Richmond's Planning Commission voted yesterday to move further consideration of Richmond's proposed Downtown Plan out another 60 days to allow time for additional public review. Since a number of changes in the plan apparently didn't get into the hands of the public until late last week, there's some sense in the delay.
But as I sat through the commission's session yesterday, here's what I was actually thinking:
Let's watch as the planning commission does what government in Richmond does well -- use listening as a form of decision making; consider incremental adoption as a tool for consensus building; and avoid dealing with the hard choices that come with a strong vision for the future.
Besides, if you're going to ask more than 60 members of the public to carve time out of their busy work day, for the love of all you hold dear don't bother to make it worth their while.
That was when I was getting bored.
The 5th Floor Conference Room at City Hall was packed beyond capacity for what was billed as the last planning commission hearing on the proposed plan before it went to City Council. More than 60 people showed up.
The hearing started with Brooke Hardin from the city's Department of Community Development giving the gathered crowd a quick snapshot of what had changed in the plan -- primarily as a result of the planning commission's edits, as well as community feedback gathered at a series of neighborhood meetings on the plan in January and February. (Those changes can be found in the plan's Revised Draft and Alternate Mapping Options at the city's website.)
Hardin covered the highlights; readers of the revised plan will see dozens of minor language revisions (many reflecting a less adversarial tone as it relates to Virginia Commonwealth University) and a handful of more significant changes.
"In a very general sense we have done a cleaning, so to speak, of the document," Hardin told the commission, "to clear up errors ... we've also addressed the tone."
Moving up in priority in the plan is the document's attention to and recommendations related to basic infrastructure maintenance (things like street trees, benches, public trash cans); a new emphasis on the arts and cultural community's role in downtown development; a clearer recommendation for an Architect for the City.
"It was also important to clearly outline the advantages and disadvantages of one-way versus two-way streets," Hardin said, nothing that the plan for street conversion spanned 20 years.
Another big change was related to Form-Based Code, a process that streamlines and simplifies the current zoning process. The commission's chairman, Robert Mills, told the crowd later in the meeting that the commission was in full support of FBC but was not willing to make a wholesale change without a pilot approach to help the city best understand how FBC would work in Richmond. Hardin said the Manchester district would likely be the first neighborhood where Form-Based Code would be implemented, though on an optional basis.
Two other significant changes dealt with large tracts of riverfront land that had been centerpieces of the plan -- Mayo Island, which the original plan targeted as green space with some recreational space, and the former Tarmac property, where plans to develop a private marina and condominiums had run into opposition. The new revisions offer multiple scenarios for both sites -- green space, green space with some development and more developed blowouts. What seems an obvious attempt to placate the development community frankly seems to muddle the picture, and cloud the plan's strong vision for the James River.
Ralph Hambrick, professor emeritus at VCU and a member of the James River Advisory Council, said as much during the public comment period.
"One of the great concepts that have emerged in the past few years is the concept of the James River as Richmond's great Central Park," Hambrick told the commission. "I am concerned that these revisions might represent a whittling away at that vision."
It was when the hearing shifted from presentation to public comment that it became clear that the commission had little or no intention of moving the proposed Downtown Plan forward to City Council.
"The planning commission is here to listen, not to take questions," Mills told the crowd. (That didn't stop him from weighing in with his own observations and clarifications throughout the "listening" portion of the afternoon.)
The idea that the plan was going to gather dust for a few more months took on extra energy as lawyers representing New Market (property owners of Tredegar, Gambles Hill and Ethyl (along the James just east of Belvidere) and Dominion Power were joined by a representative of the family that owns most of Mayo Island and several representatives of the Shockoe Bottoms merchants association pleaded with the commission to defer a vote.
"This is a critical document and you've all worked hard on it," said Richard Stotz, a member of the Shockoe organization. "We have real concerns, I have real concerns about the implementation. We've come this far. It seems we ought to get it right."
The planning commission will bring the document back for consideration in July. As a result, it is likely not to reach City Council for a vote until October -- which realistically pushes its adoption out past the fall election.
LINKS:
Recent Comments