Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Amendment Event Venues topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission weighs zoning rules for event venues, favors administratively issued annual permits
Summary
Staff briefed a zoning memo proposing an 'event/venue' use category to capture barn‑style and agritourism venues; commissioners voiced concerns about protecting farmland, mitigating noise/traffic, and suggested a tiered approach with an annual administrative permit and stricter review for large venues.
The Westmoreland County Planning Commission held an extended discussion on whether to create an event or venue use category in the county zoning ordinance to regulate weddings, agritourism events and similar commercial uses on agricultural land.
Staff presented a memo, prepared with assistance from the Berkeley Group, noting that under current rules an event can be allowed by right only in limited circumstances (typically one by‑right event every six months) and that some venues operate without consistent permitting. The memo asked the commission whether an event venue should be accessory to bona fide agricultural operations, how to protect agricultural production, and whether a tiered permit system should distinguish small‑scale from large‑scale operations.
Commissioners debated compatibility with farming uses. One commissioner observed that agritourism can "diversify your income streams'' and help retain farms, while others warned that converting pasture or parking for repeated events could erode long‑term agricultural production. Noise and public‑safety concerns were raised, including the need for VDOT‑approved entrances, adequate turnaround or 12–20 foot access widths for emergency vehicles, and buffers or setbacks between venues and residences.
Operational details under discussion included hours of operation, lighting, sanitation, parking and overflow plans. Commissioners discussed a 100‑person threshold as a possible demarcation between small and large events and questioned whether portable sanitation should be allowed as overflow while permanent restroom facilities should be required for regular venues.
On permitting, commissioners favored a system that could be administered by county staff with annual permitting and periodic inspections rather than requiring Board of Supervisors hearings for every venue. "Consensus is an annual permit," Speaker 2 said, noting that an annual permit would allow routine administration and revocation for violations while reserving higher scrutiny for large or noncompliant proposals.
No ordinance was adopted at the meeting; commissioners asked staff to draft a proposed ordinance and return with public‑hearing materials, process recommendations, and suggested operational standards for different venue tiers. The draft will be subject to future planning commission review and public hearings before any change to the zoning ordinance.
