Nelson County supervisors debate A‑1 agricultural minimum lot sizes as zoning update moves forward

NELSON COUNTY, Va. — Nelson County supervisors and planning commissioners spent much of a joint Oct. 22 work session debating minimum lot sizes proposed for the A‑1 agricultural zoning district, with differing views on how to balance protection of rural character and landowner flexibility.

Dylan M. Bishop, Nelson County Director of Planning and Zoning, told the Board and Planning Commission that the Berkeley Group’s original recommendation set a 10‑acre minimum for A‑1, but that county staff had consulted the Commissioner of Revenue’s office and proposed aligning the zoning standard with land‑use taxation practice — five acres for agricultural use plus one acre for a homesite, which staff summarized for the public as “six acres.”

The disagreement among elected officials was immediate. East District Supervisor Jesse N. Rutherford called the 10‑acre recommendation “pretty crazy” and said imposing a more restrictive A‑1 minimum could create a cohort of nonconforming parcels and hard‑to‑remedy situations for current landowners. “In the meantime, we have a two‑acre allowed by right and a sliding scale — so we have more opportunity today with A‑1 than if we were to go into this more restrictive approach,” Rutherford said.

Bishop and others noted that the draft ordinance also includes tools to reduce nonconformities — for example, reducing front setbacks from the centerline of the road from 75 feet to 50 feet — and that the update is intended to be implemented alongside a new future land‑use map. Bishop emphasized that the parcel map staff prepared (a zoomable map marking parcels under and over 10 acres) is intended to guide where residential rezonings and village hubs such as Lovingston and Colleen would direct more intensive development.

Supporters of a smaller minimum argued that rezonings provide a manageable path to add housing when appropriate. Vice Chair Ernie Q. Reed said zoning changes and targeted rezonings can be used to add R‑1 residential areas where water and sewer capacity permit, while preserving conservation areas elsewhere. Rutherford cautioned that rezoning is time‑consuming and uncertain and urged the county to require percolation and water feasibility testing before subdivision approvals "because it doesn’t do anyone any good to have five acres that hasn’t been perc tested."

The Board and Planning Commission did not reach a consensus on an exact A‑1 minimum and directed staff to continue public outreach and to incorporate water/sewer feasibility and mapping into rezoning decisions. Bishop asked Board members to provide comments to the Berkeley Group by the following Friday so staff can refine lot‑size provisions as the zoning map is developed.

The joint work session continued into other ordinance topics; no final vote on the A‑1 minimum was taken at the Oct. 22 meeting.