Category Archives: Kanawha Canal

Update on Replacing The Illegally Demolished Tredegar Wall

Posted on by
Reply

Pine Street neighbor Bryan Green, who serves on the City’s Urban Design Committee, has made a test panel for replacing the illegally demolished Tredegar wall. Because there isn’t enough surviving brick to rebuild the wall, he has ordered hand made brick from North Carolina. The test panel is by the sign in the Belle Isle parking lot.

Bryan thinks that they will start on rebuilding the wall as soon as they get in the proper mortar and when it warms up a bit. He hopes to supply some more details soon.

Tredegar brick test panel

Fences of Contention III

Posted on by
Reply

An update on the Fences of Contention saga (Here are links for Part I and Part II):

Councilperson Agelasto spoke with the City Attorney about the 2nd Street Connector legal agreement and the $53,000 budget requirement for the fence. The original agreement has been completed and is now closed. The City has no further obligation to complete the fence. In order to fund the budget, this will require the City Council to approve a budget amendment.

Yesterday, the Planning Commission review was supposed to consider the authorization of the “location, character, and extent” of the fence, but due to other issues on their agenda, the meeting went on too long and the fence item was continued until the next meeting February 2nd. According to neighbors who did attend and spoke with officials after the meeting, the City administration is still trying to maintain that the fence was paid for through the authorizing ordinance (despite the City Attorney’s opinion.)

But looking back at the authorizing ordinance for the 2nd Street Connector (Brown’s Island Way), the plans were NOT included in the ordinance or the agreement attached to the ordinance.

If plans had been included, they would have been attached to the agreement as an exhibit. These are the only exhibits attached to the agreement:
Exhibit A. Description of the Property
Exhibit B. Project Area
Exhibit C. Description of City Property
Exhibit D. Project Standards
Exhibit E. [Payment Schedule]
Exhibit F. Lease Agreement
Exhibit G. Construction Plan Showing Curb Cut Overlaid on Exhibit B “Project Area”

Exhibit G is for item 2.d of the agreement:

(d) Grantor shall have the right to a curb cut within the area identified on Exhibit G as “Approximate Location of Future Curb Cut” with the precise location of the actual curb cut within that area coordinated through the City’S Department of Public Works’ Division of Transportation and Engineering to ensure that the location and construction of the curb cut complies with transportation safety standards. The curb cut shall be at the sole expense of the Grantor and Grantor shall restore the remaining curb to a condition deemed satisfactory to the City of Richmond in its reasonable discretion. Such right for the curb cut shall be evidenced by reservation by Grantor in the Grantor’s Deed.

Exhibit G has no other purpose in the agreement. The parties are not bound by anything in Exhibit G except what is described in 2.d of the agreement.

Fences of Contention II

Posted on by
2

From the Times Dispatch (appearing after Fences of Contention, Part 1, and continuing disregard for citizen concerns):

Editor, Times-Dispatch:
I strongly disagree with portraying the costly Brown’s Island Way fences as a valid city commitment. Your news article, “$53K fence planned to keep homeless away from Richmond bridge,” had seven references to a commitment but apparently none of the insiders talked about the actual written agreement.
The agreement approved by City Council did not require the city to do construction. It required Gamble’s Hill to convey land to Dominion, Dominion then to construct a road, Dominion to then convey the completed road property to Venture Richmond, and Venture Richmond then to sell the property to the city. The city agreed to pay the purchase price.
The agreement did not require fences. It did not mention fences. It did say that it “…contains the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the matters set forth and may not be modified or amended except in a writing signed by the parties….” A prior understanding about fences was superseded by the final agreement.
The road is built. The city owns property. The deal is done. Why are fences being discussed now? Why are fences being discussed at all? Why is City Council letting this happen?
C. Wayne Taylor.
Richmond.

Fences Of Contention

Posted on by
3

From neighbor’s email:

To: Members of the City of Richmond Urban Design Committee

Re: UDC No. 2015-02 (proposed fences under bridge at Brown’s Island Way, City of Richmond property)

Dear Members of the Urban Design Committee,

Please do not approve the proposed fences under the bridge at Brown’s Island Way at the James River and Kanawha Canal. The proposed fences would be a wasteful and inappropriate use of city funds. The fences on both sides of the bridge would cost $53,000, with the city paying half of this cost.

The dubious “security” purpose of the fences of preventing homeless persons from camping under the bridge is not only a mean-spirited goal but also an unnecessary expense. The water under the bridge makes it highly unlikely that anyone would camp there. (Please see the attached photo showing the water under the bridge, leaving no place to camp.)
Of the hundreds of bridges in Richmond, this bridge adjacent to NewMarket property should not be singled out for fencing. This culvert adjacent to NewMarket Corporation property should be treated the same as the hundreds of other culverts in the city.
The proposed fences are incompatible with the city master plan goal of promoting canal boat traffic in the canal. According to the city master plan: “All public improvements to and investments in Tredegar Green should support the goal of westward (or appropriate) canal restoration …” The proposed fences do not support the goal of westward canal restoration. This is particularly significant since City Councilman Parker Agelasto last month in December 2014 submitted a CIP budget request for rewatering the James River and Kanawha Canal.
The altered design of the proposed fences is a substantial and undesirable change in character from the earlier design of gates that could be opened for canal boat traffic. The proposed bars under this bridge would resemble a cage or prison cell in character rather than a gateway for canal boat traffic.
The Brown’s Island Way written agreement approved by the Richmond City Council (Ordinance 2012-153) did not include these expensive fences, and at this point any additional verbal commitments are not relevant: Section 4(d) “This agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the matters set forth and may not be modified or amended except in writing signed by the parties to this Agreement.” The installments for Brown’s Island Way already included in the CIP budget are based on the completed project and have already been established based on the city ordinance and purchase price of the project. The City administration has been unable or unwilling to provide any documentation of who made the verbal commitment to build these fences.
The limited resources of the city should be allocated based on need and common sense rather the whims of the politically connected. Paying for these fences would be footing the bill for corporations … with little or nothing to do with public welfare or existing city regulations. There is no city regulation to prohibit public access under the city’s many bridges and no exception should be made because this bridge is adjacent to NewMarket Corporation.

Thank you for your consideration of this request to not approve the wasteful and unnecessary 2nd Street Connector bridge fencing plan .

Sincerely,
Charles Pool

water under bridge 12-30-14proposed $56,000 fence under 2nd St connector bridge

The “Tredegar Green” Amphitheater and Local Media

Posted on by
1

An article appeared on RVANews.com on the amphitheater built by Venture Richmond this summer. The subtitle of the article is “Here’s why a new patch of grassy hillside is such a big deal.” Unfortunately, like an earlier article on the subject that was published by Richmond.com, it mostly contains quotes by Venture Richmond’s executive director, Jack Berry, without including any opposing or even questioning viewpoints. In other words, these articles seemed designed to drown out any concerns coming from Oregon Hill neighbors.

I hope people remember the impetus for the creation of this community news site, OregonHill.net. Neighborhood residents were having difficulty getting their unadulterated views represented in the local media on the destruction by VCU of important historic stables, and the absorption of Green Alley and the historic City Gymnasium for its VCU student recreational center. At one point, the Times Dispatch published a column with outright falsehoods about the condition of the stables, in conflict with an earlier TD real estate column on the successful and tasteful renovation of one of the stables. Thanks to John Murden and RVAnews.com for their help with getting the site started, OregonHill.net was able to later publicly offer some opposing points. At the very least and if nothing else, the subsequent discourse eventually lead to a better finished project overall. That controversy continues to have reverberations.

And that is why it is particularly disappointing to see RVAnews.com publish such a one-sided piece on this current controversy. While I don’t think OregonHill.net necessarily represents all the views of neighborhood residents, in the same way the Oregon Hill Neighborhood Association does not necessarily represent all neighborhood residents, it at least offers a community perspective, one that is often shortchanged by the local corporate media. Case in point: Do these recent articles on Richmond.com and RVANews.com do the community interests justice or are they more interested in serving as advertising? When the Times Dispatch, WCVE, Style, or for that matter, “alternative community station” WRIR, preview the Folk Festival and ignore the amphitheater controversy altogether, can they truly say they are serving the community?

And for the record, this is not about me- there a number of other residents from Oregon Hill, the Overlook condos, the local preservation community, local politicians, the local canal society, the international canal society, etc., with their own nuanced views of the controversy that the local media could have chosen to interview for their articles. But they did not. They chose to give Jack Berry and Venture Richmond the full coverage and sole voice.

There is also the important journalism principle of disclosure. The Times Dispatch, WCVE, and many other local media outlets are sponsors or partners of Venture Richmond (along with many other powerful interests, including VCU and City government). Is there a financial relationship between Venture Richmond and RVANews.com? And while it is may be too much to expect disclosure on every article or opinion, it should definitely be part of the ones that deal with topics of important community discussions. By the way, don’t forget that the Times Dispatch and Richmond.com are owned by the same company and they are in the process of tightening their relationship. (Also, not all the local media has been amiss. The Richmond Voice has done a good job of presenting and balancing opposing views in the amphitheater controversy. It deserves more readership.)

Consider and compare the roles media and community involvement in regard to the multiple attempts to push through a flawed plan for a minor league baseball stadium in historic Shockoe Bottom. If it was not for dogged involvement and investigation by citizens, and those same citizens demanding media coverage, there are many important facets to the public debate that would have likely been ignored. Now, with City Hall figures jumping ship, opponents are feeling better about the chances of stopping the potential destruction of valuable slave history in Shockoe Bottom and making way for more responsible development.

Sadly, there are still many Richmonders who are not aware of the damage done to the James River and Kanawha Canal, an important piece of slave history in its own right, by Venture Richmond’s Tredegar Green amphitheater, despite similarities to the Shockoe stadium proposal. Oregon Hill neighbors have watched over this valuable public resource for over a hundred years, yet much of the local media has deliberately chosen to ignore our concerns. Will it continue to do so going forward?

Bottom line, real community journalism represents the happenings, news, and opinions of the community. It does not exclude voices as much as it includes them. ‘RVA’ continues to struggle in this regard and that does not bode well for the future. As citizens, in all our different communities, we need our local media to make an effort for fair reporting that gives voice to more than corporate agendas. That was true with the Shockoe ballpark debate and it should have been true for the Tredegar Green amphitheater controversy.

Questions Concerning The Future of “Tredegar Green”

Posted on by
Reply

With it almost being time for the wonderful Richmond Folk Festival, there is more attention on Venture Richmond’s “Tredegar Green”. Here are a few of the questions that Oregon Hill residents have about it:

What happened to the emergency? Venture Richmond repeatedly told the media that they had to have the amphitheater built this summer or the Folk Festival would not happen. They said that nearby property owner New Market would not allow them to use some of the site land that they had in the past due to development plans, so they had to have the amphitheater site and no other alternative sites would work. Why were alternatives like Brown’s Island and beneath the historic James River and Kanawha Canal ignored? What are those development plans for the site area that they supposedly had to vacate?

What about the issues of the lease of the City property and the fact that Venture Richmond attempted to get a tax exemption on this land during the moratorium on tax exemption by designation?

Its been almost two years since a historically significant wall was systematically torn down (despite what the contractor Liesfeld has said about it just falling down, there were witnesses who saw the deconstruction). When will the illegally demolished historic wall be replaced, as was repeatedly promised? Were all of the torn down wall’s bricks accounted for (There were pallets of brick on the berm on Venture Richmond’s property. They had to have been moved when Venture Richmond worked on the berm)? Will the public ever be allowed to see the work contract and other agreements concerning the land where this public resource was illegally demolished (The plans approved by the City government showed the wall to be removed only on Venture Richmond’s property)?

Will there be a state historic marker for the James River and Kanawha Canal west of Tredegar Iron Works?

City staff told the Urban Design Committee and the City Planning Commission that they didn’t need to consider any damage to the James River and Kanawha Canal because Venture Richmond promised a thorough Section 106 review by the Va. Dept of Historic Resources and the Corps of Engineers. But Venture Richmond withdrew from the Section 106 review the day after receiving final city approval. How can Venture Richmond be trusted after the destruction of the canal without the promised Section 106 oversight?

There are rumors that the area closer to 5th Street and the Tredegar Iron Works site will be developed soon. There are still remains of the historic James River & Kanawha Canal there as well (Venture Richmond used part of them for a bicycle ramp as part of this past Dominion Riverrock festival). What are those development plans? Will there be any efforts to preserve the historic canal site there? The parcel is privately owned, but the Canal is a publicly registered historic site.

With Venture Richmond having altered and destroyed part of the historic James River & Kanawha Canal at one of it’s previously best preserved portions, will the Canal be structurally sound in the future?

When will the historic James River & Kanawha Canal be rewatered and more properly preserved? -as per 1988 City of Richmond Canal Restoration plans, despite the recent destruction of one of the previously best preserved portions of the canal? What is the City government doing to follow its own planning?

Upon the future restoration of the James River & Kanawha Canal, where will the planned canal boats turn around, now that Venture Richmond has taken and altered much of the crucial turning basin land as well as altered and diminished a crucial part of the canal’s foundation?

Venture Richmond received the City government’s approval to build the amphitheater in conjunction with a City ordinance that authorizes “temporary events”. Jack Berry of Venture Richmond told the Oregon Hill Neighborhood Association that “we would probably be open to the idea of renting it.” which is not the same story that was told to the Planning Commission. Now that the amphitheater is built, Jack Berry is planning to have the amphitheater rezoned to allow for much more use. Is this a technique that other developers will copy? How and will rezoning plans for this area be publicly shared and debated? How will the public have a voice on this matter?

How will the new amphitheater effect programming at other public venues? How about the Dogwood Dell amphitheater? Given the number of performing arts venues that already exist and are being built, how many performing arts venues can Richmond support, both in terms of audiences and finances? How can they be coordinated to prevent interference and harm?

There is speculation that the planned reopening of a concert area on Mayo Island was basically not allowed by City government, in part because it would compete with this new amphitheater. Is there any truth to that speculation?

Oregon Hill neighborhood leaders have recently been working with the Richmond police to ensure that there is adequate parking enforcement and traffic control for public safety. As this amphitheater is used more, will Venture Richmond compensate the City and neighborhood for the additional parking and traffic pressure and needed resources?

In a similar vein, riverfront events have caused increasing pressure on public trash receptacles and outright littering. When will the riverfront and nearby neighborhoods receive better public trash and recycling infrastructure? Will there be recycling and composting at the new amphitheater?

Oregon Hill residents have had to complain to the police about multiple loud noise disturbances from concerts at Brown’s Island with varying levels of response. The Oregon Hill neighborhood has been very tolerant of the Folk Festival weekend over the years. The amphitheater is aimed at the Va. War Memorial, a place of quiet contemplation. Is Jack Berry’s desire to have more events at Tredegar Green consistent with the Commonwealth’s obligations to respect the Va. War Memorial? The City’s Zoning Administrator determined that the “temporary event” ordinance did not exempt the owner from complying with the noise ordinance. What recourse will Oregon Hill residents have with future loud noise disturbances from concerts at this new, much closer concert site? How will this noise effect wildlife on our riverfront? Will Venture Richmond be held accountable? Perhaps more importantly, how will the City address this and the noise ordinance in general?

There were repeated requests from the Oregon Hill Neighborhood Association and the Overlook Condo Association for Venture Richmond to agree to curfews and some restrictions on the new amphitheater operations in the interest of giving Venture Richmond a chance to forge a better relationship with the neighborhood. OHNA received no response. The Overlook Condo Association received a cursory, noncommittal response. If Venture Richmond is a ‘public-private partnership’, why does it treat the public with such disrespect?

What are future plans for this riverfront area? There are plans to build a connection from the current pedestrian bridge over the canal to the Belle Island pedestrian bridge. Will citizens continue to have direct public pedestrian access to Tredegar Street and the river from Oregon Hill, as they have had for generations, in addition to this new connection? This goes directly back to the City’s Master Plan, which cost a lot of taxpayers’ time and money, and done with much input from citizens. Again, what is the City government doing to follow its own planning? Why is the City’s Riverfront Plan being used to ‘water down’ the tenets of the City’s Master Plan? What is being done to preserve and protect remaining public resources from increasing privatization of the riverfront?

Is Venture Richmond Above The Law?

Posted on by
Reply

Do the City’s rules and regulations do not apply equally to everyone? If the Mayor happens to be the president of your organization, as is the case with Venture Richmond, do the City’s regulations apply equally?

20140704_184507_resized

As of Monday, July 7th, why is there no permit on the city’s web site shown for Venture Richmond’s ongoing amphitheater work on the City-owned property leased by Venture Richmond (the area above the canal)? While it appears that no permit was requested or issued for the City parcel, a City employee indicated that the City parcel work was included in the permit that was issued. But is this correct procedure?

city property W0000051010 at Tredegar Green

In October 2012, the century-old Tredegar wall was illegally demolished on this same City property leased by Venture Richmond. Last week, silt fencing to stop erosion was not installed on the Venture Richmond property until after the public complained. As a result, dirt and debris was pushed into the wetlands.

Venture Richmond repeatedly promised a thorough Section 106 historic review of the impact that the amphitheater would have on the historic James River and Kanawha Canal, but the day after receiving final City Planning Commission approval, Venture Richmond broke this promise and withdrew from the Section 106 review.

Let’s hope that the public remembers Venture Richmond’s broken promises when the Shockoe stadium again rears its ugly head!

Venture Richmond Destroys George Washington’s Historic James River and Kanawha Canal

Posted on by
4

Despite community and preservationists concerns, and with Friday Cheers over for the season, it looks like Venture Richmond has started on the unneeded amphitheater project, doing irreparable damage to this incredibly important historic resource. Alternatives, such as putting Venture Richmond’s largest stage on Brown’s Island, already leased to Venture Richmond, were ignored. There is a large “thumb” bucket backhoe on the canal berm knocking down trees and scouring the dirt. Trucks are dumping fill dirt below the canal berm. And, still no word on replacing the illegally demolished wall.

10500536_10204668859509663_4368211762438935889_n

Letter To Neko Case

Posted on by
Reply

I sent this earlier this month to Neko Case’s management in an attempt to contact the rock star:

Dear Neko Case,

First of all, let me say that I have enjoyed your music for a while now. While many fans may have first heard of you through the New Pornographers, I first heard you from your work with with one of my all time favorites, John Doe. I was lucky enough to have been tipped off last minute about a show you did years ago with the Sadies down at a Shockoe Bottom club in Richmond, Virginia, called Alley Katz (an old alley warehouse turned beer hall with a small stage.) The energy, your voice…I am not exaggerating when I say it is one of the best shows I have ever seen.

I also had the pleasure of seeing you more recently at Richmond’s National Theater, an excellent show though the venue was not nearly as personable. So, I’m excited to hear that you’re scheduled to make another appearance in Richmond at the end of June. I’m looking forward to it and hope you are too. I’ve purchased your new album “The Worse Things Get, The Harder I Fight, The Harder I Fight, The More I Love You (Deluxe Edition), locally, at Plan 9 Records and have enjoyed it very much. I’ve found the personal stories on it touching.

The reason I am writing to you now and making this an open letter is to let you and others know about a local controversy related to the venue for your upcoming Richmond show (June 27). Don’t worry, I am NOT asking you or anyone else to boycott it, but I’m hoping that you’ll choose to treat this matter with due sensitivity and understanding. There’s a lot to it, so please take a moment to gather your concentration before reading further…

I live in a very special place, a small, “historic white working-class neighborhood in Richmond, Virginia” called Oregon Hill. There are many reasons why it’s special, including that it has survived the Civil War, tornados, highway construction, suburban flight, corporate hegemony, university expansion, and other threats. It’s also known as place that many local musicians have called home, including The Rock-A-Teens, GWAR, The Cowboy Junkies, David Lowery (Camper Van Beethoven, Cracker), Tim Berry (AVAIL), the No BS! Brass Band, and countless others. There have also been many songs written about it, including The Cowboy Junkies’ “Oregon Hill”.

Perhaps because of this affinity for musicians, Oregon Hill was delighted when the National Folk Festival set up tent for a few years in a closely adjacent riverfront location. After the National Folk Festival travelled on to other cities, a private local nonprofit group called Venture Richmond went on to hold “The Richmond Folk Festival” in that location. I’ll note here that I personally attended and volunteered for both the National and Richmond Folk Festivals. I even won the Volunteer of the Year Award in 2010. So, you can imagine my happiness at having some of the best musicians in the world playing within walking distance of my home.

It’s a special kind of hell when something you love is used to threaten your community, but that has sadly become the case with The Richmond Folk Festival. Oregon Hill residents did experience some noise/trash/crowd issues over the years due to a few especially rowdy, loud acts in close proximity to our relatively quiet, residential neighborhood, but we’ve largely tolerated this, because we understand and want people to enjoy the music and riverfront. The Folk Festival is only one weekend a year and more of ‘a family event’.

However, Venture Richmond has now proposed building a new, 10,000 person amphitheater at that location. It’s called Tredegar Green and is a fragile, historic site directly adjacent to Oregon Hill and the Virginia War Memorial. Venture Richmond wants to be able to rent out their proposed amphitheater year round. The Richmond Folk Festival and other concerts have been at initially held at another river-adjacent location called Brown’s Island (where I believe you’ll be playing later this month) which is more appropriate in its proximity to residential/natural areas.

The Tredegar Green location is what our neighborhood Association (as well as numerous historic preservationists nationwide) want to preserve. The reason is that through that location runs a segment and boat basin of the The James River and Kanawha Canal. This waterway was built in 1785 to facilitate river travel upriver beyond Richmond’s rocky fall line, effectively creating a travel and trade route prior to the inception of the railroads. The canal was built with slave labor and the company that built it and managed it was founded and presided over by no one less than George Washington.

Even before Venture Richmond’s proposal was fully announced, a historic stone wall built adjacent to the canal by Washington’s company was illegally demolished while the site was under Venture Richmond’s stewardship. I’ve worked for over the last few years with our Oregon Hill Neighborhood Association to carefully document and present the history of the Kanawha Canal, focusing on the portion threatened by Venture Richmond’s proposed amphitheater. Despite our continued attempts to broker compromise (keeping the proposed amphitheater on Brown’s Island, for example) and mitigate damage, Venture Richmond (which is really a very powerful mix of local corporate and political leaders, including our own Mayor) continues to bulldoze ahead, ignoring neighborhood and historical preservationists’ concerns.

In short, Venture Richmond’s plans are threatening not only our quality of life, but the very historic and structural integrity of our city. They’ve deceptively told the media and general public that if we force them to adjust their plans, the Folk Festival will have to be cancelled. Personally, I think this has more to do with future development plans for the location and very little to do with amphitheaters, Folk Festivals, music, or public interest.

They see the historic Canal and Oregon Hill as public impediments that must be diminished to attain their private plans. Sadly, this group and their supporters pretty much own the mainstream media in this town and those they don’t own are afraid to speak out against them. I’ve been writing about this for a while now, if you want, you can read more on my website, www.oregonhill.net.

I appreciate your time and don’t necessarily expect you to step in on this mess. You have a contract to perform and I do want the best for ‘RVA’. I will pray for good weather, but I want you to know about this controversy, so when Venture Richmond’s representatives start talking to you about what they’re doing for ‘downtown living’ and their future plans, you understand that there’s more to the story and that there’s a lot more at stake.

Hold me to the line.

Sincerely,

Scott Burger

(Ed. note: Alley Katz is now gone and a new, different venue is opening there).