PC to consider proposal for truck stop at Gum Spring; Supes to consider raising some county fees, shrinking TOD; Recount confirms McGuire's win in 5th District Republican primary
PC to consider proposal for truck stop at Gum Spring; Supes to consider raising some county fees, shrinking TOD; Recount confirms McGuire's win in 5th District Republican primary
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 5 through August 10
Monday, August 5
Tourism Advisory Committee, Public Meeting Room, Louisa County Office Building, 1 Woolfolk Ave., Louisa, 1 pm.
Louisa County Board of Supervisors, Public Meeting Room, Louisa County Office Building, 1 Woolfolk Ave., Louisa, 6 pm. (agenda packet, livestream) The board will convene in closed session at 5 pm.
Tuesday, August 6
Louisa County School Board, Central Office Administration Building, 953 Davis Highway, Mineral, 7 pm. (agenda, livestream)
Thursday, August 8
Louisa County Planning Commission, Public Meeting Room, Louisa County Office Building, 1 Woolfolk Ave., Louisa, 7 pm. (agenda packet, livestream)
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.
Planning Commission to consider proposal for truck stop at Gum Spring
A controversial proposal to build a truck stop just off Interstate 64 at Gum Spring will be the subject of a much-anticipated public hearing in front of the Louisa County Planning Commission on Thursday night.
Love’s Travel Stops & Country Stores, Inc., an Oklahoma City-based company that operates more than 600 truck stops in 42 states, has asked Louisa County to rezone, from agricultural (A-2 GAOD) to general commercial (C-2 GAOD), parts of three parcels on Route 522 just south of the Gum Spring exit off 64 where the company plans to build a gas station, restaurant and parking facility with accommodations for long-haul truckers and other motorists.
The parcels, located in the Gum Spring Growth Area Overlay District (GAOD) and designated for mixed-use development on the Future Land Use Map in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, are currently split zoned with the front portion—roughly 28 acres—zoned commercial and the back portion—about 23 acres—zoned agricultural (TMP 100-87, 100-88, 100-90).
In addition to requesting commercial zoning for the entirety of the parcels, Love’s is also applying for a conditional use permit (CUP), which is required for a truck stop in C-2 GAOD zoning.
The company has a contract to buy the property, which is in the Mountain Road Election District, from the W.W. Whitlock Agency.
In community outreach, Love’s has framed the project as a benefit to the area, noting that it plans to invest millions of dollars in the site, bring dozens of jobs and increased revenue for county coffers. It has also argued that the project would have minimal negative impacts on neighbors because of its location just off the interstate, mostly surrounded by a mature vegetative buffer.
But the request has sparked staunch resistance from many Gum Spring residents, who’ve packed community meetings to oppose the proposal. They contend that a truck stop isn’t suitable for their quiet community, arguing it would overwhelm local infrastructure, add to noise and light pollution, increase crime and have negative environmental impacts.
“Our community doesn’t want it…We want this area to stay a beautiful, healthy, prosperous area. This is not what we have in mind. We’re going to do everything we can to lovingly say ‘please don’t,’” one community member said at a neighborhood meeting in February to cheers from others in the crowd.
At Thursday’s meeting, the public will again have a chance to weigh and so will the planning commission. The panel will vote on whether to forward to the board of supervisors a recommendation of approval or denial. The application will then move to the board for a second public hearing and a final up-or-down vote.
The proposal
Love’s plans to build a travel plaza on a 51-acre site that fronts Route 522 on the southeast side of the Gum Spring interchange off Interstate 64. According to its land use application and other documents, Love’s would build its gas station, restaurant and much of its parking facility on the front of the property while mostly using the back for additional parking and a wastewater treatment facility.
In proffers attached to the rezoning, Love’s agrees to limit development to 30 acres and include an up to 200-foot buffer, covering nearly 14 acres and comprised of mature trees and landscaping, on part of the property.
Per a preliminary site plan and project narrative, the complex would feature a 11,900-square foot convenience store, a 3,645-square foot fast food restaurant, eight fueling islands for cars, eight fueling bays for trucks, nine RV hookups and separate parking areas for trucks and passenger vehicles. The facility would also offer propane sales, an RV dump, a truck scale and a small dog park. It could add charging stations for electric vehicles in the future.
Vehicles would access the facility via two driveways along Route 522: one full-service and open to all vehicles and the other open to passenger vehicles only and limited to right turns in and out. In addition, Love’s plans to add a shared access drive along the west side of the site, running parallel with 522, to limit access points off the primary road and provide access to future development to the north or south.
The company conducted a traffic study and worked with the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) for over a year to finalize a larger improvement plan.
The study indicates that, at full buildout, the truck stop could generate more than 6,500 vehicles trips per day including trucks and cars. Love’s representatives have said the figure was generated by VDOT’s parameters and, while the infrastructure would be designed to accommodate that much traffic, they anticipate fewer visitors.
To handle the additional traffic, Love’s plans to install a traffic signal at 64’s westbound on/off ramps, a left turn lane at its westbound ramps, right and left turn lanes at the eastbound ramps, a right turn taper at Love’s east entrance and a left turn lane at its west entrance.
Since public utilities aren’t available in the area, the facility would draw water from an on-site well and rely on its own wastewater treatment facility. A condition included in a proposed CUP limits the company to using no more than 20,000 gallons of water per day and requires it to connect to public utilities should they become available.
In addition to the rezoning and CUP request, Love’s is asking for three special exceptions to Louisa County’s land development regulations for Growth Area Overlay Districts. Specifically, the company requests that the county waive several requirements related to the planting of ornamental trees and bushes and some requirements governing the size and number of signs, and sign placement.
Those requests will be considered by the board of supervisors, which has sole discretion to grant special exceptions.
Beyond the nuts and bolts of the project, Love’s says that the facility would bring economic benefits. At a community meeting earlier this year, Love’s Director of Real Estate Chad Bruner said the company plans to make at least a $20 million capital investment in the county. The company has also said the facility would create between 50 and 70 jobs and generate significant local tax revenue via sales, meals, real estate and business personal property taxes (BPP).
According to an email from Bruner to Economic Development Director Andy Wade, sent in February, the company expects to spend $18 million on construction and $2 million on land. It expects to have about $1 million in equipment on site and $5 million in inventory, both of which would be subject to county taxes.
Community concerns
While Love’s touts its proposal as an asset to the community with few negative impacts, many neighbors don’t share the company’s enthusiasm for the project.
Over the last year and a half, Gum Spring residents have packed four community meetings, telling company representatives that a truck stop isn’t welcome in their neighborhood. They’ve also urged county officials to vote down the proposal.
At a community meeting in February, which drew more than 100 people, neighbors voiced concern about traffic, increased crime, and noise and light pollution, among other ills.
Several speakers insisted that Love’s proposed road improvements aren’t sufficient given the number of tractor trailers that could visit the truck stop. They argued that the improvements are inadequate and ill-conceived, and they’d lead to clogged traffic and unsafe conditions.
“It’s hard to wrap my mind around this not being a traffic nightmare. At 5:30 in the evening, if you were to go there now, there’s a line of traffic trying to get off 64. If you throw just 15 semis in that mix, it’s not gonna work,” one attendee said.
The potential for increased crime and the facility’s impact on public services—namely the Louisa County Sheriff’s Office (LCSO) and Fire and EMS Department (FEMS)—also emerged as a central concern.
Some residents pointed out that Louisa County has one of the lowest crime rates in the state and said they fear a truck stop would draw transient out-of-towners that make the community more dangerous. Several community members said the county should reject the facility to protect children, arguing that truck stops are hubs for human trafficking, drug trafficking and other ills.
Neighbors also pressed the company on the potential for noise and light pollution, expressing concern that the truck stop would disrupt their quiet community and mar their views of the night sky.
In comments at several public meetings, neighbors zeroed in on the facility’s potential environmental impacts including the possibility of contamination from leaking fuel tanks and hazardous material spills. They also voiced concern about the facility’s impact on the water table.
With no public utilities in the area, neighbors emphasized that they rely on private wells for safe drinking water and worry that the project could threaten the water supply via pollution and overuse.
In a written response, Love’s addressed some of those concerns.
The company said it spent more than a year working with VDOT on its transportation plan and met all the agency’s requirements with respect to its proposed entrances and improvements to the interchange. It added that it “shares in the interest of free-flowing traffic” and would continue to look at access issues in the area, working cooperatively with VDOT and the county to find a resolution if any problems arise.
With respect to crime and the facility’s impact on emergency services, Love’s said its stores typically mirror local crime statistics, meaning areas with low crime rates remain that way. The company also noted that it partners with Truckers Against Trafficking to “provide training to staff to help be able to identify situations where something may be wrong.” And it said that it has reached out to both LCSO and the FEMS Department to discuss the project and received “minimal feedback.”
In an email to Bruner attached to Love’s application, LCSO Chief Deputy Ronnie Roberts said that, based on his experience, “we could possibly see a slight increase in call volume” just after the facility opens with a gradual increase over time.
“In the long term, after the shine wears off the new facility, I would predict a gradual increase in call volume over time for the sheriff’s office,” Roberts wrote, adding that the facility’s impact on local law enforcement would depend, in part, on “what measures Love’s management team puts in place as they consider security measures on the property and cameras etc.”
Regarding water use, the company said that it conducted a well siting analysis and consulted with local well drillers who didn’t expect water availability or flow rates to be an issue. “If flows are insufficient for Love’s, water storage tanks may be necessary,” the company said.
With respect to noise and light pollution, the company insists that the project would be well-buffered and use LED directional lighting. It would also use dark-sky compliant lighting as required by Louisa County Code.
Regarding hazardous materials and other potential contaminants, Love’s said it has “an exemplary record when it comes to environmental concerns” and its staff is trained to quickly respond “to any situation.” In addition, it has contracts across the country with rapid response clean-up teams and trucking companies also have trained clean-up crews.
Community Development Department staff proposed 20 conditions for inclusion in Love’s CUP, many of which seek to address community concerns. They include: a requirement that Love’s install four monitoring wells on site that are tested for contamination bi-annually, a requirement that Love’s install noise barriers and berms around the perimeter of the truck stop and conduct a noise study annually; a requirement that the company employ round-the clock private security; and a requirement that the company hire an independent firm to conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment prior to site plan approval, among other provisions.
Residents anonymously raise conflict of interest concerns
Some opponents have also raised concerns about what they see as a conflict of interest involving a member of the board of supervisors, the body with the final say on Love’s request.
Residents anonymously told Richmond's WTVR News 6 that they believe Jackson District Supervisor Toni Williams should recuse himself from voting on Love’s application because the company has retained his son, Torrey, as legal counsel.
“If you care about the people you are representing having faith in you making an unbiased decision then that is not a position you put yourself in," one resident said, according to the news station.
A partner in the Louisa law firm, Craig Williams, Torrey Williams is perhaps the county’s most sought-after land use attorney and frequently represents clients in front of the board.
Virginia’s conflict of interest statute doesn’t preclude Toni Williams from voting on proposals in which applicants retain his son as long as he or an immediate family member doesn’t have a financial interest in the matter. The statute defines “immediate family” as a spouse and any other person who lives in the same household and is dependent on [the government official].”
But residents said they aren’t focused on legality, but morality.
“Our concern isn’t the legality, it’s the morality," a resident told the station. "If your only metric for making a decision is if this is legal then I don’t think you are doing a good job thinking about the people you are representing."
In a brief telephone interview with Engage Louisa Friday evening, Toni Williams said he has no plans to recuse himself and isn’t required to under Virginia law. Williams added that he intends to address the issue at this Monday’s board of supervisors meeting.
“I will probably make a statement that I don’t have a fiduciary interest in my son’s law firm. I don’t have a fiduciary interest in Love’s Truck Stop, and I don’t have a fiduciary interest in the parcel of property that they’re talking about,” Williams said.
When asked what he’d say to people who frame his alleged conflict of interest as a moral issue not a legal one, Williams said that he plans to consider “the merits” of Love’s request.
“We’re going to weigh the case on the merits and whether it’s good or bad for the county and that’s how I intend to vote on it,” he said.
PC to hold public hearing on tweak to Growth Area Overlay District buffer and landscaping requirements
In other business, the commission will hold a public hearing and consider whether to recommend that the board of supervisors tweak buffer and landscape requirements for certain uses in the county’s Growth Area Overlay Districts.
Under current county code, commercial uses, civic uses and multi-family dwellings within a GAOD must adhere to extensive buffer and landscaping standards. For example, code mandates that no less than one ornamental or shade tree be placed in groupings around a site for every 2,500 square feet of development area and requires no less than eight shrubs for every required tree.
In a memo to the commission, Deputy County Administrator Chris Coon writes that the requirements don’t account for existing vegetation and don’t provide staff the flexibility to make changes that would still meet the intent of the ordinance. He notes that the buffer and landscaping requirements for industrial uses in GOADs allow the zoning administrator to green-light changes.
Coon adds that questions about the requirements have come up when reviewing several projects, most recently a project designated for civic use in which staff didn’t have the flexibility to alter the requirements.
Staff crafted two potential tweaks to code to address the issue and added a third after a preliminary discussion with the planning commission at its July meeting. The commission will consider whether to recommend that the board of supervisors adopt one of the proposals.
One proposed amendment would give the zoning administrator the ability to waive or alter the planting requirements for commercial and civic uses and multifamily dwellings, provided the project meets the intent of the requirements. The second would remove civic uses from the requirements. The third combines the first two, giving the zoning administrator the ability to waive or alter planting requirements while removing civic uses from those requirements.
Supervisors to consider raising some county fees, shrinking Technology Overlay District
The Louisa County Board of Supervisors on Monday night will convene for its lone August meeting with a relatively busy agenda, including two public hearings, on tap. Check out a meeting preview below.
Supes to consider changes to Community Development Department fee schedule
For the second time in two years, the cost of doing business with Louisa County’s Community Development Department could be going up.
The board of supervisors will hold a public hearing and consider whether to revise the department’s fee schedule, which delineates how much residents and developers pay for a range of county services including land use permits, building inspections and site plan reviews.
Deputy County Administrator Chris Coon has said the overhaul is necessary to help the department achieve cost neutrality, meaning the revenue it generates covers its annual costs.
“The thing that’s happening right now is the individuals who are using the Community Development Department’s services are getting more than they are paying for. It’s being subsidized by other tax revenue in the general fund,” Coon said at a planning commission work session in June. “Community development is something where an individual is using that service specifically, so they should cover the cost for that service.”
In a memo to the commission, Coon illustrated that point.
In Fiscal Year 2023, per the memo, the department’s expenses totaled $1,395,757.87, but it generated just $1,201,687.72 from fees, resulting in a $194,070.15 funding gap. For much of FY24, which wrapped up June 30, expenses totaled $1,351,979.54 with fees offsetting $1,210,173.01 of those costs, leaving a $141,806.53 deficit.
Those expenses don’t include vehicle maintenance and fuel costs and, last year, the department had several staff vacancies, so it spent less money, Coon noted.
The department last updated its fee schedule in 2022 in an effort to close the funding gap but continued to fall short after the changes. Coon said the proposed revisions focus on services that are currently underpriced.
According to Coon’s proposal, some fees would rise significantly.
The cost to obtain a building permit for a single-family dwelling or addition, for example, would jump 400 percent, from a minimum of $300 to a minimum of $1,500. The cost to apply for a conditional use permit (CUP) would increase some 233 percent, from $750 to $2,500. The cost to apply for a rezoning would soar 150 percent, from $1,000 to $2,500 plus $25 per acre. Fees for a range of inspections, mandated by the state building code, as well as for other services would also rise.
The planning commission, at its July meeting, recommended that the board of supervisors reject Coon’s proposal and send it back to staff to review, suggesting that staff look at different ways to structure fees for conditional use permits and consider tweaking the proposed hikes for rezoning applications and building permits for single-family homes. The commission also recommended that officials consider axing CUP requirements for some minor uses.
During its initial discussion of the fee schedule in June, the commission tabled action after Cuckoo District Commissioner George Goodwin pressed Coon for more information on how he came up with the proposed changes. Goodwin suggested that the commission was told two years ago that the fee hikes would help the department reach cost neutrality, but it hadn’t worked.
At the July meeting, Goodwin, the only commissioner to vote against rejecting the revised schedule, said that he had met with Coon and was satisfied with his proposal.
“The whole point of what he is trying to do with this fee scale made sense to me. It’s that the people who are getting the service are having to pay for the service and not the rest of the county with their taxes and what have you,” Goodwin said.
But other commissioners weren’t ready to move forward, expressing concern with the hefty fee increase for conditional use permits and other land use permits.
Several commissioners and Mountain Road District Supervisor Tommy Barlow, who serves as the board’s liaison to the commission, said that it isn’t fair to require a resident who wants to run a small business out of their home to pay the same amount for a CUP application as a large company who comes to the county with an extensive proposal that requires significant staff time to process.
“The user should pay the fees. I agree that they need to cover the costs. But, by the same token, there is no way that I think a huge company that’s dealing in millions of dollars should be paying the same thing as someone trying to have a little business in the backyard that’s struggling just to make it,” Barlow said.
Goodwin noted that Coon had come up with his proposal based on the average cost of processing a CUP. Community Development Director Linda Buckler added that the current fees for CUP and rezoning applications don’t cover the cost of the county’s public notices requirements, which apply to both processes regardless of a project’s size.
Still, Barlow and several commissioners pushed staff to explore other ways to structure the fee schedule including basing the cost of a CUP application on the amount of acreage involved or the amount of land the project would disturb.
Louisa District Commissioner Matt Kersey took a different approach. Instead of focusing on fees, he suggested the board consider why the county requires a CUP for so many minor uses.
“Is it too much government intervention to require all these things? That is where our problem is. It’s not in the cost,” Kersey said.
Board to consider shrinking TOD
After tabling action on the item last month, supervisors will again consider shrinking the county’s Technology Overlay District (TOD) and making notable changes to its rules.
The board adopted the TOD last year with hopes of attracting lucrative tech sector development that bulks up the tax base and creates jobs. The special zoning designation, which includes about 6,400 acres in six parcel group in parts of central and eastern Louisa, allows data centers and other high-tech uses by-right, meaning they don’t require a public approval process. It imposes a range of development standards on the uses including noise limits, height restrictions and buffer and landscaping requirements.
Just four months after adopting the TOD, the board announced that Amazon Web Services plans to invest at least $11 billion to build two data center campuses in the district by 2040.
One of the facilities, dubbed the Lake Anna Technology Campus (LATC), is slated for 150 acres at the corner of Kentucky Springs Road (Route 652) and Haley Drive (Route 700) adjacent to the North Anna Power Station. The other, called the North Creek Technology Campus (NCTC), is planned for part of a 1,444-acre assemblage south of Jefferson Highway (Route 33) and east of Mt. Airy Road (Route 644) near the Northeast Creek Reservoir. At full buildout, the campuses are expected to generate millions of dollars in local tax revenue annually and create dozens of jobs.
With that deal in hand, the board’s TOD committee, including Jackson District Supervisor Toni Williams and Green Springs District Supervisor Rachel Jones, recommended that supervisors slash the size of the district, arguing that the TOD had essentially done its job.
“We feel like we’ve been fishing. We caught an ample supply of fish, and it’s now time to release some of the nets,” Williams said at the board’s April 8 meeting.
While the committee has made limited public comments about its recommendation, the proposal is apparently aimed at quieting concerns that widespread tech sector development would mar the county’s rural character.
As the board created the TOD last year and subsequently announced its deal with AWS, some residents complained that data centers aren’t a suitable use for the area. They’ve said that the hulking, warehouse-like facilities, which house the infrastructure that keeps the internet running, would overwhelm local infrastructure—including straining the power grid and water supply—and bring unwanted traffic and noise.
Supervisors on Monday night will consider shrinking the district to less than 2,900 acres, meaning more than half of the acreage currently included would no longer be targeted for data centers.
Under the proposal, the county would remove three of the TOD’s assemblages: the Gum Spring TOD, more than 1,300 acres just north of Interstate 64 in southeastern Louisa; the Fisher Chewning TOD, nearly 1,400 acres between Routes 33 and 22 north of the reservoir; and the Shannon Hill TOD, comprised of the 700-acre Shannon Hill Regional Business Park.
The park is already zoned for industrial use while the assemblage north of the reservoir is slated for a 150-megawatt (MW) utility-scale solar facility under a conditional use permit (CUP) green-lit by the board in 2020.
The AWS campuses would remain in the TOD as would the Cooke Rail Park, a 1,234-acre parcel group north of Route 22 and west of Chopping Road. In 2022, the board approved a CUP for an up to 118 MW solar facility and 50 MW battery storage bank on the site.
While Fisher Chewning and the rail park have been approved for solar, construction hasn't started on either project.
The TOD would be altered in another significant way, per the proposal. Any uses permitted in the district but not allowed by the property’s underlying zoning would require a conditional use permit instead of being permitted by-right.
While that provision would apply to the three remaining assemblages—the rail park and the Lake Anna and North Creek campuses—Amazon wouldn’t need a CUP for its projects because they’re already underway.
But if the AWS deal fell through and another user wanted to develop data centers on the campuses, they’d be subject to the county’s new rules assuming they’re adopted as proposed.
The planning commission, at its June meeting, recommended approval of the proposal with one notable tweak. The commission suggested that the CUP requirement apply to both permitted uses, like data centers, and accessory uses.
Under the TOD committee’s initial proposal, the 11 accessory uses explicitly allowed in the district are permitted by-right if the applicant has obtained a CUP for the primary use. Those uses include everything from water and sewage treatment plants to food service facilities and parking structures.
The board held a public hearing on the proposal at its July 1 meeting but opted to postpone a final decision after a resident with land in the TOD said he didn’t want his property removed and Board Chair and Mineral District Supervisor Duane Adams raised concerns that requiring a CUP for tech sector development in the district going forward could create unnecessary hurdles.
Former Louisa District Supervisor Eric Purcell, who along with his father Charles, owns all the property in the Fisher Chewning TOD, via Fisher Chewning, LC, and a roughly 200-acre parcel in the Gum Spring TOD, via Duke I, LC, said that he understands the board has to look at the TOD’s impact on the county as a whole, but he’d like his property to stay in the district.
“From our standpoint as private property owners, we would love the flexibility being in the TOD provides at least from a marketing perspective. But again, we understand that y’all have to look at the big picture,” Purcell said, adding that he’d still have to ask the board for permission to pursue a TOD use that isn’t permitted by his property’s underlying (mostly agricultural) zoning if the board adopted the CUP requirement.
Several supervisors sided with Purcell including Jones, who served on the TOD committee that made the initial recommendation to remove the property.
“If a landowner wants to stay in the TOD, I believe that they should [be allowed to] if the landowner is coming forward and saying they want to stay in,” Jones said.
For his part, Adams suggested that requiring a CUP for data centers and other tech sector uses on property remaining in the district could place an unnecessary burden on companies that want to invest there.
“I don’t have a concern about reducing the TOD and think that goes toward maintaining the rural character of the county. My concern is, let’s say that one of these [AWS} campuses, for whatever reason, would not move forward and then you would have another company come in a year later…[they’re] ready to pick up the ball and move forward with this multibillion investment in the county. But they’d have to go through the CUP process. Is that correct?” Adams said, addressing Deputy County Administrator Chris Coon.
Coon said that is correct, adding that county officials opted to tack on the CUP requirement for the existing campuses because future proposals could have different infrastructure requirements.
“Depending on what the infrastructure requirements are, we may need to handle it differently and a CUP process would [allow that],” Coon said.
After some discussion, Williams motioned to table the item to allow the board time to, as he put it, “come up with some better thoughts and collect ourselves better.”
The rest of the board agreed, voting unanimously to take the issue up again at a future meeting.
Board to consider whether to build two turf fields or one
After initial bids for the project came in significantly over budget, the board of supervisors will consider whether to build two turf fields adjacent to Louisa County Middle School or scale back its plans and just build one.
At the request of Parks and Recreation Director James Smith, the board appropriated nearly $3.6 million for the fields—most of it in the Fiscal Year 2024 capital budget. Smith said the fields are necessary to provide adequate outdoor playing surfaces for youth sports like football and soccer.
The county solicited bids for the project’s rough grading phase earlier this summer, with the lowest coming in at $2.499 million. That bid came from Hawkins Creek Construction, a Bumpass-based excavation firm.
The board has already authorized $328,395 in spending on the project for engineering and design work, nutrient credits and bonding, according to a memo from Deputy County Administrator Chris Coon. And it has budgeted about $2.07 million for installation of the fields. The nearly $2.5 million for rough grading would push the project to roughly $4.9 million, at least $1.344 million over budget.
Coon presents two potential paths forward for supervisors’ consideration.
In one, he says the county could move forward with the project as planned, necessitating the appropriation of at least $1.344 million in additional funding. He describes the option as a “comprehensive approach, ensuring that both fields are prepared and ready for use.”
Alternatively, the board could scale back the project and just build one field. That option would cost the county about $2.74 million for rough grading and turf installation, leaving about $485,000 in the bank, according to Coon.
Coon writes that the latter option offers “immediate practicality, providing a usable field within the existing budget while allowing flexibility for future development.” But he notes it would extend the project timeline, requiring the county to rebid the rough grading component.
Board to hold public hearing on proffer amendment for storage facility
Supervisors will hold a public hearing and consider whether to green-light Louisa Mini Storage, LLC’s request for a proffer amendment to a rezoning approved in 2022 that cleared the way for the company to establish a storage facility on a 4.69-acre parcel adjacent to the Louisa County Industrial Air Park (TMP 41-207).
According to its land use application, Louisa Mini Storage proposes to tweak one of the five proffers attached to the rezoning, which relates to buffer and landscaping requirements.
In a project narrative submitted as part of the application, Shimp Engineering notes that when Louisa Mini Storage won the right to rezone the property, it agreed to a proffer that requires a screening buffer along the property's eastern boundary so long as the adjacent property is used for residential purposes. Additionally, the proffer requires specific plantings for the screening including only three tree varietals—Eastern Red Cedar, Leyland Cypress and Arborvitae.
Shimp says that when installing the buffer, a contractor planted Brackens Beauty Magnolia, which isn’t permitted in the proffer.
To remedy the problem, the applicant asks the board to amend the proffer to add Brackens Beauty Magnolia to the list of permitted trees and to give the zoning administrator authority to approve alternative plantings on the property in the future.
The narrative notes that approving the amendment would prevent the applicant from having to remove the trees, which are already in their first growing season, and give the zoning administrator flexibility to determine appropriate screening going forward.
The narrative describes the Brackens Beauty Magnolia as an "elegant dense evergreen,” which “provide[s] screening consistent with the species identified in the proffer”
The Planning Commission, at its July meeting, voted 4-2 to recommend that the board of supervisors approve the proffer amendment. Louisa County Community Development Department staff also supports the amendment.
Board set to green-light pair of LCWA capital projects
Supervisors are expected to green-light a pair of projects on the Louisa County Water Authority’s (LCWA) to-do list.
The board will consider a resolution authorizing LCWA to proceed with the purchase of a sludge vac system for the Northeast Creek Water Treatment Plant and to address right-of-way maintenance on the James River water line.
The board included $350,000 for the sludge vac system in the FY25 capital budget and $200,000 for right-of-way maintenance.
In a written request to the board prior to budget approval, LCWA Executive Director Pam Baughman said the Virginia Department of Health’s Office of Drinking Water has “strongly recommended” improvements to the water treatment plant’s sedimentation basin sludge collection system.
She noted that, without the sludge vac system, the plant is struggling to meet Virginia Optimization Program (VOP) goals and the upgrade would enable it to “remove as much turbidity as possible through the conventional process,” allowing its nanofiltration system to run more efficiently. The VOP’s mission is to encourage waterworks to provide water with a quality that exceeds minimum regulatory standards and to operate water systems in an exemplary manner.
In a letter to the board, Baughman said the authority has already solicited bids for the project and plans to have the new system in place by spring 2025.
With respect to the other project, Baughman said that a right-of-way along which the James River water line and an accompanying effluent line run has become overgrown, making access dangerous for LCWA staff and threatening the structural integrity of the infrastructure.
The water line, which stretches some 13 miles from just north of Route 6 in southern Fluvanna County to a water treatment plant at Ferncliff, will one day channel millions of gallons of raw water from the river to feed development along the Interstate 64 corridor.
But the line has sat idle since its construction six years ago as the James River Water Authority (JRWA) has struggled to finish its portion of the infrastructure, namely a raw water intake on the banks of the river and a four-mile water main to connect it to LCWA’s line.
JRWA earlier this year secured a key permit from the Army Corps of Engineers, clearing the way for the project’s construction. Water is expected to flow from the James to Ferncliff by spring 2027.
In a letter to the board, Baughman said the funding would allow the authority to purchase “the type of equipment needed to keep [the right-of-way] cleared and assessable.”
Supervisors to consider budget supplement for LCSO
Supervisors will consider authorizing a $20,438 budget supplement to the Louisa County Sheriff’s Office (LCSO) for the purchase of specialized software for tracking and managing accreditation. The sheriff’s office earned accreditation from the Virginia Law Enforcement Professional Standards Commission earlier this year.
Funding for the purchase would be drawn from asset forfeitures, per the proposed resolution.
Supes to consider appropriating share of transient occupancy tax revenue
Last October, supervisors hiked the county’s transient occupancy tax (TOT) from two percent to seven percent. The tax is tacked on to customers’ bills when they stay the night at a local hotel, bed and breakfast or short-term rental.
Under Virginia law, the county is obligated to earmark about 40 percent of the revenue it receives from its seven percent TOT for tourism-related initiatives. According to Finance Director Wanda Colvin, the TOT is expected to generate about $1.6 million for county coffers in Fiscal Year 2025 with more than $600,000 of that designated for tourism.
The board on Monday night will consider appropriating some of the revenue it received from the TOT in FY24: $13,680 for salaries and related taxes and benefits. The proposed resolution doesn’t provide any information about which employee or employees’ salaries the TOT would help pay.
Recount confirms McGuire’s win in Republican primary in 5th Congressional District
A recount in the Republican primary in the 5th Congressional District last week confirmed state Senator John McGuire as the party’s nominee for the November 5 General Election, ending a brutal intra-party battle in the district and ousting a two-term incumbent.
A three-judge recount court led by Goochland Circuit Court Judge Claude Worrell declared McGuire (R-Goochland) the winner over Rep. Bob Good late Thursday night after election officials in the district’s 24 localities spent the day recounting ballots.
McGuire edged Good (R-Farmville) by just 370 votes out of nearly 63,000 cast in the sprawling district, which stretches from Louisa, Albemarle and western Hanover at its northern edge to the North Carolina border. The recount results differ little from the initial results of the June 18 primary in which McGuire topped Good by 374 votes.
“This recount reaffirmed what we already knew from the June 18th primary,” McGuire said in a Facebook post Thursday night, adding “Now is the time to set our differences aside and unite as a party. Together we will Make America Great Again!”
The Goochland resident and former Navy SEAL, who earned a coveted endorsement from former President Donald Trump just weeks before the primary, will face Democrat Gloria Tinsley Witt this fall. He’ll be a heavy favorite to win the mostly rural district, which the nonpartisan Cook Political Report rates as “solid Republican.”
Good was entitled to a recount after losing to McGuire by just .6 percent—Virginia law allows candidates who lose by one percent or less to petition for a recount—but his campaign will have to cover its costs. Under state law, the government pays for the recount if the margin separating the candidates is .5 percent or less or if the petitioner is declared the winner.
During a preliminary hearing in mid-July, Worrell estimated the recount would cost $96,500. Good posted a $3,270 bond when filing for the recount—$10 for every precinct in the district. He’s on the hook for a range of expenses including paying recount officials and buying them lunch.
An order issued by the recount court on Thursday gives registrars and clerks of court 10 days to submit an itemized list of expenses to Goochland Circuit Court. Good then has seven days to remit his payment to the clerk of court for each locality unless a subsequent court order changes the amount.
In the weeks following the primary, Good, the chair of the ultra-conservative House Freedom Caucus, took to social media and email to repeatedly question the results. Without citing specific evidence, he raised the possibility that “data manipulation” and other irregularities may have impacted the results and insisted that a recount was necessary to “ensure the race is fairly and accurately decided.”
In a series of Facebook posts in the days leading up to the recount, Good accused McGuire of attempting to block the procedure and questioned his commitment to “ensuring election integrity.” Both men have embraced false claims of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election and pushed to limit early and mail-in voting and eliminate the use of drop boxes for mail-in ballots.
In a Facebook post Thursday night, Good took on a more subdued tone, thanking his supporters and acknowledging defeat for the first time.
“I want to thank the more than 31,000 voters of the 5th District who voted for me in the June 18 primary, and the thousands who volunteered, contributed, prayed, and supported my re-election campaign. While I am disappointed in the ultimate outcome, it has been my distinct honor to serve as the congressional representative for Virginia’s 5th District over the past 3.5 years,” Good said.
According to media reports, the recount was a mostly drama-free affair, sparking little controversy and few changes to Good and McGuire’s vote totals across the district.
In Louisa, election officials began recounting ballots at the Office of Elections just after 7:30 am. Four teams, comprised of two election officials each, ran several thousand ballots through voting machines, wrapping up before 1 pm.
Louisa County Registrar Cris Watkins said that the recount didn’t change the vote total for either candidate, and there were no challenged ballots. McGuire tallied 2,180 votes in Louisa to Good’s 1,464.
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 for archived video.
Click here to access past editions of Engage Louisa.