Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ordinance Fee Changes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff proposes Chapter 64 amendment and new fees to cover road sign replacements in Louisa County
Summary
Planning staff told the commission that Chapter 64 does not assign responsibility for replacement road signs and proposed ordinance language changes plus fee‑schedule additions (GIS fee for new addresses, upfront street‑sign fees for new developments). Staff said signs cost about $270 each and recalled more than 20 requests last year; commissioners agreed to discuss the fee schedule in January and consider a public hearing in February.
A planning staff member told the Louisa County Planning Commission that multiple residents and developers have requested replacement road signs and that the county’s existing Chapter 64 addressing and street‑naming ordinance (drafted in the early 1990s) does not assign maintenance or replacement responsibility.
Staff proposed two related approaches to address recurring sign‑replacement costs: amend Chapter 64 to clarify that the county will assume responsibility for future replacement/maintenance of road signs and add fees to the planning fee schedule to help offset costs. Proposed fee changes include a GIS fee tied to new addresses assigned with building permits, an upfront street‑sign fee for new internal subdivision streets, and modest increases to GIS special‑project fees for maps and datasets. The staff member said each sign costs about $270 and recalled a request last year for “somewhere 20 plus road signs” needing replacement.
The commission discussed timing and process. Staff offered to place the item on a January work session or add it to the regular January meeting agenda for discussion and to return the fee schedule for a public hearing in February if commissioners are comfortable doing so. The chair and commissioners agreed to add the fee schedule discussion to January’s regular meeting agenda and review whether to schedule a public hearing in February.
The proposal is at the discussion stage; no ordinance language was adopted at the work session and no formal vote was taken.
