Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Far topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Goochland planning commission narrowly backs removing maximum FAR limits in commercial and industrial zones
Summary
After split public comment, commissioners voted 3–2 to recommend removing maximum floor‑area‑ratio caps from business and industrial zoning districts, with supporters citing competitiveness and opponents warning it would weaken local land‑use controls and character protections.
The Goochland County Planning Commission voted to recommend a zoning code amendment that would remove maximum floor‑area‑ratio (FAR) limits from commercial and industrial districts, forwarding the proposal to the Board of Supervisors for a Sept. 3 public hearing.
Ray Cash, assistant director of community development, said staff recommended removal to improve economic competitiveness and noted that setbacks, height limits, stormwater controls and the permitted‑use matrix would continue to control building impacts. "Economic competitiveness is prime," Cash said, arguing that removing maximum FAR aligns the county with neighboring localities and reduces a potential barrier to large‑scale industrial or data‑center projects.
Opponents urged caution. Linda Moore, speaking on behalf of local residents, said FAR is "a critical planning tool that promotes high quality development" and warned removal would make it harder to ensure new development fits community character. Several residents and planning advocates said FAR provides predictable limits on building bulk and green space.
Supporters included the Goochland Economic Development Authority, whose chair, Ben Sloan, read a letter saying removal "will remove a potential barrier to investment" and could aid recruitment of large industrial or data‑center projects. James Robinson of the county's economic development office urged commissioners to consider regional competitiveness and described FAR as something site selectors notice when screening locations.
The commission approved the amendment on a 3–2 roll call vote after public comment. The recorded roll call was: Mister Kimberly — No; Miss Kowalski — Yes; Mister Petut (Petuk/Petut in transcript) — Yes; Mister Cosby — No; Mister McLaughlin — Yes. The recommendation will move to the Board of Supervisors on Sept. 3, 2024.
