Planning Commission OK’s application for Sperryville apartment and new rules to ease Internet broadband expansion
By James P. Gannon
The Rappahannock County Planning Commission wrapped up the year’s work by wading through a thicket of applications, zoning ordinance amendments and other matters in a two-hour meeting notable for its mind-numbing complexity and inexplicable detail.
In the one action that was simple and straightforward, the commission recommended approval for a special use permit to allow owners William F. and Janet W. Pumphrey to convert an existing summer-kitchen outbuilding into a rental efficiency apartment on Main Street in Sperryville.
The Pumphreys own the property at 23 Main Street that already has two rental units plus the old outbuilding that served as a summer kitchen. That building is being renovated to serve as a small rental apartment suitable for one or two persons.
Their application proved to be non-controversial, as no members of the public rose at the meeting to comment pro or con. County Administrator John McCarthy recommended approval of the permit on grounds that the structure already exists and little impact on the landscape would occur due to its conversion. He noted that it would “provide needed additional housing in Sperryville with very limited impact.”
With few questions or comments from commissioners, the planners recommended approval of the permit on a 5-0 vote. Stonewall-Hawthorn Commissioner Tom Tepper abstained from voting, noting that Mr. Pumphrey was both a personal friend and a former client–a relatively rare recusal for members of the commission.
The Pumphrey application goes to the Board of Zoning Appeals for final approval at a meeting scheduled for tonight, Dec. 20.
In a second action that may help some Rappahannock County residents or businesses obtain high-speed internet access, the commission unanimously gave its approval to a zoning amendment that would exempt from regulation certain equipment for the transmission of wireless broadband internet service.
This amendment would remove one existing impediment to the expansion of broadband internet service by at least two providers. Under current zoning law, the internet companies are required to apply for a special exception permit and go though a public hearing process at the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors before installing their “black box” receiver and antenna on any Rappahannock property.
These companies, Virginia Broadband and Tom Gordon’s e-Office firm, told the county’s Broadband Initiative study group that the zoning requirement served as an obstacle to expanding their services in the county. The study group, in a recent report to the Board of Supervisors, recommended amending the regulations to exempt this specific equipment from the permitting process.
The amendment exempts the wireless internet receivers and antennae “when such equipment is installed on property owned by a subscriber to such services, and when such equipment is mounted on existing structures or on single, wooden utility poles” no more than 80 feet tall.
This wireless internet technology offered by Virginia Broadband and e-Office uses radio waves to send signals and requires an open line-of-sight from the transmission or relay station. Receivers and the antenna are often mounted on telephone poles on the user’s property, or on tops of buildings. Some county residents are already served by these providers. (The existing installations may be technically in violation of current regulations, but the amendment would clear this legal issue.)
The zoning amendment, approved on a 6-0 vote, goes next to the Board of Supervisors for final consideration, probably at its January meeting.
In other action Wednesday evening, the Planning Commission:
- Recommended approval for an amendment defining the penalties for violations of the county’s zoning code, updating the existing version to conform with changes in state law. In general, violation of the zoning code is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine up to $1,000, with additional fines to be applied if the violator fails to correct the violation within specified time periods.
- Gave its approval to another amendment governing the conduct of public hearings, which draws distinctions between situations when a meeting is “recessed” as opposed to “continued” and defining when a meeting is “commenced” and spelling out what should happen when a meeting is “commenced” but cannot be completed. Those who need to know more about this may call John McCarthy.
- Recommended approval of certain amendments to the county’s zoning and subdivision ordinances that will be needed if the Board of Supervisors approves a proposed new Stormwater Management Ordinance. This new ordinance, aimed at reducing erosion and sediment-runoff into county streams, would impose standards for managing rainwater runoff on all commercial construction projects, all new residential subdivisions, and for all new driveway construction projects beyond a certain length. According to McCarthy, “the most immediate and likely impactful consequence of this ordinance will be that persons building a single family home that includes a very long driveway (over 1,000 feet and with a 10% grade at any point) will be required to engineer that driveway in such a manner as to manage the stormwater. This will require, in essence, an engineered plan prepared by a professional and reviewed and approved by the county.”
The new ordinance would apply only to new construction and would not have any application to existing situations, such as long driveways not built to such standards.
The Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing on the proposed Stormwater Management Ordinance before considering its approval.
-- James P. Gannon
Write a comment