Hi there, everyone! Happy Friday! This edition is coming a little late, but a *lot* happened at last night’s meeting of the Floyd Town Council. The meeting lasted almost two hours.
Personally, I didn’t mind, because much of the discussion revolved around the town’s zoning ordinances. Perhaps a little-known fact about me: I’m a big geek for zoning policy. So I enjoyed it! It was also a full house last night. I counted 14 people attending in person and three more over Zoom. (Luckily, everyone wore face masks and stayed relatively distant from each other.) The Town Council meetings are now livestreamed, and information on accessing the streams can be found here.
Have a great weekend, and thanks as always for reading along.
-Ashley
Council debates mural application; new sign ordinance almost finished
Even when those attending Thursday evening’s Town Council meeting weren’t talking about the sign ordinance, they were kind of talking about the sign ordinance. The ordinance, which has been revised and updated over the past several months by Aphi Fancon at the New River Valley Regional Commission, was an item on the night’s agenda.
But before Fancon could offer her presentation to the joint meeting of the Council and Floyd’s Planning Commission, the two bodies had to deliberate over a mural application. Murals are mentioned in the town’s sign ordinance. But they’re not signs. This distinction became important as officials debated whether to allow the mural; how large it could be; if the design could be altered post-facto and who retained legal responsibility for its maintenance.
Both the Council and Planning Commission attended Thursday’s meeting because of a joint public hearing that was scheduled for the mural application. According to the town code, murals must be approved through the same process as conditional use permits (CUP). That is to say, both the Council and the Planning Commission must approve the request, and the public must be given an opportunity to weigh in.
The mural application was submitted by Threefold Arts owner Kyra Aulani, and is proposed for the side of the building located at 110 W. Main Street in Floyd. Only three public comments were properly submitted in advance of the meeting, and all expressed support for the project. Supporters included business owners Derek Wall, Kamala Bauer and Jack Wall. Councilman David Whitaker said he’s fielded questions and concerns from many residents about the mural. Whitaker asked, Who’s idea was the mural? Who is funding it? Have we seen other examples of the artist’s work? He also asked whether the mural would be limited to 32 sq. ft., since that’s the upper size limit allowed in the sign ordinance. (Murals are not signs.)
However, Whitaker said his biggest concern was precedent. How can we deny future requests for murals, he said, which may be objectionable? Mayor Will Griffin explained later in the meeting that avoiding troublesome precedent is the entire purpose of the CUP process. Actions that are approved under a CUP are done so on a case-by-case basis. Thus, precedent is not a relevant consideration.
Aulani asked for an opportunity to address the group. She was able to provide clear answers to many of Whitaker’s questions. She also addressed several questions raised by Planning Commission Chairman Mike Maslaney.
The mural will be financed with grant money from the Virginia LoveWorks program, she said. In fact, she has already received approval on the design from the statewide marketing initiative, and bought materials to paint the mural. She realized later that approval from the Town of Floyd was also required.
Aulani said she wants the mural to highlight the best and “least divisive” parts of Floyd—its natural beauty, beautiful sunrises and sunsets, and the feeling of love that encompasses the town.
Aulani said the mural would only take a week or two to complete. Originally, she had hoped to finish the artwork prior to the winter season setting in. Now that seems unlikely, so she’s aiming for spring 2021. She said it works out for the best. The mural will feature bright colors and foliage, and Aulani said marketing the mural during springtime will be perfectly thematic and likely attract people to the area.
On the advice of Fancon, Maslaney raised questions about the mural’s placement and maintenance. Aulani said the building on which the mural will be painted is not historical. She’s received approval from the building owner to paint the mural, and said she will take personal responsibility for its aesthetic upkeep. She has no plans to leave Floyd—but if she does, she said, she’ll also pay to have the mural painted over before she leaves. The mural will be coated with a sealer to protect it from UV rays and graffiti. She said she will not make any major changes to the design after the Town approves it. Minor changes will need to be approved by Town Manager Kayla Cox.
“I put a lot of time into (the design),” Aulani said. “And I personally love it.”
The Planning Commission decided to deliberate on the mural before making a recommendation to Council. The commission next meets on Dec. 16 at 6:30 p.m., at Town Hall.
Following discussion of the mural application, Fancon offered updates on the town’s sign ordinance. Changes were minor since the last draft, she said, and she emphasized that “this is definitely the Town of Floyd’s sign ordinance.” She said she worked extensively with the Planning Commission and tried to incorporate its feedback to make sure the ordinance reflects the needs and values of Floyd.
The Council spoke at length about two issues related to the ordinance, though. First, the issue of historical signage and when it is permitted, and second, the barriers to enforcing provisions of the ordinance.
Town Vice-Mayor Mike Patton raised the issue. “I’m already thinking about this issue about historical signs—that’s an argument that has been batted around this table for years,” he said. The main problem, Patton said, is that the Town doesn’t have a good standard for what’s considered “historical.”
Fancon said traditionally, if a building is on the National Register of Historic Places, that’s an easy way to automatically make the distinction. Localities can further define historicism with the use of a time element, e.g. more than 50 years old. That is the standard used in the current zoning ordinance, Cox said.
Councilmen also raised concerns about how the sign ordinance would be enforced, and whether attempting to enforce it could lead to strain on town staff. Griffin said it could be a “time drain” on Cox and Town Clerk Katie Holfield. Not enforcing the ordinance at all isn’t an option, he said, because the town could be “overrun with signs.” Enforcing it too strictly, though, could lead to pushback from local business owners who say the inability to advertise their business is a hindrance to their success.
Fancon pointed out that enforcement isn’t an immediate concern. All existing signs in town will be grandfathered in, meaning they aren’t required to conform to the new ordinance. And the Council will be aware of any proposed future signs, so they’ll have an opportunity to enforce the ordinance if issues arise.
Still, multiple councilmen felt that the town manager position is becoming overburdened. The town manager also acts as the zoning administrator. “The more prosperous the community has become, the more work there was for the zoning administrator,” said Patton. He suggested the town consider hiring an additional person to share the workload. Councilman Bruce Turner, likewise, said “At some point in time we’re going to have to consider increasing our staff.”
Griffin countered that for the moment, rather than hiring new staff, the Town could just set reasonable expectations for enforcing the ordinance. Ordinance violations won’t be disciplined immediately, he said. Enforcement will be a slow, cooperative process with the sign owner. “We want to keep some of the neighborly feel to it, and not rule with an iron fist,” Griffin said.
The final version of the sign ordinance is slated to be approved in February 2021.
To close the meeting, Town Council discussed potential uses for its remaining CARES Act funding. The Town has $17,000 left to spend before the Dec. 31 deadline.
The town had intended to buy several new dumpsters which would have spent nearly the entire remaining total. However, Cox reported that lead times on the dumpsters meant the order couldn’t be fulfilled by the end of the year.
Councilmen decided on several new microphones to enhance the sound quality of video-streamed meetings; new touchscreen tablets for three of the council members and hazard pay for all five town employees.
The last item was a bit controversial. The criteria for employees eligible for hazard pay are: employees must be deemed essential; their duties must have substantially changed as a result of the pandemic; or they must face some additional risk of harm.
County Attorney Steve Durbin had advised the Board of Supervisors that CARES Act funding probably can’t be used for public works employees. However, trash collection in the Town of Floyd involves much more contact with the trash and with other people than the same job at the county level. Cox and Holfield have also continued to serve the public in the town’s offices, potentially risking exposure to COVID-19.
Ultimately, if the state’s use of federal CARES Act funding is audited and the Town of Floyd is found to have made an unapproved purchase, the town government will be on the hook for that expenditure. Griffin said that’s a risk he’s willing to take. “Our guys are taking a risk everyday,” he said.
The Town Council next meets Dec. 17 at 5:30 p.m.