Planning Commission Worksession   5/8/2025

And then if you're basically running a facility with neither the physician at the helm or DEA license, then you can see it.

The emails through the county.

Yes.

Look at him overhead all day.

Very good.

Stand ready to answer any questions.

But it is part of the Medicare program.

So for this, we would be looking at, I mean, I guess if it was the home base of an organization that was providing inpatient care.

This is usually family members that I'm talking about, not necessarily certified.

Okay, good.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Just a comment.

I think it's great what they came up with.

This is two months in a row.

Very good.

If there are no further questions, then we'll move on to the next item, which is land development regulations phase three, Ms. Buckler.

If there's other thoughts about how that should be calculated at the end of that 24 months, like I said, other localities use a flat rate or required that the developers engineer provide a new cost update at the end of the 24 months.

Have we had problems with this?

Others, like I said, just used either a flat percentage increase or required the developers engineer to provide the documentation.

Thank you.

Well back into the fall.

Right.

And this was just to provide more information on what type of buffering would be required.

We've been talking about this for, I want to say well back into the fall.

So we did add that language but we can certainly

They just gave you a plant of trees.

We can certainly add that language, amend what we have proposed.

Chair.

You don't have to worry about the size and calculating how far you need to be to make those measurements.

confirm in the field?

Yes.

I haven't learned I've just read.

I have I have read a lot about electronic message more than you want.

And if they were, I wouldn't see but one message.

So you never I think I'm not sure that you never see, you know, one one message, some are 20 seconds, you know,

Is it a public safety issue that people will be

But like I said, it really seems to be a preference in the localities because they all kind of vary.

Thank you, Mr. Turner.

Is there a reason for that?

We just kind of gave some different options to go through for consideration.

runs counter to that in my estimation, unless I'm reading this wrong.

So the way the second option there is recommended, the administrative review with the option to send to the board, is that they would not be allowed in agricultural or residential?

It's only for these districts.

I see.

All right, so.

All right, I see it that way.

And that side has been up 10, 15 years, if not longer.

So while there may be signs that have been placed

We operate on a complaint-based system, so our staff does not ride around looking for violations to... You don't have to look hard for this one, but I guess what I'm saying is, is there something in the ordinance that gives the compliance folks guidance on what to do when they see one of these signs?

that it would either have to be removed or they would have to apply for the proper sign permits if there was a category that it fit in.

All right, continue on.

We tried to find some videos or examples of how we could show the different knit levels, but we didn't have much luck with that.

To be perfectly honest with you.

I have had some training and some work in illumination in my career over time, but we never talked about nits.

I thought they were immature lice.

So, yeah, I'm kind of on board the same way.

Does any other commissioners have any other thoughts on it?

And one of the reasons why we determined this was the best.

Absolutely.

But besides a knit level and a period of time, is that the difference between option one and option two?

And these were just different options based on other localities.

So this is a laundry list that y'all can circle which ones you like and cross out the ones you don't.

And we can mix and match.

So really, it's however you guys want to do it.

I'm good with you.

Do commissioners have Mr. Dickerson?

You say some have it at 100 or so?

Fairfax, they increase theirs from 100 to 300, but in some of the organization documentation, for rural areas, they recommend 100 NITs at night, but those organizations also vary in their recommended NIT levels.

You're speaking of all districts, all the rest of the districts.

That would be the bottom choice.

The bottom.

The bottom choice would be the one we'd be recommending.

And have that more extended time period tend to sunrise instead of 11 to sunrise.

Because there are definitions for sunset and sunrise.

We have not defined sunset and sunrise.

Yes.

I was trying to figure the reference there.

I think that comes out of Wakefield and different places for different parts of the country.

I know that's what the wildlife people depend on.

We do not, but we can certainly look that up.

I'm not suggesting that you have to have a definition, but you know, if you're going to run something till sunrise, you ought to know when that starts, I guess.

Chairman, would it be easier for enforcement to say 7 a.m. instead of sunrise and just since we got a flat time 10 p.m.?

Mr. Coon.

I hope common sense would prevail in that situation, but... Starts early in the morning, not over until late at night.

That's it.

Very good.

Just a thought I had on it.

Yeah.

Yeah, absolutely.

Chair.

Mr. Goodwin.

Or we turn them on during business hours.

We're limiting the illumination during 10pm to sunrise.

Oh, I got you.

Is that my understanding?

So if you all set the NIT limit, that would be the brightest the sign could be.

That's not the way the chart reads though.

If you set it at 100, it's 100 day or night.

It doesn't tell you what you can do between sunrise and 10 p.m.

Cut off time means the sign is off.

Okay.

They wouldn't be able to turn it up bright at 10 p.m.

I can think of the number of businesses that are open at least till 9 and then some of them are open like the fast food places are open till 11, 10 or 11 and we're saying you can't have a sign on?

Some even, so midnight I think was the latest, or 1 a.m., there were some that

or When the Business Closes.

So there's a lot of stuff out there.

I like When the Business Closes.

But as Mr. Coon said, if we're going to reduce it to 100, we may not want to have them cut off.

I would think they're going to turn it off anyway to save money there in business.

Am I missing something?

We're just not regulating it.

by the chart, but I guess I misread the chart.

Daytime knit levels go up in the thousands.

It's cut off.

And it would be that until the recommendation we had would be 10 p.m. or 11 p.m., it would cut off and be off.

You don't have one column, really.

will not necessarily be from if the sun sets at 7 p.m. it'd be from 7 to 10 or 11 p.m. it would just have to be dead the whole purpose of this is that the safety issue is when people are driving at night after the sun goes down and those signs are bright in their eyes and so that's where it needs to be reduced and then if we're going to cut it off pick a cutoff time I understand so that we're good we're going to leave it on all night

That makes sense to me.

And at that point, using the option that you all are going with, if they wanted an exception, then staff would refer it to the board for a special exception.

Thank you.

I don't know if that affects our consideration, but it's not just a McDonald's against a brick wall.

Yeah, very clear.

That's what Ace does.

We tell them, Ace, for example, you got to turn off the lower sign, but you can leave on the upper sign?

In that scenario, yes.

I'm going to come back and talk about this thing again.

right portion on but if we remove the cutoff time and just have the maximum knit level beginning at sunset then they could leave it on but the knit level would have to be reduced is 100 knits

Is that any illumination or any nits?

I'm just wondering if we can regulate something.

We can say all you're going to have is 100 nips and you can't see it.

In Fairfax, they've got all the street signs and street lights and everything else on top of just the ambient light they have that 300 is reasonable, but that would be, in my opinion, excessive for Louisa.

Then I'm going to try and sum us up here where we are, more or less.

So does anyone feel strongly about a cutoff time if we settle on 100 nits?

I'm kind of torn on that.

If they want to turn it off and save the money, that would be the business's option.

.

Was there anything further that you needed input on to settle on where we were on the options?

The C1, C2, IND, I1, I2, RD and PUD?

If we don't have A and R, they would not be allowed.

They would not be allowed in A and R. Which means they would have to get a special exception from the board.

Exactly.

They can always come for special exceptions.

Chair, that would include commercial activity within the growth areas we've identified, like Office 64, and they'd have to get an exception.

If it was an A1 or A2.

Would that be considered a negative for somebody looking to relocate here with a business?

So, the business itself.

Pretty good.

Are you in good shape, Ms. Buckley?

I'm in good shape.

Very good.

Anything else the commissioners have any comments here?

I'm glad you kept it short.

Mr. Painting.

So every parcel inside that subdivision has to go through VDOT to get a road pipe entrance installed?

They have to get an entrance from it, yes, sir, when they are ready to build or put in the entrance.

And is that a change from what is now?

We've built the state standards.

I guess it is a change from when we used to get them.

It's no V dot.

But when they go to accept the road into the state system, they are going to check those entrances that they were installed to V dot requirements.

Mr. Parlor.

Is this what we're discussing now pertaining to the subdivision entrances and stuff?

Right, the note on the plat that all entrances would have to get an entrance permit.

Yeah, and what has happened is VDOT is no longer reviewing or approving the plats.

Yes, sir.

You can't...

Wonder what they are doing.

Take over the secondary roads.

Evolution.

Exactly.

It's been a discussion.

Mr.

Check the box.

I mean, it's a mess.

I want to thank staff for their work on this, Mr. Chairman.

Absolutely.

Mr. Chairman, I have enough questions for Linda.

They submit plans, the engineer survey submits a set of plans to the county.

For road plans, they go, they are sent to VDOT.

They are sent to VDOT and VDOT is accepting plans to review on that?

They have indicated to us that they are accepting and reviewing road plans.

I hope.

We are positive that it is going to be a good thing.

Good information.

Is this something that has come about recently?

They may not give an approval, but they give a concurrence or that they have no further comments on the plan set, which is to indicate to staff that it is an approval without calling it an approval.

make comments and then so that gets back to the question is VDOT when we do a subdivision plat is VDOT going to sign off on the plat?

They do not sign the plat they give us a concurrence letter and from that concurrence letter we are making a note on the plat and the same thing with the road plans it would be a concurrence or no further comment letter.

And because of that and they're not providing an approval that's why we've gone through and removed any requirement for VDOT approval on all these different items because they have clearly said they will not be issuing any approvals so that's why we've gone through it anywhere in our ordinance that requires a VDOT approval to move to the next stage that has now either already been addressed in a previous update or will be addressed in this update that's here tonight.

I think that was what I was trying to get to.

It did previously but now we've rectified and once we get this one that's here tonight done everything that we require from VDOT to move forward should be rectified to where it's we can still send it to him for comment we can still send it to him for review but it's not a requirement to have an approval to move forward which when it's in our ordinance we can't break the ordinance so we needed that approval to be before we can move forward so that should be addressed.

It leaves their office as a recommendation, but then it's perceived as a requirement by us because it's the recommendation.

It's a comment that I hope you all are doing that or you will consider it for this year's legislative session.

We need to do something because Redot is backing off of what they have done in the past.

Yeah, and my understanding is they're not passing money back to the localities for the work they're not doing now.

Very good.

What I'd like to do with the next item is go on to item number two under new business, which is development data GIS research, we will be picking up the shelters during if we don't have time, we'll pick them up and finish with that certainly during the discussion portion of the regular meeting, but wanted to get this in Mr. Agram.

and then how many of those are vacant.

Can you, I guess that screen won't tilt any further this way.

I apologize for technical difficulty.

I did not realize that screen was not working.

Probably going to wind up doing that too.

And some growth areas are larger than others.

Well, I have a question for you right away here.

Sure.

I'm assuming RD is Clark Country.

Yes.

And if fully developed is RD, that could be hundreds.

It could be.

So we've got to be careful how we look at that.

So I'm glad we bring that up.

It's by right and this in the out years is what we think the demand is going to be on county services.

That would just be something that gets put on a back burner and we talk about it, but just truthfully, I don't think we'd be able to get it done in the foreseeable future.

But I just want you to know that's a fair answer.

Two of these parcels, one parcel may be a division from a previous one, so you've got to look at every single one of these parcels and once you start going down the list for every growth area or everywhere in the county, you know... What gave rise to this was the recent percentage of growth that we were kind of facing with over the last 20,

It's a buy right.

That's another approach.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

And I've sent an email with all of this information to all the commissioners as well.

If you want to like summarize it for the whole county.

Any questions after that?

Mr. Eglin, could you show both Louisa and Monroe since Commissioner Kersey and I both had a question?

You have 357 parcels total and 114 that are vacant.

Correct.

And of that, we have 2,969 parcels within the growth areas alone that are currently vacant.

Yeah, and that's just the growth areas.

And that's just the growth areas, which if I, and that's why I have the screen up here, the areas with color on them are the areas that we're pulling numbers from.

If you had that next level of information, you're talking about going Google-eyed and you got nothing to say about it, it's buy right.

So we were talking about the A1 and A2, but the commercial parcels ready for development is also on there.

Any questions for Mr. Eglin?

So I think we need the information, but I'll leave it at that.

My recommendation would be... With respect to that, do we want to put together a recommendation on this to go to the board?

Based on that statement, if you all would like that to happen, if we're going to need a consultant during regular session, there may be a motion necessary to request.

You're going to have to go out on a bed for that?

Going through this tedious data and having to search every single parcel that we have in the county to figure out the division rights, this would be... That's part of planning.

throw a subdivision in there or whatever some of the high uses I mean that number up there of 2669 that's going to be so far in the rearview mirror you're going to have to back up to see it.

So the chair would entertain the motion.

This is a work session.

I would be happy with that.

The chair will entertain.

With that being said, what would you like staff to do regarding the growth areas?

I don't think that it has a bearing on what we've been talking about in the focus areas.

I mean, if there is, I'd share it with you.

I believe the focus area conversation is what started this data, so if you are linking it, we don't want to go and schedule public hearing if you guys want to wait for this additional data.

I think it would blow us away.

So should that slow us up in doing anything with those?

It might get us to review them once we see that data.

Any estimate on a timeline to get this information?

That's a very technical review process.

They're all going to have to live up with it or get an exception or a variance.

We just don't want to publicly advertise something if you all aren't ready to move on it and make a recommendation on that.

I don't know if that satisfies your question or not.

When we see these numbers, that's the part of it that I was driving at.

So that is something that will be discussed, but it will be separate from the focus areas themselves.

Mr. Coon, could you and our highly capable staff draft a proposal so one of us can make a motion to meet all of staff's needs in getting this accomplished during our upcoming seven o'clock meeting?

Yes, we will be able to get one together for you.

Thank you very much.

I will thank Matthias for that.

Absolutely be happy to pass that along to him.

I'd like to break at 740 I'm sorry 640.

I can't do math in my head.

If you would indulge us, sir.

Correct?

Yes.

Would you like to

It's because a plan says this is a shelter.

definitions and conditions just to get the concept out there of what we're talking about.

And then we can talk about what we want to do with all of these.

Certainly.

What I'd like to do with that introduction in mind

We've now looked at these, can think about these.

I don't think we're very far apart here in concept or wording, so.

Chair.

I did not share this with you all before the meeting.

Very good.

All right, then what we'll do is we will end the work session and we'll reconvene at 7 o'clock for the regular meeting.