[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6589356,"mediaKeyId","5602203-9a6d93591f4f816a12b0901679bc6d60","parentId",5602203,"title","York supervisors continue controversial zoning amendments debate to Sept. 16 after questions on cluster subdivisions, parking and buffers","audioSeconds",5591,"startMs",4234750,"endMs",9826000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5602203-9a6d93591f4f816a12b0901679bc6d60&start=4234&end=9826","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5602203-9a6d93591f4f816a12b0901679bc6d60/thumbnail_4234750.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6589356/York-County/Virginia/York-supervisors-continue-controversial-zoning-amendments-debate-to-Sept-16-after-questions-on-cluster-subdivisions-parking-and-buffers","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6589356-2d425197a9c8e5437e9b3e6c6a1e6066/orig.mp4?Expires=1770426366&Signature=msSELFoNi-MNMm~Hcxr7Rba0QMg7oAWkgebXE0CqicA~PYpz6cdAptJkH7fAEpL6vuJdt9rJWoyjaj3NYkWXMCySZkafEcDxxb7YLjGnnbynT-ch2ryi7tVSkyOw2pp91ncTkm7TwDn~XQ-ms8AVKrX9Jda3dVlhBMbs-LngV5mrt5flBY29C1JBcUPdK0TAWIpXzn2BQH44ITIIkjWBJgUTwcQFIJmknAqEgYiVURejyfIYgtD~nbcwEXG229m3YoRSaujl61q9E10btGnRYRsk5vjLekGscn6WamLUnBhR5gNOdQ2qBNsKwNo6ImzVv-AQoV~2GOG2dmQE933KVA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","York County","date","2025-08-19T00:00:00Z","article","The York County Board of Supervisors on Aug. 19 voted to continue the public hearing on proposed zoning amendments that would raise recreational-area requirements in planned developments and change performance standards for cluster subdivisions, temporarily pausing a planned reduction in the minimum acreage required to use cluster subdivision rules.

The board’s unanimous motion continued the public hearing to Sept. 16 so staff can return with more analysis of the cluster provisions — particularly the proposal to lower the minimum developable acreage to use cluster subdivision standards from 10 to 5 acres — and related concerns about parking, sidewalks, stormwater/permeable surfaces and transitional buffers.

Planning staff presented the package, ZT21125, as two linked sets of changes: one to add clarity and raise the required recreational area inside residential planned developments (PDR) from 10% to 15% of a development’s land area and to tighten what can be counted as recreation; the other to update performance standards for cluster (open‑space) subdivisions and to reduce the minimum acreage threshold for using cluster rules. Caitlin, a planning staff member who led the presentation, said the changes were intended to reflect problems seen in earlier developments and to give developers more flexibility while ensuring open space serves residents.

“Recreation area is where you’re doing your active recreation — trails, playgrounds, ballfields — and the open space is the larger preserved area,” Caitlin said during the presentation. She told the board that staff and the planning commission had sought to prevent developers from counting wetlands, steep slopes or purely stormwater basins as usable recreation space without additional intentional amenities.

Why it matters: Several supervisors said many of the proposed edits reflected lessons learned from earlier subdivisions — misplaced playgrounds, recurring maintenance cost problems for large but underused amenities, and paved or insufficient walkways — but they also warned that lowering the minimum acreage for cluster subdivisions could have unanticipated consequences. Supervisor Doug Holroyd asked how the county would prevent overdevelopment or later rezoning requests that increase density, and raised the recurring complaint that homeowners sometimes park on sidewalks or in yards when developments don’t provide adequate spaces.

“We’ve got to know what we’re getting ourselves into,” Holroyd said. “I don’t want to change the rules and later find we created widespread parking on sidewalks and other public-safety problems.”

Supervisor Tom Sheppard pressed staff about how the county would ensure recreational facilities are sited and sized so they’ll be used. Caitlin said staff’s approach was to require categories of amenities (active and passive) and safe pedestrian access, plus clearer cross‑section standards for walkways (no mulch paths; stone dust or paved all‑weather surfaces required).

Public comment: The York County Conservation Foundation’s Ron Struble told the board the foundation supported most of the amendments but asked that buffer standards and parking be carefully considered. He said past subdivision approvals sometimes left narrow or ineffective buffers at property lines.

Board action and next steps: After more than two hours of questioning and public comment, Supervisor Holroyd moved — and the board unanimously approved — reopening and continuing the ZT21125 public hearing to the Sept. 16 meeting so staff could provide additional materials. The board specifically asked staff to return with:
- a summary of parking outcomes and problems in comparable cluster developments, including whether reduced road length or narrower rights‑of‑way had produced on‑street or sidewalk parking issues;
- example cross‑sections and cost estimates for “all‑weather” pedestrian trails and sidewalks;
- clarification of what may be counted as preserved open space versus recreational area (and what is explicitly excluded, e.g., steep slopes and utility easements);
- examples and recommendations for transitional buffers (species, plant sizes, minimum screening performance) to prevent the problem of exposing marginal tree stands; and
- examples from other localities that have reduced the acreage threshold and any known problems they encountered.

Votes at a glance: The motion to continue the public hearing and to reopen the hearing for continued public comment passed on a recorded roll call: Doug Holroyd — yes; (Supervisor) Tom Drury — yes; (Supervisor) Roan — yes; (Supervisor) Sheppard — yes; Chairman Noel — yes.

Ending: Staff said McGill Associates will finish data collection for Parks & Recreation’s comprehensive plan in mid‑September and present a draft in December; the board’s request for a more detailed report on MAC usage and on-site event counts was recorded as a direction separate from ZT21125 and will be provided directly by county staff.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","York County - Board of Supervisors","oneSentenceSummary","The York County Board of Supervisors on Aug. 19 continued the public hearing on a set of zoning ordinance amendments that would raise mandatory recreational-area requirements in planned developments and change cluster subdivision rules, asking staff for more data on parking, buffers and walkability before a Sept. 16 public hearing reconvenes.","taxTitle","York County, Virginia","taxId",38210,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6589346,"Supervisors adopt tax and code updates including new aircraft classification and transient‑occupancy changes",853,11192980,12046100,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5602203-9a6d93591f4f816a12b0901679bc6d60&start=11192&end=12046","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5602203-9a6d93591f4f816a12b0901679bc6d60/thumbnail_11192980.jpg","/articles/6589346/York-County/Virginia/Supervisors-adopt-tax-and-code-updates-including-new-aircraft-classification-and-transientoccupancy-changes","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6589346-8f24735666573e25d91a28c0e304646b/orig.mp4?Expires=1770426366&Signature=gm8c4lkpbGa2VAXxLYhX-Gi7UfhYP4bwl0StCdoacS6WKhtxhxYH7GrdpmM~JxCtnbHSL7xcfcYbobDF~8EMaAmxEUAMQK0lZUO0RHwKSRdwZXEDQBJLeBY7PDFVcOmggBsyLLI7EPpKH2SyHVM6V5I5w2v7uXn7HGaxLrEPK4wYQSqQ6vDY27Hy8vTos3mKuulDFdplqqvTQrw78iFMfUjQjpLKEN7YRtTuQhMebmW3cys7S8lyYJKHBWohHxzMb8POsCBI7f5DA4GZzScm-w6qT6aVTYby5NmLJ9M1VB0p6f89MDjAHq--oksNjiWTF3pOM5lk4WjeSE3Tn3hGxQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","York County supervisors on Aug. 19 adopted Ordinance 25‑20R, a multi‑part code and taxation update that made several administrative and classification changes recommended by the commissioner of the revenue.

Key changes adopted include:
- Aircraft classification: The county added a new tax/license classification for aircraft operations (including seaplane and sightseeing tour operations). Planning and the commissioner’s office said this will allow aircraft assets to be assessed and taxed under a discrete classification rather than lumped into general personal property, and staff recommended a rate of $0.50 per $100 of assessed value (the board adopted the ordinance but did not set a new tax rate in this action).
- Transient‑occupancy tax (TOT): Local code was updated to mirror changes in state law (House Bill 2383). The amendment clarifies third‑party intermediary reporting, remittance and recordkeeping requirements for short‑term lodging providers and platforms.
- Administrative refund cap: The board raised the administrative refund threshold for certain tax refunds (commonly used for real‑estate relief for veterans) so staff can process larger refunds without placing them on the consent calendar; the change raises the administrative approval cap from $5,000 to $10,000.
- Removed obsolete references: Staff removed an expired HUD housing table and other outdated references so the county code doesn’t cite expired federal guidance.

Why it matters: The changes are largely administrative and intended to align county practice with state law, add clarity for tax administration and permit the county to treat aircraft operations consistently with peer localities. The TOT updates reflect recent state guidance on marketplace collection and reporting.

Presentation and action: Sarah Webb, the commissioner of the revenue, presented the changes and noted the code cleanup and the reason for the aircraft classification. The board adopted the ordinance on a roll call vote; the vote was unanimous.

Votes at a glance: The motion to adopt Ordinance 25‑20R passed on roll call: Roan — yes; Shepherd — yes; Holroyd — yes; Drury — yes; Chairman Noel — yes.

Ending: Staff will implement the administrative changes, update public guidance on TOT and refund procedures, and return with any recommended updates if state law clarifications require it.
","The board approved a package of code and tax ordinance changes (Ordinance 25‑20R) that include: creating a taxable aircraft classification, aligning local transient‑occupancy tax rules with recent state changes, increasing the administrative refund cap for certain veteran refunds, and removing an expired housing table reference.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6589350,"Board adopts ordinance letting building officials enforce pool‑barrier maintenance beyond two‑year permit window",1278,9839180,11118110,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5602203-9a6d93591f4f816a12b0901679bc6d60&start=9839&end=11118","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5602203-9a6d93591f4f816a12b0901679bc6d60/thumbnail_9839180.jpg","/articles/6589350/York-County/Virginia/Board-adopts-ordinance-letting-building-officials-enforce-poolbarrier-maintenance-beyond-twoyear-permit-window","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6589350-299c1000e316d76539a0f53f70e2ad03/orig.mp4?Expires=1770426366&Signature=fahzrjX5YAB94SZ2jpF1pMe8pGPurGy2zwNyaqow9HOwCY7tJS7bzE1KnoormWI-ZyRjPlad2jvNAVk3v4P7DonH7jgpAGjWV1mV-S9TjK3M3w7uk3jmA~bwe5W-UqWxtt-prWOp3y~KsntYAg4rCS4toTYQIPl2SEjtD0tfgEaAdEuHcgSi~qTfUOjmVZJbU~NbP20O1XDOLRnW2EVdE2B7urxqYjNAWgRIEk2lyuslqthsdZpQ0jx9MHfG2pxf7bMWkp8PzCX5c5ri8URRNlMyyDRAz2LWwjUy~mEfhFQ3ZmKQUYZ2uT0NlDS~kdNjzk3fFODPHsBY5eTsWotz3w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The York County Board of Supervisors on Aug. 19 adopted Ordinance 25‑22R to add authority for local enforcement of pool‑barrier maintenance beyond the two‑year period that typically limits building‑code enforcement after final inspection.

Corey Carney, the county’s building official, told the board that Virginia’s construction code leaves building officials without authority to enforce some barrier violations more than two years after final inspection unless the county adopts property‑maintenance language locally. He said the change stems from recent calls about unfenced pools and unsafe barrier conditions and is intended to reduce the risk of child drownings.

“This proposed amendment would give me the authority to enforce maintenance of pool enclosures for existing pools — commercial or residential — beyond the two‑year time limit that otherwise applies,” Carney said. “It only applies to the barrier standards in place when the pool was built; it does not force owners to meet new design standards retroactively.”

What the ordinance does: The amendment adds a section integrating pool enclosure rules from the Virginia construction code into the county’s property‑maintenance enforcement toolbox. That means the county can issue notices to pool owners, require repairs to damaged fences or gates and pursue penalties and abatement through the courts if owners do not comply. The typical enforcement path starts with a notice of violation and can escalate to civil penalties and court‑ordered repairs.

Why it matters: Building officials said they have received several calls this year about residential pools with missing gates or broken fences. Under current practice, if a pool was completed and inspected more than two years ago, the building official has limited authority; the new provision makes barrier maintenance enforceable over the life of the pool as a property‑maintenance issue.

Board action: Supervisor Tom Shepherd moved to adopt proposed ordinance 25‑22R; the motion passed on a roll call vote with all members voting yes.

Ending: The board asked staff to coordinate enforcement steps with other county departments and to return with any necessary administrative procedures for complaint intake, inspection and notice timelines.
","York County supervisors adopted an amendment to the county building code (Ordinance 25‑22R) authorizing the county to enforce maintenance of required enclosures and barriers for pools, hot tubs and spas even after the two‑year limitation following final permit inspection, aiming to reduce child‑drowning risks and improve public safety.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

York supervisors continue controversial zoning amendments debate to Sept. 16 after questions on cluster subdivisions, parking and buffers

Supervisors adopt tax and code updates including new aircraft classification and transient‑occupancy changes

Board adopts ordinance letting building officials enforce pool‑barrier maintenance beyond two‑year permit window