‘Affordable’ or not? Henrico Planning Commission endorses proposed Northern Henrico community

The Henrico Planning Commission March 9 endorsed plans for a multi-family residential community in Northern Henrico of as many as 186 units that would include three-story and four-story residential buildings, an office and clubhouse, an amenity area, parking, and a field of solar panels. An updated version of the proposal contained some new conditions that had been submitted earlier in the day, with the commission waiving the normal review period.

As previously reported in the Citizen, Richmond-based Spy Rock Real Estate and Crescent Development would partner to build the community on more than eight acres just north of the intersection of Chamberlayne Road and Brook Hill Circle. At 22.69 units an acre, the proposal is almost three units per acre more than the current zoning standard. According to a county planning report, the inclusion of "net-metered solar, as an accessory use to new, affordable housing, furthers the county’s stated goals of solar generation, reinvestment in county-designated derelict properties (like this one) and housing affordability."

But what qualifies as “affordable housing” – and did the developers even intend for this proposal to be classified as such? Much of the discussion about the proposal Thursday focused on those topics, as well as the impact on housing affordability in the area.

Planning staffers explained that media coverage of the proposal (specifically local TV news coverage, they said) had misstated that the development was intended to be an affordable housing community when in fact it simply was a standard zoning case for a multi-family development and the commission had no insight into whether or how any housing affordability programs would apply for residents.

Several local residents also voiced concerns about an affordable housing community, or any community, being added to the corridor, citing the congestion, crime, and vagrancy in the area. One resident said she had been sexually assaulted in that area by a panhandler, while another suggested a preference for a sit-down restaurant or single-family houses instead of a multi-family development. Commissioner Chris Archer (Fairfield District) specifically asked where they had heard this would be an affordable housing community and they cited TV news coverage.

Questions from one resident about what constituted an affordable housing community led to a discussion between commissioners and the applicant. In response to a question from Three Chopt District Supervisor Tommy Branin (the board’s representative on the commission), the applicant noted that sale prices for affordable single-family homes in Henrico County average between $250,000 and $300,000, which Branin said was sadly out of reach for many residents.

In response to a question from Commissioner Melissa Thornton (Three Chopt District), the applicant’s representative explained that the cost for a one-bedroom unit was expected to be approximately $1,100 monthly.

The developers have a desire to transform the underutilized property into a new community, and their representative said their goal was housing “attainability,” with likely residents including those in working class jobs like nursing and retail workers for the nearby commercial districts. A commercial use at the site, developers concluded, were not viable because of the track record of the property, but they are willing to invest in the area by widening the Chamberlayne service road and making space for bus stop.

In response to questions from commissioners William Mackey Jr. (Varina District) and Thornton, the applicant’s representative explained that the solar panels were designed to make the property for affordable for residents, who wouldn’t need to pay electrical bills as a result of the 1.5 megawatts of electricity being generated.

Archer closed debate by saying that while he understood residents’ concerns, “people have taken this to mean something different than what it really means because people have different ideas of what affordability means. People are concerned that this means someone of a different social class, which I object to. I find it difficult from a moral standpoint to cast aspersions on homeless or indigent individuals. I don’t support the crime that homeless people commit, but then I don’t support the crime that people with homes commit either.”

The case next is scheduled to be heard by the Henrico Board of Supervisors during its April 11 meeting. That board holds the ultimate decision-making authority on the proposal.