Richmond Planning Commission Meeting – June 3, 2026

Note on date: The meeting minutes list the date as Tuesday, June 2, 2026, but the user-provided directive states the meeting took place on June 3, 2026. The summary below reflects the user’s specified date while noting the discrepancy.

The City of Richmond Planning Commission held a regular meeting on June 3, 2026, at 6:00 p.m. in the 5th Floor Conference Room of City Hall. Chair Rodney Poole presided. Commissioners addressed three continuances, approved a consent agenda, and debated a controversial special use permit for 31 single-family attached dwellings (later amended to 21 units, per minutes) on the 900 block of South Meadow Street. The meeting adjourned at 8:09 p.m.

Continuances and Agenda Adjustments

• Item 4 – Painted Planters (2nd Street Bus Platform): Continued to the July 7, 2026 meeting. Unanimous.
• Item 5 – 2026 Public Art Commission Work Plan: Continued to the June 16, 2026 meeting. Unanimous.
• Item 13 – 3317 Rear Monument Avenue Special Use Permit: Continued to the July 7, 2026 meeting at the request of the district council member. Unanimous.

Consent Calendar

• Items 6–11 (Ordinances 2026-117, 118, 119, 122, 123, 124): Unanimously recommended for approval to City Council. These included:
  • Special use permits for detached dwellings at 607 Arnold Avenue (up to 2 units) and 2720 Clearfield Street (1 unit).
  • Special use permit for a motor vehicle sales, rental, and service facility at 1710 Mactavish Avenue.
  • Acceptance of a quitclaim deed for 8.234± acres at 1461 Commerce Road from the School Board.
  • Declaring surplus and authorizing the sale of 8.234± acres at 1461 Commerce Road to City Central, LLC for $4,705,500.
  • Declaring surplus and authorizing the sale of 4.715± acres at 1451 Commerce Road to City Central, LLC for $2,694,500. No public comments were received on consent items.

Public Comments & Testimony (Item 12 – 901–923 South Meadow Street)

Supporters:

• Doug Vaughan (President, The Virginia Home): Spoke as the property owner. Explained that proceeds from the sale will fund a new facility in Hanover County expanding services by 30 residents, creating a day program for 60 people, and honoring the founder with the name "Tens Lake." Supported the project.
• Will Wilson (Chapter Lead, RVA YIMBY): Argued that increasing housing supply is essential to preserve the neighborhood’s character and affordability. Cited polling showing 69% of Richmonders support denser housing in areas currently zoned for detached homes.
• Charlie Trochili (Randolph homeowner): Supported the 31 market-rate townhomes, stating they would be more accessible than eight single-family homes. Asserted that filtering would improve affordability and that parking concerns were overstated given garages and proximity to transit.

Opponents:

• Toni Mounce (1909 Blair Street): Opposed the density (31 units on 0.75 acres). Noted narrow one-way streets, existing fire truck access problems, loss of trees, stormwater runoff, and insufficient notice (7 days). Said she canvassed 250 homes and found no support.
• Virginia Campbell (1800 block Claiborne, via online): Said she never received notice from the developer despite living within 150 feet. Raised concerns about trash/recycling storage, HVAC placement, construction disruption, and stormwater. Suggested 12–15 units would be more appropriate.
• John Smith (1916 Blair Street, resident ~70 years): Emphasized already congested streets and lack of parking; fire trucks have difficulty navigating. Opposed 31 units.
• Tiffany Brown (1807 Blair Street): Supported increased density in principle but questioned fire and safety reports. Noted that three-story townhomes would be out of scale with existing two-story attached homes on Meadow. Cited her own accident on narrow streets.
• Chris Rogers (811 South Meadow Street): Received no notice until a handwritten flyer. Described Winder Street as too narrow for his Prius. Argued 31 units would not be affordable for first-time buyers and proposed 15–18 units instead.
• Chris Walsh (821 South Meadow Street): Agreed with neighbors about congestion. Asked for density reduction as a compromise.
• Boz Boschen (online, 1st District resident): Pointed to the master plan’s prescribed density for the block (not specified) and noted the proposal is six times that (later corrected to 5x). Requested a memorandum of understanding for construction impacts and suggested waiting for the city’s code refresh.

Discussion Items

• Item 12 – Special Use Permit, 901–923 South Meadow Street:
  • Staff Presentation (Madison Wilson): The vacant block in the Randolph neighborhood is zoned R5. The applicant requested up to 31 single-family attached dwellings (57 units per acre, later corrected to 41). Staff recommended approval, finding consistency with the Richmond 300 Master Plan (Objective 14.5) and no detrimental congestion or welfare impacts. Twelve city agencies reviewed and approved the plan.
  • Applicant Presentation (Lory Markham, Aldo Partners): Defended the density as “missing middle” housing (sale prices targeted at high $400s to low $600s). Highlighted off-street parking (each unit has a garage), repaving of the alley, ADA ramp improvements, new fire hydrant, on-site stormwater management, pollinator gardens, and alignment with neighborhood design. Reported extensive outreach including multiple neighborhood association meetings, an on-site open house, and a happy hour. The Randolph and Bird Park associations did not take positions.
  • Commissioner Questions and Deliberation:
    • Commissioner White asked about assurance of applicant commitments (e.g., landscaping, paving). Markham noted ordinance conditions require Director of Public Works approval before certificates of occupancy.
    • Commissioners White and Knight acknowledged community parking concerns but noted the provision of garages and the need for increased density citywide.
    • Commissioner Rowe stated she would vote no, calling the density “too much… more than five times the existing density” and out of scale with single-story homes across the street.
    • Chair Poole expressed satisfaction that fire and utility questions were answered and supported the proposal.
  • Amendments: During the meeting, staff corrected the density figure from 57 to 41 units per acre. The motion was made and seconded (Commissioner White and Knight) to recommend approval. The minutes indicate the approved ordinance was amended to limit the number of dwellings to 21 units (the transcript contains no discussion of this change, creating a discrepancy).
• Item 14 – Richmond INSPIRE Plan: A presentation on the citywide parks, recreation, and community facilities vision was received without action.

Key Outcomes

• Item 12 Vote: Motion to recommend approval to City Council carried 7–1 (Commissioner Rowe dissenting). The approval as recorded in the minutes limits the development to 21 single-family attached dwellings, not the 31 discussed in testimony. The discrepancy is noted.
• Consent Agenda: All items (6–11) unanimously recommended to City Council.
• Continuances: Items 4, 5, and 13 continued to future dates as listed.
• Next Steps: The Planning Commission may hold a work session on June 16, 2026, to discuss draft master plan items.