Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

and welcome the public. We have two very familiar faces, so we're glad to see you all. Please give the electronic notice.

Thank you very much. For purposes of establishing a forum, please call the roll.

Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, we have minutes from August 18th of 2026. Is there a motion? It's approved.

Need discussion? Voting on approval of August 18th, 2026 minutes, please call the roll.

Mr. Director, I'm going to defer your report for the end of this project. Are there continuances or cancellations from the agenda?

Is there a motion to continue item number three to November 2nd, 2025? So moved. Second. Any discussion? Hearing none, I'll call the question. We're voting on continuing item number three, 3317 Rear Monument Avenue to November 2nd, 2026. Please call the roll.

Is there a motion to continue item number four, 5706 York Road to September 15th, 2026? So moved. Second. Any discussion? Hearing none, I'll call the question. We're voting on a continuance. Item number four, 5706 York Road to September 15th, 2026. Please call the roll.

Any questions from members of the commission on the consent agenda? Hearing none, I'll open a public hearing and ask if there's any member of the public who wishes to speak on the item that's on the consent agenda. Anyone online?

We'll close the public hearing, bring it back to the commission, and ask if there's a motion on the consent agenda. Second. Any discussion? Hearing none, I'll call the question. We're voting on approval of the consent agenda as presented. Please call the roll.

Mr. Director. Would you like to give us a report on code?

To one of the points you made at the very beginning, and that is the goal for the zoning is encourage those things that you want and discourage things that you don't want. It sounds to me like if you're making it more expensive to build, you're discouraging that.

Your residential detached districts where you made the limit one plus one, correct? The attached, does that allow two principles, right? It does. Help me understand the logic. Sure. So that's going to have particularly, potentially effects in the fan, museum district, Churchill, things of that nature.

I guess potential and maybe are up there.

I'm guessing, but in the fan, probably 60% of the houses in the fan don't meet the R6 requirements.

So if you make that distinction between the attached and the detached, you're allowing more duplexes, whereas on the detached, you're allowing a principal and an ADU. Strikes me that you're... I don't understand why the difference. And that's why I think there's a potential for a major effect in those districts like the fan museums. Churchill, maybe Oregon Hill, maybe.

I would suggest that many of the non-conforming uses in those areas that were built prior to World War II became non-conforming during World War II because of the need for additional housing. You see this doing the same thing?

I'm moving on to the ability to take church property in residential areas. And I have a specific example in mind. Look, in Wilmington, there's a church there that owns six different lots. Basically from Wilmington to Laburnum, pretty much half of the block.

What are they going to be able technically, with the way you've got the zoning ordinance established or proposed, what will they be able to do there?

As a matter of fact, just to be clear, I don't think that church is going anywhere. They're going gangbusters, but they bought it from a church that folded. So, It does happen.

Some would also be more about the L-shape on the north side.

I can't quite see what you're talking about.

I'm not trying to do anything other than basically understand what your goal is and putting specific rules with respect to that.

There's multiple churches around the city that are having trouble surviving.

One of the major factors or tenets of Richmond 300 was preservation of existing neighborhoods, both residential and commercial. Do you feel the buffers that are currently proposed along Broad, Main, Cary and Wall Street are sufficient to protect the existing buildings, the existing businesses and the existing residential?

Conversation on TOD 1 on Broad and Grace as far as what the separation was between Broad's TOD and the residential on Grace. Do you feel like this is better or just...

As you know, I'm the representative from the Board of Zoning Appeals. I was trying to find, are all of the current special exceptions that exist today included in that section six?

So because the charter has some variance rules and also some specific rules for city owned properties. I just couldn't find where that was in here. But you're comfortable that all of that's included?

I just want to make sure they're there because, as you know, I feel like that board runs a pretty tight ship and I don't want to lose what we're able to do there. I think You made mention earlier in one of your comments that you might be looking for the BGA to be able to help make this easier.

Do form-based regulations apply to the old and historic districts?

I just couldn't find a distinction on that.

One last thing you, you made mention of the conditional use permits. Do you perceive them? as providing more flexibility and encouraging more folks to use those rather than the special usefulness?

Anything further that anyone wants to bring up? Thank you all very much.