Venture Richmond’s Amphitheater Proposal Before UDC On Thursday

According to an agenda I just saw, the City’s Urban Design Committee has Venture Richmond’s “Tredegar Green’ amphitheater proposal on their regular agenda for January 9th at 10 am, 5th Floor Conference Room of City Hall.

“12. Final Location, Character and Extent review of the portion of the Tredegar Green Amphitheater proposed for City Property, 344 Tredegar Street; UDC #14-07”

How ‘Tredegar Green’ and Shockoe Stadium Proposals Are Similar

This past year Venture Richmond promoted two proposals for downtown Richmond, one being a new concert amphitheater on the Kanawha Canal near Oregon Hill (codenamed ‘Tredegar Green’), another putting a baseball stadium in Shockoe Bottom. Although these two proposals may be different in scale and scope, their similarities reveal just how corrupt, flawed and misguided they really are.

Venture Richmond is a local ‘public/private partnership’. It’s stated mission is to ‘promote downtown living’. Its precursor was another corporate partnership called the Richmond Renaissance, which was partly responsible for such boondoggles as Sixth Street Marketplace and Broad Street Community Development Authority, among other questionable projects. Both Richmond Renaissance and Venture Richmond have employed Jack Berry, who by all accounts can be a very slick salesperson. So it is very telling when Berry pleads ignorance. In the case of the ‘Tredegar Green’ amphitheater plan, Berry, executive director of Venture Richmond, said he was not aware when a historic wall was illegally demolished, even though Venture Richmond was leasing and responsible for the city-owned land at the time the wall was demolished.

As for the latest rendition of the Shockoe stadium proposal (which has been made off and on for the last ten years), Jack Berry told the Times Dispatch this past September that he was͏ not aware of any involvement by Louis Solomonsky, a multimillionaire architect and real estate developer who infamously served two years in federal prison for conspiring to bribe former City Councilwoman Gwen C. Hedgepeth (for her vote in electing a new mayor in 2002 under Richmond’s previous city manager form of government ). Salomonsky, I might add, has developed properties in this neighborhood. It’s worthwhile to keep in mind that Salomonsky told local preservationist Jennie Dotts, who opposed his stadium plans back in 2004, that “there are powerful forces out there, and they can destroy you”.

In fact, neither of these plans are new, as this may be the third or fourth pitch for the Shockoe stadium, and as for the canal, the Ethyl corporation destroyed the architecturally significant 2nd Street bridge back in 1991 despite public protest and company officials derided the Kanawha Canal as ‘a stinking ditch’ (shades of the way Shockoe Creek has been treated over the decades). So if you know the full history, there is a lot to think about in regards to the motives of these projects.

Its also very telling that both plans have been pushed forward with manufactured crises. In the Kanawha Canal case, the public was told that the wonderful Richmond Folk Festival might have to fold if Venture Richmond is not allowed to build the amphitheater to its specification. Certainly there are other qualified entities besides Venture Richmond that could run a successful folk festival along Richmond’s extensive riverfront. What’s even more disturbing is how Venture Richmond lead the media and public to believe the controversy is just about the 3-day Richmond Folk Festival. In fact, Venture Richmond would like to be able to rent its proposed amphitheater to other entities year round, with no limits, which could significantly impact its neighbors in terms of litter, congestion, and noise. Venture Richmond insists it must be allowed to alter the Kanawha Canal in order for their amphitheater plan to work, yet there is plenty of space beneath the canal and further from the Oregon Hill neighborhood. This area has hosted a stage for previous festivals, including this past year’s. So, what’s the crisis? I suspect this may have more to do with future corporate ambitions for re-zoning the area than any folk festival.

In the Shockoe stadium proposal, the media and public are told that the Flying Squirrels franchise could leave possibly Richmond just like the Richmond Braves did if the proposal does not go forward (as if that would justify the costs of the proposal). In addition, the public is told that the Shockoe stadium proposal has to go forward NOW for the economic redevelopment of the Shockoe Bottom neighborhood AND the current location of the baseball stadium, the Boulevard area, to succeed. In fact, the footprint of the proposed Shockoe stadium development could easily fit in the Boulevard area with lots of space left over for more (re)development. In both cases, there are significant, very viable, publicly popular alternatives to these plans that are only now coming forward and receiving media attention.

Both the Shockoe stadium proposal and the ‘Tredegar Green’ amphitheater plan could be disastrous for historical preservation in Richmond. Even more crazy, these flawed ventures potentially damage very important slavery history while pretending to save it. Both sites, Shockoe Bottom and the Kanawha Canal, have been allowed by their landholders to become derelict and unappealing with very few indications of their historical importance. By proposing to bulldoze the canal bank, Venture Richmond claims it will “restore” the canal — the same way that it is “honoring” Richmond’s slave history by building a ball park on the Shockoe site. This comparison is especially appropriate and yet disturbing since the canal was largely built with slave labor and many of the slaves that worked on the canal were probably sold in Shockoe. In both situations, past transgressions have already done damage to these sites, and in both situations, there has not been enough archeological exploration to document what is under the ground. There are concerns that archeological requirements will be waived to make way for immediate construction. Any Richmonder who is familiar with the interstate 95 construction, the discovered James River bateaux, or the relocation of the Jacob House should understand the danger and what is potentially at stake.

And it’s not just the past, but also Richmond’s future. In both cases, Venture Richmond’s plans could block or destroy needed transportation options for Richmond (which makes the alternative plans that much more important). For decades there has been interest and plotting to properly restore the Kanawha Canal for boat use, which could potentially re-create “the blueway” (think greenway but on water) from downtown to Maymont, reconnecting the Haxall Canal to the Kanawha Canal to a renovated Byrd Park Pumphouse. In 1988, with Historic Richmond’s help, renowned architect Carlton Abbott prepared plans and cost estimates. More recently, Councilperson Parker Agelasto submitted a Capital Improvement Project budget request for rewatering the canal. Think about the tourism potential! Most cities could only dream of having this historic amenity, a working canal originally designed and presided over by George Washington himself! Yet Venture Richmond’s amphitheater plan would seriously endanger the canal’s historic and structural integrity by slicing into of its best preserved portions. If the canal can’t hold enough water, it can’t be fully restored.

In comparison, in Shockoe Bottom, there has been interest and plotting to bring the beautiful Main Street Station back to full train service, with high speed rail being an eventual goal. Unfortunately, the Shockoe ballpark proposal is more likely to hurt multi-modal transportation in Richmond than help it. Instead of a stadium, city planners should be considering a GRTC bus transfer station near Main Street Station, with an airport shuttle, that can make Shockoe Bottom a true transportation hub for the entire region. If the Shockoe stadium happens in lieu of a good bus transfer station, in the future, when you can’t easily catch a bus to and from Main Street Station train station, think back about how this public interest was bypassed.

In addition to the spurning of multimodal transportation, the Shockoe stadium plan further buries Shockoe Creek, a natural feature that served as another of Richmond’s original ‘blueways’. Think about it, while cities all over the world are recognizing the importance of urban tributaries and working hard to daylight them, Shockoe stadium proponents are lobbying to pour more concrete over Shockoe Creek. So much for local environmental stewardship.

In closing, its important to once again recognize how both of these plans are arrogantly pushed forward with no willingness for compromise. It appears that Salomonsky is a prime mover and would be a prime beneficiary of the proposed Shockoe stadium, which, according to recent polling, a large percentage of the public considers a very poor location for a ball park. Yet in the Shockoe stadium debate, proponents are that emphatic that all of the components of the plan must happen. Hmmm, I seem to remember a recent Times Dispatch article that stated that the “plan” is to swap the property that Salomonsky purchased [in the flood zone] for property on Broad St. [not in the flood zone]. A few years back, many of Salomonsky’s LLCs sued the city regarding the flooding of Shockoe Bottom; isn’t it strange now that the city is apparently working with Salomonsky, a principal of many of the LLCs that sued the city because of the flooding, to acquire the property in the flood zone for the baseball stadium? By the way, how are those traffic studies coming?

In the ‘Tredegar Green’ amphitheater case, the Times Dispatch has floated a compromise that would keep the project below the Kanawha Canal without diminishing it. The Oregon Hill Neighborhood Association has neighborly suggested that it could go along with this compromise as long as other restrictions on the amount and dates of use could be codified. Yet Venture Richmond has not only remained silent on this potential compromise, but recently submitted its original plan to the Army Corps of Engineers. This would damage the canal, which shares important historic ties to Oregon Hill. This unreasonable attitude from Venture Richmond certainly contradicts its stated mission for ‘promoting downtown living’.

Let’s cut to the chase. If Venture Richmond’s joined cabal of corporate and political power is going to continue to be wielded against Richmond’s public in order to force projects which the public does not agree with, then it’s time to stop publicly funding Venture Richmond. Other cities are moving away from this particular ‘public-private partnership’ model, which relies on special tax assessment districts for downtown. Richmond should do the same.

Canal Water Levels And Venture Richmond

There is important new documentation on the water level in the James River and Kanawha Canal provided by the research of canal enthusiast C. Wayne Taylor. He has made the discovery that there is still a water gauge in the canal at the city Park Hydro near Cherry Street, some 1000 feet from Venture Richmond’s proposed amphitheater. The water level in the canal is clearly shown by a line on the wall at 83 feet next to this water gauge. Water has eroded all paint from the gauge under the 83 foot mark on the gauge.

James River and Kanawha Canal gauge at Park Hydro, Cherry Street, showing water line at 83 feet elevation

Remarkably, Wayne Taylor has also discovered a 1990s photograph from the City Planning Department in the VCU Library showing water in the canal at the location of the Park Hydro, and this photograph shows the water gauge in the canal.

Water in canal at 83 feet elevation at Cherry Street, Park Hydro, 1990s (Source - VCU Libraries)

The 83 foot water elevation of the water in the canal shown in this gauge and photograph correspond with the many Tredegar and C&O Railroad surveys of the historical water level in the canal at this same location.

James River and Kanawha Canal detail showing 83 foot gauge at Park Hydro

It would be folly to reduce the elevation of the tow path of the James River and Kanawha Canal to 83 feet as proposed by Venture Richmond, when a preponderance of evidence shows that the historical water level in the canal near the amphitheater is documented at 83 feet elevation.

When will Venture Richmond acknowledge its plan is based on flawed history? When will Venture Richmond give in to sensible compromise and stop trying to dishonorably label neighborhood concerns as unreasonable?

Tredegar Takes In Museum of Confederacy To Form New Civil War Museum

It was alluded to earlier, but now it has been announced. From NBC12:

Now the Museum of the Confederacy and the American Civil War Center are joining forces to build a $30 million museum in Richmond with the goal of creating the top Civil War museum in the nation 150 years after the deadliest conflict fought on U.S. soil.

The marriage of museums, announced to The Associated Press, will meld the collection of Confederate battle flags, uniforms, weapons and other historic relics with a narrative-based museum that uses bold, interactive exhibits and living history events to relate its 360-degree telling of the war.

In a joint announcement, the museums said the new historic attraction in the former capital of the Confederacy has yet to be named, but $20 million has been committed to its construction. Ground will be broken in 2014, with an expected opening the following year.

The new museum will be located along the James River, at the Tredegar Ironworks, where much of the South’s cannons were forged during the war. It’s also the home of the Civil War Center. The museums said bringing together both institutions will “further establish Richmond as the foremost Civil War destination in the United States.”

While other news sites are just reporting the announcement, many are still digesting what this means. A more nuanced reflection from an unnamed Oregon Hill neighbor:

Hmmm … no comment on the fate of the authentic White House of the Confederacy, coveted by VCU. And the $20 million pledged for this new museum would have gone a long way toward building a slavery museum in the authentic location in Shockoe Bottom. I wonder what proportion of that $20 million is being pledged by VCU foundations and their donors.

Between turning the canal location into an amphitheater, turning the slave market location into a ball park, and ceding the White House of the Confederacy to VCU, we are really at risk of losing the city’s authentic history.

Questioning Venture Richmond

From citizen “watchdog” C.Wayne Taylor:

Councilor Agelasto requested that Venture Richmond provide financial and other data to the Council’s Finance and Economic Development Committee. Jack Berry presented the information at the committee’s October 24th meeting.

I support Mr. Agelasto’s inquiry into the breadth and depth of the city’s involvement with and funding of Venture Richmond. While Venture Richmond is good at promotional work, it seems to have become a monopoly with excessive influence over the decisions made at city hall.

Mr. Berry is a very experienced promoter. He presents Venture Richmond’s view very effectively. As with most matters, there may be more to the story. He seems to be off on some of the facts included in his presentation. Regarding the amphitheater:

–Mr. Berry said that the planning commission proved the amphitheater project. The planning commission approved a concept plan. The final plan must still get commission approval.

–Mr. Berry refers to the canal’s configuration in the early 1800s. In past presentations he cites the 1850 to 1860 period.

–Mr. Berry repeats the claim that the amphitheater plan is necessary to continue the festival. He has not explained why.

It is noteworthy that councilors Graziano, Robertson and Samuels had no questions.

Also noteworthy is that some of the materials available on-line are very poor quality and some seem to be completely missing.

Presentation: (ed. note: click here to download large .pdf file from the City website)

Venture Richmond self-promotion on pages 9 through 101.
Venture Richmond financial data on pages 103 through 109.
[stop at page 109]

The two pages of financial data are hard to read and in some places illegible. Not all the figures Mr. Berry recites can be verified in the data.

The materials are incomplete. Several financial reports mentioned at the meeting are not included in the on-line documents.

Audio:(ed. note: click here to download .wma audio file from City website)

0:00:27 Presentation
0:00:35 Venture Richmond – Jack Berry, Executive Director
0:06:18 amphitheater – Berry: It got unanimous approval from the planning commission last month.
0:06:54 canal – Berry: The canal will be restored to its configuration in the early 1800s during the heyday of canal boat traffic on the James River and Kanawha Canal.
0:07:04 crowd – Berry: This is the crowd of people that are now at the main stage on NewMarket property that will need to move to that amphitheater in order for us to continue to host this big festival.
0:11:03 answers to budget questions [handout]
0:18:36 questions
0:18:48 Agelasto – future of Venture Richmond
0:30:07 Agelasto – top priorities
0:33:09 Agelasto – base-line services
0:36:27 Agelasto – sidewalk cleaning
0:39:40 Robertson – compliments Venture Richmond
0:43:53 Samuels – no comments
0:43:53 Graziano – thanks Venture Richmond

Times Dispatch Editorial Offers Compromise in Theater Controversy

The ‘top opinion’ in today’s Times Dispatch contained this:

The alternative of confining the amphitheater to space below the canal has considerable appeal, and we endorse it. It is our choice.

Todd Woodson, a longtime officer of the Oregon Hill Neighborhood Association, made this comment in response:

Thoughtful and equitable. If Venture Richmond made the concessions of restricting the amphitheater to BELOW the canal with use of the facility to only the Folk Festival and River Rocks, not disturbing the canal’s infrastructure and leaving the upper area as a considerate buffer to the war memorial and the residents of Oregon Hill, I believe progress could be made. The attitude that its “your plan or this here Folk Festival gets it!” has caused extensive loss of trust in VR amongst city community and fosters fears that the plan as you envision it establishes the facility as a cash cow- renting to all comers- not good. It’s the upper part that is not zoned for an amphitheater anyway. It’s in EVERYBODY’S best interest to be good neighbors and to do what’s right. The Tredegar wall gets rebuilt, the discussion can begin in earnest on restoring this wonderful canal. VR saves money by not butchering the canal infrastructure. There are some smart people in the city that can help make the grand canal renovation happen. Venture Richmond?

Harvie’s Deed Contradicts Venture Richmond’s Flawed History

New documentation from deed research that confirms that the 30 foot wide tow path on the site of Venture Richmond’s proposed amphitheater is authentic and dates from at least 1801.

As documented in Henrico Deed Book 6, page 260, when John Harvie and his wife on June 26, 1801 conveyed to the James River Company his property for the canal and for the upper basin, he reserved the right to fish in the basin and reserved the condition of a “public Road” on the lower side of the canal not more than 30 feet wide from the edge of the water. In this deed, the tow path embankment was referenced as a “Dam” for holding back the water that was to overflow the upper basin.

In this 1801 deed, Harvie and his wife conveyed to the James River Company, “… the following portions or parcels of land, lying and being in the County aforesaid, near James River, that is to say one hundred feet in breadth horizontal measure, of the said land, thro’ which the said Canal passes in the present direction of the said Canal, and which shall not extend more than thirty feet horizontal measure below the lower edge of the water in the said canal for the purpose of a public Road being part of the land purchased by the said John Harris from Samuel Overton, and also all the land which shall be overflowed by means of the Dam or wall of the said Canal …” (Please see attachment, “Henrico DB 6, page 260.”)

This 30 foot wide public access is clearly shown on the 1848 Plat of Harvie’s land. (Please see attachment, “Henrico Plat 3-417.”)

Henrico Plat 3-417 (crop)

The 1868 Pleasants/Bates map, which shows the Canal company owning a 45 foot property width on the the south bank of the canal, has an inscription in the canal that references this June 26, 1801 Deed: “From John Harvie, strip 100′ wide and ground covered by water of upper basin … Extending from lower Belvidere line to Harvie’s lower line June 26, 1801” (Please see attachment, “1868 Pleasants/Bates map, detail showing 1801 Harvie deed reference.”)

1868 Pleasants-Bates map, detail showing 1801 Harvie deed reference

As John Harvie recognized early on, by harnessing the water power available in the canal, there was great potential for industrial development on his land between the canal and the James River. He was a highly respected businessman, who not only was a Director of the James River Company and former Mayor of Richmond, but was one of the original statesmen in the Virginia delegation who ratified the U.S. Constitution. Harvie could command concessions in his sale of land to the James River Company that assured adequate access on the tow path for his industrial interests.

Hopefully, this new deed documentation will end the mistaken effort to alter the south bank of the canal from its authentic 1801 configuration for sight lines for the proposed amphitheater.

Henrico DB 6 p. 260, Harvie reserving 30 ft. road on south bank of canal

Theater Controversies Continue: Venture Richmond Main Stage Comparisons

This weekend Venture Richmond employees and volunteers will be putting together stages for the upcoming Folk Festival. Still looming in the background is the controversy over Venture Richmond’s ‘Tredegar Green’ theater plan. It seems like a good time to present this information from concerned citizen C. Wayne Taylor:

I have an aerial photo that show the Newmarket venue after a festival. People trampled the grass except where it was protected by structures. The stage, control tent, cable runs, and concession tents locations are clearly visible as green areas. I marked the areas that the audience occupied; excluding space for foot traffic.

Then I laid the area over the Venture Richmond (ed.- proposed ‘Tredegar Green’) site. It’s interesting that none of the Newmarket footprint reaches the “upper lawn” of the VR site. Spectators in the upper lawn would be further away from the stage than anyone at the Newmarket venue.

Sq Ft Percent
Newmarket 86,234 100%

Venture Richmond

Lower 34,567 40%

Upper 16,419 19%

TOTAL 50,986 59%

Reduction 35,248 41%

The canal, street, etc. on the Venture Richmond site eliminate 60% of the Newmarket footprint. The upper lawn adds back 19%. That is a net reduction of 41%.

The Venture Richmond venue is very poor and cannot accommodate the crowds experienced on the Newmarket site. I think a main reason Berry (ed.- Jack Berry of Venture Richmond) wants to modify the canal is to increase the lower lawn square footage.

It appears to me that it really does make sense to consider moving the main stage to Brown’s Island and move the two stages on Brown’s Island to the lower lawn and upper lawn. The sizes of the venues would more closely match the sizes of the audiences. The regrading expense would be less. I don’t understand why Berry has rejected that alternative.

3 2012 venture richmond venue2 2012 newmarket venue 21 2012 newmarket venue

As the Folk Festival (Venture Richmond’s propaganda push) gets closer, expect more information and history to be shared on oregonhill.net. It’s important to recognize that Oregon Hill is not against the Folk Festival, but the neighborhood association is strongly against the current ‘Tredegar Green’ plan that Venture Richmond is wrongly insisting on and arrogantly pushing upon our historic neighborhood.

UDC Did Not Approve Of Venture Richmond’s Proposed Theater; Planning Commission Decides Tomorrow; Overlook Condos Releases Statement, and Oh Look, There Is A Lease!

In case you did not not know already, the City Of Richmond’s Urban Design Committee did NOT approve Venture Richmond’s amphitheater, wait, sorry, THEATER plan this past Monday. Oregon Hill Neighborhood Association President Jennifer Hancock gave a great speech on behalf of the association, and Laurel Street neighbor Caroline Cox spoke in regard to the parking and noise problems associated with putting an amphitheater directly below Oregon Hill. Pine Street neighbor Bryan Green who serves on the Urban Planning Commission was one of four who voted against the plan.

Tomorrow, the proposal will be at City’s the Planning Commission (1:30pm, on the fifth floor at City Hall).

Venture Richmond, as expected, has threatened that this Folk Festival will be its last if they don’t get what they want and most of the local media is going with their storyline.

Meanwhile, the Overlook Unit Owners Association board has released the following statement:

1. Our Overlook community is made up of a wide variety of residents, including young professionals, working people of all ages, retirees, families with young children, graduate and undergraduate students.

2. We support the work that the City and Venture Richmond has done to develop the Riverfront and encourage more people to visit and live in the city.

3. Our residents enjoy the entertainment and other amenities available downtown, including concerts, festivals, parks, art galleries and restaurants.

4. We frequent and support the Richmond Folk Festival.

5. We believe that it is important that decisions made by the City and non-governmental institutions regarding the use of land be sensitive to the impact those decisions will have on neighbors living close-by.

6. We acknowledge that some alterations of the canal may be necessary. We support restoring the canal in a manner that will be both historically accurate by allowing canal boat traffic from Maymont to Third Street and the use of Tredgar Green as an amphitheater.

7. We prefer that the Tredegar Green area remain green and undeveloped, with only occasional use for amplified performances. We are concerned that a stage at the base of the Lee Bridge would disturb the peace of some members of our community if concerts were scheduled there regularly without restriction.

8. We note that loud events on a stage aimed directly at the Virginia War Memorial would destroy the peace and tranquility of that facility. The Virginia War Memorial is a sacred place for thousands of friends and family members of Virginia’s fallen veterans. We hope that Venture Richmond and the Virginia War Memorial can coordinate schedules to not have events on the same day, with priority going to the Virginia War Memorial.

9. We ask that, if approved, amplified events at Tredegar Green be limited to no more than 15 days per year and not run past 10:00PM on weeknights and 11:00PM on Fridays and Saturdays.

10. If more events are scheduled for the site at the foot of the Lee Bridge, large crowds and parking issues in our neighborhood will move from an occasional inconvenience to a frequent problem. The Overlook development was approved by the City with the assumption that reasonable street parking would be available to residents, supplemented by limited off-street parking on our land. Frequent events that draw thousands to our neighborhood would destroy that basic assumption, resulting in an unfair burden on our residents.

11. We ask that a reasonable volume limit be put on performances at the amphitheater stage.

Also, Laurel Street neighbor Charles Pool, when he has not been researching the history of the Kanawha Canal, has been asking the City a lot of questions. Under the Va. Freedom of Information Act, he requested on Aug. 26, 2013, “Any lease agreements or draft lease agreements regarding the use of City of Richmond property by Venture Richmond for an amphitheater.” His FOIA request was copied to the City Attorney. The use of City property for Venture Richmond’s proposed amphitheater is an item on the agenda of the Sept. 16, 2013 meeting of the Richmond City Planning Commission.

On Sept. 9, 2013, he received a response from a City employee on behalf of city administrator Byron Marshall, that “the City is not in possession of any records responsive to your requests nor is the City aware of the existence of any records responsive to your request.”

After receiving this response from the city administration that the lease did not exist, and after he notified all of the City Planning Commissioners that the lease did not exist, he actually received the lease agreement that someone else had independently received from the city attorney. Here is a link to the lease agreement, which the administration denied existed until two business days before the Planning Commission hearing:

http://eservices.ci.richmond.va.us/applications/clerkstracking/getPDF.asp?NO=2012-153-110

Among other things, this lease agreement is significant because it states that Venture Richmond must maintain the existing city parking for the public except for limited circumstance related to use of the property for an event like the Folk Festival. But Venture Richmond is proposing unlimited use of the proposed amphitheater which would be leased with no limit on the number of events annually.

UDC Meeting This Thursday

There are several items on the agenda pertinent to Oregon Hill for the upcoming City of Richmond Urban Design Committee meeting to be held next Thursday at 10:00am. These include curb extensions for Cumberland Avenue as well as new curb extensions at N. Laurel and W. Main Street as part of the Landmark Theatre renovations. UDC will be reviewing other items for the Landmark Theatre including lamposts, marquee, trees, etc. Perhaps of most interest is that Venture Richmond’s plan for what they call “Tredegar Green” is also on the agenda.