Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Old South Village topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves Old South Village master-plan revision; HOA and residents pressed for stronger amenity and infrastructure standards
Summary
Staunton City Council voted Jan. 9 to approve a revised master plan and special-use permit for Old South Village and Southview, swapping some previously required amenities and walking trails for a $35,000 cash payment to the homeowners association.
Staunton City Council on Jan. 9 approved a revised master plan and special-use permit (PRD) for the Old South Village/Southview planned residential development after a public hearing in which neighborhood representatives urged the city to adopt clearer, enforceable standards for amenities, sidewalks and access.
Tim Hartless, the Community Development planning manager, said the original PRD was approved in 2006 and called for multiple amenities and walking trails. The developer, Augusta Opportunities Inc., and the HOA negotiated a revised plan that reduces the number of required built amenities from four to two community-amenity areas (Amenity A and Amenity B), eliminates a requirement for city-mandated walking trails and substitutes a cash contribution of $35,000 to the homeowners association to fund amenities. Hartless said the revised plan preserves the same density, lot layout and open-space amounts and that the HOA will determine amenity build‑out and maintenance.
Residents and HOA representatives addressed council during the public hearing. Jeremy Bailey, an HOA leader who chaired developer–HOA negotiations, said the HOA supports the agreement but urged city leaders to strengthen future ordinance language so master plans specify amenity standards and reduce ambiguity about trail and equipment quality. HOA President Karen Magno asked council to require commercial-grade playground equipment, ADA‑compliant walking paths, improved landscaping and clearer requirements for stormwater grading, curb breaks and street lighting. Residents raised concerns about a single ingress/egress for some subdivisions, stormwater runoff onto lots, and the long delay in promised amenities at older developments.
Developer representative Gary Goodall told council the $35,000 payment was the result of negotiation with the HOA and reflected parties’ agreement about what amenities to provide in the two amenity areas.
The Planning Commission had conducted a public hearing on Dec. 19, 2024 and recommended approval with conditions. Hartless outlined the conditions that the Planning Commission attached: lighting for amenity areas must be contained within the common area and not spill onto adjacent properties, building permits must be sought where required and amenity build-out plans for Amenity A and B must be reviewed and approved by Community Development before work begins.
Councilor Woods moved to adopt the resolution approving the Special Use Permit and conditions as recommended by the Planning Commission; Councilor Park seconded. Roll-call votes were recorded as unanimous in favor. Council members noted the discussion shows the city may need to clarify subdivision and planned-development standards to prevent future disputes over amenity quality and infrastructure responsibilities.
The approved revision removes the city requirement for walking trails and leaves amenity selection and timing to the HOA with the $35,000 payment as seed funding; residents asked council to pursue an ordinance review to add technical standards for amenities and stormwater management in high-density subdivisions.
