Good evening, ladies and gentlemen.

This is the regularly scheduled meeting, City of Richmond Planning Commission.

We're glad to see you all here.

Adam Secretary, would you give the electronic notice?

This meeting is being held in person in the fifth floor conference room of City Hall while staff in a quorum of planning commissioners are attending the meeting in person.

Citizens may choose to participate in the meeting virtually.

All written comments that were received by email prior to 12 p.m.

today have been provided to the planning commissioners in advance of the meeting.

During the public comment period, speakers will be asked to limit their comments to three minutes for an individual or five minutes of representing.

Very much for establishing quantum vote.

Mr.

Poole?

Ms.

Greenfield, Miss Ever.

Ms.

Knight?

Here.

Ms.

Robertson.

Here.

Miss Rowe.

Mr.

White?

Here.

Mr.

McKinsey.

Here.

And we have form.

Very much.

That's a minutes.

First is August 19th of 2025.

Is there a motion?

Second.

Any discussion?

None.

I'll call the question.

We're voting on approval of the minutes of August 19th, 2025.

Please call the roll.

Mr.

Poole?

Aye.

Ms.

Greenfield?

Aye.

Ms.

Ebert?

Abstain.

Ms.

Knight?

Aye.

Ms.

Robertson.

Aye.

Ms.

Rowe.

Aye.

Mr.

White?

Hi.

And Mr.

McKenzie.

Aye.

Motion passes and those minutes are.

We also have minutes from April the 7th, 2026.

Is there a motion?

Move to approve.

Any discussion?

Hearing none.

Question.

We're voting on approval of the minutes of April 7th, 2026.

Please call the vote.

Mr.

Poole.

Aye.

Ms.

Greenfield?

Aye.

Ms.

Bert.

Abstain.

Ms.

Knight?

Aye.

Ms.

Robertson.

Aye.

Ms.

Rowe?

Aye.

Mr.

White?

Aye.

And Mr.

McKenzie.

Aye.

Motion passes and those minutes are approved.

Mr.

Director, do you have a report for this evening?

Um, I do not.

Good evening.

We have any continuances of deletions.

Uh no.

Would you please present the consent agenda?

The first item on the consent agenda, item three is ordinance 2026-075.

This is an ordinance to amend and reordain ordinance number 80-125-107, adopted June 30th, 1980, which authorized the use of the real estate, a parcel containing 2.274 acres located on the south side of Forest Hill Avenue, East of Byley Road for multiple family dwelling condominium purposes and to authorize the construction of 18 townhouse condominium dwelling units for sale with accessory off-street parking to allow for accessory structures and additions that are customarily incidental and clearly subordinate to the single family attached dwellings.

Item 4, ordinance 2026-083.

This is to authorize the chief administrative officer for and on behalf of the city of Richmond to accept the funds in the amount of 10,369,508 dollars from the Central Virginia Transportation Authority and to amend ordinance 2025-058, adopted May 12, 2025, which accepted a program of proposed capital improvement projects for fiscal year 2025 to 2026 in the four fiscal years thereafter.

Adopted a capital budget for fiscal year 2025 to 2026 and determined a means of financing the same by I establishing a new project for the Department of Public Works in the Transportation Federal State Regional Category entitled Diamond District Transportation and for Infrastructure Project and two increasing estimated revenues from the funds received from the Central Virginia Transportation Authority and the amount appropriated to the new Department of Public Works Diamond District Transportation Infrastructure Infrastructure Project in the Transportation Federal State Regional Category by 10,369,508 for the purpose of funding the Diamond District Transportation Infrastructure Project.

Item 5, UDC 2026-05.

This is the concept location character and extent review of Bryan Park Dam removal and stream restoration located at 4308 Hermitage Road.

And item six, um, this is the resolution of the Richmond City Planning Commission approving a final community unit plan for the parcels known as 1300 Westwood Avenue and 1219 Palmyra Avenue to authorize the development of a field passage very much.

Any questions from members of the commission concerning the consent agenda?

I'll open a public hearing and ask if there's any member of the public present or online who wishes to speak to matters on the consent agenda.

Anyone online?

I'm seeing no one online.

I'll close the public hearing.

Bring it back to the commission and ask if there's a motion on the consent agenda.

Second.

Are there any discussion?

Hearing none, I'll call the question.

We're voting on approval of the consent agenda.

Please call the role.

Mr.

Polk.

Ms.

Greenfield, hi.

Ms.

Ebert.

Hi.

Miss May.

Hi.

Ms.

Robertson.

Hi.

Ms.

Rowe.

Hi.

Mr.

White?

Hi.

And Mr.

McKenzie.

Matt.

Motion passes.

Please present the first item on the regular agenda.

The first item on the regular agenda is ordinance 2026-073.

This is an ordinance to authorize the special use of the property known as 1215 North 29th Street for the purpose of up to one two family detached dwelling and one dwelling unit within an accessory building upon certain terms and conditions.

And Jonathan Brown will be giving us a presentation on that.

Thank you.

The property is located in the Churchill North Neighborhood on North 29th Street between S and R Streets.

Property is currently a 3,960 square foot or 0.10 acre unimproved parcel of land.

Here are some images of the existing context.

Across the street at 121629th is some new townhomes.

Also across the street is uh 1207 or 29th is the new affordable multifamily development.

And on the same block at 1204 North 30th Street, it was a 2017 SCP for two-family attached dwellings.

The applicant is requesting a special use permit to authorize up to one two-family detached dwelling and one dwelling unit within an accessory building within an R6 single family attached residential district.

Accessory dwellings are not a permitted use within the RCX district when combined with the two-family dwelling on the same parcel, which is purpose safely.

This is the small, but you can see it here at the site plan.

Building heights are generally two to four stories.

Buildings taller than four stories may be found along major streets.

Parcels are generally between 1500 and 5,000 square feet.

Primary uses include single family houses, accessory dwelling units, duplexes, small multifamily buildings, typically between three to ten units, and open space.

Secondary uses include large multifamily buildings, retail office, personal service, institutional cultural income.

The current zoning for this property is R6 single family attached residential.

And again, uh the special use permit is due to the fact that you accessory dwelling units are recommended on properties with existing two family properties.

Here are the conditions.

Special use of the property shall be as up to one two family detached dwelling and one dwelling unit within an accessory building substantially as shown on the plans.

The heights of the special use shall not exceed two stories.

All building materials, elevations, and site improvements shall be substantially as shown in the plans.

All mechanical equipment serving the property shall be located or screened so as not to be visible from adjoining public right away.

In terms of neighborhood participation, staff notified adjacent property owners of the application.

To this date, staff has received letters of opposition from nearby residents.

Here is staff's recommendation.

Staff find that the proposed use aligns with the master plan recommendations for neighborhood mixed use land uses and is considered a primary use.

While functioning as a duplex, the units appear in the public realm as a single family dwelling.

Staff concludes that the proposed ordinance conditions substantially satisfy the safeguards established in the city charter concerning the granting of special use permits.

Specifically, staff finds that the proposed use would not be detrimental to the general welfare of the community involved.

Therefore, staff recommends approval of the request.

That concludes my presentation.

Are there any questions?

Questions from Mr.

Brown from members of the commission.

Thank you very much.

You're welcome.

I'm sorry, there's an idea of standing or most.

Good evening.

Good evening, Mr.

Chairman, members of the commission.

My name is Alessandro Vagazzi, making development resources.

I'm representing the property owner of 1215 North 29th Street.

This is a parcel located on the east side of North 29th Street between R and S Streets.

It's a legal lot of record.

It's vacant and access is provided to the rear by means of a north-south alley.

The goal here is to permit a high quality infill that's consistent with the Richmond 300 plan, being appropriately dense and efficient, consistent with the uses permitted by right, and respectful to the historic development pattern and predominant character of the area.

Specifically, the proposal permit one single, excuse me, one two-family detached dwelling, which fronts 29th Street and one accessory dwelling unit towards the rear of the property.

The reason for the request, as Jonathan Brown mentioned, is that while the R6 zoning permits the two-family use, and the lot is a legal lot of record, the lot area and width requirements are not met, and this development contemplates an ADU, which is not permitted by the underlying zoning in conjunction with the two-family use.

When complete, the two-family dwelling would be two stories in height and configured as flats.

Each unit would be about 1,100 square feet with three bedrooms, three bathrooms.

The exterior design is a traditional Italianate style, consistent in character with the surrounding neighborhood, and includes a single entrance to appear as a single family dwelling from the street.

This SUP was originally applied for on March 19th, 2024.

So over two years ago.

At the time we sent out letters to all property owners within 150 feet.

This was back in April of that year.

We met with the Churchill Central Civic Association in August of that year.

And the original SUP proposal, which was still consistent with the comprehensive plan guidance and had been signed off by all city reviewing agencies, was for two duplexes on the property.

During our initial community engagement, both in meeting with the owner of the adjacent property at 1217 North 29th Street on site, as well as with meeting with the Church Hill Central Civic Association.

We heard concerns relative to the density, uh, the lot coverage, and it being kind of a foreign lot layout to have two duplexes on a property as had originally been presented.

Based on that feedback, uh, again, despite consistency with the comprehensive plan, the owner had a desire to address the community concerns, and we revised the proposal to its current iteration.

So the proposal now has a lot coverage of 39%, which is significantly below the 55% threshold for the underlying R6 zoning, providing a larger backyard, more in line with the adjacent homes.

We've reduced the density in terms of units, four to three, and also in terms of bedrooms by 42%, so almost half, and while managing to retain two off-street parking spaces, which are not required on buy right development.

Additionally, we increased the setbacks at the rear of the northern property line to nine feet to help protect an existing tree that straddles the property line.

Lastly, I also want to add that after making the wholesale revisions, we did present the revised proposal to the Churchill Central Civic Association again in February.

Our revisions were well received.

Some folks actually wanted more density.

At that meeting, we did receive some additional comments in regards to adding some additional landscaping on the front porch, adding an additional window on the left elevation of the garage.

The owner is more than happy to add these items at the building permit stage.

We do not want to delay this paper since we've been at this for over two years, but we are happy to commit to adding those two items at the building permit stage as the plans will remain substantially as shown per the ordinance language.

Thank you for your time.

I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

I'd also like to reserve a little time for rebuttal.

Two minutes.

Any questions from members of the commission for Mr.

Rogazi?

Thank you very much.

Public hearing, and I ask if there's any member of the public present or online who wishes to speak in favor of this paper.

One online.

If there's a motion on ordinance 2026-073.

Second.

I think this is exactly the kind of gentle density we want to see on these kinds of blocks.

And I'm sorry that it took them two years to get here.

I'm very supportive of this paper and very thankful.

Anything further?

I'm gonna call the question.

Voting on approval, special use permission 1215 North 29th Street.

Please call or Mr.

Poole.

Aye.

Ms.

Greenfield, aye.

Miss Evert.

Hi.

Ms.

Robertson.

Hi.

Ms.

Rao.

Hi.

Mr.

White?

Hi.

Mr.

McKenzie.

It's not your standing correct.

So perfect.

And I can prepare you.

I'm standing for the next one too.

Sorry.

All right.

Uh the motion passes, and the item will be forwarded to city council with the recommendation of approval.

Next item on the regular agenda.

Next item on the regular agenda is ordinance 2026-074 to authorize the special use of the property known as 101 Corden Avenue for the purpose of a multifamily dwelling containing up to 120 dwelling units upon certain terms and conditions.

And to repeal ordinance number 85-316-86-1, adopted January 13th, 1986, and all the mandatory ordinances there too.

We will be welcomed again by Jonathan Brown.

This property is located in the Manchester neighborhood on Clawden Avenue and Bainbird Street.

The property is currently 67,518 square foot or 1.5 acre parcel of land approved with a commercial building constructed according to city record in 2005.

Terms of the existing context, you can see here there's a surface parking lot on the property, a quite large surface parking lot that takes up most of the property currently.

Just beyond that on Bainbridge Street is a mixed use development apartment building with 49 units.

Across the street on Bainbridge at 1510 Bainbridge Street are 24 units multifamily.

I thought it needed a little bit more context, so I rated a graphic showing you when we think about the Richmond 300.

Bainbridge Street's really one of the streets that sticks out to us, showing like what's possible and how we can achieve the goals within the plan.

You can see the red multifamily interspersed with two family single family dwellings, commercial uses.

Some of the lots aren't developed yet.

The applicant is requesting a special use permit to authorize the construction of a multifamily residential building in the R63 multifamily urban residential district.

The proposed development does not comply with several applicable standards in the R63, such as minimum lot area, minimum width, open space, building height, building facade demonstration, etc.

The special use permit is therefore required to authorize this request.

There was two entrances and egresses to the parking lot.

Parcels are generally between 1400 and 5,000 square feet.

Primary uses include single family houses, accessory dwelling units, duplexes, small multifamily buildings, typically three to ten units and open space.

Secondary uses include large multifamily buildings, 10 plus units, retail office, personal service, institutional cultural, and government.

Current zoning for this property is R6 single family attached.

You can see near Hole Street is mostly B5.

There is some R8 to the north, but a very large area of R63, which accounts for the diversity of use within this area.

Joining the public right away.

Staff notified residents and the Manchester Alliance of the proposed special use.

Staff find that the proposed use at new five-story multifamily buildings with all street parking to be well aligned with the goals of the neighborhood mixed use land use category within the master plan.

Characteristics found within the proposed that align with neighborhood mixed use, including expansion of a unified street wall, appropriate setbacks, maintaining the existing street grade, building orientation, and rear parking.

Staff also find that the request is supported by objectives 15.1A and 15.1F, which call for an increase in the number of Richmonders living in a development pattern that encourages density and reduces dependency on single occupancy vehicles.

The proposed is directly located on a designated GRTC high frequency route and one block from the recently chosen route for an additional bus rapid transit pulse system expansion.

Staff further find that the proposal increases the market for future and current walkable destinations.

The city's walk score map scores this area as between 70 to 89, which is very important.

Staff find that the proposed use is located on Corden Avenue, a designated major mixed-use street.

Sign elements of major mixed use streets found within the proposed plan include sidewalk improvements, building orientation, rear parking, and additional street trees.

Staff find that due to all findings summarized above, the proposed ordinance conditions substantially satisfy the safeguards established in the city charter concerning the granting special use permits.

Staff find that since ordinance introduction to city council on May 23rd, the applicant has requested the inclusion of an additional site plan showing improvements to the site to accommodate fire department vehicles.

This sheet entitled fire access markup is recommended by staff to be included in the proposed ordinance.

Repeal of ordinance number 85-316-86-1 and inclusion of sheet titled fire access markup, drawn by Kimley Horn and dated April 14th, 2026.

And here is that markup, Lindy.

That concludes my presentation.

Questions from members of the commission for Mr.

Brown.

Thank you very much.

You're welcome.

May the applicant come forward.

Welcome.

Glad to see you back.

Want us back up at the podium?

Yes, please.

Thank you, Jonathan.

Welcome for that presentation.

Thank you, Chair and Commissioners.

Appreciate you letting us come up here and speak for a quick minute.

Um I name's Will Allen.

I work with Harper Associates, and uh together with Eric, um, we represent the applicant.

Um in our graphic that I wanted to make a change on as part of the relief that we had been asking for.

Well, let me back up real quick.

So from inception, we were always kind of caught between the crosshairs of do we just rezone this to B5 because it really feels like B5, or do we put an SUP on it?

We kind of went back and forth on that a few times.

Um, we ultimately landed on the SUP, and we could kind of carbon, I mean custom fit it for what we needed to do, which we feel really good about at this point.

But one item that we had on the building facade festrations, the underlying district R63.

We were getting some relief on that first floor um glazing requirement.

And in our graphic, it mentions a 35% minimum.

Um, and we are asking, we'd like to ask uh tonight to have that revert to um it's right here the text you probably can't read, but the intent was really for it to be the um the B5 glazing requirement, and it's put here at 35% in the B5.

We crack me how long is 30%, and then we add then there some minimums for the composition of the uh siding to include a minimum of 25% broke veneer and a minimum of uh 25% cementitious siding.

Um secretary, is the change in that regard?

We'll moving this forward to the council for council, no.

Um, because they already are requesting the fire access markup, we have to amend the ordinance as well, so it could just be put in the ordinance.

It would be up to you if you liked that idea.

Well, yes, sir.

May I ask the question?

Absolutely.

Um, if I recall, Mr.

Brown said that a lot of the adjoining areas are gonna be five, so they're essentially asking for standards that are in place today in the community just to replicate that okay.

Yeah, so some of the area, yeah.

Not all of it, but a portion of it.

So they're not asking for anything that's out of character with the community, it's more fitting with parts of the community.

Thank you.

Any other questions from Mr.

Allen?

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Come back and see us.

I was gonna say if there's any kind of rebuttal if any there's we'll reserve two minutes in the event you choose to exercise that.

Yeah.

See no one online.

Any member of the public who wishes to speak in opposition either here or online anybody online.

Seeing no one online.

Then I'm gonna close public hearing bring it back to the commission and ask if there's a motion to approve or motion approval the amendment as requested.

There's two amendments two amendments you're yes seconds I guess early a second second is I take it yours was a second well yeah I think Elizabeth need me to it's commissioner right it doesn't have to do with this case particularly but I know we talk about um public outreach and when we have these larger units that carry a larger footprint when it comes to the public outreach I know I think we brought this up before is there a way to ensure that we actually are getting the community like the the actual surrounding neighbors because I think the footprint increases when you have or decreases when you have a smaller project I mean a larger project I think uh two things we're trying to do on that the first is through the actual physical notice and the signage of the property but also the applicant themselves are highly encouraged to deal to be a week to that uh we we've had extensive conversations with sorry sorry since you you can introduce yourself please if you associates uh to speak to that point um we had extensive conversations with not only the Manchester Alliance but all um adjacent property owners um and we hosted that meeting at studio two three and those that were unable to attend um I personally met them at the new coffee shop that's in the multifamily building uh right here this is studio two three um yeah and so one of the support letters is Caden Ashley um from studio two three uh met with every single owner um that lines this street maybe a few came from this street but uh we thought it was extremely important to get neighborhood buy-in given that it was going to change from um you know old office medical office to a five story multifamily building um the feedback that we got was they were very uh focused on uh solar panel well there was a solar panel question um just based on the the height um but eye line sight from Bainbridge into their backyards um and so you know we we talked about the uh the greenery that would be planted and to mitigate the ability for people to see from Bainbridge into their backyards and for temporary fix because we've knocked down the fence that was kind of dilapidated um we put the temporary construction fence up there to to appease those concerns that was one of the questions that we got at the committee meeting so it's important to us to talk to adjacent owners and we made sure we did that like I said it wasn't specific to this it was but but I assure you that the staff makes every effort to make sure that engagement is robust because these larger projects deserve that and I agree with your point not only for this but for all of those cases like this that have a larger number of units but it also speaks to the fact that the master plan has encouraged us to have more density more affordable housing and I think this particular paper meets that any other comments or questions thank you um Commissioner Nate if you want more information on how we do the property notices or like the actual radius of it we can also email you okay she's more interested in is how the encouragement for the applicant to physically engage with the neighborhoods and the neighbors themselves I think that's really what she was more after and I think you do that when you meet with the applicants these guys happen to be professionals that do this on a regular basis and I know they're they know how important it is but uh the staff is encouraging all applicants to do that particularly when you've got a larger number of units like this.

I think that's really what she was more after.

And I think you do that when you meet with the applicants.

These guys happen to be professionals that do this on a regular basis, and I know they're they know how important it is, but uh the staff is encouraging all applicants to do that, particularly when you've got a larger number of units like this.

And you know, so they're part of the community.

Yeah.

Appreciate that.

Well, I keep inviting them back.

Anything further?

We're voting on approval of special use permit at one on one coordinate avenue.

Please call the role.

Mr.

Poult, Miss Greenfeld, aye.

Miss Ebert.

Hi.

Ms.

Robertson?

Hi.

Mr.

McKinsey?

Aye.

And Miss Thank is abstaining.

That motion passes, and that item will be recommended to city council for approval.

With two amendments.

With the two amendments, yes.

All right.

Council action update.

Yes.

So city council last met on the 13th.

Um, there were three new special use permits that were introduced.

You'll see those on your May 5th agenda.

And then there's a couple still hanging out, um, North 18th Street.

That was the conditional use permit from last time, 1705 Commonwealth, that's Lavender Hill, and then Tuxedo Boulevard is also still hanging out at council.

Um, and then there were two special use permits that were adopted.

Those are all the upcoming items as well.

Yep, just three.

Is there anything further?

Just uh yeah, I am I changed my trip plans.

I'm gonna miss the next meeting.

I'm gonna miss the May 19th meeting.

You won't be here.

I won't be here.

I can take it virtually, but I won't be here.

Neither will I, it's the inner city business.

And I'm gonna miss the how many people.

How many people?

Mr.

Director.

Come on, that's the docket review on May 26.

How many are missing for um May 19th?

It's May the 5th.

Okay.

May 5th.

Anyone else?

Not going to be here.

Phoenix.

Not going to be here.

No, yes to Phoenix.

That's the fifth.

Yes, that's yeah.

I thought we were all talking about the 19th.

I was getting nervous.

I will be calling you all on May 5th.

You do not tell me you won't be here.

I can do it for it.

Anything further from any member of the commission?

We're adjourned.

All right tonight, probably.

I have a have to sign that resolution, right?

Well.