M-2" Heavy Industrial district, on land parcels at or exceeding one
hundred fifty (150) acres and used for gravity assisted processing, may erect to a height not exceeding one
hundred seventy-five (175) feet, when such buildings are set back from any other contiguous zoning district
by at least one foot for each one foot of additional building height above the height regulations for the "M-2"
Industrial District.
Section 3. Modification of area regulations.
3.1. Yards generally.
Petersburg, Virginia, Code of Ordinances Created: 2023-08-21 15:56:13 [EST]
(Supp. No. 18, Update 3)
Page 1 of 5
(1) Whenever a lot abuts upon a public alley, one-half of the alley width may be considered as a portion of
the required yard only.
(2) Every part of a required yard shall be open to the sky, except as authorized by this article; and ordinary
projections of sills, belt courses, window air conditioning units, chimneys, cornices and ornamental
features, which may project to a distance not to exceed twenty-four (24) inches into a required yard.
(3) Within a residence or office-apartment district, the least dimension of a yard upon which the principal
entrances or exists of a multiple dwelling face shall be twenty (20) feet.
(4) Where a lot is used for a commercial or industrial purpose more than one main building may be
located on the lot, but only when such buildings conform to all open space requirements around the
lot for the district in which the lot is located.
(5) A bathroom not exceeding fifty (50) square feet in area may be constructed on the rear of an existing
dwelling which does not have these sanitary facilities, provided the addition is at least ten (10) feet
from the rear lot line and conforms to the side line requirements.
(6) On residential lots having a width of less than fifty (50) feet and on record prior to November 20, 1947,
there shall be a side yard on each side of a building having a width of not less than ten (10) percent of
the average width of the lot; provided, however, that such side yard shall not be less than three (3)
feet.
(7) For housing projects involving the construction of several multiple-group dwellings on the same lot or
parcel of land, in order to permit a more flexible placing of the buildings on the land and more
desirable grouping of open spaces and such accessory facilities as recreation and parking areas, the
following yard requirements shall apply:
(a) Front, side and rear yard requirements along the boundaries of the lot shall be in accordance
with requirements previously established;
(b) Within the lot, minimum distances between main buildings, except Residential Town House
Districts, shall be as follows:
1. When buildings are front to front, not less than fifty (50) feet.
2. When buildings are front to rear, not less than sixty (60) feet.
3. When buildings are front to side, not less than fifty (50) feet.
4. When buildings are side to side, rear to side, or rear to rear, not less than twenty (20) feet
for one story buildings and not less than thirty (30) feet when one or both of the buildings
are more than one story.
3.2. Accessory buildings and structures.
(1) Except as herein provided, no accessory building shall project beyond a required yard line along any
street.
(2) Filling station pumps and pump islands may occupy the required yards; provided, however, that they
are not less than fifteen (15) feet from the street lines.
(3) One directional or name sign or sign advertising products sold on the premises may occupy required
yards in a district where such sign is permitted by the use regulations of this ordinance; provided such
sign is of not more than thirty (30) square feet in area, does not contain flashing, moving, or
intermittent illumination; and provided the requirements of other city ordinances are complied with.
(4) An ornamental fence or wall not more than three and one-half (3½) feet in height may project into or
enclose any required front or side yard to a depth from the street line equal to the required depth of
Created: 2023-08-21 15:56:13 [EST]
(Supp. No. 18, Update 3)
Page 2 of 5
the front yard. Ornamental fences or walls may project into or enclose other required yards, provided
such fences and walls do not exceed a height of seven (7) feet.
(5) Accessory, open and uncovered swimming pools and home barbecue grills may occupy a required rear
yard, provided they are not located closer than five (5) feet to the rear lot line not closer than three (3)
feet to a side lot line.
(6) Accessory buildings which are not a part of the main building, although connected by an open
breezeway, may be constructed in a rear yard; provided, such accessory building does not occupy more
than twenty-five (25) percent of the area of the required rear yard; and provided, it is not located
closer than eight (8) feet to the rear lot line nor closer than three (3) feet to a side lot line.
3.3. Front yards.
(1) Where and official line has been established by the adopted major arterial plan, for the future
widening or opening of a street upon which a lot abuts, then the depth of a front or side yard shall be
measured from such official line to the nearest line of the building.
(2) On through lots, the required front yard shall be provided on each street.
(3) Where a lot is located at the intersection of two (2) or more streets, there shall be a front yard of
fifteen (15) feet on the side street; provided, however, that the buildable width of a lot of record at the
time of passage of this ordinance shall not be reduced to less than thirty-two (32) feet.
(4) Open unenclosed porches, platforms or paved terraces, open or covered by a roof or canopy, and
which do not extend above the level of the first floor of the building, may extend or project into the
front yard not more than six (6) feet.
(5) Where twenty-five (25) percent or more of the street frontage, or where twenty-five (25) percent or
more of the street frontage within four hundred (400) feet, of the property in question is improved
with buildings that have a front yard (with variation of six (6) feet or less) that is greater or less than
the required front yard in the district, no building shall project beyond the average front yard so
established; provided, however, that a depth of front yard of more than fifty (50) percent in excess of
the depth of the required front yard in the district in which the lot is located shall not be required.
Where forty (40) percent or more of the street frontage is improved with buildings that have no front
yard, no front yard shall be required for the remainder of the street frontage.
(6) All buildings hereinafter erected, or structurally altered so as to change the character of use of such
building, shall observe the following setback requirements or the setbacks or front yard requirements
set forth elsewhere in this ordinance, whichever is greater:
(a) Except as otherwise provided below, on Washington Street, the minimum setback shall be forty
(40) feet, and on Sycamore Street south of Halifax Street, the minimum setback shall be forty-five
(45) feet. (On Crater Road, between Graham Road and South Boulevard, the minimum setback on
the west side shall be forty (40) feet and on the east side shall be ninety (90) feet for dwellings
and sixty (60) feet for all other buildings.) On all other streets thirty (30) feet in width and less
than sixty (60) feet in width the minimum setback shall be thirty (30) feet. The term "center line
of the street" as used below, shall mean the center line which existed November 20, 1947.
(a-1) The minimum setback along U.S. Rout 301 (South Crater Road) from the Norfolk and Western
Railway underpass south of Morton Avenue and to the Prince George County Line shall be one
hundred (100) feet. The minimum setback along U.S. Route 460 (County Drive) from the Norfolk
and Western Railway overpass, at the old corporate limits, to the Prince George County Line shall
be one hundred (100) feet. The minimum setback along State Route 604 (Halifax Road) from its
intersection with Boydton Plank Road south to the overpass over Interstate 85 shall be one
hundred (100) feet; along the west side of Halifax Road from Interstate 85 south to Vaughan
Created: 2023-08-21 15:56:13 [EST]
(Supp. No. 18, Update 3)
Page 3 of 5
Road the minimum setback shall be one hundred forty-five (145) feet; along Halifax Road from
Vaughan Road south to the Dinwiddie County Line the minimum setback shall be one hundred
(100) feet. The minimum setback along State Route 142 (Boydton Plank Road) from its
intersection with Halifax Road west to the Dinwiddie County Line shall be one hundred (100) feet.
The minimum setback along State Route 632 (Wagner Road) from U.S. Route 301 east to U.S.
Route 460 shall be one hundred (100) feet. The minimum setback along State Route 608
(Johnson Road) from the Norfolk and Western Railway overpass, at the old corporate limits,
south to the Dinwiddie County Line south of Flank Road shall be one hundred (100) feet. The
minimum setback along State Route 109 (Hickory Hill Road) from U.S. 460 east to Fort Lee shall
be one hundred (100) feet.
The minimum setback along State Route 629 (Rives Road) from U.S. Route 301 east to the Prince
George County Line shall be one hundred (100) feet. The minimum setback along State Route
613 (Squirrel Level Road) from Boydton Plank Road southwest to the Dinwiddie County Line shall
be one hundred (100) feet. The minimum setback along Dupuy Road from Spring Street
Southwest to Boydton Plank Road shall be eighty (80) feet. The minimum setback along State
Route 613 (young's Road) from Brick House Run south to Boydton Plank Road shall be eighty (80)
feet. The minimum setback along Flank Road from U.S. Route 301 west to State Route
604(Halifax Road) shall be one hundred fifty (150) feet. The minimum setback along Defense
Road from Banister Road west to State Route 142 (Boydton Plank Road) shall be one hundred
fifty (150) feet. The term "center line of the street," as used below in subsection (b), when
referring to this paragraph shall mean the center line which existed January 1, 1972. Where there
are two (2) center lines on a road, the center line referred to is a line running half way between
and parallel to the two (2) existing center lines.
(b) The minimum setback required herein shall be the minimum horizontal distance from the center
line of the street to the main building, or any projection thereof. Where an existing building has
less setback than provided herein, any building hereafter erected or structurally altered within
twenty (20) feet of said existing building may observe the setback line established by the existing
building provided that provision be made in the structure for the removal of that portion which
extends beyond the setback line established herein, without damage to the balance of the
structure, and that the owner of the building to be erected or structurally altered enter into
agreement with the City of Petersburg, relieving the city of damage for the removal of that
portion of the structure extending beyond the required setback line, when at such time the city
acquires title to this portion of the property for street widening.
(c) No setback of any building shall be required on the south side of East Tabb Street, between North
Sycamore Street and Monroe Street.
(d) Where the minimum setback required herein would require a front yard, the depth of which is
greater than ten (10) percent of the average depth of a lot of record prior to November 20, 1947,
or require a front yard on the side having the greater, and the front yard is not required by the
district regulations, an application for a building permit, conforming to the provisions herein,
shall be denied by the building inspector for a period of sixty (60) days. The building inspector
shall immediately notify the council of such application for a permit, and unless the building
inspector be notified by the clerk of the council within sixty (60) days of date of the application
for permit, of the city's intention to purchase the land occupied by the setback required herein,
the building inspector shall grant the permit.
3.4. Side yards.
(1) Where dwelling units are erected above business and industrial structures in business and industrial
districts, no side yards are required, except such side yard as may be required in the district regulations
for a business or industrial building on the side of a lot adjoining a dwelling district.
Created: 2023-08-21 15:56:13 [EST]
(Supp. No. 18, Update 3)
Page 4 of 5
(2) For the purpose of the side yard regulations, a two-family dwelling or a multiple dwelling shall be
considered as one building occupying one lot.
(3) The minimum width of side yards for schools, libraries, churches, community houses and other public
and semipublic buildings in residence districts shall be twenty-five (25) feet, except where a side yard is
adjacent to a business, commercial or industrial district, in which case the width of that yard shall be as
required in the chart of article 22, for the district in which e building is located.
3.5. Rear yards. Open or lattice-enclosed fire escapes, outside stairways and balconies opening upon fire towers,
and the ordinary projections of chimneys and flues, may project into the required rear yard for a distance of
not more than five (5) feet, but only where the same are so placed as not to obstruct light and ventilation.
3.6. Lot area. Where a lot was of record prior to the application of zoning regulations and restrictions to the
premises, and if such lot does not conform to the requirements of such regulations and restrictions as to the
width of lots or lot area per family, the provisions of such lot area per family and lot width regulations and
restrictions shall not prevent the owner of such lot from erecting a one-family dwelling or making other
improvements on the lot; provided such improvements conform in all other respects to the applicable zoning
regulations and restrictions. However, this section will not apply if the lot or lots in question were contiguous
to another lot or lots of record owned by the same person at the time the more restrictive regulations
became in force.
(Ord. No. 88-48, 5-17-1988)
Created: 2023-08-21 15:56:13 [EST]
(Supp. No. 18, Update 3)
Page 5 of 5
Get email alerts for Petersburg
A daily email when new agendas and minutes are posted.