Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/19/2020 - Public Hearing and WorksessionMINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE TOWN OF VINTON PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 2020, AT 6:30 P.M., VIA ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION MEANS. MEMBERS PRESENT: Keith Liles, Chairman David “Dave” Jones, Vice Chairman Robert “Bob” Benninger Andrew “Ty” Braxton Sarah Reid STAFF PRESENT: Anita McMillan, Planning and Zoning Director Nathan McClung, Principal Planner Julie Tucei, Planning and Zoning Coordinator Susan Johnson, Town Clerk OTHERS PRESENT: Giacomo Montuori, Petitioner AGENDA PARTICIPATION WILL BE BY ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 15.2-1413, CODE OF VIRGINIA (1950), AS AMENDED, ORDINANCE NO. 1016 AND SECTION 4-0.01(G) OF CHAPTER 1289 OF THE 2020 ACTS OF THE VIRGINIA GENERAL ASSEMBLY The Vinton Planning Commission will hold a Work Session at 6:30 p.m. and a Public Hearing at 7:00 p.m. on Thursday, November 19, 2020, using electronic communication means without the public being present. Participation by Planning Commission members, staff, and the public will only be available through electronic means. The public will have access to observe the Work Session and Public Hearing through a livestream on the Town’s Facebook page at www.facebook.com/ vintonva. Citizens may register to speak at the Public Hearing by calling the Town Clerk’s Office at 540-983-0607 or by sending an email to sjohnson@vintonva.gov by 12 Noon on Wednesday, November 18, 2020. Once registered, the citizen who wishes to address the Planning Commission will be provided the Zoom meeting information and will be allowed to join the meeting and address the Planning Commission by electronic means. WORK SESSION—6:30 P.M. I. Call to Order—Roll Call II. CONFIRMATION THAT MEETING IS BEING HELD IN ACCORDANCE WITH ORDINANCE NO. 1016 AND SECTION 4-0.01(G) OF CHAPTER 1289 OF THE 2020 ACTS OF THE VIRGINIA GENERAL ASSEMBLY AND ROLL CALL III. Introductions 1. Introduction of new members: Ms. Sarah Reid and Mr. Andrew “Ty” Braxton IV. Briefing 1. Briefing on petition of Giacomo Montuori, for a Special Use Permit (SUP) for a proposed commercial indoor amusement use, located at 700 Hardy Road, Vinton, Virginia, tax map number 060.20-05-64.00-0000, zoned GB General Business District. PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION AND PUBLIC HEARING NOVEMBER 19, 2020 PAGE 2 V. Comments of Planning Commissioners and Planning Staff VI. Adjournment of Work Session PUBLIC HEARING—7:00 P.M. VII. Call to Order—Roll Call VIII. Consent Agenda: 1. Consider approval of the minutes: a. Work Session and Public Hearing, August 2, 2018 b. Work Session, January 15, 2019 c. Work Session, March 7, 2019 d. Work Session, April 11, 2019 e. Work Session, June 7, 2019 f. Work Session, October 4, 2019 g. Work Session, November 14, 2019 IX. Public Hearing to receive comments concerning: 1. Petition of Giacomo Montuori, for a Special Use Permit (SUP) for a proposed commercial indoor amusement use, located at 700 Hardy Road, Vinton, Virginia, tax map number 060.20-05-64.00-0000, zoned GB General Business District. a. Chairman opens public hearing • Report from staff • Receive petitioner’s comments • Receive public comments • Commissioners discussion and questions b. Chairman closes public hearing c. Commission takes action on proposed petition for a special use permit X. Overview of the Survey Results for the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Updates 1. Sign Ordinance Revisions 2. Accessory Dwelling Unit Regulations 3. Homestay Regulations 4. Off-Street Parking Regulations 5. Dimensional Revisions 6. New and Revised Use Regulations XI. Adjournment WORK SESSION Ms. Tucei took the Zoom meeting live to Facebook and turned the meeting over to Chairman Liles. Chairman Liles welcomed everyone to the meeting and called it to order at 6:34 p.m. He asked Ms. McMillan for the roll call. She called the roll and all members were present. She also mentioned that the following members of Town Staff were present: Anita McMillan, Nathan McClung, Julie Tucei, and Susan Johnson. Ms. McMillan said she believed that the petitioner, Mr. Giacomo Montuori, would be joining the meeting at 7 p.m. Ms. McMillan then read the following statement, “I would like to confirm PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION AND PUBLIC HEARING NOVEMBER 19, 2020 PAGE 3 that our meeting is being held in accordance with Town Ordinance No. 1016 and Section 4-0.01(g) of Chapter 1289 of the 2020 Acts of the Virginia General Assembly, and everyone present is participating by electronic means. Chairman Liles the meeting is now yours.” The first item on the work session agenda was the introduction of new members: Ms. Sarah Reid and Mr. Andrew “Ty” Braxton. Chairman Liles first allowed the current members to introduce themselves and state how long they have each been on the Commission. He stated he has been on the Commission for about 6.5 years. Dave Jones stated he has been on the Commission for 15 to 20 years. Bob Benninger said he has been on the Commission for 3 to 4 years, and he mentioned that he is also on the Board of Zoning Appeals. Chairman Liles introduced Mr. Ty Braxton and asked him to tell a little about himself and what interests him in the Planning Commission. Mr. Braxton stated that he has been living off and on in Vinton for about 13 years. He said he was in the military so he was in and out constantly, but now has a family here, including three boys. He joined the Commission in June or July and wanted to help with any decision-making, especially since he has a family growing up in Vinton. Sarah Reid introduced herself and stated that this is her first meeting. She said she is happy to be here. Ms. Reid said she grew up in Vinton, then moved away for a while, then came back about six or so years ago. She stated that she has an interest in placemaking and an interest in the direction of the Town and the future of the Town. She thanked them for allowing her to join the Commission. Chairman Liles said he appreciated the two new members joining the Commission. The next item on the work session agenda was the briefing on the petition of Giacomo Montuori, for a Special Use Permit (SUP) for a proposed commercial indoor amusement use, located at 700 Hardy Road, Vinton, Virginia, tax map number 060.20-05-64.00-0000, zoned GB General Business District. Chairman Liles asked Ms. McMillan for the briefing, and she deferred it to Mr. McClung, who has been handling the application. Mr. McClung stated that this request was for a commercial indoor amusement use, specifically an arcade, for New York Pizza at 700 Hardy Road. He presented the staff report, a copy of which will be made a part of the permanent record of this meeting. Mr. McClung mentioned that there are several possible conditions that they might consider placing on this request, including disallowing Queen skill machines. Chairman Liles asked for comments from the Commissioners. Mr. Benninger asked how many parking spaces the petitioner will be required to have since it is an existing building. Mr. McClung stated that since it is an existing building, no additional parking would be required. Ms. McMillan said that staff could request additional parking on the already existing pavement by asking them to paint lines on it. Vice Chairman Jones asked if there would be any stormwater runoff requirements. Ms. McMillan said a site plan was approved a few years ago, and the existing lot is already impervious, so stormwater measures will not be required. Vice Chairman Jones asked if any comments had been received from any of the neighbors. Mr. McClung stated that no comments were received by Planning and Zoning or the Town Clerk. Ms. McMillan said that the adjoining property owners were notified by First Class Mail and also two notice of hearing signs were posted on the property, as well as a legal notice being placed in the Vinton Messenger. She stated that no comments or requests to attend the public hearing were received. Mr. Benninger asked if they plan to actually connect the two buildings or have a hallway to go from New York PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION AND PUBLIC HEARING NOVEMBER 19, 2020 PAGE 4 Pizza to the arcade area. Mr. McClung said they plan to use the existing patio area as a breezeway to go from the New York Pizza building to the arcade building. Mr. McClung pulled up the street view on his shared screen to show where the patio is located. Ms. McMillan suggested that Mr. McClung show them the plans approved in 2017. Mr. McClung shared the building plans on his screen. He stated that they still want to have the drive through serving ice cream and possibly coffee, and now also the arcade. Vice Chairman Jones asked if they plan to move the existing games from New York Pizza over to the arcade. Mr. McClung stated that they might not be able move the Queen skill games over, if this is a condition placed on the SUP, but could move the other games. Mr. McClung said he believes they intend the arcade games to be ticket based or similar where you redeem for prizes like Chuck E. Cheese or Dave & Buster’s. Chairman Liles asked how they could place a condition that disallows the Queen skill games when other places like gas stations have them. He wondered, if these are legal machines in Virginia, why would we limit one establishment and not another. Mr. McClung stated that four or more arcade machines triggers a special use permit at any type of business in Town. He mentioned that also in July 2021, the Virginia General Assembly is planning to ban Queen skill games. He said that the petitioner has indicated they want this to be a family friendly place. The General Assembly made the decision to keep the Queen games around for the next year due to the tax revenue they generate, especially with the shortfalls due to COVID- 19. However, he said they are leaning towards outlawing them in July. He stated that it was a good question, but they do have the ability to place conditions. The Town would not want it to turn into a mini- casino, and Mr. McClung said the petitioner had confirmed to him that they want it to be family friendly. Chairman Liles inquired if they would be able to put four Queen skill games over in the other building. Mr. McClung stated that they would not be required to remove the existing machines because they are on a separate parcel. He said that Special Use Permits stay with the property, so the Town wants to ensure it does not become something that is not wanted. Mr. McClung stated that he had spoken with the Town Attorney and was able to draft some language that can be included in the ordinance that would disallow skill games or gambling devices. Ms. McMillan mentioned that they may also want to consider adding the condition that a change of use must be obtained from the Building Commissioner for the amusement center. She reminded them that the ice cream/coffee uses are already approved. Mr. Braxton mentioned that in talking with Mr. Montouri, the focus would be the arcade center. He said that perhaps he and his wife could have some pizza while his boys play the arcade games. He mentioned that the arcade will be the primary focus, but the ice cream and coffee will be a bonus. Chairman Liles said he also talked with Mr. Montouri and was told it is really going to be more like a Dave & Buster’s and will really be a hands- off operation—mostly automated with no attendants. Players will turn in their winnings in at kiosks to obtain the prizes. Chairman Liles said he thinks it will be a good addition to the Town being family oriented. He asked if there were any further questions or comments. There were no further comments or questions. Vice Chairman Jones asked in what areas of Town Mr. Braxton and Ms. Reid live. Mr. Braxton said he lives behind the Kroger area, and Ms. Reid said she lives off Washington Avenue behind N. Pollard Street. Vice Chairman Jones asked what happened to former Commissioner Booth. Ms. McMillan stated that his term was up and there were other interested applicants, so Town Council decided to appoint a new member in his place. PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION AND PUBLIC HEARING NOVEMBER 19, 2020 PAGE 5 There was a brief discussion about some of the happenings around Town with new development, especially in the downtown area, like Vinyard Station, new dining areas for Farmburguesa and the Dogwood. Vice Chairman Jones mentioned that there are a couple of new restaurants including Granny’s Grill and Big Belly Pizza. With there being nothing further to discuss in the work session, it was adjourned by Chairman Liles at 7 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Liles called the regular session of the Vinton Planning Commission to order at 7 p.m. The first item on the agenda was the consent agenda for the approval of minutes from work sessions and public hearings held over the course of about a year and a half. These include: Work Session and Public Hearing, August 2, 2018; Work Session, January 15, 2019; Work Session, March 7, 2019; Work Session, April 11, 2019; Work Session, June 7, 2019; Work Session, October 4, 2019; and Work Session, November 14, 2019. Vice Chairman Jones made a motion to approve the minutes as written, and Mr. Benninger seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken, and all members voted in favor of the motion. The next item on the agenda was the public hearing to receive comments concerning the petition of Giacomo Montuori, for a Special Use Permit (SUP) for a proposed commercial indoor amusement use, located at 700 Hardy Road, Vinton, Virginia, tax map number 060.20-05-64.00-0000, zoned GB General Business District. Chairman Liles opened the public hearing at 7:03 p.m. He introduced Giacomo Montouri, the other Planning Commission members and Town Staff. He then asked Mr. McClung for the staff report. Mr. McClung briefly went over the staff report, a copy of which will be made a part of the permanent record. He shared his screen so that everyone could see the previously approved plans for the ice-cream and coffee area and the arcade area. He explained the reason for the SUP is that they want to have more than four coin operated or entertainment devices in the arcade area. Staff does recommend two conditions for this use. The first recommended condition is to disallow games of skill, and the second recommended condition is that the change of use process, according to the Virginia State Building Code, take place before it can become an amusement center. Chairman Liles asked if there were any comments from Mr. Montouri or members of the public. There were none. He asked Ms. McMillan if any comments had been received from the public prior to this meeting. She stated that no public comments were received. Chairman Liles asked if the petitioner had any questions for the Planning Commission. Mr. Montouri did not have any questions. Chairman Liles asked if the Commissioners had any questions for the petitioner, Mr. Montouri. There were no questions for the petitioner. Vice Chairman Jones said that it sounds straightforward for what Mr. Montouri is trying to do, and the Town will get a building in use again that has been empty for many years. Mr. Benninger asked, with the target audience being younger kids with the arcade games, will there be any skill games included? Mr. Montouri said there would not be any skill games—just arcade games like Chuck E. Cheese or Dave & Buster’s. There were no further questions or comments; therefore, Chairman Liles closed the public hearing at 7:08 p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION AND PUBLIC HEARING NOVEMBER 19, 2020 PAGE 6 He asked if there was a motion to approve or deny the request. Mr. Benninger made a motion to approve the special use permit with the condition that no skill games will be allowed in the arcade. Chairman Liles asked if there was a second to the motion. Ms. McMillan reminded him that there are two conditions that were mentioned by Mr. McClung earlier. She stated that Mr. Benninger might want to amend his motion to mention the two conditions as discussed. The motion to approve by Mr. Benninger was amended to include both conditions: No skill games; and the arcade cannot be established until the change of use has been approved by the Roanoke County Building Commissioner. Mr. Braxton seconded the amended motion. A roll call vote was taken, and all members voted in favor of the amended motion. Mr. Montuori was reminded that the Planning Commission has recommended approval of his request with two conditions to Town Council. Chairman Liles expressed appreciation to Mr. Montuori for his attendance. Mr. Montouri was informed that Town Council would hear the request on December 1, 2020, at 7 p.m. via Zoom. Mr. Montouri thanked the Commissioners. With that, Chairman Liles moved on to the next item, the overview of the survey results for the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Updates. Mr. McClung briefly reminded them of the update process so far over the past almost two years. He also reminded them about the survey that was crafted to collect public feedback for this process. He said the survey was advertised on social media and in the Vinton Messenger. He said he would go through the high points of the survey responses. Mr. McClung said the turnout for the survey was better for some uses, especially things people are passionate about like signs and home stays. He referred to the memo about the survey that was sent to them in their packets. Mr. McClung said there were six major topic areas covered on the survey including: Sign regulations; Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs); Homestay regulations; Off-street parking regulations; Dimensional revisions; and Proposed New and Revised Use Regulations. The first topic for discussion was exempted signs. Mr. McClung mentioned that a Supreme Court ruling in 2016 affected all localities’ sign ordinances. The case was Gilbert vs. Reed in Arizona. He stated that the Town could not regulate what type of flags can be flown in the Town as long as long as the flag is not obscene. Mr. McClung said that a flag that is up to 24 square feet would be the maximum size allowed. Vice Chairman Jones asked if Kroger would have to remove their large United States flag because it is probably about 20’ by 10’ in size. Chairman Liles said a regular citizen would likely not have a flag of that size. He asked if the size of the lot could dictate how big and tall the flag could be. Chairman Liles stated that he would not want to see Kroger be required to take down their large flag. Ms. McMillan mentioned that, in the past, the United States and State of Virginia flag have been exempt. However, she would need to check with the Town Attorney on the current regulations. She mentioned that the height is regulated by the building code because of footers needed for the pole. Mr. McClung said he would look into whether we can split the regulations between residential and commercial. Ms. McMillan said again that staff would have to check with the Town Attorney to see if the United States and Virginia State flags are still exempt, but the Supreme Court ruling may have changed it. Portable signs was the next item for discussion. Mr. McClung mentioned that the freestanding temporary signs and A-frame signs would not fall under this regulation. He said this would be for the large changeable letter temporary signs. He shared some photos to illustrate what signs this section covers. Mr. PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION AND PUBLIC HEARING NOVEMBER 19, 2020 PAGE 7 McClung stated that on the surveys there were comments both in favor of and opposed to the portable signs. Vice Chairman Jones mentioned that there used to be one of these on concrete blocks at one of the Vinton businesses. Mr. McClung said that does happen on occasion, where these type of temporary signs become more permanent in nature. He stated that temporary signs will not be grandfathered in and will have a 90-day grace period to comply or be removed. He mentioned that no off-site signs would be permitted. Mr. McClung said that commercial signs held or carried by a person or mannequin may be restricted because they can be distracting to traffic. Mr. Liles asked how those are different from the inflatable figure signs that blow up and down. Mr. McClung said the inflatable type signs are currently prohibited in the ordinance. Chairman Liles said he has seen more of those than the portable type signs recently. Mr. Braxton said his concern with these types of signs is with kids holding the signs for car washes for school teams. Mr. McClung confirmed that those would fall under this section. Mr. Liles said that he thinks that if William Byrd wants to do a car wash and have the cheerleaders holding the signs they should be able to do so. If they were not allowed to do so, he said it could take away the small town feel from our Town. He said that we could get into too many stipulations that could take away from the small hometown feel. Mr. Braxton said his main concern is that they should not be so close to the road holding the signs. He stated that the small town feel definitely needs to there, but we need to be sure they are not so close to the road holding up the signs. Mr. McClung said that was a very good point, and he will revisit it as he works on the revisions. Chairman Liles said it should definitely be revisited. Vice Chairman Jones said the car washes would only be held for a few hours and the signs would only be there while it is going on, not for days and days. He mentioned that the other sign flippers may not be there for days and days either. Ms. Reid asked if there could be a requirement that the sign flippers must be a certain footage from the road. Ms. McMillan said it would be difficult to enforce, but the police may be able to enforce it as no standing in the right of way. Mr. Braxton stated that perhaps the Town could have a police officer on site during the events to show support. Chairman Liles said that would be a whole other ballgame. He stated that it costs the Town a lot of money to have a police officer stationary for several hours at an event. He said they could enforce the no standing in the right-of-way as needed. He mentioned that it is a good idea, but he is not sure it would be feasible for the Town. Ms. McMillan said signs are ever changing, and there are always complaints about the ordinance being too strict or too lenient. She stated that it is very difficult issue. Chairman Liles mentioned gas station signs and how other nearby localities have gas station businesses who have tons of signs. He said he agrees with Ms. McMillan in that it is hard to find a happy medium with signs. Mr. McClung moved on to discuss the enforcement of the sign regulations. He stated that in the new ordinance, it is proposed that no permits be required for temporary signs. He said the Town would just enforce the regulations that the ordinance lays out. He mentioned that many localities are doing this type of ordinance now. Mr. McClung said staff is recommending a total of 32 square feet maximum for temporary signs, and he showed an example of how the 32 square feet limit would look. He stated that it would make enforcement easier by not requiring a sign permit for temporary signs. Chairman Liles mentioned that the revenue generated for the Town from those type of sign permits is probably not too great. PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION AND PUBLIC HEARING NOVEMBER 19, 2020 PAGE 8 Mr. McClung briefly discussed the non-commercial speech signage including such items as political, religious, etc. He pointed out that this is the portion of the survey where the comment was made about the name “Billy Bob”, which Mr. Jones briefly mentioned earlier. Next for discussion, was the sign measurements rules. Mr. McClung said that currently staff uses a square or rectangle to figure out the size of a sign. He shared a picture showing how lines would be drawn tightly around the sign to calculate the area. Mr. McClung mentioned that, when a business closes, the current regulations state that the sign must be removed within two years of the closing. He stated that the new regulations do not have to follow that time limit. He said we could require that the signs be removed within six months, or maybe a year. Vice Chairman Jones mentioned that, this year, with COVID-19, it has been a unique challenge for many businesses. Ms. Reid asked how he came up with 6 months as the limit. He stated that other localities use six months for removal as a rule. He said that usually six months of no activity is a sign that the business is gone. Chairman Liles said six months might be too short for seasonal type businesses. He also said that a business may try to sell out, and it may take longer than six months to sell it. Vice Chairman Jones asked if the same nine to eleven people answered all the questions on the survey. Mr. McClung stated that about six people answered all the questions, and the rest of the respondents answered items about which they were passionate. Mr. McClung discussed the Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) next. He stated that people overwhelmingly support ADUs, but there are some things to consider regarding ADUs. For instance, should the ADUs be allowed to be rented out or would they have to be occupied by an owner or family member. Both Chairman Liles and Vice Chairman Jones said they should be able to be rented out. Mr. McClung said they could consider ADUs being only for aging in place, not rentals. Chairman Liles said he believed that they should be allowed to be rented out. Mr. Braxton asked if we are talking about renting homes or something like airbnb. He was told that it could possibly be like airbnb. Chairman Liles said the Commission has talked about this in the past. He stated that it would bring more visitors into Town. He wondered why we would not want visitors to help downtown become a destination. Vice Chairman Jones said he thinks the Town has fallen behind times on this. He said this is the way people do things now. He said we should move ahead. Ms. McMillan wanted to know if they thought that the property owner should also reside on the property. Both Vice Chairman Jones and Chairman Liles answered yes to that question. Ms. McMillan said she was glad to hear that they felt that way. Mr. McClung said of those who took the survey—most agreed that the owner should live there on the property. Vice Chairman Jones said we could even have some ADUs in Town now of which we are not aware. Mr. McClung stated that he does not see any currently advertised in Vinton on airbnb. Mr. Benninger asked about the detached dwelling units and how they would be served by water and sewer. Mr. McClung said that it is proposed that the water and sewer come from the main structure on the lot, and not be separately metered for the ADU. Mr. Benninger asked if there is a meter connection for the ADU, who would be responsible to pay the water bill. Mr. McClung said that could be a nightmare. Mr. McClung also discussed potential complaints from surrounding property owners. He said one suggestion is an appeal process held before PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION AND PUBLIC HEARING NOVEMBER 19, 2020 PAGE 9 Council or the Town Manager. However, one questions may be, “Would there be a maximum number of complaints before it goes to appeals? “ Vice Chairman Jones said it would come down to fairness, too. He said that perhaps the neighbor just makes complaints that are not legitimate versus having police arrest ADU occupants for breaking laws. Mr. Braxton said he likes the idea of an appeals process. Chairman Liles said it would have to be determined if the complaint was from a disgruntled neighbor or not. He said that he agreed with Mr. Braxton on the appeals process with a mediator to determine if there are valid complaints. Vice Chairman Jones mentioned that it could be like the complaints that are received from the triplexes along Ruddell Road. As the meeting was running long, Ms. McMillan suggested that this discussion be continued into another future Zoom meeting. However, they decided to continue the meeting on for a bit longer. Mr. McClung asked if there should be a limit on the amount of time the unit is rented out within a year or by establishing a maximum stay of 14 days. He said if the stay is longer than 30 days, it is a more typical rental than a homestay. He asked them to email any comments they have on this to him. Chairman Liles asked what the difference is between a homestay and a rental. He asked if there were different taxes or what the difference is between them. Mr. McClung stated that the taxes for a homestay are like the hotel tax. If you rent it on a platform such as airbnb, there are taxes, but if you rent with a lease from an owner or leasing agent, there are no taxes. Chairman Liles asked if there are a lot in Town. Mr. McClung said he checks airbnb regularly, and there are none currently. Ms. McMillan said people do inquire with Planning and Zoning if they can do homestays. Mr. McClung said the office also gets requests for ADUs from time to time. Vice Chairman Jones asked if there have ever been any of the health units put in since they had to amend the ordinance as the state required. Ms. McMillan said there have been none yet. Chairman Liles asked if he had an ADU for a relative, and if his relative dies, could he rent it out to anyone? Mr. McClung said homestay regulations deal specifically with airbnb, etc. Mr. McClung said the rentals are intended to be short-term stays, not long term. Chairman Liles asked how the Town would know if someone uses a former ADU as a homestay. Mr. McClung said there would need to be an annual permit procedure to keep track of them. He said most of the homestay websites will work with local governments on getting the taxes remitted--they are becoming more transparent. The next item that was discussed was alternative financial institutions. The options for these institutions are to allow by Special Use Permit (SUP), or prohibit them, or allow them by right. Mr. McClung said this category would include pawnshops, title lenders, precious metal dealers, payday lenders, and check cashing establishments. Mr. Benninger asked where pawnshops are allowed currently. Mr. McClung stated that they are allowed in the GB and CB Districts. Chairman Liles said pawnshops are more like stores in which people like to shop. He said a pawnshop is like a consignment shop, but you can also sell items for money. He said it seems like a very different thing than payday or title lenders. He stated that a pawnshop is a place people actually shop and look for deals in. He said more people go to shop at pawnshops than for loans. Ms. Reid said she agreed with Chairman Liles. Chairman Liles said a precious metal dealers could be a jeweler. He stated that he understands why the payday lender and title lender places would be included in these regulations. Whereas pawnbrokers charge taxes on sales, and the Town sees revenue from their sales. He asked why pawnbrokers and precious metals dealers are lumped in this PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION AND PUBLIC HEARING NOVEMBER 19, 2020 PAGE 10 category. Mr. Braxton said probably because it is an alternative way for money to be exchanged. Chairman Liles said they are much more than that. Ms. McMillan stated that staff can check see if those types of uses can be differentiated. Mr. McClung said we could tailor the definition to remove pawnshops and precious metal dealers. Chairman Liles mentioned most jewelers would buy items from customers. Vice Chairman Jones said he agrees with putting the payday loan and title lenders in this category. Mr. McClung said he would look into revising the definition. The next item to be discussed was Research and Development facilities. Mr. McClung said that sometimes you have Research and Development types of businesses that are not industrial in nature. He stated that in the past this was a grey area because, if they did certain things, they are considered industrial and would not allowed in the downtown area. Vice Chairman Jones mentioned some of the businesses in Midway as examples, and Ms. McMillan said they are allowed there because they are zoned industrial. However, the Town is looking into allowing some Research and Development uses in CB and GB, perhaps by SUP. Vice Chairman Jones said you could control it with the SUP. Chairman Liles mentioned the HIVE and how it may have these types of businesses from time to time. Mr. McClung stated that the HIVE is a good example. Chairman Liles said those type of businesses could lead to higher paying jobs, and the workers visiting shops and restaurants in Downtown. Pet Daycare Facilities was the next topic. Mr. McClung said outdoor and/or indoor components would be the difference for these uses. He went over the standards that would have to be met by these businesses: limits on number of animals that could be outside at a time; dawn to dusk limit on outdoor activities; and regulations on overnight stays and soundproofing. Ms. Reid asked if there are regulations about the pet waste being cleaned up and not running off into waterways. Ms. McMillan stated that Field of Dreams had a condition put on their zoning permit about picking up after the pets they have at their facility. The final use to be covered was mixed-use buildings with both commercial and residential uses. Ms. McMillan said the current ordinance states that residential uses have to be located above or to the rear of the business use. She said they want to incentivize residential uses. Chairman Liles said we do not want to change that, but only increase the amount of floor area that is allowed to be residential. He said he likes more people living downtown and in Vinton. Chairman Liles asked for further questions or comments. Vice Chairman Jones said Mr. McClung did a great job with the surveys and putting them in a format that is easy to understand. Mr. McClung said we are all a team and are all working hard to get this together. Mr. Benninger said he was glad that Mr. Braxton and Ms. Reid joined the Commission Chairman Liles stated that the Town has continued to move forward at a rapid pace despite the pandemic. He said Town Staff stays busy in these times, and he really appreciates all the hard work that Planning and Zoning Staff does to move the Town forward. PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION AND PUBLIC HEARING NOVEMBER 19, 2020 PAGE 11 With there being nothing further to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m. on a motion by Vice Chairman Jones and a second by Ms. Reid. Respectfully Submitted, Anita McMillan Planning Commission Secretary