Planning commission backs ordinance and comprehensive-plan amendments to guide electric transmission siting
May 15, 2026 | Louisa County, Virginia
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
Louisa County's Planning Commission voted to recommend two related policy changes to the Board of Supervisors: an amendment to Chapter 86 creating a conditional-use permit (CUP) standard for electric transmission facilities, and a comprehensive-plan amendment to set preferred corridors and siting criteria for transmission routing.
Staff explained changes to the CUP language that were carried in the packet and noted that the commission directed lowering the applicability threshold from 150 kilovolts to 69 kilovolts. Staff also said language on pole color/finish was revised to "minimize visual contrast" and that the draft CUP requires a vegetation management plan, property-owner notification before clearing and measures intended to minimize environmental impacts while maintaining system reliability.
During the public hearing, Craig McClung (Mineral Voting District) said he supported adoption of the amendment but asked whether the CUP would apply to substations associated with new lines and whether the county could move from an "encourage" toward a required vegetative buffer. McClung asked for a minimum buffer standard rather than only case-by-case decisions. Staff responded that the memo uses case-by-case language for setbacks and buffers based on voltage and structure, but the actual CUP language (packet page 108) contains a vegetation management requirement and property-owner notification procedures and thus imposes a required vegetation-management plan rather than simply encouraging screening.
Separately, staff presented a comprehensive-plan addendum intended to ensure the State Corporation Commission (SCC) can consider Louisa County's preferences when reviewing transmission routes. The addendum defines preferred corridors (existing linear infrastructure, VDOT rights-of-way and previously disturbed corridors), encourages collocation and consolidation of infrastructure, and lists avoidance/minimization priorities (residential areas, agricultural and forest lands, scenic and historic resources). Staff said they balanced stronger language with reasonableness so that the SCC would consider the locality's guidance.
Two residents, William Hale (Mountain Road District) and Robin Horn (Mineral District), spoke in appreciation of the county's proactive approach to transmission routing and expressed support for the proposed plan and ordinance language. The commission moved, seconded and recommended both the ordinance change and the CPA amendment to the Board of Supervisors for approval.
The recommendations now go to the Board of Supervisors for final action; staff said the packet (referenced pages) contains the detailed language of the CUP and the comprehensive-plan addendum.
Staff explained changes to the CUP language that were carried in the packet and noted that the commission directed lowering the applicability threshold from 150 kilovolts to 69 kilovolts. Staff also said language on pole color/finish was revised to "minimize visual contrast" and that the draft CUP requires a vegetation management plan, property-owner notification before clearing and measures intended to minimize environmental impacts while maintaining system reliability.
During the public hearing, Craig McClung (Mineral Voting District) said he supported adoption of the amendment but asked whether the CUP would apply to substations associated with new lines and whether the county could move from an "encourage" toward a required vegetative buffer. McClung asked for a minimum buffer standard rather than only case-by-case decisions. Staff responded that the memo uses case-by-case language for setbacks and buffers based on voltage and structure, but the actual CUP language (packet page 108) contains a vegetation management requirement and property-owner notification procedures and thus imposes a required vegetation-management plan rather than simply encouraging screening.
Separately, staff presented a comprehensive-plan addendum intended to ensure the State Corporation Commission (SCC) can consider Louisa County's preferences when reviewing transmission routes. The addendum defines preferred corridors (existing linear infrastructure, VDOT rights-of-way and previously disturbed corridors), encourages collocation and consolidation of infrastructure, and lists avoidance/minimization priorities (residential areas, agricultural and forest lands, scenic and historic resources). Staff said they balanced stronger language with reasonableness so that the SCC would consider the locality's guidance.
Two residents, William Hale (Mountain Road District) and Robin Horn (Mineral District), spoke in appreciation of the county's proactive approach to transmission routing and expressed support for the proposed plan and ordinance language. The commission moved, seconded and recommended both the ordinance change and the CPA amendment to the Board of Supervisors for approval.
The recommendations now go to the Board of Supervisors for final action; staff said the packet (referenced pages) contains the detailed language of the CUP and the comprehensive-plan addendum.
View the Full Meeting & All Its Details
This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.
✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
30-day money-back guarantee
