Planning commission trims and clarifies draft comprehensive plan language, schedules Jan. 21 public hearing

At a work session the Fauquier County Planning Commission reviewed proposed edits to the comprehensive plan, offered line‑by‑line changes and approved several deletions and wording revisions ahead of a public hearing scheduled for January 21.

Planning staff opened the session with a statutory overview and an explanation of the proposed changes to Chapters 1 and 6 and a new Chapter 1b. "The comprehensive plan is the what, the zoning ordinance is the how," a presenter said while explaining how the plan guides zoning and implementation. Commissioners focused on removing editorial language that could be read as policy endorsements; for example, members voted to delete existing sentences that said commercial or industrial activity "often adds to the tax base without creating additional tax burdens" or that industrial sites "typically produce more in tax revenue than they require in public services." Those deletions passed by voice vote after multiple commissioners argued the statements were unnecessary and could invite misinterpretation.

The commission also debated a section on the transfer of development rights (TDR). Planning staff described TDR as a tool that has limited local application and suggested removing the section. "My suggestion would be to would be to just take this whole section b out, if the commission was comfortable with that," a staff member said; commissioners agreed and a motion to remove the TDR discussion passed.

Commissioners amended guiding principles to add a phrase requiring that plans for public facilities and infrastructure "meet the needs of the community as it grows while protecting the natural, historic, and cultural resources of Fauquier County." The body also approved a change from "expect" to "require" in a guideline so projects seeking increased residential density must demonstrate they will maintain or improve infrastructure.

On technology policy language, several commissioners cautioned that the phrase "encourage technology infrastructure" was too broad and could be read to invite large industrial uses such as data centers or major transmission projects. The commission asked staff to draft narrower language (for example, references to "access to communications technology" or "access to technology throughout the county") and circulate revised wording by email.

After completing the line‑by‑line review the commission voted to schedule a public hearing for the draft amendments at its January meeting. Staff will update the draft to reflect the commission's edits and prepare materials for the advertised hearing.