Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

so i'm not calling the order but the july 9 2026 zoning meeting of the planning commission uh thank you for joining us this evening uh we were first asked to check your cell phones uh make sure that either they're turned off or vibrating also to let me apologize in advance i know we have some modifications going on in our public hearing space so we have title quarters this evening but still we want to thank you for joining us if you're able would you please join us and stand for the pledge of allegiance

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Also at this time, I'd like to take this opportunity to welcome any news media that we have in the room or in attendance. It appears that we have all members present this evening. I'd like to note District. He'll be with us all year from the Board of Supervisors representing them. I'll note on the record that Mr. Smith abstains from any voting that will be taking place unless needed. With that being said, I'd like to turn the meeting over to our Secretary, Mr. Joe Emerson.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I'll join with you welcoming everybody to the Planning Commission meeting for July 9 2026. As you noted, the commission did have a work session that convened at 430 and recessed at 524. And then of course reconvened here in this room at 6pm. The work session was for the board or the board Planning Commission to to hear from staff and continue discussions on the 2045 comprehensive plan in the zoning and subdivision ordinance amendments that are on your agenda this evening. And I would also like to note for for the public who is present and those who are with us online, it is requested all public comments be provided from the lectern. And normally I say at the back of the room, it's in the corner of the side of the room towards the doors this evening, where you entered for everyone who's watching live stream on the county website, public comments. I'm sorry, I didn't finish that public comment should be made from that lectern. For those who are participating remotely, you can participate by following these guidelines. If you'll visit the planning departments meeting web page at Henrico.gov backslash planning backslash meetings, then you need to scroll down under planning commission and click on WebEx event. 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 Neha Shinde from the drop-down menu and send her a message. She'll place you in the queue to speak. Commission does have guidelines for its public hearings. The applicant or their representatives 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 10 minutes unless the chair extends the time. Individual speakers in opposition will have up to two minutes to present their testimony and will not exceed a total 10 minutes, again, unless the chair extends the time. A group representative may speak for support or opposition for up to 10 minutes. If four other citizens appear at the podium, identify themselves and each exceed two minutes of their time. 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 and thank you again for your participation and interest in your community this evening with that said mr chairman the first item on your agenda a request for withdrawals and deferrals and those will be presented by miss jean moore

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and the Secretary. The first item for deferral is a request for deferral in the Varina District is on page three of your agenda. This is REZ 2025-102340. The applicant is DRB3 Trucking LLC. This is a request to conditionally rezone 5.96 acres from A1 and B3 to M2C. to allow outdoor storage and trailer parking. The site's located at the southeast intersection of Darbytown Road and Miller Road. The deferral is requested by the Planning Commission to the August 13, 2026 meeting. Thank you.

Is anyone present on WebEx who is opposed to the deferral of case REZ-2015?

all right mr chairman there being no opposition to the deferral i move that raz-2025-102340 drb the third trucking llc be deferred to the august 13th 2026 meeting at the request of the commission second i have a motion by mr mackie second by mr winterhall all in favor

The next item is in Fairfield on page 4 of your agenda. This is REZ 2026-00916 Imperial Investments Group LLC. This is a request to rezone 0.202 acres from R6C and B3 to B2C business district. The site's located at the northeast intersection of Magellan Parkway and Brooke Road, the applicant proposes access for general retail. The deferral is requested to the August 13th, 2026 meeting. Thank you.

2026100916, Imperial Investment Group, LLC. Be deferred to the August 13, 2026 meeting.

Second.

Motion by myself. Second by Mr. Shippen. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes.

Chairman, that completes the withdrawals and deferrals for this evening. Next, our request for expedited items. There are two of those, and they will also be presented by Ms. Jean Moore.

The first item is on page four of your agenda in the Brooklyn District. It is Provisional Use Permit 2026-00970. The applicant is Richmond Lodge of Perfection A and ASR. This is a request for Provisional Use Permit to allow the continuation and redevelopment of a Masonic Lodge. The site is located on the east line of Bethleman Road, approximately 160 feet north of its intersection with Dickens Road. I don't know in your packet you do have minor revisions, amendments to the staff recommended conditions. Otherwise, we have heard no opposition to this request.

zero Richmond larger perfect motion to all that's right and approved to you be two zero two six one zero zero nine seven zero Richmond larger perfection a a a and a s or second I have most months those

finally also on page four of your agenda in the Fairfield districts we have a request for approval of the Chesapeake Bay resource protection area exception twenty twenty six dash one zero one one three six the applicant is God see properties incorporated The site is located at the northwest corner of the proposed Farewell Section 6 development, approximately 600 feet west of the terminus of 9 Iron Lane. A level spreader stormwater management facility is proposed to encroach 1,567 square feet within a required 100-foot wide resource protection area, and a component of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area adjacent to Stony Run Tributary 1 in the James River Watershed is proposed. on staff recommending is recommending approval and no opposition is known to this exception.

All right, thank you. Is there anyone present on WebEx who is opposed to the approval of case number RPAE-2026-101136? item RPAE dash two zero two six dash one zero one one three six Gossett properties second all right motion by myself second by Mr Shippey all in favor aye any opposed motion passes Mr chairman before we move into the regular agenda I would would like to know from our technical staff if WebEx is up and running correctly

okay no one will align at this time so if you just monitor that for myself and let me know i appreciate it thank you uh mr chairman with uh with that item covered you have three items that are for discussion and decision only you held your public hearings at your last meeting And I will call all three together. You will receive a presentation from Ms. Deamer and also from Mr. Blankenship regarding these items. And then, of course, after your discussion and deliberation, separate motions for each item will be required. The first item is the draft 2045 comprehensive plan. again the planning commission will continue meeting and recommendations on the draft proposed by staff the second item is the subdivision ordinance revisions and these are to amend and reordain section nineteen and there are numerous sections that are listed and have been advertised And Mr. Blankenship will discuss that with you. And then also the second, second ordinance change making the third case is the zoning code. It's to amend and reordain section sections of section 24 of the county code. And they're noted in your agenda and also have been duly advertised. And with that said, Miss Deamer will present the first presentation on the comprehensive plan.

deem thank you the planning department began work on updating its comprehensive plan in 2020. delayed by covet the process started in earnest in 2021 with the creation of henrico next our plan to inform and engage the public following the analysis of existing conditions including population growth land development patterns natural resources and our transportation network The plan is before you this evening for your consideration. This has been a multi-year effort by the Planning Department, with assistance from numerous county agencies, our consultants, and of course, the Planning Commission. At your June public hearing, there was a presentation of all the planned chapters, and you took comments from the public. This evening, I'll be summarizing those comments, as well as any received since then. prior to my summary i wanted to review our efforts for engaging the community apologies Numerous opportunities were planned and conducted to encourage residents and other stakeholders to participate in safe and informative ways, such as our introductory kickoff meeting, surveys, community events, listening and suggestion sessions, and in March of this year, a Varina-specific community meeting. A web presence has been provided throughout the process so everyone could follow from their computers or home. Surveys, polls, and interactive maps allow residents to share comments about specific areas of the county and react to various draft materials. To date, we've engaged approximately 9,000 residents through surveys, 1,950 people in our community visioning exercises, 270 during our 2024 listening sessions on visions and goals, and 131 at our 2025 future land use suggestion sessions, and an additional 200 people in public meetings. Through outreach at community events such as Glen Island Day, Earth Day, and countywide farmers markets, an additional 1,000 people heard about our planning efforts. We've held 14 information sessions, sent out over 7,500 emails, and mailed over 5,000 individually addressed notice letters. We sent out 29,000 mailers for a March of Orina meeting, and for the June 2nd and 4th community meetings, we mailed postcards to every residential and business address in Henrico County, notifying close to 209,000 households and companies. using the county's facebook instagram x and next door platforms we've informed an additional 123 000 people during the month of may we posted the various draft chapters of the plan on our project website so interested individuals could review them Prior to your June public hearing, we'd received 113 online comments, 97 emails, and 22 phone calls. That information was provided to you at your June work session. Approximately 85 people attended the June public hearing, during which 27 speakers provided comments in person or via WebEx. Of those, two suggested additional time to review and discuss the plan, two were opposed to the Cox Road connection to Church Road, one commented on the need to revise the zoning ordinance regarding fencing, and the remaining 22 speakers were opposed to the specifics of the A2 zoning amendment. A breakdown of the comments received up to and including the Commission's June meeting identified 44 related to land use, 36 on transportation including the MTP, 25 about our environment, 14 related to recreation and parks, 11 on community character, 8 about public facilities, 7 on implementation, and 3 on goals. Further analysis revealed 29 requests for a delay on planning commission action, 28 provided other random comments, and 59 had concerns about the A2 zoning ordinance amendment. This evening during your work session, you were provided with a spreadsheet with the most recent comments received. Since the June 11th Planning Commission meeting, we've received one survey submission that included 10 topical comments related to the planned chapters, six emails, and five phone calls. Their topics included four land use comments, seven A2 comments, two public facilities and services, two I'm sorry one regarding each environmental community character recreation and parks transportation implementation of chapters and then one regarding last month's presentation During the June work session, staff recommended several changes to the major thoroughfare plan and the inclusion of specific strategies to the environmental justice policy found in the management sustainable growth chapter. Since then, staff has continued to review comments and identify potential changes to the document. There were fewer than 40 comments related to the context of the text, most of which were stylistic in nature. State code requires that the Virginia Department of Transportation review our transportation chapter. They have requested we provide additional information on any deficiencies to our transportation network and create a map showing utility infrastructure as most are located beneath roads. The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality also reviewed the plan, focusing on our environmental chapter. Maps of impaired waters and sources of pollution were inadvertently left out of the chapter, as was a summary on wellhead protection. Staff are actively working on updating the document to address VDOT and DEQ's concerns. Several departments also offered revised comments. The Department of Public Works requested we modify text related to the county's participation in the National Flood Insurance Program, and police provided modified language addressing crime prevention through environmental design guidelines. Planning staff also identified minor text changes in several chapters, the addition of a public facilities map, as well as maps showing the location of water, sewer, stormwater, and natural gas. In addition, in response to feedback from the community, staff is also recommending the prime agricultural rural conservation designation be modified from one unit per five acres to one unit to one to five acres. An additional implementation measure would recommend further study of the PARC designation and the A2 zoning ordinance amendment, which Mr. Blankenship will shortly discuss with you. The county's 2024 population was estimated at 353,770 people, and we know that it grows just under 1% a year. That means we need to plan for approximately 3,500 new residents a year. The Henrico Next Comprehensive Plan attempts to balance growth with environmental concerns, economic development, and public facility and service provision. The plan has been a major work item for the department since 2021 with substantial public engagement. Its major focus is on infill and redevelopment as evidenced by the fact that exclusive of the PARC designation, only 12% of the land in the county is being recommended for change. The inclusion of redevelopment quarters and form-based overlay districts will help direct future growth and redevelopment, while a new section of the plan addressing sustainability and resilience will protect the community against natural disasters and economic shifts, meet the growing demand from residents for environmental responsibility, and reduce long-term operating costs. A review of the acreage in open space recreation and environmental protection areas, county parks, and preserved and conserved land indicates that approximately 32% of the county would be used to protect our natural resources and open space. Incorporation of the prime agricultural rural conservation areas would increase this number to 45%. The document advocates a strong multimodal transportation network with avenues to reduce single occupancy vehicle trips. Affordable housing is promoted through a mix of housing types and locations, and environmental justice will be studied to include initiatives in land use decision making. As a result of our market and housing assessments and fiscal analyses, the 2045 assumed growth scenario results in a 58% residential to 42% non-residential split. When the existing tax base is added to new growth, the tax base ratio by 2045 will be 67% residential to 33% non-residential. The planning director recommends the commission consider the contents of the document along with community input and suggested staff changes and recommend adoption of the plan by the Board of Supervisors. That concludes my presentation. I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, Ms. Baker. Does anyone on the commission have any questions for her at this time?

about the, there was a little bit of confusion in the statement amending the recommended density of the prime agriculture rule conservation land use category from one unit per five acres to one to five units per five acres.

No, not units per, from one unit to five acres, which is currently what everybody has seen on the plan, to one unit to one to five.

acres yeah it's it makes it hard to explain it is it's not really clear in in the language that we have in front of us either unit to one to five acres of land so one acre lots would still be permitted it wouldn't be one to five units per five acres not unit one acre okay that's that's what it is that's where the mistake is the uh it is a little bit of confusing language the intent is it still remains at one unit to the acre okay But the range in that area would be one unit per five acres and in terms of the way in terms of the way the land use rates would be one through five acre one unit correct because that's where our land use density densities are calculated. So it is confusing. But the intent is it doesn't change the the acreage the one unit to the acre unit count is the intent.

All right.

Any other questions? Thank you, Mr. Dean. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good evening, Mr. Chair, members of the Commission. On June the 11th, I presented to you a series of amendments to the zoning and subdivision ordinances. Since June the 11th, there have been no recommended changes to the subdivision ordinance amendment. So everything that was presented on the subdivision ordinance amendment last month is still in the recommendation this month. on the zoning ordinance amendments. Those as you remember, were broken into three categories. The first is implementing the comprehensive plan. The second is changes required by recent changes to the code of Virginia. And the third is changes that are proposed by based on community and staff input and ideas for improvement. I will be touching on the first and third of these groups. Under the comprehensive plan, of course, the The most notable change that was presented last month was the creation of an A2 agricultural zoning district. This month, based on the input received from the community and other sources at the public hearing and other sources, our recommendation this evening is that the proposed A2 agricultural district should be deferred for further study. Based on what we heard last month, we do not believe we are prepared to proceed with that recommendation at this time. The other main emphasis from the comprehensive plan was the creation of new form-based alternative overlay sub-districts. One of those is the best products reimagined area, and I mentioned this to you last month, but we did not have the completed maps yet. You see on the map of what was presented June the 11th, I'm indicating with the mouse an area that was not included in the district. We are recommending that that area be included as shown here. You'll also see up in the northern part of the diagram here that there are some changes to the street classifications. So all those were presented to you in greater detail in the text. Also, I mentioned to you on June the 11th that we were very near the completion of developing guidelines for green streets in the, again, the best products reimagined. sub-district but we did not have the final graphics and text ready for you on june the 11th they are ready now and are included in the draft and so we are recommending that those be included in your recommendation to the board of supervisors we also mentioned some additional language added to the frontage standards and the street sections that would just clarify and document the process by which the planning director may modify those standards where necessary and the guidelines that he would apply in making any modifications. As I mentioned, there were no changes to the state code provisions from the June 11th hearing. So moving on to the community and staff area, we had proposed several changes to the table 4205, the principal use table. At last month's meeting, it was suggested by one of the commissioners that all of the uses in the group living classification, which are boarding house, children's residential facility, and dormitory, be allowed by provisional use permit rather than a mixture of by right, by conditional use permit, and by provisional use permit. The recommendation was to standardize that approval, and staff agrees with that recommendation. So with those changes, we would be pleased to see this recommended for approval to the Board of Supervisors, and I would be happy to answer your questions.

mr chairman i want to thank publicly uh the staff for undertaking this herculean effort over several years as they've been describing the last couple of months i also want to thank the public for engaging in this process over over multiple years especially in the last several months here with the listening sessions last month's hearing we have heard and read all of the comments before during and after the June 11th public hearing and in particular you know one of the major points of discussion has been how to preserve the rural character of Reina while respecting landowner rights and I think we've made good progress over the past several weeks in trying to achieve a balance of those interests uh however as you've heard recommended as i'm about to uh to move um i think we need further study on that issue to make sure we get it right uh and so um i believe that's the right uh that's the right path because i think we can achieve both of those of those interests so having said that mr chairman i'm ready with a motion i move that we recommend approval of the 2045 henrico next comprehensive plan with the following staff recommendations including amending the major thoroughfare plan to remove five concept roads which include a segment of concept road 2026-26 parallel to the james river connecting to hickory avenue along with two minor collector roads 2026-34 and 2026-27 connecting to i-895 pin oak drive north of middle road and minor collector 2026-30 between buffin and new market roads and in addition to the staff recommendations i also recommend the board consider the following major thoroughfare plan amendment to remove a segment of concept road 2026-140 which would have connected cox road to ridgefield parkway and church road continuing with the staff recommendations recommend amending the recommended density of the prime agricultural rural conservation land use category from one unit per five acres to one to five units per five acres as we just discussed undertaking a study of the appropriate zoning district minimum lot sizes and standards as an action item as part of the implementation plan of the of the plan implementation chapter of the plan And finally, creating supplemental maps and text changes that staff reviewed with us today and that are minor in nature and will not impact land uses for the implementation items.

Second. All right. I have a motion by Mr. Shipley, second by Mr. Mackey. All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion passes.

Mr. Chair, I also wanted to thank staff for their continued work and effort, especially in regards to sometimes things that may seem very minute, but the details really do matter. So in regards to the subdivision ordinance amendment, I move that we recommend approval of the ordinance to revise the subdivision ordinance to implement the recommendations of the 2045 Comprehensive Plan, clarify the relationship between a family subdivision and minor subdivision, conform the subdivision ordinance with recent changes to the Code of Virginia, and improve consistency with the zoning ordinance as presented this evening.

Second.

have a motion by Mister when all second one is to ship you all in favor aye any opposed motion and then Mister chair

Again, another thanks. Over the past month, the staff continues to work and focus on the comprehensive plan and ensuring that we are listening, that we are partnering with the community and making sure that we're heading in the right direction as a community and a county. And I appreciate the recommendations, the changes, and the continued improvement of this plan. So at this time, I move that we recommend approval of the revisions to the zoning ordinance to implement the recommendations of the 2045 Comprehensive Plan, create the best products reimagined, Brook Road North and Lakeside Avenue form-based alternative overlay sub-districts, conform the zoning ordinance to recent changes to the Code of Virginia, update, modify, and clarify certain provisions of the ordinance, And while I recommend to the Board adopt the proposed amendments as discussed, I'd also like to include in my motion that the Commission recommend the Board consider delaying the creation of the A2 Agricultural District to a later date, rather than as part of the other proposed zoning ordinance amendments. This would allow additional study of the appropriate manner of accomplishing the vision proposed with the park future land use designation and the comprehensive plan update. Additionally, I recommend the proposed ordinance amendments include the additional items presented by staff, including the incorporation of an additional parcel and modification of the street hierarchy of the Best Products Reimagined Subdistrict, the development of clearer standards for the green streets identified in the zoning ordinance draft, the addition of new language related to modification standards for typical street types and frontage standards, the deletion of proposed section 24-3851 related to automatic sprinkler systems and modification to section 24-4205 to require a provisional use permit for certain group living uses in residential zoning districts.

Mr. Chairman, these items will be on the Board of Supervisors' agenda on July 28th for public hearing and the Board's consideration. Moving on to the next items on your agenda this evening We move to page three of your agenda and these these are public hearing items versus just discussion items The first is our easy 2026 one zero zero five four five Andrew M Conlon for Beckley Bluford investment LLC This is a request to rezone from C one conservation district to a one agricultural district 26.4 acres located on the east line of Beckley Road, approximately 300 feet west of its intersection with Beaverstone Road. The 2026 comprehensive plan recommends suburban residential one and environmental protection area. The staff report will be presented by Mr. Seth Humphreys.

How are you?

stormers thank you Mr. chairman members of the commission as stated this request is to rezone the property from C1 conservation district to A1 agricultural district the subject property consists of 26.4 acres of a larger 95 acre parcel that extends to the north side of interstate 295 this portion of the property is located between interstate 295 to the north beckley road to the south the chickahominy river and silver spring farm subdivision to the west and east this request includes only the section of the property zone c1 conservation district the same area was previously part of a larger rezoning which was proposed which proposed r5ac general residence district zoning which was rez 2024-101268 that application was ultimately denied and no zoning changes resulted. Although this current request falls within the one year that denial has been deemed substantially different due to the reduced acreage and the different zoning classification being proposed. The proposed a one zoning district would allow agricultural uses as well as single family residences with the maximum density of one unit per acre. This request contemplates the appropriateness of the A1 zoning and all allowable uses as no specific use has been identified. The comprehensive plan recommends suburban residential one, an environmental protection area. Suburban residential one carries a recommendation of detached single family homes with a density range of one to 2.4 units per acre. And the A1 zoning district would be consistent with that. The applicant has worked with the Department of Public Works to verify the boundaries of the floodplain, as would normally be done during the subdivision process. The Department of Public Works determined the boundaries submitted with this request are consistent with the latest available 100-year floodplain. Based on these efforts by the applicant and the verification by Department of Public Works, staff can now recommend approval of this request. That ends my presentation. I'd be happy to take any questions.

um uh there wasn't any opposition in the audience anymore i wanted to speak okay so let me do that one more just one second is it one of them now yes okay i think it's the podium right here hello hello we can hear you i'm not sure if that mic is operational but just make sure you loudly state your name and address i'm adam collett i'm from 800 emerson road uh this parcel is currently zoned c1 because the county has deemed it suitable for preserving virginia's natural resources

to prove that his parcels for preserving Virginia's natural resources earlier with the owner's lawyer, the lawyer only mentioned that a land expert opined that the floodplain was a slightly different type of floodplain, not that it was wholly not a floodplain, or that it was somehow unfit to preserve natural resources.

There is also a concern of the effectiveness of the penalties the county can impose to guarantee any development of the land will prevent farm off and water onto my property, including, but not limited to, perfecting my septic tank and dispensing water. Allowing this land to be rezoned and further developed for the intent stated in the original zoning hearing notice would also cause financial harm to me and my loved ones in the form of a guaranteed increase in property taxes with only a theoretical potential summer calendar line.

ability to sell my home maybe i'll later do something i have no intention to do all right thank you mr hoffman uh last meeting your uh lady spoke about the comprehensive plan of our right-wing county she mentioned imports preserving in this environment. Is this a true feeling of the county government? There is endangered species, plant life, that lives on that lower portion of that property. It's called the small pink. We have lived in our home for 40 years. In that time, a lot of development has gone on around us. Every inch of concrete, asphalt, and rooftop covers that much more ground that cannot absorb rainwater. Every unabsorbed raindrop will run off and end up in the Chickahominy River. The raindrops does not dry alone. They carry along pollutants, sediments, and toxins into the river. The more vegetative buffer and filter to remove the hot pollutants the cleaner our streams and rivers will stay this is the reason the line was drawn along excuse me this is the reason the line was drawn along back the road as a conservation easement to protect the delicate chickahominy watershed area from the encroachment of excessive development not as a flood zone Although I have, excuse me, I have stated over the meetings, and I will say it again, even though it is not part of the floodplain, I have seen this property flood during the storm down stone. Water was rushing over back to the road like a spillway, and for that reason, it would be irresponsible to build in this section of property. We the community have over 200 signatures on a petition against zoning change on this property and the change was denied by the Board of Supervisors just a few months ago. Now the same property, same owners change the LLC and they come back to change the zoning again with no plans or reason to make the change. As you know the main difference between A1 and C1 is the building of homes on A1. So you know as well as I do they will jam as many homes as they can on the property. They are developers, that's what they do. The concern of wells has been risen. I've noticed over the years my average well level has dropped several feet. This could be due to construction and subject use in the area. I'm not really sure. Has a study been made to see how many wells can be supported by the aquifers in this area? Or do you keep building until the water runs out? It has happened in other areas. These are just a few of the reasons we feel that rezoning this excuse me this is just a few reasons we feel the zoning change should again be denied on this property

Good evening. My name is Sarah LaPointe. I live at 800 Beverson Road. I'm here to represent the interests of myself and my community by insisting this parcel remains a C1 conservation zone. According to the Hunt-Ranco County flood map, a partial section of the area that is proposed to change is not in a 100-year flood zone. While Virginia requires developers to manage water as not to cause erosion or unmanaged runoff to neighboring properties, it does not always hold them legally liable if the damage occurs. We can all hope that developers will work in good faith to ensure drainage is properly routed, but when it comes to real estate developers, if the punishment is a fine to them, this is just the cost of doing business. The likelihood that the development of this parcel will affect the water table and the runoff to our neighboring communities is undistainful, and we as the homeowners will be left with the bill. With the current affordability crisis, this is not acceptable for the county to place this burden on its residents, and I'd like to point out the significant cost that can occur because of the reclassification of this parcel. First, the excess runoff can not only cause flooding to houses, but failures to septic systems, which is the majority of the neighborhoods that have. A new pump septic system can range up to $60,000, and that does not even ensure that a new system won't fail. Even if the developer were liable for damage, that would leave us residents with a responsibility and the cost of finding a lawyer and creating litigation. All of that falls on the individual. Second, in order to ensure crawl spaces and basements do not flood, homeowners may have to grade their home. This can cost several thousand dollars, and if you contract the work out to a landscaping business, it can be more. If you do it yourself, it's still a few thousand dollars, but endless hours of digging work dirt and planting grass. I know it because I had to do this last summer because our garage would not stop playing. For the sake of my wallet and my back, I'd really like to not do that again. Finally, there's some unintended ecological impacts that can also affect our wallets and our health. This is a conservation zone with incredible biodiversity. There are animals within this section of land, like bats, possums, and that tick mosquitoes. because they take care of these parasitic bugs. That means we don't have to spray a significant amount of pesticides as they do in the suburbs. This is ideal because we are in well water. And I personally don't want to be drinking permethrin when it when it obviously tap water is going to have that and bottled water is really expensive. Additionally, if this area was cleared of all the clear of all the trees, all those animals are going to be pushed out of their habitat directly into I 295 traffic. will cause damage and harm to the local commuters and interstate travelers alike. I believe it is up to the county to represent the interests of their residents ensure that they can continue to live in this county healthy and without unnecessary financial burden. Thanks.

We get a representative from DPU to speak, speak to the whale situation.

I'm not sure we have anybody from DPU do you have anyone here so no no no one came that I'm aware of okay no problem I just had a question DPU doesn't handle the wells per se okay I believe water may be available in this area but not yet not yet sewer is available not water all right okay thank you

Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, my name is Andy Conlon here on behalf of the applicant. First of all, I want to say thank you for the accommodation last month. I know it was a little bit of a disturbance, but I appreciate the time. This property, and I think, Fred, we've got a PowerPoint, if you don't mind pulling that up real quick. This property is 26.4 acres. property is not being resolved at the 31 acres in the front is already zoned A1. It's the back parcel, parcel A, that's the 26 acres. That's currently zoned C1. If you go to the next slide, please. This 26 acres zoned C1 is not in the floodplain at all. We've actually gone to public works and verified the fact that none of this is in the floodplain. Of the 95 acres, the 31 is already A1. This 26 is... but not in the floodplain. The remaining 38 acres will remain C1, and it is within the floodplain, and we're not asking for any change on that property. This property was, as noted by Mr. Humphreys, part of the request last year, consistent with the comprehensive plan, if you go to the next slide, Mr. Humphreys, calling for up to 2.4 dwelling units an acre for single-family residential. We proposed 1.4 dwelling units an acre, and unfortunately, the Board of Supervisors did turn down that request. But what we heard by the county and the neighbors was, Even 1.4 dwelling units per acre was not appropriate, and we were told time and time again, use of the property should be consistent with the surrounding area, that is, agricultural A1. Next slide, please. The C1 zoning on this property has a simple history. This is the zoning map from 1959, if you can go to the next slide. I've circled the area, and you can see right there that line sets the line for the C1 property. It's on the 90-foot contour line, straight across the property, straight across both east and west from this property, and it's hand-drawn. Nothing more scientific than that, and it is wrong. In 1968, with the passage of the National Flood Insurance Act, FEMA created flood insurance rate maps to designate special flood hazard areas. Henrico's floodplain maps are modeled on that very analysis to calculate the base flood elevations for a 100-year storm event. And that's what the floodplain is supposed to do. If you go to the next slide. So in 1968, this is the next information that we had that we were able to find from Mr. Humphreys in the county. If you go to the next slide then. That line did not change. Whoops. I guess we'll have to go back. I'm not sure what happened there, if you don't mind. That line did not change other than for the Silver Springs subdivision. You see that little notch? To accommodate the Silver Springs subdivision, they changed that one area from C1 to A1. But otherwise, that line was straight across, did not change from 1959. And in 1980, I-295 in this area was constructed and opened up finally. And still this line from 1959 never moved other than that one notch for Silver Springs. So per the county zoning ordinance, C1 is intended primarily to preserve and protect floodplain and floodway while providing for EPA areas or open space for recreation and public and private use. The Department of Public Works has already verified there's no floodplain on this 26 acres and this property is privately owned and not open for public and open space use and doesn't have no intention for using it for recreation purposes. Instead, we were told very clearly that While not appropriate for 1.4 dwelling units an acre, this property is appropriate to be what is in the surrounding area, which is A1. And that's all we're asking for. So we just want to use the properties we're told to be consistent with the surrounding area. There's no plans for development. The owner just wants to be able to rezone it to agricultural. And we believe that agricultural is appropriate. because it's not in the floodplain, it's consistent with the surrounding area, it's preserving the rural character in Verona by using agricultural land for agricultural purposes, and that's what they want to do, and we simply want to be treated the same as our neighbors, including Silver Springs, and allow agricultural use of the property that is not in the floodplain. With that, I would ask you to follow staff's recommendation and recommend this case to the Board of Supervisors. I'll be happy to answer any questions at this time.

I don't have I don't really have a questions I mean we we've been through this um I think um Mr Conlon has uh done a good job of uh proving to myself and to staff that the line was incorrect and the applicant should be treated fairly just like everyone else um just because you change Something from C1 to A1, as he said, doesn't mean that the entire plot could be developed anyway. I think he should be treated fairly just like anyone else. And having said that, Mr. Chairman, I move that we recommend approval of REZ-2026-100545, Beckley-Buford Investments, LLC. Second.

All right, I have a motion by Mr. Mackie, second by Mr. Winterhall. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes.

Mister chairman we we now move on to the next case on your agenda which also appears on page 3. It is provisional use permit 2026 1, 0, 0, 7, 5, 0. His lowest Lewis. Joe Lee for Whitehead and Chaka properties LLC is a request for provisional use permit to allow an indoor event venue located on the South line of 9 mile road approximately 400 feet east of its intersection with new bridge road. I believe it may be the former Ames Shopping Center. The 2026 comprehensive plan recommends commercial concentration. The site is located in the Enterprise Zone and Airport Safety Overlay District. The staff report will be presented by Ms. Molly Mallow.

How are you, Ms. Mallow? I'm doing well. One second before we go. Is there anyone in the audience on WebEx?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission. As mentioned, this is a request for a provisional use permit to bring an existing business, Occasions 2, into compliance with the zoning ordinance. This case was deferred at the June Planning Commission meeting to allow the applicant additional time to address concerns regarding security at the subject site. Following the distribution of the staff report, the applicant has updated staff regarding lighting and security camera improvements they intend to make at the site. Additionally, staff has added several recommended conditions, including a reduction in the hours of operation, a requirement that the owner or representative must be on site during all hours of operation, limit this provisional use permit to one year, and require that at least one uniformed security officer be on duty during hours of operation. Staff is recommending deferral to allow additional time for the applicant and staff to meet with Henrico Police and discuss the recommended conditions and plan security improvements for the site. However, should the commission deem this request suitable, staff recommends the conditions outlined in Section 5 of the staff report. This concludes my presentation. I would be happy to answer any questions.

excuse me is not did you say staff is recommending different for all I'm sorry yes you do because this is speak to thank you appreciate it is anyone on the commission have any questions from this is I don't before I do I mean have they made arrangements with PD and had discussion have they met those I believe it will speak to okay in a second so you know my but so that's why Yeah. Anything else?

No. I would just hold it when they come up. Yeah.

Gotcha. All right. We may proceed. Just remember to state your name and address and everything else.

Good evening. I'm Lois Lewis Jolly. I am from 6015 Nine Mile Road. I'm here representing Occasion 2, which is a facility that has actually been open for 10 years. We have recently put up for this provisional use permit, and over the last, I would say, couple of months, we ran into a situation where we have tried to do some events for some of the teenagers in the area, and it just did not work out in our favor. So, based on recommendations from the commission, Police Department. We have made some changes and updates according to what they've asked for. We have updated our camera system. We have added lights to our building, our part of the building that face the parking lot. We have contacted Dominion Power to get the lighting system in the parking lot itself cleared away because we found out it belongs to them and not the owner of the property. We have done quite a bit of things, actually. There are two things on the recommended... changes that we would like to talk about a little bit. And one of them is closing a little earlier, at 10 o'clock. That directly affects the business. We are an event hall. It takes us out of competition from other event halls in the area, which they're all allowed to stay open until at least midnight in that area. There is a lounge that is directly across the street from us that is allowed to stay open until 2 a.m. We are not the same kind of business. We host weddings, we host baby showers, We host family events. I mean, we do community events. We have an hour of operation that starts at 8 a.m. and we would like to end it at midnight, which is conducive for the business. If we cannot stay open to midnight, it just doesn't make sense for us to even have the business because we're an event hall. The other thing that is on the list that wasn't stated is to not cover the windows. And this is a private facility. People rent our facility because it's a private facility and it's not their home. But we're in a shopping center, so we cannot have the windows open where people, just regular people, can just stare into people's emails and conduce it to the business. So again, these are things that directly could affect the business and would not allow us to actually be in competition with anybody else who also has a business like this. I do understand why we're in this position and why we've been asked to update things to make it safe for the type of events that we're having here. We have decided not to have any more teenage events because that has adversely affected us, so we're not doing that. But we do have regular events that we've been doing for years as well as community events that this will affect us if we don't do it.

Right. Thank you. Does anyone have any questions from the commission? I believe so.

I do. Sorry for getting that order. But just with all the security updates and the lighting and all those things, have you all conferred talk with Henrico PD to see if they have any additional recommendations or issues or concerns that they may have moving forward?

As soon as we left the last meeting, we actually stood outside with them for quite some time, and we kind of came up with a better plan of what we should be doing and how we should be doing it. A lot of those things are stated in the recommendations already, so we have taken care of those things. And then the other thing is just kind of trusting us to actually implement them while we're having the events, which we have. I'm sure you, Michael, can say that in the last one, there have not been any issues. There's no things on the record. There's nothing. Going forward, we would like to do that. We would like to show that we can continue to do it. We've been in the building for 10 years, so it's like how can we improve it much more if we're already following the guidelines? And so we tried something that didn't work. We're not doing that anymore.

Well, I do appreciate your efforts and concerns because it's very difficult, especially with teenagers and just having events and things like that. get a pile of people in a group and there are a lot of challenges there. My biggest concern is with having events and things like that and the security and making sure everybody's best interest one is in mind too, that we can go to an event and all of our safety precautions and items are put in place, so those are my concerns.

Thank you, Chris. Ms. Jolly, is it Jolly? Jolly. Jolly, I apologize. You handed me your information at the last meeting, and I was going through it. When I was told by staff that you had met with the police and come to an agreement on everything except for two basic items, one of them on your page is not numbered, but it's under natural surveillance and visibility, Roman numeral 12. To support crime prevention through natural surveillance, your first line says storefront window shell remain unobstructed.

Yeah, we gave that to you prior to meeting with them, and I didn't update that when I sent it to her. She just asked for what I sent to you last time, so I hadn't updated that paper to send to her this time. I just sent her what we gave you last time, so that was before we met with the police. so before you would you would want the storefront windows to remain unobstructed i didn't necessarily want it that way but you know it's just not conducive to the business as i was there making those changes this last month and we had events you can't i mean we just can't have people peering into we have like i hate to say this but we have unhoused people in that area we have people walking back and forth there's a chinese restaurant in the area and you and just having watching those people watch people have their events in the building is very uncomfortable So it makes the clients not want to rent our space. I've had a concern about that. It made me bring it back up when she asked me.

I understand that, but to have the staff recommend that, the police recommend that, and then you have recommended it yourself, it would be hard for me to move on that. And as far as the time goes... I don't know if it's something that could be done if you say you're not running out to the youth anymore. Perhaps if it was some way you could put some type of age restriction on there, perhaps when you go ahead to the Board of Supervisors, they would be willing to maybe extend it to midnight. But as it sits right now, I'm compelled to go along with what was recommended by staff and stick with the 10 p.m. closing.

I mean, if you don't mind me asking, so many other event spaces in the area, private facilities, lounges, restaurants, I mean, why?

Well, I mean, well, We don't want to get in the way of your business, but safety has to come first. We have had incidents there. We have had situations there. And that's another reason why we were asking this to be a one-year permit. And perhaps if things go well through that year, you can come back and they'll make some more changes.

I may not be in business then because of this. If there's a choice between, think about it. If you're renting a space for a wedding, a reception, and you have the option to go somewhere that allows you to be there until midnight, and your reception starts at 6 p.m., and then you have the option of being somewhere that you have to be out by 10 o'clock p.m., who are you going to choose? I mean, you're lowering the time frame.

Some people may choose the 10 p.m.

I've been in business for 20 years in total. And in this facility, 10. They don't. That's why we always go into midnight.

Right. I appreciate your comments. I don't have anything else. all right mr chairman um okay all right mr chairman i move i move that we recommend approval of pup-2026-100750 whitehead and chalk up properties llc with the revised conditions listed in the staff report second i have a motion by mr mackie second by myself all in favor aye any opposed

Chairman, we now move on to the next item on your agenda, which appears on page four. And that is the consideration of the approval of your minutes from your regular meeting and work session on June the 11th 2026. And I do not have an errata sheet. But as usual, if there are any mistakes or considerations that the commission has regarding the minutes, we certainly will make those adjustments.

move the approval of the minutes from the planning commission regular meeting and work session on june 11 2026 as presented second i have a motion by mr shiffy second by mr phelps all in favor aye aye any opposed motion passes mr chairman i have nothing further for the commission this evening