Richmond City Planning Commission recommends special-use permit for Daytona Drive homes, forwards to City Council

The Richmond City Planning Commission voted to recommend a special-use permit allowing up to five single-family detached homes at 6320, 6330 and 6340 Daytona Drive and forwarded the measure to City Council for final action.

City staff presenter Mr. Brown told commissioners the properties sit in the Hy Oaks neighborhood and that, under the city’s master plan, the parcels are designated for residential use. "Staff finds that the proposed use aligns with the master plan recommendations for residential land uses and is a recommended primary use," Mr. Brown said, and recommended approval with conditions including a public-easement dedication and onsite improvements.

The applicant, Alessandro Segasi of Baker Development Resources, presented revised plans reducing the development from an earlier proposal for eight homes to five homes with lots that the applicant said range about 6,300 to 6,500 square feet and home footprints of about 1,500 square feet (three bedrooms, two-and-a-half bathrooms). Segasi noted neighborhood outreach and said the project has a letter of support from the Department of Housing and Community Development and "would be eligible for affordable housing trust fund funding."

Mr. Brown described several site conditions the commission would require if it recommended approval: a permanent 9-foot-wide public easement to be conveyed to the city and recorded in the land records of the clerk and circuit court, installation of a 5-foot sidewalk along Daytona Drive, building materials and elevations to match the submitted plans, a maximum height of two stories, and screening of mechanical equipment. Mr. Brown also cited noncompliance with Section 30-406.4 of the zoning ordinance on minimum lot area and lot width under current zoning; the proposed lots were described as approximately 6,337 and 6,474 square feet with proposed widths of about 46 feet.

The transcript includes two different figures for combined parcel area: in his presentation Mr. Brown said the properties total 43,560 square feet (one acre); the applicant later described the tract as "approximately 34,000 square feet". The commission record did not reconcile that discrepancy during the meeting.

A single neighbor letter opposing the density was received by staff; the applicant said he met with neighbors and with the councilmember and had discussed the project at a district town hall. The applicant emphasized accommodating aging-in-place design with a first-floor primary bedroom.

The commission voted on a motion to approve the item as amended and recorded affirmative responses during roll call. The transcript records the roll-call responses as follows: "Mr. Poole: Aye; Ms. Greenfield: Aye; Ms. Ebert: Aye; Ms. Knight: Aye; [Clinton]: Hi; Ms. Rowe: Hi." The motion passed and the commission forwarded the recommendation to City Council.

Next steps: the planning commission’s recommendation will be transmitted to City Council for final consideration and any additional conditions or modifications. The transcript does not list a City Council hearing date for this item.