[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-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",[32,75,87,99],{"_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",5979123,"mediaKeyId","5797592-4ff750208f2316f60b4ff79f4e221d62","parentId",5797592,"title","Staff proposes transition window, small‑lot options and religious‑use clarifications in ZOMOD draft","audioSeconds",1036,"startMs",3539030,"endMs",4575360,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5797592-4ff750208f2316f60b4ff79f4e221d62&start=3539&end=4575","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5797592-4ff750208f2316f60b4ff79f4e221d62/thumbnail_3539030.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/5979123/Chesterfield-County/Virginia/Staff-proposes-transition-window-smalllot-options-and-religioususe-clarifications-in-ZOMOD-draft","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/5979123-b3aac300e31bef9bededc1a341519fe7/orig.mp4?Expires=1771119777&Signature=d7INBj1-kVy1fx6E30a8hK22wOgVMgEE1wXejcv7aGriyz73-HIetNSpPp996uyuiGdafHWb0sHDzIxT7UkChiwhKJNnItmd0p-U56yDuf1~jVqp-smY~sSwGVr31QSCid2YQMOESA4onJpJlrfjXG8~XUQkRXPjn4-etrXjmZ3F33dG0btgBVmaxagdOWmIAyM1-NP4t4d-oSjIk-G9rIjhKDkQC4F5KAkmzTeXopZAuiwRgKTfqTamPLZ0ajFmAlg8aQOUOr2G~K4cPaGFmA8rt6TJfWMjzeOmEyCeTp6VkI8qpZ6hodtLxbw0eFPZ1ZiizD6RXIOUTrovBrLZ~A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Chesterfield County, VA","date","2025-09-18T12:35:21Z","article","County staff described three substantive clarifications or additions to the ZOMOD draft that board members requested after the August work session: a temporary transition window for existing 19.1 zoning applications, an approach to smaller single‑family lots in townhouse or alternative residential districts, and clarified wording about religious institutions and accessory uses.

First, staff proposed amending the procedure section (19.247(d) in the draft) to give cases filed under the existing 19.1 ordinance an option: if ZOMOD is adopted, applicants with pending 19.1 applications would have until 180 days after the ZOMOD effective date to choose to proceed under 19.1 rather than being immediately converted to 19.2. Staff said the provision would expire after the 180‑day window.

Second, the staff presentation addressed whether smaller single‑family detached lots should be allowed in the townhouse (TR) district. Staff recommended pausing for about six months to observe early ZOMOD cases; as an interim alternative they proposed allowing townhouse development paired with smaller single‑family lots within the alternative residential (AR) district rather than immediately expanding the TR district to include very small detached lots. Staff emphasized that changing lot configuration standards would not increase the total unit count on a site but would allow smaller lot products that could lower unit cost and offer additional ownership options.

Third, staff revised ZOMOD language about religious institutions after public concerns. The revised language clarifies that typical ancillary activities that occur in conjunction with worship services (for example, Sunday school occurring during services) are not intended to be regulated as private schools or day‑care uses requiring a conditional use; by contrast, a standalone private school or day‑care associated with a religious institution would follow the county’s existing conditional‑use process. The county attorney told the board the proposed ZOMOD language complies with federal religious land‑use law and other applicable law.

Staff said other minor edits have been added since the August workshop and that the County Attorney and senior staff reviewed legal conformity. No final action to adopt ZOMOD occurred in the recorded discussion; staff indicated they would prepare language for formal consideration and public hearing.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Zoning Ordinance Modernization (ZOMod) Alignment Projects Update - BOS Meeting - September 17, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Staff presented three edits to the draft ZOMOD ordinance: a 180‑day option for pending 19.1 cases, guidance to allow small detached lots through the AR district rather than immediately expanding TR, and clarified religious‑institution language distinguishing services and accessory uses from private schools or day care.","taxTitle","Chesterfield County, Virginia","taxId",27598,"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},5979138,"Chesterfield staff seek public hearing to align comprehensive plan chapter with new zoning tools",1315,33640,1349299,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5797592-4ff750208f2316f60b4ff79f4e221d62&start=33&end=1349","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5797592-4ff750208f2316f60b4ff79f4e221d62/thumbnail_33640.jpg","/articles/5979138/Chesterfield-County/Virginia/Chesterfield-staff-seek-public-hearing-to-align-comprehensive-plan-chapter-with-new-zoning-tools","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/5979138-24a3bf0f8b40652c70eac4fc5c8187eb/orig.mp4?Expires=1771119777&Signature=kLeiUfKEwLeX3SQDcl0qRyT2WHH6hWS3z0KSiNssW4Mp7Ecmu3fNzqgGb0nQdoL7uIV-rlDFW0iRx0~viWsFxSrjU83ZpT4QL5GTMMeOFyeD2nUvTQM6AvAwvYMDok4J6EoeWs8IVrfxdXt8hIGd~5UZgrs7pyU4eZ5VpIk~j6yJEXLxxgkC0IATlowbd0o446ypKruaq-zK-LRfMTD7eKOYBlGMpCLp8lOkTBTED9icnUobebLbOm3mrh7sP3xLC4d19xGRa8rRi6dE0m1JDqGculWXAz2VJfu-Ta~MtBuwvB6Pae23LSMJuMCXEI2ycZm2mBq-P291J-2Q5HqRSA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Chesterfield County planning staff asked the Board of Supervisors on a request to set a public hearing to amend Chapter 10 of the county comprehensive plan so it aligns with the zoning modernization ordinance known as ZOMOD.

The amendment would not change the plan’s vision map or the boundaries of land-use categories, staff said, but would update the plan’s language and the recommended zoning districts to match new ZOMOD tools. “We are not changing densities,” staff said, adding that the sole density change reduces the highest residential category from 12 units per acre to an 8-plus standard.

The change aims to make the comprehensive plan—described by staff as the county’s policy vision—use the same terms and district recommendations that ZOMOD introduces. Staff told the board the proposal would: rename several land-use categories (for example, previous “low-density residential” would become “residential neighborhood 1” to indicate a one-unit-per-acre cap), map older categories such as C-5 commercial into ZOMOD’s commercial-corridor or industrial categories depending on use, and add guidance on amenity space, accessory dwelling units, village overlays and large land uses such as data centers.

Staff emphasized that the draft chapter 10 amendments do not automatically rezone property. Instead, the plan would guide applicants and staff about which new ZOMOD districts are appropriate in each land-use category. For properties zoned today in legacy districts such as C-5, staff described a five‑year conversion window in ZOMOD that would allow existing uses now permitted under C-5, I‑1, I‑2 and I‑3 to continue for five years even if the ZOMOD conversion assigns a different district; those uses must be actively used and cannot be abandoned for two years or more or they revert to the comp‑plan/zoning conversion outcome.

Board members asked how the plan would handle infrastructure requests tied to walkability, citing Springline and Chester Village as examples of mixed‑use, walkable development. Staff said the plan could be used in negotiations with applicants to request off‑site improvements—such as pedestrian bridges or buried utilities—but that such items are subject to negotiations with applicants and state agencies (for example VDOT) and are not requirements imposed by the comprehensive plan itself. Staff also said the plan adds guidance recommending undergrounding utilities where feasible and general residential quality standards to guide negotiations on future residential projects.

Staff said the Chapter 10 amendment is intended as a stopgap to align plan language with ZOMOD so zoning applicants have consistent guidance; a full comprehensive‑plan overhaul is still planned and would include broader public engagement later.

Less critical details include staff’s mapping of former neighborhood office and other office‑type comp‑plan categories into ZOMOD‑compatible categories such as light business, arterial business or office‑light production, and additional guidance about analyzing impacts of data centers on infrastructure.

The board did not take a recorded vote on the Chapter 10 amendment during the discussion; staff requested the board set a public hearing for the amendment in the coming month.","Chesterfield County planning staff asked the Board of Supervisors to set a public hearing to amend Chapter 10 of the comprehensive plan so its land‑use categories and guidance match new zoning tools in the proposed ZOMOD ordinance.",{"_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},5979128,"Utilities staff to move mandatory connection rules into zoning districts under ZOMOD",242,3070105,3313099,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5797592-4ff750208f2316f60b4ff79f4e221d62&start=3070&end=3313","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5797592-4ff750208f2316f60b4ff79f4e221d62/thumbnail_3070105.jpg","/articles/5979128/Chesterfield-County/Virginia/Utilities-staff-to-move-mandatory-connection-rules-into-zoning-districts-under-ZOMOD","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/5979128-f531b1158b217117217d7c43190261d6/orig.mp4?Expires=1771119777&Signature=GyTDHWcY5Iwhu9EMa7OUzmBFQyaEkCZpHLJz4ZjvoVSaTFksyvd1kAgfS-6H7fm43dZLa47nGiUej46F2Ih2TxdRZrB6Z~2irjuHpCqmbr-9pdlmX7y2oAvastD2hMZr0VrIkGOpuhgH9wsdraOELbono~ASTDugyHncyWzMjD9x1V7pqv7vwqJ3cKsqeNtL9haQNu4fjqg7gwrgcuBMXW~AlmzJCug81O~TBM-KERWvTwAWZFp7V7UBFrcYw1rdtymyq4xT8Jh39eMt0GsAEcxoCJEru4TtqrQFs168OzrZCfPWjSbYCMuSXqvwgEr76AHgHc7w8BM9qwFNlkwQPw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Utilities staff told the Board that mandatory connection requirements for water and wastewater—currently codified in Chapter 18 of the county code—should be reassigned to ZOMOD’s zoning districts so connection obligations and exception processes are handled in the zoning process.

Staff said residential lot subdivisions in much of the county are required to connect to public water and wastewater systems under current code, but the southwestern portion of the county is excluded from residential mandatory connections. Utilities staff cited Chesdin Landing and Highlands as examples of subdivisions that use septic systems. On the nonresidential side, staff said properties in certain mapped areas must connect regardless of current zoning; the CVS at Hull Street and Baldwin Creek was cited as an example of a nonresidential site on septic across from public water.

Under the proposed approach, each ZOMOD district would indicate whether connection is required; exception requests would be handled during the zoning review so utilities, planning staff and the board see a single consolidated record rather than separate chapter‑18 exception filings. Utilities staff said they will continue to review exceptions and vet connection plans as part of zoning cases.

Board members raised questions about fire protection in unserved rural areas and county water‑supply infrastructure. Utilities staff and the fire‑service representative noted drafting sites, dry hydrants and transmission lines that supply hydrants and tanker‑refill corridors. Staff noted the Appomattox River Water Authority supplies water (staff cited a 96,000,000‑gallon‑per‑day plant) and that major transmission mains can move large volumes and are extended as development occurs.

No final action to move Chapter 18 requirements into ZOMOD was recorded in the transcript; staff said the change will remove duplication and place connection requirements in the zoning ordinance where they can be considered with rezoning and exception requests.","County utilities staff proposed moving mandatory water and wastewater connection requirements from Chapter 18 of the county code into the zoning ordinance (ZOMOD), aligning connection obligations with zoning districts and simplifying exception requests under one process.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},5979133,"County outlines updates to subdivision ordinance to match ZOMOD and state law",1641,1397684,3038895,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5797592-4ff750208f2316f60b4ff79f4e221d62&start=1397&end=3038","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5797592-4ff750208f2316f60b4ff79f4e221d62/thumbnail_1397684.jpg","/articles/5979133/Chesterfield-County/Virginia/County-outlines-updates-to-subdivision-ordinance-to-match-ZOMOD-and-state-law","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/5979133-da30996d099066362aca8a9b33b24662/orig.mp4?Expires=1771119777&Signature=ohE6XvOb7Zit55InZZY37i82dWwITqBgI~hbFt9XOkUdXhq7dqMYzMlF8hhPjKPJ4mfC-R7CeInKxCb-tFhjwhqXp~mSdZ4jc~lZ8vf52SoH~JvBxwVL6gocorCKgFVt3aRKTHbSbCHLlqTF9KroNdv6q36J6PzHgcA4Ph~GO8bGKMGQRmT5pBBJZOMSmSw5cXlLNnstpwMvY2MFMHuedRbyz-jD2CLWOJCe2dcvpMHMKX9BfkCGYBgXAalwvgc6HLW3NbzQuOLy32fb6pW2fZvXRQx8Gdi8xiMUy~f5nE8rv6S0B5BeO3U3e~VdvpBb8l5Lm4GaMxIGzyF5EBepKQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Planning staff told the Board of Supervisors they are proposing a reformatted Chapter 17 subdivision ordinance to align subdivision procedures with the new ZOMOD zoning ordinance and recent state law changes.

\"We like to think of it as a rule book for the way to go about subdividing land in the county,\" the planning presenter said, and emphasized the draft keeps about 80–85% of current standards while reorganizing and adding clarity. Major topics in the draft include updated submittal types, replacement of a broad “not‑for‑residential‑use” (NFRU) plat with more specific plat types (nonresidential subdivision plat, multifamily subdivision, residential phasing plat, mixed‑use phasing plat), and a clearer minor‑plat qualification (minimum 5 acres and 250 feet of road frontage).

Staff told the board state code changes effective July 1, 2025 remove the planning commission’s ability to accept transfer requests for preliminary plats (an administrative transfer from staff to commission); as a result the planning commission’s review role on some preliminary plats was narrowed and staff will maintain public posting and comment on preliminary submissions instead. To retain some board/commission oversight, staff noted zoning approvals can and often will include schematic‑plan requirements that return project details to the commission for review.

Staff also proposed modified review sequencing: after an initial staff review of a preliminary plat, applicants could submit the first construction‑plan phase for concurrent review, but the preliminary plat must be approved before final construction‑plan approval. That change aims to shorten review timelines while keeping the approval sequence intact.

Other code additions drawn from long‑standing county policy were moved into Chapter 17, including the stub‑road/connectivity policy (originally adopted 1989), existing private‑street considerations, and mailbox/cluster‑box unit (CBU) timing. Staff said cluster boxes must be planned for subdivisions of four lots or more and that timing for installation should allow new residents to receive mail when a certificate of occupancy is issued.

Board members questioned whether the changes would allow “cherry‑picking” or resubdividing parts of existing subdivisions to increase density. Staff said safeguards remain: resubdivision or vacation of a subdivision requires board action, and the process is not changed from today.

Staff noted fees mostly remain unchanged; new modest fees correspond to the new, specific plat types. The draft Chapter 17 rewrite was on the agenda for the board to set a public hearing in October, and no final vote on adoption occurred in the discussion recorded in the transcript.","Staff presented a draft rewrite of Chapter 17 (subdivision ordinance) that reformats the code, updates procedures to match recent state law changes effective July 1, 2025, introduces new plat types and allows limited concurrent reviews of preliminary plats and first‑phase construction plans.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Staff proposes transition window, small‑lot options and religious‑use clarifications in ZOMOD draft

Chesterfield staff seek public hearing to align comprehensive plan chapter with new zoning tools

Utilities staff to move mandatory connection rules into zoning districts under ZOMOD

County outlines updates to subdivision ordinance to match ZOMOD and state law