Planning staff outline new citywide site‑plan ordinance, note HB 2660 timeline changes and July 1 rollout

City planning staff presented the citywide site‑plan ordinance and associated implementation materials to the Richmond Planning Commission and described changes that will affect when a site plan is required, how interdepartmental review will operate, and the timelines the department plans to meet.

The director of the Planning Department said the ordinance is intended to standardize when a site plan (previously called a plan of development in some districts) is required across zoning districts, to clarify what is mandatory under state and local code versus discretionary best practices, and to create a clearer interdepartmental review framework. "The intent of the site plan ordinance when it was adopted is to establish consistency for what a site plan is required," the director said.

Staff laid out thresholds for when a site plan will be required, including: work on lots of a certain size (4,000 square feet in many areas; 2,500 square feet in specified areas), significant changes to public right‑of‑way or public utilities (upsizing or major alterations), documented increases in parking of 10 percent or more, installation of public‑facing infrastructure (drive‑throughs, fuel pumps, charging stations), and an increase of usable building space by 2,500 square feet or more as measured by building codes.

Staff also described recent state legislation (House Bill 2660) that shortens code review timelines: the director explained the first municipal review period drops from 60 to 40 days and the first resubmission window shortens from 45 to 30 days; when state review is required, municipal review following state completion is shortened (for example, a 35‑day municipal window is reduced to 20 days), and on a third review the director (or designee) must step in and a 14‑day decision timeline applies. Staff said the city will follow state law and prepare a follow‑up amendment to the local ordinance to codify the new statutory deadlines.

Deputy Director Leo Manty and other staff walked commissioners through operational changes: encouraging pre‑application conferences, consolidating interdepartmental comments before issuing review letters to applicants, separating mandatory code deficiencies from discretionary recommendations in comment letters, and publishing a shorter, user‑friendly four‑page checklist for applicants with an optional longer reference checklist for first‑time applicants.

Commissioners and attendees asked about implementation capacity, department coordination and how discretionary requests from non‑planning departments will be handled. Director and staff said they will continue to refine internal review procedures, use pre‑application meetings to catch major issues early, and publish the checklist and guidance materials online before the July 1 effective date. Staff also offered to return with a brief update at the next commission meeting and to circulate the final four‑page checklist to commissioners prior to that meeting.

Public comment: Mark Baker, a frequent applicant and development practitioner, praised staff’s work and urged administration to model implementation capacity and clarify how thresholds will be applied in practice; he also raised questions about the volume of projects that will be captured by the new thresholds. Staff said they will provide additional outreach and training materials for applicants and reviewers.

Why it matters: The site‑plan ordinance replaces the variable plan‑of‑development thresholds and aims to create consistent citywide standards for when a site plan is required, which affects the permitting path and timelines for many private development projects. The change, combined with state timeline adjustments under HB 2660, shortens review windows in ways that will affect developers, reviewers and project schedules.

What happens next: The ordinance goes into effect July 1; staff will publish the four‑page checklist and supporting materials on the department website and circulate the final checklist to commissioners and frequent applicants. The department will return with implementation updates and will amend the local ordinance to reflect HB 2660 statutory timelines.