Williamsburg council approves special-use permit for 1006 Richmond Road with conditions on parking and ground-floor use

The Williamsburg City Council on Thursday approved PCR 24-026, a special-use permit that allows the owner of 1006 Richmond Road to add multifamily apartments in the LB-2 (Limited Business Neighborhood) district and increase density from 8 to 14 units per net acre to permit 11 apartments on the second and third floors.

City planner Ms. Griffin told the council the LB-2 zoning allows apartments only by special-use permit and that staff and the Planning Commission had concluded the proposal met the six criteria in the zoning ordinance, including conformance with the comprehensive plan and adequacy of public services. “Staff recommends approval of PCR 24-026 because it meets the criteria to approve special use permits according to the zoning ordinance,” Ms. Griffin said.

The proposal keeps commercial use on the first floor and converts the upper floors to housing: two one-bedroom and four studios on the second floor (one ADA-accessible) and five one-bedrooms on the third floor. The property sits in the Midtown Parking District and currently has 56 parking spaces; staff reported required parking for the proposed mix would total 33 spaces, so parking was judged adequate unless both proposed restaurants used patios at the same time.

A traffic impact analysis submitted for the application estimated daily trips for the proposed residential/retail configuration would be lower than trips generated by some prior commercial uses in the building. The traffic report used one-day traffic counts (a common approach, the applicant’s traffic engineer said) and compared those counts to historical Virginia Department of Transportation benchmarks; Richmond Road was reported to carry roughly 18,000 vehicles per day in the study area. Ms. Griffin said the planning commission requested the analysis and had its specific questions addressed in the study.

Applicant Demetrius Tarakis told council the project is an adaptive reuse of a 54-year-old, mostly vacant building: “We're gonna gut the whole building, bring it up to code, and give it a nice face lift,” he said, and he proffered a limit of two occupants per apartment. A nearby resident, Geyser of 609 Richmond Road, said the community worries the additional units would increase noise, traffic and trash and questioned whether future traffic changes (including a possible roundabout) might make the study obsolete: “It seems to run contrary to the message we're getting as city residents,” Geyser said.

Council members asked detailed questions about parking, rental-inspection requirements and whether a drive-through could be reinstalled in the future. Ms. Griffin said restaurants in the LB-2 district may not have drive-through windows under the zoning ordinance and that the applicant had proposed eliminating the former drive-through. She also explained that the property is in the city’s rental-inspection district; if the property remains in good standing it would cycle to inspection every four years, and for multifamily properties with more than 10 units the state allows inspection of 10% of units (two units for this 11-unit proposal) unless additional problems trigger more inspections.

The Architecture Review Board reviewed the concept and requested that awnings be enclosed; Ms. Griffin said that ARB conditions would be enforced as part of the building permit and certificate-of-occupancy processes. Fire-department staff raised concerns about access if the council permanently closed the rear parking entrance; Fire Department Chief Schneider asked staff to review whether life‑safety vehicle access and egress could be maintained if the most-southwesterly rear entrance were closed.

After discussion, council approved PCR 24-026 with four conditions: (1) the first floor must remain dedicated to commercial uses at all times (no residential on the first floor); (2) occupancy shall be limited to no more than two people per apartment (the owner’s proffer); (3) the most-southwesterly entrance from the rear parking area exiting onto Matoaka Court shall be permanently closed prior to issuance of any occupancy permit, subject to the Fire Department’s review to ensure life‑safety access (the ingress/egress requirement may be modified depending on the fire department’s determination); and (4) the drive‑through exit in the rear shall be permanently closed. The motion passed on a roll-call vote with all members present voting aye.

The council action means the applicant may proceed with building permits and final site work, subject to ARB review and the fire-department review required by the condition. Staff said additional permit-level review will address final patio sizes, any required curb work and enforcement of ARB conditions before a certificate of occupancy is issued.