Downtown Plan: Catching Up

While I was out welcoming a new baby into the world, the Times-Dispatch's Sunday Commentary section did great work presenting an array of perspectives on Richmond's proposed Downtown Plan. Without further editorial ado:

• From "Raising Downtown" (April 27, 2008): The foundations of the plan are entirely laudable, offering a clear and creative vision for the future. The emphasis on making better use of Richmond's remarkable and truly unique assets -- the James River, the wealth of history, the enormous stock of historic buildings and distinctive architecture -- represents a refreshing and uninhibited celebration of downtown's strengths. At last!

  The plan's focus on better mass transit, its insistence on maintaining economic diversity, its hopes for a greener city, and its appreciation of the amenities and characteristics of a traditional urban landscape move beyond bricks and mortar to address the character of the city -- and provide a blueprint for its ambitions.

  Some of the key suggestions are simple common sense, even if long overdue. Plant more trees. Open more streets to two-way traffic. Build parking garages behind and above street-level stores and offices.

  The citizens and the city have created a most excellent plan. We offer our congratulations and our support.

• From developer Robin Miller's "Increase Quality of Life by Capitalizing on Richmond's Assets" (April 27, 2008): But the Master Plan is only a step in the right direction, because it is primarily a guideline. Actual development is controlled by the underlying zoning. Examples of frequent problems under current zoning include archaic suburban-style parking requirements, lot setback requirements that render some properties unbuildable, and commercial restrictions that preclude any mixed use, such as neighborhood coffee shops and cafes in residential districts.

  Current zoning restricts much of the spirit of the Master Plan. In fact, if the Fan District were to burn down today, current zoning would not allow it to be rebuilt the way it is. Because the underlying zoning often does not work for the new intended use, developers must rely on cumbersome special-use permits or rezoning to achieve the same outcome. Unfortunately, both options are very time-consuming, expensive, and unnecessarily hamper the efficient development of our resources.

  During the past 30 years I have preserved historic buildings and rejuvenated depressed properties in five states. Richmond has by far been the most difficult city to navigate due to the old suburban-style Master Plan, the still-existing suburban-style zoning, and the cumbersome special-use permit process. During the past 12 years I have had to obtain seven special-use permits to revitalize distressed neighborhoods in Downtown Richmond, the Fan, Old Manchester, and the Museum District.

  Adjusting our zoning to reflect the new Downtown Master Plan's vision would establish a coherent, long-term plan that reflects community needs and consensus. In addition, such action would decrease the need for special hearings and would encourage more efficient development of downtown.

• From VCU President Eugene Trani's "Master Plans Acknowledge Symbiotic Relationship" (April 27, 2008): I am struck by the similarity of the foundations of the VCU and Richmond master site plans. For example, there is an emphasis in both plans on being "green," not only in providing green spaces in an urban environment, but also in building design and infrastructure projects. There is acknowledgment of the strength of developing the plans around our histories and heritages. Most important, there is recognition that the plans must support economic and cultural viability. According to the city's plan, economic diversity should be encouraged -- that it is not only how a city looks but also what it offers that makes it a vibrant place to live and work.

  The current draft of the city's master site plan recommends working with VCU to support economic diversity specifically in terms of social, cultural, and economic advancement. Coincidentally, a theme of VCU's strategic plan is to maintain the university as a model for university-community partnerships.

• From Richmond Mayor Doug Wilder's "Our Citizens Want a Vibrant Downtown" (April 27, 2008): I made it clear, and our city officials have insisted, that what was needed was "the people's plan" because our citizens are voicing an unprecedented degree of interest in what they want our downtown to become.

  This new Master Plan serves as a blueprint for the look and feel of how Richmond's downtown and its riverfront will develop and grow in the coming years. Not only do people work and visit downtown -- it also is one of the city's fastest-growing residential areas.

  Citizens have said that they want recreational access along the north bank of the James, which our downtown so noticeably lacks at present. They have said they want guidelines in place and a systematic approach to further maximize the historic qualities for which Richmond is already known.

  A Master Plan is a guide for localities to use in making future decisions. As Rachel Flynn, the city's director of community development -- who has ably overseen the Master Plan's development -- has repeatedly noted, "It all starts with a city having a firm vision in place for what it wants to become."

Comments

[John]

The key to your question, Scott, probably involves understanding how Trani defines the word "partnership". As you know, he's all for win-win situations if the person on the other side of the deal is willing to take the bronze medal and give Trani both the gold and silver. Though when you run a university like a corporation, I suppose that's just business as usual.

[Scott Burger]

"Coincidentally, a theme of VCU's strategic plan is to maintain the university as a model for university-community partnerships" Does this mean like when Trani publicly promised not to encroach into Oregon Hill, but then did it anyway? I can't say this Downtown Plan means much as long as VCU controls the City's agenda. Though I support 'the green' of course. How much green building has gone into the new Monroe Campus? How much is going into the new Engineering School expansion? Like I said, VCU and Trani's word does not mean much.