Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

We're now reconvening from earlier. We did have a planning session, work session earlier today, so we are actually reconvening. But I'd like to take this opportunity to welcome each of you out to the May 14th, 2026 Planning Commission meeting. Thank you for joining us. We will first ask that you check your cell phones just as a protocol measure. Make sure that your cell phones are either off or on vibrate. And if you're able, that you'll join us at this time for the Pledge of Allegiance. I would also like to take this time to welcome any news media that we might have present with us today or on the WebEx. It appears that we have all members. Matter of fact, Mr. Schmidt from the Board of Supervisors will not be with us today. He had a scheduling conflict. But we do have each of the representatives from the commission, so we have a full quorum. And at this time, I'll turn the meeting over to our secretary, Mr. Joe Emerson.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would would join with you as well, welcoming everyone to the Henrico County Planning Commission public hearing for May 14th. This evening it is requested all public comments be provided from the lectern to the rear of the room. For everyone who's watching the live stream on the county website, you can participate remotely in the public hearing by following these guidelines. Go to the planning department's meeting webpage at henrico.gov backslash planning backslash meetings. Scroll down under Planning Commission and click on WebEx event. And Ms. Moore, if you would, click on the slide so people can follow that online. Ms.

Thank you.

Mr.

Thank you. Once you have joined the WebEx event, please click the chat button in the bottom right corner of the screen. Staff will send a message asking if anyone would like to sign up to speak on an upcoming case. To respond, select Allie Hartwick from the drop-down menu and send her a message. She will place you in the queue to speak. Commission does have guidelines for its public hearings, and we also have these nice new timers that I'll note to you. They have three lights on them. They are green, yellow, and red, and I think we all know what that means. Green means go, yellow means you're almost done, so hurry up, and red means you're done. The applicant or their representative, based under the guidelines adopted by the Commission, will have 10 minutes to present testimony. A portion of that time can be saved for rebuttal of opposition statements. Individual speakers in support and not part of the applicant's presentation will have up to two minutes to present their testimony and collectively will not exceed ten minutes unless the chair extends that time. Individual speakers in opposition will have up to two minutes to present their testimony And that will not exceed a total of 10 minutes unless the chair extends the time. There is an allowance for a group representative who can speak for support or opposition for up to 10 minutes of four other citizens appear at the podium, identify themselves and each cede two minutes of their time to that individual. Time to respond to questions of the commission will not be included in the allotted time for public participation. The commission maintains verbatim minutes of the meeting. Commenters must provide their name and address prior to speaking for the record. Thank you again for your participation and interest this evening. Mr. Chairman, with that said, as you noted, the Commission did have a work session this evening. It convened at 2 p.m. and the discussion items were the continued conversations surrounding review of the 2045 comprehensive plan update and also the review of zoning code and subdivision code revisions and amendments. And with that, you did recess at 4.49 and, of course, reconvened the meeting this evening at 6 o'clock. First item on your agenda this evening are the requests for withdrawals and deferrals, and those will be presented by Ms. Jean Moore.

Thank you very much. The first request for deferral is on page 1 of your agenda. It's in the Varina District. It is First Case REZ 2025-102, 340 the applicant is drb3 trucking LLC and this is a request to conditionally reason from a1 and b3 business district to m2c General Industrial District as you can see the sites located the southeast intersection of Darby Town and Miller roads the applicant Proposes outdoor storage and they're requesting a deferral into the June 11th 2026 meeting

Thank you. Is there anyone present on Webex who is opposed to the referral of case number REZ2025102340?

Mr. Chairman, there is no one on Webex for this case.

Thank you. Mr. Chairman, since there is no opposition, I move that REZ2025-102340DRB, the third... Trucking LLC be deferred to the June 11, 2026 meeting at the request of the applicant.

Second. I have a motion by Mr. Mackey, second by Mr. Winterhoff. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes.

Also on page one of your agenda in the veranda is REZ 2026 100545 Andrew Conlon for Beckley Bluford Investments. This is a request to rezone from C1 Conservation to a1 agricultural district located on the east line and Beckley Road approximately 300 feet west of its intersection with Beaverstone Road the Applicant is requesting deferral into the June 11th 2026 meeting All right Thanks again.

Is there anyone present on WebEx who was opposed to the referral of our EZ? 2 0 2 6 1 0 0 5 4 5 and he called him for Beckley blue for an investment LLC

Mr. Chairman, there is no one on WebEx for this case.

Mr. Chairman, I move that R.A.Z. Yes, I move that R.A.Z. 2026-100545 Beckley-Blueford Investment LLC be deferred to the June 11, 2026 meeting at the request of the applicant. Second.

Motion by Mr. Mackey, second by Mr. Phelps. All in favor? Aye. Any opposition? Motion passes.

Moving on to page two of your agenda in Tuckahoe, it's PUP 2026-100178, Kermit Farrow for Crown Castle USA, Incorporated. This is a request for a provisional use permit to replace and extend the height of a wireless communication tower located at the southeast intersection of Gaskins Road and Stone Ridge Lane. The applicant is requesting deferral until the June 11th meeting.

Is there anyone president on Webex who's opposed to the deferral of P UP 2 0 2 6 1 0 0 1 7 8 Kermit Farrow for Crown Castle USA Mr. Chairman, there is no one on Webex for this case Thank you Mr.

Chair, I move that P UP 2 0 2 6 1 0 0 1 7 8 Crown Castle USA Inc be deferred to the June 11th 2026 meeting at the request of the applicant. Second.

Motion by Mr. Winterhoff, second by Mr. Shippey. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes.

Also on page 2 in the Fairfield District, it's REZ 2026100676. This is Adina M. Patterson for Emongo Day School. This is a request to conditionally rezone from M2 to R4C. To propose a private school located at the intersection of Dill Road and Valter Avenue The applicant is requesting a deferral also to the June 11th 2026 meeting All right.

Is there anyone present on WebEx who's opposed to the deferral?

Mr. Chairman, there is no one on WebEx for this case All right.

This is in my district. So I'll move that our easy two zero two six one zero zero six seven six and be deferred to the June 11th meeting. Second. Motion by myself, second by Mr. Mackey. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed?

That concludes the deferral request that we have.

Mr. Chairman, the next item would be request for expedited items. There are none this evening. So moving into your regular agenda on page one, are easy 2026 1, 0, 0, 3, 4, 7, Felicia Saunders request to conditionally rezone from a one agricultural district or two AC one family residents district, 2.5 acres located at the intersection of Wilson road and Mesa road. The applicant proposes single family residents. The 2026 comprehensive plan recommends traditional neighborhood development and the staff report will be presented by Ms. Neha Shinde.

Hey, how are you, Mr. Shinde? Good to see you. All right, one second before we go. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak to this case, either on WebEx? All right. So when she finishes her report, we'll let you know when it's time to go to the back of the podium. All right. You may proceed.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the commission. As mentioned, this is a request to conditionally rezone 2.5 acres located at the south intersection of Wilson Road and Messer Road from A1 Agricultural District to R2AC, One Family Residence District conditional to allow for single family development. The 2026 plan's designation for the site is traditional neighborhood development. While not entirely consistent with the T&D recommendation, the applicant's proposed use and density would be appropriate in this location given the surrounding development pattern. The property has an existing single-family home with driveways connecting to Port Wilson and Messer Roads. There are also three outbuildings along Messer Road on the property. To the west, the property borders single-family residential in the A1 district. To the north, there is a single-family home zoned R2AC. To the east is the George Baker Elementary School zoned A1, and the Hughes Farm single-family subdivision to the south is zoned R2AC. To address concerns in the staff report, the applicant has provided a revised concept plan and updated proffers dated May the 5th, which you have received this evening. The proffers will not need time limits waived. The applicant has changed the original request from a maximum of six homes to a maximum of five homes, which includes the existing home. The updated concept plan seen here shows three lots with access to Messer Road. Lots 1 and 2 will have a shared access. Lots 4 and 5 will connect to Wilson Road. The existing home located along Wilson Road will have access restricted to Wilson and the access from Messer Road will be removed. The updated proffers also include other commitments such as finished floor area, foundations, garages, driveways, architectural elevations, and building materials. These are similar to what has been provided in other recently approved rezoning requests. In closing, by addressing staff comments and offering proffers similar to other recent developments in the area, the proposed subdivision could fit well with nearby properties. For these reasons, staff supports the proposed use at this location. This concludes my presentation. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you, Mr. Shinde. Does anyone up here have any questions? No, sir.

I don't have any questions.

All right.

Thank you, Mr. Shinde.

Would you like to hear from the applicant?

I'd like to hear from the gentleman that wanted to speak to the case.

Sure.

Good evening, everyone. My name is Ray, R-E-Y, last name Hallion, H-A-L-L-I-O-N. I live at 6825 Cornelius Court. That address is part of Hughes Farm, the original subdivision there. and I am a member of the Homeowners Association, therefore my interest in this property. I first have a question, and then I think basically a comment. My first question is, I would like to know what the price range of the homes that are expected to be built there is, simply because that would affect property values already established in that area. Should I go on with the next thing?

No, I was going to let Mr. Mackey or anybody up here try to speak to that real quick.

Yes, when the applicant comes up, they'll address that. Okay.

And the second thing is more of a comment, but a question. I understand that it is being called Hughes Farm Section 2. But my understanding is that it has no relationship to our Hughes Farm subdivision. Our Hughes Farm subdivision has an HOA that some of our members object to already, and I believe there might be some concerns with some of those HOA members if another Hughes Farm comes along and they possibly do not have to have an HOA. We have to have one because we have a level spreader in our subdivision and we have to be prepared to take care of that. So that is I can interest in know why it is being called use farm section 2.

Thank you Mister House.

Yes, yes, we have an applicant.

Can you guys hear me?

Yes, we can hear you.

Okay. All right. So the first question around the price range in the first community meeting.

Excuse me, one second. You mind stating your name?

Oh, yes. My name is Felicia Sanders. Got you. All right. Good. Yeah. So on the price range and the building design considerations, type of garage, all that, in the first community meeting, we did have a so-called a design to show. And we are planning to basically mimic the neighborhood, if not to increase the valuation of the house. So the size on the proffer, it's similar to what you guys already have in the Harmony and the Cornelius Court. And the style of the house is going to be pretty similar as well, so that it should blend in very well. The second point around the naming, to be honest, I don't really have a strong opinion about why it's named that way. From my understanding, it's either the civil engineer that actually named the project or I believe it's probably him. So if there is any consideration that, you know, the HOA feels strongly about, we can definitely have that discussion unless if the county has a different opinion about that. All right, that's it.

Yeah, did you want to? Was there anything else you want to discuss for your presentation? I mean, you don't have to. I was just asking.

No, because we actually had several meetings about the feedback that you guys have provided. So a lot of the feedback we incorporated into the updated conceptual plan.

I had one question before you left the podium. I know you said it was going to be comparable as far as the design and everything, but was there a particular range, so to speak?

Yes. As a licensed agent, I have to wear my comparable hat. So in the initial stage, when we actually designed the size of the house, it's around $500,000 to $600,000 median home range in that price range, which I think is very comparable with the Eastwood subdivision. Does that?

All right. Thank you.

I didn't have anything.

How would you like to proceed? Did anybody else have any questions? Okay.

All right. I'd like to thank Ms. Sanders for coming out and speaking to the case. Thank Ms. Shindy for her work on the case as well. I appreciate you coming back with the updated proffers, addressing some of the concerns that we had and some of the setbacks and stuff to make it more uniform to the existing residents that were already established there. I think that made a big difference. I do think this will be a good addition to that area. I think it will complement the existing neighborhood well. And so having said that, Mr. Chairman, I move that we recommend approval of RAZ-2026-100347, Felicia Sanders, with the revised proffers dated May 5, 2026.

Second.

Motion by Mr. Mack and second by Mr. Winterhoff. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes.

Mr. Chairman, we now move on to page two of your agenda for REZ 2026-100669. Brian Lee from Bon Secours St. Mary's Hospital. This is a request to conditionally rezone from R31 Family Residence District to 03 Office District. 1.628 acres located at the intersection of Maple Avenue and Paxton Street. The applicant proposes a parking lot. The 2026 comprehensive plan recommends suburban residential too. The staff report will be presented by Mr. Livingston Lewis.

Mr. Lewis, how are you? Real quick. Well, thank you. I would like to ask, is there anyone in the audience on WebEx that would like to speak to this case?

Mister chairman, there is no one on WebEx for this case.

All right, Mister Lewis, you have the floor. Thank you Mister Chairman, members of the Commission. This is a request to rezone 1.6 acres from R3 to O3C to construct a paved parking lot for St. Mary's Hospital visitors and employees. The site is an open grass field on the south line of Paxton Street adjacent to the hospital's existing rear parking area. Surrounding properties include the hospital campus to the north, the Westview neighborhood to the west, and vacant lots in the city of Richmond. Comprehensive Plan designation is Suburban Residential 2, reflecting the property's former use as part of a single-family neighborhood. However, since 1995, the hospital has incrementally acquired the 11 subject parcels and removed the residential structures in preparation for future needs. As illustrated on Exhibit A, the St. Mary's campus is undergoing a multi-phase project to add a new eight-story, 200,000-square-foot medical tower redesign the hospital's main entrance, relocate the helipad from the ground to the new rooftop, and reconfigure surface parking for customers and employees. A provisional use permit was approved in 2025 for the new building and helipad relocation, and during community meetings for that case, additional parking was identified as a significant need. To help address parking, the applicant proposes this 362-space lot for the subject property. It would require vacating Paxton Street, but access would still be provided between Maple Avenue and Chase Street through the parking lot. Tree planted landscape islands would be distributed throughout the parking lot and a 25 foot wide landscape buffer would be installed along the western perimeter adjacent to Maple Avenue to provide an attractive streetscape and help screen views from adjacent homes. The applicant has also submitted three proffers consistent with previous rezonings for the campus. In addition to describing the buffer, the proffers also address lighting and state the site would only be used for a parking lot. In other words, no additional building. Adequate parking is essential in all land use categories, including SR2, and is a clear need in this area. The proposed surface lot would help alleviate parking on neighborhood streets and would be compatible with surrounding uses. For these reasons, staff supports the request, and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, Mr. Lewis. Does anyone from the commission have any questions at this time?

I do. Do we have a timeline on when this project would be completed?

I do not have a specific timeline. I'm sure it's as soon as possible, but the applicant probably could answer that in more detail.

Okay.

Mr. Phelps, would you like to hear from the applicant?

Absolutely.

Absolutely.

Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, my name is Rhodes Rittenhour, and I represent Bon Secours Health System. I'm the Vice President of External and Regulatory Affairs. Thank you so much for hearing this case today. As you probably have seen if you've been through there, Commissioner, the project has started, and our goal is to have it completed by about the end of 2028. So with the investment we're making there and all the moving parts, we say we don't have a specific date, but certainly, as Mr. Lewis says, as soon as possible, but our goal is to have it completed by the end of 28.

Yeah, not a problem. I was through the area a couple times over the past few weeks, and it's desperately needed over there. It looks like they're hunting everywhere to find a parking spot, and they're Parking anywhere and everywhere. So I was just curious with the timeline because I know sooner the better. I'm sure yesterday would have been perfect, you know, to have it completed. So I have no further questions.

I would just say, Commissioner Phelps, that while 28 is the goal for finishing the tower, we certainly hope to have parking in place to alleviate some of those things that you and I have seen every day long before the end of 28. Well, thank you very much. Yes, sir.

I have no further questions.

All right.

How would you like to proceed? Mr. Chair, I'd move that we recommend approval of RZ-2026-100669, Bond Secure St. Mary's Hospitals, with proffers dated April 20, 2026. Second.

Motion by Mr. Phelps. Second by Mr. Shippey. All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion passes.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. Mr. Chairman, that completes the cases to be heard this evening, but we do have several other items of business. The first discussion item are two resolutions for your consideration, PCR 326 and PCR 426. And these two resolutions would initiate The subdivision and zoning code updates that we discussed earlier with you during work session.

Right. Mr. Shippey has that, I believe.

Yes, Mr. Chairman, thank you. As you know, the commission has been reviewing and considering amendments to both the zoning ordinance and the subdivision ordinance based on input from staff, from the public, and, of course, from the recently concluded General Assembly session. And we do find these amendments to be appropriate, and so I'll make two resolutions. The first is Resolution PCR 3-2026, which is the initiation of the zoning ordinance amendments, and I would move that resolution.

Second. Motion by Mr. Shippey, second by Mr. Mackey. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes.

And additionally, there were some subdivision ordinance amendments that are appropriate and that we've been reviewing in the past several weeks. And I would move resolution PCR-4-2026, the initiation of the subdivision ordinance amendments.

Second. Motion by Mr. Shippey. Second by Mr. Phelps. All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion passes. Thank you, Mr. Shippey.

Thank you. Mr. Chairman, the next discussion item. is to discuss setting a public hearing for June the 11th, 2026, to consider the zoning and subdivision ordinance updates related to the two ordinances that you just, or the two resolutions you just adopted.

All right. Can we get a motion? Do we need a motion for that?

Yes, sir. We need a motion. All right. Setting the public hearing for zoning and subdivision ordinance updates relating to changes in the Code of Virginia. So moved. Second.

We have a motion by Mr. Shippey, second by Mr. Winterhoff. All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion passes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The next discussion item is, again, another public hearing for actually this one. It says public hearing, but This one is actually a work session regarding the 2045 comprehensive plan and zoning and subdivision ordinances. I felt we might have a need for another work session at the June 11th meeting just to tie up any loose ends, any changes that we may have come up. That meeting, I believe, if it meets with everybody's liking, we could schedule for 430, just to give you enough time, and of course I'll bring some some food in, so you'll have some dinner. But any updates? We do have a few form-based code pieces to fill you in on as we receive them, and there may be some other changes, and you may have some questions. So I felt like we might want that just to make sure all our bases are covered. Everybody good with the 430?

Yes, sir.

All right, so move.

We don't need them.

We can do that one by consensus, Mr. Chairman, but thank you. That's... The next item is the public hearing discussion item, and that is setting a public hearing for June 11th to consider the 2045 comprehensive plan, and that we do need a motion for that, Mr. Chairman. All right.

So moved.

Second.

All right. Motion by myself, seconded by Mr. Winterhoff. All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion passes. Mr. Chairman, the next item is the consideration of the approval of your minutes from the regular meeting and work session on April 9th. We do have an errata sheet that should have been in a folder there at your seat if you hadn't received it earlier. So the approval would contain these corrections and, of course, any other corrections that you would like to add to that.

I move that we approve the minutes of the April 9th, 2026 Planning Commission as amended. Second.

Motion by Mr. Shippey, second by Mr. Phelps. All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion passes.

Mr. Chairman, again, I would like to thank all of you for taking valuable time today and coming in early and working on all these items and all the diligence that you put forth and in your consideration of this large amount of work that's flowing through and and I know that takes a lot of time so thank you for for your time and your attention with that mr. chairman I have nothing further for the Planning Commission this evening meeting adjourned