|
|
|
Preserving the Past, Protecting the Future
from City Edition, April 24, 2006 by Cesca Janece Waterfield Each day in Church Hill north of Broad, busy construction sends up new houses in days as empty lots fill. Some older houses are quickly restored, painted and hurried to the market. For several years, developers and construction companies have eyed this area, and many have entered to claim a part of the growth they’ve watched closely from outside. The buzz is understandable. This relatively small section of Richmond boasts the largest collection of antebellum frame houses on the nation's East Coast. While much of the area around St. John’s Church is protected by the zoning overlay that arrived with its designation in 1957 as a City and Old Historic District, other areas that are not included in that zone lay vulnerable to frenzied development, and virtually no restrictions hinder ambitious developers who set their sights on quick gain. According to 13-year resident Laura Daab, it’s enough to make her look out at the tree-lined streets of this Southern neighborhood and feel like she’s in the midst of the Wild West. Though her description might sound hyperbolic, consider this: As long as new construction and restoration complies with basic zoning laws, virtually any style or substance of structure may be put in place here, without regard to issues such as density, parking or design, and virtually any quality of materials is acceptable. And while there is serious concern for maintaining the historical integrity of a neighborhood as architecturally rich as Church Hill, many residents say they are most alarmed by the amount of slapdash construction taking place; “progress” that represents a combination of greed and negligence. They say the mixture threatens their community's, and the city’s, long-term quality of life. In November 2005, a few of them decided to form a task force to meet and discuss what they might do to protect the community they call home. Led by Daab, the task force is working to see that the area is soon designated as a City and Old Historic District, known as Church Hill North. The rabid growth is new to some, while to others, similar development inspired feelings of guardianship two decades ago when an attempt at achieving city historic designation was made, ultimately succumbing to divisive political wrangling. This time, the questions the task force has raised seem to have stimulated dialogue about the unique value of Richmond’s history and architecture, about bureaucratic review and the responsibilities borne by those who claim the benefits of being part of a community. There are currently fifteen Old and Historic Districts recognized by the city of Richmond. With the designation arrives a zoning overlay; additional checks on construction companies, developers and anyone who seeks to alter the exterior of property within the district. While admitting that she does not speak for the whole task force, Daab says, “The irony is that a lot of these outside developers come into the city from neighborhoods that have covenants in place. Then they come here and they’re not doing thoughtful work.” While she doesn’t oppose new construction and development in the area, she claims, “You’re more likely to get better quality work from renovators who live in Church Hill.” Although much of this area falls within national register districts, achieving the City and Old Historic designation would establish the requirement that new construction, demolition that isn’t associated with safety concerns, and changes to exteriors would have to pass review by the Commission for Architectural Review (CAR), a volunteer commission appointed by City Council and established in 1957, the same year St. John’s Church District achieved its City Old and Historic designation. Many say the process would allow residents a collective voice in the fate of their neighborhoods. A few argue that dealing with CAR is a complicated and protracted process. Jean Wight knows a bit about the process of review. She was board member of CAR from 2000 to 2005 and served as chair for two years. She is currently renovating the Ann Carrington House (c.1813) in the 2300 block of East Grace Street. Wight declares, “There is tremendous [development] pressure to the north of Broad. Contactors are going deeper and north, but they have few restrictions regarding quality of exterior or the materials they use.” She recognizes that this area’s position is unique, because its surplus of empty lots creates an urgency to “throw up anything.” She hopes the task force’s efforts for historic designation succeed, and she claims that in neighborhoods protected by the overlay, “While [residents] give up certain flexibility regarding exteriors, they are given a greater degree of control over the atmosphere of the block.” Other neighborhoods in Richmond have acknowledged the security such designations provide while grappling with its challenges. The Fan District is included in both the national and state registry of historic places. Part of it is also recognized as a City Old and Historic District, making it subject to architectural review. Bobbe Lehew, a six-year resident of the Fan, lives within that area and admits to occasional frustration when she’s sought changes to her property – improvements, she thinks, that were needlessly delayed or denied. “There are some things, some people who are too pure in their renovations. There have been tremendous strides in making new, more modern materials that stand up to the elements and look attractive. But some people are critical of that.” Citing one example, she continues, “We want to put up a wrought iron fence. It’s my understanding that unless we can prove that the house originally had one, we can’t. Things like that are a little silly. I appreciate the guidelines that are in place. But there are some things that could be an asset to the property and the neighborhood that won’t be approved.” Lehew’s experience reflects the fears of some homeowners who remain undecided about a City Old and Historic designation. They worry that the designation will limit their freedom to create their own homes and that their efforts will be subject to draconian restrictions. But unless the homeowner is taking advantage of state and federal tax credits that are available to people who renovate properties, only exterior changes are regulated. Interiors remain free of any review. David Herring, Church Hill resident and co-founder and director of properties at the Alliance to Conserve Old Richmond Neighborhoods (ACORN), does not deny that some concerns harbored by opponents of city recognition are reasonable. “If you want for example, new steps,” he says, “a new porch, or you want to change the paint color, you’ll have to submit an application to CAR.” Paint color is an issue that continues to raise a bit of tension in the dialogue about architectural review. Herring admits, “I honestly think CAR shouldn’t be so sensitive about paint. I’d rather save the house, have it standing.” Preserving such buildings must be a personal value maintained by the homeowner, because when taking on some restoration projects within historic districts recognized by the city, Herring admits, “It may cost the owner more money. It might.” As an example, he offers the temptation to install vinyl replacement windows as opposed to using rarer historical materials. But he insists architectural review is about protecting the neighborhood, and is not “big brother” watching closely over the shoulders of homeowners. Instead, he insists, it provides protection against bad buildings and thoughtless design. Herring says, “When you have someone who wants to put up some shoddy structure next to a 19th-century house, it freaks people out.” But he claims that if the task force’s efforts succeed, residents won’t confront undue obstacles in how they improve or change their property. When an area is designated by the city as historic, existing structures and color schemes are considered “grandfathered” and require no changes. Only new modifications will require approval. “And people need to keep in mind that you can repair original material,” he advises. In doing so, he says, they can save money while preserving the past. Personally and as a representative of ACORN, Herring believes in the evolution of old neighborhoods, but he maintains that it can be done while safeguarding historic resources to benefit the entire neighborhood, and ultimately, the city. ACORN offers regular workshops in all aspects of renovation. Melinda Skinner, co-founder and development director for ACORN, has been a resident of Church Hill since 1962, and her two adult children went to schools there. She supports the task force’s efforts for historic designation by the city. She says she has witnessed ravenous and unconscionable developers entering the neighborhood, building in a hurry, and then leaving as quickly. She says, “Developers scare me. [To them] it’s not about what’s best for the city, it’s about money. They make a profit and go back to Arizona. I trust developers who live here. The closer you live to the development, the more honest you’re going to be.” Their concern does not couch an insular shutting out of outsiders, and Herring notes, “There are a lot of good developers. But there are many who get their profit, and they’re out of there.” But while the city historical designation would serve as a guard against such unscrupulous developers, Skinner points out another obstacle in the way of achieving designation; people think their property values and taxes are going to go up. In response, she and Herring respond simultaneously, “They won’t.” Herring says that a neighborhood thrives economically, growing property values “ because of money invested, not because something is deemed historical. But [the designation] is a protection that as the area does revitalize, it’s done in a cohesive way.” In fact, the area seeking designation is currently taxed at the same rate as its neighboring – and city-protected – districts, St. John’s and Chimborazo. Skinner says, “People who are homeowners of all races, classes, socio-economic backgrounds want this when they know how it works.” Designation would guard against unprincipled developers and contractors, she says, something that is imperative, because “When people come to make money and not a community, that’s when you get problems.” Rick Bancroft, Owner of Tulip Tree Renovations, has completed a great deal of restoration work in Richmond, including areas of the Fan governed by CAR. When asked about his experiences, he shakes his head. As a contractor who values Richmond’s history and who has made its architecture his life’s work, he’s endured his share of frustration in dealing with CAR. After sharing a couple stories about projects that seemed to linger on awaiting approval, Bancroft offers a fair-minded observation. He says that ultimately, in spite of waiting “months” to complete projects that were slowly approved, “I know these rules are in place for good reason.” He suggests, “I just wish they’d move a little faster.” “A little faster,” is also the hope for residents seeking city historic designation for Church Hill North. Middle school teacher John Murden is an active resident of the area. He carefully watches developments in the neighborhood he’s come to embrace in the three years since he took residence there. He enjoys Church Hill as “one of the city’s most diverse communities culturally, racially and economically” and he says his neighbors welcome anyone who comes to impact the area – contractors, developers and individuals who move in to call Church Hill home. “[We] don’t care who they are. [We] want to see the blight gone.” But he adds that toward that goal, residents want “balance.” In particular, they want to know that developers share their “long-term vision.” In pushing for city historical designation, Wight voices a similar purpose and goal. “The designation is really a long-term planning mechanism.” Whether the community at large agrees remains to be seen. For now, the task force is focusing on disseminating information to residents, and they are compiling literature to answer their most pressing questions. They aim for a vote in about six months. For the overlay to pass, 70 percent of property owners must reply to the ballot. Among them, at least half must vote to approve, and then it’s up to City Council. “People have pride in these neighborhoods and they want them to be consistent. Without that layer of protection, they won’t be. Ultimately, these things that are plopped into the neighborhood, they hurt.” But the Church Hill North Taskforce and many residents are optimistic. Herring continues, “People are recognizing that these houses and the neighborhoods are valuable. They’re worth protecting.” On That Note Get Involved Church Hill North Taskforce Contact Laura Daab (804) 649-1913 info@mysterydinner.com City of Richmond Contact Saul Gleiser, Planner, Department of Community Development (804) 646-6313 gkeusers@ci.richmond.va.us ACORN, the Alliance to Conserve Richmond Neighborhoods 1307-A E. Cary St. Richmond, 23219 (804) 422-2148 ACORN offers low-cost and free workshops designed to pass on tools to homeowners and anyone interested in learning how to realistically preserve the elements of historic homes and buildings. Workshops include plaster repair, window sash replacement, as well as loan education, and more. Back
|
|
|
Site design by .
|
Contact
|