Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Goochland board adopts higher erosion, stormwater and plan‑review fees after debate over process and 99% first‑pass failure rate
Summary
Supervisors voted to raise erosion and stormwater fees and adopt a plan‑review resubmittal fee (charged after the third submittal) following staff benchmarking; one member voted no and debate highlighted a high first‑pass failure rate and calls to improve the review process.
The Goochland County Board of Supervisors on Aug. 5 adopted two ordinances to raise fees tied to erosion and stormwater management and to add plan‑of‑development resubmittal charges.
Staff said the changes—intended to recover staff costs and reflect benchmarking with neighboring localities—would increase base per‑acre fees, distinguish residential and nonresidential fees, add a reinspection fee and remove certain single‑family exemptions. Josh Gillespie told the board erosion/stormwater fees had not been updated in more than a decade and that a comparables analysis recommended changes.
The board then considered changes to the county fee schedule to increase plan of development review fees and add a resubmittal fee for additional reviews. Under the adopted schedule, no resubmittal charge is assessed until the third submittal; staff characterized three submissions as the approximate current average number of review cycles.
A key point of contention was staff’s statement that fewer than 1% of submissions pass on first review. Several supervisors and staff discussed whether fees should be used to incentivize better front‑end submissions or whether the county should instead improve pre‑submittal guidance and processes. Supervisor Spoonhauer voted against the erosion fee ordinance and against the plan‑review changes, arguing the high apparent failure rate indicates process problems rather than developer noncompliance.
Other board members said the resubmittal fee—triggered only after repeated reviews—was a reasonable cost‑recovery tool and an incentive to fix deficiencies earlier. Staff noted the new fee structure is consistent with neighboring counties and that the county offers pre‑application meetings and checklists to reduce rework.
Votes: The erosion and stormwater ordinance and the plan‑review fee amendments were adopted by roll call; the board recorded one or more dissenting votes for each measure.
What’s next: Staff said they will continue outreach to the business community, maintain pre‑application assistance and monitor whether fee changes and better guidance reduce repeat submissions.
