Richmond planning department officials will unveil their idea for the future of the west end’s Libbie, Grove and Patterson Avenue shopping area. Their goal is to make the district a unified shopping and business area, while keeping the community’s wish to maintain a quaint atmosphere. Link
The Oregon Hill Neighborhood Association requests a postponement of the Victory Apt. SUP Ordinance No. 2012-200 scheduled hearing at the City Planning Commission on December 3, 2012. This postponement is necessary because two of the plans attached and referenced in the Victory Apartment Special Use Permit Ordinance No. 2012-200 are not the latest revisions that were required by the Planning Department and because the property was not posted properly per the requirements of city code Section 114-1050.5 (4). Link
A $5.8 million plan to move Richmond city and public school facilities off North Boulevard so the 60-acre site can be redeveloped hit a snag at Monday’s Planning Commission meeting, when a lawyer for a developer said his client has a contract on property the city wants to buy.
Lombardy Street Partners intended to seek a special-use permit to build the apartments and that planning officials were aware of the forthcoming application.
June 11, 2012
VIA EMAIL TO:
Ms. Lou Brown Ali, Chief of Staff, email@example.com
The Honorable City Council
City of Richmond
900 E. Broad St., Suite 200
Richmond, VA 23219 USA
Re: Ordinance 2012-74 – Special Exceptions
Dear Honorable Members of Council,
The Special Exception ordinance is on Council’s consent agenda for today. In my opinion the ordinance is unlawful, unnecessary and unwise. It should be rejected.
The ordinance is unlawful because it contains numerous provisions that Council is not authorized to adopt. The ordinance is unnecessary because it does nothing beneficial that cannot be accomplished with well-written zoning district regulations. The ordinance is unwise because it gives special treatment to some properties and harms surrounding properties.
Other cities in Virginia have legal and sensible land use regulations. The City of Hampton is a good example. It follows the requirements of the Code of Virginia and it is practical.
Hampton recognizes that the purpose of the special use process is to protect the people and property in the neighborhood and the use must conform to the zoning regulations. The Hampton ordinance requires that the use:
(1) will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use;
(2) will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood; and
(3) will be in accordance with all the current regulations of and the purpose of this ordinance, and the comprehensive plan of the City of Hampton, and all other applicable ordinances…. Sec. 20-4.
The Hampton ordinance recognizes that a “special use” is a “use” and that it means an activity occurring on the property. The Richmond ordinance contains numerous items that are not “uses.”
The Hampton ordinance recognizes that a special exception does not waive any rules. Most of the exceptions in the Richmond ordinance waive rules.
The Hampton zoning district regulations are well written. The districts include over 50 conditional uses to accommodate the potential interests of property owners and the needs of the neighborhoods. The Richmond regulations have only 16 conditional uses. Hampton has conditional uses available in every zoning district. Richmond has 30 zoning districts with no conditional uses available.
The Hampton ordinance is a good example to follow. Before the Richmond Council takes any action, the citizens deserve to know how the proposed ordinance compares to a good ordinance. The relevant portions of the Hampton ordinance are attached in outline form and in full text form.
You might also examine the wisdom of giving the Board of Zoning Appeals authority to set building heights in most zoning districts. Council would have no power to reverse the Board’s decision.
C. Wayne Taylor
Attachments: CITY OF HAMPTON CODE.pdf
Links: City Hall – Special Exceptions
Copy: Liaisons, Press, Candidates
….They said they’re sick and tired of seeing blighted houses in their neighborhood and that the abandoned properties are attracting rodents and crime….Neighbors said they’ve reached out to the city leaders and police but have gotten little help…. nbc12.com
Re: Food Truck Court
Dear Honorable Mayor,
About the same time as the Art 180 Project controversy, “food trucks” began the widely publicized activity of selling products in the Virginia Historical Society parking lot. The property is zoned R-6 – Residential (Single Family Attached), which does not list the activity as an allowed use.
Read the rest of this entry »
….The murals that would sit in a historic district required the approval of the Richmond Commission of Architectural Review, which granted permission for nine of them….The murals that would sit in a historic district required the approval of the Richmond Commission of Architectural Review, which granted permission for nine of them…. timesdispatch.com
Commission of Architectural Review denies application for rear porch roof. Paper Number: 2012-R18.
As of 21 March 2012, no minutes for the Commission of Architectural Review have been posted since October 2011.
In 2001, City Council approved a special use permit for the Dominion Resources headquarters on Tredegar Street. The permit increased the maximum allowed building heights within a sloping “envelope” that extended from 60 feet above ground level to 160 feet above ground level.
Under the terms of the permit, it would automatically expire if certain conditions were not met. The city maintains that the conditions were met and that the permit is “still valid.”
The facts indicate that the permit expired. The property owner failed to meet the deadline for using the special use permit. The development that occurred on the property complied with the zoning regulations and did not require the special use permit. Olinger Read the rest of this entry »