[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6509111,"mediaKeyId","5442755-4ea9b69785be670499469462ff8567a8","parentId",5442755,"title","Committee forwards wireless lease, Main Street and Patterson Avenue grant resolution to council; appointments approved","audioSeconds",127,"startMs",2063000,"endMs",2190000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5442755-4ea9b69785be670499469462ff8567a8&start=2063&end=2190","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5442755-4ea9b69785be670499469462ff8567a8/thumbnail_2063000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6509111/Richmond-City-Independent-City/Virginia/Committee-forwards-wireless-lease-Main-Street-and-Patterson-Avenue-grant-resolution-to-council-appointments-approved","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6509111-09d6d5cd74018f3f829346c84b38f4e0/orig.mp4?Expires=1770455964&Signature=GLE036MvSwAnZik441SraXzf6GQ3mpiwM8CaMNx64vkQcAIHygpWG3YUUOySabY3E6yuZuzmT2uOLLO3HnFInXFePjj9CMuAvoox6E4SBNgTnQz3uZQcXbT1n7370liVE9Vdgv5wi3YNrEZanIQCqJCEFFHyu8b1SwkxS82cx9rhfkO1HD4IR9nAIOQ086ZBK3lSoO~GFdFJju3uWAdvRZfCff~NKpWS0fL0Ys3E9TwCdS3OIPrzzH6R8BXUcaZevWil3D6FQlfAkKWzaonZlnBgwldF64EU4T3jve5e5u4nv1Y3zRPjZRW4GhptelRGVrChWqxvN0J~SIK0QfJBhw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Richmond City","date","2025-07-22T00:00:00Z","article","The Land Use, Housing and Transportation Standing Committee voted to forward several papers to full City Council with recommendations to approve.

Item summaries and outcomes:
- Ordinance 20 20 five-one 165 (paper 2): a five-year lease between the city and New Singular Wireless PCS LLC to allow continued operation of a telecommunications facility at 3518 North Hopkins Road. The lease initial rent is stated as $47,000 with an annual increase described in the presentation as 3% per year (staff described the term as a 5-year lease with five additional extension terms). The committee held a public hearing with no speakers and voted to forward the ordinance to council with a recommendation to approve. Committee members recorded votes as: Mr. Bridal — Aye; Vice Chair Robertson — Aye; Chair Jones — Aye.

- Resolution 20 25 R0 30 (paper 3): a resolution supporting an application to the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development for participation in the Virginia Main Street program as an Exploring Main Street community. The administration said the city would pay a $375 per-year fee for the Exploring stage, receive technical assistance, and initially target the Broad Street corridor (approximate boundaries described as Eighteenth to Belvidere). No public commenters spoke for or against; the committee voted to forward with recommendation to approve (Mr. Burton — Aye; Vice Chair Robertson — Aye; Chair Jones — Aye).

- Resolution 20 25 R0 32 (paper 4): a resolution supporting an application to the Virginia Department of Transportation Transportation Alternatives Program to fund pedestrian-safety improvements on Patterson Avenue (Maple Avenue to Libby Avenue). The project budget figure cited by staff was approximately $1,440,000, with a federal request of $1,000,000 (80% of the project) and a required local match of $250,000; staff also proposed an additional $187,000 in local CBT funds to improve competitiveness. The committee held a public hearing with no speakers and voted to forward with recommendation to approve (unanimous recorded “Aye”s by the voting members present).

- Appointments (board packet): The committee voted to forward three appointment recommendations to council: James Hutzler (Community Transportation Advisory Committee, MPO representative), Bridal Sims (position not specified in transcript packet language), and William Andrews (reappointment to Board of Fire Appeals). The committee record shows the motion carried and the committee voted to forward with recommendation to approve (votes recorded in the transcript: Bridal — Aye; Vice Chair Robertson — Aye; Chair Jones — Aye).

Procedural notes: Public hearings were held for papers 2–4; no members of the public spoke for or against those three items. Committee members asked clarifying questions about the lease rent escalation for paper 2 and about project boundaries and match commitments for the Patterson Avenue grant application.

Ending: The committee forwarded the items to full council with recommendations to approve and requested no changes to those papers at the committee level; council will consider final approval at a subsequent meeting.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Richmond City - Land Use, Housing and Transportation Standing Committee on 2025-07-22 3:00 PM - To access the meeting via Microsoft Teams, please use the following link: https://go.rva.gov/https://go.rva.gov/LUHT-JULY22 or dial *67-804-316-9457 and enter ID: 262 393 562# - Jul 22, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Land Use Committee forwarded a cell-site lease, a Virginia Main Street application and a VDOT pedestrian-safety grant application to full City Council with recommendations to approve.","taxTitle","Richmond City (Independent City), Virginia","taxId",5755,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6509116,"City staff says special-use permit process has allowed more housing projects; staff urges continued applicant outreach",221,7245000,7466000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5442755-4ea9b69785be670499469462ff8567a8&start=7245&end=7466","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5442755-4ea9b69785be670499469462ff8567a8/thumbnail_7245000.jpg","/articles/6509116/Richmond-City-Independent-City/Virginia/City-staff-says-special-use-permit-process-has-allowed-more-housing-projects-staff-urges-continued-applicant-outreach","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6509116-2aef54616684bf971184803c0cd1ca2b/orig.mp4?Expires=1770455964&Signature=dtSgBbzDw-r1Ih6sQSlqDtrgN9iIwbBkDXHGH3UjB7fdP1nU12xwJWRsP7lRjG1q1fKfzMOmpcRUTZ5u3BK6b0FhydD2t~SR8Oa~cBtK-YmvbyjdHJyqRYxo0N32d66TFUZWWQVmADUNy9FuUqtFH-AG1NXPVYtRC6iMy9JAdZYMdC4seyv1T8~CCzx9dpzTQFuRZ8GCFyQJth8gWa9UiuhN~-e~LunbWOkYNF44tF2W95uLRWMU6CVTtbMU5rG~ZyajbEYqTHrIf9pf1iZSkkzoJr31eGb6ycirerSpbk1SONlPbMu5pZdE8asHu8cjyrPw8M~oNBqd5k-argEvKA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City planning staff updated the Land Use, Housing and Transportation Standing Committee on the Special Use Permit (SUP) process and how the mechanism has been used since ordinance changes.

The city’s deputy director for Planning and Development Review described SUPs as a legislative tool that allows uses or dimensions not otherwise permitted by the underlying zoning, and said staff reviews each case with multiple city departments (planning, land use/zoning, building plan review, public works, utilities and fire). Staff noted the public-notice steps: newspaper publication at 21 and 7 days before hearings, signage 15 days before hearing, and mailed notice to property owners within 150 feet.

The nut graf: Planning staff said SUPs have been used most often to accommodate lot-area, yard/setback and lot-coverage exceptions and that the majority of SUP approvals over the last five years related to residential uses — including single-family, two-family and accessory dwelling units — contributing to housing supply where strict zoning would have otherwise blocked development.

Staff presented summary counts showing steady SUP activity (examples cited: 118 applications in 2021 with 113 going to the planning commission; 125 applications in 2024 with 88 reviewed by the planning commission). They said SUP use was concentrated in R5 and R6 zoning districts (the Fan and West End neighborhoods among others) and that the mechanism has allowed numerous small residential developments that the current zoning would not permit without case-by-case review.

Staff encouraged applicants to engage neighbors and council members early and noted internal coordination with other agencies to reduce negative impacts. The presentation concluded with an invitation for committee members to send follow-up questions; staff asked that any specific questions be sent by email rather than taking more time during the packed agenda.

Ending: Planning staff framed the SUP process as a flexible, public-noticed legislative tool that has contributed to incremental housing development; they recommended continued outreach and coordination with applicants and neighborhood groups to smooth the process.

","Planning staff presented five years of special-use permit (SUP) data, showing many applications and a strong contribution to housing supply, particularly single-family and small multi-family units. Staff described the SUP review and notification process and said most SUPs addressed lot and setback requirements.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6509120,"Richmond Housing Authority outlines redevelopment, financial plan and resident protections; councilors press for relocation details",7018,1100000,8118000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5442755-4ea9b69785be670499469462ff8567a8&start=1100&end=8118","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5442755-4ea9b69785be670499469462ff8567a8/thumbnail_1100000.jpg","/articles/6509120/Richmond-City-Independent-City/Virginia/Richmond-Housing-Authority-outlines-redevelopment-financial-plan-and-resident-protections-councilors-press-for-relocation-details","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6509120-172895f750e0db9f295ca024be618974/orig.mp4?Expires=1770455964&Signature=juAT6CgZKv-P6EWseWSdKiWPoxjpDKRjQahrzjHesSzUQm4rS5tMlFELGIsSUGZHsRsDViVRoGPO7hsUypy2mWnWw5y2lXFGrh8swhy966JWZHvAaN~lmjK63zpTlvPXfTLgTrTcq4Z5lb0yRy0fIZJMys2jGRMsSBrCvj3c6TNFvHXJyTZcaaGITGJDK0pciRa3EbqpMlF-NMSjf6ZIciq9Y99OnvIrzV~UwpUhMLabEEwATQl2vPUGNqPP5bq5IVlWkhxxVxSupRsmaH8R3N~Fw7DtanMIAt2x~zr0yvDq-DZI-ngfOMV0WXSjZm6vrYlh1SJPdlI~RG5sZnCVNg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Richmond Housing Authority leaders briefed the Land Use, Housing and Transportation Standing Committee on the authority’s finances, redevelopment strategy and programs intended to support homeownership for public housing residents.

RHA CEO and representatives told the committee an external audit completed earlier this year found no audit findings for the first time in many years. RHA said it remains financially vulnerable because roughly 80% of its revenue is federally funded through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; officials said they seek to diversify revenue by using a nonprofit development arm, the Richmond Development Corporation (RDC), to attract philanthropic and private capital.

RHA’s plan and the nut graf: RHA described a multi‑phase redevelopment plan for Gilpin Court (10 phases estimated at roughly $466 million in the presentation materials), a “build-first” approach to reduce displacement, and a pledge to require winning development partners to reinvest a portion of project profits back into the redeveloped communities through the RDC.

RHA said the RDC is a 501(c)(3) wholly owned by RHA that can accept philanthropic grants and other unrestricted funding that the housing authority itself cannot receive. ‘‘Do you have a 501(c)(3) entity to receive those dollars?’’ the CEO recounted foundations asking; he said the RDC fills that role.

Council members and residents pushed for greater transparency and concrete relocation guarantees. Multiple councilors asked for data RHA had not provided at the hearing — notably the number and distribution of landlords who accept Housing Choice Vouchers and the inventory of deeply affordable units (those at or below 40% of area median income). RHA committed to provide that information and to circulate a draft relocation plan; the CEO said a more complete relocation/Section 18 plan would be produced by Aug. 15 and shared with council.

Residents and tenant advocates pressed for firm assurances on return rights and alternatives. Several public speakers described long-standing maintenance and safety problems in public housing and urged resident-led redevelopment. RHA leadership said residents would be engaged and that the authority would present a tenants’ bill of rights to residents first and then to the board; RHA said it will include resident participation in redevelopment governance and that the board is considering adding a resident voting member to the RDC board.

Committee members said they welcomed the build-first strategy and the idea of tying developer profits to community reinvestment, but emphasized that redevelopment in a period of constrained regional affordable housing supply requires explicit, enforceable relocation guarantees and a credible plan to ensure displaced residents have comparable housing options. Council members asked RHA to provide the promised relocation plan and data to the full council and committee for review.

Ending: RHA committed to provide a draft relocation plan and data on voucher acceptance and affordable-unit inventory; the committee said it will continue oversight and requested a September return for follow-up materials.

","Richmond Housing Authority officials described clean audit results and redevelopment strategy that relies on a nonprofit development arm (Richmond Development Corporation). Council members and residents pressed for concrete relocation plans and guarantees for voucher access during phased redevelopments.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6509124,"Richmond committee continues debate on residential rental inspection ordinance; council to consider targeted amendments",4743,2369000,7112000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5442755-4ea9b69785be670499469462ff8567a8&start=2369&end=7112","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5442755-4ea9b69785be670499469462ff8567a8/thumbnail_2369000.jpg","/articles/6509124/Richmond-City-Independent-City/Virginia/Richmond-committee-continues-debate-on-residential-rental-inspection-ordinance-council-to-consider-targeted-amendments","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6509124-4f4cedd57cca17eefc41e027aa0989b1/orig.mp4?Expires=1770455964&Signature=hPMD3P3ym90yoKj58hO3XZCW5GU7QqeTmCitrVfkuZ58nDAR8leClTYhfAFmRT~OV2eLjI4hesfJwCSytRGCfgjsDevRnPasaqEuMPhh2vskBIFayV1uSEOBI10iBiVh6FqmxpO8C-Cj-bTQ3D9EvYuA1FTHDy~bjRlBVVNPKttXALfqAxtj46iUKVv6kgHc9E9LYxZGhu~Jmu4~01IcVfqqS7GdOk06xPtzeyppw36YgUu4Nn-O~GiolMaI4gzmvWmdw9jOrRLy5TYMIRelXSwnCD4jz5DS0rVWUlDZszzHRQNKeSmkB1wGHx03--ZVnsmNLWIcHgIMxak8N28Vyw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Land Use, Housing and Transportation Standing Committee on Tuesday continued consideration of ordinance 20 20 five-one 161, which would establish a residential rental inspection program in Richmond.

The proposal, presented by Kevin J. Bonk, director of Planning and Development Review, would create a program (shortened in the draft to RRIP) permitting proactive periodic inspections of residential rental dwelling units under the authority and limits defined in the Code of Virginia and the city’s building code. The ordinance as drafted would not automatically enroll units; council would need to adopt a subsequent ordinance to add any properties to the program.

Bonk told the committee the program is limited to building- and habitability-related violations (not sanitation or tall-grass complaints) and that state law prescribes many of the program’s limits. “For properties with 10 or more units, it allows inspection of 10% of those units. And if there is a violation found in one of those units, it allows all of the units in that particular complex to be inspected,” Bonk said.

The nut graf: Tenants and housing advocates urged adoption as a tool to compel repairs and reduce health and safety risks; property owners and trade groups pressed the committee to narrow the proposal so it targets “bad actors” and does not stigmatize entire neighborhoods or unduly burden small landlords.

During the public hearing, tenants and advocates described repeated code and habitability problems. Omario Gaddafi of the Legal Aid Justice Center said residents need an inspection program backed by enforcement: “We are all here to support a redevelopment of public housing that is resident led and community supported,” he said in public comment that connected to broader housing concerns. Tenants described mold, slow or missing maintenance responses and safety risks; one resident, Sylvia Davis, displayed photographs of water damage and deteriorated finishes she said had persisted for years.

Landlords and trade groups asked for targeted criteria and protections. Latoya Washington, identified as a local property owner, said she supported safe housing but opposed the ordinance as drafted, warning that broad districts could stigmatize low-income neighborhoods and impose costs on small operators. Elizabeth Greenfield of the Homebuilding Association of Richmond and speakers representing the Virginia Apartment Management Association and Virginia Apartment Management Association raised similar concerns and proposed exemptions or different triggers (for example, focusing on repeatedly noncompliant “bad actors”).

Administrators and committee members discussed available data sources and program design. Bonk said staff can provide four years of police, fire and building-inspection call data and notices of violation to help council draw boundaries and justify districts, but matching individual emergency calls to building-code violations would be time-intensive. He recommended a cautious approach that prioritizes complexes where tenants have petitioned for inclusion or where inspectors have documented repeated violations.

Committee members asked about tenant protections and the possibility that repairs could lead to rent increases or displacement. Bonk said the rental-inspection ordinance cannot directly control rent or evictions under Virginia law; the program’s scope is limited to building-code enforcement and inspection timing. He recommended that any district rollout include an implementation plan addressing inspection capacity, housing for displaced tenants if units are placarded unsafe, and tenant notification and education.

After extended discussion and dozens of public speakers, the committee voted to continue the ordinance so staff can prepare amendments and supporting materials. The motion to continue the item to the September Land Use, Housing and Transportation meeting passed unanimously in committee: Mister Britton, Vice Chair Robertson and Chair Jones recorded “Aye.”

The committee directed staff to return with proposed amendments that clarify criteria for designating districts, tenant-notification and education language, an implementation plan describing staffing and capacity, and data runs that map violations and emergency calls where feasible. Bonk said the ordinance as drafted would establish the program but would not add any units until council adopts a separate ordinance specifying districts or parcels to inspect.

The committee set an expectation that staff would bring suggested amendments and analysis ahead of the September meeting so councilors could consider more narrowly targeted approaches to inspection districts.

Ending: The item remains active; council members and advocates signaled continuing differences over scope and triggers and asked staff to return with clearer criteria, tenant-protection measures and implementation steps before the committee resumes consideration.

","City staff presented an ordinance to establish a residential rental inspection program; weeks of public comment produced sharply divided testimony from tenant advocates and landlord groups. The committee voted to continue the ordinance to September to allow amendments and further data work.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee forwards wireless lease, Main Street and Patterson Avenue grant resolution to council; appointments approved

City staff says special-use permit process has allowed more housing projects; staff urges continued applicant outreach

Richmond Housing Authority outlines redevelopment, financial plan and resident protections; councilors press for relocation details

Richmond committee continues debate on residential rental inspection ordinance; council to consider targeted amendments