This week in county government; BOS approves emergency ordinance to rein in roaming livestock, oks rezoning, CUP for affordable housing; PC sets public hearing on proposed STR regs
This week in county government; BOS approves emergency ordinance to rein in roaming livestock, oks rezoning, CUP for affordable housing; PC sets public hearing on proposed STR regs
Engage Louisa is a nonpartisan newsletter that keeps folks informed about Louisa County government. We believe our community is stronger and our government serves us better when we increase transparency, accessibility, and engagement.
This week in county government: public meetings, August 14 through August 19
For the latest information on county meetings including public meetings of boards, commissions, authorities, work groups, and internal county committees, click here. (Note: Louisa County occasionally schedules internal committee/work group meetings after publication time. Check the county’s website for the most updated information).
Tuesday, August 15
Louisa County Electoral Board, 103 McDonald Street, Louisa, 10 am. (agenda)
Livestock Committee, Extension Conference Room, Louisa County Office Building, 1 Woolfolk Ave., Louisa, 2 pm. The Board of Supervisors formed this committee at its August 8 meeting to consider regulations on at-large livestock. (See article below for more information).
Wednesday, August 16
Community Policy Management Team, Executive Boardroom, Louisa County Office Building, 1 Woolfolk Ave., Louisa, 1 pm.
Thursday, August 17
Louisa County Industrial Development Authority, Public Meeting Room, Louisa County Office Building, 1 Woolfolk Ave., Louisa, 8:30 am.
Other meetings
Monday, August 14
Mineral Town Council, 312 Mineral Ave., Mineral, 6:30 pm. (agenda)
Tuesday, August 15
Louisa Town Council, 212 Fredericksburg Ave., Louisa, 6 pm. (agenda)
Additional information about Louisa County’s upcoming public meetings is available here.
Interested in taking your talents to one of the county’s numerous boards and commissions? Find out more here including which boards have vacancies and how to apply.
BOS oks emergency ordinance to rein in roaming livestock
The Louisa County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday green-lighted emergency rules to rein in livestock running at large after goats and sheep roamed on to Interstate 64 in late July. (meeting materials, video)
Amid pushback from some farmers who worried that the rules would unfairly penalize them, the board voted 4-2 to adopt a temporary ordinance that makes it unlawful for livestock or poultry “to be allowed by the owner to run at large intentionally or knowingly.” Livestock is considered “running at large” if it’s off its owner or custodian’s property and out of their immediate control.
A violation of the ordinance could result in a $250 fine and Class 4 misdemeanor. Every animal running at large would be considered a separate violation and the animals could be impounded. The ordinance caps the fines at $2,000.
The board adopted the ordinance on an emergency basis, so it wasn’t advertised for two weeks prior to the public hearing as typically required by state code. Accordingly, the ordinance can’t be enforced for more than 60 days unless it’s readopted with proper notice. Supervisors opted to set its expiration date for September 5, the date of their next meeting, and form a committee to consider future action.
Before motioning to approve the ordinance, Jackson District Supervisor Toni Williams, who owns a farm with livestock in eastern Louisa, said it was necessary to address an imminent threat to public safety and isn’t designed to harm the county’s many responsible farmers.
Williams said that on July 25, some goats and sheep, which have been habitually allowed to roam, got on to Interstate 64 and one was killed. Over the last two years, Louisa County Animal Control has received 483 calls regarding at-large livestock to addresses on Hasher Lane, which runs parallel to the interstate near Ferncliff. Williams said that county officials had no power to deal with the animals on the interstate other than to “shoo them back into the yard.”
Several residents and property owners on Hasher Lane complained at recent county meetings that goats, sheep and other animals regularly roam on their property and occasionally cause damage. Doug Hitchcock, who owns land just off the interstate, said during Tuesday’s public hearing that roaming farm animals had torn up his fields and woods and he’d repeatedly called animal control for help.
Lynnel Morris, whose home adjoins Hitchcock’s property, told the board at its July 17 meeting that, for the last five years, a neighbor’s goats, sheep, and pigs have roamed outside her house. The animals have damaged her car and fence, eaten her vegetable garden, and left her land smelling like a barnyard, she said.
The July 25 incident prompted county officials to consider emergency action.
“The day that the animals made it to Interstate 64 and one got hit…(made this) a public safety issue. (The ordinance is) a way to address a singular incident and this one-off problem we have,” Williams said. “If those animals got back on the interstate in the morning, God forbid, and caused an accident and someone got killed, I would have a moral issue that I did not take action, that I did not do what I could’ve done to prevent that.”
Williams added that the ordinance wouldn’t impact farmers whose livestock escapes because of a temporarily damaged fence or similar circumstances because that wouldn’t be considered “knowingly and intentionally” allowing animals to roam, a point reiterated by Chief Animal Control Officer Alyssa Ellison.
“If a tree came down on your fence and your cows got out, clearly that wasn’t willfully and intentionally. However, if I’ve been to your house 400 times for your goats getting out, if I come to your house and tell you to get them contained and you’re still not and you get a civil judgement and you still don’t contain them, I would say that’s pretty willful and intentional,” Ellison said, referencing the Hasher Lane issue where neighbors filed a civil action and received a judgement in their favor because the livestock had damaged their property.
Patrick Henry District Supervisor Fitzgerald Barnes, Louisa District Supervisor Eric Purcell, and Green Springs District Supervisor Rachel Jones joined Williams in supporting the ordinance while Mineral District Supervisor Duane Adams and Mountain Road District Supervisor Tommy Barlow cast opposing votes. Cuckoo District Supervisor Willie Gentry was absent.
Several supervisors who supported the ordinance acknowledged it wasn’t perfect, but said they believed it was necessary for now.
Adams said that he feared an imperfect temporary ordinance could easily become permanent, so he wasn’t comfortable supporting it. Barlow said that he’s concerned farmers didn’t have enough time to weigh in. Barlow initially tried to remove the public hearing from the agenda at the start of the meeting but was outvoted, 4-2.
Prior to the animals accessing the interstate, county officials had been grappling with how to deal with farm animals that habitually roam. Several supervisors noted during the meeting that a pair of goats showed up at Moss-Nuckols Elementary School just days ago. Ellison said that the animals had been running at-large for about two weeks and the owner wouldn’t keep them contained.
To address citizen concerns, supervisors this spring sent a draft ordinance to the Planning Commission for its review that would’ve prohibited livestock from roaming at large at any time and implemented escalating penalties for people who habitually allowed their farm animals to leave their property. But that proposal stalled after several commissioners expressed concerns about its potential impact on commercial farmers and the county’s rural character. The same ordinance was considered earlier this year by the county’s Agricultural, Forestal and Rural Preservation Committee, a citizen-led panel that includes several famers. The body split on whether to recommend approval.
An initial emergency proposal—advertised in the board’s agenda packet for Tuesday’s meeting—included a significant carve out to protect commercial farmers. It prohibited livestock from running at large but exempted any property owner whose land is used for agriculture and enrolled in the county’s land use program. The program is reserved for parcels with at least five acres of open land or 20 acres of timberland. County Attorney Helen Phillips said the draft was scrapped due to legal and enforcement concerns.
The board is continuing to search for a more permanent solution. During Tuesday’s meeting, Adams appointed a mix of farmers and county officials to a committee charged with recommending to the county possible future action. Williams said he expects the committee to “quickly go to work and come back at our September 5th meeting with a proposed permanent ordinance or changes to the temporary one.” The committee is scheduled to hold its first meeting on August 15.
The public hearing drew a larger than usual crowd to Tuesday’s meeting, mainly local farmers. Fifteen people spoke during the hearing, expressing a range of views about the temporary ordinance.
Several farmers wondered why the county had to adopt the ordinance, contending that there had to be another tool to remedy the issue on Hasher Lane.
Charles Rosson, the county’s extension agent, pointed to a section of county code that granted animal control officers the power to hold livestock that’s abandoned. Phillips and Ellison said that provision didn’t authorize the county to act in this situation. Phillips said that code had been reviewed and researched “exhaustively” by her office and the commonwealth’s attorney.
Ellison explained earlier in the meeting that, under state code, she has no immediate power to seize livestock. She said that to seize farm animals, she must prove cruelty or “detriment to their life, health and safety” and get approval from the State Veterinarian. Animals roaming on the interstate one time isn’t enough to justify a seizure, she said. Ellison further explained that, under county code, she only has the power to impound wandering livestock—temporarily holding the animals—if the owner is unknown. In those cases, she can take animals to the shelter and the owner can pick them up.
Adopting the temporary ordinance, Ellison said, would allow her to impound the at-large animals on Hasher Lane when she received the next call. The owner would receive a summons and court date and the animals would be held at least until then. An ordinance adopted several years ago requires the owner to pay for any cost incurred during the animals’ impoundment.
Other speakers worried that the ordinance would unfairly penalize farmers whose animals escape because of damaged fencing or other circumstances out of their immediate control. To deal with “one bad apple,” they said, county officials could punish responsible farmers who do what they can to protect their livestock.
“We are enforcing this on every farmer in this community predominantly because of one person’s issue,” Patrick Henry District farmer John Austin said, noting that many farmers rent property and can’t afford to invest money for high-quality fencing on land that they might only have temporarily.
Williams reiterated throughout the meeting that the words “knowingly and intentionally” would protect farmers whose animals accidentally escape.
At least two commercial farmers said they supported the temporary ordinance. One, beef cattle farmer James Kean, advised board members to look to the future when crafting a long-term solution, attributing most of the problems with habitually roaming livestock to farmettes.
“Looking at this county, the way things are growing, you are going to see more and more of these smaller operations. As you go through with your committee, it should be addressed looking into the future, 15, 20 years down the road,” Kean said. “I do feel very confident with the law enforcement we have now and with you on the board that this is not going to be abused. But, as this county becomes more urban or suburban, I should say…you don’t know if you will have a government that becomes somewhat overzealous.”
The other, Steve Hopkins, reminded the board and the crowd that the ordinance under consideration was just a short-term fix.
“What we are talking about tonight is just temporary for this one issue. We can have the debate later for something permanent,” Hopkins said, adding “We do need to look at (an ordinance) permanently because, once this person is taken care of, someone else is going to move to the county and we are going to be facing the same thing again.”
As for the whereabouts of the wandering farm animals on Hasher Lane, as of Thursday night, they hadn’t been impounded by the county. Community Development Director Josh Gillespie told the Planning Commission the animals had been “secured”
But Louisa District Supervisor Eric Purcell, who said before voting for the ordinance that he wanted the “danger to the public removed” as soon as animal control received the next call, told Engage Louisa Friday evening that the county impounded animals on Hasher Lane some time Friday afternoon.
In busy meeting, supervisors approve rezoning, CUP for affordable housing
A plan to build affordable housing between the towns of Louisa and Mineral got the go-ahead from the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday night.
Supervisors voted 6-0 to approve the Fluvanna-Louisa Housing Foundation’s request to rezone, from industrial (IND GAOD) to residential (R-2 GAOD), 8.3 acres at 140 Resource Lane in the Mineral Growth Area. The board also voted unanimously to green-light a Conditional Use Permit to allow multi-family dwellings on the property. Cuckoo District Supervisor Willie Gentry missed the meeting.
FLHF plans to build 25 affordable rental units on the parcel, another step in the non-profit organization’s effort to address the dearth of affordable housing in Louisa County. For more than 30 years, the foundation has rehabbed older homes, offered low-cost home repairs, and installed accessibility ramps. It currently owns 28 rental units in Louisa and Fluvanna.
“We’ve doubled what we’ve been able to do in repairs over the last several years. But, as you all know, many of these homes are beyond repair. We need some alternatives that would give more people housing that is safe, particularly when they don’t have any other options,” FLHF Executive Director Kim Hyland said.
To that end, FLHF’s project would serve several demographics particularly impacted by what Hyland has called “a housing crisis”: lower income elderly and disabled residents and essential workers like first responders and school staff.
Hyland said that the county has a significant number of older, deteriorating homes where elderly residents live because they have no other option. Residents who want or need to move out of older homes and remain in the community face a significant challenge, she said. Most of the newer homes available in the county have at least three to four bedrooms and are costly. The median sales price for a home in Louisa currently hovers just under $370,000 according to the Charlottesville Area Association of Realtors.
Rental units are also difficult to find, Hyland said, as more than 85 percent of dwellings in Louisa are owner-occupied.
Just as the housing market and limited rentals spell trouble for some older residents, they’re a challenge for many essential workers, some of whom endure long commutes from other localities because of the lack of local housing options.
According to preliminary plans, the foundation intends to build the project in three phases with each aimed at specific demographics. The first and third phase will consist of eight one-bedroom units for elderly or disabled residents with income at or below 60 percent of the area’s median income (AMI), $36,120 for a single person according to the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The units will be about 600 square feet, fully accessible and maintenance-free. Hyland said that many of the older people the organization currently serves have incomes below 30 percent AMI, so she expects the units will benefit residents that are “truly low income.”
In the second phase, the organization plans to build nine two-bedroom units, measuring about 900 square feet. Those dwellings would be designed for essential workers who make at or below 80 percent AMI, $48,100 for a single person. The units could accommodate single people and small families.
Instead of asking market rate, FLHF plans to charge tenants rent equal to about 30 percent of their income in accord with federal affordability guidelines. The units would be reserved for Louisa County residents or those who work in the area and can’t find housing. Limiting the units to people who live or work in the county was a priority for several supervisors.
“We serve Louisa County. We don’t serve Charlottesville or any other areas. Everybody has their problems, and we have our own. We do have a priority to take care of Louisa people,” Hyland told the board.
Hyland envisions the complex as a vibrant intergenerational community. With that in mind, the foundation plans to build the one-bedroom units as duplexes centered around a courtyard and interspersed among the free-standing two-bedroom dwellings. The community will include gazebos, walking trails and potentially a vegetable garden.
The organization also hopes to involve the larger community. It plans to partner with the local Master Gardeners and Louisa County Public Schools’ Career and Technical Education program for help with landscaping and to solicit in-kind donations from area businesses. FLHF will hold a luncheon later this year to share details about the project and let community members know how they can pitch in.
To minimize building costs, supervisors approved a pair of special exceptions to county regulations at FLHF’s request. It permitted the organization flexibility in buffer requirements and allowed for the use of cement board siding and vinyl siding. While the exceptions would save FLHF money, they wouldn’t negatively impact the neighborhood according to Community Development Department staff.
Hyland said that the foundation hasn’t settled on a builder, but it’s considering a company that builds high-quality modular homes because the units can be erected quickly and at a lower cost than traditional construction.
FLHF developed its plan in partnership with Louisa County, which will directly chip in $775,000 toward the project’s at least $3.25 million price tag. The county was awarded that money in 2021 as part of a Community Project Funding Request submitted by Congresswoman Abigail Spanberger’s office. The money was specifically earmarked for affordable housing.
After an initial plan to use the funding to build an 80-plus unit mixed-income community at Ferncliff with Habitat for Humanity of Greater Charlottesville met stiff resistance from neighbors, county officials opted to work with FLHF on a scaled-down project in a new location.
The Resource Lane parcel that FLHF and county officials ultimately chose was selected, in part, because it’s in an area designated for growth, close to a range of services and in proximity to public water and sewer. The foundation acquired the parcel from the Louisa County Industrial Development Authority.
The parcel is located next door to the Louisa County Resource Council, a nonprofit that operates a food pantry and offers other services to residents in need. LCRC was listed as a co-applicant for the rezoning because a portion of its property will be used for access, utility easements and stormwater management.
Bringing public utilities to the property could pose a challenge, however, as water and sewer lines must run under the railroad, which abuts the property along Route 22. Building out the lines could cost about $900,000 according to a preliminary budget presented late last year. And acquiring a right of way from the railroad, owned by the state but managed by CSX, is typically a time-consuming task. Two supervisors expressed concerns about FLHF’s ability to clear that hurdle.
Hyland said that FLHF is aware of the challenge and has already begun the railroad’s application process.
“We do know that this could be a major stumbling block and cause some delays for us,” she said. “But we are just going to keep plowing through it as best we can and find a solution.”
Other business
Board oks rezoning for family subdivision: Supervisors voted 6-0 to approve Thomas and Mary Johnson’s request to rezone, from commercial (C-2) to agricultural (A-2), about 10.8 acres on Louisa Road just west of the Town of Louisa for development of a family subdivision. The Johnsons, who live adjacent to the parcel, plan to subdivide the land so their son and daughter can build homes.
Louisa County Community Development Department staff said that the rezoning fits with the character of the neighborhood, noting that the parcel is surrounded by commercial, industrial, residential and agricultural zoning, but the area is primarily rural in character. A slice of the property is already zoned A-2.
Though the Johnsons initially plan to create only two lots, under the county’s rules for A-2 zoning, they could subdivide the land several more times as long as the lots conform with the county’s 1.5-acre minimum lot size and 200-foot width requirement.
No one spoke for or against the rezoning during the public hearing. In brief comments to the board, the applicant, Thomas Johnson, Sr., said that the land has been in his family since the late 1800s and the rezoning would allow it to remain in the family for future generations.
“My son and daughter both will build houses on this property...I held on to this property since my parents (passed it down to me) and their parents (gave it to them). It’s been in (my family) for a real long time. So, this will be a way to keep it,” he said.
Board approves sale of property to Region Ten: Following a public hearing in which no community members weighed in, supervisors voted 6-0 to authorize the sale of about a tenth of an acre of county-owned land to the Region Ten Community Service Board, a nonprofit organization that provides mental health services to Louisa County residents and works with people with developmental disabilities and substance abuse disorders. The property is part of a larger 1.6-acre tract near the corner of Elm Avenue and McDonald Street in the Town of Louisa.
Region Ten owns adjoining land and, according to a proposal submitted to the county during the FY24 budget process, plans to build a free-standing clinic and psycho-social rehabilitation center on the property.
County Administrator Christian Goodwin said that the organization offered to pay about $5,000 for the triangle-shaped plot, a price that lines up with the proportional value of the parcel.
Board green-lights ambulance purchase: Supervisors authorized the Fire and EMS Department to purchase an ambulance using a mix of donations, grant money and county funds.
The department plans to buy the unit for $350,000 and spend $5,000 more on ancillary medical equipment. The county received a $175,000 Rescue Squad Assistance Fund grant to cover half the vehicle’s cost and the grant requires a 100% local match.
The county will draw the remaining money from a $155,000 donation from the Foundation for Lake Anna Emergency Services (FLAES), $5,000 of which came from a grant from the Charlottesville-based BAMA Works Foundation. That money is earmarked for the medical equipment. The remaining $25,000 will come from the county’s Revenue Recovery Fund.
FLAES was launched by lake residents in 2019 to raise $100,000 in seed money for the construction of the Lake Anna Fire and Rescue Station along Route 208. The facility, which officially opened its doors earlier this year at a cost of more than $2.3 million, is the county’s first emergency service facility built largely with taxpayer dollars. The county’s other fire and rescue stations were built by volunteers. Since raising the initial $100,000, the foundation has pulled in about $300,000 more for emergency apparatuses and other equipment.
Patrick and Jane Gallagher, founding members of the foundation, told the board that FLAES is continuing to fundraise in support of emergency services.
“It’s been a pleasure working with the community to be able to raise over $400,000 and to actually be able to write checks to the county for $350,000,” Pat Gallagher said. The Gallahgers added that the foundation will be the beneficiary of proceeds from a luau at Callie Opie’s restaurant on August 17. (Click here for more information).
Supervisors thanked the Gallaghers and other community members for their work.
“Y’all truly need to be applauded. When you first started the fire and EMS station, I said that all of the different communities, they each had input to their fire and EMS station, and that you all needed skin in the game. You have definitely done that,” Mountain Road District Supervisor Tommy Barlow said.
Supes ok supplemental appropriation for repairs at Lake Anna Wastewater Treatment Plant: With no discussion, the board voted unanimously to approve a $100,000 supplemental appropriation to the Louisa County Water Authority for repairs and upgrades at the recently acquired Lake Anna Wastewater Treatment Plant.
The county purchased the facility earlier this year for $90,000 from Lake Anna Environmental Services amid struggles by its former owner to comply with Department of Environmental Quality regulations. Since assuming operation of the plant on May 1, LCWA staff has been cleaning up the property and performing work to ensure compliance, according to General Manager Pam Baughman. The board initially allocated $100,000 for repairs and improvements at its May 16 meeting.
While the plant currently serves Lake Anna Plaza and adjoining town homes along Route 208, county officials plan to overhaul and expand it to support future economic development in the Lake Anna Growth Area. The board earmarked $6.5 million for that effort in its preliminary Capital Improvement Plan for FY25 and LA Resort, LLC proffered another $1 million toward its expansion when supervisors rezoned 15 lakefront acres across the street for mixed used development. LAR plans to build a 96-unit residential condo building, hotel, restaurant and marina on the property and rely on the plant for sewer service.
The county’s decision to buy the plant last January stirred controversy, in part, because of its ties to the LAR rezoning. Some neighbors argued that the county was buying a troubled facility that would cost taxpayers millions to upgrade and operate while mainly benefitting wealthy out-of-town developers.
Supervisors said that, under county ownership, the plant would be less of an environmental concern and pay dividends in the long run by supporting increased economic development along the Route 208 corridor.
Board approves operating agreement with Jaunt: With no discussion, supervisors voted 6-0 to approve an operating agreement with regional transit provider Jaunt that obligates the county to pay $475,647 this fiscal year for existing services. Supervisors included that amount in its FY24 budget.
Jaunt, a public service corporation jointly owned by five localities including Louisa, provides public transportation to destinations across the county from 6 am to 5 pm five days a week and operates buses to and from Charlottesville on Monday, Wednesday and Friday.
Under the agreement, which supervisors considered at the organization’s request, Jaunt will continue existing service contingent on the county making quarterly payments totaling the requested amount. If the actual cost of service exceeds the budgeted amount, the county could provide additional funding, Jaunt could reduce service, or some combination of the two.
Jaunt agrees to submit quarterly invoices to the county and provide “reasonable access” to its transportation logs “and such other information as may be reasonably required to validate the provision of the services and Jaunt’s invoices.” The agreement will be subject to annual review.
During the FY24 budget process, Jaunt initially asked for $637,000 to continue existing service, a 118 percent increase over last year. Jaunt CEO Ted Rieck said the increase was necessary because, under the organization’s previous CEO, Louisa and other localities hadn’t paid their share and the organization has been relying heavily on federal pandemic relief, which was nearing its end. Rieck told the board in March that he and his staff were “trying to turn a corner” and find ways “to formally and equitably distribute costs and funding” among the five member localities. The board eventually agreed to cover the increase with a portion of the request rebated to the county.
Transportation Safety Commission could have more duties: The board gave County Administrator Christian Goodwin a green light to take his plan to expand the duties of the Transportation Safety Commission to commission members for their consideration.
Goodwin suggested at the board’s July 17 meeting that he’d like to get the commission involved in reviewing speed studies and other minor road safety improvements before they go to either VDOT or supervisors for consideration.
Goodwin said Tuesday night that he discussed the idea with VDOT Residency Administrator Scott Thornton who responded favorably. Thornton suggested in an email that the commission could review speed study requests, through truck restriction requests, the need for turn lanes and road side improvements like brush removal, concerns about sight distance and potential operational and safety projects.
Currently, the commission meets quarterly, but, if it took on more duties, it could meet quarterly and as needed, Goodwin said.
Planning Commission sets public hearing for proposed short-term rental regs, oks rezoning
The Louisa County Planning Commission on Thursday night held a pair of meetings. During a 5 pm work session, commissioners continued a discussion from July about proposed regulations on short-term rentals. At its 7 pm meeting, the commission held a public hearing on a request to rezone 3.03 acres near Zion Crossroads from industrial to commercial use. Check out a quick roundup of the meetings below. (work session material, video, meeting material, video)
Planners set public hearing on proposed STR regulations: Louisa County’s effort to sanction and regulate short-term rentals took a small step forward Thursday night.
After discussing proposed rules for STRs during a pair of work sessions in the last month, commissioners opted to formally consider the draft regulations. They set a public hearing for their September 14 meeting where community members will have a chance to weigh in and commissioners will likely make a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors on whether to approve the proposal.
STRs, typically available on online platforms like Vrbo and Airbnb, have exploded in popularity in recent years especially in vacation destinations like Lake Anna. Their proliferation in lakeside neighbors have stoked controversy with some residents arguing that the rentals are businesses operating in residential neighborhoods that threaten the character of their community, public safety and the health of the lake. They’ve specifically cited concerns that overcrowded STRs could lead to septic system failures that harm the lake’s water quality and urged the county to regulate the rentals by adopting an occupancy cap and other rules.
But some STR operators and business owners take a different view. They contend short-term rentals are essential to the lake’s tourism industry and that strictly regulating them could decimate the local economy. Some STR owners have also said that they have a right to do want they want with their property just like their neighbors, noting that the county isn’t trying to regulate how many guests those who don’t run short-term rentals can have at their home.
In response to community concerns, county officials have been struggling with how to address short-term rentals for more than a year. Though the use isn’t permitted in county code, more than 460 STRs have been identified in the county according to figures from the Commissioner of the Revenue’s office, which tracks STRs to collect the county’s two percent transiency occupancy tax. Most, but not all, of the rentals are clustered around the lake.
County officials drew on a section of state code that allows for the establishment of a short-term rental registry, among other rules, to draft an ordinance last year that would’ve strictly regulated STRs county-wide, mandating a two-person per bedroom occupancy cap unless state regulators approved more occupants, regular septic system inspections, and annual registration.
But those regulations—particularly the occupancy cap—met stiff resistance from the Louisa County Chamber of Commerce, realtors and others in the business community who warned of the potential impact on tourism and, in turn, local businesses. Several STR owners urged the county to conduct an economic impact study before holding public hearings on the regulations.
The county didn’t move forward with the study, but did shelve the initial proposal, citing concerns that the state legislature would change how it allows localities to regulate STRs.
Officials have since put another proposal on the table that seeks to sanction and regulate STRs through the county’s zoning code, where the state gives localities more latitude to make its own rules.
Broadly, the proposed rules impose some regulations on STRs in densely populated areas where they’ve seemingly caused the most concern while largely avoiding regulations in the county’s most rural reaches.
The ordinance defines an STR as “the rental of a dwelling for periods of 30 days or less” and designates it as a commercial use. It permits STRs by-right with some restrictions on property zoned residential (R-1 GAOD, R-2 GAOD) in the county’s designated growth areas, as defined in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, as well as on property zoned for Resort Development (RD) and Planned Unit Development (PUD). Most waterfront real estate on Lake Anna is zoned residential and in a growth area. Spring Creek and Blue Ridge Shores are the two largest communities zoned for resort development. As currently proposed, STRs operating in these zoning designations would be required to:
provide a point of contact for their property to Louisa County and its subdivision’s governing body, if applicable;
provide to tenants a copy of Louisa County code sections pertaining to noise and solid waste as well as the definitions for Special Occasion Facilities and Gatherings as part of short-term rental contracts.
inform tenants that using the property for a special event typically held at a special occasion facility—a wedding, for example—is prohibited unless the property has a valid Conditional Use Permit;
provide tenants with at least one off-street designated parking space per bedroom and an off-street parking space for a trailer (20 ft by 8 ft);
provide to Louisa County documentation of septic system inspections and repairs whenever they are completed, if applicable;
comply with all applicable state building code and safety regulations;
If STR owners didn’t follow those rules, they would be required to obtain a Conditional Use Permit from the Board of Supervisors.
STRs operating inside or outside of growth areas in industrial (IND, I-1, I-2) and commercial (C-1, C-2) zoning designations would require a CUP as would STRs operating in residential zoning designations outside of growth areas. Short-term rentals in agricultural zoning (A-1, A-2) inside or outside a growth area would be permitted by-right and not subject to the rules governing STRs on residentially zoned property in growth areas.
The county wouldn’t impose rules on STRs in agricultural zoning to comply with an opinion that Attorney General Jason Miyares published earlier this year. The opinion essentially says that localities can’t use their zoning code to regulate short-term rentals on agricultural land because the use is considered agritourism.
The proposal was tweaked slightly since the Planning Commission’s work session in July, namely to specify that vehicles park in “designated” parking spaces. Commissioners had expressed concern that vehicles could park anywhere on the property under the initial proposal. Several members continued to voice concern about how parking is handled in the draft during Thursday’s meeting.
Commission Chair John Disosway said that he met with several county officials about the proposal prior to the work session. Based on that meeting, he said the draft ordinance could see more changes, most notably the removal of a provision requiring STR operators to submit to the county information about septic system inspections and repairs.
“We’re not really looking now at septic systems under this discussion. It doesn’t seem like that requirement makes any sense,” Disosway said, noting that he didn’t think the county requires any other commercial endeavors to submit documentation about their septic system.
At its July work session, Mountain Road District Commissioner Gordon Brooks suggested that the ordinance identify occupancy limits—a key point of contention when the previous proposal was debated last year—but staff didn’t add any language explicitly addressing occupancy.
Cuckoo District Commissioner George Goodwin suggested that the word “health” be included in the provision requiring STRs to comply with state regulations. In theory, that would enable the county to require an STR operator to obtain a CUP if their property was in violation of Virginia Department of Health regulations. VDH standards address occupancy as it relates to the capacity of septic systems.
Three people spoke during Thursday night’s public comment period to criticize the proposal, arguing that it doesn’t adequately address the problems with STRs in their neighborhoods including over-occupancy.
“This issue with short-term rentals and not dealing with occupancy and septic is actually wrong. We all know that when there are septic problems in communities, everybody suffers not just the owner, (but also) the community, the neighbors, Louisa County. Tourists aren’t going to want to come here when there’s a problem…we may not see this in our lifetime, but the future generations are going to see the problems at Lake Anna if this county does not address occupancy and septic,” Lake Anna resident Valerie Bagby said.
Commissioners ok commercial rezoning: The commission held a public hearing and voted unanimously to recommend to the Board of Supervisors approval of Three Notch Road, LLC’s request to rezone, from Industrial Limited (I-1 GAOD) to General Commercial (C-2 GAOD), 3.03 acres (tmp 52-2-2) near the intersection of Three Notch Road (Route 250) and Bybee Road (Route 607) to allow a recreational vehicle sales and service business.
Currently, the parcel is home to Peebles Golf Cars, a business that sells, stores and repairs golf carts. But, according to Steve Houchens, a representative of Three Notch Road, LLC, the property’s owner, his tenant wants to sell a new classification of golf cart that’s considered a “low speed vehicle.” To accommodate those sales, the property requires a rezoning to general commercial because the use isn’t permitted in industrial zoning.
“This new classification of vehicle is built and operates like a car, but it looks and has the same speed limit and probably more capability than a golf cart. But it operates like an automobile, so it’s classified as an automobile. Basically, we are seeking this (rezoning) to be able to allow them to sell a new product line. The site will not get used any differently than it is. It won’t look any different than it does,” Houchens said.
In proffers attached to the rezoning request, Houchens initially offered to exclude six future uses for the property permitted by-right under C-2 zoning, but several planners expressed concerns about the litany of other uses that the rezoning would permit.
Cuckoo District Commissioner George Goodwin said that he wasn’t comfortable green-lighting the request if it would allow the applicant to put everything from a dance hall to an indoor shooter range on the property should the current tenant leave.
Houchens said that his company asked for the rezoning to accommodate its tenant and has no plans to change the property’s use. In proffers amended during the meeting, he agreed to exclude some 80 uses, retaining the right to use the parcel for uses related to vehicles sales and service and for most uses allowed in both commercial and the property’s current industrial zoning including a brewery and winery.
Besides the applicant, no one spoke for or against the rezoning during the public hearing.
Click here for contact information for the Louisa County Board of Supervisors.
Find agendas and minutes from previous Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission meetings as well as archived recordings here.
Click here for contact information for the Louisa County School Board.
Click here for minutes and agendas for School Board meetings.
Click here to access past editions of Engage Louisa.