Planning Commission approves special-use permit for accessory dwelling at 2315 Floyd Ave, forwards to City Council

The Richmond Planning Commission voted to approve a special-use permit for 2315 Floyd Ave, authorizing a two-family attached dwelling with an accessory dwelling unit (ADU), and will forward the commission's recommendation to the City Council for its Dec. 8 meeting.

Jonathan Brown, a city planner, told commissioners the property in the Fan neighborhood is currently zoned R-6 and that the proposal — an accessory structure with a two-car garage and living space above — requires a special-use permit because ADUs are not permitted accessory uses to duplexes under the current zoning. Brown summarized staff findings that the proposed use aligns with the Richmond 300 master plan’s neighborhood-mixed-use guidance and said the Fan District Association had voted not to oppose the application; staff also noted two written letters of opposition had been received.

Applicants Hudson and Vanessa Yost described the site as a long, narrow lot (about 24 feet wide and roughly 0.1 acre) and said they had engaged an architect and met with the Fan District Association and adjacent neighbors during 2024 and 2025. They described the accessory structure as a two-story unit above a garage and said lot depth made compliance with some dimensional expectations impractical.

Several nearby residents urged the commission to delay or deny the project. Trevor Dobbinspeck, the adjacent owner, said the structure exceeded what he understood to be ADU limits, raised concerns about height, square footage, setbacks and shading of a backyard certified as wildlife habitat, and asked for a continuance to allow more community feedback. Matt Monta, a Fan District Association board member, said he voted not to oppose at a previous FDA meeting because he expected a small carriage-house design but later saw plans and concluded the project was much larger than that characterization. Melissa Savinco, chair of the FDA zoning committee, testified the committee and board had reviewed the proposal and unanimously recommended not opposing it given lot depth and infeasibility of stricter constraints.

A motion to continue the case failed for lack of a second. A subsequent motion to approve carried on roll-call vote with multiple commissioners recorded as voting 'aye'; the motion passed. The clerk recorded that the item will be forwarded to City Council on Dec. 8 with the commission’s recommendation for approval.

Next steps: The City Council will consider the commission’s recommendation at its Dec. 8 meeting. The commission’s approval does not itself authorize permits or building construction; any building permits must still meet applicable code requirements and conditions noted in the ordinance as it advances through council review.