Acknowledging confusion, county planners consider zoning ordinance amendments
‘The planners themselves often don’t seem to understand or agree on the meanings and implications’
Special to the Rappahannock News
“A lot of people don’t understand what we’re trying to do,” Jackson District Supervisor Ron Frazier remarked in the early minutes of the Planning Commission’s Monday night meeting, referring to confusion surrounding the county’s comprehensive plan and zoning ordinances.
Planning Commission chair David Konick replied that people don’t come to public meetings.
“That’s the best way to understand” what we’re trying to do, he said.
The planners then went on to illustrate why people don’t understand what the county’s planning and governance bodies accomplish, even if they do attend the meetings — because the planners themselves often don’t seem to understand or agree on the meanings and implications of the zoning ordinance language.
The very first topic the planners took up at Monday evening’s continuation of its November 18 regular meeting was discussion of 32 pages of zoning ordinance amendments — the concept of adaptive reuse — which had commission members arguing among themselves about the meaning of the concept.
At one point, Jackson District plan
ner Rick Kohler said, “This has gotten too confusing.”
On the other hand, now that the Planning Commission has completed its work on the comprehensive plan, it is turning attention on much needed amendments to the county’s zoning ordinance.
First proposed in 2017, the amendments seek to redefine and clarify terms such as short term rentals (i.e., B&Bs and tourist homes) and spas. A new designation — accessory dwelling units — replaces family apartments and removes the previous requirement that family apartments be used for family only for the first two years. A new provision for guest houses requires a special use permit if the guest house includes kitchen facilities. The adaptive use ordinance was greatly expanded.
The planners voted six-to-one to hold a public hearing on the amendments at the commission’s December 16 meeting. Piedmont District planner Mary Katherine Ishee cast the sole nay vote, explaining that she felt the members had not fully defined transient lodgings and slaughterhouses.
After the public hearing, the planners may decide to keep working on the amendments or recommend them to the Board of Supervisors for its consideration.