[1. Call to Order]
[00:00:13]
UH, SO, UH, THE CODE OF VIRGINIA REQUIRES LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO HAVE A PLANNING COMMISSION, THE PURPOSE OF WHICH IS TO ADVISE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON LAND USE AND PLANNING ISSUES AFFECTING THE COUNTY.
THIS RESPONSIBILITY IS EXERCISED THROUGH RECOMMENDATIONS CONVEYED BY RESOLUTIONS OR OTHER OFFICIAL MEANS.
IN ALL MATTERS OF PUBLIC RECORD, THE COMMISSION IS COMPRISED OF SEVEN CITIZEN VOLUNTEERS APPOINTED BY THE BOARD WITH ONE REPRESENTED REPRESENTATIVE FROM EACH VOTING DISTRICT, AND TWO AT LARGE MEMBERS.
MR. CHAIRMAN, YOU HAVE A QUORUM.
WOULD YOU JOIN US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PLEDGE? PLEDGE ALLE TO THE FLAG, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS? ONE NATION UNDERGONE INDIVISIBLE, LIBERTY AND JUSTICE.
[4. Approve Minutes – November 13, 2024]
ITEM OF BUSINESS IS TO PROVE THE MEETING MINUTES FROM OUR LAST MEETING.I THINK ALL THE COMMISSIONERS RECEIVED THOSE.
ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS OR DISCUSSION POINTS? MOTION.
A MOTION TO, UH, BY MR. SMITH TO APPROVE THE MINUTES.
THE MOTION BY MR. SMITH IS TO ADOPT THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING ON NOVEMBER 13TH, 2024.
[5. Citizen Comments]
UH, CITIZEN COMMENTS.AND LEMME JUST SAY A COUPLE OF THINGS, CITIZEN COMMENTS.
UH, AS YOU NOTICED TONIGHT, WE HAVE THREE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA THAT WE'LL HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR.
CITIZEN COMMENTS IS A CHANCE FOR ANYONE TO COME AND ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON ANY TOPIC THEY WOULD LIKE.
UH, NOT THOSE THREE TOPICS IS WE'LL HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR THOSE.
UH, AND I'D ALSO LIKE TO SAY, AND I'LL PROBABLY REMIND US AS WE GET INTO THIS A LITTLE BIT TOO, UH, WE LIKE TO MAINTAIN A, A PROPER ETIQUETTE IN THE DECORUM HERE.
AND, UH, A LOT OF TIMES, UH, IF THERE ARE ITEMS THAT, UH, ARE, UH, THERE ARE PEOPLE HERE FROM BOTH SIDES, AND SO WE'D ASK THAT IF PEOPLE ARE SPEAKING, PLEASE, UH, YOU KNOW, IS NOT THE TIME TO CHEER AND CLAP AND THOSE KIND OF THINGS.
SO, UH, APPRECIATE, UH, RESPECTING THE PROCESS.
NO, I, I WE WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO ALL THREE OF THESE TIME OF THE ITEM.
I, I CAN'T HEAR AT THE TIME OF THE ITEM, SO I'M JUST TRYING TO GET CLARIFICATION.
SO THIS THE FIRST HEARING CORRECT ITEM? THAT'S CORRECT.
THIS IS, UH, FOR THE FIRST ITEM.
SO, UH, WE'VE NOT RECEIVED ANY REQUESTS FOR CITIZEN'S COMMENT.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? ALRIGHT, SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE CITIZEN COMMENT AND MOVE ON TO OUR
[Application No. YVA-58-24, Yorktown Main St. LLC.: Request for Yorktown Village Activity approval, pursuant to Section 24.1-327(b) of the York County Zoning Ordinance, to authorize the establishment of a tourist home on a 0.48-acre parcel (P11b-3190-4741) located at 606 Main Street. (Route 1001). The property is zoned YVA (Yorktown Village Activity) district and is designated Yorktown in the Comprehensive Plan]
PUBLIC HEARINGS.THE FIRST ONE, UH, WE WILL ASK STAFF TO PRESENT, UH, IS, UH, APPLICATION Y VA 58 DASH 24.
UH, GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS APPLICATION IS A REQUEST FOR A YVA PERMIT TO AUTHORIZE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A TOURIST HOME IN AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED DWELLING, LOCATED AT 6 0 6 MAIN STREET.
THE PROPERTY IS SITUATED IN A 0.48 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED IN THE YORKTOWN VILLAGE ACTIVITY, AND IT IS ACROSS SMITH STREET FROM THE HORNSBY HOUSE INN.
THE SUBJECT PARCEL HIGHLIGHTED HERE IN PINK AND THE SURROUNDING PARCELS ARE ZONED YVA FOR YORKTOWN VILLAGE ACTIVITY.
THIS IS AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
THE ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIRES THE OWNER TO EITHER RESIDE IN THE HOME OR IN AN ADJACENT PREMISE, OR DESIGNATE A RESPONSIBLE PARTY WHO CAN RESPOND TO AND RESOLVE PROBLEMS THAT ARISE WHILE TENANTS ARE TAKING, UM, RENTALS ARE TAKING PLACE.
ALSO, THE BOARD POLICY STATES THAT THE OWNER OF A TOURIST HOME SHOULD RESIDE, RESIDE EITHER IN THE HOME OR IN AN ADJACENT PREMISE.
IN THIS CASE, YORKTOWN MAIN STREET, LLC,
[00:05:01]
OWNS THE HORNSBY HOUSE INN, HIGHLIGHTED HERE IN PURPLE, UH, AND THEIR GENERAL MANAGER AND THE STAFF WILL MANAGE THE TOURIST HOME.THIS IS A PICTURE OF THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY, PICTURE OF THE DRIVEWAY, LOOKING TOWARDS SMITH STREET AT THE HORNSBY HOUSE INN.
THIS IS, AGAIN, ANOTHER PICTURE OF THE DRIVEWAY, AND THIS IS WHERE THE CARS WOULD BE PARKED UP TO THREE VEHICLES.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS APPROXIMATELY 1200 SQUARE FEET.
THE BEDROOMS ARE UPSTAIRS, AND STAFF HAS PROPOSED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THAT WOULD REQUIRE THE TOURIST HOME TO BE RENTED AS A WHOLE HOUSE RENTAL.
THE RENTAL OF INDIVIDUAL ROOMS WOULD BE PROHIBITED AND AN OCCUP OCCUPANCY OF UP TO FOUR GUESTS WITH LENGTHS OF STAY, RANGING FROM A MINIMUM OF TWO NIGHTS TO A MAXIMUM OF SEVEN NIGHTS.
UH, THE APPLICANT'S WISH, UH, DO NOT WISH TO HAVE SIGNS ADVERTISING THE TOURIST HOME.
THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL MEETS THE STANDARDS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND IS CONSISTENT WITH THE TYPE AND INTENSITY OF PREVIOUSLY APPROVED TOURIST HOME.
STAFF BELIEVES THE TOURIST, UH, THE PROPOSED TOURIST HOME WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE CHARACTER OF THE YORKTOWN VILLAGE.
THEREFORE, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THIS APPLICATION, AND STAFF RECOMMENDS THE CONDITION SET FORTH IN PROPOSED RESOLUTION PC 24 DASH 22.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, AND I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
AND THE APPLICANTS ARE ALSO HERE TONIGHT.
ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE QUESTIONS? NOPE.
IS THERE ANY OTHER, UH, TOURIST HOMES IN EITHER THE VILLAGE OR IN THE COUNTY? YEAH, HE'S GOTTA HELP ME TURN MY MIC ON, OTHERWISE I CAN'T DO THIS.
THAT'S, THAT'S OWNED AND OPERATED BY A CORPORATION.
ANY QUESTIONS HERE? YEAH, PLEASE.
UM, ONE QUICK, DOES THIS MEET THE NEW BOARD POLICY? YES, IT DOES.
ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE BOARD POLICY? YES.
UH, NO OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
WE'LL, UH, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, THE PUBLIC HEARING STARTS OFF WITH THE APPLICANT HAVING 10 MINUTES IF THEY WOULD LIKE, UH, TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
UM, AND YOU'LL NOTICE THERE ARE LIGHTS, UH, ON THE, UH, ON THE PODIUM THERE.
WHEN THE YELLOW LIGHT COMES ON, YOU'VE GOT 30 SECONDS LEFT AND THE RED LIGHT COMES ON, WOULD ASK YOU TO STOP, UH, AND YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO TAKE THE WHOLE 10 MINUTES IF YOU WOULDN'T LIKE.
AND LET ME JUST, UH, WHILE YOU'RE GETTING READY AND GETTING THE BRIEFING UP, UH, THERE ARE FORMS OUTSIDE IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AT THE PUBLIC HEARING AT ANY OF THESE, IF YOU'LL FILL THOSE OUT AND HAND OVER HERE TO THE CLERK FOR FUTURE HEARINGS.
SO WITH THAT END, WE'D ASK, UH, ANYBODY THAT SPEAKS TO, UH, YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE.
MY NAME IS DAVID HORNSBY BDI, UH, 7 0 2 MAIN STREET, WHICH IS THE HORNSBY HOUSE INN.
IT'S BEEN A FAMILY HOME SINCE 1930 WHEN IT WAS ORIGINALLY CONSTRUCTED.
UM, I PULLED UP A PICTURE OF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE BECAUSE YOU PROBABLY DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THIS HOUSE.
IT'S QUITE UNIQUE, QUITE INTERESTING.
WE BOUGHT THE PROPERTY FROM FRED ROBERTSON, AN ARCHITECT, A LOCAL ARCHITECT FRIEND OF OURS BACK IN, UH, I THINK IT WAS ABOUT, UH, 14, 15 YEARS AGO.
AND HE GAVE ME A FILE ON THE HOUSE.
AND IT ACTUALLY, THE MATERIALS YOU SEE THERE, THE REAL SLATE ROOF, IT'S REAL, IT'S REAL SLATE, WAS A HOUSE BUILT IN DENWITTY COUNTY IN THE 17 HUNDREDS.
UM, ADMIRAL VALENTINE'S WIFE AT THE BEGINNING OF WORLD WAR II WANTED A SMALL HOME FOR HER TO VISIT YORKTOWN.
SO SHE HAD THE MATERIALS FROM THIS HOUSE MOVED TO THIS LOCATION, AND THEY REBUILT IT FROM THE HOUSE THAT WAS IN DINWOODY COUNTY.
NOW, SOME PEOPLE TOLD ME IT WAS KING, KING AND QUEEN COUNTY, BUT I'M STICKING WITH DINWOODY RIGHT NOW.
AND THE BRICK IS FROM THE 17 HUNDREDS, A SLATE ROOF.
THE INSIDE, I THOUGHT I HAD PICTURES TO SHOW YOU THE WONDERFUL, UH, UH, WOODEN, UM, UH, FIREPLACE AND THE, THE BEAMS. AND THE, THE HOUSE IS JUST, IT'S VERY UNIQUE, BUT IT'S SMALL.
IT BASICALLY HAS A LIVING ROOM THAT ABOUT THE SIZE OF THAT AREA THERE, A VERY SMALL KITCHEN.
AND UPSTAIRS THERE'S A SMALL BEDROOM, A MASTER BEDROOM THAT WE PUT A KING SIZE BID IN, AND THEN EVEN SMALLER SECOND ROOM.
SO IT'S A KIND OF A TINY HOUSE ACTUALLY.
AND, UM, WE'VE OWNED IT FOR THESE YEARS AND WE'VE USED IT
[00:10:01]
FOR DIFFERENT PURPOSES.THIS APPLICATION IS SO THAT, TO LET YOU KNOW THAT, UM, WE'RE NEXT DOOR.
THE HORNSBY HOUSE INN HAS BEEN THERE SINCE, UH, BEEN IN OPERATION NOW FOR 13 YEARS.
WE'VE HAD OVER 21,000 GUESTS COME THROUGH.
MY BROTHER PHILIP, WHO I LOST THREE YEARS AGO, AND I MISS HIM DEARLY.
WE COOKED BREAKFAST, WE DID EVERYTHING.
BUT AS TIME WENT ON AND PHIL PASSED AWAY, UH, WE GOT YOUNGER, SMARTER PEOPLE RUNNING IT NOW.
AND I WANT TO INTRODUCE TOM MUL.
TOM HAS BEEN THE GENERAL MANAGER NOW FOR TWO AND A HALF YEARS.
HE ALSO HAS GOT SOME SKIN IN THE GAME.
'CAUSE NOW HE IS A ONE FOURTH OWNER OF THAT HOUSE.
AND THE HORNSBY HOUSE IN, HE'S THE GENERAL MANAGER.
HE HAS A GREAT STAFF, UH, KATRINA AND LEXI.
AND IF YOU HAD TIME, YOU COULD READ PROBABLY A HUNDRED REVIEWS SINCE HE'S BEEN RUNNING IT THAT ARE FIVE STAR OVER THE TOP.
UM, SO ANYWAY, THAT'S A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE HOUSE.
I DON'T, I'VE TALKED TO SEVERAL OF THE NEIGHBORS NEXT DOOR.
I, I SAID CELESTE, YOU WON'T EVEN NOTICE PEOPLE COMING THERE.
AND, UH, TERRY HOON AND BOB, THEY'RE HERE.
I THINK THEY EVEN WROTE A LETTER.
UH, THEY HAD NO PROBLEM WITH IT.
I HAVE NOT, NOBODY HAS CONTACTED ME WITH ANY PROBLEM ABOUT US USING IT FOR THIS PURPOSE.
THE GOOD THING ABOUT THIS IS THAT TOM AND HIS STAFF ARE THERE 24 7.
WE'LL PROBABLY BE INVITING THESE PEOPLE TO COME OVER AND HAVE BREAKFAST WITH US IN THE MORNING.
BUT IT DOES HAVE ITS OWN KITCHEN.
THIS HOUSE IS PROBABLY MORE COMPATIBLE TO COLONIAL WILLIAMSBURG THAT HAS A LOT OF, UH, COLONIAL TIME HOUSES THAT THEY RENT TO THEIR GUESTS THAT COME IN WHERE THEY COME IN AND STAY THE HOUSE.
THEY HAVE THEIR OWN KITCHEN, REFRIGERATOR AND SO FORTH.
SO I THINK THIS FITS THE CHARACTER OF YORKTOWN PERFECTLY.
I DON'T THINK I TOOK MORE THAN FOUR MINUTES TRYING TO SAVE YOU GUYS TIME.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE ASK ME.
AND WITH THAT, ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? NO.
THANK YOU FOR, APPRECIATE THAT YOUR TIME.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE ON THE, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION.
UH, I DON'T HAVE ANYBODY ELSE THAT HAS SIGNED UP THAT WANTS TO SPEAK, UH, TO THIS, UH, THIS ISSUE.
IS THERE ANYBODY HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO OKAY WITH THAT, I GUESS I'M SUPPOSED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND, UH, WITH THAT, ANY DISCUSSION FROM COMMISSIONERS? JI VERY WELL, UH, PRESENTED MY APPLICATION.
IN MY OPINION, IT, IT CERTAINLY LENDS ITSELF TO A, A GOOD SETUP HERE, UH, WITH THE LOCATION AND PROXIMITY TO THE, UH, AIRBNB.
SO, I MEAN, THE, THE BED AND BREAKFAST THAT'S NEXT DOOR, I THINK THAT DEFINITELY WILL SUPPORT THIS.
YOU KNOW, I GOTTA TALK
IT'S A GOOD APPLICATION, GOOD LOCATION.
UH, I DON'T, THE ONLY ISSUE I HAD WITH IT IS I DON'T LIKE CORPORATIONS DOING TOURIST HOMES.
I THINK THAT HEADS US DOWN A PATH THAT WE REALLY DON'T WANT TO GET TO.
AND I THINK I WAS OUTVOTED, UH, SEVERAL TIMES NOW.
BUT ANYWAY, UH, I I DON'T LIKE THAT.
AND THAT'S THE ONLY REASON I DON'T LIKE IT.
I THINK IT'S, IT'S GOOD I THAT, BUT A CORPORATIONS HOLDING TOURIST HOMES, THEY CAN DO MULTIPLE ONES AND IT'S ALWAYS NOT JUST, MAYBE NOT YOU GUYS, BUT IF YOU, IF YOU GET THIS OUT IN THE COUNTY, THEY CAN ALWAYS 0.1 PERSON, POINT THE OTHER PERSON.
IT'S THAT STAFF MEMBER, IT'S SOMEBODY ELSE.
UH, NOT A DISCUSSION TIME AT THIS POINT.
MY COMMENT IS GONNA BE DIRECTLY AGAINST YOURS,
AND IT HAS HISTORY OF ALREADY DOING THIS.
AND WITH THIS, THIS LOOKS LIKE A SLAM DUNK TO ME.
AND I, THE CORPORATION PART, ALTHOUGH I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERNS, I DON'T THINK IT APPLIES SO MUCH IN THIS PARTICULAR ONE, BROOKS.
UH, WITH THAT, I, I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY, DO YOU HAVE I MOVE? OKAY, GO AHEAD PLEASE.
THE MOTION BY MR. CHAMBERLAIN IS TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NUMBER PC 24 DASH 22 FOR THE YORKTOWN VILLAGE APPROVAL TO AUTHORIZE THE TOURIST HOME LOCATED AT 6 0 6 MAIN STREET.
[00:15:01]
THANK YOU.UH, AND JUST TO EXPLAIN THE PROCESS I THINK MOST FOLKS KNOW IS YOU THE, ALL OF THESE COME BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
WE EITHER APPROVE THEM OR DISAPPROVE THEM, BUT THAT JUST GOES THEN TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND THE PROCESS KIND OF REPEATS AGAIN WHERE THEY WILL HAVE A HEARING.
THEY MIGHT AGREE WITH US, THEY MIGHT NOT AGREE WITH US.
SO, UH, ANYWAY, JUST TO, TO UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS GOING FORWARD.
AND THAT, UH, WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT
[Application No. ZT-201-24, York County Planning Commission: Consider amendments for sexually-oriented businesses to the York County Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 24.1), York County Code by amending Section 24.1-104, Definitions, Section 24.1-284, Prohibited home occupations, Section 24.1-306, Table of land uses; and Section 24.1-470.2, Standards for sexually-oriented businesses. ]
APPLICATION.SO THIS APPLICATION IS TO CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO INCORPORATE REGULATIONS FOR SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES.
JUST A LITTLE BIT OF LEVITY BEFORE WE START OUR MEETING.
NOT THAT KIND OF DULL CONTENT
UM, IN ALL SERIOUSNESS, SO I WANNA DISCUSS THE BACKGROUND BEHIND THIS APPLICATION AND WHY WE'RE BRINGING THESE AMENDMENTS FORWARD.
THE DISCUSSION AROUND ADULT USES KIND OF ORIGINATED IN PART WITH THE HOME-BASED BUSINESS COMMITTEE.
THAT WAS THE AD HOC COMMITTEE THAT WAS FORMED A COUPLE MONTHS AGO IN RELATION TO THOSE HOME OCCUPATION AMENDMENTS THAT WERE RECENTLY ADOPTED BY THE BOARD.
AND IN THE COURSE OF THE COMMITTEE'S DISCUSSION, ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT CAME UP WAS BANNING ADULT USES AS A HOME OCCUPATION.
AND WHAT KIND OF THAT SEGUED INTO IS REALLY RIGHT NOW OUR ZONING ORDINANCE, WE DON'T ADDRESS ADULT USES AT ALL THERE.
WE DON'T HAVE DEFINITIONS, WE DON'T HAVE REGULATIONS, IT'S JUST SILENT ON IT.
SO THIS KIND OF SPURRED US INTO ACTION TO LOOK AT, OKAY, IF WE'RE GONNA WRITE REGULATION, IF WE'RE GONNA WRITE DEFINITIONS, WHERE DO WE START? AND SO THIS WAS KIND OF A COUPLE OF PIECES PLAYED INTO OUR BACKGROUND RESEARCH.
WE STUDIED ZONING REGULATIONS IN ADJACENT CITIES AND COUNTIES, WHICH I HAVE A SIDE ON.
WE ALSO ANALYZE EXISTING BUSINESSES AND LOCATIONS, WHERE ARE ADULT BUSINESSES RIGHT NOW.
I ALSO HAVE A SLIDE DISCUSSING THAT IN A LITTLE BIT MORE DEPTH TOO.
SO AS FAR AS STUDYING REGULATIONS, SO WE LOOKED IN TWO PLACES.
THE FIRST IS WE LOOKED IN OUR HAMPTON ROADS REGION, WHAT CITIES, WHAT COUNTIES ALREADY HAVE REGULATIONS IN THEIR ZONING ORDINANCES FOR ADULT USES.
AND YOU SEE THERE ON THE MAP, THESE ARE THE COUNTIES AND CITIES, UH, IOWA WHITE RATHER BEING THE ONLY COUNTY THAT HAS REGULATION.
AND IT WAS VERY VARIABLE ACROSS THE BOARD WHAT WE SAW.
SOME ONLY HAD LIKE A FEW DEFINITIONS AND A FEW PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.
OTHERS SUCH AS CHESAPEAKE, THEY HAD A WHOLE SUPPLEMENT IN THEIR ZONING ORDINANCE WHERE THEY HAD DEFINITIONS AND THEN THEY HAD PRETTY ROBUST PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.
AND SOME PLACES THINGS WERE ONLY ALLOWED BY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT OR SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
AND OTHER PLACES IT'S ALLOWED BY RIGHTS.
AND SIMILARLY, WE SAW VARIATION IN WHAT KINDS OF USES WERE UNDER THIS UMBRELLA OF ADULT USES.
UM, OLDER ORDINANCES THAT WERE ADOPTED IN MAYBE THE EIGHTIES OR NINETIES.
WE SAW DIFFERENT KINDS OF USES THAN NEWER ADOPTED ONES.
I WANNA NOTE THAT, YOU KNOW, JAMES CITY AND THE NEW KEN COUNTY AND WILLIAMSBURG, UH, DIDN'T FIND, UM, ANY REGULATIONS FOR, YOU KNOW, ADULT USES OR SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES IN THOSE ORDINANCES.
WE ALSO LOOK NORTH, KIND OF AT THE RICHMOND REGION AND IN RIKO COUNTY, CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, CITY OF RICHMOND, ANDOVER COUNTY, AND THEN CHARLES CITY ALSO AGAIN HAVE REGULATIONS AND AGAIN, DIFFERENT FORMS IN DIFFERENT STYLES, BUT DIFFERENT WAYS THAT THEY ADDRESS ADULT USES.
SO WE TOOK ALL OF THAT TO SAY, OKAY, WHAT, WHAT FROM THESE DEFINITIONS CAN IS, IS WHAT CAN WE PULL FROM THIS TO INFORM US AS WE GOT TO OUR NEXT PIECE, WHICH IS WHAT SORT OF ADULT BUSINESSES ARE CURRENTLY EXISTING IN OPERATING IN OUR REGION? WHAT DO WE REGULATE? AND SO WHAT I PROVIDED YOU IN YOUR PACKET, YOU HAVE THAT SPREADSHEET AND THEN THAT AND LOCATION ANALYSIS.
BUT WHAT THAT KIND OF SHOWED US ARE THERE, THERE'RE KIND OF TWO GENERAL TYPES OF BUSINESSES THAT CURRENTLY OPERATE NOW IN THIS INDUSTRY.
THE BLUE ARE WHAT I'M GONNA CALL LIKE ADULT RETAIL STORES THAT SELL ITEMS. AND PINK ARE WHAT I'M GONNA CALL ADULT ENTERTAINMENT ESTABLISHMENT.
UM, NOT NECESSARILY NIGHTCLUBS, BUT ADJACENT TO THAT YOU CAN PROBABLY INFER.
AND WHAT WE LOOKED AT WHEN WE REALLY, THE PURPOSE OF DOING THIS LOCATION ANALYSIS WAS NOT JUST TO UNDERSTAND LIKE WHAT KINDS OF BUSINESSES ARE THAT WE NEED TO REGULATE, BUT WHERE ARE THEY LOCATED? WHAT, WHAT KIND OF ZONING DISTRICTS ARE THEY GENERALLY LOCATED IN? ARE THEY BUFFERED FROM RESIDENTIAL? ARE THEY STANDALONE? ARE THEY IN SHOPPING CENTERS? AND THEN HOW ARE THEY PERMITTED? ARE THEY USES THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN GRANDFATHERED IN PRE-EXISTING ZONING ORDINANCE.
AND SO WE LOOKED AT ALL THAT TO KIND OF INFORM US AGAIN, HOW HOW SHOULD WE WRITE THESE REGULATIONS.
UM, AND REALLY THERE'S SOME KEY TAKEAWAYS FROM THAT.
WE NOTICED A LOT OF THE RETAIL STORES TENDED TO BE IN LIKE SHOPPING CENTERS AND NOT NECESSARILY STANDALONE WHILE ADULT ENTERTAINMENT ESTABLISHMENTS OFTENTIMES WERE IN INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS OR LIKE VERY INTENSE COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS.
[00:20:01]
THEMSELVES.AND SO THAT KIND OF LEADS US INTO OUR NEXT DISCUSSION, WHICH I'M GONNA SEGUE THIS BY SAYING THAT I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY.
THIS IS JUST RATHER A LARGE, MORE BROAD OVERVIEW OF SOME OF THE LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS THAT STAFF TOOK WHEN WE WERE WRITING THESE AMENDMENTS.
SO AN INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT LEGAL CONSIDERATION WHEN WE ARE GONNA BE WRITING REGULATIONS FOR ADULT BUSINESSES IS THE FIRST AMENDMENT.
SO THIS IS A REFRESHER, YOU PROBABLY ARE AWARE, BUT THE FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTS FREE SPEECH AND TO A DEGREE THE THINGS, THE PRODUCTS OF FREE SPEECH.
WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, LIKE PICTURES, BOOKS, ART MEDIA, MOVIES.
AND THEY FALL UNDER THIS KIND OF CLASS OF LIKE WHAT WE'RE GONNA CALL PROTECTED SPEECH.
NOW THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT FALL OUTSIDE THE LIMIT OF PROTECTED SPEECH, THINGS SUCH AS OBSCENITY THAT TIP INTO THAT.
BUT GENERALLY WHERE THIS INTERSECTS WITH ADULT REGULATIONS IS THERE'S A LOT OF CASE LAW AND REALLY LANDMARK SUPREME COURT CASES THAT HAVE GONE TO THE SUPREME COURT.
AND WHAT THESE KIND OF INFORM US OF ARE ESSENTIALLY THE COURT HAS SAID, YES, YOU CAN WRITE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR ADULT USES.
UM, FOR INSTANCE, SOME OF THESE DEAL WITH LIKE DISTANCE AND SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS, OTHERS DEAL LIKE, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE CREATING A DISTRICT.
BUT WHAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT IS THAT WE CAN'T NECESSARILY REGULATE LIKE THE CONTENT.
AND SO THAT'S WHEN YOU GET INTO AREAS WHERE, AGAIN, IF YOU HAVE PROTECTED SPEECH, THE GOVERNMENT CAN'T REALLY CREATE, WE DON'T WANNA CREATE A REGULATION THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED LIKE SUPPRESS SUPPRESSION OF THAT SPEECH OR INFRINGING ON THOSE FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS.
MERCHANDISE IS A LITTLE BIT MORE MURKY, SPECIFICALLY ADULT MERCHANDISE.
UM, THE COURT ITSELF, FROM WHAT I COULD SEE HASN'T DIRECTLY ADDRESSED ADULT MERCHANDISE, BUT IT'S BEEN LITIGATED IN LOWER COURTS.
AND WHAT'S KIND OF COME FROM THAT IS, AGAIN, BANNING OR PREVENTING THE SALE.
YOU'RE STARTING TO KIND OF GET OVER INTO LIKE RIGHT TO PRIVACY AND ISSUES LIKE THAT.
SO A LITTLE MURKY HERE, BUT AGAIN, WE NEED TO ERR ON THE SIDE OF CAUTION WHEN WE'RE WRITING REGULATIONS FOR THESE THINGS.
SO ZONING, AS YOU ALL ARE PROBABLY AWARE, IT'S THE BASIC TECHNIQUE USED BY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.
AND IN THIS CASE WE WERE GONNA USE IT TO REGULATE THE LOCATION OF SEXUAL ORIENTED BUSINESSES.
AND ZONING IS ALSO, AGAIN, SOMETHING ELSE WE USE TO REGULATE OTHER KINDS OF BUSINESSES.
SO THE SUPREME COURT HAS UPHELD THAT THE APPLICATION OF ZONING TECHNIQUES TO SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES AS A DISTINCT CATEGORY OF LAND USE IS VALID.
HOWEVER, THIS IS THE KIND OF TEST THAT THEY WOULD APPLY TO THESE REGULATIONS.
WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT IT FROM A FIRST AMENDMENT FREE SPEECH PERSPECTIVE.
THE REGULATION HAS TO BE WITHIN THE POWER OF THE GOVERNMENT HAS TO FURTHER IMPORTANT GOVERNMENT INTEREST, HAS TO BE UNRELATED TO THE SU SUPPRESSION OF SPEECH AND WHATEVER INCIDENTAL RESTRICTIONS ON FREE SPEECH ARE NO GREATER THAN THE ESSENTIAL TO FURTHER THE INTEREST.
THOSE ARE THE KINDS OF THINGS WE HAVE TO CONSIDER WHEN WE'RE WRITING SOMEWHAT CONTENT NEUTRAL REGULATIONS.
SO THIS LEADS US TO OUR CONSIDERATIONS.
SO PEOPLE HAVE TRIED TO BAN ADULT USES MANY, MANY TIMES GOING BACK DECADES.
AND WHAT A LOT OF CASE LAW AND LITIGATION HAS KIND OF SHOWN US IS THAT OUTRIGHT PROHIBITION IS SHOWN TO BE A BIT DIFFICULT TO SUSTAIN IF DOES GET CHALLENGED.
AGAIN, WHEN CREATING THESE REGULATIONS.
WE NEED IS PARAMOUNT TO AVOID CONFLICT AND ISSUES WITH THE FIRST AMENDMENT.
WE, WE CANNOT INFRINGE ON FREE SPEECH RIGHTS.
SO FOR CREATING CONTINUITY RULES REGULATIONS, THEY HAVE TO WITHSTAND WHAT'S CALLED INTERMEDIATE CERTAIN SCRUTINY.
UM, NOW THAT'S, AGAIN, THIS GETS A LITTLE CONFUSING LEGALLY, BUT ESSENTIALLY WE WANT THE REGULATION TO WITHSTAND, IT HAS TO UPHOLD A IMPORTANT GOVERNMENT INTEREST UNRELATED TO THE SUPPRESSION OF SPEECH AND CAN'T BURDEN SUBSTANTIALLY MORE SPEECH THAN NECESSARY.
SO AGAIN, THINGS TO CONSIDER LIKE THIS IS SIMILAR TO WHEN WE ARE DOING SIGN REGULATION AND IF WE'RE GONNA WRITE DEFINITIONS FOR SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES, WE HAVE TO HAVE VERY CLEAR DEFINITIONS.
WE CAN'T HAVE ANY KIND OF MURKY OR THINGS THAT COULD BE CONFUSING BECAUSE AGAIN, THAT'S BEEN LITIGATED ALREADY.
SO THIS ALL KIND OF LEADS US TO WHAT ARE OUR PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
IN 1 0 4, WE HAVE, UH, YOU PROBABLY SAW QUITE A FEW NEW DEFINITIONS.
I'M GONNA CALL THIS THE LARGER UMBRELLA DEFINITION SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESS, WHICH I'M GOING TO ABBREVIATE IS SOB.
WE HAVE FURTHER DEFINITIONS UNDER THAT.
NOW, THESE KIND OF ARE LIKE A RUSSIAN NESTING DOLL WHERE THEY EACH LEAD INTO EACH OTHER.
SO OKAY, WE HAVE THE BROADER DEFINITION OF SOB AND THEN WE HAVE, OKAY, WE'LL HAVE ADULT ENTERTAINMENT ESTABLISHMENT AND THEN AN ADULT STORE.
WHAT'S IN THE ADULT STORE? ADULT MEDIA, ADULT NOVELTY ITEMS. WHAT, WHAT COMPRISES THOSE? AND THEN WE GET DOWN TO THIS PARTICULAR DEFINITION.
I'M NOT GONNA READ IT OUT LOUD 'CAUSE THIS IS A FAMILY FRIENDLY PUBLIC MEETING.
BUT THE PURPOSE BEHIND THIS IS, AGAIN,
[00:25:01]
WE'RE NOT WRITING THIS FOR FUN.IT'S RATHER BECAUSE WE WANT, WE HAVE TO VERY CLEARLY DEFINE THE COMPONENTS THAT MAKE UP THIS LAND USE.
IN 24 AND 2 84, WE HAVE ADDED SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES TO THE LIST OF PROHIBITED HOME OCCUPATIONS.
THEY'RE NOT APPROPRIATE FOR A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, SUBSECTION SIX IN CATEGORY 11 IS CURRENTLY RESERVED.
WE WOULD STRIKE THAT ADD SOBS TO THAT, AND IT WOULD ONLY BE PERMITTED BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT IN GENERAL BUSINESS AND ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY DISTRICTS STAFF FELT THESE WERE REALLY ONLY THE SUITABLE ZONING DISTRICTS FOR THIS KIND OF LAND USE.
AND THEN LASTLY, WE HAVE OUR PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES.
WE KIND OF COVERED THREE CATEGORIES, GENERALLY, DISTANCE SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS, VISIBILITY, AND THEN REGULATIONS FOR OPERATION AND ACCESS FOR DISTANCE FROM A SCHOOL OR A DAYCARE OR A COLLEGE UNIVERSITY.
AN ADULT BUSINESS NEEDS TO BE AT LEAST A THOUSAND FEET AWAY.
SIMILARLY, FROM A RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT OR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ROAD ZONING DISTRICT, AN EXISTING RESIDENCE, A PLACE OF WORSHIP, A PARK, A SENIOR HOUSING, A TIMESHARE RESORT, MOTEL, HOTEL, CAMPGROUND, ANOTHER, UM, ADULT USE.
WE HAVE THAT SEPARATION REQUIREMENT OF 500 FEET.
NOW I WANNA NOTE THAT THE SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS DIDN'T REALLY COME OUT OF THIN AIR NECESSARILY.
SO WHAT STAFF LOOKED AT IS, AGAIN, THE COURT HAS KIND OF HELD THAT SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS ARE DEFENSIBLE, BUT THEY NEED TO BE REASONABLE.
SO YOU CAN'T CREATE SUCH A DISTANCE REQUIREMENT THAT THEN THAT WOULD PREVENT THE USE FROM GOING ANYWHERE IN THE COUNTY BECAUSE OF HOW IT WOULD SAY LIKE PROHIBITIVE THE BUFFER WOULD BE.
SO WHAT WE DID IS WE QUEUED UP A MAP IN GIS, WHICH YOU GOT A COPY OF IN YOUR PACKET.
AND WE RAN A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT, LIKE SEPARATION SCENARIOS.
WE LOOKED AT A HALF MILE, WE LOOKED AT A THOUSAND FEET, WE LOOKED AT 500 FEET, WE SEPARATED IT FROM ALL THESE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS.
WE SEPARATED FROM CERTAIN USES AND WHAT DO WE END UP WITH? AND WHAT WE KIND OF ENDED UP WITH, WITH A THOUSAND FEET ACROSS THE BOARD FOR EVERYTHING, UM, REALLY WOULDN'T LEAVE ANY AVAILABLE LAND.
AND THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN'T DO.
SO WE HAVE TO HAVE AT LEAST A LITTLE BIT OF AVAILABLE LAND FOR THIS PARTICULAR USE.
WE FELT THAT KEEPING THE A THOUSAND FOOT BUFFER FROM A SCHOOL WAS APPROPRIATE.
WE REALLY WANNA HAVE THAT DISTANCE BETWEEN THESE USES AND OUR SCHOOLS OR DAYCARES OR COLLEGES, BUT STILL HAVE SEPARATION FROM RESIDENCES 500 FEET FROM A RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH MIND YOU, WE ALSO INCLUDED RC, THAT'S A RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT, SO THAT'S FULL INCLUDED IN THAT BUFFER ANALYSIS.
AGAIN, WE HAVE SOME LAND ON LIKE MAJOR CORRIDORS, BUT AGAIN, IT PROVIDED THAT SEPARATION WE FELT WAS APPROPRIATE.
SOME VISIBILITY REGULATIONS, WE WOULDN'T LIKE ANY ADULT ITEMS TO BE VISIBLE FROM OUTSIDE AN ADULT ESTABLISHMENT.
SIMILARLY, THIS WOULD REQUIRE RENDERINGS AND PLANS FOR SIGNAGE FOR AN ADULT BUSINESS, UM, WHEN THEY WOULD APPLY FOR AN SEP THAT WOULD COME IN WITH THAT APPLICATION.
AND THEN SOME REGULATIONS ON OPERATION AND ACCESS.
WE HAVE OUR RESTRICTIONS FOR ADULT ENTERTAINMENT BUSINESSES AND THEN OUR RESTRICTIONS FOR ADULT STORES.
THESE ARE KIND OF IN MIND OF SECURITY, OKAY? WE HAVE A RESTRICTION THAT AN ADULT VENDING MACHINE MUST BE LOCATED INSIDE AN ADULT STORE.
UM, THESE ARE REAL THINGS THAT, UH, ARE IN OTHER COUNTRIES AND THEY'RE STARTING TO COME OVER TO THE US AND SO WHEN TALKING TO A FELLOW PLANNING COLLEAGUE, THEY MENTIONED THEY HAD A INSTANCE OF AN ADULT VENDING MACHINE WANTING TO GO INTO A PARK.
SO, AND THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY REALLY TOOLS IN THEIR ZONING ORDINANCE TO ACTUALLY ADDRESS THAT.
SO WE WANTED TO COVER IT HERE JUST IN CASE THAT OCCURS IN THE COUNTY.
IT WOULD CONTAIN THAT INSIDE AN ADULT STORE.
AND THEN FINALLY, THESE ESTABLISHMENTS, ALL SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES HAVE TO BE 18 PLUS ONLY SOME CONCLUSIONS REGULATING ADULT USES IS UNIQUE AND IT HAS ITS OWN REALLY UNIQUE REGULATORY CHALLENGES WHEN WE'RE WRITING ZONING REGULATION.
AGAIN, WE WANT A CAREFULLY CRAFTED ORDINANCE, BUT WE CAN WRITE SOMETHING THAT WOULD MITIGATE POTENTIAL NEGATIVE IMPACTS WITH A REASONABLE OPERATION SEPARATION AND VISIBILITY REQUIREMENTS, WHICH IS WHAT WE PRESENTED TO YOU TONIGHT.
I WANNA NOTE TOO, THAT REGULATION OF A USE IS STRICTLY REGULATION.
IT'S NOT NECESSARILY RENDERING A MORAL ON, NOR WE'RE NOT OPENING THE FLOODGATES TO ADULT USES.
THIS IS REGULATING IT AND BEING ABLE TO PROTECT SENSITIVE LAND USES AND PREVENT NEGATIVE SECONDARY EFFECTS.
WITH ALL THESE IN MIND, STAFF'S GONNA RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS APPLICATION SUBJECT TO RESOLUTION PC 24 DASH 23.
AND THAT IS ALL I HAVE FOR YOU TONIGHT.
[00:30:01]
YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.UM, I'M HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
APPRECIATE, UH, THE PRESENTATION AND, UH, THE AMOUNT OF WORK AND RESEARCH THAT WENT INTO IT.
UH, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? START OVER A COUPLE, A COUPLE OF THINGS.
I WENT, WENT THROUGH AND LOOKED AT THE HOMEBASED BUSINESS COMMITTEE, UM, MINUTES TO GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THEIR ISSUE WAS, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY THEY DON'T WANT THIS IN A HOME-BASED MM-HMM
SO OBVIOUSLY THAT BROUGHT IT TO US, UH, TO CREATE, TO GET AHEAD OF THE, A PROBLEM I GUESS BEFORE IT BECOMES ONE.
IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT? WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS IF WE DON'T HAVE AN ORDINANCE TO ADDRESS THIS? WELL, OKAY, SO REALLY IT DEPENDS ON THE KIND OF USE.
UM, YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAD A RETAIL STORE, FOR EXAMPLE, AND WE DON'T DEFINE THAT PARTICULARLY, THEN IT WOULD BE LEFT UP TO THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S INTERPRETATION.
AND REALLY, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT, I I WOULDN'T CALL IT GOOD PRACTICE TO CAUSE SOMETHING TO HAVE TO BE INTERPRETED CONSTANTLY IF WE SEE EVIDENCE OF IT.
ESPECIALLY IF IT'S LIKE, THESE ARE THINGS THAT EXIST, THEY'RE OTHER LOCALITIES, SO IT'S PRUDENT TO HAVE SOME SORT OF REGULATION FOR IT.
UH, AND BY THE WAY, IT, IT, IT'S IMPRESSIVE.
THIS WAS THOROUGHLY RESEARCHED, THOROUGHLY VETTED, UH, MY COMPLIMENTS TO THE STAFF ON PUTTING THIS PACKAGE TOGETHER.
UH, AND I COMPLIMENT YOU ON THAT.
UM, I THINK THERE WAS SOME, UH, THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT FOR RIGHT NOW, SO I WANNA COMPLIMENT IT AS WELL.
I THINK THIS WAS A, A GREAT, UM, GREAT RESEARCH PUT, UM, PUT INTO THIS THING.
AND, UH, AND JUST, JUST TO BE CLEAR MM-HMM
TODAY, THERE'S NO REGULATION FOR THIS AT ALL? NO.
SO IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO OPEN A STORE AND THEY MET ALL THE REGULATIONS FOR A RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT YES.
THEN THEY COULD DO THAT? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND WE WOULDN'T HAVE ANY CONTROL OVER THAT.
SO JUST TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR, THANKS.
I I WANT TO DO THE SAME THING.
I WANNA MAKE SURE THIS IS JUST A STANDARD THAT WE'RE CREATING TO PROTECT US WHEN SOMEONE REQUESTS TO DO THIS MM-HMM
UM, AND THERE, RIGHT NOW THERE ARE NO STORES IN YORK COUNTY? NOT CURRENTLY, NO.
THAT YOU KNOW OF? NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF.
BUT I, I WANT EVERYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE TO UNDERSTAND TOO, THAT IF WE GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS, WE'RE ONLY, UH, APPROVING OR DISAPPROVING AN ORDINANCE FOR SOMETHING THAT COULD COME UP IN THE NEAR FUTURE.
THIS, SO THIS WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT HAS NOT RECEIVED AN INTERPRETATION YET AND SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE COMING TO YOU.
SO IN THIS CASE HAS TO GO THROUGH A SPECIAL USE PERMIT PROCESS.
SO IT WOULD BE A NEW BUSINESS.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY ONES THAT ARE LIKE OPERATING RIGHT NOW.
WE DON'T HAVE LIKE, ANY ADULT ENTERTAINMENT ESTABLISHMENTS OR ADULT STORES THAT ARE CURRENTLY FUNCTIONING IN THE COUNTY AND OPERATING.
AND I, I KNOW THIS IS A VERY SENSITIVE ISSUE IN, AND I AGAIN, APPLAUD THE STAFF FOR EVEN TAKING THIS ON.
'CAUSE I KNOW THIS WAS SUBCONSCIOUSLY YOU WERE THINKING THINGS TO AS WELL AS YOU WERE DOING IT.
TO BE CLEAR, YOU'RE NOT OUTLAWING IT, YOU'RE JUST INDICATING IN CERTAIN ZONING YES.
IT'LL BE ALLOWED WITH A SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
SO LIKE, AS I KIND OF ALLUDED TO EARLIER, UM, PROHIBITING ADULT USES PEOPLE LO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS HAVE TRIED MANY TIMES AND THEY GENERALLY HAVE NOT BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN COURT.
SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE WE'RE UNDERSTANDING IS WE CAN REGULATE BANNING'S, BANNING'S GONNA BE HARD TO DO AND PROBABLY WOULD NOT SUSTAIN NOT NOT A PROBLEM.
AND AGAIN, I COMPLIMENT YOU ON THE DEPTH OF WHAT YOU WENT THROUGH TO GET US ALL THIS INFORMATION.
AND I PROMISE I WILL NOT SET ON ANOTHER AD HOC COMMITTEE.
THESE ARE THE ONLY PLACES, UH, WHERE NOW IT'S KIND OF AN OPEN BOOK THAT ALLOWS A LOT OF INTERPRETATION.
SO AGAIN, UH, YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE, UH, THE OTHER DAY WHEN I CAME OVER AND WE SPENT TIME TOGETHER GOING THROUGH THIS IN DETAIL.
UH, AND, UH, AGAIN, AS ALL OF US HAVE SAID FOR THE, FOR THE DEDICATION, UH, AND, AND RESEARCH THAT YOU'VE DONE.
SO, UH, SINCE WE HAVE NO APPLICANT, UM, UH, I GUESS, UH, WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO, UH, WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS.
I DON'T HAVE ANY A OR ANY NOTES OF ANYBODY THAT WANTS TO SPEAK TO THIS.
UH, IS THERE ANYONE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS? ALL RIGHT.
HEARING NONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, ANY COMMENTS BY COMMISSIONERS OR A MOTION? MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE THAT
[00:35:01]
WE SEND PC 24 DASH THREE TO THE BOARD.JUST IS THERE AN R ON THAT? THERE'S AN R ONE.
RR THE MOTION BY MR. TITUS IS TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NUMBER PC 24 DASH 23 R TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENTS TO THE YORK COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE TO ADDRESS SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES.
[Application No. ZT-202-24, York County Board of Supervisors: Consider amendments for large cruise ship docking to the York County Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 24.1), York County Code, by amending Section 24.1-104, Definitions, Section 24.1-306, Table of Land Uses, and Section 24.1-462, Standards for marina, dock, or boating facility (commercial) and Section 24.1- 462, Standards for marina, dock, or boating facility (private or club).]
OUR LAST, UH, ITEM.AND THAT'S APPLICATION, UH, NUMBER ZT 2 0 2 DASH 24.
HEY, THIS APPLICATION IS A PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE YORK COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE TO INCORPORATE PROVISIONS CONCERNING LARGE PASSENGER VESSELS.
THE AMENDMENTS WOULD ADD A DEFINITION FOR PASSENGER TENDER VESSELS, A FOOTNOTE TO THE TABLE OF LAND USES, AND WOULD AMEND THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL AND PRIVATE OR CLUB MARINAS, DOCKS AND BOATING FACILITIES.
SO I'M GONNA START BY GIVING YOU SOME BACKGROUND INFORMATION.
THE YORKTOWN WATERFRONT IS AN ATTRACTIVE DESTINATION FOR VISITORS TO THE HISTORIC TRIANGLE AS EVIDENCED TO IN PART BY THE AMERICAN CRUISE LINES RIVERBOATS THAT HAVE VISITED THE COUNTY MULTIPLE TIMES DURING THE PAST YEAR.
THESE SHIPS ARE RELATIVELY SMALL IN SIZE AT ABOUT 5,000 GROSS TONS AND CARRY IT BETWEEN 102 HUNDRED PASSENGERS EACH.
IN 2022, THE COUNTY ALSO RECEIVED A VISIT FROM A PRIVATE RESIDENTIAL CRUISE SHIP NAMED THE WORLD, WHICH IS ABOUT 43,000, UH, GROSS TONS IN SIZE AND CONTAINS 165 RESIDENCES.
HOUSING AN AVERAGE OF 200 PASSENGERS.
VISITS FROM SMALL CRUISE SHIPS, UH, HAVE OCCURRED FOR YEARS AND HAVE GENERALLY HAD A POSITIVE IMPACT ON THE COUNTY AND THE HISTORIC TRIANGLE AT LARGE.
AS MOST ARE PROBABLY AWARE, YORKTOWN WAS UNDER CONSIDERATION IN RECENT PAST AS A PORT OF CALL FOR MUCH LARGER CRUISE SHIPS.
COMMUNITY CONCERNS REGARDING LARGE CRUISE SHIPS ANCHORING OFFSHORE AND UTILIZING TENDER BOATS FOR PASSENGER TRANSPORT TO SHORE GENERATED SIGNIFICANT DISCUSSION REGARDING APPROPRIATE LOCATIONS AND REGULATIONS.
COUNTY RESIDENTS HAVE CITED POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND EFFECTS ON INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE COMMUNITY CHARACTER OF NOT JUST THE YORKTOWN VILLAGE, BUT TO OTHER LONGSTANDING MARITIME ORIENTED AREAS IN THE COUNTY.
WHILE THE CURRENT ZONING ORDINANCE ADDRESSES VARIOUS WATER ORIENTED USES WITHIN THE COUNTY'S JURISDICTION, IT LACKS COMPREHENSIVE REGULATIONS FOR LARGE CRUISE SHIPS AND THEIR TENDER VESSELS.
WHILE THE COUNTY CANNOT REGULATE VESSELS ANCHORING WITHIN THE WATERS OF THE YORK RIVER OR ITS TITLE TRIBUTARIES, THE ZONING ORDINANCE CAN OUTLINE REGULATIONS FOR SHORE FACILITIES THAT WOULD RECEIVE THESE LARGE SHIPS AND THEIR TENDER VESSELS.
SO NOW LET'S MOVE ON TO STAFF'S CONSIDERATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS.
THE OCEANS OF THE UNITED STATES ARE GOVERNED BY A VARIETY OF FEDERAL LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND AGENCIES.
THE AUTHORITY OF VIRGINIA AND ITS LOCALITIES IS LIMITED TO REGULATE MARITIME TRAFFIC ON TIDAL WATERWAYS THEMSELVES.
IN VIRGINIA, WATER DEPENDENT FACILITIES ARE PRIMARILY REGULATED THROUGH A MULTI-LAYERED SYSTEM.
AT THE STATE LEVEL, THE VIRGINIA MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION OR VMRC HAS AUTHORITY OVER SUBMERGED LANDS OR BOTTOM LANDS.
AND THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, OR DEQ HAS AUTHORITY OVER WATER QUALITY, THE VMRC AND IN CERTAIN CASES, UH, DEQ MUST PERMIT ANY STRUCTURE OR ACTIVITY THAT ENCROACHES ON STATE OWNED BOTTOM LANDS, INCLUDING DOCKING FACILITIES.
THIS INTERSECTS WITH FEDERAL REGULATORY AUTHORITY THROUGH THE US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND THE US COAST GUARD, AS WELL AS LOCAL REGULATORY AUTHORITY THROUGH WETLANDS BOARDS, RIPARIAN RIGHTS AND ZONING OF COASTAL AREAS.
THERE ARE A FEW PLACES IN THE COUNTY SUITABLE FOR LARGE CRUISE SHIPS TO DOCK DIRECTLY GIVEN THEIR SIZE.
WHILE THE YORKTOWN WATERFRONT IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE LOCATION FOR CRUISE SHIP TERMINAL FOR EIGHT CRUISE SHIP TERMINAL, OTHER LOCATIONS IN THE COUNTIES SUCH AS THE PLAINS MARKETING AND DOMINION ENERGY PROPERTIES IN DANDY COULD POSSIBLY BE SUITABLE FOR A TERMINAL IF THEY EVER BECAME AVAILABLE FOR THAT PURPOSE.
HOWEVER, GIVEN THE LOW LIKELIHOOD OF THAT SCENARIO, STAFF EXAMINED LOCATIONS WHERE CRUISE SHIP TENDER VESSELS COULD DOCK AND UNLOAD.
THESE LOCATIONS ARE ALSO FAIRLY LIMITED GIVEN, UH, GIVEN THE SIZE AND DOCKING REQUIREMENTS FOR PASSENGER TENDERS.
THE WATER ORIENTED COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL OR WCI LIMITED INDUSTRIAL OR IL AND GENERAL INDUSTRIAL OR IG ZONING DISTRICTS ALLOW FOR COMMERCIAL AND PRIVATE MARINAS AS A BUY RIGHT USE.
MOST WCI ZONED PROPERTIES ALREADY DEVELOPED WITH EXISTING MARINAS AND OTHER WATER ORIENTED BUSINESSES.
THE ONLY INDUSTRIALLY ZONED WATERFRONT PROPERTY IS OWNED BY DOMINION ENERGY PLAINS MARKETING AND HRSD, NONE OF WHICH HAVE INDICATED THEY HAVE ANY
[00:40:01]
PLANS TO BE REDEVELOPED WITH MARINA FACILITIES.HOWEVER, SOME OF THE EXISTING COMMERCIAL AND PRIVATE MARINA PROPERTIES, IF THEY, UM, IF THEY WERE SO INCLINED, COULD CONSTRUCT DOCKING FACILITIES TO ACCOMMODATE PASSENGER TENDER VESSELS FOR CRUISE SHIPS.
A LARGE SCALE PASSENGER DISEMBARKATION OPERATION AT AN EXISTING MARINA FACILITY COULD HAVE A NUMBER OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
SO THE COUNTY'S RECREATIONAL AND WORKING MARINAS NESTLED WITHIN RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS IN SEAFORD, DARE AND DANDY HAVE HISTORICALLY BALANCED SMALLER SCALE COMMERCIAL MARITIME OPERATIONS WITH RESIDENTIAL USES THE VISUAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND TRAFFIC IMPACTS FROM LARGE PASSENGER VESSELS OR THEIR TENDER VESSELS AND THEIR ASSOCIATED SHORESIDE FACILITIES MUST BE CAREFULLY MANAGED.
THEREFORE, AN EFFECTIVE REGULATORY FRAMEWORK SHOULD BEGIN WITH A SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUIREMENT FOR MARINAS SERVING LARGE PASSENGER VESSELS AND OR THEIR TENDER BOATS.
THIS ALLOWS THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO REVIEW AND CONSIDER THE PROPOSED USE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS WHILE GIVING THE PUBLIC AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT.
STAFF CONDUCTED THOROUGH RESEARCH OF PLANNING AND ZONING ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH DOCKING FACILITIES FOR LARGE CRUISE SHIPS AND TERMINALS BY SERVING AVAILABLE LITERATURE AND REVIEWING LOCAL REGULATORY ORDINANCES.
THE CITIES OF NORFOLK AND VIRGINIA BEACH PROVIDE SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR CRUISE SHIP TERMINALS OR DOCKING FACILITIES FOR LARGE PASSENGER SHIPS IN THEIR ZONING ORDINANCE.
IN ADDITION, THE CITIES OF NEWPORT NEWS HAMPTON AND SUFFOLK CONTAIN SECTIONS IN THEIR MUNICIPAL CODES THAT SPECIFICALLY REGULATE BOATS, WATERWAYS, AND OR BEACHES TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OUTSIDE OF THE COMMONWEALTH.
LARGE LOCALITIES SUCH AS THE CITY OF CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA, AND MIAMI-DADE COUNTY FLORIDA, HAVE EXISTING URBAN WATERFRONTS AND PORT FACILITIES THAT INCLUDE CRUISE SHIP TERMINALS THAT ARE SEPARATELY REGULATED BY THEIR PORT AUTHORITIES.
THERE ARE SMALLER LOCALITIES LIKE THE CITY OF SHEBOYGAN, MICHIGAN AND THE TOWN OF BAR HARBOR, MAINE THAT REGULATE LARGE VESSEL TERMINALS THROUGH ZONING ORDINANCE REGULATIONS AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.
BAR HARBOR MOST CLOSELY MIRRORS YORK COUNTY WITH A SMALLER HISTORIC WATERFRONT AND ADJACENCY TO FEDERAL LAND BAR HARBOR AND SHEBOYGAN SHARE A COMMONALITY AND THAT THEY CONTAIN REGULATIONS FOR LARGE VESSEL DOCKING FACILITIES ALLOWED BY RIGHT OR CONDITIONALLY IN SPECIAL WATERFRONT DISTRICTS.
NONE OF THE LOCALITY ZONING CODES CONTAIN SPECIFIC REGULATIONS FOR TENDER VESSELS.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL AND PRIVATE MARINAS ARE PROVIDED IN SECTIONS 24.1 DASH 4 62 AND 4 63.
THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THESE SECTIONS WOULD REQUIRE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR ANY MARINA DOCK OR BOATING FACILITY THAT WOULD SERVE VESSELS PERMITTED TO CARRY MORE THAN 400 PASSENGERS AND OR THEIR TENDER, UH, PASSENGER TENDER BOATS.
A HIGH VOLUME OF PASSENGERS DISEMBARKING FROM LARGER VESSELS COULD BE DISRUPTIVE, ESPECIALLY AT A COMMERCIAL OR PRIVATE MARINA WITHIN THE COUNTY'S RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
THEREFORE, IN ADDITION TO THE REQUIREMENT FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS WILL BE REQUIRED WITH AN APPLICATION.
THE PROPOSED ZONING AMENDMENTS REQUIRE SEVERAL OTHER SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS, INCLUDING AN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN, A DESCRIPTION OF PERMITTED PASSENGER CAPACITY OF VESSELS TO BE SERVED, HOURS OF OPERATION, AND A SKETCH PLAN SHOWING PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO THE PROPERTY.
THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ALSO NOTE THAT THE BOARD MAY IMPOSE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ON ANY APPLICANT.
ADDITIONALLY, A NEW UH, DEFINITION HAS BEEN PROPOSED FOR PASSENGER TENDER VESSELS IN SECTION 24.1 DASH 1 0 4.
GIVE YOU A SECOND TO LOOK AT THAT.
AND A FOOTNOTE HAS BEEN ADDED TO SECTION 24.1 DASH 3 0 6 CATEGORY NINE THAT DIRECTS CITIZENS TO SECTIONS 24.1 DASH UH, 4 62 AND 4 63.
NOW, NOW MOVING ON TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
THE COUNTY'S WATERFRONTS ARE ATTRACTIVE DESTINATIONS FOR SMALL CRUISE SHIPS LIKE RIVERBOATS, WHICH HAVE BEEN IN ESPECIALLY POPULAR AT THE YORKTOWN PIERS.
VISITS FROM THESE VESSELS HAVE GENERALLY BEEN POSITIVE.
HOWEVER, THE COMMUNITY HAS RAISED CONCERNS ABOUT LARGER CRUISE SHIPS, POTENTIALLY DOCKING AND UNLOADING LARGE VOLUMES OF PASSENGERS AT THE VILLAGE WATERFRONT OR OTHER MARINAS WITHIN THE COUNTY.
GIVEN THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS INFRASTRUCTURE STRAIN AND DISRUPTION TO NEARBY RESIDENCES, THE PROPOSED ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS WOULD REQUIRE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR COMMERCIAL AND PRIVATE MARINAS OR DOCKING FACILITIES SERVING LARGE CRUISE SHIPS AND THEIR PASSENGER TENDER VESSELS.
AS SUCH, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS WOULD ENSURE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WOULD HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING TO REVIEW SHORESIDE FACILITIES PROPOSED TO RECEIVE LARGE VOLUMES OF CRUISE SHIP PASSENGERS TO ENSURE THEIR COMPATIBILITY WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA.
THEREFORE, STEPH RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THIS APPLICATION SUB, UM, THROUGH THE ADOPTION OF PROPOSED RESOLUTION NUMBER PC 24 DASH 24 R.
BUT WE FOUND TWO SCRIVENER ERRORS ON PAGE SEVEN RELATING TO THE NUMBERING AND LETTERING OF THE STANDARDS.
SO, UM, WE PROVIDED YOU WITH THE REVISED RESOLUTION.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.
[00:45:01]
IF, IF I UNDERSTAND WHAT, WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE, THIS IS BECAUSE OF CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE WITH LARGE SHIPS COMING IN WITH, WITH, UM, UM, THE CONCERNS THAT COME WITH THAT THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT WOULD GIVE US ASSURANCE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND A BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WOULD NOW HAVE, SAY, IN THESE LARGER SHIPS IF THEY WERE TO COME IN AND APPROACH THE COUNTY FOR TO DO SERVICE HERE.IS THAT CORRECT? WITHOUT THAT, THEY, WHAT HAPPENS? SO THERE'S THE POSSIBILITY THAT IF A ONE OF THE COMMERCIAL MARINAS IN THE AREA WANTED TO, UM, HOST A LARGE CRUISE SHIP, THEY THEY COULD NOW, BUT THROUGH THESE REGULATIONS, UH, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO REQUIRE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THAT.
SO THIS KIND OF GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO HEAD 'EM OFF AT THE PAST.
UM, WHY NOT A PROHIBITION? WHY, WHY DID WE, WHY DID YOU ELECT TO NOT GO DOWN THE PROHIBITION ROUTE? BAR HARBOR PROHIBITED, UM, CRUISE SHIPS AND THAT'S HELD UP IN COURT.
SO, AND MAYBE IT'S A QUESTION FOR THE ATTORNEY AS YOU, BUT WHY, WHY ARE WE ALLOWING THIS BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND NOT JUST FLAT OUT PROHIBITING THE DOCKING AT TENDER VESSELS? SO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS INITIATED THIS, UM, RESOLUTION AND THEY REQUESTED THAT WE, UM, THAT WE PROVIDE REGULATIONS ON DOCKING FACILITIES.
THEY DID NOT REQUEST A PROHIBITION.
AND THAT'S WHY WE HAVE NOT PROVIDED THAT TONIGHT.
SO WHEN THE NUMBER OF BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CALLED ME, THEIR EXPECTATION WAS WE WERE GONNA DO A PROHIBITION.
SO WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE RESOLUTION THAT THE BOARD GAVE US, IT SAID THEY WANTED REGULATIONS FOR EMBARKATION AND DISEMBARKATION.
IT DID NOT SAY PROHIBITION OR BANNING.
SO WE WERE JUST FOLLOWING THEIR, THEIR GUIDANCE TO ADOPT, YOU KNOW, TO PROVIDE SOMETHING THAT WOULD GIVE THAT INFORMATION.
IF THEY HAD TOLD US THEY WANTED SOMETHING PROHIBITIVE, BANNING, WE WOULD'VE GONE THAT THAT ROUTE.
BUT WE WERE JUST FOLLOWING THE RESOLUTION THAT THEY GAVE US.
SO IF WE WANTED TO DO A PROHIBITION, WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO DO THAT? JUST START OVER.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, UH, MAYBE OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY CAN, OUR DEPUTY COUNTY ATTORNEY CAN EXPAND ON, BUT, UM, IF, IF THE BOARD WOULD ASK US IF TO, UM, PROVIDE A PROHIBITION, WE COULD PROVIDE THE LANGUAGE.
UM, SIR, CERTAINLY THE STAFF WOULD BE RESPONSIVE TO ANY NORMAL REQUESTS.
ANY TOPIC THAT IS A DIFFERENT TOPIC THAN THEY HAVE BEEN REQUESTED TO DO AND THAT WE HAVE ADVERTISED FOR A PUBLIC HEARING, WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO APPROACH AT THIS POINT.
THAT WOULD BE AN ANIMAL OF A DIFFERENT NATURE, NOT AN AMENDMENT TO WHAT'S BEFORE YOU.
AN AMENDMENT IS MORE IN LINES OF, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU'RE LOOKING AT A TOURIST HOME AND YOU DECIDE INSTEAD OF FOUR BED, FOUR PARKING SPACES, YOU WANT FIVE BECAUSE THERE'S AN EXTRA BED, EXTRA BEDROOM, YOU CAN MAKE THOSE KINDS OF AMENDMENTS.
A PROHIBITIVE ORDINANCE IS THE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THING WOULD HAVE TO HAVE ADVERTISING NOTICE AND OPPORTUNITY FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.
AND I, AS ALWAYS, I KNOW STAFF WOULD BE RESPONSIVE TO WHATEVER DIRECTIVES THEY ARE GIVEN JUST AS THEY WERE IN RESPONSE TO THE WRITTEN RESOLUTION THEY WERE PROVIDED TO WORK FROM FOR THIS PROJECT.
SO IF WE VOTE, IF WE VOTE THIS DOWN AND VOTE NO, UM, THEN IT WOULD GO TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND IF THEY IN TURN VOTE NO, THEN THEY COULD GIVE DIRECTION BACK TO STAFF OR EVEN BEFORE THEIR VOTE, THEY COULD GIVE DIRECTION TO THE STAFF.
IT COULD GO IN ANY OF THOSE DIRECTIONS.
YOU ALL AT THIS POINT WOULD EITHER VOTE TO ADVANCE THIS FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OR VOTE NOT TO ADVANCE IT DEPENDING ON HOW YOU ACT AS A GROUP.
UM, OTHER REQUESTS FROM THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ARE NOT DEPENDENT ON THIS AND CAN COME AT ANY TIME.
UH, SO IT'S A REALLY A MATTER OF UP OR DOWN AT, AT THIS POINT.
AND THE TWO DON'T NECESSARILY NECESSARILY RULE EACH OTHER OUT.
NO, I THINK IT WAS HIM, IT WAS ALREADY ANSWERED.
YOU KNOW, WHERE THERE, UH, SERVICING AND CRUISE SHIP TERMINALS, UH, TENDERS.
AND WHERE'S THAT? I'M, I'M BABBLING HERE 'CAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SAY EXACTLY.
UH, SO I'M GONNA NOT SAY ANYTHING ANYMORE.
JEANNIE, FOR AN EXAMPLE, IF, IF YOU HAD TO ESPECIALLY USE PERMIT AND WENT ALL THROUGH THE PROCESS AND THE BOARD APPROVED IT AND YOU HAD A THOUSAND PASSENGER CRUISE SHIP, COULD THAT CRUISE SHIP DOCK AT YORKTOWN? IF IT'S COMP, IF IT COMPLIED TO THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT? SO IF, UM, THE COUNTY RUNS THAT, UH, HERE AT YORKTOWN, SO
[00:50:01]
THE COUNTY WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE, OUR LAWS, WE WOULD HAVE TO APPLY FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT.UH, IF THE BOARD APPROVED THAT, THEN YES.
SO YOU, YOU COULD HAVE A LARGE CRUISE SHIP DOCKING IN YORKTOWN.
EVEN IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN PLACE TO SUPPORT THAT.
UM, SO WE HAVE, UH, REQUIREMENTS IN THE PROPOSED ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS THAT, UM, THAT REQUIRE THEM TO SUBMIT A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, WHICH WOULD SHED LIGHT ON THE, UM, THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE HAVE.
UH, IF WE SAW THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE WAS NOT ADEQUATE TO SUPPORT THAT, I WOULD HOPE THAT OUR BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WOULD VOTE DENIAL ON THAT BECAUSE OF THE, THE ROAD STRUCTURES CAN'T, CAN'T SUPPORT THAT.
ESPECIALLY IF YOU HAVE BUSES TRANSFERRING PEOPLE BACK AND FORTH.
I JUST REMIND YOU, THIS IS ALL SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SO IT WOULD HAVE TO COME BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE BOARD.
SO THOSE ARE CONSIDERATIONS YOU COULD TAKE AT THAT TIME.
UM, THE YVA DISTRICT, YOU KNOW, ANY NEW USES IN YORKTOWN WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT YVA PROCESS.
AND SO THEY WOULD BE, THEY WOULD FALL UNDER THIS, THESE REGULATIONS ALSO.
SO AGAIN, YOU JUST HAVE TO REMEMBER IT'S A SPECIAL USE PERMIT PROCESS.
SO A LOT OF THOSE QUESTIONS THAT YOU'RE ASKING LIKE FACILITIES, INFRASTRUCTURE, RIGHT? THOSE WOULD BE ADDRESSED AT THAT TIME.
THEY WOULD NEED TO BE, THEY WOULD NEED TO BE SHOWN.
AND THEN IT WOULD BE UP TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE BOARD AT THE TIME TO MAKE THAT DECISION.
WHETHER OR NOT THEY HAVE ADDRESSED EVERYTHING ADEQUATELY ENOUGH FOR THEM TO GIVE AN APPROVAL JUST LIKE THEY WOULD WITH ANY SPECIAL USE PERMIT THAT COMES BEFORE YOU OR THEM.
I JUST, MY WHOLE, MY WHOLE POINT OF THIS IS THOUGH YOU HAVE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, THEY DO A TRAFFIC ANALYSIS, UH, AND THAT GETS APPROVED AND YOUR STRUCTURE IN YOUR INFRASTRUCTURE CAN'T SUPPORT THAT.
YEAH, I HAVE A CONCERN WITH THAT.
THINK THAT'S, THAT'S THE BIG PART OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
I MEAN, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SECTION HERE, I MEAN WE, WE TOLD THEM THEY HAVE TO ANALYZE NOT JUST AROUND WHERE THEIR PROPERTY IS, BUT THEY HAVE TO TAKE IT ALL THE WAY OUT TO THE NEAREST ARTERIAL ROAD.
SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO ANALYZE ALL THE INTERSECTIONS AND ROAD NETWORKS ALL THE WAY UP TO THAT.
UM, AND I THINK A LOT, AS JEANNIE SAID IN HER PRESENTATION, A LOT OF THOSE MARINAS ARE TUCKED BACK IN RURAL RESIDENTIAL RC NEIGHBORHOODS WITH SMALLER ROADS AND THEY JUST WOULD HAVE, IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR THEM TO COME FORWARD WITH A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS THAT WOULD ADEQUATELY ADDRESS HOW YOU'RE GONNA TAKE 60 TO A HUNDRED BUSES IN AND OUT OF ONE OF THOSE MARINAS.
AND, AND I MEAN, IT'S NOT, I'M NOT SAYING THEY COULDN'T, I'M JUST SAYING IT WOULD BE AN INTERESTING TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS TO SEE
THE, UM, WHY 400 WE'RE, WE'RE THE, THE NUMBER YOU, YOU SETTLED ON 400 PASSENGERS? IS THERE A PARTICULAR REASON FOR THAT NUMBER? YES.
SO, UM, THE AMERICAN CRUISE LINES RIVERBOATS THAT, UH, REGULARLY VISIT YORKTOWN CARRY AROUND 200 PASSENGERS OR LESS.
UM, OCCASIONALLY THERE ARE TWO DOCKING OR TWO IN THE AREA AT THE SAME TIME.
AND SO WE WANTED TO ALLOW FOR THAT.
SO, AND THAT SEEMS TO BE THE LIMIT OF WHICH YOUR COUNTY SEEMS COMFORTABLE OVER AND ABOVE THAT THERE SEEMS TO BE A LOT OF BLOWBACK, WHICH I CAN APPRECIATE.
I REALIZE WE CAN'T DO AN OUT AND OUT, UM, RESTRICTION ON THIS, BUT AS YOU SAID, WE COULD LIMIT THAT.
AND IF, UM, THIS RIGHT HERE GOES FOR THINGS THAT CARRY MORE THAN 400 PASSENGERS, CAN WE PUT A TOP END ON THAT, UM, AND LIMIT IT NOW BEFORE WE TRY TO SEND THIS FORWARD THAT WE NOT ALLOW THINGS THAT ARE OVER 500 PASSENGERS OR PICK A NUMBER? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT COULD BE AMENDED AS I LOOK DOWN THE END OF THE DAES? ARE YOU SUGGESTING A, UM, PROHIBITION, A TOTAL PROHIBITION ON PASSENGER OVER, OVER A NUMBER? OKAY.
I THINK WE WOULD, I'M JUST HAVE THE, UH, ATTORNEY WAS SPRING IN MY EAR, BUT YES, NO, I, I THINK IT WOULD BE, I THINK THIS WOULD BE, THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE A CONVERSATION.
WE AS STAFF WOULD HAVE TO HAVE, UM, ON AN UPPER LIMIT.
UH, BASICALLY WE'VE SAID ANYTHING ABOVE THAT MINIMUM WOULD REQUIRE THAT SUP, UM, BUT ONCE YOU START CAPPING IT, THEN YOU'RE PUTTING MORE OF A PROHIBIT PROHIBITION ON IT MM-HMM
UM, WHICH MAKES IT A LITTLE DIFFERENT ANIMAL WHEN IT COMES TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND HOW WE AS STAFF WOULD WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE ADDRESSING IT IN A LEGAL WAY.
I'M NOT SAYING WE COULDN'T DO THAT.
I JUST THINK IF YOU WANTED TO DO THAT, WE MAY NEED TO HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION ON HOW TO
[00:55:01]
ACTUALLY WORD THAT.BUT I ALSO CAN READ THE ROOM AND THERE'S OBVIOUSLY A DESIRE TO LIMIT OR PUT A PROHIBITION ON THESE LARGE MEGA SHIPS COMING IN HERE.
AND I WANNA HONOR THAT IN SOME WAY.
MR. TITUS, DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER, I HAVE A HYPOTHETICAL FOR YOU IF THAT'S ALL RIGHT.
SO THE, THE YORK RIVER OUT HERE, A CRUISE SHIP LINE COULD PARK A 2000 PASSENGER, UH, SHIP OUT HERE IN IN ANCHOR IT IN THE YORK RIVER, CORRECT? YES.
THOSE TENDERS RIGHT NOW, THEY CAN'T COME INTO HERE UNLESS WE CHANGE A REGULATION, CHANGE THIS STUFF, BUT THOSE TENDERS COULD GO TO GLOUCESTER.
AND ACTUALLY RIGHT NOW WE DON'T HAVE REGULATIONS, UH, PREVENTING TENDERS TO COME TO OUR DOCKING.
SO THEY COULD GO TO GLOUCESTER AND THEY, AND IN GLOUCESTER THEY COULD BE PUT ON A BUS AND THEN THEY COULD BE OR SENT OVER HERE BY BUS TO YORK VILLAGE OR THEY COULD COME ACROSS THE RIVER IN A FERRY VERY EASILY.
SO THEY DON'T NEED TO GO TO GLOUCESTER.
BUT EVEN IF, EVEN WITH THESE REGULATIONS LIKE THEY ARE, THEY COULD DO THAT BECAUSE IT'S, IT PROHIBITS TENDERS FROM COMING FROM THE, THE SHIPS TO YORK COUNTY, BUT NOT A FERRY COMING FROM GLOUCESTER TO YORK COUNTY.
SO IF THEY WANTED TO, THEY COULD PUT TENDERS GOING TO YORK, GLOUCESTER AND THEN FERRY 'EM BACK ACROSS, OVER TO YORK COUNTY IF THEY SO DESIRED.
I DON'T KNOW HOW TO FIX THAT, BUT IT WAS JUST A THOUGHT I WAS HAVING, YOU KNOW.
'CAUSE A LOT OF THE COMMENTS IN THE BACK IN THE PAST HAVE BEEN ABOUT THE MEGA SHIPS OUT HERE BY THE BRIDGE BEING TALLER THAN THE BRIDGE AND ET CETERA, ET CETERA.
AND WE CAN'T LIMIT THE TENDERS TO ONLY COMING HERE AND NOT THE PASSENGERS GOING TO GLOUCESTER AND COMING OVER HERE BY BUS.
UH, ANY, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SO JUST A A POINT OF ORDER QUESTION.
IF, IF WE WANTED TO HAVE AN UPPER LIMIT, SAY IF YOU WERE ABOVE 400, BUT BELOW I'M JUST PICKING A NUMBER, 1500 PASSENGERS ON THE SHIP, THEN YOU WOULD BE ALLOWED A SPECIAL USE PERMIT ANY ABOVE 1500, WHATEVER THAT NUMBER IS.
IF, IF WE WANTED TO DO THAT, WHAT'S THE PROCEDURE OR IS THERE A PROCEDURE FOR US TO ASK TO DO THAT? I THINK YOU'RE ASKING THE SAME QUESTION YOU ASKED EARLIER.
YOU'RE JUST ASKING IT IN A DIFFERENT WAY AND WE CAN'T DO THROUGH THE BACK DOOR WHAT WE DON'T DO THROUGH THE FRONT DOOR, WHICH IS HAVE A DISCUSSION TO HA BRING FORWARD THIS EVENING A PROHIBITIVE, UM, ORDINANCE THAT HAS NOT BEEN NOTICED AND SUBJECT TO PUBLIC HEARING AND IS, 'CAUSE WHAT THAT WOULD DO IS ESSENTIALLY CARVE OUT A CLASS FOR WHICH YOU ARE DEFACTO WRITING A PROHIBITIVE ORDINANCE WITHOUT GOING THROUGH THE PROCEDURE.
SO IT'S NO DIFFERENT THAN THE ANSWER THAT I GAVE YOU EARLIER, BUT I GUESS MY QUESTION IS FROM A POINT OF ORDER, COULD WE TABLE THIS AND HAVE IT COME BACK IN LIKE FEBRUARY? IS THAT POSSIBLE OR IS THAT TOO FAR OUT OF WHAT YOU I THINK THE, I THINK THE BIGGER PIECE IS THAT THE BOARD HAS ASKED US SPEC FOR SPECIFIC LANGUAGE.
UM, AND I THINK IF, IF YOU ALL TABLED IT, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY MAY, THEY MAY GIVE THE BOARD OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE THAT ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE TO STAFF.
UM, BUT I THINK WITHOUT THAT DIRECTIVE FROM STAFF, FROM THE BOARD, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'VE TRIED TO ADDRESS WHAT THEY'VE ASKED US TO ADDRESS, UM, IN THE ORDINANCES BEFORE YOU TONIGHT.
SO, UM, IF YOU WERE TO TABLE IT, I THINK IT'S JUST KIND OF A GRAY AREA AS, AS SHERRY WAS SAYING, AND, AND YOU KNOW, WE WOULD HAVE TO ADVERTISE IT DIFFERENTLY THAN WHAT YOU GOT BEFORE YOU TONIGHT RESOLUTION.
IT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT RESOLUTION.
THAT'S WHAT I WOULD CONSIDERING THAT FOR SURE.
AND YEAH, WE'RE, UH, THESE ARE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, SO, UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? AND WE'LL GO TO THE PUBLIC, UH, COMMENT AND THEN WE'LL HAVE MORE DISCUSSIONS HERE.
AND I JUST, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, I JUST WANNA REITERATE, WE'RE OBVIOUSLY VOTING THAT BOARD SUPERVISORS ASKED US TO VOTE OR TO COME UP WITH STAFF AND US APPROVE REGULATIONS TO EMBARK AND DISEMBARK.
SO THIS COULD BE A TWO STEP PROCESS THAT THIS IS APPROVED.
AT LEAST WE PUT SOME RAIL, UH, GUARDRAILS ON AND I SUSPECT WHEN THIS GOES BACK TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, THEY'RE GONNA COME BACK BECAUSE OF PUBLIC COMMENTS AND, AND, YOU KNOW, CONCERNS AND PROBABLY REDIRECT, UH, THAT, THAT I, AND SO THIS IS KIND OF A, SOME KIND OF GUARDRAILS WHERE TODAY WE HAVE NOTHING.
YOUR APPROVAL TONIGHT WOULD NOT, UM, WOULD NOT, UH, PUT THESE, UM, LAWS INTO EFFECT, BUT, UM, TRUE.
[01:00:01]
ASKED, UM, FOR REGULATIONS ON, UM, ON DOCKING FACILITIES.SO WE PROVIDED THAT TO YOU AND, UM, I THINK YOU CAN VOTE YES OR NO, UM, AND THEN TAKE IT ON TO THE BOARD.
ALRIGHT, WELL THANK YOU, UH, TO STAFF AGAIN.
I KNOW THIS IS ONE OF THOSE ISSUES WITH A LOT OF RESEARCH AND A LOT OF, UH, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, SENTIMENT ABOUT IT AS WELL.
AS THERE'S NO APPLICANT, UH, WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I HAVE, UH, QUITE A, A LIST OF, UH, FOLKS THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AGAIN.
I'LL REMIND YOU, UH, THREE MINUTES, UH, PLEASE.
WHEN THE YELLOW LIGHT COMES ON, YOU HAVE 30 SECONDS.
UH, WHEN YOU COME UP, PLEASE, UH, STATE YOUR NAME AND UH, ADDRESS.
SO FIRST I HAVE, UH, GEORGE BENNETT.
UH, MY NAME IS GEORGE BENNETT.
I JUST WANTED TO GO OFF SCRIPT JUST A LITTLE BIT.
UH, I WAS HAVING A MEETING THIS MORNING WITH A COLLEAGUE OF MINE.
WE WERE PLANNING AN EVENT UP IN, UH, WILLIAMSBURG, AND WE WERE LOOKING AT OVERLAY OF THE OUTLET MALL.
AND, UH, WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT HOW WE'RE GONNA SET THINGS UP.
AND HE POINTED TO A HUGE PARKING LOT OUT BEHIND THE OUTLET MALL, AND HE SAID, OH, YEAH, THAT'S WHERE THEY PARK ALL THOSE, UH, BUSES THAT COME FROM THE CRUISE SHIPS.
SO THAT'S WHERE THE PEOPLE ARE GOING.
UM, CRUISE SHIP TOURISM SHOULD BENEFIT YORK COUNTY ECONOMICALLY AND EMPHASIZED YORK YORKTOWN'S.
HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE IS THE FOCUS OF THE DEFINING BATTLE OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION.
CRUISE SHIPS REGISTERED IN THE UNITED STATES CONTRIBUTE TO THE US ECONOMY THROUGH CORPORATE TAXES AND MUST FOLLOW US LABOR LAWS.
THE LARGE FOREIGN FLAG PASSENGER SHIPS ARE NOT NOT REQUIRED TO PAY US FEDERAL TAXES AND DO NOT COMPLY WITH ALL US LABOR LAWS.
ONLY AMERICAN FLAG CRUISE SHIPS REGISTERED IN THE US SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO DO BUSINESS IN YORKTOWN.
THE SCALE OF CRUISE TOURISM MUST BE COMPATIBLE WITH A SMALL HISTORIC VILLAGE OF YORKTOWN.
SHIPS WITH 200 PASSENGERS OR LESS ARE CONSIDERED ACCEPTABLE.
THEY REQUIRE NO SPECIAL SECURITY REQUIREMENTS AND WILL NOT OVERSATURATE THE LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE.
THEY WILL PRESENT NO VISUAL SPECTACLE AND SHOULD HAVE NO MORE THAN ONE DOCKING ON ANY GIVEN DAY VISIT SCHEDULE SHOULD BE TEMP TEMPERED BY LOCAL EVENTS, PRIORITIZING LOCAL COMMUNITY OVER THE CRUISE INDUSTRY.
LARGE OCEAN CLASS SHIPS SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO TENDER TO PUBLIC OR PRIVATE PEERS IN YORK COUNTY.
AS THESE SHIPS ARE DIRECTLY RELATED TO ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS AND GROWTH AND EXPANSION CONCERNS AS SEEN IN MANY OTHER PORT CITIES, IT'S ESSENTIAL TO PROTECT OUR RIVER AND THE BUSINESS AND SPORTSMEN THAT DEPEND ON IT.
A KEY STIPULATION TOWARD THIS GOAL IS THE USE OF LOW SULFUR FUELS, WHICH AVOID THE REQUIREMENTS FOR OPEN LOOP SCRUBBERS.
THESE SCRUBBERS REMOVE TOXICANTS FROM THE EXHAUST AND THEN FLUSH 'EM RIGHT INTO THE RIVER.
YORK COUNTY SHOULD ONLY DO BUSINESS WITH CRUISE LINES THAT HAVE DEMONSTRATED SOUND, ETHICAL, LAWFUL, AND TRANSPARENT BUSINESS PRACTICES.
YORK COUNTY SHOULD CONDUCT ALL APPROPRIATE DUE DILIGENCE FOR BOTH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE CRUISE LINE BUSINESS AND TOURISM AGREEMENTS WITH ROBUST CITIZEN INPUT REGARDING LIMITATIONS ON VESSEL SIZE, FREQUENCY AND TIMING OF VISITS.
IS THAT, YEAH, THAT'S, THANK YOU.
UH, NEXT UP I'M GONNA SAY WHO'S NEXT UP AND WHO WILL FOLLOW THEM JUST SO YOU CAN, CAN GET READY.
NEXT UP, UH, ELIZABETH, UH, WILKINS.
AND, UH, WE'LL BE FOLLOWED BY, UH, JACQUES VAN AND MON FRANCE.
I PROBABLY DIDN'T GET THAT EXACTLY RIGHT, BUT GOOD EVENING.
UH, MY NAME IS ELIZABETH WILKINS AND I LIVE AT 2 28 CHURCH STREET HERE IN YORKTOWN.
I'M HERE TO DISCUSS THE PROPOSED ZONING AMENDMENTS PERTAINING TO LARGE CRUISE SHIPS IN THE FIRM, BELIEF THAT MERELY REQUIRING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THEIR ACTIVITIES LEAVES YORK COUNTY AS VULNERABLE TO THE PRESENCE OF THESE HUGE SHIPS AS WE WERE WHEN PRINCESS FIRST POUNCED ON OUR COMMUNITY.
IT SEEMS THAT IT MERELY CREATES A MINOR ADMINISTRATIVE HOOP THAT THE CRUISE INDUSTRY COULD SAIL THROUGH ALL TOO EASILY, GIVEN THAT
[01:05:01]
THEY HAVE TONS OF MONEY TO SWAT AWAY SUCH TRIFLING OBSTACLES.IN ANY CASE, I SUSPECT THAT THE PERMIT DENIAL RATE FOR APPLICATIONS BY BUSINESSES IS HISTORICALLY QUITE LOW IN YORK COUNTY, AND THAT DETERMINATIONS CAN BE VERY SUBJECTIVE.
I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOUR EXPOSURE HAS BEEN TO THE ARGUMENTS WE'VE MADE AGAINST BRINGING LARGE CRUISE SHIPS TO YORK SINCE IT WAS PRIMARILY THE SUPERVISORS WHO HEARD FROM US MONTH AFTER MONTH, PLEAD WITH THEM TO STOP PRINCESS IN ITS TRACKS.
BUT YOU SHOULD KNOW THAT OUR OBJECTIONS ARE ECHOED IN PORT CITIES AROUND THE COUNTRY AND ACROSS THE WORLD.
BAR HARBOR, CHARLESTON, KEY WEST, MONTEREY, SEATTLE, SITKA, JUNO, JUST TO NAME A FEW IN THE US ALL TELL, TELL THE SAME STORY OF OVER TOURISM, POLLUTION AND CULTURAL DEVASTATION.
AND THEY ARE AT THE BREAKING POINT.
WHY WOULD YORK HEAD DOWN THE SAME ROAD AND SOMEHOW EXPECT A DIFFERENT RESULT? FURTHERMORE, THE PROSPECT OF HAVING TO ENGAGE IN SOME SUBSTANTIVE PROTEST EVERY TIME SUCH AN APPLICATION IS MADE IS NOT TENABLE FOR OUR CITIZENS, NOR FOR THAT MATTER FOR YORK COUNTY OFFICIALS.
WE SPOKE ON MOSS LOUDLY, CLEARLY AGAINST THESE HUGE SHIPS IN THE YORK RIVER TO THE POINT WHERE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY WAS TASKED BY THE BOARD WITH DETAILING THE OPTIONS THAT ARE LEGALLY AVAILABLE TO KEEP THEM OUT.
SO, WHERE ARE THE OPTIONS OTHER THAN REQUIRING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT? SUCH EXTRAORDINARY IMPACTS, AS WOULD BE FELT IF THESE SHIPS WERE ALLOWED HERE, CAN'T REASONABLY BE COMPARED TO MORE ROUTINE SPECIAL USE APPLICATIONS.
AND THEREFORE, CALL FOR MORE PROTECTIVE ACTION.
PLEASE DON'T ADVANCE THIS INSUFFICIENT MEASURE.
WE ASK THAT YOU REVISIT OR THAT STAFF REVISITS THE ISSUE AND PRESENT MORE APPROPRIATE OPTIONS FOR REFUSING THESE MASSIVE FLOATING CITIES IN YOUR COUNTY.
APPRECIATE YOUR BEING HERE, SIR.
UH, YOU'RE NEXT JACQUE SWAN FRA AND FOLLOWED BY MARY JO O'BRIEN.
I ALSO LIVE AT 2 28 CHURCH STREET.
I'D LIKE TO COMMENT THE PROPOSED CRUISE SHIP, UH, ZONING AMENDMENT BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING.
CRUISE INDUSTRY IS A 26 PLUS BILLION DOLLAR INDUSTRY, AND IF THEY WANT SOME SOMETHING, THEY HAVE THE FINANCIAL MEANS TO MAKE IT HAPPEN.
YORK COUNTY STAFF'S ASSUMPTION THAT THE PLANE'S MARKETING AND DOMINION ENERGY PROPERTY WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED FOR TERM FOR A TERMINAL IS GROSSLY NAIVE AND A MISREPRESENTATION OF THAT POSSIBILITY.
IF CARNIVAL CRUISE LINES DEEMS IT PROFITABLE, THEY WILL STOP AT NO COST TO PURCHASE THAT PROPERTY TO CREATE A CRUISE TERMINAL.
THIS SCENARIO HAS OCCURRED THROUGHOUT THE WORLD, INCLUDING IN KEY WEST, JUNO, THE BAHAMAS, ITALY, AND SEVERAL OTHER CITIES WHERE CRUISE LINES HAVE PURCHASED PRIVATE PROPERTY AND ESTABLISHED THEIR OWN PRIVATE FACILITIES.
TO AVOID PUBLIC CONTROLS, CRUISE COMPANIES HAVE ONE CONSISTENT FOCUS, NAMELY THAT OF MAXIMIZING PROFITS FOR THEIR SHAREHOLDERS.
THESE SHIPS ARE BUILT AND REGISTERED OVERSEAS, AS GEORGE MENTIONED, AND THEY ARE NOTORIOUS POLLUTERS AND PRINCE'S.
CRUISE LINES HAS IN INCURRED A $60 MILLION FINE FOR DELIBERATE VESSEL POLLUTION WITH CORPORATE LEVEL KNOWLEDGE.
MOST CRUISE SHIPS USE A FUEL KNOWN AS BUNKER FUEL OR HEAVY FUEL OIL, WHICH IS A SLUDGE LEFTOVER AFTER THE REFINING PROCESS.
AND LET ME MENTION THAT AMERICAN CRUISE LINES USES A HIGHER GRADE OF FUEL AND THEY DON'T USE SCRUBBERS.
IT'S THE LEAST EXPENSIVE FUEL AND IS LADEN WITH NUMEROUS POLLUTANTS, INCLUDING SULFUR OXIDES, NITROGEN OXIDES, HEAVY METALS, AND CARCINOGENIC CHEMICALS SUCH AS PH IS TO NAME A FEW.
IN ORDER TO MEET THE 2020 INTERNATIONAL CELL EMISSIONS REGULATIONS.
CRUISE SHIPS STARTED USING EXHAUST GAS CLEANING SYSTEMS, ALSO KNOWN AS SCRUBBERS.
AND AS GEORGE MENTIONED, THEY WORKED BY TAKING AMBIENT WATER, SPRAYING IT INTO THE EXHAUST STACKS, AND REMOVING SOME OF THE SULFUR FROM THE EXHAUST, BUT ALSO ALL OF THE OTHER POLLUTANTS THAT ARE GOING INTO THE AIR, AND THAT WATER GOES BACK INTO THE RIVER.
SO THAT'S A, A REAL PROBLEM IN TERMS OF, UH, POLLUTION AND THE GUIDELINES.
AND, AND THE PROPOSAL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT IS, IS VERY NEBULOUS, IN MY OPINION.
THERE'S NO MEAT MEAT TO THAT, UH, CONDITION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
[01:10:01]
NUMEROUS SCIENTIFIC STUDIES THAT DEMONSTRATED THE IMPACTS OF SCRUBBER WATER ON FOOD CHAINS IN THESE SYSTEMS. AND THEY'RE DEVASTATING.WE DO NOT NEED TO HAVE ADDITIONAL POLLUTANTS ADDED TO OUR FRAGILE YORK RIVER ECOSYSTEM WITH ITS MAJOR RECREATIONAL AND COMMERCIAL RESOURCES OF CRABS, OYSTERS, CLAMS, AND FISH YORK COUNTY NEEDS FOR ONCE AND FOR ALL TO PUT IN PLACE A PROHIBITION ON CRUISE SHIPS CARRYING MORE THAN 400 PASSENGERS, PLUS THEIR CREW.
UH, AND, AND THIS, THIS AMENDMENT PROVIDES A LOOPHOLE FOR THEIR PRESENCE.
PLEASE DON'T APPROVE THIS APPLICATION.
LET'S LOOK AT SOME OTHER OPTIONS.
THANK YOU TO, UH, AS REQUESTED BY THE CITIZENS OF THE COUNTY.
MR. HILL WAS TASKED WITH THAT, UH, REQUEST, AND WE FEEL THIS IS, THANK YOU.
UH, MARY JOE O'BRIEN, FOLLOWED BY TOM DES.
I LIVE AT ONE 20 AUGUST DRIVE IN SEAFORD.
LAST YEAR, ALMOST 8,000 CITIZENS SIGNED A PETITION AGAINST ALLOWING LARGE CRUISE SHIPS TO DISEMBARK PASSENGERS AT YORKTOWN.
THE OPPOSITION WAS CLEAR, AND IN FEBRUARY, PRINCESS ANNOUNCED THEY WERE GOING ELSEWHERE FOR A WHILE.
MEANWHILE, FIVE PRINCESS LOBBYISTS REMAINED ACTIVE IN RICHMOND TRYING TO GET CRUISE SHIP GAMBLING APPROVED IN VIRGINIA WATERS.
AROUND THAT SAME TIME, TOM SHEPHERD ASKED THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO PROVIDE US WITH ANY WAYS WE COULD PROTECT OURSELVES FROM THESE LARGE CRUISE SHIPS.
ON AUGUST 24TH OF THIS YEAR, FRANK WAGNER, A PRINCESS LOBBYISTS, AUTHORED AN ARTICLE IN THE DAILY PRESS TITLED, CRUISE TRAFFIC REPRESENTS UNTAPPED POTENTIAL FOR VIRGINIA.
AND YORKTOWN WAS AGAIN MENTIONED AS A PROTOCOL.
THEY STILL WANNA COME AND THEY STILL ARE TRYING.
I DON'T BELIEVE THIS PROPOSED SOLUTION IS STRONG ENOUGH TO PREVENT LARGE CRUISE SHIPS FROM COMING TO THE COUNTY.
THE CRUISE INDUSTRY HAS DEEP POCKETS AND AN EXPANSIVE CAPABILITY TO GET WHAT THEY WANT.
WHAT OTHER OPTIONS WERE EXPLORED? WE NEED TO BE MORE RESTRICTIVE FROM THE GET GO.
FOR EXAMPLE, RESTRICTING TO THE MAX LENGTH OR PASSENGER CAPACITY.
LET'S SAVE OURSELVES THE HEARTACHE, RESOURCES AND TIME OF GOING THROUGH THIS AGAIN AND AGAIN.
YOUR CITIZENS DO NOT WANT THEM HERE.
WE'VE STUDIED THE INDUSTRY EXTENSIVELY AND THEY AREN'T A GOOD FIT FOR OUR COUNTY.
WE ARE IN CONSTANT COMMUNICATION WITH LIKE, SIZE COMMUNITIES THAT ARE FIGHTING THEM AFTER THEY'VE GOTTEN IN THE DOOR.
AND BELIEVE ME, YOU DON'T EVER WANNA BE IN THAT POSITION.
PLEASE DENY THIS PROPOSED SOLUTION.
THANK YOU, MR. DIS VARS AND FOLLOWED BY BOB HODSON.
GOING, UH, MY NAME'S TOM DE 1 0 7 COVE DRIVE, UH, PROBABLY RIGHT NEAR, UH, ONE OF YOUR HOUSES OVER THERE.
I'M A PROUD, UH, MILITARY RETIREE.
UM, I LIVE, UH, I MOVED TO SEAFORD ABOUT FOUR YEARS AGO.
I LIVED DOWN IN GOOSE CREEK, UM, SOMEWHERE.
AND I, I LIKE GOING OUT AND ENJOYING THE WATER JUST AS MUCH AS EVERYONE, UH, RIGHT AROUND THIS AREA, YOU KNOW? UM, AND IT IS, IT IS CLEAN WATER.
YOU KNOW, I'M PART OF THE OYSTER RESTORATION AND STUFF LIKE THIS, SO IT'S VERY CONCERNING FOR ME.
I'M VERY HUGE SUPPORT OF WAYNE DRURY.
I, YOU KNOW, UH, PUTTING HIM IN OFFICE AND STUFF LIKE THIS, I KNOW HIS STANCE ON THIS HERE.
UM, I RECALL JUST AS WELL AS, UH, YOU, TOM, YOU KNOW, AND JEFF, UH, THAT YOU RECALL WHAT WAS ASKED OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
I MEAN, OF ALL PEOPLE HERE IN NEW YORK COUNTY.
YOU KNOW, IT SAYS, WE HEARD THAT MESSAGE AND WAYNE DREW ARENA BROUGHT IT UP.
HE SAYS, HEY, WHAT CAN WE DO TO PUT A PROHIBITIVE STANCE ON BRINGING CRUISE SHIPS IN HERE? AND TOM SHEPHERD LOOKED AT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, TIM, AND, YOU KNOW, SAYS, HEY, LET'S, LET'S MAKE PROHIBITIVE, UH, MEASURES TO STOP THE CRUISE SHIPS COMING IN HERE.
SO, UM, OUT OF ALL THE PEOPLE I'VE TALKED TO WHEN I, YOU KNOW, WAS OUT REPRESENTING, YOU KNOW, WAYNE TALKING TO PEOPLE, THE ONES THAT WERE AGAINST IT, YOU KNOW, THEY WOULD LIKE TO KNOW JUST AS WELL AS I WOULD, WHERE'S THAT OPTION AT? AND RIGHT NOW, I, I DON'T SEE IT.
AND THIS GIVES, IT IS JUST A COMPLETE, UH, LOOP FOR US RIGHT NOW.
SO ASK YOURSELVES THAT QUESTION.
UH, WHAT WAS REALLY REQUESTED, UH, AND HOW WE GOT MISINTERPRETATION OF WHAT WE'RE GETTING PROVIDED RIGHT NOW.
I THINK THAT THERE WAS A WRONG MESSAGE OR SOMETHING.
SO THERE'S A MESSAGE THAT'S WRONG, EARL.
BOB HODSON, FOLLOWED BY LYNN DOUGLAS.
UH, HI, BOB HODSON, UM, 2 0 7 NELSON STREET.
I'M GONNA ADD ADLIB A LITTLE BIT 'CAUSE SOME OF THIS WAS ALREADY TALKED ABOUT.
BUT FIRST I WANNA SAY HOW, HOW DISAPPOINTING IT IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THE MESSAGE THAT WE HEARD
[01:15:01]
THE BOARD SAY, DIDN'T GET TO THE COUNTY IN A CLEAR FASHION.AND THIS WAS EIGHT MONTHS AGO, AND I'VE BEEN PINGING REGULARLY.
HOW'S IT GOING? HOW'S IT GOING? SOMETHING'S COMING.
THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO GET BACK TO ME WITH OPTIONS.
AND HERE WE ARE EIGHT MONTHS LATER AND A COUPLE DAYS, YOU KNOW, BEFORE THIS THING DROPS IN FRONT OF YOUR BOARD.
UM, YOU KNOW, THIS THING COMES OUT HERE.
IT'S IN HOLIDAY SEASON, LATE RAINY, COLD NIGHT.
AND WE FIND OUT THAT, HEY, THERE'S SOMETHING COMING TO THE PLANNING BOARD THAT IS REALLY NOT MEETING WHAT THE PEOPLE ARE LOOKING FOR AND HAVE BEEN LOOKING FOR.
THERE'S LIKE, MARY, UH, MARY JO SAID, THERE'S, YOU KNOW, OVER ALMOST 8,000 PEOPLE SIGNED A PETITION SAYING THEY DON'T WANT THESE SHIPS IN YORKTOWN.
THAT MESSAGE COULD NOT HAVE BEEN CLEARER.
AND IF YOU READ THIS SPECIAL PERMIT THING, IT TALKS ABOUT, WELL, MAYBE THE DOMINION PROPERTY COULD WORK.
WE DON'T WANT THAT PROPERTY TO WORK.
WE DON'T WANT ANY PROPERTY TO WORK, AND THERE'S GOOD REASONS WE DON'T WANT THE PROPERTY TO WORK.
I WAS ON A PHONE CALL TODAY WITH PEOPLE FROM SITKA, FROM PEOPLE FROM THE BERMUDA, FROM PEOPLE FROM FROM ROME, FOR PEOPLE ALL AROUND THE WORLD.
AND THEY'RE TELLING ME THESE STORIES THAT THEY'RE HAVING.
THE GUY IN MAINE HAS SPENT OVER $300,000 FIGHTING THESE SHIPS IN JUNE, ALASKA, WHERE THEY NOW HAVE 1.5 MILLION VISITORS A YEAR.
THEY JUST WANTED SATURDAYS TO BE CRUISE SHIP FREE.
AND THE CRUISE INDUSTRY SPENT OVER A MILLION DOLLARS ON A CAMPAIGN TO MAKE THAT NOT HAPPEN.
RIGHT? ONCE THEY'RE IN THE DOOR, THEY'RE GONNA MAKE IT HAPPEN.
THIS SPECIAL USE PERMIT READS LIKE, GIMME THESE THINGS.
AND, YOU KNOW, YEAH, THERE'S PUBLIC HEARINGS.
IS THIS THE PUBLIC HEARING, THIS KIND OF FORUM AT THE LAST MINUTE KIND OF THING.
I MEAN, THEY'RE GONNA JUST BLOW OUR DOORS IN IF THEY GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME HERE.
AND IF THEY REALLY WANT TO COME HERE, IF WE DON'T DRAW A LINE IN THE SAND AND PRO PROHIBIT THESE SHIPS, WE'RE NOT GONNA WIN HERE.
AND IT'S NOT ONLY HERE, YOU'RE RIGHT.
IT'S A PROBLEM IF THEY GO TO GLOUCESTER TOO.
WE'VE TALKED WITH THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OVER AT GLOUCESTER.
WE'VE GOT THE WORD THAT THEY DON'T WANT 'EM THERE EITHER, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE GOTTA KEEP 'EM OUT OF THESE WATERS.
THEY ARE HORRENDOUS POLLUTERS.
THEY'RE TERRIBLE BUSINESS PARTNERS.
THERE'S STUDY THAT SHOW THAT THEY, YOU ONLY GET ABOUT 5% OF WHAT THEY PROMISED YOU.
THERE'S ONE ECONOMIST THAT BASICALLY SAYS YOU LOSE MONEY WHEN YOU TAKE IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS, RIGHT? THIS IS A BAD INDUSTRY TO BE INVOLVED IN, AND WE NEED TO MAKE IT CLEAR FROM THIS BOARD AND FROM THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO THE COUNTY OFFICIALS THAT ARE PUTTING THESE RESTRICTIONS IN PLACE THAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO THE PEOPLE IN THIS COMMUNITY.
SO I WOULD JUST ASK YOU TO, TO VOTE THIS DOWN AND WORK ON A PROHIBITION.
UH, LYNN DOUGLAS, FOLLOWED BY KENNETH DUNN.
I LIVE AT TWO 12 SMITH STREET.
MUCH OF WHAT I WAS GOING TO SPEAK ABOUT TODAY HAS ALREADY BEEN SP SPOKEN TO, BUT I WILL GO AHEAD AND SAY THAT AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO REQUIRE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR LARGE CRUISE SHIPS IN THEIR PASSENGER TENDERS TO ME LEAVES A GIANT LOOPHOLE FOR BRINGING THEM INTO OUR COMMUNITY.
UNDER THE COVER OF HOLDING PUBLIC HEARINGS, LARGE CRUISE SHIPS DO NOT BELONG.
ONE OF THIS COMMISSION MEMBERS SPOKE TO THE CONCEPT OF THIS AMENDMENT PROPOSED MINUTE BEING A GUARDRAIL.
WELL, AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT ONLY TAKES THREE PEOPLE ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO GRANT A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW CRUISE SHIPS THEY DON'T BELONG HERE, PROHIBIT THEM, DENY THIS AMENDMENT.
MC KENNETH DUNN, FOLLOWED BY JULIE, UH, RICHLEY.
I LIVE AT 3 0 5 DOROTHY DRIVE.
UH, MOST OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED ALREADY, BUT ONE OF MY BIGGEST, UH, IMPORTANT THINGS I NEED TO SPEAK ABOUT IS OUR, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL ECOSYSTEM THAT WE HAVE OUT HERE IN NEW YORK RIVER.
MOST OF OUR RIVERS ARE VERY DELICATE, OKAY? AND WE HAVE BEEN FIGHTING FOR A LONG TIME TO PREVENT POLLUTION TO 'EM AND CLEAN UP THE MESSES THAT HAVE BEEN DONE IN THE PAST.
NOW WE'RE LOOKING AT TRYING TO BRING IN THESE LARGE SHIPS AND STUFF THAT WILL ADD POLLUTION TO, UH, OUR ECOSYSTEMS THAT WE HAVE.
WE HAVE OUR FISH, WE HAVE BIRDS, WE HAVE REPTILES, WE HAVE MAMMALS.
AND DURING THE SUMMERTIME, WE ALSO HAVE, UH, SEA TURTLES THAT COME INTO THE BAY, INTO THE RIVER.
AND WE ALSO HAVE, UH, BOTTLED NOSE DOLPHINS.
OKAY? THE IMPACT THAT THESE LARGE SHIPS THAT CAN HAVE ON THESE IS DETRIMENTAL.
AND I DON'T THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE REALLY, CONSIDERING
[01:20:01]
THAT WE CONSIDER THE COMMUNITIES AND THE STUFF, THE IMPACTS THAT WE HAVE ON THE ROADS AND THE DOCKING AND STUFF LIKE THAT.BUT WE GOTTA LOOK AT HOW MUCH OF AN IMPACT IS THIS GONNA HAVE ON OUR DELICATE ECOSYSTEM.
WE HAVE OYSTER BEDS OUT HERE THAT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN TRYING FOR YEARS TO GET REESTABLISHED AND PUT BACK INTO PLACE, AND NOW WE ARE LOOKING AT TAKING THINGS AND PUTTING SOMETHING IN PLACE THAT COULD DESTROY THOSE ALSO.
OKAY? ALL THAT TRAFFIC, ALL THAT DISTURBANCE, EVERYTHING CAN DESTROY OYSTER BEDS.
I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT YOU REALLY THINK ABOUT NOT JUST THE COMMUNITY, BUT HOW IT'S GONNA AFFECT THE YORK RIVER AND THE ANIMALS AND THINGS AND WHAT IT PROVIDES TO EVERYBODY ELSE.
FISHERMEN, YOU KNOW, SPORTS, RECREATION, THINGS LIKE THAT.
AND, UH, I HOPE YOU GUYS CONSIDER THAT AND VOTE THIS DOWN.
I, JULIE RICHLEY, 2 3 4 NELSON STREET.
I ASK THAT YOU VOTE NO, NO, TO SPECIAL USE PERMITS FOR CRUISE SHIPS.
I WOULD MUCH PREFER THE PROHIBITION OPTION LEADERSHIP CHANGES.
AND YOU ALL MIGHT NOT BE SITTING HERE WHEN THE PERMIT COMES UP FOR A HUGE CRUISE SHIP.
UM, THE PLANNING COMMISSION SHOULD BE VERY SURE OF WHAT THEY ARE ALLOWING WITH THESE PERMITS.
THE CONSEQUENCES COULD BE DEVASTATING TO HISTORIC YORKTOWN.
I CAN REMEMBER WHEN MY GRANDFATHER COULD NOT FISH IN THE JAMES RIVER BECAUSE OF POLLUTION.
I REALLY DON'T WANNA SEE THAT HERE.
AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR A LONG TIME, AND I THINK THE PUBLIC HAS BEEN PRETTY CLEAR ABOUT THEIR OPINION ON THE MATTER.
THAT WAS THE LAST, UH, PERSON THAT I HAD SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
UH, ARE THERE ANY OTHERS THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? MR. BDI? I HADN'T PLANNED ON SPEAKING, DAVID BOUT IT.
I WOULD LIKE TO ENCOURAGE THE STAFF TO NOT DO SUP GUARDRAILS, BUT PUT, DO NOT ENTER SIGNS AT THE MOUTH OF YORK RIVER.
ANY ANYBODY ELSE LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? YES, MA'AM.
UM, JULIE COATES, 4 0 3 HOWARD LANE IN GRAFTON.
UM, I COMPOSED AN EMAIL TO THE COMMISSION TODAY, AND I SENT IT TO THREE OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
ALSO, I'M ASKING THAT YOU NOT TAKE ANY STEPS THAT WOULD LEAD TO THE PERMITTING OF LARGE OCEAN CLASS CRUISE SHIPS IN OUR YORKTOWN WATERS.
THERE'S OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE THAT THESE SHIPS DAMAGE THE ENVIRONMENT, INCLUDING THE WILDLIFE, FISHERIES, AND WETLANDS.
YORKTOWN WATERS ARE NOT RIGHT FOR THOSE OCEAN CLASS SHIPS, NOT PRINCESS AND NOT ANY OF THEM.
MANY, MANY LOCALITIES AROUND THE WORLD HAVE BANNED THEM FROM DOCKING DUE TO THE SERIOUS AND LASTING DAMAGE THAT THEY CAUSE.
THE LIST OF COMMUNITIES BANNING OR COMING CLOSE TO BANNING LARGE CRUISE SHIPS INCLUDES MANY FAMOUS TOURIST DESTINATIONS SUCH AS VENICE, DUBLIN, AMSTERDAM, BARCELONA, BRUGE, FRENCH POLYNESIA, BORA BORA, MONTEREY, KEY WEST, CHARLESTON, JUNO, ET CETERA.
THE HUNDREDS OF PASSENGERS, DISEMBARKING HAVE BEEN CALLED A PLAGUE OF LOCUSTS.
IS THIS WHAT WE WANT FOR OUR SMALL VILLAGE? YOU CANNOT USE A REASONING THAT THE PASSENGERS WILL BRING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO YORKTOWN.
MOST OF THE PEOPLE WHO GET OFF THE SHIP WILL BOARD BUSES TO WILLIAMSBURG.
THOSE BUSES CAUSE MORE ISSUES, DAMAGE TO OUR ROADWAY INFRASTRUCTURE.
OUR SMALL ROADWAYS CANNOT DEAL WITH FOUR TO SIX LARGE BUSES PER SHIP THAT IT WOULD TAKE TO MOVE A FEW HUNDRED, MAYBE A THOUSAND PASSENGERS FROM ONE SHIP TO WILLIAMSBURG AND BACK TRAFFIC IN THE VILLAGE AND ON FEEDER ROADS WOULD BE WORSE THAN IT ALREADY IS.
THE COLONIAL PARKWAY IS UNDERGOING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF REPAIR.
THOSE BUSES WOULD ONLY UNDO ALL OF IT IF THEY'RE ALLOWED ON THERE.
NO ONE WHO DRIVES A PARKWAY WANTS TO DEAL WITH THOSE BUSES.
WHAT ABOUT THE LIVELIHOOD OF OUR LOCAL WATERMEN? THE SEAFOOD INDUSTRY IS WORTH BILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE COST OF SEAFOOD LIKE FISH, CRABS, OYSTERS, AND OTHER SHELLFISH? WHEN THE FISHERIES BECOME SO POLLUTED THAT THEY ALL DIE? HOW MANY WATERMEN AFTER GENERATIONS WILL HAVE TO STOP FISHING OUR WATERS? HOW WILL THEY BE? HOW WILL THEY BE REPAIRED FOR LOSING THEIR LIVELIHOOD? WHAT ABOUT THE BIRDS AND THE ANIMALS THAT DEPEND ON OUR WATERS AND WETLANDS TO LIVE? THERE'S OVER 300 SPECIES OF BIRDS AND FISH THAT WILL ALL SUFFER FROM THE POLLUTION THAT THESE SHIPS BRING.
MILLIONS OF BIRDS STOP HERE ON THEIR VOYAGE.
HOW WILL OUR BALD EAGLES KORANS GULLS, PELICANS AND FISH HAWKS FIND FOOD.
THE GOVERNMENT HAS ALREADY SPENT $600 MILLION TRYING TO CLEAN UP THE CHESAPEAKE BAY.
WON'T ALLOWING THE SHIPS TO COME HERE, UNDO ALL OF THAT.
[01:25:01]
DIRECTIVE 10 ACKNOWLEDGES VIRGINIA'S CRITICAL ROLE IN DEFENDING THE BAY WILL YORKTOWN BE THE CAUSE OF THIS BEING UNDERMINED.UH, THE EMISSIONS FROM THESE CRUISE SHIPS, FROM THEM SCRUBBING THEIR BUFFERS, UM, IS IT'S INCREDIBLE TO BELIEVE WHAT THEY COULD DO TO OUR WATER.
ACCORDING TO POPULAR MECHANICS, ONE SHIP CAN BURN UP TO 250 TONS OF DIRTY BUNKER FUEL A DAY.
AND I'VE NEVER TAKEN A CRUISE.
I'VE NEVER HAD THE DESIRE TO, AND I DON'T WANT THEM HERE.
ANYBODY ELSE? UH, WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
SEEING NONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
WE APPRECIATE, UH, YOU BEING HERE AND SHARING YOUR COMMENTS WITH US.
UH, I GUESS I WOULD LIKE TO, BEFORE WE START DISCUSSION, JUST ASK THE STAFF, WAS THERE A DISCONNECT IN, IN, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ASKING FOR A PROHIBITION AND, AND THEN SOMEHOW IT GETTING TURNED INTO, WHAT'S THE, YOU KNOW, EMBARKATION DEMARCATION? WELL, THE RESOLUTION THAT THE BOARD PASSED SPECIFICALLY USED THE WORDS PROVIDE LANGUAGE FOR EMBARKATION AND DISEMBARKATION.
IT DID NOT SPECIFY PROHIBITION IN THE ORDINANCE THAT THE FIVE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEMBERS VOTED ON.
I THINK IT WAS LAST MONTH, RIGHT? YES.
SO THAT'S WHAT STAFF WENT OFF.
I MEAN, IF IT HAD SAID PROHIBITION, WE WOULD'VE INCLUDED LANGUAGE FOR PROHIBITION, RIGHT? AND LIKE, UH, THE COUNTY ATTORNEY SAID, WE, WE CAN'T CHANGE THAT AT THIS POINT.
UM, I MEAN, WE VOTE EITHER WAY.
WHETHER IT'S A YES OR A NO, IT'S GONNA GO BACK TO THE BOARD.
AND I IMAGINE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S GOTTA BE SOME DISCUSSION UP THERE TO, TO ADDRESS, YOU KNOW, THE SEDIMENT THAT, UH, WE'VE HEARD TONIGHT.
SO, UM, AND, AND I, I THINK AS MR. CHAMBERLAIN ASKED, UM, UM, TABLING THAT IS, UM, I MEAN THAT DOESN'T REALLY GET US ANYWHERE EITHER.
WITH THAT, UH, UH, COMMENTS BY THE COMMISSION, MR. KRONER, WOULD YOU LIKE TO START? UH, CERTAINLY.
FIRST I'D LIKE TO COMMEND, UH, STAFF FOR PUTTING TOGETHER ALL OF THIS.
I CAN TELL YOU WITHOUT AN UPPER LIMIT RESTRICTION ON IT, I'M NOT VOTING FOR IT.
THE, UM, I AGREE WITH A LOT OF WHAT WAS SAID OUT HERE, WHICH IS, UH, SEEMS TO BE THE UNDERLYING CURRENT IN THE COUNTY RIGHT NOW.
AND I'M NOT ONE, ONE TO ONE TO BE THE ONE TO OPEN THE DOOR SO WIDE WITHOUT LIMITING IT.
AGAIN, I THINK STAFF IS, DID A WONDERFUL JOB.
AND, AND THEN IN THIS PROCESS AND, YOU KNOW, SHOWS VISION AND WHICH IS, IS IMPORTANT FOR EVERYTHING.
UH, I'M A NEW MEMBER OF THE COMMISSIONERS JUST STARTED IN SEPTEMBER, BASICALLY, BUT I FOLLOWED Y'ALL ALL THROUGH YOUR PROCESS AND I WATCHED YOU ON TV, BELIEVE THAT OR NOT.
MY WIFE USED TO MAKE FUN OF ME.
WHY? WHAT ARE YOU DOING WATCHING THOSE MEETINGS? AND I SAID, WELL, I, I WANT IT TO, UH, AND I AGREE I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS, UH, THE CLIMATE RIGHT NOW IS NOT READY FOR THIS.
AND I FEEL LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO FIND ANOTHER WAY OF THE PROHIBITION AND THAT PROCESS NEEDS TO TAKE ITS PLACE.
UM, I PERSONALLY DON'T LIKE CRUISE SHIPS SITTING OUT THERE MYSELF.
UH, AND YOU KNOW, I, I DO WORRY ABOUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE AS WELL.
ONE, UH, ALL WE CAN DO IS PROHIBIT TURN THE MIC ON AGAIN.
AGAIN, ONE OF THESE DAYS I'LL LEARN, UH, ALL WE CAN DO IS PROHIBIT THE TENDERS OR THE SHIPS FROM DOCKING.
WE CAN'T PROHIBIT THE SHIPS BEING IN THE YORK RIVER.
WE CAN'T PROHIBIT THEM BEING IN THE CHESAPEAKE.
AND THERE'S ALREADY CRUISE SHIPS IN THE CHESAPEAKE AND ALL THROUGH HAMPTON ROADS, AND YOU COULD CATCH 'EM AT NORFOLK B BALTIMORE, ALL KINDS OF PLACES.
SO, BUT, SO THIS COMMITTEE IN THIS COUNTY CANNOT PROHIBIT THOSE SHIPS IN THE COUNTY, IN, IN THE WATERS.
WHAT WE CAN DO IS PROHIBIT OR LIMIT THE, THEIR DOCKING ABILITIES.
AND I BELIEVE THAT THE, UNLESS IT'S A PURE PROHIBIT PROHIBITION FROM DOCKING ANY OF THOSE, AND I THINK THERE MIGHT BE A PROBLEM WITH ALLOWING 400 PASSENGER SHIPS AND NOT ALLOWING 401 PASSENGER SHIPS MAY BE A PROBLEM THERE.
BUT YOU CAN, YOU CAN LIMIT THEM THROUGH A SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
AND WE USE SPECIAL USE PERMITS UP HERE ALL THE TIME.
AND WE HAVE MILLION DOLLAR CORPORATIONS COME UP HERE AND ASK FOR THINGS.
AND SOMETIMES WE APPROVE THEM, RECOMMEND APPROVAL, AND SOMETIMES WE SAY, NO, NOT, IT'S NOT RIGHT.
[01:30:01]
YOU HAVEN'T, UH, CROSSED THE T'S AND DOTTED THE I'S AND, AND DID YOUR HOMEWORK.AND WE JUST DON'T BELIEVE IT'S GOING TO WORK THAT WAY.
AND THAT HAPPENS A LOT UP HERE.
AND SOMETIMES IT'S, YOU KNOW, ONE PERSON VOTING FOR IT AGAINST, SOMETIMES EVERYBODY VOTES FOR IT AGAINST IT.
SO I BELIEVE IN THE SPATIAL USE PERMITS, ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE'S A CONTENTIOUS ISSUE TO COME FORWARD.
'CAUSE IT GIVES THE EVERYBODY THE CHANCE TO TALK IT THROUGH.
SOMETIMES THERE ARE, THERE ARE ISSUES THAT IT'S NOT GOOD.
THERE'S ENOUGH TWIST IN THE WAY THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO APPROACH SOMETHING THAT IT'S OKAY.
SOMETIMES MAYBE THE CRUISE SHIP WILL LIMIT ONLY, YOU KNOW, A HUNDRED PASSENGERS COMING OFF OF IT SOMEHOW.
I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY WOULD DO THAT, BUT THEY COULD LIMIT THAT AND SAY, WE CAN ONLY SEND A HUNDRED PASSENGERS IN TO YORKTOWN.
UH, SO PROHIBITING THE MARINAS FROM SUPPORTING TENDERS OR CRUISE SHIPS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY, I THINK IT'S A GOOD THING.
IT'S NOT JUST THE YORK VILLAGE DOWN HERE ON THE WATERFRONT THAT'S INVOLVED HERE.
AND SO, YEAH, I DON'T KNOW, BUT THAT'S MY COMMENTS.
ONE IS, I DON'T THINK THIS GOES FAR ENOUGH.
I THINK WE NEED A PROHIBITION AND, AND THE WAY MY PHONE'S BEEN RINGING OFF THE HOOK FOR THE LAST FEW DAYS, IT'S, IT'S CLEAR THAT PEOPLE IN THE COUNTY WANT THAT.
UM, THE OTHER THING IS I THINK WE'RE MAKING A MISTAKE IF WE'RE IGNORING DOMINION ENERGY AND THE PLANES MARKETING, UM, THEY HAVE THE CAPACITY TO TO DOCK LARGE SHIPS.
UM, THEY'RE DOMINION ENERGY IS CLOSING THE FACILITY, PLANES IS NEAR CLOSING.
UM, AND SO I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT TOO.
AND FOR THAT REASON, I'M NOT GONNA SUPPORT THIS.
I'LL BE BRIEF AND TO THE POINT.
I WOULD'VE COVERED THAT, THAT, I MEAN, FROM A COMMISSION STANDPOINT, UH, THE STAFF ANSWERED THE MAIL.
I THINK WE NEED TO RETURN THE MAIL.
I JUST, THIS ISN'T WHAT I THINK THE, THE COUNTY NEEDS GOING FORWARD.
UH, I GUESS MY COMMENTS ARE, I, I HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF CHAIRING THE VIRGINIA PORT AUTHORITY FOR SEVERAL YEARS AND ARE WELL FAMILIAR WITH THE PORT INFRASTRUCTURE IN VIRGINIA AND, AND UNDERSTAND WHAT BIG PORTS LOOK LIKE AND WHAT SMALL PORTS LOOK LIKE AND WHAT SMALL WATERFRONTS LOOK LIKE.
AND THERE CERTAINLY IS A DIFFERENCE.
AND, UH, AND THERE ARE CERTAINLY PLACES IN VIRGINIA, UH, IN HAMPTON ROADS, AS YOU ALL KNOW, THAT, THAT THOSE KIND OF SHIPS CAN COME.
THIS DOESN'T SEEM TO BE AN APPROPRIATE PLACE.
UM, AND, UH, I'VE ALSO SERVED ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
I'M NOT QUITE SURE, UH, HOW WE GOT TO WHERE WE ARE.
UH, I, I WOULD ASSUME AS WE'VE ALL GOTTEN CALLS FROM MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS THAT SAY NO TO THIS ISN'T A NO, THAT THE STAFF PRESENTED THIS AND WHERE HE SAID, NO, WE DON'T LIKE THAT, BUT, YOU KNOW, SO JUST LET IT GO.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, HOPEFULLY WE, WE WILL, I, I GET THE SEDIMENT UP HERE, BUT WE'LL, IF THIS IS RETURNED OR AS A NO, IT'S, UH, IT'S, UH, YOU KNOW, NO, WE NEED MORE CLARIFICATION AND WE NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE WORK TO, TO ADDRESS, UH, YOU KNOW, THE FEELINGS OF MOST OF THE YORK COUNTY, UH, CITIZENS.
AND, AND AGAIN, YOU KNOW, UH, THERE ARE CERTAINLY TWO SIDES OF THIS OPINION.
SO, UH, WITH THAT, UM, I'LL TAKE A MOTION.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I'LL MAKE A MOTION FOR, UH, FORWARDING PC 24 DASH 24 R.
THE MOTION BY MR. SMITH IS TO ADOPT SOLUTION NUMBER PC 24 24 R TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENTS TO THE YORK COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE TO ADDRESS STANDARDS FOR MARINA DOCK OR BOATING FACILITIES.
AND AGAIN, WE APPRECIATE, UH, YOU BEING HERE AND, AND SHARING, UH, YOUR, YOUR THOUGHTS WITH US.
[7. Old Business]
BUSINESS, WHICH I THINK WE DON'T HAVE ANY.[8. New Business]
WHICH I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY ALSO CORRECT.[9. Staff Reports/Recent Actions by the Board of Supervisors]
I THINK WE DO.SO, UM, I'D JUST LIKE TO START OFF AND THANK, UM, OUR VERY HARDWORKING PLANNING STAFF, KAITLYN ELGI AND GE.
THEY'VE WORKED VERY HARD OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS TO, UH, PRODUCE THE ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS THAT YOU HAVE HAD BEFORE YOU TONIGHT.
UM, THEY HAVE DONE AN AMAZING JOB AS YOU, YOU COMPLIMENTED THEM ON, UM, IN THE RESEARCH THAT THEY'VE DONE, UM, AND THE PRESENTATIONS THEY MADE TO YOU TONIGHT.
[01:35:01]
AN AMAZING JOB AND JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU TO THEM, UH, FOR SURE OF ALL THE HARD WORK THAT THEY'VE BEEN DOING.UM, YOU HAVE THE, UH, DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY REPORT IN FRONT OF YOU.
SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS FROM THERE.
UH, THE CASE THAT YOU HELD, YOU, UM, REVIEW RECOMMENDED FOR LAST MONTH, MR. VANCE'S CASE THAT WILL GO TO THE BOARD ON DECEMBER 17TH.
UM, THE MARQUEE CROSSING, UM, MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS UP OFF OF, UH, 1 99 PENMAN AREA.
UM, THAT WILL, IS TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED RIGHT NOW FOR THE JANUARY 21ST BOARD MEETING.
UH, SO, UH, WE'RE HOPING TO GET THAT IN ON THEIR DOCKET.
OTHER INTERESTING ITEMS, UH, FOR SUB SITE PLANS THAT'S BEEN APPROVED.
THE, UM, DOCK MASTER BUILDING DOWN HERE ON THE WATERFRONT.
THAT SITE PLAN WAS APPROVED RECENTLY, END OF NOVEMBER, AS WELL AS THE BOARDWALK BETWEEN, UH, THE PUB AND THE NEW COASTAL THIRST RESTAURANT THAT'S DOWN THERE SO THAT, THAT SITE PLAN WAS APPROVED ALSO.
AND THEN LAST AT THE VERY, UH, END ON THE LAST PAGE, UH, LAND DISTURBANCE PERMIT FOR PANDA EXPRESS.
IF YOU'RE HAVE BEEN UP OFF MOTOWN ROAD, YOU'LL SEE THAT THEY HAVE STARTED GETTING THAT SITE READY TO, UH, BEGIN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THAT RESTAURANT UP THERE.
SO, UH, THOSE ARE THE MAJOR HIGHLIGHTS.
THE ONLY OTHER THING I'D OFFER IS, UM, HAPPY HOLIDAYS TO EVERYONE.
UM, I HOPE EVERYONE GETS TO HAVE SOME GREAT FAMILY TIME, UM, AND EAT SOME GOOD FOOD AND MAYBE GET A GET AND GIVE A GOOD PRESENT HERE AND THERE.
[10. Committee Reports]
NO COMMITTEES.[11. Commission Reports and Requests]
HAVE NO COMMITTEE REPORTS.ARE THERE ANY REQUESTS, UH, FROM THE COMMISSION AND I, I'LL, I GUESS I'LL JUST LEAD MY REQUEST.
IT'S JUST AS WE GO BACK TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS JUST CLARIFICATION ON THE LAST, UH, YOU KNOW, ISSUE THAT THEY UNDERSTAND IT'S NOT A NO, BUT, BUT WE NEED, WE NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE TO WORK WITH.
SO IN, IN, IN COMPLIANCE WITH A LOT OF THE WISHES THAT WE, WE HEARD TONIGHT AND WE'LL SHARE THAT WITH THEM.
ANY OTHER REQUESTS FROM THE COMMISSION? OKAY.
WITH THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS THANKS TO THE STAFF AS WELL, UH, FROM ALL OF US.
UH, A LOT OF, UH, HARD WORK, UH, ESPECIALLY ON THESE TWO ISSUES, UH, TONIGHT, UH, AND, UH, HAS ALWAYS BEEN THOROUGH AND, UH, WE APPRECIATE THE DEDICATION, UH, THAT YOU GIVE ALL OF THESE IMPORTANT ISSUES.
UH, AND WITH THAT I'LL JUST ADD, UH, FROM, FROM THE COMMISSION, UH, YOU KNOW, WE ALL CELEBRATE THE HOLIDAYS IN DIFFERENT WAYS.
SO HAPPY HOLIDAYS FOR ME, MERRY CHRISTMAS.
AND UH, WITH THAT WE STAND ADJOURNED.