Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Washington County supervisors table rezoning request from Cox family seeking to keep companion pigs for legal review
Summary
After public testimony for and against, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to table a rezoning petition from Isaac and Hope Cox so county counsel can review whether state law or private covenants allow miniature pigs as companion animals.
The Washington County Board of Supervisors on Oct. 14 unanimously voted to table a rezoning petition from Isaac and Hope Cox, who asked to rezone about 3.66 acres on Peaceful Valley Road from R-2 to A-2 to keep four miniature pigs as companion animals.
Hope Cox told the board she and her family bought the property without clear knowledge of a restrictive Kirby Smith covenant and that the pigs are household companions, not livestock. “Miniature pigs kept solely as pets and not for agricultural production or sale fall within the statutory understanding of companion animal,” Cox said, referencing Virginia Code 3.2-6500 during her remarks and presenting photos and a recent survey of her lot.
Neighbors who spoke in support described the pigs as quiet and well cared for. Opponents raised concerns about appearance, structures on the property and an increase in black vultures they said were attracted to the site; Connie Brown said the number of vultures posed a public‑health and nuisance concern.
Planning staff and Supervisor Mitch Richardson told the board the planning commission recommended denial on a 6-0 vote. Several supervisors said the matter raises two separate legal questions — whether the county’s zoning code allows companion animals as described, and whether rezoning would conflict with private restrictive covenants recorded against the subdivision. Supervisor Mike Rush urged a legal review to clarify whether the covenant’s language and state case law permit the requested change.
County counsel or legal staff (Mr. Snodgrass was identified as the attorney the board asked to review the matter) will meet with the applicants and report back. The board made a substitute motion to table and instructed counsel to examine the legal points raised; the motion to table carried unanimously.
The board did not grant rezoning at the Oct. 14 meeting; the public hearing was left open for administrative follow-up and a future action date on the board calendar.
