Page 1
Northumberland County Planning Commission
August 20, 2026
Minutes
The regular monthly meeting of the Northumberland County Planning Commission was held on August 20, 2026, at 7:00 p.m. in person at the Northumberland Courts Building and using Zoom (telephonic meeting), with the following attendance:
Michael Bryant Present Roger McKinley Present
Vivian Diggs Present Patrick O’Brien Present
Allen Garland Present Garfield Parker Present
John Kost Present Heidi Wilkins-Corey Present
James Michel Present
James Brann Present
Others in attendance:
Stuart McKenzie (County Planner)
Philip Marston (Zoning Administrator)
RE: CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Parker at 7:03 pm. The invocation was given by Mr. Parker, and the Chairman led the commission in the Pledge of Allegiance. RE: AGENDA – August 20, 2026
A motion to approve the agenda was made by Mr. O’Brien, and was seconded by Mr. McKinley. The commission voted unanimously to approve the agenda.
RE: MINUTES – June 18, 2026, and July 16, 2026
A motion to approve the June 18, 2026 minutes was made by Mr. Kost, and was seconded by Mr. O’Brien. The commission voted unanimously to approve the June 18, 2026 meeting minutes. Mr. McKenzie noted that the Commission did not have a quorum at the July 16, 2026 meeting, so there were no official minutes, but more of a meeting summary since no official action could be made, the meeting summary is not needed to be approved.
RE: COMMISSIONERS’ COMMENTS
Mr. Parker asked if there were any Commission member comments. Mr. Parker then thanked former District 5 commission representative Mr. Charles Williams and stated he always did a great job and as a businessman, brought a unique perspective to the discussion. Mr. Parker thanked Mr. Williams for the many years he served on the Commission. Mr. Parker stated that Mr. Cralle has decided not to renew his appointment to the Commission and that he thanked Mr. Cralle for his years of service to the County, 1
Page 2
as well. Finally, Mr. Parker stated that he was happy to welcome new member, Michael Bryant, representing District 1, to the Commission.
Mr. Kost stated he had an update to the Friends of Northumberland County Animal Shelter’s search for a site to build their new animal shelter. Mr. Kost stated that there is another landowner who might be willing to donate some land. Mr. Kost revealed the property is not in the village of Heathsville, but East of the Food Lion supermarket. Mr. Kost stated that negotiations have begun, and there is a long way to go, but he hopes eventually they will work through all the details and eventually come to the Commission for a conditional use permit in the future.
Mr. Kost added that regarding the District 5 Planning Commission vacancy, Mr. Kost stated Supervisor Williams is working on it.
RE: STAFF MEMBERS’ COMMENTS
Mr. McKenzie stated he had no comments.
RE: CITIZENS’ COMMENTS
There were no citizen comments, either in person or online.
RE: PUBLIC HEARINGS
Mr. Parker asked staff about the scheduled public hearing. Mr. McKenzie stated the first public hearing is a revision to the Northumberland County Zoning Ordinance, § 148-3, to modify the definition of Bulk Oil/Propane Storage, Commercial, (third sentence of the definition) from “Such facilities shall not include retail sales.” to “Such facilities may include retail sales.” Mr. McKenzie informed the Commission that neither Mr. Marston or himself had received any public comment on the definition revision.
Mr. Parker opened the Public Hearing at 7:08 pm, asking if anyone present would like to speak regarding the proposed change to the definition of Bulk Oil/Propane Storage, Commercial. Hearing none, Chairman Parker asked if there was anyone online that would like to speak regarding the public hearing, there were none.
Mr. O’Brien asked if anyone knows why retail sales were excluded? Mr. Marston stated no, adding that it was before he started working for the county. Mr. Brann stated that this initiative started because there may be a conditional use permit application coming. Mrs. Wilkins-Corey stated that regardless, the county needs more gas stations and businesses for tax revenue, especially in the Eastern part of the County.
Mr. Parker closed the public hearing at 7:15 pm. Mr. O’Brien made a motion to recommend to the Board of Supervisors to revise the Northumberland County Zoning Ordinance, § 148-3, to modify the definition of Bulk Oil/Propane Storage, Commercial, (third sentence of the definition) from “Such facilities shall not include retail sales.” to “Such facilities may include retail sales.” Mr. O’Brien added that this motion is made in due consideration of the administrative record before the body, including the planning 2
Page 3
commission’s deliberations and recommendation, the information received via the public hearing, including statements offered by staff, the applicant, and members of the public, the public health and safety, the general welfare of the community, public necessity, convenience, in the exercise of good zoning practices and the body’s legislative prerogative, and pursuant to the body’s statutory authority. Mr. Kost seconded the motion. The vote was as follows:
Michael Bryant Aye Roger McKinley Aye
Vivian Diggs Aye Patrick O’Brien Aye
Allen Garland Aye Garfield Parker Aye
John Kost Aye Heidi Wilkins-Corey Aye
James Michel Aye
James Brann n/a
The motion passed unanimously.
After being prompted by the Chairman, Mr. McKenzie stated the second public hearing is related to a revision to the Northumberland County Zoning Ordinance § 148, Attachment 1, Table of Usages to add Bulk Oil/Propane Storage, Commercial as a conditional use in the B-1, Business, General Zoning District.
Mr. Parker opened the public hearing at 7:18 pm, and hearing no one present wanted to speak, asked if there was anyone online who wanted to speak, and hearing none, closed the public hearing at 7:20 pm.
Mr. Garland stated that Bulk Oil/Propane Storage, Commercial is already allowed as a conditional use in the A-1 and M-1 zoning district, so he said he sees no reason why it would not be allowed in the B-1 Business district.
Mr. O’Brien made a motion to recommend to the Board to revise the Northumberland County Zoning Ordinance § 148, Attachment 1, Table of Usages to add Bulk Oil/Propane Storage, Commercial as a conditional use in the B-1, Business, General Zoning District. Mr. O’Brien added that this motion is made in due consideration of the administrative record before the body, including the planning commission’s deliberations and recommendation, the information received via the public hearing, including statements offered by staff, the applicant, and members of the public, the public health and safety, the general welfare of the community, public necessity, convenience, in the exercise of good zoning practices and the body’s legislative prerogative, and pursuant to the body’s statutory authority. Mr. Kost seconded the motion. The vote was as follows:
Michael Bryant Aye Roger McKinley Aye
Vivian Diggs Aye Patrick O’Brien Aye
Allen Garland Aye Garfield Parker Aye
John Kost Aye Heidi Wilkins-Corey Aye
James Michel Aye
James Brann n/a
The motion passed unanimously.
3
Page 4
RE: WORK SESSION ITEMS
Mr. McKenzie read the July 10, 2026 memo from the Board of Supervisors regarding home occupation businesses, asking the Commission to review current zoning regulations on Home Occupation Businesses to further clarify the use so as to not negatively impact the surrounding neighbors.
Mr. Kost asked Mr. Brann if he had any more insight as to what the Board is looking for? Supervisor Brann stated that the Board does not want to stifle business in the county, but there a couple of businesses in the county where the business overflows into the front yard. Mr. Brann stated one is a marine repair business and another is an auto repair business. Mr. Brann stated that the Board members get a lot of calls about both of these businesses, especially the one in Callao. Mr. Michel stated he has had discussions regarding home occupation businesses over the years, including one such business on Lodge Rd a few years back, and Mr. Michel said that Mr. Marston stated nothing could be done about them.
Mr. Kost asked about the current businesses the Board gets calls about, it is because the equipment is too close to the road. Mr. Brann stated it was more the total volume of stuff in the yard. Mr. Kost asked Mr. Marston what is the enforcement mechanism? Mr. Marston stated that the current ordinance has no differentiation between a hair salon or a boat repair business. Mr. Marston stated there is a flow of boats/cars in and out, they eventually just overflow. Mr. Michel stated that the county needs to restrict the volume of cars/boats. He added something needs to be done, people working is no problem, but they have to live there. Mr. Kost asked Mr. Marston if we can revise the definition to put a percentage of the land (yard) that can have boats/cars/equipment present? Mr. Marston stated that staff has gathered other county definitions that address those issues, perhaps the commission can look at those. Mr. Marston stated he did not want the county to go too far that it restricts people looking to make a living at home. Mr. McKinley asked Mr. Marston what language do you think would address the problem? Mr. Marston stated we could modify the zoning ordinance definition to use screening, make it conditional use, or prohibit external storage.
A citizen in the audience, Mr. Maurice Johnson, stated a number of years ago there was a discussion in the county what is commercial and what is residential. The consensus was auto repair is not residential, but a doctors office is. Mr. Johnson stated the county needs to decide which uses are allowed and which uses are not.
Mr. O’Brien asked would the Middlesex County zoning ordinance requirement of having to be 50 feet away from adjoining properties solve the problem? Mr. Michel stated that could prohibit a hair salon if the houses are not 50 feet apart. Citizen Johnson clarified that the wording would have to define commercial, and which ones are not suitable in a residential setting. Mr. O’Brien, reading from the Middlesex zoning ordinance stated “no stock in trade shall be displayed or sold on the premises.” Mr. Garland stated that the business in Callao is not selling boats, but selling services. Mrs. Wilkins-Corey stated that the boat repair business may have to sell boats if the owner does not pay the service bill, and some boats may be waiting for the boat owner to earn enough money to pay the repair bill.
4
Page 5
Mr. Michel stated that some years ago, the county cleaned up the three entrances to Callao, there was a forklift repair business on Rt. 202, on the way to Warsaw, there was an antique store and towards Heathsville, there was a dilapidated vegetable stand. Mr. Michel stated that county took down the vegetable stand and got the other business owners to clean up their yards. Mr. Michel said the county must have done something to clean up the junk, and why can’t we do that now? Mr. Marston stated he did some research on one of the properties which was deemed an illegal landfill. Mr. Marston stated that someone volunteered to clean up the property. Mr. Marston stated there is a fine line between junk and valuable good, depending on who you ask. Mr. Garland stated the county needs to address junk in the yard. Mr. Brann stated they get a lot of calls about the house in Lottsburg, as well. Mrs. Wilkins-Corey asked if that is a home occupation business, and Mr. Brann replied I think the person does carpentry work. Mr. McKinley asked if someone gets reported, could the Board of Supervisors require a conditional use permit? Mr. Kost stated something would have to trigger that process. Mr. McKinley stated a citizen complaint would trigger it. Mr. Garland asked Mr. Marston what is the enforcement mechanism for inoperable vehicles? Mr. Brann stated you have to get registration on all vehicles. Mr. Marston concurred, stating if the vehicle is not registered, you have to screen the vehicle from view.
Mr. Kost stated there needs to be a county policy to define what is objectionable. Mr. Kost asked Mr. Marston if any of the neighboring counties have an eyesore ordinance. Mr. Marston said no, they all focus on trash and refuse, that is going to endanger the health and safety of the neighbors. Mr. Garland stated that an eyesore ordinance is not a home business occupancy ordinance. Mrs. Wilkins-Corey stated that we have two problems eyesores and home businesses. Mr. O’Brien asked if the commission members wanted to revisit this next month so they would have time to look into the existing county ordinances. Mr. Kost asked about eyesore ordinances. Mr. Marston commented that upkeep of properties is hard to prove, one person’s junk is another person’s treasure. Mr. Garland stated that of the home business occupation zoning ordinances staff collected, Lancaster County’s ordinance is the closest to what the county needs. Mr. O’Brien stated there are public nuisance ordinances that likely could be used. Mrs. Wilkins-Corey asked Mr. Marston if we change the home occupation zoning ordinance, will it affect existing businesses or would they be grandfathered. Mr. Marston stated they would be legal non-conforming uses. Mr. Michel stated he felt businesses should be given time to comply. Mr. O’Brien stated you could make the ordinance effective date January 2027, that should give them long enough to comply. Mr. Garland cautioned about treading lightly here, one guy could have 30 boats in his yard, the next guy has 2 boats in his yard, how many (cars) or boats is too many? Mr. Kost likes Lancaster County’s 3 item “there is not to be display of products being sold or products being serviced.” Mr. Parker warned that we do not want to do anything to deter business in the county. Mr. Garland asked Mr. Marston to talk with his counterpart in Lancaster County and bring back that information. Mr. Parker stated he would like to table the discussion for now. Mr. Kost volunteered to draft something for the Commission to consider at their next meeting.
Mr. McKenzie transitioned to the discussion of the telecommunications tower ordinance. Mr. McKenzie stated that last time we discussed the Lancaster/Richmond County ordinances, and now were at the point where the Westmoreland County ordinance begins, and much of the information is redundant as well as dictating parameters to the wireless 5
Page 6
telecommunication companies which may or may not be the best options to choose. Mr. McKenzie stated that the majority of the Westmoreland County ordinance should be deleted, as there is no need to dictate antenna size or color of the tower. Mr. Kost stated he will work on re-writing the ordinance, giving careful scrutiny to the Westmoreland section, and cross reference with the state requirements.
A citizen in the audience, Ryan Rogers of Ophelia asked if he could talk, the Chairman allowed him to address the Commission. Mr. Rogers stated that one thing to keep in mind is how bad we need cell towers in the county, why can’t the county go by the FCC rules. Mr. Rogers stated Edwardsville and Ophelia are badly in need of cell phone towers. Mr. Kost added that since 5G cell service has arrived, there is a need for cell towers to be closer together, and that the county is aware of the trade offs regarding instituting a more robust telecommunications tower zoning ordinance.
Staff then transitioned to work on the DRAFT Telecommunications Ordinance, and the Commission directed staff to delete the sentences after the end Section O., Number 5. of the ordinance after the sentence ending in “of the Board’s action.” Furthermore, the Commission directed staff to delete Section P and Section Q.
Regarding Section R, which discusses the application fee, but does not cite what the amount of the application fee was, there was discussion regarding how many and what amount of fees to charge. Mr. O’Brien stated that any application fee the county could think of would be a drop in the bucket for a conglomerate such as Verizon. Mr. O’Brien suggested a new tower application fee of $5,000. Mr. Marston stated that staff can get the fee amounts from other counties and bring back to the next Commission meeting for their consideration
The next section of the ordinance, Section S, details the project performance security bond so the county is assured the applicant will faithfully follow the terms and conditions of this chapter. Mr. O’Brien stated that the performance bond is $15,000 for Richmond County and $75,000 for Lancaster County, and thought we should probably go with a fee between those two numbers.
The Chairman stated that it was getting late and staff should wrap up the work session, to which Mr. McKenzie agreed, stating that we would begin discussion at Section “T” next time. Mr. Kost volunteered to edit the Draft Ordinance to remove redundancies and to evaluate it with respect to state code and have it available for the next meeting. Mr. McKenzie stated he would send the draft ordinance to Mr. Kost on Monday.
Chairman Parker stated that he wanted the Planning Commission Members to consider water supply in the county. Mr. Parker stated with the ongoing drought, even though it has been raining as of late, there are many citizens who’s well has failed, and he is noticing a lot of new wells being dug. With the promulgation of data centers in Northern VA and Fredericksburg, and their subsequent need for cooling water, there are more demands for water than there is supply. Mr. McKenzie stated that he read in a newspaper recently that Virginia DEQ recommended that New Kent quit relying on groundwater for its municipal water source, and instead build a surface water intake on the Pamunkey River. Mr. Kost added that the NNPDC, when discussing water supply planning, stated 6
Page 7
that if the West Point paper mill closed, as industrial uses takes most of the water, if it were gone, then we may not have any problems with groundwater (supply).
RE: DISCUSSION ITEMS
There were no discussion items on the agenda.
RE: PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no citizen comments in person or online.
RE: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS REPORT
There was no Board of Supervisors report given.
RE: ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Kost made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:37 pm, which was seconded by Mr. O’Brien. The Commission voted unanimously to accept Mr. Kost’s motion and adjourned the meeting.
7