You are on page 1of 111

AGENDA

PLANNING COMMISSION
TOWN OF WARRENTON
May 17, 2016
7:00 PM

1. Call to order and establishment of a quorum.


2. Approval of Minutes February 16, 2016 and March 15, 2016.
3. Public Hearing
A. Commission Permit #01-2016: Dog Park Discussion of an application to locate a dog park, to
be operated by the Town of Warrenton, at the end of the Fifth Street Parking lot (GPIN 6984-423052-000) per Article 11-3.8 of the Zoning Ordinance. The dog park would be approximately
.36 acre in size and would consist of fencing and gates, a water fountain, benches, and signage.
Improvements for drainage are anticipated on the adjacent property owned by the Town (GPIN
6984-42-2290-000). The Future Conceptual Land Use Map in the Comprehensive Plan indicates
that the property is identified for public/semi-public non-intensive use, which is suitable for park
use. The applicant and property owner is the Town of Warrenton.
B. Town Code Amendment Condition of Premises. This is an amendment to Section 8-63 of
the Notice to Cut Weeds to add language on the development status of the property and indicate
overgrown properties could be considered a nuisance. The applicant is the Town of Warrenton.
C. Town Code Amendment Mobile Food Vendors Discussion of proposed amendments to
Section 9-69 (d) of the Itinerant Merchant regulations that would allow mobile food vendors to
locate on specified properties within certain areas per the Mobile Food Vendor Policy and
Procedures document through the Town Managers office. The applicant is the Town of
Warrenton.
D. ZTA 16-01 Mobile Food Vendors. Discussion of proposed amendments to the Public SemiPublic, Commercial and Central Business Districts, and Industrial District in Articles 3-4.9.2
(PSP), 3-4.10.2 (C), 3-4.11.2 (CBD), 3-4.12.2 (I) and Article 12 - Definitions of the Zoning
Ordinance to add mobile food vendor as a use with the condition that the site must meet the
requirements of the Mobile Food Vendor Policy and Procedures document through the Town
Managers office. The applicant is the Town of Warrenton.
E. ZTA 16-02 Central Business District (CBD) Discussion of proposed amendments to add to
Articles 3-4.11.2 and 3-4.11.3 of the Zoning Ordinance to add hotels, bed and breakfast, inns and
tourist homes to allowable uses in the Central Business District (CBD). The applicant is the
Town of Warrenton.
4. Old Business
5. Adjourn

MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
TOWN OF WARRENTON
February 16, 2016 7:00 P.M.
The regular meeting of the Town of Warrenton Planning Commission convened on Tuesday, February
16, 2016 at 7:00 PM in the Municipal Building.
The following members were present: Dr. John Harre, Chairman; Ms. Brandie Schaeffer, ViceChairman; Ms. Susan Helander; Mr. John Kip; Mr. Lowell Nevill; and Mr. Brett Hamby. Ms. Sarah
Sitterle, Director of Planning and Community Development represented staff. Mr. Ali Zarabi and Mr.
Yakir Lubowsky, Ex-Officio member, were absent.
A quorum was present.
Approval of Minutes
Dr. Harre asked if anyone had any changes for the September 15, 2015 and January 19, 2016 minutes.
Mr. Kip made motion to approve September 15, 2015 minutes as submitted. Ms. Helander seconded
the motion. All were in favor and the motion passed unanimously (6-0).
Mr. Kip made motion to approve January 19, 2016 minutes as submitted. Mr. Nevill seconded the
motion. All were in favor and the motion passed unanimously (6-0).
Public Hearing

I-PUD Regulations Text Amendment Discussion of proposed amendments to the Planned


Unit Development (PUD) regulations specific to the Industrial Planned Unit Development
(I-PUD) overlay district.

The proposal would modify the minimum standards to allow for a revised land use mix, a change in
the uses, and addition of a waiver procedure for Town requirements. Staff referred to the PUD
ordinances from other local jurisdictions, including the towns of Culpeper and Leesburg, Fauquier and
Prince William counties, and the City of Manassas for comparison purposes. The following are some
highlights from the comparison:

Changes to the maximum land use mix for commercial use is not standard among the
comparative ordinances. The current maximum of 35% commercial use is proposed to be
increased to a maximum of 60%.
Changes proposed for the open space areas appear to be relatively consistent.
No other jurisdictions have the same process for waivers of regulations.

Some jurisdictions do not allow for residential uses among the industrial mixed-use
development proposals.

Ms. Sitterle suggests a text change to modify shall to may, Use definitions/Use terms tweaks for
consistency, and additional discussions with the applicant to resolve the remaining items. Ms. Sitterle
then read the Staff Comments provided to Applicant:

On page 1 under Article 3-5.2.1, the second paragraph references Sections 3-5.4.5.3 and 35.4.6. It is unclear where this reference came from. There is no mention of these sections under
the 2009 Amendment or 2006 PUD regulations.
What is the impact of the mixed-use residential component? How much would be considered
commercial use? How much is residential? The amendment proposes to remove the 10%
maximum cap on apartments.
What is the impact of residential use?
The proposed text amendment suggests a change from a maximum 15% residential
use/mixed-use residential to a maximum of 35% residential use/mixed-use residential,
resulting in a 20% increase.
Drive through facilities are considered a permissible use in all other applicable districts with a
Special Use Permit this proposed change would make drive through facilities by-right
Internal setbacks may be reduced to 0 feet with an approved waiver, per the proposed Section
3-5.2.10.5 (waiver/modification provisions for PUDs).
The proposed waiver/modification provisions under Section 3-5.2.10.5 would allow for a
waiver of Subdivision, Zoning Ordinance and other Town requirements (presumably the PFM
and other ordinances such as the Town Code).
This would also allow for a waiver or modification to the sign regulations in Article 6,
which could change the size, number, orientation, location, functionality and design of
signage.
The waiver/modification requests may not be common. There is concern that this waiver
process may replace a function of the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) with variance requests
related to setbacks.

Mr. John Foote, representing F&R Development and the Springer Properties, said his intentions were
not to create a modification for all PUDs. The rezoning application will follow this text amendment
because lately they have found jurisdictions prefer having text against which to evaluate the zoning. It
was also concluded through meetings with Ms. Sitterle and Mr. Whitson Robinson that because the
proposed development is more consistent with the uses in the I-PUD than with the C-PUD, the
proposed I-PUD amendments are smaller than the amendments needed to fit under a C-PUD. It made
sense to stay with the I-PUD and consider amendments.
Mr. Foote went on to discuss the reasons why the I-PUD rezoning made sense for the town. He then
asked the members of the Planning Commission to consider tabling any action until after the meeting
next week between Ms. Sitterle, Mr. Robinson and himself to clarify the language of the I-PUD.
Ms. Schaeffer asked how this text amendment was doing in terms of timing. Mr. Robinson stated that
he and Ms. Sitterle are concerned with timing. Although they would like to move forward, delaying the
Commission vote until the next meeting should allow sufficient time to meet and ensure agreement on
proposed amendments. Dr. Harre reiterated the criteria that Mr. Nevill brought up, which require
consideration with this text amendment, such as the impact on schools and Public Utilities.
2

Mr. Robinson responded, while the town does not handle school issues, the town has been very
conscientious about having a good relationship with the county and talking to supervisors in the past
about the impact of residential zoning for areas not originally zoned residential. Ms. Schaeffer thought
this decision should be made at the Town Council level.
Ms. Schaeffer asked Ms. Sitterle for a preference on the best process to get the remaining concerns and
waivers resolved within the allocated timeline. Ms. Sitterle believed that with the meeting between set
for next week; staff should be able to bring the text amendment back next month.
Mr. Kip motioned that the I-PUD Regulations Text Amendment be brought back to the March 15,
2016 meeting. Ms. Schaeffer seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion passed
unanimously (6-0).
New Business

Urban Development Area Grant Consideration of a motion to recommend the Town


Council accept from the Commonwealth of Virginia Office of Intermodal Planning and
Investment a grant for technical on-call consultant services in the amount of $65,000 from the
Urban Development Area (UDA) program.

Ms. Denise Harris, Senior Planner, Planning and Community Development Department, made the
Planning Commission aware of a funding opportunity for updating the comprehensive plan. The staff
has been exploring funding opportunities to leverage limited town resources. The first opportunity to
present itself is through the Virginia Secretary of Transportation Office of Intermodal Planning and
Investments UDA grant program. This program was enabled by Virginia Code 2.2-229, to offer
grants for professional planning consultant assitance to local governments and regional entities to
establish and support UDAs. This funding opportunity is an award for technical assistance in the form
of direct on-call consultant support to assist local governments in one or more of the following:
Plan for and designate at least one urban/billage development area in their comprehensive plan,
Revise as appropriate applicable land use of ordinances (including appropriate zoning
classifications and subdivision ordinances) to incorporate the principles of traditional
neghborhood design (see 15.2-2223.1 of the Code of Virginia) and
Assist with public participation processes, and other related tasks.
The Town is a natural fit for this grant program as it is already designated as a Service district for
Fauquier County and the majority of the Towns current zoning already meets the desired density
outlined in the state code. In addition, the Towns goals of walkability and traditional neighborhood
design have been in place for over twenty-five years. An additional benefit to UDA designation is that
the Town would become eligible for HB2 transportation funds. Currently, the only projects eligible for
HB2 funds are associated with a Corridors of Statewide Significance (i.e. U.S. Route 29); those that
address capacity needs on regional networks (i.e. I-66); and improvements to support UDAs. A UDA
designation would enable the Town of compete for HB2 funds beyond projects associated with U.S.
Route 29.
The Town successfully applied to the UDA grant program and was awarded $65,000 with no match
required. If the Town chooses to proceed, staff will work with the assigned consultant team to scope
3

the project into the overall comprehensive plan process, thus potentially lowering the resources needs
of the Request for Proposal (RFP).
Ms. Brandie Schaffer made a motion to recommend to the Town Council that the Town of Warrenton
accept the Commonwealth of Virginia Office of Intermodal Planning and Investment grant for
technical on-call consultant services in the amount of $65,000 from the Urban Development Area
program. Mr. John Kip seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion passed (6-0).
Work Session

2017-2022 Capital Improvement Program (DRAFT) Six-year program of public


improvements to coordinate infrastructure, available financial resources and the Warrenton
Comprehensive Plan. This is the draft listing of projects for the new program.

The Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for the coming year represents a significant investment in
Town infrastructure. It is a six-year, 2017-2022 term, scheduling of municipal projects. The draft
program is compiled by staff from requests and recommendations by each of the operating departments
in the Town, which include Planning, Public Works, Utility, Police, Recreation, and Fire/Rescue
departments. The proposed projects are coordinated with available funding and reasonable prospects
for implementation in the requested year with regard to availability of property, design, and other
factors. Projects are assembled based on staging and prospective implementation to maximize the
effectiveness and coordination of the program. Some of the projects were drawn from suggestions in
the 2000-2025 Comprehensive Plan, such as the timing and expansion of Town infrastructure.
The Planning Commission is the first forum for review of the program and its projects, and began its
review last fall with the review of the previous program and the identification of projects for the new
program. This insures that those involved in the future development of the community and the
comprehensive planning of that future has the opportunity to assess the viability of projects that
comprise the program. Both public and private infrastructure improvements are required to be
reviewed by the Planning Commission as advisors to the Town for the coordination of future planning
and development. Projects for the draft CIP have been reveiwed by Town Council committees for
inclusion and justification.
Dr. Harre asked each department head to go over the projects for this year, provide justification, and
answer any questions the commission may have.
PUBLIC WORKS/UTILITIES
Mr. Paul Bernard, Assistant Director, Public Works/Utilities reviewed the summary sheet that
identifies $2.1 million dollars of capital improvements for Public Utilities. He went on to describe the
four main items for Public Works. The first item is the Water Treatment Plant Physical Plant
Expansion at a cost of $511.837 to add a new a chemical building, allowing the storage of chemicals in
a safer manner and improving efficiency. The new building would accommodate the transition from
chlorine gas to chlorine liquid.
The second item is the Sewer Line Rehabilitation Program, which is necessary because the system has
been under stress for a long time from infiltration and inflow. There has been some flow monitoring,
but Public Works/Utilities needs to proceed into more issolation work to identify key areas to target for
rehabilitation at a cost of $800,000.
4

The third item, which is currently under review with the Virginia Department of Health, is the
activation of Well #3 for $415,000. The well is located at the end of Academy Hill Road near the
wastewater station. This well has been retired for a period of time and it needs to be brought online as
it would provide about 300 gallons a minute. The well was taken off-line because of some radio
nuclides that were present in the water, which can removed with a proposed treatment process.
The fourth item is the Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement for $175,000. The current process
involves rotating biological contactors that have been in service for a long time. These are large discs
that carry a media and a biogrowth that circulate around on a shaft. The shafts are starting to
breakdown and need to be replaced. New technology is available for the denitrification process so the
proposal is to modify the Wastewater Treatment Plant to include a moving bed bioreactor (MBBR)
system that will replace the current process while improving treatment levels.
Mr. Bernard then presented the Public Works summary sheet of capital improvements totaling
$809,900. The first item is Broadview Avenue for $10,000 that initially represented the Towns 2% fee
with VDOT, covering the remaining balance under the HB2 Program. However that funding is not
looking good because of state-wide significance, so other funding mechanisms such as revenue share
are being considered. The $10,000 is a place holder to keep the project alive until funding is found.
Next item is a Traffic Signal for the intersection of Falmouth Street and East Shirley Avenue, near
Walmart. There is an application for 50% VDOT Revenue Sharing in process, which would bring the
cost down to $217,000. Funding from Walmart still needs to be locked-up. The first portion of funding
available from Walmart is from proffers with an additional $60,000 when the traffic impacts are
demonstrated to be a result of Walmart activities. There is a traffic consultant we are working with to
provide information to Walmart so we can claim our money to offset the cost of a traffic signal.
Ms. Schaeffer commented that funding from the Walmart proffer was brought to their attention by an
applicant through a rezoning. She asked Mr. Bernard if there had been a concerted effort to identify
any other situations sitting out there where the town was proffered money for transportation
improvements that subsequently were not used. Mr. Bernard replied that he was not aware of any other
proffered monies, but would certainly be willing to investigate.
There is a Drainage Improvement project for $125,400 that has been needed for pipe deteriorations at
the intersection of Cleveland Street and East Shirley Avenue and running diagonally through the
church parking lot. This drains a fairly good area of the town and is inadequate in size along with its
deterioration.
Next is a Truck Scale for the shop at $70,000. This is to help tie street sweeping into the storm-water
permitting criteria for nutrient removal. This requires that the town document the amount of street
sweeping to help make the case.
Ms. Schaeffer then asked about the location of Parking Lot E on the list for $48,500 of improvements.
Mr. Bernard replied that Parking Lot E is located behind the Post Office, which currently has some
fairly good sized ruts from surface runoff because the drainage system is not functioning.
POLICE DEPARMENT
Chief Louis Battle, Town of Warrenton Police Department, presented four items totaling $412,913 for
the Police Department. The first item is the replacement of three (3) high-mileage police cruisers for
$215,727. The fleet averages 9 years old and 90,000 miles. The vehicles being replaced are: a 2004
5

Crown Victoria with 108,000 miles; a 2004 Crown Victoria with 110,000 miles; and a 2008 Crown
Victoria with 84,000 miles that was lost when it was transferred over to the new IT Directors position.
Funding includes equipping vehicles with laptops, wireless camera systems, first aid, and emergency
equipment.
The second item is for the P25 Compliant Radio System Upgrade which is actually a placeholder as it
will soon be coming online for the county. The towns portion is $185,656 and could come due
anytime in the next three years. The P25 Compliant Radio System Upgrade is a new $13 to $16 million
dollar system and our portion covers the replacement of all vehicle radios and some handheld radios.
The third item is Base Mobile Server/Field reporting Upgrade for $3,828 that covers the licensing for a
block of 5 laptops. With the purchase of the three vehicles with laptops, we will exceed the current
licensing so we need to cover the licensing for those laptops.
The fourth and final item is $7,720 for the VA Supreme Court Citation Data Software that will allow
wireless upload of citations written using vehicle laptops. While this will be a convenience for now, it
will soon be a requirement for all municipalities using the e-Summons System.
PARKS & RECREATION
Ms. Margaret Rice, Director of Parks & Recreation provided information on eight items totaling
$1,190.258. The Warrenton Aquatic & Recreation Factility (WARF) opened in 2007 and has began
replacing and refurbishing some of the equipment this year. The first item is $35,000 to replace some
of the original equipment that is heavily used with an estimated life-cycle of five years, but which has
been in place from the beginning. Next year we would like to refurbish the Woodway Treadmills and
add Arc Trainers. The Arc Trainers would add a new dimension to what is offered and clientele that
the WARF is trying to attract. There are some world-class runners using the facility now and one is an
Olympic hopeful who has brought ESPN to the facility to film her.
WARF Facility Upgrades for $49,500 to improve the facility and service. This item includes the
installation of a permanent wall between the classroom and fitness room. Currently there is a
temporary wall that moves when someone bumps into it. The other is replacing the touch-pads for the
timing system as they have gone beyond their life cycle and the manufacturer will not service them
next year because they are so old. We also would like to put a fence with gate around the trash area
behind the WARF because what is there does not work and allows trash to blow around. Surveillance
camera upgrades as those are used all the time. Also to switch from paper towels to hand dryers with
the expectation to recoup investment in about three years along with being environmentally friendly.
The next project is a Micro Golf Course that the Recreation Committee has been investigating. It
would be located to the left-side of the WARF so existing staff can manage it. Patrons would come to
the frontdesk, purchase their game and receive the ball and club, then exit through the left-side door.
Micro Golf is like mini-golf and we would like to phase that in over two years. The first year cost of
$50,000 would be for design, installation of fence and the first 9 holes with the second year adding the
second 9 holes at $35,000.
Mr. Nevill and Mrs. Schaeffer questioned the feasability of a Micro Golf Course that was not
mentioned in the Comprehensive plan or from a citizen survey. Ms. Schaeffer stated golf is a sport that
is dying fast with country clubs having problems staying open and the county has taken this off their
Parks iniative feeling without a demand for someone to privately install Putt Putt Golf then it will
probabally not generate enough revenue to cover associated maintenance costs. Ms. Rice suggested
6

checking with Larry as they are planning to install with the pool at the Marshall Center. Mrs. Schaeffer
said she was at Marshalls last Park Board Meeting and it was removed from their project list citing
maintenance and inability to find any public sector investment. Mr. Nevill and Mrs. Schaeffer feel
without some sort of survey from the citizens survey or ranking/understanding, this sort of popped out
of nowhere without being mentioned in the comprehensive plan and moved to the top of the list. Ms.
Rice responded that there was not a Parks section in the comprehensive plan, which is why they are so
excited to become a part of it as the last time the comprehensive plan was updated there was not a
Parks & Recreation Department for the Town because the WARF just opened and the parks were
managed by the county. The Recreation Committee has been looking for ideas to generate revenue and
while there has not been a formal survey, they have been talking to other Parks Departments that have
them and in general all report positive results. Staff has been actively talking with youth in the
community to see if there was interest and results have been positive. That stated, it is there for your
consideration and any feedback is appreciated and welcome.
The next item is Vehicle Replacement at a cost of $27,000. The vehicle being replaced is 20 years old
and the police department and public works had it prior, but because of reliability issues it was passed
on to the Parks Department. The check engine light stays on and it does not have heat or air
conditioning, but they are grateful to have had something other than personal vehicles. Since it is
getting to the end of its life, they would like to replace it with a new vehicle.
Timber Fence Trail is in the CIP because an application has been filed for a VDOT TAP grant, which
could fund 80% of this project. If the grant is received, the Town would pay expenses for the project
and be reimbursed for the 80%. Fauquier County has committed to half of the remaining funding
leaving the Towns net commitment at $91,876. While it does seem unlikely we will get this grant
funding, we have kept it on the list until the grant final determination letters come out mid-June.
Mr. Kip remarked that the Planning Commission was familiar with the Timber Fence Trail as it was
discussed about three years ago when it was not in the CIP. He understands the funding is high, but
knows this is a project the community has been wanting that would benefit many citizens so it needs to
be considered instead of the Micro Golf.
Ms. Rice said this is a project she would like to see completed, but given the lack of funding it does not
look promising because it is so large. Completing this project in phases would be difficult since the
trail would need to run from the WARF across wetlands, across Fauquier High School property,
around the athletic fields and through woods to connect to the Timber Fence Parkway. The project
does not contain any fluffy items like call boxes. Fauquier County has committed $91,876 (10%)
toward this project. Ms. Rice says she is open to any funding suggestions.
The Depot Park is the next item for $50,000 and would be located behind the Towns former train
depot. They asked for a phased approach to get all the elements discussed during the concept stage that
went through the Recreation Committee. The money in the out years would possibly add a restroom.
Parking for Soccer Fields at $20,000 would cover the improvements such as adding gravel to the area
off of US Route 211. They are trying to accommodate as many cars as possible because there is a
parking problem at the WARF every weekend and they want to exist peacefully especially with the
hockey league gaining in popularity.
Ms. Schaeffer asked if the leagues had been asked to assist by scheduling the games further apart,
thinking this would help alleviate the overcrowding of the parking area. Ms. Rice responded that she
7

has reached out to the leagues without any success and will definitely address when it comes time to
renegotiate the lease that has four years remaining. The leagues have taken the financial responsibility
for maintaining the fields and offer a great service for the local children and families. Ms. Rice also
mentioned the overflow parking available at the high school that is advertised via large signs during
the weekend, but many families do not want to use the overflow parking.
The last item is Fields Trail Completion for $40,000 that would finish asphalt paving of a mile
portion of the trail loop that goes around the soccer fields. As Mr. Kip knows as a user, a portion of the
trail is still gravel and would be nice to have one surface. Mr. Kip asked if there was any way they
could get a Boy Scout to revitalize the signs put in five years ago that have been knocked down. Ms.
Rice said she was sure she could find someone to take on that project.

Update on the Comprehensive Plan Ms. Denise Harriss update on the RFP Work Group
meeting and status of the process.

Ms. Harris began by prefacing the Comprehensive Plan update would be an ongoing conversation. As
stated at the last Planning Commission meeting on January 19, 2016, she would be presenting the
Work Groups recommendations. The Work Group developed and considered an exhaustive list of
comprehensive plan deliverables. The Work Group was surveyed on their priorities to determine items
were essential to the comprehensive plan update or not deemed as essential by a majority of those
surveyed. The Attachment I of the Staff Report for the Planning Commission, dated February 12,
2016, contains the Work Group Essential Scoping Items and Prioritization Survey percentages from
each theme.
At the conclusion of the Work Group activities, the members stressed the overall importance that, in
their opinion, the scope emphasizes demographics, housing, public utilities, economic resources,
design, and multi-modal transportation. It was expressed that the comprehensive plan should continue
to be aspirational in nature with a vision that is forward reaching in terms of goals and strategies.
Finally, the Work Group strongly recommended the comprehensive plan emphasize data and
implementation components to enhance Knowledge-Based Governance.
The 2016 Timeline for the Comprehensive Plan Update is as follows:

MARCH Presentation to Town Council on scoping and resources needs for the
comprehensive plan update.
APRIL / MAY Town Council Work Sessions and Budget adoption.
MAY / JUNE Comprehensive Plan Request for Proposal is drafted based on budget
and released.
JUNE / AUGUST Comprehensive Plan proposals accepted finalist interviews,
scoping negotiations, and final contract award.
LATE SUMMER Comprehensive Plan work launched with consultant team.

Ms. Harris shared she is starting the public engagement process now. During the month of March she
will be going to all the schools in Warrenton to ask students (Kindergarten 12th grade) what they
value most, what are their favorite places, and what would they like in the future. Come April she is
expecting to get back hundreds of responses and will try to do a presentation possibly tied to some sort
of large event in the community. The point being to share the student provided information then tell the
8

adults it is their turn to provide input. The public engagement starts now while working with consultant
team will begin late summer.
The next step is for the Planning Commission to have a discussion about what you think came out of
the Work Group. Do you agree with it? Are there things that give you concern? Are there things that
you see missing? And again this is an ongoing conversation so we do not need to solve everything
tonight as the RFP will not be going out for a few more months, but I wanted to provide you with an
update and get your thoughts.
Mr. Nevill commented how he liked the use of Survey Monkey and a few artfully designed questions
to gather useful information. Ms. Harris replied that when she is ready for the presentation to the
community she would like to have a survey ready to go for the community. She will also be asking
department heads and the Planning Commission if there are questions they want the community to
answer, which will help her to refine the survey for the community.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 PM.
Minutes Submitted by Karen Kowalski.
Minutes Approved on _________________.

MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
TOWN OF WARRENTON
March 15, 2016 7:00 P.M.
The regular meeting of the Town of Warrenton Planning Commission convened on Tuesday,
March 15, 2016 at 7:00 PM in the Municipal Building.
The following members were present: Dr. John Harre, Chair; Ms. Brandie Schaeffer, Vice-Chair;
Mr. John Kip; Mr. Ali Zarabi; Mr. Lowell Nevill; Ms. Susan Helander, and Mr. Brett Hamby.
Ms. Sarah Sitterle, Director of Planning and Community Development represented staff.
A Quorum was present.
Approval of Minutes
Dr. John Harre recommended the following edits to the December 15, 2015 minutes:
Page 7

The next to the last paragraph, Town Council is a quasi-judiciary function; change to the
BZA is a quasi-judiciary function.

Last Page

Dr. Harre complimented the Catholic University students plan for the design project they
created; change to Ali Zarabi complimented the Catholic University students.

Ms. Helander made a motion to approve the December 15, 2015 meeting minutes with the
recommended amendments. Ali Zarabi seconded the motion and the motion passed.
2017-2022 Capital Improvement Program (DRAFT) Six-year program of public
improvements to coordinate infrastructure, available financial resources and the Warrenton
Comprehensive Plan.
Brannon Godfrey, the Town Manager, thanked the Chairman and addressed the Commission to
give an introduction. He said the work session in February gave some very good suggestions on
ways to improve on the details provided in the CIP, which was incorporated into the draft. There
are improved descriptions about the projects as well as location maps to identify where the
improvements are proposed. Also added is a funds source page for the budget year FY2017.
1

The only dollar change made to the draft considered at the work session was the addition of a fire
department capital contribution for their apparatus, a $150,000 request. It was in the operating
budget, but was put into the CIP because the apparatuss long life qualifies it as a capital item.
The budget amount for year FY2017, $1.339 million, is likely to change before the
recommended budget is submitted to Council to balance revenues with expenditures. At the close
of the last fiscal year, there was about a million dollars in surplus. The Town Manager explained
that he would not want to exceed that amount in terms of how much is included with the capital
budget for next year because capital improvement projects are not funded with debt, but are cash
funded projects. This concluded the introduction. Mr. Godfrey asked if there were any questions.
Mr. Nevill asked if he could address the realignment of the fund structure in the past couple
years, from the parks and recreation fund and the relationship of the rainy day fund. Does it have
any impact on whats available for CIP related projects?
Mr. Godfrey said it may have been last year when there was a separate recreation fund. Now its
all in the general fund. Recreation capital projects are in the CIP under general fund, as shown on
page 11 at the bottom of the left hand column. This current fiscal year, next year, and going
forward, they will be handled as general fund capital projects. Capital Improvements dont
follow year-to-year trends; there can be equipment expenditures one year and not the next.
Mr. Kip asked if there was information on the grant for the Timber Fence trail.
Mr. Godfrey did not think the Town was going to receive it, but there would be plans to reapply
if unsuccessful.
Public Hearing
Dr. Harre called the Public Hearing to order and asked if there was anyone who wished to
comment on any of the items in the CIP. No one came forward to speak and Dr. Harre closed the
Public Hearing at 7:11 p.m.
Mr. Nevill asked if the department had a chance to address questions/comments from the last
meeting or if there was additional information on items like the issues regarding parks and
recreation and the Micro Golf Course.
Margaret Rice, Director of Parks and Recreation answered questions and said the Micro Golf
Course had been discussed at the recreation committee, but there was some question as to who
was for it and against it. She said that it may be moved forward. Ms. Schaeffer thanked her for
the work that she has done and said it will help them to make good decisions going forward.
Mr. Nevill asked if the Commission had talked about the well proposed for the Alwington
property. He asked if it was one of the wells that were going to be activated.
Mr. Bo Tucker, Director of Public Works and Utilities said wells three and four are abandoned or
inactive town wells. Alwington proposed the postage stamp for a well and funds to develop their
well or bring other wells online. Mr. Tucker does not plan on bringing the well online. There are
many people on that side of town on wells. When there is a drought you have to water, but
developing that well would be a last resort.
2

Mr. Nevill said the other item was the water and sewer extension on Old Meetze Road for
potential development.
Mr. Tucker was sure they would want the service availability and will use it for development of
the property. Once the line is there, availability fees are $17,000, so no one is clamoring for it.
Ms. Schaeffer said utilities are things that are under ground, and although not seen, they are
important for economic development and quality of life. The improvements to Parking Lot E are
above ground. From a Planning Commission standpoint, it would be helpful to put parking lots
and sidewalks in the CIP.
Mr. Nevill said Denise Harris spoke at the last meeting about the eligibility for that within the
Urban Development Area grant.
Ms. Schaeffer asked Mr. Bernard if he had any comments.
Mr. Paul Bernard, Assistant Director of Public Works and Utilities, said the House Bill 2 funding
was not going to happen right now because no funds are available. We will apply for it again this
year. The scoring will be a little different so we hope that will increase eligibility.
A discussion was then held regarding the intersection at Broadview Avenue. Mr. Nevill asked if
VDOT does a periodic study on the intersection. Mr. Tucker said he believes every other year
that a study is conducted.
Mr. Zarabi made a motion to approve the Capital Improvement Program draft for FY 2017-2022.
Ms. Helander seconded the motion and the motion passed unanimously with a vote of 7-0.
Old Business
I-PUD Regulations Text Amendment Discussion of proposed amendments to the Planned
Unit Development regulations specific to the Industrial PUD overlay district.
Dr. Harre stated there was also a public hearing last month.
One idea Ms. Schaeffer had while reading and preparing for the Planning Commission, from the
Statement of Justification, suggestions from the Director of Economic Development, and the
exchanges back and forth, they continue to reference the property as a mixed use development.
Much of the mix of uses within the industrial district starts to compromise the intent of the code.
The intent of the code is to remain industrial, and this is starting to water it down. There has been
some information presented to the Commission that shows most of the industrial district has
businesses currently operating with existing commercial uses. Ms. Schaeffer wondered if the
Towns industrial zoning currently was serving us in any way. As we move forward with the
zoning text amendment, there is concern by Mr. Nevill and myself that the Statement of
Justification references the plan. Ms. Schaeffer wondered how the Commission starts to evaluate
the zoning text amendment while not running them concurrently.

She went on to say that Mr. Foote talked about that at the last meeting, how we can do that either
way. We can do the text amendment first and then the application can fit into that. I would
encourage the staff and the applicant to work with the current application so that we can
understand the implications of the text amendment as well as looking at this as a mixed use
district rather than trying to make so many changes to the existing I-PUD that it becomes
something it was never intended. The Chairman had suggested the potential of rezoning this to a
commercial district rather than an industrial district. That was another reason proposing the idea
for discussion tonight, that maybe its neither a commercial district nor an industrial district, its
truly a mixed use proposal. Unlike other districts, including Fauquier County, we do not have a
mixed use zoning category for people to apply under. This may be an opportunity to take that
title away and say were looking at a mixed use code.
She said to the Town Attorney, Whit Robinson, that the Commission is struggling with whether
this should be a rezoning to commercial. Ms. Schaeffer asked whether the changes to the I-PUD
move too far away with the intent of an industrial district or if they were looking at a new code
running concurrently with this application to see what it looks like. It also presents a new code
moving forward that better achieves the comprehensive plan goal of creating a mixed use
environment. She asked the Town Attorney whether the Commission would be creating any
complications on his end for a new zoning district.
Mr. Robinson indicated that he will do what the Commission asks him to do in terms of how it is
determined to go forward. The question is going to be timing more than anything and working
with the applicant on timing issues. What we have are text amendments, which apply to
everything, and the application is coming along. He indicated he had been thinking about which
way the Commission may want to go. If you want to continue to go with a rezoning, whether its
the I-PUD, C-PUD, or a new zoning district, he wondered if the Commission wanted the
application to come along with the amendment. Right now they are separate. He noted that the
text amendments were before the Commission and they can make adjustments as they relate to
the zoning districts that are left. If the Commission wishes to go a different route, with a new
rezoning, lets say commercial and then add a C-PUD overlay, he noted that could be done
together.
He added that this could be handled any way the Commission wanted. If rezoned a different way,
with a new zoning district in its entirety, it would take longer. Each area will have different legal
ramifications as to whether it is considered down zoning or up zoning. The applicant may be
comfortable with what we already have in terms of commercial with a C-PUD, as long its
running concurrently. If consecutively, it will take longer. These are the different options.
Ms. Schaeffer suggested going through and seeing what the proposal and text amendment
actually mean. She went through it and found that some of the changes were minimal. What does
the text actually mean, in numbers, for different town properties? With this new matrix, some of
the concerns discussed in the last meeting are not there.
Mr. Robinson said perhaps mixed use is something the Commission wants to do, that an overall
approach should be taken when it comes to the town. He indicated that was the Commissions
prerogative to look at those options. In terms of dealing with these text amendments, which it is
known that it will affect different parcels other than the one with the application, try to keep in

mind the timing of those two things. It may sway you one way or another as far as which way to
go. The timing may not be what the applicant wants, but you have a larger picture to look at.
Ms. Schaeffer believed that is something that gets lost, the fact that changing the text doesnt
necessarily change the other properties. Those properties still have to go through a rezoning. She
noted that the Commission would still have to comment on them and approve them. It doesnt
automatically grant them this right. It just says that if they get a rezoning, they will also be
subject to these percentages.
Mr. Robinson said that you may end up with text amendments to those applications as well.
Dr. Harre said the town may be put in a bind if it approves 35% residential for this area and
someone wants something with similar water and sewer impacts. He noted that 35% residential
is more than the applicant requires and the Town may be committed to something it cannot
provide later on.
Mr. Robinson suggested keeping in mind that an SUP is an SUP for a reason. It is not by-right.
Thats why you take a look at different parcels and differentiate. You take into account public
health and welfare. Just because one person gets an SUP doesnt mean everyone gets one. That is
why they have to keep coming forward.
Mr. Zarabi said his daughter, while talking about the Walker Drive project, as much as she liked
shopping said, this project doesnt seem consistent with Warrenton. He was wondering if this
was an opportunity for us to talk about how this project relates to this piece of land and
developable properties across the street.
Mr. Robinson said that is one of the things that you are required to look at, what the neighboring
parcels are like. With this particular project there is a lot of office nearby.
Dr. Harre asked if the Commission wanted to discuss this in detail, whether it meets the
comprehensive plan, or should they take it from a broader standpoint asking if this the correct
way to go. It seems like more of a C-PUD. At the last meeting Mr. Foote said they would
consider other ideas.
Mr. Nevill believed they should go with the proposal in front of the Commission. Weve had
questions about the various wordings and what has been agreed on. The last staff analysis gave
us the grading scale from the ordinance. We have to use that grading scale.
Ms. Schaeffer said staff has included here that the Comprehensive Plan encourages flexibility to
meet traditional design standards and promote economic development. There are also comments
from Heather Stinson, Economic Development Manager encouraging flexibility and mixed use
development for economic opportunity.
Discussion was held regarding the I-PUD, the Comprehensive Plan, what percentages the land
uses should be, and whether or not to adjust the ratios.
Jessica Pfeiffer, representing Mr. Foote as well as the applicant, addressed the Commission. She
said the applicant is okay with looking at a new district, perhaps a mixed use district. On the
5

rezoning application, there are multiple documents with it for review including a traffic impact
analysis, water and sewer impacts, and design guidelines. They are willing to look into a mixed
use district if that makes it more comfortable.
Dr. Harre said they are having trouble justifying the I-PUD in relationship to the ordinance and
the comprehensive plan.
Mr. Robinson said if it is the desire of the Planning Commission to take a look at that, staff
would be happy to meet with the applicant in the next week or two to work out some of these
issues and present them at the next meeting to not hold things up.
Mr. Nevill said its the same question. Youre looking for different means by which to request
that a majority of the property have some other use other than the by right industrial.
Ms. Pfeiffer said that is correct.
Mr. Nevill expressed his concern that its going to be the same later.
Ms. Pfeiffer said one of the documents being are worked on now is a Physical Impact Analysis,
because there is a need for the proposed development and they will bring that in with their
rezoning to show there is a need for their proposal.
Dr. Harres concern is that it impacts this one parcel and not the entire one hundred some acres
of industrial land. What happens in the future when people want to put in 35% residential?
Ms. Schaeffer said if they do mixed use it impacts the entire town.
Further discussion was held regarding the I-PUD, the comprehensive plan, flexibility, and land
use percentages. The importance of the parcel in consideration was also discussed.
Dr. Harre inquired whether anyone wished to make a motion.
Mr. Zarabi made a motion to approve ZTA 15-02 with the following amendments:

20% Residential
30% Commercial
50% Industrial

Mr. Kip seconded the motion and the motion passed unanimously with a vote of 7-0.
Dr. Harre said there is no work session next Tuesday. He then asked for an update on Cube
Smart.
Ms. Sitterle explained the meeting with the building team regarding Cube Smart. Cube Smart
will be submitting architectural renderings on the proposed changes.
A discussion was then held regarding Cube Smart.

The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m.


Minutes were approved on ________.

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT


STAFF REPORT

PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING

DATE OF HEARING: May 17, 2016


PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION DEADLINE: August 19, 2016
TOWN COUNCIL DECISION DEADLINE: May 17, 2017

SUBJECT: Town Code Amendment Condition of Premises


PURPOSE: This is an amendment to Section 8-63 of the Notice to Cut Weeds to add
language on the development status of the property and indicate overgrown
properties could be considered a nuisance. The applicant is the Town of Warrenton.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Town staff submits to the Planning Commission for consideration amendments to


Town Code Article III: Condition of Premises, 8-63: Notice to cut weeds. The
proposed amendments would:

Broaden the notice to cut weeds to include additional parcels/properties.


The existing code includes any vacant property in town and the proposed
amendment would comprise any occupied or vacant developed or
undeveloped property in the town, including such property upon which
buildings or other improvements are located
o The expanded notice would include more than vacant properties,
allowing Warrenton to notify and remove weeds on any property in
town.

Expand the uses declared as a nuisance to be those that are malodorous,


and other substances which might endanger the health or safety of other
residents of the town

o The current text includes a notice for properties that are permitted to
become unsightly by being overgrown with grass, weeds, or other
foreign growth.
o This addition would add malodorous nuisances, as well as specifically
mention the health and safety of residents in the code.

Town Code Amendment - Condition of Premises


Planning Commission Public Hearing
May 17, 2016

Adds a time frame for repeat notices, allowing the town to: For purposes of
this provision, one written notice per growing season to the owner of record
of the subject property shall be considered reasonable notice.
o This provision allows the town to remove nuisances throughout the
growing season with one notice for the first occurrence.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION

Staff recommends the following amendments to the Town Code for the Town of
Warrenton, VA:
Sec. 8-63. - Notice to cut weeds. 1

Whenever any occupied or vacant developed or undeveloped property in the town,


including such property upon which buildings or other improvements are located vacant
property in the town is are permitted to become unsightly or malodorous by being
overgrown with grass, weeds, or other foreign growth, and other substances which might
endanger the health or safety of other residents of the town, all of which is hereby
declared a nuisance, and the town manager deems it necessary, the owner thereof shall be
notified in writing to cut the grass, weeds and other foreign growth on such vacant
property within a reasonable time, specified in the notice. If the owner refuses to comply
with the notice, the town manager may, in his discretion, have such grass, weeds and
other foreign growth on the vacant property in question cut by the agents or employees of
the town and the cost and expenses thereof shall be chargeable to and paid by the owner
of such property. If such cost and expenses are not paid by such owner, the amount shall
be assessed against the owner and such assessment shall become a lien upon the vacant
property as in the case of real estate taxes and shall be collected as real estate taxes are
collected. For purposes of this provision, one written notice per growing season to the
owner of record of the subject property shall be considered reasonable notice.
(Code 1981, 7-16)

SUGGESTED MOTIONS

I move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed


amendments to Town Code Section 8-63 to the Town Council.
OR

I move that the Planning Commission recommend disapproval of the proposed


amendments to Town Code Section 8-63 to the Town Council.
OR
I move an alternative motion.

Additions to the Town Code are underlined in red, recommended removals have a strikethrough.

Table of Contents
I.

Town Code Amendment - Condition of Premises


Planning Commission Public Hearing
May 17, 2016

PROJECT REVIEW .......................................................................................................................... 3


A. Summary of Proposed Text Changes ............................................................................. 3

B. Zoning Ordinance Intent & Comprehensive Plan Use Description ......Error!


Bookmark not defined.

C. Zoning Ordinance Criteria For Text Amendments ................................................. 3

II.

ATTACHMENTS ............................................................................................................................... 4

I.

PROJECT REVIEW

A. Summary of Proposed Text Changes

The requested amendments to the zoning ordinance will impact most


parcels/properties within the Town of Warrenton. The proposed amendments
would:

Broaden the notice to cut weeds to include additional parcels/properties.


The existing code includes any vacant property in town and the proposed
amendment would comprise any occupied or vacant developed or
undeveloped property in the town, including such property upon which
buildings or other improvements are located
Expand the uses declared as a nuisance to be those that are malodorous,
and other substances which might endanger the health or safety of other
residents of the town

Add a time frame for repeat notices, allowing the town to: For purposes of
this provision, one written notice per growing season to the owner of record
of the subject property shall be considered reasonable notice.

B. Zoning Ordinance Criteria For Text Amendments

Section 11-3.9.13 of the Town of Warrenton Zoning Ordinance if the request is for an
amendment of the text of this Ordinance, the Planning Commission and Town Council
shall consider the following matters, in addition to any relevant matters included in
Section 11-3.9.12
3

Town Code Amendment - Condition of Premises


Planning Commission Public Hearing
May 17, 2016

Standard
1. Whether the proposed text amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.

Analysis
The overall planning goal of the Comprehensive Plan is, to promote and enhance the
unique setting of Warrenton while promoting the health, safety and general welfare of
its residents. The intent of the proposed Town Code amendment is to better fit this
goal.

The proposed text amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan General
Land Use Objective to, To encourage good landscape design and urban beautification
in existing and new developments. The policy associated with this objective is to:
Improve Landscaping for Existing Development and Require Adequate Landscaping
for New Development. Through updated land development regulations and the
development review process, strengthen the requirements for landscaping on
commercial sites.

Standard
2. Whether the proposed text amendment is consistent with the intent and purpose of
this Ordinance.
Analysis
The purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is to promote the health, safety, and general
welfare of the public. The intent of the proposed Town Code amendment is to better
fulfill this purpose.
II.

ATTACHMENTS

Proposed Town Code Amendment

DRAFT TOWN CODE AMENDMENT CONDITION OF PREMISES


April 5, 2016

ARTICLE III. - CONDITION OF PREMISES[2]

Footnotes:
--- (2) --State Law reference Noxious Weed Law, Code of Virginia, 3.1-296.11 et seq.; removal of trash,
garbage, weeds, etc. from property, Code of Virginia, section 15.1-11; authority of town council to control
Johnson grass and multiflora rose, Code of Virginia, 15.1-28.4; weeds and plants on highway rights-ofway, Code of Virginia, 33.1-209.

Sec. 8-61. - Duty of owners, etc.


It shall be the duty of every owner or other person in charge of premises within the town, whether or
not he avails himself of the garbage and trash disposal service provided for in Articles I and II of this
chapter, to keep such premises in a sanitary condition.

(Code 1981, 7-14)


Sec. 8-62. - Notice to remove trash, garbage, etc.
Whenever the owner of any property permits trash, garbage, litter and other substances which might
endanger the health or safety of other residents of the town and town manager deems it necessary, the
owner of such property shall be notified in writing to remove such garbage, refuse, litter and other
substances on such property within a reasonable time, specified in the notice. If the owner refuses to
comply with the notice, the town manager may, in his discretion, have such trash, garbage, litter and
other substances in question removed by the agents or employees of the town and the cost and expense
thereof shall be chargeable to and paid by the owner of such property. If the cost and expenses are not
paid by the owner, the amount shall be assessed against the owner and such assessment shall become
a lien upon the property as in the case of taxes and levies and shall be collected as real estate taxes are
collected.

(Code 1981, 7-15)


Sec. 8-63. - Notice to cut weeds.
Whenever any occupied or vacant developed or undeveloped property in the town, including such
property upon which buildings or other improvements are located vacant property in the town is are
permitted to become unsightly or malodorous by being overgrown with grass, weeds, or other foreign
growth, and other substances which might endanger the health or safety of other residents of the town, all
of which is hereby declared a nuisance, and the town manager deems it necessary, the owner thereof
shall be notified in writing to cut the grass, weeds and other foreign growth on such vacant property within

Page 1

a reasonable time, specified in the notice. If the owner refuses to comply with the notice, the town
manager may, in his discretion, have such grass, weeds and other foreign growth on the vacant property
in question cut by the agents or employees of the town and the cost and expenses thereof shall be
chargeable to and paid by the owner of such property. If such cost and expenses are not paid by such
owner, the amount shall be assessed against the owner and such assessment shall become a lien upon
the vacant property as in the case of real estate taxes and shall be collected as real estate taxes are
collected. For purposes of this provision, one written notice per growing season to the owner of record of
the subject property shall be considered reasonable notice.

(Code 1981, 7-16)


Sec. 8-64. - Service of notice.
The notices provided for in this article shall be served personally, if possible, but if the person upon
whom personal service is to be made cannot be found in the town, such notice shall be sent, by certified
mail, to the last known post office address of such person and proof thereof shall be taken and accepted
in lieu of personal service.

(Code 1981, 7-17)

Page 2

DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT


STAFF REPORT

PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING


DATE OF HEARING: May 17, 2016
PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION DEADLINE: August 19, 2016
TOWN COUNCIL DECISION DEADLINE: May 17, 2017

MEMO
Date: May 2, 2016
To:

Sarah Sitterle, Director of Community Development

From: Heather Stinson, Economic Development Manager


Re:

Proposed Amendments to the Town Zoning Ordinance and Town Code

Town staff submits to the Planning Commission for consideration amendments to the zoning ordinance
and town code that would enable the following potential business uses:

Hotels, Inns, Bed & Breakfasts, and Tourist HomesThe proposed amendment would
add these as allowable uses in the Central Business District (CBD), which largely covers the
towns historical district. Staff believes this use is appropriate in the CBD and if established
may encourage tourism in Old Town by providing overnight accommodations and drawing
visitors into Old Town for private events, such as weddings.

Food TrucksFood trucks are a growing industry that has proven successful throughout the
country in providing not only additional food choices, but increased food sales overall and
where multiple gather, creating new points of interest. Amendments to the zoning ordinance
and the town code are proposed that would add food trucks as allowable uses in the
Commercial and Public/Semi-Public districts, subject to a comprehensive Food Truck Policy.
The proposed policy would be administered by the Town Manager and delineate specific areas
food trucks may operate within Commercial and Public/Semi-Public zoning districts; as well
as hours, conditions, and fees for operation.

Incubator and Maker SpaceStaff wishes to explore these uses and their potential
placement with the Planning Commission in order to determine if amendments to the zoning
ordinance are necessary to allow for their creation. No amendments have been drafted for
consideration of the Planning Commission at this time.

Staff analysis, recommended text amendments and proposed policy documents referenced above are
attached separately.

Hotels, Inns, Bed & Breakfasts, and Tourist Homes


Introduction
Old Town Warrenton has much to offer would-be visitors, including history, great shops, delectable dining,
and easy access to the regions many wineries. It does not, however, have overnight accommodations.
While there are modern hotels (Hampton Inn and Holiday Inn Express) within town limits, there are no
traditional Bed and Breakfasts nor Inns within the Central Business District (CBD). Currently, these and
similar uses are not allowable within the CBD, nor are they permissible with a special use permit. Staff
believes these uses would be appropriate in the CBD and are a potential opportunity to increase tourism
activity in Old Town.
Staff recommends adding the following as permissible uses within the CBD: Hotels, Inns, Bed &
Breakfasts, and Tourist Homes. As permissible uses, interested proprietors would be required to obtain a
special use permit. This process requires the applicant to provide a site sketch or plan, as well as describe
potential impacts, including noise and traffic. The process for consideration of this application provides the
opportunity for the Planning Commission and Town Council to assess the project in detail and, if found
necessary, apply conditions that can modify the project and/or make additional requirements above those
set-out for by-right uses (e.g., applying conditions that limit the hours of events, number of participants and
require some amount of on-site parking). This process also requires notification of immediate neighbors
and provides the public and others affected the opportunity to express their concerns to both the Planning
Commission and Town Council.
Additionally, staff recommends amending the definition of Inn to provide for additional services, including
serving food and holding events. These services are customary for similar uses and would also be open to
review as part of the proprietors application for a special use permit.
Conversely, staff does not believe Motels to be an appropriate use in the CBD and recommends its removal
from the current list of permissible uses.
A list of definitions of lodging uses and comparison chart are included for reference.

Economic & Fiscal Impact


The addition of new accommodation options, particularly within Old Town, may help to attract visitors
from outside the immediate area. Additionally, desirable accommodations may encourage visitors to stay
in Warrenton and the surrounding area longer, and thereby increase the potential amount spent on goods
and services, as well as increase the potential sales, meals and lodging tax revenues for the town.
Specifically, the Town levies a 4% meals tax, 4% lodging tax and receives a portion of sales tax on
purchases within the town.
Furthermore, amending the definition of Inns to allow for events, meeting space and food service provides
potential proprietors an important source of revenue. Additionally, drawing groups of people into Old Town
for private events may help to expose new groups of people to the charms of Warrenton, creating potential
for their return as tourists, or extended stays.

Page 1 of 4

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends the following amendments to the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Warrenton, VA:
1. Article 3-4.11.3 (Central Business District-Permissible Uses): Addition of, Hotels, Inns, Bed &
Breakfasts, and Tourist Homes
2. Article 12 (Definitions): Modification of the definition of Inn as follows, A single-family
dwelling, or portion thereof, or accessory building to, where short-term lodging is provided for
compensation to transient guests only. Additional services, such as restaurants, meeting and
event space, and recreational facilities may also be provided. The operator may or may not live
on the premises. Meals may be provided to guests only. Up to twelve (12) guest rooms may be
provided.
3. Article 3-4.11.3 (Central Business District-Permissible Uses): Removal of, Motel

Comparison Chart & Definitions


Comparison Chart: See Table 1 on the next page.

Page 2 of 4

Table 1. Comparison of Overnight Accommodation Uses

Rooms/Guests
Permitted

Additional Services
Permitted

Other

Zoning Districts

Dwelling

Up to 5
persons

None.

Open to transients.

Permitted (by-right): None


Permissible (SUP): R-15, R10

Bed &
Breakfast
Facility

Private
Residence

Up to 4 rooms
(no cooking
facilities)

Meals for guests only.

Maximum visit duration 14


days.
Live-in operator on-site
required.

Permitted (by-right): None


Permissible (SUP): R-15, R10, R-6, R-40, R-E

Inn

Single-Family
Dwelling

Up to 12
rooms

(Proposed) Additional
services, such as
restaurants, meeting and
event space, and
recreational facilities.

Transient guests only.


Operator may live on or offsite.

Permitted (by-right): None


Permissible (SUP): R-15, R10

Hotel

Facility

10 or more
individuals

Additional services, such


as restaurants, meeting
rooms, and recreational
facilities.

Daily rate required.

Permitted (by-right): C
Permissible (SUP): CBD

None.

Separate room/apartment
entrances close to parking or
storage space.
Building principally for
sleeping accommodations for
automobile travelers.
Building suitable for
occupancy in all seasons.

Permitted (by-right) : C
Permissible (SUP): CBD

May include food


preparation and service,
entertainment, social or
charitable events, and
recreational facilities.

May include overnight


accommodations or shortterm lodging (not longer than
14 consecutive days)

Permitted (by-right) : I
Permissible (SUP): None

Use

Structure

Tourist Homes

Limited to 75
rooms in CBD
Motel

Building/Group
of detached or
semi-detached
buildings

No limit
specified in
definition
Limited to 75
rooms in CBD

Conference
Center

Facility
designed for
conducting
large or small
group meetings

No limit
specified in
definition

Page 3 of 4

Definitions
Tourist Home: A dwelling where only lodging is provided for compensation for up to five (5) persons (in
contradistinction to hotels and boardinghouses) and open to transients.
Bed & Breakfast Facility: A private residence, or portion thereof, where short-term lodging is provided for
compensation (no longer than 14 consecutive days) and meals may be provided, to guests only. The operator
of the facility shall live on the premises or in an adjacent premises on the same lot. Up to four (4) guest
rooms without cooking facilities may be provided. [also see Tourist Home; also see Inn]
Inn: A single-family dwelling, or portion thereof, where short-term lodging is provided for compensation
to transient guests only. The operator may or may not live on the premises. Meals may be provided to guests
only. Up to twelve (12) guest rooms may be provided. (Also see Bed and Breakfast Facility).
Hotel: A facility offering transient lodging accommodations for ten or more individuals on a daily rate and
providing additional services, such as restaurants, meeting rooms, and recreational facilities (See also,
Motel).
Motel: A building or a group of two (2) or more detached or semi-detached buildings containing rooms or
apartments having separate entrances provided directly or closely in connection with automobile parking
or storage space serving such rooms or apartments, which building or group of buildings is designed,
intended, or used principally for the providing of sleeping accommodations for automobile travelers and is
suitable for occupancy at all seasons of the year.
Conference Center: A facility designed for conducting large or small group meetings. Such facilities may
include overnight accommodations or short term lodging (not longer than fourteen (14) consecutive days),
food preparation and service, entertainment, social or charitable events, and recreational facilities.

Page 4 of 4

Food Trucks
Introduction
Mobile food vendors, or food trucks, continue to gain popularity and use across the country. Their mobile
nature presents new intricacies and challenges for localities. Like many localities, Warrentons town code
and zoning ordinance do not envision this type of business.
Currently, mobile food vendors are able to operate on private property for a limited time period. However,
these businesses are not able to receive a business license or remit meals tax without a zoning permit.
Therefore, several amendments are necessary that will define what a mobile food vendor is and indicate
which zoning districts it can be an allowable use in. Additionally, rules and regulations on how food trucks
must operate, when, and other requirements are often desired.
Staff reviewed the programs for mobile food vendors in several localities (including City of Charlottesville,
Fairfax County, and the City of Norfolk), as well as best practice documents from the National Association
of Food Trucks and data on industry trends and impact.
Staffs goals are to create a program that is uncomplicated, can be administered with minimal cost, and that
can be adapted as Warrentons experience with food trucks grows. Staff found the model used by the City
of Norfolk to be most suitable. To follow this model, the Town of Warrenton would need to do the
following:

Amend the Town Code to define Mobile Food Vendors;

Amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow mobile food vendors as allowable uses in the commercial
districts (Commercial, Industrial, and Central Business District), subject to the policy and
procedures of a Mobile Food Vendor Program; and

Create a Mobile Food Vendor Program, including Policy and Procedures document that is
administered and may be amended by the Town Manager.

Specifying the rules and regulations in a policy document administered by the Town Manager allows the
program to operate more succinctly and evolve over time. This document (draft enclosed) would specify:

The specific areas where mobile food vendors can operate

Requirements and process for application into the Mobile Food Vendor Program

Fee schedule and meals bond requirement

Hours and specifics of operations

Circumstances for dismissal from the Mobile Food Vendor Program

At this time, it does not require the use of a decal system or specially marked areas.

Economic & Fiscal Impact


The long-term impact of allowing food trucks is reported by national research to be positive. Among the
benefits are increased sales, customers, diversity, entrepreneurship opportunities, and tax revenue as well
as a positive reflection of community values. These can all benefit existing restaurants, as well as food
trucks. Each listed benefit is described in further detail below and examples are included as often as
possible. A selection of reference materials follows, including case-studies, best practice information and
links to programs in other localities.

Page 1 of 3

Increased sales to customers who may not otherwise purchase food, due to:

LocationFor example, at the WARF parents may not be inclined to leave while their child
participates in sports and there are no food options available.

CostThe low cost of some trucks attracts customers who wouldnt normally go to a restaurant to
eat or wouldnt go to a restaurant for a lunch or a snack.

Increased draw of new customers and new sales. Including customers that:

Follow a specific food truckSome loyal foodies will drive upwards of 20 miles for their favorite
truck. This potentially draws new customers in from outside areas.

Are attracted by a specific food type or dishFor example, specialty offerings (like lobster rolls,
fugu kimbap, or watermelon jalapeno lemonade) and international flavors not available in the
current market create interest and draw new customers to dine on a must-have.

Creates new business opportunities. The small size and mobile nature of food trucks allows food truck
entrepreneurs to:

Try out new marketsTesting demand can be very helpful for would-be restaurant owners. For
example: Vietnamese and Korean food are very popular in northern Virginia, but are not offered
in the Warrenton area. Successful food truck sales of these cuisines would demonstrate demand to
the food truck operator and other potential restaurateurs that a potential market opportunity exists.

Sustain a business with smaller sales volumesFood trucks are often what many would consider
micro-businesses, employing only one or two people. The smaller volume of sales required to
keep a food truck operation running allows entrepreneurs with limited cash-flow or time a new
opportunity to start their own business. Additionally, smaller sales volumes allow owners to
prepare smaller amounts of food at a time, which can be an important cost savings for those using
organic or other specialty products (such as, gluten-free dough, etc.).

Expand into mobile sales (in addition to a brick and motor location)With the swell of
interest in food trucks, many traditional restaurateurs are capitalizing on the food truck scene by
taking their cuisine mobile as an additional revenue stream and a way to reach new customers.

Capture of tax revenue. Creating opportunities for food trucks to operate legally allows the town to
capture tax revenue from food truck vendors, including business license taxes and meals tax. The 4% meals
tax applied by the town is one of the largest sources of revenue for the town. The food truck policy, as
proposed, would make applying to operate a food truck in town a simplified process and make timely
submission of meals tax a requirement of continued operation.
Demonstrate the openness and diversity of a community. If you are what you eat, then ever expanding
diversity in food offerings reflects a communitys appreciation for other cultures and creativity. An active
food truck scene also demonstrates a communitys openness to entrepreneurship in general.

Reference Materials
Case Study: On the Go - Insights into Food Truck Regulation in US Cities Data-Smart City Solutions,
Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation, Kennedy School, Harvard University (Mar
2015)
Food trucks gaining momentum, new research finds National Restaurant Association (Sept 2011)
FOOD ON WHEELS: Mobile Vending Goes Mainstream National League of Cities (Sept 2013)
Hampton Health Department Requirements for Mobile Food Units Hampton Health Department,
Virginia Department of Health
Page 2 of 3

MOBILE FOOD UNIT OPERATION GUIDE Guidelines for Food Service Chesapeake Health
Department, Virginia Department of Health
Food Truck Programs by Locality
City of Norfolk, VA:

http://www.norfolk.gov/index.aspx?NID=225 ;
http://www.norfolk.gov/DocumentCenter/View/6689

Fairfax County, VA:

http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/parks/mobile-vending.htm

Arlington County, VA:

http://health.arlingtonva.us/environmental-health/mobile-food-unitvendor-health-licenses/

Washington, DC:

http://dcra.dc.gov/service/mobile-food-truck-licensing-information

City of Alexandria, VA:

https://www.alexandriava.gov/FoodTrucks

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends the following amendments to the Code of the Town of Warrenton, VA:
1. Section 9-69 (d) Itinerant Merchants: Addition of, Any itinerant merchant who engages in the sale
of food or beverages, whether prepared on-site or off-site, and does so through the use of a mobile
unit with a current certificate of inspection from the local health department, shall only be
permitted in specific areas as provided within the rules and regulations administered by the Town
Manager, or his designee. All other ordinances applicable to mobile food vendors remain in effect
and shall be enforced by the Town.
Staff recommends the following amendments to the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Warrenton, VA:
2. Article 3-4.9.2 (Public/Semi-Public Institutional District-Permitted Uses): Addition of, Food
Trucks, if allowable by the Warrenton Mobile Food Vendor Program.
3. Article 3-4.10.2 (Commercial District-Permitted Uses): Addition of, Food Trucks, if allowable by
the Warrenton Mobile Food Vendor Program.
4. Article 3-4.11.2 (Central Business District- Permitted Uses): Addition of, Food Trucks, if
allowable by the Warrenton Mobile Food Vendor Program.
5. Article 12 (Definitions): Addition of, Mobile Food Vendor: Any itinerant merchant who engages
in the sale of food or beverages, whether prepared on-site or off-site, and does so through the use
of a mobile unit.

Page 3 of 3

Warrenton Mobile Food Vendor Program


Policies and Procedures
I. Introduction
The Town of Warrenton shall administer a program to receive, review and approve permit
applications for mobile food vendors that desire to vend in designated zoning districts. This
policy sets out guidelines for the permitting process for vending in designated food truck zones
in designated zoning districts. This policy does not cover participation in Special Events (such
as, festivals). To participate in Special Events, all vendors must comply with the rules and
regulations laid forth in the Special Event permit provided to the event organizer.
Questions about the Warrenton Mobile Food Vendor Program can be directed to the
Department of Community Development, ssitterle@warrentonva.gov or (540) 347-2405.
II. Allowable Zoning Districts
Mobile food vendors are allowable in the following zoning districts, subject to the policies and
procedures laid out in this document: Commercial (C); Industrial (I); Commercial Business
District (CBD); and Public/Semi-Public Institutional (PSP).
III. Operation on Private Property
Mobile food vendors may operate on private property within the allowable zoning districts (C,
I, CBD, and PSP) with the expressed, written consent of the property owner. All operations, on
public or private property, must comply with these regulations.
IV. Designated Public Vending Sites
Mobile food vendors may operate on public property ONLY at public vending sites designated
in this policy. Public property includes, but is not limited to: public streets, sidewalks, parking
areas and road right-of-way.
The following are designated as public vending sites for mobile food trucks/trailers:
Warrenton Aquatic and Recreation Facility, Parking Area
A. The entire operation of a food truck/ trailer must fit in the allowable public parking spaces.
Vehicles that do not fit within the designated spaces will not be permitted to operate in the
program.
B. Each food truck/trailer site shall not be within 10 feet of an intersection, crosswalk, driveway,
bus stop, taxi stand or handicapped parking space, will not be situated in any part of a
designated loading zone or fire lane.
C. Food vendors are to comply with the vending hours specified in this policy and not leave
truck/trailers beyond the allowable vending hours. Trucks/trailers left beyond these hours are
Warrenton Mobile Food Vendor Program (May 2016)

Policies & Procedures Page 1 of 6

Commented [SH1]: Sarah: I just took a stab at this.


Please review and edit as you see fit.

subject to towing.
D. The Town may adjust these sites in cases of construction or other circumstances, as approved
by the Town Manager.
E. The Town may consider additional locations based on demand and impact, as approved by
the Town Manager.
III. Vending Permit Application Process
A. Interested food truck/trailer vendors must submit a completed Application for a Food Vendor
Permit and required documentation online or in person at Town Hall at 18 Court Street, from 8
a.m. to 4:30 p.m. The Town will verify all permits have been obtained prior to issuing a vending
permit to the selected vendor.
B. The mobile food vendor must submit all required documents, pass all physical inspections,
provide payment and hold a permit to participate in the program. The following permits and
documentation are required:
1. A Health Permit from the Virginia Department of Health;
2. Proof of Current Fire Inspection;
3. Statement of authorization from property owner or their agent if on private
property; and
4. Certificate of insurance (see section V. n).
C. The mobile food vendor must supply at the time of application all applicable Program Fees (see
descriptions below).
D. Staff will review applications for completion and no application will be accepted unless deemed
complete.
IV. Program Fees
A. All vendors (new and renewing) must submit all fees and taxes as outlined below.
B. Annual Program Fee. The full annual program fee is due upon acceptance into the Warrenton
Mobile Food Vendor Program. If a vendor chooses to withdraw from the program, the annual
fee is forfeited. The annual fee for renewing mobile food vendors is due by June 30th.
C. Annual Business License Fee. The business license fee for mobile food vendors is an annual
flat fee and cannot be refunded. The business license fee is due by June 30th.
Warrenton Mobile Food Vendor Program (May 2016)

Policies & Procedures Page 2 of 6

Commented [SH2]: Is this possible right now? If not,


could we set up a generic email they could submit the
application and documents through?

D. Meals and Consumption Tax. Mobile vendors are required to collect Meals and Consumption
Tax on all applicable food and beverage sales at a rate of 4%, and remit to the Town on a
monthly basis.
E. Meals and Consumption Tax Bond (New Vendors). At the time of application to the program,
a one-time Meals and Consumption Tax Bond in the amount of $300 is required. The Bond is
refundable only if the vendor application is not approved, or if before incurring any meals tax
liability the participant goes out of business, moves their business, or otherwise ceases to
operate in the Town of Warrenton.
F. Meals and Consumption Tax Bond (Other). Mobile vendors that do not maintain participation
in the program for a period of two years or more will be considered new vendors and will
be required to provide the meals tax bond again upon application to re-enter the program.
Mobile food vendors that are delinquent in the remittance of meals tax may be required to
provide the meals tax bond annually, at the discretion of the Town Manager.

Commented [FM3]: Whitt I added this. Could you


please review and make sure its ok to do this?

G. Mobile vendors are required to comply with all other applicable local, state and federal taxes,
including remittance of Sales Tax in accordance with state law.
H. Fee Chart
Fees

Town of Warrenton

Annual Downtown Mobile Food Vendor


Program Fee (per vendor)
Annual Business License Fee (per vendor)

$100

One-time Meals Tax Bond (per vendor)

$300

Other Agencies
Commented [FM4]: Sarah This will hypothetically
encompass the zoning permit. What is the typical zoning
permit fee?

$50

Annual Fire Inspection Fee (per vehicle)

Fauquier County
Fire Marshalls Office
VA Department of Health
(Fauquier County Office)

Annual Health Permit Fee (per vehicle)


Total

$450

V. Rules and Regulations


A. Allowable vehicles include enclosed trucks and trailers for parking spaces in which service is
provided to customers through the side of the vehicle at the sidewalk only. Canteen trucks that
require or encourage standing in the street or behind the vehicle are not allowed.
B. Mobile food vendors are required to maintain minimum standards for continued participation in
Warrenton Mobile Food Vendor Program (May 2016)

Policies & Procedures Page 3 of 6

Commented [FM5]: Sarah Could you please confirm it is


the Fauquier County Fire Marshalls Office that does the fire
inspections?

the program. Standards include, but are not limited to, the following:
Floors, walls, ceilings and food contact surfaces must be easily cleanable (i.e. stainless
steel, aluminum or other approved non-corrosive and non-rusting metal)
Surfaces must be waterproof, smooth, readily cleanable, and resistant to dents and
scratches
All outer openings must be screened and/or sealed when not operating
Serving areas on top of carts and truck serving windows may be made of whatever
material is appropriate for food preparation: metal, tile, synthetic countertop, etc.)
There should be no structural defects (i.e. holes, openings, rust, seams or broken parts)
Business name should be affixed to the back or side of the operation and clearly visible to
customers
C. Trucks or trailers must be sized to fit into designated parking areas. Parking space
dimensions are typically 8X22.
D. Only one permitted vendor will be allowed to vend at each designated public parking space at
any time. Subleasing is not permitted. The permit covers only the vehicle on file. If a secondary
or alternate vehicle is used for the business, it must also carry an updated fire inspection decal
after being inspected and approved by the Fire Marshals office.
E. Vending at designated food truck zones will be allowed at the times listed below. No vending
operations shall take place outside the hours noted.
1.

Warrenton Aquatic and Recreation Facility Location: Everyday, 11 am to 7 pm.


Additionally, whenever athletic fields or pool facility is in use for competition or
organized practices.

2.

All other public and private vending sites:


Sunday
Monday-Thursday
Friday
Saturday

8:00 am 10:00 pm
6:00 am 12:00 am
6:00 am 2:00 am
8:00 am 2:00 am

F. All sales on public property must be made on the sidewalk directly from the licensed unit,
unless otherwise specified.
G. Mobile food trucks/trailers must park in the same direction as traffic.
H. If any area is closed for an emergency or other permitted activity, no vendors will be allowed to
set up. Areas will be monitored for compliance and any violations could result in a permit being
suspended or revoked. The Department of Public Works will notify participants in the Program
of any planned special event that would close the area.
Warrenton Mobile Food Vendor Program (May 2016)

Policies & Procedures Page 4 of 6

Commented [SH6]: Who do we want to be responsible


for this?

I.

The entire operation must be fully mobile. For trucks/trailers, coolers may not be placed on the
ground, nor may tables and chairs be provided for customers. Generators must be attached to
the mobile unit and should be whisper or quiet generators are required that produce no more
than 75 decibels (dB).

J.

Fees are subject to change with Town Manager approval.

K. Prohibited Items:
Radio or sound-amplifying devices;
Flashing signs or signs that move or give the appearance of moving;
Sign, menu board, tables, chairs, waste receptacles or other objects in the roadway,
sidewalk or ground;
The sale of merchandise or any other articles other than food;
Water, sewer, gas or electrical connections to a building.
Participants must ensure that no pollutants, including waste/grease, liquid wastes, gray
water garbage/debris, and other materials are discharged to the Towns storm drain
system (including gutters, curbs, and storm drains).
L. A waste receptacle shall be provided for the use of customers and shall be affixed or attached to
the pushcart or stand. Trash must be removed from the site by the vendor. Use of Town waste
receptacles is prohibited.
M. Participants are required to pick up, remove and dispose of all garbage, refuse or litter
consisting of foodstuffs, wrappers, and/or materials dispensed from the vending vehicle and any
residue deposited on the street from the operation thereof, and otherwise maintain in a clean
and debris-free condition the entire area within a 25-foot radius of the location where mobile
food vending is occurring. Assistance in cleaning any public eating spaces is appreciated.
N. The vendor shall secure and maintain a policy of automobile liability insurance coverage issued
by a company authorized to do business in the Commonwealth of Virginia in the amount of at
least $1,000,000 for injury to or death of any person or persons in any one incident and
$100,000 for property damage, and the policy shall list the Town of Warrenton as an additional
insured.
O. Monthly Food Truck Sales data reports and meals tax receipts are required to be submitted
each month for the calendar year. Failure to comply and submit in a timely manner may risk
vendor participation in the program.

Warrenton Mobile Food Vendor Program (May 2016)

Policies & Procedures Page 5 of 6

VI. Revocation or Suspension


A. The participant may be removed from the Program at the discretion of the Town Manager in
the event of any of the following:
The use of conditions under which the truck, trailer, is being operated or maintained is
detrimental to the public health, welfare or materially injurious to property or
improvements in the vicinity;
The property is operated or maintained so as to constitute a nuisance;
The use is operated in violation of the conditions of the program; or
Any other violation of applicable law.
VII.

Renewal Process
A.

Vendor licenses expire on December 31 st of each calendar year with annual renewals
subject to administrative review, modification (if necessary) and approval.

VIII. Associated Fees

IX. Program Compliance


I understand and will abide by these Policies and Procedures for the Warrenton Mobile Food Vendor
Program. I further understand that should I commit any violation of this policy, my participation in this
program may be revoked.

Signature

Warrenton Mobile Food Vendor Program (May 2016)

Date

Policies & Procedures Page 6 of 6