Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents tell Goochland supervisors new road requirement makes building a home unaffordable for small landowners
Summary
Multiple residents described unintended consequences of a recently adopted ordinance requiring state‑level road or constructed access, saying driveway or road construction costs (one estimate cited $300,000) are prohibitive and asking the board for guidance, exceptions, or easements.
Several Goochland County residents told the Board of Supervisors during the Sept. 4 public comment periods that a recently adopted ordinance requiring state‑standard road access is creating severe, unintended financial burdens for individual landowners who planned to build single homes.
James and Jennifer Ott, who said they have lived in the county for 23 years, described purchasing two lots and being told the new ordinance requires construction of a state‑level road to access their property. "We're not here to ask for any kind of special treatment," James Ott said, "we're just simply here to consider our situation, help us find a resolution that can make it financially feasible for us to build." He said a quoted cost to construct the required road was about $300,000 plus engineering fees.
Frank Hart and other speakers described similar situations: Hart said he bought four contiguous parcels at the end of a dead‑end road intending to build a private home and now faces the choice of building a road or not building at all. Keiley Lochneet, who said she has invested more than $100,000 preparing property for a home near the fire training center, urged the board to honor what she described as a historical 50‑foot right‑of‑way or grant a permanent easement so she can install a driveway without building a full state road.
Ellen Blake and Carolyn Elliott pressed the board on a related project, Serenity Trail, calling for stronger conservation protections and more rigorous water‑use and erosion controls if development proceeds. "It's water," Elliott said. "We have to do things the right way," urging strict criteria and proof of water availability before approving large subdivisions.
Board members acknowledged the comments and noted the ordinance’s intent to deter large‑scale overdevelopment while also recognizing possible unintended consequences for long‑time landowners and small buyers. No formal vote or immediate policy change was taken; several supervisors encouraged staff to review the issues and identify potential remedies, and the board accepted a deferral for the Serenity Trail applicant to Oct. 7.
The meeting record shows multiple residents asking for flexibility, administrative guidance, and possible use of easements or case‑by‑case exemptions to avoid forcing individuals to shoulder large road construction costs that were not foreseeable when they purchased land.
