Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Density Bonus Jolina Court topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Richmond planners propose voluntary density bonuses for Jolina Court instead of mandatory inclusionary zoning
Summary
Commissioners discussed an optional density-bonus program for the Jolina Court district that would offer developers extra market units in exchange for affordable units, senior units or public amenities; staff was asked to draft language for a future vote.
At the Aug. 21 Planning Commission meeting commissioners discussed a compromise for the Jolina Court zoning district that would offer developers voluntary density bonuses in exchange for public benefits rather than imposing mandatory inclusionary zoning.
Virginia outlined the approach after consulting regional examples and state law. She explained that under a route in state statute (Act 47) a developer that makes 20% of the final units affordable can receive a 40% increase in density and up to one additional story. "If you make an affordable housing development with 20% of the final number of units being affordable then what you get for that is a 40% density bonus and up to and including one more story," Virginia said.
Because Buttermilk (the project applicant) has indicated it does not want mandated affordable units, Virginia proposed offering optional density bonuses instead of raising the base density: developers could keep the current base density or elect a bonus package. Options discussed included a statutory-style route (20% affordable for a large 40% bonus) and smaller local incentives (for instance, several market units granted for each affordable unit provided; bonuses in exchange for senior/adaptable units or additional parking). The commission discussed using monitoring oversight (the housing committee) for any affordability covenants.
Why it matters: the Jolina Court site is a near-term development opportunity in the village. The commission sought a compromise that gives the town leverage (incentives for community benefits) without imposing mandatory requirements that might halt a small project.
Reaction and process: commissioners generally signaled conditional support for a voluntary density-bonus program and asked staff to draft model language. Chris and others said they could support the incentive approach; several members requested the item be placed higher on the next agenda so the commission can review a new draft before taking any motion. No formal vote was held; staff will prepare a written draft for the next meeting.
Ending: The commission adjourned after the discussion; a redrafted density-bonus section will be circulated before the next meeting so commissioners can consider specific bonus rates and monitoring procedures.
