February 24, 2009
RICHMOND, Va -- The Richmond City Council met yesterday to consider, among other items, the Commission of Architectural Review’s denial of a proposed 33-unit condominium development in Church Hill.
After arguments by the commission, the developers, and worried citizens, the council reversed the decision of the commission unanimously (barring Councilwoman Reva Trammell’s abstention), allowing Fulton Hill Properties to begin development on Oakwood Heights.
The property, which lies between 3618-3626 E. Broad St. and 3609-3611 E. Marshall St., is located in the Church Hill Historic District, sparking controversy over the project’s perceived misalignment with the City Code of Ordinances.
The code lays out requirements for new development in old and historic districts, giving this the appearance of a cut-and-dry case of compatible or incompatible design; however, as secretary of CAR Jim Hill noted in his presentation to the council, the commission is authorized to adopt additional guidelines to further restrict development.
“This denial is an attempt to strip away…my property rights,” said Margaret Freund, founder of Fulton Hill Properties, in her address to the council. Freund’s argument stressed the development’s compliance with the code, which, as another representative for Fulton Hill said, supersedes the non-binding guidelines.
To prevent the meeting from dragging on for hours of deliberations, City Council President Kathy Graziano suggested a suspension of the rules, giving each side of the debate 15 minutes to argue for or against the project. After a quick affirming vote and the developers’ arguments, upwards of 35 residents lined up to
express their dislike of the project.
The opposition primarily cited references in the adopted guidelines to issues of massing in the surrounding neighborhood. Massing refers to the number of units available for occupation in a development. This 33-unit behemoth, which one resident said “cannot overcome the issue of massing,” is not compatible with the single-family homes and duplexes common to the area, according to the commission’s ruling.
Even though the complex is compatible with the district regulations, noted Church Hill Association President John Johnson, it does not fit with the existing architecture on the street. “Just because you have the right,” he asked the council, “does that mean you should?”
Despite the opposition’s turnout, their 15 minutes expired with almost 30 residents still in line to speak.
Following deliberations in which the council members clarified the codes for the district, the council sided with Freund, valuing district standards under law over the additional community guidelines.
This decision marked the end of a three-year conflict between Freund and the city to obtain permission to develop the condos.
The council also voted last night to approve a conservation and open space easement on the James River, which ensures the city’s ownership and management of the river and parks system indefinitely, which Graziano said “guarantees this park will always be a natural area.”
Council members sympathized with the 10-year struggle by environmentalists, such as Amber Foster. Speaking at the meeting, she said the easement was necessary to “preserve the natural character” of the river. The ordinance received unanimous support from the council members.
No comments:
Post a Comment