Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Meeting Actions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Votes at a glance: Planning commission approves consent items and forwards Daytona Drive special-use to City Council
Summary
The commission approved minutes, granted remote participation, approved the consent agenda with an amendment, and recommended approval of a Daytona Drive special-use permit to City Council. Vote tallies were recorded by roll call. (Meeting date not specified.)
At its meeting, the Richmond City Planning Commission recorded the following formal actions:
• Permission for remote participation: The commission voted to allow Miss Knight to attend virtually (roll-call responses in the transcript recorded as ayes from the commissioners called).
• Approval of minutes: The commission approved the minutes of Feb. 17, 2026, by roll-call vote.
• Consent agenda: The commission approved the consent agenda with an amendment to include 2119 West Cary Street in the ordinance referenced as item 3. Staff noted that item 2 (a final community unit plan amendment for Stony Point Shopping Center) was approved; items 3 and 5 were forwarded to City Council with a recommendation for approval.
• Regular agenda (Item 6): The commission voted to recommend approval of ordinance 2025-258 (special-use permit for properties at 6320, 6330 and 6340 Daytona Drive, as amended) and will forward that recommendation to City Council.
Roll-call records in the transcript list commissioners and their recorded responses (transcript text preserved):
- Permission for remote participation: Mister Poole (Aye); Miss Greenfeld (Aye); Miss Ebert (Aye); Miss Knight (Aye); Miss Robertson (Aye); Miss Roe (Aye).
- Approval of minutes: Mister Poole (Aye); Miss Greenfeld (Aye); Miss Ebert (Aye); Miss Knight (Aye); Miss Robertson (Aye); Miss Roe (Aye).
- Consent agenda and Daytona Drive recommendation: the transcript records affirmative roll-call responses for the commissioners called (see meeting record).
Notes: The transcript contains some inconsistent or unclear transcriptions of names and a garbled line concerning required off-street parking; details not clearly recorded in the transcript are marked as "not specified" in the planning record.
