Planning staff presents sweeping subdivision and zoning ordinance updates; commission forwards recommendations to council

Town staff presented a bundle of proposed changes to the subdivision and zoning ordinances on Sept. 2 that respond to input from a stakeholder working group and the development community and that would revise street design, construction sequencing, connectivity, driveway standards and other procedural items. The Planning Commission voted to recommend all three ordinances to Town Council.

Cauley Casper, a planning staff member, summarized the work as the product of a stakeholder working group that met from September 2023 to April 2024 and said the changes will be captured in three ordinances (2082, 2083 and 2084). The proposal covers street design items (allowing roll‑top curb in single‑family districts except infill situations, adopting VDOT vetted smaller street sections with required no‑parking signage where applicable), requirements for sidewalks on both sides of streets in higher‑density zones, full cul‑de‑sac sidewalk loops, medians on arterials/collectors with variance criteria, and clarified public‑utility easement standards.

Why it matters: The package changes how new subdivisions will be designed and built, including when paving and sidewalks must be completed, how many connections a subdivision must provide to adjacent streets, and the circumstances under which developers may use smaller street sections or request variances. Staff said the revisions are intended to streamline processes, reflect widely used VDOT standards and codify stakeholder consensus while retaining variance paths.

Major proposed changes and clarifications

- Street design and sidewalks: Allow roll‑top curb in single‑family zoning districts (except where curb must match adjacent vertical curb); require sidewalks on both sides of streets in R‑4 density and greater, and permit trails in lieu of sidewalks where the Past‑the‑Future map or adjacent conditions make a trail appropriate. - Street widths and parking: Adopt VDOT road‑width standards (smaller sections) where appropriate; require no‑parking signage where widths do not allow parking on both sides. - Cul‑de‑sac and connectivity: Limit cul‑de‑sac length by trip generation (maximum 250 vehicle trips, typically about 25 houses) but not exceeding 1,200 feet; require minimum two connection points for subdivisions and clarify when unfinished roads may count toward connectivity; require construction to the depth of a lot but not to exceed 500 feet, with proof of feasibility, right‑of‑way dedication and construction easements where the road exceeds 500 feet. - Timing and sequencing: Change paving and trail timing so base paving is required to issue building permits, final paving before first certificate of occupancy, and trails/sidewalks completed within set timeframes (one year with limited weather‑related extensions allowed). - Driveway and grade standards: Keep a 12% maximum driveway grade overall but allow sections up to 18% with required landings; require variances for driveways on arterials (planning commission review) and for collectors depending on number of lots. - Process and preliminary plat: Reduce preliminary‑plat submittal detail and remove the public hearing for preliminary plat review to focus more detailed review at final plat and site‑plan stages; updates also implement recent General Assembly changes to review timelines and clarify references to VDOT documents.

Discussion and external input

- Stakeholder involvement: The staff presentation noted input from a subdivision/zoning stakeholder group and the development community; Steve Simonis of Balzer and Associates (who served on the stakeholder committee) thanked staff and said the Home Builders Association supports the recommendations. - Clarifications requested by commission: Commissioners asked for clarification on the “500‑foot” construction limit (staff explained the requirement is to construct the road to the depth of a lot, not to mandate 500 feet beyond typical lot depths; 500 ft acts as an upper cap and proof of feasibility, dedications and easements are required beyond that). Staff explained the change is a codification of a prior zoning interpretation and Board of Zoning Appeals confirmation while providing more flexibility than the prior literal reading.

Action and outcome

- Ordinance 2082 (amend subdivision ordinance sections): Motion to approve carried on voice vote; commission recommended approval to Town Council. - Ordinance 2083 (amend zoning ordinance sections 2103, 5110, 5204): Motion to approve carried on voice vote; commission recommended approval to Town Council. - Ordinance 2084 (additional subdivision ordinance amendments): Motion to approve carried on voice vote; commission recommended approval to Town Council.

What remains: The ordinance package will go to Town Council for consideration; staff and the commission noted that the code changes include variance pathways and that subsection implementation details will be further refined in town standards and specifications as appropriate.

Ending note: Commissioners expressed appreciation for the stakeholder process and for clarifications that make timing and connectivity expectations clearer for developers and the town.