Richmond Planning Commission Meeting – September 2, 2026

Note: The official minutes record this meeting as occurring on September 1, 2026, but the summary is dated per the instruction provided.

The Richmond Planning Commission convened at 6:00 PM on September 2, 2026, in the 5th Floor Conference Room of City Hall. Seven commissioners were present, two were absent. The meeting included approval of previous minutes, continuances of two special use permit items, a consent agenda referral, and a detailed presentation and discussion on the third draft of the city’s zoning code rewrite (Code Refresh Draft #3). No regular agenda items were heard. The meeting adjourned at 7:37 PM.

Consent Calendar

• Item 5 – Little John Park Renovation (UDC 2026-13): A conceptual Location, Character, and Extent review for the renovation of Little John Park at 1401 Little John Road was placed on the consent agenda. The Commission unanimously voted to refer the item to the Urban Design Committee meeting on September 10, 2026. No public comments were received.

Public Comments & Testimony

• No members of the public provided oral or written comments during the public hearing for the consent agenda.

Discussion Items – Code Refresh Draft #3 Update

Director of Planning and Development, Gavin Your Baum, presented an overview of the Code Refresh Draft #3, emphasizing the need to align zoning with Richmond 300 master plan goals—more housing, complete neighborhoods, economic vitality, and climate resilience. Key changes from Draft #2 to #3 included:

• Dwelling units per lot: Reduced maximum to one primary dwelling unit plus one accessory dwelling unit (ADU) up to 1,200 square feet, with ADU size limited to be smaller than the primary unit and subject to contextual height and footprint limits.
• Household definition: Changed to include not more than five adults (separate from Code of Virginia group living provisions).
• Sustainability standards: Added minimum vegetation space and tree canopy requirements for nearly all development, with lot coverage percentages adjusted to capture 90% of existing lots as conforming.
• Vehicular traffic uses: Uses that generate substantial auto traffic (e.g., drive-throughs, car washes, service shops) were removed as permitted uses in non-industrial districts, often requiring special or conditional use permits.
• Conditional use permits: Expanded use of conditional use permits (with temporal limits) over special use permits (which run with the land) for uses like nightclubs and retail.
• Places of worship: Rezoned from MX3 (mixed-use) to a variety of RM districts (RMA, RMB, RMC) based on location, allowing up to 4, 12, or unlimited units respectively, with height limits and contextual standards.
• Transit corridors: High-frequency transit corridors with mostly two-story buildings were rezoned to MX3 (with select MX5 on corners) to avoid encouraging demolition and displacement.
• New districts: Added RMS (garden-style low-rise apartments in more suburban context) and CMP (campus district for institutional uses like universities).
• Lot subdivision: Minimum lot width for by-right subdivision in RDC (most dense detached) increased from 25 to 30 feet, reducing eligible lots to about 2-3%.

Commissioners expressed concerns and raised questions:

• Commissioner White and Commissioner Greenfield questioned the feasibility of requiring 10% open space for multifamily buildings, given costs, security, and maintenance. They argued that such mandates could deter development, especially for smaller infill projects, and that amenity space should be project-specific. Director responded that the percentage had been reduced from earlier drafts, that vegetated areas can double-count, and that savings from reduced special use permit costs might offset added expenses.
• Commissioner Pinnock asked about housing shortage data; Director promised to provide city-specific numbers (average 2,500-3,000 units/year produced, but deficit remains).
• Commissioner Knight inquired about the impact of allowing duplexes by right in residential attached districts, noting potential for major effects in historic neighborhoods like the Fan and Museum District. Director clarified that in RA (residential attached) districts, two principal units are allowed only within one building, not as separate buildings, and that most areas already permit duplexes under current zoning.
• Commissioner Rowe asked about buffers and transitions between zoning districts; Director explained A, B, and C standards with setbacks and stepbacks, especially for taller buildings adjacent to lower-density areas, and noted that shadow studies showed minimal impact on nearby streets.
• Commissioner Mckenzie Jr. sought clarification on the use of conditional versus special use permits, with Director providing examples (e.g., nightclubs timed to 18-month renewals).
• Commissioner Burchell Pinnock (also BZA representative) asked whether all current special exceptions were included; Director confirmed they are in Section 6.2.8 and that city attorney’s office is ensuring compliance with Virginia code and charter provisions.
• Commissioner Knight asked about protections against demolition on transit corridors; Director cited analysis showing demolition rates would likely remain similar to current levels (about 80 per year) due to high costs.
• Commissioner Greenfield asked about tools to address displacement; Director noted the preservation bonus was removed because most districts now allow only one primary + one ADU, and that zoning appropriately, contextual height limits, and mapping corrections help preserve naturally occurring affordable housing and reduce incentives for demolition.

Key Outcomes

• Minutes Approved: August 18, 2026, meeting minutes were adopted by a vote of 5 in favor, 2 abstaining (Commissioners Mckenzie Jr. and Knight).
• Continuances Granted:
  • Item 3 (3317 Rear Monument Avenue, special use for up to four single-family attached dwellings) continued to November 2, 2026 (unanimous).
  • Item 4 (5706 York Road, special use for up to eight single-family attached dwellings) continued to September 15, 2026 (unanimous).
• Consent Agenda Adopted: Item 5 (Little John Park) referred to the Urban Design Committee on September 10, 2026 (unanimous).
• Code Refresh Next Steps: Director indicated that a resolution of intent to formally amend and replace the zoning ordinance would likely be presented at the September 15, 2026 Planning Commission meeting. After that, a final ordinance would be prepared for City Council introduction, sent back to the Commission for deliberation, and then to Council for a vote. Public engagement will shift toward educating civic associations and council districts. Implementation is expected to include a 90-day delay after Council adoption to allow staff calibration and transition.
• No Regular Agenda Items: No additional items were scheduled on the regular agenda.

Director’s Report: Code Refresh Draft #3 Update

A full presentation was given (detailed above), covering the rationale, key changes, and responses to commissioner questions. The Director committed to providing city-specific housing deficit data at the next meeting.