Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board accepts Planning Commission’s recommendation and opts for broader study of A‑1/RA zoning changes
Summary
The Board of Supervisors accepted the Planning Commission’s unanimous recommendation not to advance draft A‑1 and RA zoning amendments and approved a motion to pursue comprehensive study and work sessions on growth management instead.
The Culpeper County Board of Supervisors on Jan. 10 accepted the Planning Commission’s recommendation not to move forward with proposed amendments to the A‑1 and RA zoning districts and directed staff to continue working on broader study options aimed at managing rural growth.
County Administrator John Eggerson told the board that staff and the Planning Commission developed a fully drafted ordinance based on the board’s concept but that the Planning Commission, after a public hearing, recommended against forwarding the ordinance to the board. The Planning Commission vote was reported as 9‑0 against the proposed change.
Why it matters: The proposed amendments sought to change how rural A‑1 and RA districts are regulated, a policy area supervisors and constituents have linked to concerns about accelerating residential subdivision, school district pressures and road maintenance costs.
Board members from across the ideological spectrum urged a pause on the immediate ordinance and called for a structured process of work sessions, public engagement and possibly a consultant study to identify options that could gain broader public support. Several supervisors cited concerns about school capacity and road infrastructure; one supervisor said county improvements now total roughly $120 million in planned school projects.
“I don’t think that going forward with that would lead to a good outcome,” one supervisor said, urging the county to follow the Planning Commission recommendation and to take more time for a comprehensive review. Another supervisor said the county must “manage and direct” development rather than attempt to control it outright, and urged public hearings and timely action if the board wishes to change the regulatory framework.
The board voted to accept the Planning Commission’s December decision (9‑0) to deny the proposed amendment and approved an amended motion directing staff to pursue other policy options and public engagement to address rural sprawl and growth management.
Next steps: Supervisors asked staff to schedule work sessions and to consider a consultant study and public engagement sessions this year; no ordinance was advertised for public hearing at the Jan. 10 meeting.
