Richmond Planning Commission Meeting Summary - August 14, 2026

This meeting of the City of Richmond Planning Commission on August 14, 2026, began at 4:30 PM and primarily focused on the final Location, Character, and Extent review of the Shaco Valley Streets Improvement Project (Item 6), which generated extensive debate and public commentary. The Commission approved the project by a 6–2 vote despite recommendations for denial from both the Urban Design Committee (UDC) and Planning and Development Review (PDR) staff. The consent agenda items were referred to the UDC, and one zoning item was continued.

Consent Calendar

• Item 2 (Ordinance 2026-093, 3317 Rear Monument Avenue): Continued to the September 1, 2026 meeting at the applicant's request. Unanimous vote.
• Items 3, 4, 5 (UDC 2026-10, 11, 12): Referred to the August 13, 2026 Urban Design Committee meeting. These are final location, character, and extent reviews for: (3) street/sidewalk/stormwater improvements on Hay Road; (4) a shared-use path from Terminal Place to Arthur Ashe Boulevard; (5) a stormwater sediment catchment pond in Bryant Park. No public comments; unanimous approval.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Supporters included:
  • Jewel Trent (Just C): Spoke for the project, citing pedestrian safety, roundabout traffic calming, and connectivity for youth.
  • Brandley Tendall (Bike Walk RVA): Expressed full support, highlighting the project's alignment with Vision Zero and NACTO guidelines, though noted some design details (e.g., slip lane, cycle track) could be refined.
  • Chad Sanders (RVA Rapid Transit): Supported the project as a step toward multimodal, people-centered development, improving transit rider access.
  • Draymond Miller (Street Smart): Read a letter from a wheelchair-bound resident stressing the need for sidewalks, lighting, and safe crossings.
  • Individual residents (Kelsey Boyle, Guy Roach, Courtney Ferrar, Stefan Dupont, Tammy Guido McGee): Emphasized safety improvements, particularly for biking, walking, and transit. Tammy Guido McGee urged approval to save lives, recounting personal tragedy.
• Opponents included:
  • Richard Hankins (Partnership for Smarter Growth): Argued the project is a road-widening disguised as a multimodal project, outdated (2013 traffic studies showed only 3% growth vs. projected 20%), and misaligned with Richmond 300, Richmond Connects, and the Shaco Small Area Plan. Called for a cheaper, narrower plan.
  • Stuart Schwartz (Church Hill Association): Opposed the design, citing concerns about lane widths, roundabout dimensions (140 ft diameter), slip lane safety, and prioritization of vehicles over pedestrians/bikes. Asked for clearer data on traffic modeling.
  • Spencer Grice (Shaco Partnership): Focused on lost development potential at Oliver Hill Way and roundabouts, urging a rethought solution integrated with the grid.
• Public written comments received before noon on August 14 were shared with commissioners.

Discussion Items

• Item 6 – Shaco Valley Streets Improvement Project (UDC 2026-07): Final Location, Character, and Extent review of proposed transportation infrastructure on Oliver Hill Way, N. 18th Street, Venable Street, Mosby Street, and Lee Street.
  • Staff Presentation: Ray Rokes (UDC Secretary) explained that the UDC recommended denial based on three grounds: (1) the design prioritizes vehicle traffic over pedestrian needs, especially at the Lee Street Viaduct roundabout near MLK Middle School; (2) negative impacts on future urban development due to the large main roundabout and residual land; (3) inadequate neighborhood connectivity. Staff emphasized that the project is at 70% design and the final review.
  • Applicant Presentation: M. Kara (Public Works) and engineers from RK&K and VHB detailed the $50 million project (funded by $31.5M Smart Scale, $1.7M revenue sharing, city bonds, and CBTA regional funds). They argued the project meets the Master Plan's equitable transportation goals, is a major safety improvement (93% safety goal), and has broad community support (35+ meetings, 90% approval at 2025 public hearing). They noted that a $4 million federal funding repayment risk exists if the project does not advance to right-of-way acquisition soon. They addressed UDC conditions, committing to consider gateway signage, public art, and Shaco wayfinding, but disagreed that the main roundabout layout could be changed without compromising engineering safety standards.
  • Commission Questions and Debate:
    • Commissioner Pennick clarified this is a final approval; no return to Commission if passed.
    • Chair Poole highlighted the conflict between staff recommendation (denial) and the motion to approve.
    • Commissioner Knight expressed discomfort with voting against staff, but cited the engineers' testimony on physical constraints and funding deadlines.
    • Commissioner McKenzie noted the project is “good” and “don't let perfect be the enemy of good.”
    • Commissioner Rowe and Poole voted against, citing the Master Plan inconsistencies and length of time since conceptual approval (2019).
  • Departmental Clarifications: Deputy Director Ebert (PDR) clarified that PDR's recommendation was not an absolute denial but a preference; physical constraints may justify proceeding. Director Vincent (Public Works) defended the engineering, noting the roundabouts are designed to slow highway traffic from 55 mph to 25 mph.

Key Outcomes

• Item 6 Approved: Motion to approve the Shaco Valley Streets Improvement Project as presented (with commitments to address UDC conditions) passed 6–2. Commissioners voting in favor: Greenfield, Ebert, Knight, Pennick, Robertson, McKenzie. Commissioners opposing: Poole, Rowe.
• Consent Agenda Items: All three (Items 3, 4, 5) referred to the August 13, 2026 UDC meeting.
• Item 2 Continued: Continued to September 1, 2026 meeting.
• Commissioner Update: The City Council adopted several ordinances, including the Oak Grove-Bellemeade Master Plan incorporation (Ordinance 2026-166).