[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6500399,"mediaKeyId","5453625-2b1eef1662f40e751a578dad15ef9fb9","parentId",5453625,"title","Votes at a glance: committee forwards telecom lease, Main Street application and Patterson Avenue grant application","audioSeconds",335,"startMs",1015000,"endMs",1350000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5453625-2b1eef1662f40e751a578dad15ef9fb9&start=1015&end=1350","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5453625-2b1eef1662f40e751a578dad15ef9fb9/thumbnail_1015000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6500399/Richmond-City-Independent-City/Virginia/Votes-at-a-glance-committee-forwards-telecom-lease-Main-Street-application-and-Patterson-Avenue-grant-application","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6500399-3bff6f921edd0902ebdd36cbbde23d31/orig.mp4?Expires=1770424827&Signature=JOY9az01-1Dy8aUPfhBZbV2C9x0XPw0c9kQxmbp~rTbduQuJhgH0Rnh7Ye2SvUgjl9yxt67LuXWxbWHPoATxKy8GX9gS6Dj3NULRVRUCR8OnGGQ-SJDx3hPuC7ACDDV9iJEHA6uVkP25M~ky~OA2c33gi9fQk995dPjfqex4PuYWzOoGKff2YEmwHwI7sG1knxSzI5bAB9LhZyU27AgPq0N1PDCKGWcPIUf9wVZOhCgupSUp7MvoI6~dkgXRlrTsrc9EyNeI7REsM0LKlLxosurOThDxvbzd0EQdKxiVOevyhAknEWOFZKteeBbKwlP3FgrJyjKcW8Z8TWI9QuFd3w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Richmond City","date","2025-07-23T00:00:00Z","article","The Land Use, Housing and Transportation Standing Committee forwarded three items and multiple appointment recommendations to the full City Council with a recommendation to approve.

New Singular Wireless lease (ordinance 2025-165)
The committee voted to forward an ordinance that would authorize the chief administrative officer to execute a lease with New Singular Wireless PCS LLC to continue operation of telecommunications equipment at 3518 North Hopkins Road. Shania Wilson of the Department of Emergency Communications, Preparedness and Response said the lease term is five years, with initial rent of $47,000 and an annual rent increase of 3 percent; the draft also allows five additional renewal terms. During questions a council member asked whether the 103% phrasing in the staff memo meant 3%; staff clarified the intended increase is 3% annually (approximately $1,410 on a $47,000 base). The committee voted to forward the ordinance with a recommendation to approve; recorded “Aye” votes included Mister Burton, Vice Chair Robertson and Chair Jones.

Virginia Main Street program application (resolution 2025-R30)
The committee forwarded a resolution supporting an application to the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development’s Main Street program to participate as an Exploring Main Street community. Acting Director Matt Welch said the initial step requires a $375 annual fee and technical assistance through a multi-year process; the current target for designation work is the Broad Street corridor with tentative boundaries from East 18th Street to Belvidere Street. The committee voted to forward the resolution with recommendation to approve.

Patterson Avenue Transportation Alternatives grant (resolution 2025-R32)
The committee forwarded a resolution supporting an application to the Virginia Department of Transportation’s Transportation Alternatives Program to fund pedestrian safety improvements on Patterson Avenue between Maple Avenue and Libby Avenue. City engineer Emkharat described the $1,440,000 project that would include ADA curb ramps, sidewalk reconstruction, bike racks, narrowed shopping-center entrances to reduce vehicle/pedestrian conflicts, and streetscape amenities. Federal funds requested total $1,000,000 (about 80%); the city would be required to commit a 20% local match of $250,000 and staff indicated an additional $187,000 in local funds could make the application more competitive. The committee voted to forward the resolution with a recommendation to approve.

Appointments and committee vacancies
The committee moved to forward reappointments and appointment recommendations to city council. The motion to accept applications and forward recommendations included William Andrews (reappointment to the Board of Fire Appeals), James Hudler (Community Transportation Advisory Committee vacancy) and Bridal Sims (name as recorded in packet). The committee voted to forward the appointment recommendations to council with a recommendation to approve.

Ending: Each item above was forwarded to the full council with recommendations to approve and will appear on council agendas for final action.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Richmond City - Land Use, Housing and Transportation Standing Committee Meeting - July 22, 2025, at 3:00 P.M. - Jul 23, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Land Use committee forwarded three papers to council with recommendations to approve and advanced several appointments; details of each action are listed below.","taxTitle","Richmond City (Independent City), Virginia","taxId",5755,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6500403,"Richmond Housing Authority outlines redevelopment plans, 501(c)(3) arm and resident protections; advocates press for tenant-led decision-making",7777,83000,7860000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5453625-2b1eef1662f40e751a578dad15ef9fb9&start=83&end=7860","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5453625-2b1eef1662f40e751a578dad15ef9fb9/thumbnail_83000.jpg","/articles/6500403/Richmond-City-Independent-City/Virginia/Richmond-Housing-Authority-outlines-redevelopment-plans-501c3-arm-and-resident-protections-advocates-press-for-tenant-led-decision-making","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6500403-acc5a34a550ffeff59be4d7a84011f75/orig.mp4?Expires=1770424827&Signature=jCNVT5NHEdWGcxv~9F88ZxH0fYUx3YIM4YktcbX7TfI51NehUUFw3nQGgDIdcqkpUJ6vFLEC25jypG3FzPztlQxskta~qy0jNI0jisSFiFFoOi5PAb6ZLbP~tUcHeiepuZ36mPjb7MBLre9tJzaVohHdq0hxt4NuqW--JSnBvWZ4zX4Z~QafiIPLUNxsjDxnZG0ccX65y9sa5t4OBpkjO-r-k4XMImo3sJpBOcJ2Ux0im-65UbBDpfdMzEjJQZ0uYs78troy-JSg2xPmSr9dFfAqPqPjwpfWtf2RNDQqgb05iItAm4YdD-0YtkJ9MYmCXZpzZ4Zv8hetOytSHJQ-Ag__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Richmond Housing Authority (RHA) returned to the Land Use Committee to report on finances, redevelopment plans and resident programs and to answer questions about its nonprofit development arm, the Richmond Development Corporation (RDC).

RHA CEO reported that an outside audit completed in the prior month produced no findings for the first time in many years. RHA said roughly 80% of its funding comes from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and described efforts to diversify funding by using the RDC, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit wholly owned by RHA, to attract philanthropic and private capital for resident programs and redevelopment.

On redevelopment, RHA outlined a multi-phase strategy for Gilpin Court and other public-housing sites. The agency said Gilpin’s full redevelopment is planned in 10 phases and that the total estimated cost for those phases is $466,000,000. RHA said its preferred approach is a build-first strategy—construct replacement housing on the site so residents can move directly into new units rather than face long-term displacement—and that the agency will present a detailed relocation plan and Section 18 considerations in mid-August. RHA also said it intends to include a resident bill of rights in master development agreements and to host community meetings (RHA listed upcoming resident meetings on Aug. 28 and Sept. 6) before finalizing MDAs.

CEO remarks also flagged a procurement condition added to the Gilpin MDA: a requirement that a selected private developer reinvest a portion of profits back into the community in consultation with residents. RHA said it intends to add a resident voting member to the RDC board and that the RDC is necessary because RHA itself, as a public housing authority, cannot receive certain philanthropic or private funds.

Public comment earlier in the meeting had included sustained testimony about conditions at Gilpin Court and other public-housing sites. Omar El Gaddafi of the Legal Aid Justice Center, residents of Gilpin Court, and organizers from Virginia Organizing and New Virginia Majority described mold, broken building systems and long maintenance delays; several speakers urged resident-led redevelopment and called for tenant protections such as a tenant bill of rights and stronger relocation guarantees.

RHA told the committee that it had revised its administrative plan and annual plan and that it is pursuing homeownership pathways for residents through counseling, partnerships with local lenders and plans to pair residents with city down-payment assistance where eligible. The agency said it has preliminary homeownership activities under way, including land parcels (Blackwell lots) planned for affordable homeownership.

Committee members pressed RHA on details. Councilors asked for data on landlords accepting Housing Choice vouchers and the size of very-low-income inventory; RHA agreed to supply those figures. Council members and advocates said they want the agency’s relocation and redevelopment plans in writing and available to the full council and public before any demolition or large-scale displacement occurs.

Ending: RHA said it will provide the committee the draft relocation plan and related materials mid-August and continue community outreach; council members said they will reconvene with the agency for detailed follow-up and directed staff to distribute the RHA materials to the full council prior to additional votes.","The Richmond Housing Authority presented redevelopment strategy, use of a Richmond Development Corporation nonprofit arm, a resident bill of rights and a build-first approach to minimize displacement. Public commenters described unsafe conditions and urged resident-led redevelopment and legal protections.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6500407,"Council continues debate on residential rental inspection ordinance after hours of public testimony",4802,1352000,6154000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5453625-2b1eef1662f40e751a578dad15ef9fb9&start=1352&end=6154","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5453625-2b1eef1662f40e751a578dad15ef9fb9/thumbnail_1352000.jpg","/articles/6500407/Richmond-City-Independent-City/Virginia/Council-continues-debate-on-residential-rental-inspection-ordinance-after-hours-of-public-testimony","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6500407-a04997b3f87852f5230924ae095e32ea/orig.mp4?Expires=1770424827&Signature=HfYfgQ6lHkCUloX-8gvexrOwCCt6DSUwyOqfdZ0gBvPpcAhZYG5Is1ft6Gcg2GAPRxqKcCFWMKpFm8M87dQIde29EDs5FYDh2oBzQqBxDlzga~qNWlyC3vpfxix5REF~NolGLR8h6kp9FjMXtRiVLq-xLHsIUcMBYnca4v4NKooCm2HRgAQgIjwfKxF2CEmz05Pencsevb8aMjS0eHF3V07i9PWG0I8ns9FK2c96eWzK6UdVtnbGti6BSsHmFfcIEO3JjUPQS3bJNczQT37TGt4K4puvqPYBVUfMNJ7UKC7REWUZjkdYg95SSoB9JUjWdxaA-wW0APwgJxNGzRTXtg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Land Use, Housing and Transportation Standing Committee continued consideration of an ordinance to establish a residential rental inspection program after more than two hours of public testimony and detailed staff discussion.

The ordinance before the committee (ordinance 2025-161) would create a Residential Rental Inspection Program, known in presentations as RRIP, and authorize proactive and periodic inspections of rental dwelling units consistent with the Code of Virginia. Kevin J. Bonk, director of Planning and Development Review, told the committee the ordinance would allow the city to perform initial inspections, periodic inspections (no more than once per calendar year), transfer inspections after property sale, and follow-up inspections until code compliance is achieved. For properties with 10 or more units, inspectors would select 10% of units for the initial inspection; a violation in one unit could trigger inspection of all units in a complex. New construction or units that pass an initial inspection would be exempt from periodic and transfer inspections for 48 months.

Bonk said the Code of Virginia sets prescriptive limits on what municipalities may do when creating inspection programs and that any decision to add units into the program would be by separate council ordinance. He recommended a targeted, bottom-up approach that adds individual complexes or small clusters rather than a citywide district, and told the committee that current staff capacity could handle “a few dozen, maybe a few hundred” units before additional staffing would be needed.

Speakers were sharply split. Tenants, tenant organizers and housing advocates urged adoption of the ordinance and said the city’s existing complaint-driven enforcement fails to hold many landlords accountable. Rachel Hefner, a tenant organizer and former municipal housing staffer, described cases she had handled in other cities and cited research showing reduced residential fires and lead levels following inspection programs. Several residents described unsafe and unhealthy conditions, including long-unaddressed mold and failing building systems.

Opponents—small landlords, property managers and industry groups including the Homebuilding Association of Richmond and the Virginia Apartment Management Association—said the ordinance as drafted would be overly broad, might stigmatize neighborhoods, could impose disproportionate costs on “mom-and-pop” landlords, and risk unintended consequences such as displacement. Speakers proposed narrowing triggers for districts, exempting well-managed properties (for example those with certain certifications), and changing language in the draft ordinance: several asked the city to replace the term “blighted” with “deteriorating.” Industry representatives also questioned whether police and fire calls should be part of the criteria for adding properties to a district, arguing that emergency calls do not always indicate a building code violation.

Staff and councilors discussed several technical points raised in testimony. Bonk said the administration can supply historic police, fire and building-inspection call data, but matching individual calls to building-code violations would be “a pretty intensive effort.” He emphasized that tenant petitions to be included in the program would be an important criterion because tenants may be reluctant to call for service for fear of retaliation.

Council members and staff agreed more work was needed to tighten definitions, confirm data availability, and add tenant-notification and tenant-rights education components. Committee Chair Tara Jones and members said they wanted amendments to clarify criteria for creating inspection districts, tenant notification requirements, and implementation steps, including how the city would handle temporary relocation if units were placarded as unsafe.

The committee voted to continue consideration so staff could draft amendments and return in September. The motion to continue item 1, ordinance 2025-161, to the September Land Use, Housing and Transportation meeting passed without recorded opposition: Mister Burton, Vice Chair Robertson and Chair Jones recorded “Aye.”

The committee did not adopt a rental-inspection district at the meeting; as presented the ordinance would establish the program but would add no properties until council separately enacts district ordinances. Staff repeatedly emphasized that adding units would require a separate council action and that the administration recommended adding individual complexes rather than large, pre-identified swaths of the city.

The committee asked for an implementation plan with staffing estimates, data analyses that would support any proposed district, and a tenant-education and notification plan before the ordinance returns for further action.

Ending: The committee set a target to return amended language at its September meeting and directed staff to prepare the requested data and a draft implementation plan for council review.","After hours of public comment from tenants, landlords and housing advocates, the Land Use, Housing and Transportation Standing Committee voted to continue an ordinance that would establish a residential rental inspection program so staff and council can craft amendments.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: committee forwards telecom lease, Main Street application and Patterson Avenue grant application

Richmond Housing Authority outlines redevelopment plans, 501(c)(3) arm and resident protections; advocates press for tenant-led decision-making

Council continues debate on residential rental inspection ordinance after hours of public testimony