Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Snead Road Multifamily Special Use topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning Commission refers 5009 Rear Snead Road 180‑unit special‑use proposal back to council without recommendation; continued to July 15

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Richmond Planning Commission voted to send the special‑use ordinance for the 5009 Rear Snead Road project — proposing up to 180 multifamily units and a clubhouse — back to City Council without a recommendation and continued the item to the July 15 meeting so council can consider amendments.

The Richmond Planning Commission on an in‑person meeting voted to refer the special‑use ordinance for 5009 Rear Snead Road back to City Council without a recommendation and continued the item to the commission's July 15 meeting.

Preston Lloyd, an attorney for the applicant, told the commission the applicant and city staff had negotiated a change in how right‑of‑way and pedestrian improvements along Snead Road would be handled. "The applicant is now going to contribute, an amount in cash, that would be equivalent to what the cost of constructing those improvements would be so that the city would have those funds, available when the city also brings money to the table to construct those improvements," Lloyd said, asking the commission to send the ordinance to council so counsel could amend it and then return it to the commission for consideration in July.

The commission voted to continue the item and refer it without a recommendation so city council can consider amendments. The motion passed on a roll call with all members voting in the affirmative.

Why it matters: The referral pauses action on a large multifamily proposal that would add up to 180 units and a clubhouse on Snead Road and defers to City Council the task of finalizing an ordinance that clarifies whether the applicant will build improvements or provide a cash contribution for future city construction.

What the commission discussed and decided: Lloyd explained the proposed change is intended to let the city hold funds equivalent to the cost of constructing pedestrian or right‑of‑way improvements while the city secures its own funding. Commission members and staff discussed the procedural mechanics required if counsel modifies the ordinance and how the change affects noticing and scheduling. The commission and applicant agreed the amended ordinance would need to be re‑noticed before the planning commission could act again; commissioners set July 15 as the next hearing date for the matter.

No final land‑use approvals or construction permits were granted. The commission’s action was procedural: (1) forward the ordinance to council without a recommendation to allow counsel and Department of Public Works to finalize the language and (2) continue the item to the July 15 Planning Commission meeting to consider the amended ordinance if council refers it back.

What happens next: City Council may amend the ordinance; if council does so and refers it back to the commission, the Planning Commission will consider the amended ordinance at or after its July 15 meeting. If council does not send an amendment back, the commission will take further direction at a later date.