Planning Commission continues hearing on 7100 Jank Road mixed-use special-use permit after residents voice safety, vaping and convenience-store concerns

The Planning Commission continued the public hearing on a developer’s request to allow a mixed-use building at 7100 Jank Road after neighborhood residents raised safety and land-use concerns about the proposed commercial tenant types.

Baker Development Resources attorney Beau Gillette told commissioners the proposal would include a mixed-use building with up to 14 dwelling units, a corner commercial space, 29 parking spaces and a set of conditions proposed to address neighborhood concerns: a 32-square-foot maximum of indoor retail display for “tobacco and/or vaping products,” a prohibition on string lighting in building windows, and a “no smoking or vaping” condition within the commercial space. The applicant also proposed that up to seven units could be used as short-term rentals, conditioned on an on-site manager living on the property.

Residents and nearby business owners opposed the commercial portion of the project. Tony Dean, owner of a local donut shop on Jank Road, said the neighborhood already has multiple convenience stores and vape shops and said those uses have harmed his business and the area’s sense of safety. Several residents and civic-association spokespeople told the commission they were particularly concerned about easy visibility of vaping and paraphernalia at a corner adjacent to multiple school bus stops and to Chippenham Hospital. Mark Olinger, representing the Churchill Central Civic Association, told the commission the association had repeatedly asked for clarification whether proposed ground-floor units were intended as accessible housing but that the developer’s responses were not received promptly.

Supporters of the project argued the site meets Richmond 300’s neighborhood-mixed-use guidance and would add housing in a citywide housing shortage: Andrew Brunnett, speaking in favor, told the commission the city is facing a “housing crisis” and that building on the vacant parcel would add needed homes.

Commissioners questioned traffic and pedestrian safety, how the commercial use would be operated and whether the applicant’s proposed limits would prevent undesirable uses from appearing later, should the property change hands. Commissioners also asked whether short-term rentals would be tightly controlled; staff said the city’s short-term rental ordinance requires owner-occupancy registration and a city certificate of zoning compliance and that the proposed SUP would limit short-term rentals to no more than seven units and require an on-site manager.

After discussion, the commission took a motion to continue the case. Commissioners then approved a motion to continue the matter to the commission’s April 1 meeting to allow the applicant and community to negotiate further conditions; the roll-call vote was unanimous. The continuance postpones any final council recommendation until the applicant returns with revisions or a clarified set of proffers.

The continuance keeps open options: commissioners asked staff to seek clarifying commitments from the applicant on whether skill games and gambling-style devices would be prohibited, whether sales of vaping paraphernalia and other paraphernalia would be restricted beyond the 32-square-foot cap, and whether a plan without a commercial space (residential-only) should be considered as an alternative.