Planning Commission Worksession   8/13/2026

Did that do a good job, Linda?

I think so.

Okay.

And based on that, I'll stand ready to answer any questions.

I do, Mr. Coon, thank you for your presentation.

What position does that put that young man in?

and he built the house and it owned it for two, then he would need to own it until it got to the five years before he could sell it.

If everything stayed just like it is today, it would take 21 and a half years to build out what is available now.

Do we want that growth to keep happening at this current rate or do we want to do something to slow it and get it to what I would say is a more reasonable level?

If everything as it is presented were to pass tonight, would anything change with the available build-out or would that stay just as it is?

I'm glad you brought it up because that's effectively what we're trying to do is that 9,000 and some change let's try and keep it as close to that number as possible and then the expectation is when Louisa County is quote unquote built out every home that could be built on a parcel is built that's you know we have only about 10,000 more homes and then that's it but with divisions and everything else we could expand that and increase much further than that

Would the underground utilities be allowable between the road and the 250 foot setback?

I think the 250 is just to protect the rural viewshed, but I don't see why there would be any reason to prohibit utilities between that as well.

Help me understand what rezoning would look like so that you could rezone it from A1, A2 to a residential to an R. What would that look like?

based on our two standards and that's what I would like to do and divide it, build it and sell it and then it would come to you all to request a rezoning and they'd have to articulate why a rezoning would be beneficial to the community and why it fits in this area better than the growth area or other places and you all make your recommendation and then it goes to the board.

Well, that's road frontage.

The 450 is how much?

Any thoughts on that?

from 50 feet to 100 feet, you're going to have additional costs that come with that.

That changes a lot in that data that you're presenting.

I can pull the data in the GIS to say we have 10,432 parcels that are three acres or larger in Loyce County.

That is correct.

I know the search was flawed, but it was to the best that we could do with what we had in-house.

Mr. Chairman, thank you, sir.

Mr. Hicks?

We can have a list of brokers that have solidified sellable TDRs from the selling areas of the county so that way when someone comes in and they look to buy they know which brokers to contact and then private negotiations can go on outside of Louisa staff to come to that TDR and that's something we're gonna dive into a lot next month and it's one thing that we've switched gears on and we're gonna spend adamant time diving into that.

So before you go on, just to help me understand, why is the former method not feasible?

Was that decent, Chris, of a summary on that in a basic form?

That was a pretty good summary.

So it doesn't necessarily negate any of the county's due diligence, it just shifts when the due diligence would happen.

Is that clearer?

I'm not sure that it will ever be completely uncomplicated just by the nature of how it all works, but we are trying to figure out a system that will be the easiest for buyers, sellers, and county residents to understand.

Again, I don't know if that's going to be a full possibility yet, but it's something we are actively working on.

is not something that we would even want to contemplate because you're talking about that would significantly increase the taxes on land that I think would

Many of those rights are the tax abatement method and we just won't be able to do that.

Yeah, everything she said is just picture coming out of my mouth and that's what I wanted to do.

Thank you, Mr. Hicks.

Did I say that correct?

Is there any reason why we need to continue to look at the zoning item and the zoning method or is that something we can set aside and just devote all our time and effort to the TDR piece for the next month and then come back to you guys?

We've gone over zoning many times, but details in these TDRs have been strenuous to say the least.

Does any commissioner have any further concerns with the ordinances we've been talking about?

I personally think we're ready to go with the ordinance side of it, the land use part of it, and we still need to work on that TDR to bring that back to the next work session so we can go full tilt in October and listen to the public.

Yes.

So then that would eat up that little bit of profit that's in there once you figure in taxes.

So I just wanted to say we would really, really welcome those conversations.

Yes.

just don't put that much money into it next year and the board can operate the accelerator or the brake depending on what we need and I like that.

Very good, thank you.

Maybe some of them have got a different idea of what actually happened, but we talked about it at great length.

And that's why we, I'm sorry.

And maybe Chris has some more to add to that, but I wanted to make sure everybody knew where I was coming from.

But I know we have electronic message signs that we need to discuss as well so if there's no other questions that's all I have.

I want to compliment what Ms. Brickville said.

It's very educational.

So, Ms. Butler.

But it would just give you all an idea of what we would be looking at if if you all wanted to entertain amending that ordinance again.

We spent a lot of time discussing that ordinance, as I recall.

There was a lot of discussion on this topic during the original amendments last year.

Mr. Barlow.

And I don't know that when we were looking at that, even if that was a possibility.

So it is, from our understanding, a pretty standard feature nowadays.

I think it's something new that's come up that might be worth just looking at.

Well, we put in, as part of the ordinance, we put in some discussion about being able to turn down at night daytime and nighttime luminance.

Right.

I'd be glad to.

And I don't know that anything's changed between then and now.

It was a church that wanted to replace their existing sign with an electronic message sign.

We have had other requests come in or other inquiries about what types of signs are allowed, but I believe it was the pastor at the church or a representative of the church spoke at the board meeting in July.

They came in and said it was easier to change the wording on the sign rather than having to go out and manually stick it on the sign that they got.

Linda, don't we have dozens of churches in A1 and A2 now with signs?

I don't know if there are dozens, but there are a number of churches in the agricultural zoning districts that do have electronic message signs that were done before the regulations were amended.

Because we do have, it's probably dozens.

So I just wanted to clarify and make sure that that was.

So what we do is got to be for everything.

That is correct.

Is that included in this?

I believe we already have that in the ordinance.

Since the gentleman came and spoke at the meeting, the board asked the Planning Commission just to look at this and see if there were any needed changes.

We'll have to look at it as far as doing a special exception to where you can limit it to maybe just churches or something other and not make it all over the county.

I think it probably does.

I think a lot of them already have them.

But I also would say whatever they're saying, it should apply to everybody and not just one group or one neighborhood or any other delineation you want to make.

It's fine for them to do.

They've sent it back, you discussed it, and good enough.

I don't hear anybody with a different opinion on that.

That will be a report back to the board.

I believe that takes us to the end of our business for now so we're going to adjourn until seven o'clock.