Cultural Heritage Stewardship Plan - Draft 1

the irony is that these neighborhoods were not built under such heavy-handed regulatory regimes. by trying to preserve every particle you are demolishing the makeshift, market-oriented processes that are part of the legacy. the built environment must be able to accomodate new ventures, new cultures, new family types. let's not kille the thing trying to save it.

the refining needs to come before the expanding if it comes to that. too arbitrary and heavy-handed as program exists now

if we must continue with architectural controls in limited areas look at pre-approved pattern books as a compromise - allows for predictability and potentially could even replace or augment CAR. Norfolk utilizes this strategy to some extent. - link

It appears this document has omitted how the role free blacks contributed to the development in the City of Richmond and politics. My Great, Grand Father, Daniel James Farrar, Sr., was born free and was a well-known "Master Architect, Contractor and Builder". In the 1890's as a designer, builder. or both according to a Biographical Dictionary 1865 - 1946. He built and was directly involved with 14 buildings in Richmond, some standing today. He was the contractor on the now-demolished St. Luke Penny Savings Bank at First and Marshall Sts. There was an expansion of home ownership by blacks in the City Of Richmond, Va following the Civil War, many constructed by Daniel, Sr. and financed by my Great, Great Grand Father Joseph E. Farrar. Elvatrice Belches is a Richmond area public historian, archival researcher and author who specializes in chronicling the black experience in history has photographs and legacies of other free black in Richmond including the Forrester, Gilpin, Ruffin, Hill, Colston and Jarratt families. Research more in the Encyclopedia Virginia. I have out of print historical brochures and books to evidence my concern.

could inhibit what owners want to do with the property - this knowledge is distributed and calculus is ever-changing based on any number of economic factors. and...what about renters?

can 'community character' be substantiated? exclusive language for what should be plan for all Richmonders but if used let it be pointed out that in many cases the zoning designation is an inhibitor to matching the historic density pattern from which certain neighborhoods may derive community character.

i not qualified to make suggestions or criticisms. i n however thank the myrid individuals for this extensive document. and to thank those who are qualified for their suggestions.

Our business community (the full range from our Fortune 500 companies to the rich ecosystem of entrepreneurial enterprises) should be included as partners in the collaboration between protecting cultural resources and providing affordable housing.

Our city is fortunate to have such a rich history - and the places and people who are able to tell the multi-layered story of our city. In today's world, we are a society of visual learning. Please protect and preserve our multiple palpable assets of buildings, neighborhoods and historic locations located throughout our region. This is such important work.

I think the folks who lobby on behalf of the City should more aware of the immense benefits of the HTC. It is a critical redevelopment tool and we need to be more proactive in educating our legislators about its positive impact for the City. If there's space to incorporate that somewhere, I would recommend it.

But the vacant properties do provide an opportunity for more housing in general, think that's worth noting here

I understand the intent of this sentence, but perhaps rewording to be clear that yes, new construction is necessary but there are other solutions that involve the re-use of existing buildings

Cemetery Upkeep: A recent tour with The Valentine Museum brought to light the incredible history literally hidden in cemeteries throughout our city. Particularly those found around the Jackson Ward neighborhood. It is disheartening that our historic figures, including Arthur Ashe, Maggie Walker, and many others , seem forgotten. Their resting places neglected and untended for far too long. The city would be wise to invest in maintaining these special places, they are part of our rich history that are worth preserving. Trees/Greenspaces: One of the many things that makes living in Richmond a special place are our neighborhood Trees, Parks and Green-spaces. As a current homeowner in the FAN area of the city, I am continually reminded of the need to maintain especially irrigation, and care for the number of trees we have. Other neighborhoods would greatly benefit from more Trees, especially Downtown, Jackson Ward, Scotts Addition, and the new Diamond District. In addition, all planned growth must better incorporate our natural world. Our health and our planet depend on what we do moving forward. Without this commitment we become a lifeless, concrete desert like too many cities around the Country. Slavery Museum: After a recent visit to Charleston's Slavery Museum, I was reminded that we continue to wait to get a museum here built to recognize Richmond’s complex history. This needs to happen. It would certainly increase interest in visiting the City. Let’s keep Richmond the special place it is for everyone to grow and prosper. Thank you for your consideration.

Katherine

All the good work and thoughtful considerations described in this document will likely come to very little unless the Stewardship Plan is given some authority vis-a-vis the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission routinely overrules the Urban Design Committee. How will the work described herein find a different fate?

The Model Tobacco building (on Richmond Highway) repurposed as loft space could be a useful "model" for historic preservation coupled with affordability. Zoning and tax incentives, and perhaps collaboration with the nonprofit community, could well stimulate such possibilities.

Our city has only intermittently engaged citizens early in planning issues. Even when it does so, the considerations of the citizens have usually been ignored. How can we change this pattern?

Required? How? By whom? What is the enforcement mechanism?

Enforcement of ordinances and safeguards against improper demolition are essential to the success of the goals described herein. A recent episode of an illegal demolition resulted in a laughable $200. fine, which is more of a green light for more illegal demolition and hardly a penalty to prevent more of the same.

The community engagement described in this document is vital to best outcomes in our city, but without codified stipulations for enactment of recommendations that emerge from this engagement, it seems likely -- given Richmond's patterns -- that the Planning Commission will pursue its own agenda without abiding by community input.

Consider also consulting with LGBTQ community groups. Carytown has at least two VCRIS documented historic buildings with known LGBTQ histories - there are surely many more tangible and intangible resources in the City with this history.

There is always a possibility that significant archaeological sites are located under "vacant" lots, or beneath existing buildings that are planned to be demolished. How would demolition permits handle this? What would be the protocol for unanticipated discoveries identified during demolition, or during subsequent activities?

What does this look like on a practical, day-to-day level? How do we decide what "triggers" archaeological investigation? What sites are worth investigating, mitigating, and/or protecting?

Thank you for valuing and identifying important places to preserve that make Richmond a special city, distinct from Anywhere USA.

Because others are listing neighborhoods, perhaps change Chesterfield to "Midlothian." My job title should be "VCU Associate Professor of Urban Planning" ...and perhaps "co-leader of the Richmond Cemetery Collaboratory"

We need to be sure that these historic structures, no matter if they are houses or commercial buildings, need to be saved and not demolished. The building inspection department needs to have this in their data base as part of the demolition permit application process to insure that demolition permits will NOT be issued for a historic building unless said historic building is about to crumble to the ground beyond repair. Thank you.

Will this exist under enabling legislation (i.e. 15.2-2306) or is there something else in mind? How does this differ from an "Old and Historic District" arrangement, which is expressly enabled by 15.2-2306 of Virginia State Code? Is it a form-based type of overlay district? If so that cannot manage demolition activity. Again--just wanting to be clear about expectations to not breed frustration/disappointment between staff, builders, homeowners, citizens.

Should there be a direct reference made somewhere that specifically frames what we can/can't do under Virginia State Code (15.2-2306, for instance)? That being the legal underpinning for this might help situate expectations in regards to implementation.

Also consider reviewing/adapting building code/zoning to better allow for adaptation from commercial to residential-- for example, operable windows in a high rise. If we could more affordably turn some of the empty office buildings downtown into housing that would help!

"Wind" :)

I would like clarification on how this would work.

Another potential partner: Virginia Housing.