Richmond City Council Code Refresh Work Session - June 15, 2026
Richmond City Council Code Refresh Work Session - June 15, 2026
On June 15, 2026, the Richmond City Council held a work session to review the code refresh initiative—a comprehensive update to the city's 50-year-old zoning ordinance. The session focused on three key unresolved questions: the maximum number of unrelated persons in a household, how to zone places of worship, and how many dwelling units may be placed on a lot. No public comment was taken; council members offered feedback and raised concerns about affordability, displacement, infrastructure, and alignment with the Richmond 300 master plan. The meeting, scheduled to begin at 9:15 AM, opened with an afternoon greeting, a discrepancy noted from the provided start time.
Discussion Items
- Presentation on Code Refresh – Kevin J. Bonk, Director of Planning and Development Review, presented the rationale for updating the zoning code, emphasizing alignment with Richmond 300, extensive public engagement (over 5,000 individual touchpoints), and the need to balance growth with neighborhood character. He highlighted three areas still under evaluation:
- Household Occupancy: Current code limits unrelated persons to three; draft two proposed eight; draft three may defer to building code occupancy limits.
- Places of Worship: Draft three proposes zoning them into small multifamily districts (RMA, RMB, RMC, RC) to allow housing while preserving assembly uses, with contextual standards to prevent strip malls.
- Dwelling Units per Lot: Draft three introduces a “preservation bonus” allowing two principal units plus an ADU if the existing building is preserved; demolition reduces options to one principal unit plus ADU.
- Council Concerns and Positions:
- Councilmember Gibson emphasized the need for data, questioned the market analysis (RKG) showing market-rate units concentrated in affluent areas, and warned that private equity drives the housing crisis. She reserved judgment pending displacement data and fire safety analysis.
- Councilmember Jones urged deeper engagement in Southside communities and asked about provisions for recovery/transition houses. She noted that Richmond Public Schools were not part of the master plan and that current growth pressures already exist.
- Vice President Jordan praised public engagement, called for contextual zoning and tree canopy protections, and commented on the need for more housing products like condos. She suggested 4–5 unrelated persons (vs. 3 or 8) as a compromise.
- Councilmember Brighton supported the broad strokes of the plan, emphasized “small is beautiful” for starter homes, and asked for transition treatments between residential and node zones, stronger tree canopy rules, and safeguards against state agency preemption.
- Councilmember Trammell strongly opposed the code refresh, arguing it would not produce affordable housing, increase assessments, strain infrastructure and schools, and eliminate the “American dream” of quiet neighborhoods. She noted that Richmond Highway was omitted from the mayor’s corridor focus.
- Councilmember Lynch advocated keeping the three-person limit, taking a conservative approach to the “God in my backyard” state mandate, and limiting dwelling units per lot to one principal plus ADU to prevent demolitions. She called for the cultural heritage plan and facilities master plan to be completed first.
- Councilmember Robertson stressed the need for clear definitions (e.g., affordable housing), myth-busting about high-density in single-family neighborhoods, and more information on private equity’s role in affordable housing. She requested data on LLC ownership and more community engagement before draft three.
- Additional Input: Director Merrick Malone (Housing) outlined parallel tools (performance grants, affordable housing trust fund, inclusionary zoning) that complement code refresh. Ruth Morrison clarified that state Bill HP 1279 (God’s Backyard) is a mandate effective Jan 1, 2027, requiring substantial compliance.
Key Outcomes
- No votes were taken; the session was solely for feedback.
- Council members will submit follow-up questions via Chief of Staff RJ Warren.
- Administration will incorporate feedback into a third draft of the code, expected in July 2026.
- The cultural heritage stewardship plan and Richmond 300 annual report (including enrollment projections) will be presented to council before final consideration.
- Director Bonk committed to providing data on demolitions (projected 30–40 per year with code refresh, vs. 80 in 2025), infrastructure capacity, and alignment with master plan height/density maximums.
Meeting Transcript
Good afternoon, everyone. The code refresh work session for the Richmond City Council will now come to order. And if we can have the chamber emergency evacuation plan announcement, followed by the provision of the general procedures for today's work session will get underway, Ms. Reed. Upon activation of the emergency alarm signal, all persons should immediately exit the building. Please use the exits to the left or right front of the council chamber or the north or south stairwells outside the rear doors of the chamber. Do not use elevators or escalators after exiting the building. Security will direct everyone down 9th Street to the fenced area located between Clay and Lee Streets. Able persons should assist visually and hearing impaired visitors with exiting the building. And Madam President, for the record, all members of council are present this afternoon with the exception of counselors Breton and Abu Bakr. You do have a quorum. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Clore. Council Chief of Staff RJ Warren, if you would come forward to provide general info regarding procedures for today's work session. Yes, may it please the council, uh, city administration and the mayor's office have requested this work session to present you all information on code refresh and the update and the work being done to update the city's zoning ordinance. Uh we will start off with the administration uh presenting in full, followed by which we will have two rounds of remarks, five minutes per council member per round. So you'll have similar as we did the budget work sessions. So you'll have a total of 10 minutes. Uh use that time as you see fit for questions, perspectives, or you may reserve your remarks. We will adjourn after the second round, and there is no public comment at this meeting today. This is a work session between council and city administration. Any follow-up questions, including those you didn't have time to raise during the first two rounds, may be directed at me. I'll forward them to city administration. Council staff will compile all questions and responses from today and any follow-up after this meeting, and we will provide those to members and the public, and I will work to get those posted online for everyone to see. Thank you so much. Thank you, Mr. Warren. At this time, I'll invite Dr. Vonk up to begin in terms of the presentation. Thank you. Kevin J. Bonk, Director of Planning and Development and Review. Um, here to work with you this afternoon, and appreciate uh covering out some time to be able to do this. So, purpose and objectives. Uh, we've been at this two years working on an update of our zoning ordinance. Uh what we'd like to do, uh we are uh in the process of moving from draft two to draft three of the code. Uh, we've done a lot of engagement, and we thought it would be appropriate to engage uh with the elected and appointed bodies. So today uh working with city council, tomorrow working with Planning Commission, and on Wednesday, working with the zoning advisory committee to really get in uh to some specific questions uh that we'll talk about today, uh, and really get an understanding of what is needed in terms of additional information uh to help you as a body make good decisions as we move forward on this process. Uh I want to to frame today's discussion and all right. All right, we exited the matrix. All right, uh, and and framing some discussion to uh provide some feedback to us uh so that we can work on incorporating uh additional changes into draft three or providing information that would be helpful in terms of making decision uh on on draft three. And again, I wanted to frame uh today's discussion, and I've said before, there's no right answers, there's no wrong answers. We're looking to get towards some answers of what we'll be putting together in our final code. Um, I have lost the ability to navigate on this. Alright, great. So, why code refresh? Our 50-year old zoning code does not align with our master plan. Uh Richmond 300, a document many of you and the community is very familiar with. It does not align with our goals for housing choice, neighborhood walkability, economic vitality, and climate resilience. So we need a new zoning code that helps us or allows us more residents to build the type of housing units that fits their needs.
openpublica.com