Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Farmstand topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Goochland BZA upholds zoning administrator in farm-stand appeal at Shallowwell Road
Summary
The Goochland County Board of Zoning Appeals on May 18 upheld the zoning administrator’s Jan. 21, 2026 determination that a proposed farm stand at 1151 Shallowwell Road must meet county farm-stand development standards; the board ruled 4–1 after legal debate about the BZA’s authority to interpret conflicts with state agritourism law.
Get email alerts on the Land Use Farmstand topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Goochland County Board of Zoning Appeals on May 18 upheld the zoning administrator’s Jan. 21, 2026 determination that a proposed farm stand at 1151 Shallowwell Road must meet Goochland County’s farm-stand development standards, including the 200-square-foot size limit and setback requirements. The motion to uphold the administrator passed 4–1 after a closed-session consultation with counsel.
Why it matters: The appellant, Aurora Hill Foundation LLC, argued county code limits on farm stands conflict with state agritourism and Right-to-Farm protections and therefore the BZA should reverse the administrator’s interpretation. County counsel and staff maintained the administrator followed the adopted county ordinance and that questions about an ordinance’s validity belong in circuit court rather than before the BZA.
County position and legal frame: Tara McGee, Goochland County attorney representing zoning administrator Ray Cash, told the panel that the BZA must "start with a presumption of correctness" for the administrator’s determination and may not declare local ordinance provisions invalid; she said the administrator’s staff report and legal memorandum explain why the determination was consistent with the zoning ordinance. McGee also explained that the farm-stand development standards (200 sq ft limit, 25-foot right-of-way setback) are written to address health, safety and welfare concerns—principally ensuring space for vehicles to pull off the road and limiting parking demand.
Appellant’s argument: Attorney (Bridal) Prater of Williams Mullen, representing Aurora Hill Foundation LLC and speaking with owner-operator Tyler McCormick present, argued state agritourism law limits local regulation and that sales of products produced on the farm should not be subject to a conditional use permit or other restrictions beyond a farm-use permit. Prater said the project would include cattle, dairy and farm-produced retail items and would provide educational/agritourism benefits. "The goal is here: Mr. McCormick’s going to have cattle...and have that available to visitors and guests as they come to the farm to sell," Prater said during his presentation.
Public comment and practical concerns: A nearby resident who said she received the applicant’s mailing described recent heavy activity at the property and raised safety concerns about Shallowwell Road's narrowness and a new access road, asking the board to defer until buffers, fences and a clearer plan are shown. County staff replied that issues such as buffers and access would be addressed if the applicant proceeds with a conditional-use permit application, and that the present appeal concerns the zoning-administrator determination only.
Board reasoning and outcome: After questions about whether a large, building-based retail operation remains a "farm stand" under the ordinance and a short closed-session consultation with counsel about the BZA’s role in evaluating potential conflicts between local ordinance and state law, the board voted to uphold the zoning administrator’s Jan. 21 determination. The board record shows the motion to uphold passed 4–1. Board members who supported upholding the determination said the BZA lacks authority to invalidate the ordinance and that applicants have other avenues, including conditional-use permitting or judicial challenge, to pursue larger retail operations.
Next steps: Staff noted the applicant has a separate conditional-use permit process pending (a community meeting for that CUP was scheduled next week) and that state agencies (VDOT, VDH) still have reviews to complete for septic, entrances and signage. Any judicial challenge to the ordinance’s validity would proceed outside the BZA process.
Provenance: Topic introduction and presentation began with SEG 163 and the board’s final vote certification and announcement of the outcome occurred by SEG 1296.
