[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-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],{"_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",6455764,"mediaKeyId","5760573-96dc7695a89536e38a0f4dacf186923f","parentId",5760573,"title","Planning commission and BZA record multiple approvals; pool-cover variance denied, sign and setback variances approved","audioSeconds",335,"startMs",2536000,"endMs",2871000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5760573-96dc7695a89536e38a0f4dacf186923f&start=2536&end=2871","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5760573-96dc7695a89536e38a0f4dacf186923f/thumbnail_2536000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6455764/Loudon-County/Tennessee/Planning-commission-and-BZA-record-multiple-approvals-pool-cover-variance-denied-sign-and-setback-variances-approved","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6455764-d1e28974682a86a06a06ff2e70b11d96/orig.mp4?Expires=1773263778&Signature=G~H~h0x3ugiEX5Fn59Gpoq2GXVi2CjL6ZfXJriLk68BVNWouIUR93p4ALBDTUoKa9ZNg8TB3Cz16X0ccPtr57wgMtsVb0ILbKHCsXmrapRfoX3SjaFBYOkcCXfDa8Co8l91G-Eoeub4QejaUVSUKixJd-ExulA5Gcax-EoBP3gUwgOpwUUktNLTDQOxhn8VcK7oxxxcXB0VQ7uN7SUDJ0owGfVPv1skc764VVsnVV2WtEwu8hw3v7hzi9QQ51yrJka1jJczlNR6sl~DC2t~7HKGxW3FgeiUNCiiNMlvbQ9bf3SClvXG56FmkAeH-2RtxYAHZxrmTTwHdRq0w1jxChQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Loudon County, TN","date","2025-09-12T15:10:16Z","article","The Loudoun County Regional Planning Commission and the Board of Zoning Appeals disposed of multiple items on the agenda, approving subdivision plats and commercial site plans in several districts, denying at least one rezoning request that lacked county road frontage, and recording BZA actions on sign, pool and setback variances.

Planning commission votes (summary):
- Approve subdivision plat for three lots (applicant Justin Kennedy) at 195 Ritchie Road (A-2 residential district, District 4). Motion carried.
- Approve subdivision plat for three lots (applicant Leah Metcalfe, property owner Mary Dunsmoor). Motion carried.
- Approve commercial site plan (applicant Russ Edens, Gerald's General Shale). Motion carried.
- Deny rezoning request from A-2 to A-3 (applicant Michael Akins) because the parcel lacks county-accepted road frontage and subdivision would be contingent on variances and road improvements; motion to deny carried.
- Approve commercial site plan (applicant Andrew Brackett) for Wade Road (C-2 General Commercial District). Motion carried (vote tally not specified in transcript).

Planning staff reported the county commission accepted planning commission recommendations and voted for a moratorium on new cluster developments until recommendations are returned; staff said a plat for Fosterville remains scheduled for review next month but may be affected by the moratorium.

Board of Zoning Appeals votes (summary):
- Approve height/variance request for a replacement outdoor advertising structure (Lamar Advertising / property owner James Evelyn). Motion to approve carried.
- Deny variance request to waive the four-foot pool enclosure in favor of an ASTM-approved safety pool cover (property owners Ryan and Carla Allen). The board also directed staff to consider updating the regulation to allow modern safety devices and bring a recommendation back to the planning commission and county commission. Motion to deny carried.
- Grant variance requests for setback reductions for Clay and Joan Ward (121 Alexander Road): motion carried.
- Grant temporary side-yard variance for Kelly Hargis / Thomas Watts (4950 Coyote Road) to allow construction to proceed while property-line adjustments are made; the board imposed a time limit (motion carried).

Where roll-call tallies were not recorded verbatim in the transcript, the article reports outcomes as recorded by the commission and board minutes. Specific vote counts were not specified on the audio transcript for several items.

Actions will be reflected in official minutes; applicants with denied requests retain administrative appeal options under county procedures.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Loudon County Planning Commission and BZA Meetings, September 9, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Loudoun County Regional Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals resolved multiple subdivision, site-plan and variance items; the planning commission denied a rezoning lacking county road frontage while the BZA denied a pool-cover variance but approved several sign and setback variances.","taxTitle","Loudon County, Tennessee","taxId",54394,"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},6455770,"Loudoun planners debate role and limits of cluster-option developments as detention ponds occupy open space",1859,456000,2315000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5760573-96dc7695a89536e38a0f4dacf186923f&start=456&end=2315","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5760573-96dc7695a89536e38a0f4dacf186923f/thumbnail_456000.jpg","/articles/6455770/Loudon-County/Tennessee/Loudoun-planners-debate-role-and-limits-of-cluster-option-developments-as-detention-ponds-occupy-open-space","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6455770-3c71764f204dc466fc7e0d703847860f/orig.mp4?Expires=1773263778&Signature=ScWMQzwQYGCh6PkoYRc~2VpGewDqNr3v~VtCtwOGR~TcNtlqO5AMQysRYuvHPqNwNDYrgdu7cmMQSOeINIrTysN3-Avd90DfHX-i9AFoZ6Zl-CfkK8yEdS3cXUNKgZAEt7eDPVcy0-ZYpvy7tCCp7FlMvZ7vOKUguQvmJaVB1UmR6auqWPF3aOBxOyjtBYDaY0sPHi5Q5XcqlOW1-j~WPRT-x9dSuHMuEUP5-pA0gyGsroBxAo2OJyKfbIAZkrZSLn~KtWJ3tN5v2TF47KQfv-rY6usCQZ~yh5wNtZCxRGqU-kGEPmKIHGbyH~~rY1cKSvRtQs-koUddH7bfOODBuQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Planning Department staff outlined the county's cluster-option development rules and answered commissioners' questions about how open space is being used in recent subdivisions.

The staff presentation said the cluster-option option was established \"to encourage clustering residential development, promoting more creative design options based on the size, shape, natural resources of a site,\" but commissioners and staff said the open space created under the option often becomes detention storage rather than public green space.

The staff presentation noted recent regulatory changes that affect cluster developments. Under revisions implemented in May 2024 the portion of a site set aside for infrastructure rose from 20% to 25%; minimum lot calculations changed so the half-acre equivalent used for density is now about 21,780 square feet; and the cluster option allows lot sizes down to 15,000 square feet. Staff said the cluster option also permits reduced setbacks (a 25-foot front setback compared with 30 feet in the R-1 district, side setbacks as small as 15 feet, and a 20-foot rear setback in place of 30 feet) and requires sewer connection and a 100-foot lot width standard that can be met while reducing lot area to 15,000 square feet.

\"When commission discussed the open space, what we use the open space for'based on the developments you see'it's space that we don't have a house on,\" Planning Department staff said. \"We do put detention in there. But on the same token, they were discussing what can we do to get the, basically, not to have the potential ponds be a part of that.\" The staff presentation included photographs of recent cluster-option projects such as the Oaks and a Farmstead development off North Shore and Bill's Chapel.

Commissioners raised maintenance and long-term liability concerns. Leon Shields, Commissioner, said many homeowners associations lack sufficient long-term funding to maintain retention ponds and common areas. \"A lot of these HOAs have kinda just went either bankrupt or didn't have the funding to maintain those things,\" Shields said, adding that the county rarely has had to force corrective work but that the risk exists.

Commissioners discussed potential regulatory responses that staff might draft for a future recommendation: require a minimum percentage of open space to be \"usable\" rather than incidental; require sidewalks or houses to face open space; require maintenance bonds or other financial assurances that survive turnover from developer to HOA; or deny cluster-option rezoning when applicants do not demonstrate public benefit beyond allowing smaller lots. Planning Department staff said some jurisdictions impose minimum usable-open-space percentages and require design elements that connect homes to that space.

Jim Brooks, Planning Department staff, said the county commission accepted the planning commission's recommendations and has enacted or extended a moratorium on new cluster submissions until the commission returns recommended changes. \"They accepted our recommendations we sent forward, and voted for moratoriums on cluster developments until we come back with any recommendations,\" Brooks said.

Commissioners noted cluster developments are currently limited to the R-2 zoning district and require sewer availability. Several commissioners said they favor eliminating the cluster option entirely unless applicants can demonstrate clear, long-term public benefit. Others said the option can produce real neighborhood green space if the regulations require it and if the presentation to the planning commission shows how the open space will be improved and maintained.

The planning commission asked staff to return with written options and suggested regulatory language at a future meeting. Staff said a subdivision plat related to a pending cluster project in Fosterville remains scheduled for review next month but acknowledged the moratorium could affect timing.

The discussion lasted more than an hour and included multiple commissioners and members of planning staff. Commissioners asked staff to research bonding or escrow requirements, existing maintenance provisions in the regulations, and examples from other jurisdictions before drafting recommended changes.

A follow-up work session was proposed for the next month; staff invited commissioners to email ideas in advance.","Planning staff and commissioners discussed whether Loudoun County's cluster-option zoning produces usable open space or merely shifts detention and maintenance burdens onto homeowners associations; county commission has placed a moratorium pending recommendations.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning commission and BZA record multiple approvals; pool-cover variance denied, sign and setback variances approved

Loudoun planners debate role and limits of cluster-option developments as detention ponds occupy open space