Planning Commission

City of Petersburg Planning Commission Meeting Agenda Thursday, May 1, 2025 6:00 PM – 8:30 PM Click here to join the meeting virtually https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-teams/join-a-meeting Meeting ID: 247 909 409 188 Passcode: J8yoAt 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Adoption of the Agenda 4. Officer Elections The Planning Commission will hold annuals elections for Chair, Vice-Chair, and Secretary. 5. Consent Agenda a. Revised March 6, 2025 Regular Meeting Minutes (pages 3-6) b. April 3, 2025 Regular Meeting Minutes (pages 7-13) 6. Public Comment Comments and Correspondence from citizens, visitors, and delegations in the audience on items not on the agenda. Individuals wishing to speak should sign up prior to the start of the meeting. Please limit comments to no more than three minutes. Total Public Comment period shall not exceed 15 minutes. 7. Public Hearings 1 8. Old Business a. 2024-ZTA-09: Consideration of a resolution recommending approval of an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Petersburg pertaining to short-term rental uses in the City. (pages 14-32) 9. New Business a. Discussion on potential text amendment revising Subdivision Ordinance to align with Code of Virginia. (pages 33-38) b. Discussion on potential text amendment revising the sign ordinance to address recurring issues. (pages 39-47) c. Discussion on proffers/conditional zoning. 10. Secretary/City Staff Reports 11. Announcements/Commissioner Reports 12. Adjournment 2  City of Petersburg Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 6th, 2025 Members Present: Mr. Fenton Bland Mr. Al Cannon, Vice-Chair Mr. Marshall Ford, Chair Ms. Kirsten Katzenbach Mr. Aku Reinhardt Dr. Dianne Harley (left at 7:25 p.m.) Dr. James Norman (arrived at 6:28 p.m.) Members Absent: Mr. Thomas Hairston Mr. Tony McDaniel 1. Call to Order: The City of Petersburg Planning Commission meeting held on Thursday, March 6th, 2025, was called to order by Chair Ford at 6:00 p.m. A roll call was completed by Mr. Jackson. 2. Roll Call A quorum was established by Mr. Jackson. Others Present: Naomi Siodmok, Jared Crews, and Tyler Jackson, City Planning Staff 3. Adoption of the Agenda: Chair Ford called for any changes to the agenda. Staff requested that item 6b be heard first since there were representatives from the public for that case. Commissioner Bland moved to approve the agenda as amended and Chair Ford seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 4. Consent Agenda: Commissioner Katzenbach motioned to approve the consent agenda which included the February 6th meeting minutes. Commissioner Bland seconded the motion which passed unanimously. 5. Public Comment Chair Ford opened the floor for public comment. No public comments were received. 3 6. Public Hearings: 6b. 2025-ZTA-03: Consideration of a resolution recommending approval of a request by Crater Center, LLC to amend the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Petersburg to allow recreational substance retail uses in the B-2, General Commercial Zoning District with an approved special use permit and at least 1,000 linear feet from the property line of any child day care center or public, private, or parochial school. Mr. Crews presented, explaining the history of the Zoning Ordinance regulations on recreational substance retail uses. The regulations were adopted in July of 2024 and Planning Commission originally recommended that the use be allowed in the B-1, B-2, M-1 Districts subject to an approved special use permit. City Council adopted the regulations, but limited the use to the M-1 District only. Mr. Crews noted there are certain limitation on how localities are able to regulate these uses based on State Code. Mr. Crews also clarified that the regulations pertained only to tobacco, vape, and hemp products for consumption by inhalation and noted that retail sales of marijuana are not legal in Virginia. Mr. Crews stated staff recommended approval of the proposed change to the ordinance as the Comprehensive Plan supports retail uses, but also emphasizes the importance of a healthy community. Commissioner Harley voiced their concerns over the use and worried that the use would increase the frequency of illegal sales to minors. Chair Ford then opened the floor to the applicant’s representative, Joe Morrisey. Mr. Morrisey spoke about the origin of the application and the history behind recreational substance regulations in the state. Mr. Morrisey noted the Planning Commission had previously voted to recommend allowing the use in the B-1, B-2, and M-1 districts. Mr. Morrisey stated the applicant and owner of 3209 South Crater Road as and his proposed tenant had made financial investments into 3209 South Crater Road in the B-2 District for the purpose of operating a tobacco and vape shop. No records were provided to the Planning Commission detailing the financial investments referenced, but Mr. Morrisey pointed out images that had been included with the application that show the retail space that the proposed tenant had installed. Mr. Morrisey stated the property owner had encouraged his prospective tenant to make sure that the use of the property was allowed before renting the space and that the tenant had been informed by an unnamed member of City staff that the use was allowed. Bryan Robinson, owner of property at 3209 South Crater Road spoke and noted that the use is permitted in neighboring localities and felt that limiting the use to the M-1 District would be a detriment to the City. With no additional speakers, Chair Ford closed the public hearing. 4  The Planning Commission discussed concerns over health risks to residents associated with recreational substance retail uses. Mr. Crews stated staff perspective was that the limitations on the use through the requirement for a special use permit and the separation from schools and daycares would make the change to the text appropriate. Commissioner Katzenbach made a motion to recommend City Council deny the request to amend the Zoning Ordinance as presented. Commissioner Cannon seconded the motion, which passed 6-1 with Commissioner Bland voting against. 6a. 2025-ZTA-02: Consideration of a resolution recommending approval of an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Petersburg pertaining to the introduction of civil penalties for violations of the zoning ordinance. Mr. Crews presented an overview of the proposed text amendment, noting that staff has had limited success pursuing criminal penalties for zoning violations. Mr. Crews explained that if the text amendment was adopted, staff would have the option to pursue civil penalties for violations while retaining the option to pursue criminal charges in certain cases. Mr. Crews stated staff recommend approval of the text amendment and believe that pursuing civil penalties would prove more effective for dealing with most zoning violations. Chair Ford opened the floor for public comment. Hearing no one in favor or against, Chair Ford closed the public comment period. Commissioner Norman made a motion to recommend City Council approve the text amendment as drafted. Commissioner Aku seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 7. Old Business There was no old business discussed. 8. NEW BUSINESS Presentation and review of FY25 Capital Budget and Improvement Plan (CIP) by City Staff. Randall Williams, Assistant Director of Public Works, and Garry Cozier, Budget Manager, presented the Planning Commission with an overview of the FY25 Capital Budget and Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and noted that the City is currently working towards adoption of the FY26 budget and CIP. Mr. Williams stated that staff would be return to present the CIP to the Commission once it’s completed and explained that the plan would include planned capital improvements over a five year period. Mr. Cozier 5  discussed the City’s bond rating with the Commission and explained different variables which contribute to that rating. The Commission discussed several questions, including the status of projects like the new courthouse and animal shelter as well as coordination with the School Board and improvements for schools. 9. SECRETARY/CITY STAFF REPORTS Mr. Crews asked any Commissioners interested in the summer Planning Commissioner training session through VCU to let him know as soon as possible. 10. ANNOUNCEMENTS/COMMISSIONER REPORTS No Commissioner Reports were offered. 11. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:31 p.m. on motion by Commissioner Norman and second by Commissioner Bland. Planning Commission Chair Date 6  City of Petersburg Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 3rd, 2025 Members Present: Mr. Fenton Bland Mr. Al Cannon, Vice-Chair Mr. Marshall Ford, Chair Ms. Kirsten Katzenbach Mr. Aku Reinhardt Dr. Dianne Harley Dr. James Norman Mr. Thomas Hairston Members Absent: Mr. Tony McDaniel 1. Call to Order: The City of Petersburg Planning Commission meeting held on Thursday, April 3rd, 2025, was called to order by Chair Ford at 6:01 p.m. A roll call was completed by Mr. Jackson. 2. Roll Call A quorum was established by Mr. Jackson. Others Present: Naomi Siodmok, Jared Crews, and Tyler Jackson, City Planning Staff 3. Adoption of the Agenda: Chair Ford called for any changes to the agenda and requested the consent agenda be heard last. Commissioner Cannon moved to approve the agenda as amended and Commissioner Hairston seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 4. Public Comment Chair Ford opened the floor for public comment. No public comments were received. 5. Public Hearings: a. 2025-REZ-02: Consideration of a resolution recommending approval of a request by Alexander Graham, Jr., on behalf of the Warrenton Group, to rezone property at 2233 Halifax Road, Parcel ID 076030800, from the A Agricultural District to the M-1 Light Industrial District with proffers 7 Mr. Crews presented, detailing the applicants request to rezone the subject property from A to M-1 with proffers for development of a data center. The property is currently owned by the City, with an option-agreement with the Warrenton Group for a data center development. The proposed development would include 6 data center buildings two-stories in height and 145,000 square feet in area with two substations approximately 4.5 acres in area each. Mr. Crews concluded the presentation by sharing the proffers and comprehensive plan considerations. Mr. Crews then opened staff up for questions of which there were none. Alexander Graham, representative of the applicant, began speaking; noting the plans presented to the Planning Commission was a first effort and subject to change based on feedback from public hearings. Mr. Graham stated the task of dealing with the wetlands present on the property and complying with DEQ and the Army Corps of Engineers. Mr. Graham discussed the current zoning of the property, being Agricultural, as wrong for this property, and proposed that this is why the property has remained undeveloped. Mr. Graham stated the property was bought by the City 12 to 13 years ago for use for high-speed rail. Mr. Graham stated Dominion Power is a key partner in the site, and without additional power, then the data center would not be possible. He stated that the economic benefits of the use is astounding. He also stated the pharmaceutical industry is big in Petersburg and noted that the Casino is also in the works. He stated that A.I. can also be a similar opportunity and that requests for data centers are also happening in adjacent localities. Mr. Graham emphasized the increased real estate and machinery tax that the development would bring to the City. Mr. Graham addressed noise and traffic accompanying the development, stating that the plan is to access the site from Halifax Road, and there will be additional traffic because of that, but that this would cease after construction is done. An access easement would need to be obtained from the railroad, he explained. Mr. Graham restated that the site plan shown is proposed and may change with regard to the number of buildings. Mr. Graham also stated that they don’t want to take down anymore trees than necessary as they aid as a noise buffer. Mr. Graham addressed the archeological concerns and said that an outside firm performed multiple test digs and only found general domestic scatter. Mr. Graham also stated that there were no battles in either the Revolutionary War or Civil War fought on this property. Mr. Graham then spoke about the architectural treatment and showed sketches to the Commission to give them an idea on how the buildings could look. Mr. Graham then ended his presentation. Chair Ford opened the floor for public comment. Gale Beck, owner of 1977 Vesonder Road, voiced their concerns over the impact the development would have on the wildlife on the site. 8 Troy Wilkins, owner of 2344 Wells Road, voiced their concerns over site access from Halifax Road, in particular, they noted a problem of having to cross multiple sets of railroad tracks as other projects faced similar problems in that area. Erik Williams, owner of 606 Harding Street, voiced their concerns over whether the City had the infrastructure to accommodate the project on that site and if the applicant would bear a portion of that cost. Mr. Crews responded and stated that if the City doesn’t have the infrastructure to serve the site, then it couldn’t be developed. Mr. Graham, representative of the Applicant, stated that this is addressed in one of the options in the purchase agreement with the City, but who would make those improvements is still under discussion. James Beck, owner of 1977 Vesonder Road, made statements reminding the Commission and Staff that there is a lot of competition over these types of development and request that research be done regarding the applicant’s ability to oversee the development of the proposed site. They also restated the concerns over noise buffering and archeological history of the site. Barbara Coleman, owner of 928 Farmer Street, having lived in Loudon County, spoke about the economic benefits of data centers and how that money had been used in the county. They raised a question about what would be done to the site and infrastructure if the property is no longer under that use in the future. Chair Ford, hearing no further comments, closed the public comment period. Mr. Graham, representative of the Applicant, was then granted time to respond to the comments presented. Regarding concerns over access, Mr. Graham stated that a discussion with the railroad would need to take place regarding specific solutions to the crossing. Erik Williams, owner of 606 Harding Street, posed an additional question over whether the applicant has a customer already committed to leasing space in the development. Warren Williams, CEO of the Warrenton Group responded stating that they don’t want to put the cart in front of the horse and that those conversations will be held after the possibility of a data center on the site is confirmed. 9 Commissioner Hairston posed a question to the Applicant asking if they have had experience developing a data center before. Mr. Williams responded, stating that they have not developed a data center before, however, they have experience in similar large-scale developments with the same principles as seen in this project. They also outlined that the consultants working on the project also have similar experience. Vice-Chair Cannon voiced their concerns over the wetlands present on the property. Steve Moss, representative of the Applicant, responded stating that the concept plan proposed was an initial effort in order to give the Commission an idea on how the site would look. They stated that the development would continue to evolve as the applicant works with the relevant Departments such as DEQ for approval to their standards. Mr. Moss also noted that the site layout also has to take into consideration the adjacent residential community, noting the 100 buffer to the properties on the concept plan. Commissioner Hairston stated the neighbors in the area were concerned with fencing and asked what type of fencing is being proposed for the development. Mr. Moss stated that with the proffer, the fencing would have to be set back at least 35 feet from the property line. Mr. Moss then stated with regard to the specific aesthetics of the fence, the applicant hasn’t gotten that far with regards to those plans. Commissioner Katzenbach noted some more typical regulations for data centers in other localities, namely; lighting buffers, effect of weight of materials on the surrounding roads, effects on trees on the site, and sound buffers specifically on the roof. Commissioner Katzenbach noted that the data center in Prince William has been consuming 10-15% of the Potomac River and suggested that a plan be constructed to address water consumption, possibly a maximum amount that the data center can consume. Commissioner Katzenbach also noted that data centers in other localities have condensers moving air at gale force capacity and this is one of the most popular complaints regarding noise from data centers. Commissioner Katzenbach suggested additional noise buffering on the roof for this purpose. Mr. Crews, responded, stating that things such as lighting and noise standards would be addressed by the City’s preexisting conditions for data centers, but that access to the site would need to be facilitated with the railway. Mr. Crews also stated that if 10  they weren’t able to comply with the standards in place, then they would need to come to the City for a special use permit. Commissioner Bland motioned to approve the request with the proffered conditions. Commissioner Harley seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. b. 2025-ZMA-01: Consideration of a resolution recommending approval of an ordinance adopting the official City of Petersburg Zoning Map in accordance with Code of Virginia Section 15.2285 Mr. Crews gave his presentation, outlining the State and Local code regulating the adoption of an official zoning map for the City. Mr. Crews gave a background of the project stating the last known official adoption was in 1986 and detailing the process staff went through in putting the map together. Mr. Crews also recommended the map be approved, conditional on the outcome of 2025-REZ-03. Commissioner Hairston made a motion to approve the Zoning Map as drafted, with the caveat that the zoning of 2233 Halifax Road be updated pending the outcome of 2025-REZ-03. Commissioner Aku seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 6. Old Business Mr. Crews gave an overview of the topics covered at the March 17 th subcommittee meeting regarding short-term rental regulations, namely the age of renters, deadlines for registration, limits on amount of guests, waste management, and what happens if we receive repeated violations. Mr. Crews requested guidance on how to put in place exemptions for those who are currently operating. Mr. Crews, on meeting with the attorney, suggested a deadline to register by October 1st so those registered before that date wouldn’t be subject to the special use permit requirement. Commissioner Katzenbach stated that they are in favor of the exemption mentioned, however, they still want some amount of zoning control over those properties. They also asked if there would be a way to grant preference to Petersburg residents to limit the influence of outside companies in order to protect the housing stock in Petersburg. Commissioner Hairston stated that it should be the right of the homeowner to do what they like with the property they purchased. Commissioner Hairston also questioned the end goal of regulating short-term rentals Mr. Crews stated that the aspect in question would limit the number of units in a specific property rather than the total amount of properties one could own. Mr. Crews 11  stated that taxing short-term rentals would certainly be a piece of motivation in wanting to regulate the use. Vice-Chair Cannon motioned to remove the special use permit requirement from the draft short-term rental regulations. Commissioner Hairston seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 7. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business discussed. 8. Consent Agenda: Commissioner Katzenbach requested that the minutes be amended to note that the applicant did not provide financial record verifying any investments or improvements to the property when prompted by the Commission. Additionally, the applicant did not identify the City representative they spoke to before proceeding with renovations. Chair Ford also requested staff include in the minutes be consistent with including information such as names and addresses for those speaking. Approval of the March 6th Planning Commission meeting minutes were moved to the following Planning Commission meeting, pending edits. Commissioner Katzenbach made a motion to approve the March 17th Subcommittee Meeting minutes. Commissioner Hairston seconded the motion, which was approved unanimously. 9. SECRETARY/CITY STAFF REPORTS Mr. Crews confirmed Commissioners that had signed up for the summer Planning Commissioner training session through VCU and that if anyone else would like to participate to notify him immediately. Mr. Crews also noted that there was a question that was asked at the last Planning Commission meeting regarding when and how you would go into closed session, stating that, normally these reasons would be for personnel matters and legal advice and that the City Attorney generally advises not to go into closed session unless absolutely necessary. Staff also requests that they be aware if such a thing may come up prior to the meeting. Mr. Crews states that you are able to take a free recess, which would allow you to take a break from the meeting, but that you can’t discuss the case that’s ongoing. 12 10. ANNOUNCEMENTS/COMMISSIONER REPORTS No Commissioner Reports were offered. 11. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:56 p.m. on motion by Commissioner Norman and second by Commissioner Aku. Planning Commission Chair Date 13  City of Petersburg Department of Planning and Community Development 135 N Union St, Room 304 Petersburg, VA 23803 (804) 733-2308 MEMORANDUM UPDATED: NEW TEXT IN RED DATE: May 1, 2025 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning and Community Development RE: 2024-ZTA-09: Consideration of a resolution recommending approval of an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Petersburg pertaining to short-term rental uses in the City. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: A number of residential properties in the City are utilized for short-term rental, but the City currently has no registry of these properties and the use is currently unregulated by the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed text amendment would introduce short-term rental as a use in the Ordinance, allowing the City to create a registry of properties conducting short-term rentals and to introduce standards to regulate the use. An initial public hearing was held with the Planning Commission on October 3, 2024 and the Commission requested several changes to the drafted text, including allowing short-term rental uses in the Mixed Use Zoning Districts and allowing a “grace period” for operators of properties currently offered as short-term rentals. A second public hearing was held on January 2, 2025 and the Planning Commission tabled the item so that a subcommittee could review the recommendations. The subcommittee recommended several clarifications of the drafted text and at the April 3, 2025 meeting, the Planning Commission directed staff to remove the requirement for a special use permit for short-term rental uses where a property owner does not occupy a rental unit as their primary residence. The updated text is reflective of the changes from the subcommittee and full Planning Commission and is being brought back for Planning Commission action. Planning staff recommend approval of the text amendment as drafted. 14 CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS: 1. July-September 2024 – The Planning Commission has a potential text amendment regarding short-term rental uses, including being surveyed on preferences for use standards. At the September 5 meeting, Staff were directed to bring the proposed amendment to public hearing. 2. October 3, 2024 – The Planning Commission held a public hearing on draft short-term rental regulations. The Commission requested several changes and it was decided to hold a new public hearing in December. 3. November 7, 2024 – Staff presented draft changes based on the Commission’s comments; the Commission stated the changes seemed to address their concerns from October 4. December 5, 2024 – A public hearing on the amendment was scheduled but not held due to time constraints. 5. January 2, 2025 – A public hearing on the amendment was held and the Planning Commission deferred action until a subcommittee could be appointed to review the drafted regulations. 6. March 17, 2025 – The subcommittee met and directed staff to make several clarifications to the ordinance and consult with the City Attorney on the grace period for existing rental properties. 7. April 3, 2025 – Staff reported to the full Planning Commission on the City Attorney’s recommendation and were directed to remove the requirement for a special use permit for short-term rental of non-owner-occupied properties. BACKGROUND: Short-term rental refers to the rental of a dwelling unit or room for fewer than 30 days in exchange for payment. Short-term rental uses are commonly associated with entities like Airbnb, Homestay, or Flipkey. Short-term rental uses typically occur within the residence of the operator and distinguishing them from traditional bed-and-breakfast inns, which are built specifically for transient guests and include eating accommodations and a resident-manager on site. An unknown amount of dwellings within the City are currently used for short-term rental, but the properties are not tracked or governed by any specific regulations in the Zoning Ordinance. Without being listed in the Ordinance, the use is technically prohibited. The Code of Virginia empowers the City to regulate short-term rental as a land use and to create a registry of properties being used for short-term rental. Penalties can be applied to properties which fail to register that are. The City can also require Special Use Permits for short-term rentals of property that are not occupied by a property owner as their primary residence. Proposed Changes: The proposed text amendment would introduce short-term rental as a permitted use in the R-3 Two-Family Residence, R-4 Multiple-Dwelling, R-5 Multiple-Dwelling, R-6 High Rise, RB Office- 15 Apartment, MXD-1, Mixed Use, MXD-2, Mixed Use, B-2 General Commercial, and B-3 Central Commercial District. The use would be by-right but subject to certain development standards as covered below. The former draft of the text would have required a special use permit to operate a short-term rental in a property not occupied by the owner as their primary residence, but that requirement was removed at the direction of Planning Commission. Short-term rental of apartment units would be permitted, but limited to no more than ten units or one-third of total units in a development, whichever is less. On properties where apartments are being used for short-term rental when the text amendment is adopted, those rentals may continue regardless of the number or portion of units as long as they register by the deadline and no additional units are rented in cases that exceed the established limits. The proposed amendment would stipulate that properties used for short-term rental would need to register annually with the Zoning Administrator to certify the property meets regulations. A penalty fee would apply to any properties who fail to register. Existing short-term rental properties would be given a grace period through October 1, 2025 to register. Approval to operate as a short-term rental would be revocable based on violations of any regulations and operators would not be able to re-register for the remaining portion of the year in which they lose a license. In cases of repeated violations, the Zoning Administrator can prohibit rental of that property indefinitely. Prior to a revocation, an rental operator would be made aware of the applicable violations and would be given a chance to appeal the revocation to the Board of Zoning Appeals within 30 days. The proposed text amendment would also introduce Article 39 of the Zoning Ordinance which would introduce specific regulations of the use which would include: • Operators must provide floor plans and emergency contact information to the City and renters and the provide smoke detectors, carbon monoxide detectors, and fire extinguishers in accordance with the Building Code • Lodging accommodations are limited to primary structures • The primary renter must be at least 18 and the total number of overnight renters cannot exceed the maximum occupancy of the dwelling unit being based on its underlying zoning. Additionally, no more than six unrelated individuals will be allowed in the rental unit at one time during the rental • Rental units cannot be double-booked or split to accommodate multiple parties • No recreational vehicles, buses, or trailers associated with a short-term rental use can be visible on the property or an adjoining street • No signs are permitted associated with the short-term rental use • The dates for trash and recycling collection for a property shall be posted for renters and renters are required to follow City policy on waste disposal • A short-term rental operator cannot prepare or serve food or beverages to guests 16  • A property used for short-term rental cannot include commercial use unless that use is permitted by the Zoning Ordinance Inspection of properties for compliance with these regulations would be required prior to approval of a registration as well as in the case of any complaints against the property. Failure of an operator to allow an inspection could result in revocation of a registration. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSIDERATIONS: In general, The PetersburgNEXT Comprehensive Plan speaks to the importance of the hospitality industry within the City, mentioning that hospitality uses are expanding and should be accommodated as the City looks towards the future. The plan also specifically mentions short- term rental uses as potential revenue streams not currently being utilized by the City. The Comprehensive Plan is supportive of permitting short-term rental uses and further appears to support the creation of a registry to ensure that those uses are accounted for and taxed appropriately. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommend approval of the proposed text amendment. ATTACHMENTS Presentation - Updated Resolution Article 3, Definitions - Revised Article 8, R-3 Two-Family Residence District Regulations Article 9, R-4 Multiple Dwelling District Regulations Article 18.1, MXD-1, Mixed Use District – Revised Article 18.2, MXD-2, Mixed Use District - Revised Article 39, Short-Term Rental Regulations – Updated per subcommittee and Planning Commission recommendations 17 PLANNING COMMISSION 2024-ZTA-09: Consideration of a resolution recommending MEETING approval of an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Petersburg pertaining to MAY 1, 2025 short-term rental uses in the City. 18 Recap ◦ July – September 2024 – Discussion and polling with existing Planning Commission to draft text ◦ October 3, 2024 - Original public hearing held; public feedback received ◦ January 2, 2025 - Second public hearing held reflecting requested changes from Planning Commission ◦ March 17, 2025 - Subcommittee meeting held to review draft regulations; clarifications were incorporated ◦ April 3, 2025 – Recommendation from Attorney brought on “grace period” brought to Planning Commission; staff were directed to remove requirement for special use permits for any short-term rentals ◦ May 1, 2025 – Final draft of ordinance presented with updates from subcommittee and Planning Commission 19 Reminder: Where/How Permitted ◦ To be allowed by-right in higher-density residential districts; R-3, 4, 5, and 6, MXD-1 and 2, RB, B-2, B-3 ◦ Registry to be created with deadline to register for existing rentals; operators to apply to Zoning Administrator annually and verify compliance with standards; $500 applies for existing rentals not registered by deadline or rentals operating without registering after deadline ◦ Use standards included in text to speak to safety, occupancy, minimum standards, and penalties for violations 20 Updates from Subcommittee oClarified that age of primary renter can be 18 to accommodate students and military oProvided a limit on total occupants at one time (6 unrelated adults) to supplement the existing limit on overnight guests oClarified that guests are responsible for waste management during stay oAdded stipulation that if registration is revoked more than once, Zoning Administrator can prohibit rental of the property indefinitely 21 Update from full Commission oAll short-term rental uses will be subject to the same registration process; no units will require a special use permit regardless of whether the owner occupies the dwelling as their primary residence. oLimit on number of apartment units that can be rented will still apply, but existing units can be registered by October 1 deadline and continue to be rented. 22 Additional Notes oRegistration deadline has been shifted to October 1, 2025; Staff expect an influx of rental properties when the temporary casino facilities open in the Fall oSubcommittee discussed a section in the draft ordinance that exempts realtors from registration requirements; staff verified that this is mandated by State law and the provision cannot be removed oThe regulations discussed pertain to short-term rental uses only (Airbnb, FlipKey, Vrbo); group homes, recovery facilities, etc. are separate matters 23 Comprehensive Plan Considerations •Hospitality uses are expanding and should be accommodated as City looks forward •Existing short-term rentals are currently un-utilized revenue stream •Plan recommends ensuring that short-term rental uses pay taxes; registry is first step in this process 24 Planning Commission Options •Recommend approval of the text amendment as drafted •Recommend denial of the text amendment •Recommend approval of the text amendment with changes Staff recommendation: Approval of text as drafted 25  A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING ARTICLE 39. – SHORT- TERM RENTAL REGULATIONS AND AMENDING AND READOPTING ARTICLE 3. – DEFINITIONS, ARTICLE 8. – R-3 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 9. – R-4 MULTIPLE DWELLING DISTRICT REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 18.1, MXD-1 MIXED USE DISTRICT, AND ARTICLE 18.2, MXD-2 MIXED USE DISTRICT AS SET FORTH IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PETERSBURG, TO PERMIT AND INTRODUCE REGULATIONS FOR SHORT-TERM RENTAL USES IN THE CITY WHEREAS, the City of Petersburg Zoning Ordinance includes Article 3. – Definitions, Article 8. – R-3 Two- Family Residence District Regulations, Article 9.- Multiple Dwelling District Regulations, Article 18.1.- MXD-1, Mixed Use District, Article 18.2.- MXD-2, Mixed Use District, and Article 23 – Supplementary Use Regulations which deal with land uses in the City and regulation of such uses; and WHEREAS, there are residential properties throughout the City currently being used for short-term rental, which is not a permitted use according to the Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission is supportive of allowing short-term rental uses within certain districts which permit residential uses and subject to certain regulations as well as creating a registry of properties being used for short-term rental; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission supports the adoption of Article 39. – Short-term rental regulations to create the aforementioned registry and introduce use standards for short-term rental uses; and WHEREAS, the PetersburgNEXT Comprehensive Plan is supportive of hospitality uses in general and short-term rental uses in particular, but mentions the need to register short-term rental properties to raise revenue through appropriate taxes; AND WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of Titles 15.2-2204 and 15.2-2285 of the Code of Virginia, as amended, a public hearing was advertised and held, in accordance with applicable laws. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of an ordinance adopting Article 39. – Short-term Rental Regulations and amending and readopting Article 3. – Definitions, Article 8. – R-3 Two-Family Residence District Regulations, Article 9.- Multiple Dwelling District Regulations, Article 18.1, MXD-1, Mixed Use District, and Article 18.2, MXD-2, Mixed Use District, as indicated in Exhibit A. 26  PART II - CODE APPENDIX B - ZONING ARTICLE 3. - DEFINITIONS Section 2. Definitions. Abattoir. A commercial slaughterhouse. ….. Short-term loan establishment. A business licensed to make payday loans under Chapter 18 of Title 6.2, Code of Virginia, licensed to sell money orders or engage in the business of money transmission under Chapter 19 of Title 6.2, Code of Virginia, registered as a check casher under Chapter 21 of Title 6.2, Code of Virginia, or licensed to make motor vehicle title loans under Chapter 22 of Title 6.2, Code of Virginia. Banks, savings and loans institutions, credit unions, and retail stores, among others, are not considered to be short-term loan establishments. Short-term rental. The provision of a room or space that is suitable or intended for occupancy for dwelling, sleeping, or lodging purposes, for a period of fewer than 30 consecutive days, in exchange for a charge for the occupancy. Short-term rental operator. The proprietor of any dwelling, lodging, or sleeping accommodations offered as a short-term rental, whether in the capacity of owner, lessee, sublessee, mortgagee in possession, licensee, or any other possessory capacity. Short-term renter. Any person who contracts with a short-term rental operator to occupy a short-term rental in exchange for a charge for such occupancy, and any companions or guests of such person. Sign. A sign is any structure, or part thereof or any device attached to, painted on, or represented on a building, fence or other structure, upon which is displayed or included any letter, work, model, banner, flag, pennant, insignia, decoration, device or representation used as, or which is in the nature of an announcement, direction, advertisement or other attention-directing device. A sign shall not include a similar structure or device located within a building, except illuminated signs within show windows. ….. ARTICLE 8. "R-3" TWO-FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT REGULATIONS Section 2. Use regulations. A building or premises shall be used only for the following purposes: (1) Any use permitted in the "R-1A" Single-Family Residence District; (2) Institutions of an educational or religious nature; (3) Two-family dwellings; (4) Short-term rental of an existing dwelling, subject to the provisions of Article 39, Short-term rental regulations. EXHBIT A Page 1 of 6 27  PART II - CODE APPENDIX B - ZONING ARTICLE 9. "R-4" MULTILE DWELLING DISTRICT REGULATIONS Section 2. Use regulations. A building or premises shall be used only for the following purposes: (1) Any use permitted in the "R-1A" Single-Family Residence District; (2) Two-family dwelling; (3) Multiple-family dwelling or group of dwellings designed to be operated as a unit by an individual, partnership, corporation or cooperative; (4) Off-street parking of private automobiles in connection with any use permitted in this section; (5) Short-term rental of an existing dwelling, subject to the provisions of Article 39, Short-term rental regulations. ARTICLE 18.1. "MXD-1" MIXED USE DISTRICT Section 2. Use regulations. Within the "MXD-1" Mixed Use District, the permitted uses are as follows: (a) Residential: (1) Single-family and two-family residences; (2) Residential townhouses. (3) Redevelopment and adaptive reuse of existing structures, originally designed for ground level commercial use and upper floor residential use, to multiple-family dwelling designed to be operated as a unit by an individual, partnership, corporation or cooperative. Such redevelopment/adaptive reuse shall not exceed four dwelling units. Off-street parking regulation as per article 19 of this zoning ordinance shall apply. (4) Short-term rental of an existing dwelling, subject to the provisions of Article 39, Short-term rental regulations. EXHBIT A Page 2 of 6 28  PART II - CODE APPENDIX B - ZONING ARTICLE 18.2. "MXD-2" MIXED USE DISTRICT Section 1. Purpose. Section 2. Use regulations. A building or premises shall be used for the following purpose: (a) Residential: (1) Single-family and two-family residences; (2) Residential townhouses; (3) Short-term rental of an existing dwelling, subject to the provisions of Article 39, Short-term rental regulations. EXHBIT A Page 3 of 6 29  PART II - CODE APPENDIX B - ZONING ARTICLE 39. SHORT-TERM RENTAL REGULATIONS Section 1. – Registry. 1. Prior to utilizing any dwelling unit for short-term rental, a short-term rental operator shall apply to be registered by the Zoning Administrator who shall review the application for conformance with this article. Registrations shall be recertified yearly no later than January 31. 2. The registration form shall include the following information: a. The name, telephone number, address, and email address of the short-term rental operator; b. If the property shares a common wall or common driveway with another property owner, proof of written notification to such property owner(s); c. The designation of a responsible party who will be available twenty-four (24) hours a day, seven (7) days a week, to respond to and resolve issues and complaints that arise during the period of time in which the dwelling is being used for short-term rental; d. Certification that the short-term rental unit meets the requirements of this article and, as part of the registration, the operator is agreeing to permit inspections of the home (at reasonable times and after notice has been provided) to address complaints. Failure to permit such an inspection is grounds for registration suspension; e. Proof of commercial general liability in a coverage amount of at least one million dollars ($1,000,000.00). 3. Registration is not required for persons who are (i) licensed by the Real Estate Board or a property owner who is represented by a real estate licensee; (ii) registered pursuant to the Virginia Real Estate Time-Share Act (§ 55.1-2200); (iii) licensed or registered with the Department of Health, related to the provision of room or space for lodging; or (iv) licensed or registered with the locality, related to the rental or management of real property, including licensed real estate professionals, hotels, mot els, campgrounds, and bed and breakfast establishments. 4. An operator’s failure to register a short-term rental property prior to use shall result in a registration fee of $500 as a penalty. Until the operator has completed registration, including payment of the registration fee, the property shall not be offered for short-term rental. 5. The owner or manager of any property actively providing room or space for dwelling, sleeping, or lodging purposes for fewer than thirty (30) consecutive days in exchange for a charge at the time of adoption of the article may register the property by no later than October 1, 2025, without incurring the penalty fee outlined in Section 1.4. Section 2. - Safety. 1. Each short-term rental operator shall provide to the Zoning Administrator and conspicuously post within the short-term rental a floor plan of the layout of the dwelling unit, on which floor plan the short-term rental operator shall label the following: a. The use of each room; b. The occupancy level of sleeping rooms and cooking facilities; c. The location and size of emergency egress and rescue openings; and d. The location of fire and carbon monoxide detectors. 2. Smoke detectors, fire extinguishers, and carbon monoxide detectors shall be present and functional in compliance with the current edition of the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code. EXHBIT A Page 4 of 6 30  PART II - CODE APPENDIX B - ZONING 3. The name and telephone number of the responsible party shall be conspicuously posted within the short-term rental unit. Section 3. - Use standards. Short-term rental uses shall adhere to the following: 1. Lodging accommodations shall be limited to primary structures; 2. The principal short-term renter shall be at least eighteen (18) years of age; 3. The number of overnight guests during a short-term rental shall not exceed the maximum number of occupants that would otherwise be permitted to reside in the dwelling by the Zoning Ordinance. The total occupant load of the dwelling at any one time during the rental shall not exceed six (6) unrelated adults; 4. No short-term rental operator shall agree to more than one booking transaction during the same period that results in reservations for two or more separately-booked short-term renters to occupy the same short-term rental at the same time; 5. No recreational vehicles, buses, or trailers shall be parked on the adjoining street or visible on the property in conjunction with the short-term rental use; 6. No signage may be placed on the exterior of a dwelling in conjunction with the short-term rental use; 7. The dates for trash and recycling collection shall be posted prominently within the short -term rental unit. Short term rental operators and/or renters shall be responsible for management of waste in accordance with Chapter 94 – Solid Waste of the City code; 8. No food shall be prepared for or served to guests by the property owner or short-term rental operator; and 9. No short-term rental operator shall offer, provide, advertise or permit use of a dwelling unit for any commercial use that is prohibited by law. Section 4. - Short-term rental of multiple-family dwelling units. For multiple-family dwellings, a maximum of ten (10) or one-third (1/3) of the dwelling units, whichever is lesser, on a lot shall be registered for short-term rental use unless the dwelling units used for such short-term rental are registered in accordance with Section 1 prior to October 1, 2025. Section 5. - Revocation of short-term rental registration. 1. Registration approval for a short-term rental use can be revoked by the Zoning Administrator for the following reasons: a. Failure to collect and/or remit any required taxes or to register and maintain a business license for the short-term rental use; b. Three (3) or more substantiated claims of failure to maintain compliance with any of the regulations set forth in this article within a twelve (12) month period; and c. The failure to abide by any other regulations set forth in the Zoning Ordinance or City Code 2. Before any revocation is made effective, the Zoning Administrator shall give written notice to the short - term rental operator. The notice shall be sent by certified mail and a copy of the notice shall be posted in a conspicuous place on the premises. The notice shall contain: a. A description of the violation(s) constituting the basis of the revocation; EXHBIT A Page 5 of 6 31  PART II - CODE APPENDIX B - ZONING b. If applicable, a statement of acts necessary to correct the violation(s); and c. A statement that if no request for appeal is made within thirty (30) days from the date of the notice, the registration will be revoked. 3. A short-term rental operator whose registration has been revoked pursuant to this section shall not be eligible to re-register for a short-term rental use for the remaining portion of the calendar year in which the registration is revoked, and for the entire succeeding calendar year. If a registration is reinstated and subsequently revoked for the same property, the Zoning Administrator may prohibit any subsequent registration of that property. Section 6. - Petition for review of decision by Zoning Administrator. 1. Any short-term rental operator who is aggrieved by a decision of the Zoning Administrator to revoke registration approval may petition the Board of Zoning Appeals for review of such decision pursuant to the provisions of Article 27 within thirty days of the notice given by the Zoning Administrator. EXHBIT A Page 6 of 6 32  Text PLANNING COMMISSION Amendment MEETING MAY 1, 2025 Discussion: Subdivision Ordinance 33 Background ◦ Subdivision Ordinance: Regulations that govern the division of land into smaller parcels for development purposes ◦ City’s current ordinance adopted in 1981; now outdated and not compliant with State code ◦ Recent laws passed by State will become effective July 1, 2025 and ordinance should be updated accordingly 34 Existing issues oOrdinance currently has two definitions; clarity is needed to capture the breadth of items that fall under subdivision regulations oOrdinance currently requires preliminary plat for all subdivisions; localities are only able to require preliminary plats for subdivisions of over 50 lots oThe ordinance does not distinguish between major and minor subdivisions; a single large parcel split into three is subject to the same in-depth reviews and processes as a large subdivision with many lots, utilities, streets, etc. oThe fees attached to subdivision reviews are outdated and do not reflect the appropriate time or level of review oThe ordinance does not have provisions for other reconfigurations of land such as boundary line adjustments or lot consolidations 35 State-Mandated Changes oAll plats must be reviewed by administrative agent; localities cannot require plats to go to Planning Commission or City Council oReview deadlines for plat will be shortened from 60 to 40 days for first submissions and from 45 to 30 days for resubmissions 36 Summary of Proposed Changes oAdd definitions to the ordinance to clearly define types of subdivisions as well as responsibilities for plat review oClarify when preliminary plat is required oDistinguish between minor and major subdivisions and clarify processes for each; address boundary line adjustments and lot consolidations oUpdate plat review fees to be appropriate for review type (major subdivision, minor subdivision, preliminary plat) oAmend review processes to match state code requirement for administrative reviews and approvals oTie review timeframes to State Code so they will remain compliant 37 Staff Request oStaff ask that Planning Commission vote to hold a public hearing on an amendment of the subdivision ordinance to bring it up to date and into compliance with State Code. 38  Text PLANNING COMMISSION Amendment MEETING Discussion: MAY 1, 2025 Minor Sign Ordinance Updates 39 Background ◦ Sign Ordinance included under zoning; regulates size, placement, types of signs allowed in city ◦ Frequent complaints about certain types of signage, but these signs are unrestricted or unregulated currently; goal is to have consistent and attractive signage ◦ Several sections of the Sign Ordinance are unclear and leave staff without reference to interpret whether signs are allowed in certain cases 40 Existing issues – window signs 41 Existing issues – flag/sail signs 42 Existing issues – signs in Historic Districts 43 Existing issues – rules for shopping center signage 44 Summary of Proposed Changes oWindow signs – make sure all signs within windows count as signs, set a minimum transparency requirement so windows aren’t completely covered, introduce rules for string/tube lights oFlag/sail signs – clarify the definition and specify these as prohibited signs o Signs in historic districts – codify the requirement for indirect lighting oShopping centers – clarify the allowances for signs in shopping center without sign plan on record 45 Considerations oA total overhaul of the sign ordinance is planned with the overall Zoning Ordinance rewrite; currently looking to address specific issues that we’re encountering oCouncil and Administration are emphasizing having attractive and cohesive signage throughout the city oSigns are protected by First Amendment and we cannot regulate the content of signs, only size, placement, quantity, etc. 46 Staff Request oStaff ask that Planning Commission vote to hold a public hearing on an amendment of the sign ordinance to address ongoing issues and meet goals for attractive and appropriate signage in the city. 47