Nelson County reviews zoning rewrite and punts lot‑size decision to public

Cecile Gaines, a consultant with the Berkley Group, told the Nelson County Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission on Dec. 17 that the county is ready to move the draft zoning and subdivision ordinance to public engagement after a final joint work session to review comments. She outlined a schedule that retains the online comment form for one week after a public open house and called for one more joint review before public hearings and formal action.

The rewrite makes numerous numeric and standards changes across districts, Gaines said. Notable proposed edits include changing A‑1 (agricultural) minimum lot size from 10 to 6 acres and reducing R‑1 minimum lot size options (the draft also shifts some R‑1 metrics and setbacks). The draft would also create village and corridor overlays, revise use tables, and add several administrative and enforcement clarifications.

The meeting centered on a persistent policy dispute: whether A‑1 should use a flat six‑acre minimum (the consultant/staff recommendation) or retain a sliding scale that produces smaller lots in some situations. Jesse N. Rutherford, East District Supervisor, and several commissioners said the existing sliding scale has helped preserve rural character while allowing a degree of smaller, two‑acre lots in parts of the county. ‘‘The sliding scale does the best job of that,’’ Planning Commissioner Philippa Proulx said, while others—including Vice Chair Ernie Q. Reed—said a clear six‑acre standard aligns more directly with land‑use taxation rules and is simpler to administer.

Dylan M. Bishop, Nelson County’s director of planning and zoning, told the group that staff and planner Cody Barker have been evaluating options and that mapping (the phase after the ordinance is adopted) will clarify where districts like R‑1, R‑2 and A‑1 will be applied in practice. Bishop and Barker warned that a flat six‑acre standard could create many nonconforming lots and that a sliding scale requires better tracking by staff; Bishop said staff could implement either approach but would need systems to record prior splits.

Berkley Group consultant Rebecca Cobb urged using the public process to test public reaction, noting that rezoning conversations often provoke strong responses. County staff asked for written comments by Dec. 24 (to staff) and Dec. 31 (to Berkley Group) to inform revisions; the group agreed to hold a public open house on Feb. 25 and a final joint review session afterward.

The session produced no formal vote on lot‑size policy; board members agreed to take the draft ordinance and public engagement materials forward and revisit lot‑size choices after public input. The Board adjourned after the Planning Commission adjourned at 7:08 p.m.