Henrico supervisors defer decision on 36-acre North Airport rezoning after lengthy public comment

Henrico County supervisors on Aug. 12 deferred a rezoning request for a 36.118-acre property on North Airport Drive after hours of staff presentation and public comment.

County planning staff and the applicant described the current proposal as a conditional rezoning to R-5A(C) and C-1(C) that would allow clustering for up to 49 detached single-family homes, an equivalent density of about 1.36 units per acre. Joe Emerson, a county planner, said the application includes a conceptual plan with a single access point on North Airport Drive and proffers to set aside roughly 18–19 acres as conservation C-1(C) to protect environmental features.

The board’s deferral followed more than an hour of public testimony that included neighbors opposed to smaller, clustered lots and residents and local advocates who said the county needs more housing. Opponents cited concerns about proximity to mapped floodplain and streams, impacts on private wells and septic systems, traffic safety near the I-295/North Airport Drive interchange, and school capacity. Supporters urged the board to allow more housing choices and noted proffers that increase conservation acreage.

Why it matters: The decision postpones whether the county will allow higher-density clustered development in a largely one-acre-lot area of the Varina district. If approved, the project would add public water and sewer infrastructure and create a neighborhood with trails and common open space, but residents warned it could change the character of surrounding properties and raise environmental and public-safety risks.

What county staff and the applicant said Joe Emerson told supervisors the developer’s concept plan shows how homes would be clustered in the center of the site while C-1(C) conservation areas would surround the residential portion to the west, north and east. "The applicant proposes to develop the site for up to 49 detached homes, an equivalent density of 1.36 units to the acre," Emerson said, adding that additional environmental features discovered during engineering would be rezoned C-1(C) before final subdivision approval.

Developer Harsh Thacker of Dorado Capital said his team has reduced the plan from earlier iterations — the project began as about 103 units, then 81, and now 49 — and that the applicant has commissioned wetland delineations and a hydrogeologist’s letter about likely well impacts. "We have been working on this development since late 2023," Thacker told the board, and said the team is trying to respond to neighborhood concerns.

Public response and technical issues Opponents at the lectern described repeated flooding nearby, potential runoff to the Chickahominy River, and long-standing worries about the effect of new development on private well yields and septic systems. Resident Ricky Witt, who lives on Beverstone Road adjacent to the site, told the board: "Do not allow the urban development invasion of our community. Help us preserve our rural homes."

Supporters argued Henrico needs more homes at a variety of prices. Joe Gelbach of RVA YIMBY, who identified his organization as supporting more housing, told supervisors the county’s housing shortage pushed local prices up and urged approval.

County staff noted several technical items the project must address before buildout: detailed stormwater and floodplain delineation as engineering advances, Corps of Engineers and DEQ permitting if jurisdictional waters are affected, and design resolution for buffers and trail/amenity areas. Emerson and other staff said the applicant removed a previously proposed second connection through an adjacent subdivision at neighbors’ request; the single access design is only allowed without a second entrance if the neighborhood contains no more than 49 lots under county rules.

Schools and emergency access Henrico Public Schools provided an estimate the development would generate roughly 8.5 high-school–level students and noted Highlands Springs High School has fluctuated historically between near-capacity and surplus depending on redistricting and new approvals. Board members emphasized the cumulative effect of many approvals in an area and said the district and county must monitor enrollments.

On emergency access, staff described common mitigations used elsewhere: gated permeable-paver emergency access drives that remain closed in daily use but can be opened by first responders in emergencies.

Board action After the public hearing and discussion, Supervisor Jeff Nelson moved to defer the rezoning to the Sept. 9, 2025 board meeting for decision only so supervisors could verify technical points raised at the meeting. The motion was seconded and carried. The board did not reopen public comment for the Sept. 9 session; staff and residents may continue to submit written comments in the interim.

Clarifying details and next steps - Site area: 36.118 acres (applicant-provided). - Proposed maximum lots: up to 49 detached homes; proposed density ~1.36 units/acre. - Conservation/C-1(C) acreage: roughly 17–19 acres shown on the concept plan; final acreage may increase as engineering defines wetlands/floodplain. - Community meetings held: Oct. 28, 2024 and May 13, 2025 (applicant noted); applicant said it plans an updated community meeting after Labor Day. - Utilities: applicant and staff confirmed the project would use public water and sewer. - School yield: county estimate ~8.5 students (high school yield cited in staff comments). - Access: single access on North Airport Drive proposed; second entrance removed at neighbors’ request; county rule requires two entrances for 50 units or more. - Environmental review: wetlands delineation completed by the applicant; additional permitting (including U.S. Army Corps of Engineers jurisdictional review) may be required during site plan engineering.

What was decided: The board deferred the case to the Sept. 9, 2025 meeting for decision-only so supervisors could check outstanding technical questions (floodplain mapping, traffic signal feasibility, and school capacity tracking). The public hearing was closed; written comments will remain part of the record.

Ending note: The applicant said it would host another community meeting shortly after Labor Day to present updated engineering and to collect neighborhood feedback; neighbors said they will continue to press for one-acre lots or other changes to preserve the area’s existing rural character.