Council sends Allen Iverson-backed zoning application back to planning after developer apologizes

Mayor Jones and the Newport News City Council voted 6-0 on March 11 to reconsider item E-1—an ordinance adopting conditional zoning for application Charlie Zulu-2024-001—and to refer the matter back to the planning department for further work.

The question returned to the council after Mayor Jones said the city needed to improve its process and asked the applicant to speak. The applicant, identified in the meeting as Mr. Kiel, acknowledged shortcomings in how the project was presented to the public and apologized to the council for a rushed process. "I'll take full blame from the standpoint that the process could have been more transparent to the citizens," Mr. Kiel said. He told council members he would work with district council members and neighborhood leaders if given another opportunity to bring the application back.

The reconsideration reverses the council's previous handling of the application at the February 25 meeting and sends the file back to planning for additional public outreach, updated proffers, and further review. Mayor Jones said the matter "needs to go back to planning" and that while he still "stands firm in my belief" on some substantive points, the process required reworking to ensure fairness and adequate engagement.

During the public comment period that followed, Matt Regassa, a resident of Newport News's North District, addressed the council about the proposed housing project connected to the application. Regassa said he supported the council's decision to reject the earlier proposal and urged greater attention to pedestrian connectivity and transit access as part of affordable housing planning. "I'm glad that you did," Regassa said of the council's earlier rejection, adding that affordable housing should be sited where residents can reach jobs and services without relying on cars.

Council members present in the roll call for the motion were Mayor Jones; Councilman Long; Councilwoman Vick; Vice Mayor Bethany; Councilman Coleman; and Councilman Harris. The motion to reconsider and the subsequent motion to defer until the matter is ready for council review both passed on unanimous 6-0 votes. Council instructions and the minutes indicate that when the revised filing is ready, the council itself will hear it again rather than leaving the final decision solely to planning staff.

Why this matters: The application concerns a proposed housing development that city residents and the applicant both said prompted disagreement over outreach, proffers and neighborhood fit. Sending the application back gives planners and the applicant time to revise commitments to the community and further vet traffic, pedestrian access and other impacts.

What happens next: The file will return to the planning department for additional review and community engagement; the council will schedule the item for public hearing when the revised materials are ready to be presented to this body.