The Richmond Planning Commission voted Feb. 20 to continue consideration of a special‑use permit for 7100 Jank Road after several hours of presentation and public comment focused on the commercial space proposed at the corner of Jank Road and High Oaks.

The permit would allow a three‑story mixed‑use building with up to 14 dwelling units and a small commercial space. The commission continued the case to its April 1 meeting at the applicant’s request so staff, the applicant and neighborhood representatives can continue negotiations on conditions that would limit certain retail activities.

The move followed a packed public hearing in which dozens of residents said the commercial space — as described by opponents — would function like another convenience or vape shop at a busy intersection across from Chippenham Hospital. Tony Dean, who identified himself as owner of the Treat Shop on Jank Road, said, “We don't need any more vape shop game machines, lottery machines.” Several speakers cited loitering, public‑safety concerns and proximity to school bus stops.

The applicant, Beau Gillette of Baker Development Resources, said the owner does not intend to open a vape shop and described three proffered conditions added after earlier community meetings: a 32‑square‑foot cap on indoor retail space for tobacco and vaping paraphernalia, a ban on string lighting in commercial windows, and a prohibition on smoking or vaping within the commercial space. “It's not the owner's attempt to create a vape shop,” Gillette told the commission.

Commissioners and staff acknowledged the applicant had added written conditions but also heard repeated concerns about skill‑game machines, sale of paraphernalia and the potential for future owners to change the retail use. Several residents showed photos and receipts from a store the owner operates on Commerce Road and said the product mix there worried them.

Planning staff noted the property's existing zoning and the Richmond 300 master plan support neighborhood‑mixed‑use development at higher intensity than what currently sits on the lot. Staff said public‑works review did not require additional traffic signal changes for the current proposal but recommended right‑of‑way improvements, sidewalks and other pedestrian infrastructure as conditions.

Commissioner discussion centered on whether additional, enforceable restrictions could be included in an SUP to prevent uses residents opposed while allowing the proposed housing. Commissioner comments asked specifically whether the applicant would proffer to exclude particular product categories and whether short‑term rentals would be limited; staff noted short‑term rental ordinance requirements would require registration and could be revoked for violations.

After the applicant requested 45 days to continue negotiations, the commission voted unanimously to continue the matter to the April 1 meeting, allowing time to negotiate additional conditions and return with revised language for the special‑use permit.

The continuance does not approve the project; the SUP will return to the commission for further consideration on April 1. The commission recorded the continuation by roll call: Rodney Poole, Aye; Miss Greenfield, Aye; Miss Joyhaug, Aye; Nikia Knight, Aye; Mister Pennock, Aye; Miss Robertson, Aye; Miss Roe, Aye; Mister White, Aye; Victor McKenzie, Aye.

The next hearing will give neighborhood groups and the applicant additional time to frame enforceable conditions addressing items such as vending/gaming restrictions, product limitations, operating hours and short‑term rental oversight pending the commission’s final decision.