Riverfront Development ‘Community Conversation’ Tuesday

Posted on March 1, 2014 by Scott

V.45.28.229a
Richmond, VA and Its Vicinity engraving
1863

The Valentine Richmond History Center collaborates with Richmond Magazine, TMI Consulting Inc. and the Future of Richmond’s Past to present this year’s Community Conversations series, conceived to engage the community in a dialogue about the region’s past and how that past can positively shape our collective future. Featured are a series of monthly discussions about various Richmond localities, from Shockoe Bottom to the Boulevard. A Richmond Magazine moderator will lead each discussion, illuminating historical and current-day perspectives that shape our understanding and experience of each location.

Riverfront Development with Jack Cooksey
Tuesday, March 4, 6-8 pm
F.W. Sullivan’s Canal Bar & Grill (Plaza Room), 1001 Haxall Point

OHNA Letter To Planning Commssion

Posted on February 28, 2014 by Scott

From letter:

To the Members of the Richmond City Planning Commission,

The Richmond City Planning Commission continued Venture Richmond’s amphitheater issue to the March 3, 2014 meeting of the Planning Commission in order that new lease arrangements could be worked out for the city-owned property.

At the February 25, 2014 meeting of the Oregon Hill Neighborhood Association (OHNA), our organization voted to ask that this item be continued to a later hearing because at this late date we have yet to see any lease language, despite repeated requests. We understand that no lease was introduced at City Council on February 24, 2014.

It is of great importance that adequate time be taken to assess any new lease for the city property proposed for use by Venture Richmond’s amphitheater. The City Planning Commission should also take into consideration the fact that City Councilman Parker Agelasto has introduced a CIP budget request for re-watering the James River and Kanawha Canal, which is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

We ask that the new lease exclude the city property above the canal. This city property above the canal is not zoned for an amphitheater. A 1990 study sponsored by Richmond Renaissance determined that this city property above the canal would be the best location for the eastern terminus and canal boat dock of the re-watered canal. Because the Tredegar Wall that was illegally demolished is slated to be soon rebuilt, the city property above the canal will not be within view of the proposed amphitheater stage. OHNA has endorsed the compromise of confining Venture Richmond’s proposed amphitheater to the property below the canal in order to minimize the adverse impacts upon the canal, the Va. War Memorial and the Oregon Hill neighborhood. This compromise was also endorsed by the editorial staff of the Richmond Times Dispatch.

We ask that the Planning Commission delay any final approval of the amphitheater plan until the reviews by the Corps of Engineers and the Va. Dept. of Historic Resources (DHR) are completed. We are concerned that Venture Richmond is threatening to withdraw from the promised Corps of Engineers and DHR reviews if Venture Richmond cannot begin work on the landscape plan for the proposed amphitheater before the reviews are completed.

We ask that the Planning Commission make it clear that it will constitute a “substantial” change to the plan if Venture Richmond removes the fill in the canal that provides the wetlands contact, which triggered the Corps of Engineers and DHR reviews. The Planning Commission and city staff have promised that the amphitheater must again be reviewed by the UDC and Planning Commission if any “substantial” changes to the amphitheater are made subsequent to the reviews by the Corps of Engineers and DHR.

The Oregon Hill Neighborhood Association would like to express our gratitude for the time and attention that the Planning Commission is devoting to this issue and for your consideration of our requests. The James River and Kanawha Canal promises to be a remarkable tourist attraction and notable feature of Richmond.

Sincerely,

Jennifer Hancock
President
Oregon Hill Neighborhood Association

Thanks To City Council For Postponing Ordinances On ‘Tredegar Green’

Posted on February 11, 2014 by Scott

From email:

Dear Honorable Members of the Richmond City Council,

I would like to express my appreciation for the postponement of the Ordinances that would grant Venture Richmond tax exemptions for its “Tredegar Green” amphitheater properties.

Venture Richmond wants exemption from all the rules. It wants to be exempt from having to bid for city contracts, to be exempt from the non-profit prohibition of engaging in substantial lobbying, to be exempt from having to answer all of the questions submitted by the Taxation by Designation Committee, to be exempt from paying real estate taxes, and even to be exempt from the moratorium on exemptions.

As you carefully consider this issue, I would like for you to understand the frustration that the Oregon Hill neighborhood has experienced in dealing with Venture Richmond, which apparently also feels exempt from treating its neighbors and George Washington’s James River and Kanawha Canal with respect. Venture Richmond wants to be exempt from the zoning requirements for its proposed amphitheater at “Tredegar Green,” to be exempt from protecting Oregon Hill and the Va. War Memorial from the noise and parking congestion of events at the amphitheater, and to be exempt from protecting the historic canal from damage so that it can again be a “blueway” westward to Maymont.

Recently Venture Richmond notified the Corps of Engineers that it may withdraw from the Section 106 review of the amphitheater project by the Va. Dept. of Historic Resources if it cannot be exempt from the holding off implementing much of the project before the review is completed.

The “Tredegar Green” amphitheater also includes city property, so it is my hope that the Richmond City Council, when drawing up a revised lease for this city property, will not exempt the significant interests of the community. The Oregon Hill Neighborhood Association and the editorial staff of the Richmond Times Dispatch have endorsed limiting the amphitheater to the properly zoned property below the canal, and this would eliminate any cause to damage the canal and protect the Oregon Hill neighborhood and the Va. War Memorial from excessive noise and parking congestion.

Thank you for your consideration of the needs of the community and for the postponement of the untimely Venture Richmond tax exemption Ordinances during the moratorium on tax exemptions by designation.

Sincerely,

Charles Pool

Venture Richmond Tax Exemption Application – Chronology of Law and Facts

Posted on February 8, 2014 by Scott

Yes, more on this topic. From C. Wayne Taylor:

2014 February 08

VIA EMAIL TO:
Ms. Lou Brown Ali, Chief of Staff, lou.ali at richmondgov.com

The Honorable Mr. Baliles and Honorable City Council
City of Richmond
900 E. Broad St., Suite 200
Richmond, VA 23219 USA

Re:
Council – Venture Richmond Tax Exemption Application
Ordinances 2014-2, 2014-3, 2014-4

Dear Mr. Baliles and Members of Council,

Please make the following documents part of the official record for each of the above referenced ordinances:

Document 1:

Venture Richmond Tax Exemption Application – Chronology of Law and Facts

This document contains information for the following issues:

A. Legal issues:

01 Property does not qualify for exemption.
02 Application is for wrong property.
03 Application expired on April 8, 2013.
04 Ordinances contain substituted plat.
05 Application was incomplete.
06 Application failed to specify purpose.
07 Application failed to state how property is used.
08 Application failed to certify exclusive use of property.
09 Application failed to answer list of questions.
10 Application contained documents for wrong entity.
11 Applicant paid $242,233 annual compensation to CEO.
12 Applicant spent $32,000 for advocacy and petitions.
13 Review committee recommended against application.
14 City attorney evaluated property for “public park”.
15 City attorney declined to find property eligible.
16 Property is not zoned for use.
17 Property may be used to consume alcohol.
18 Property may be rented for profit.
19 Property may be rented for private use.
20 Ordinances do not list a specific use.
21 Ordinances list a legally unrecognized use.
22 City council does not define “cultural”.
23 Files will be inadequate for triennial review.

B. Ethical/Favoritism/Transparency Issues:

01 Ordinances requested by a city partner of applicant.
02 Ordinances introduced by the president of applicant.
03 Ordinances presented by a city partner of applicant.
04 Public does not know specific reason for delay.

Document 2:

Letter sent to City Council on February 3 2014

This letter questions compliance with the January 28 2013 application and qualification deadline and the April 8 2013 City Council action deadline.

City Council should not consider these ordinances until all the issues are resolved.

Sincerely yours,

C. Wayne Taylor, Publisher
City Hall Review LLC
CityHallReview.com

Attachments:
1 Chronology of Law and Facts 02.pdf
2 20140205 letter to council.pdf

Copy: City Clerk, Better Government Richmond, News media, Interested parties

Chronology of Law and Facts 02

20140205 letter to council

Editorial On Venture Richmond’s Tax Exemption

Posted on February 6, 2014 by Scott

On Monday, February 10th, the Richmond City Council will vote on giving Venture Richmond a tax exemption for its real estate on the site of its proposed amphitheater below Oregon Hill. City Council should not approve this tax exemption for Venture Richmond for the following reasons:

The City Council has a moratorium on granting tax exemptions by designation. Venture Richmond submitted this application in 2012, and Venture Richmond failed to meet the deadline of April 8, 2013, as established by City Ordinance 2013-19, for introducing an ordinance exempting property from taxation by designation.

State code requires that City Council consider whether the executive salary of the organization is reasonable when considering an organization’s application for tax exemption. Venture Richmond Director Jack Berry receives a salary of over $240,000 annually. If Venture Richmond can afford to pay its Director $240,000 are we to believe that it cannot afford to pay $43,836 in real estate tax?

State code also requires that City Council consider whether the non-profit applying for tax exemption engages in substantial lobbying for legislation. According to Venture Richmond, it has spent at least $32,000 lobbying for the Mayor’s Shockoe Stadium proposal. The Mayor is President of Venture Richmond, and Venture Richmond has been engaged in substantial lobbying for the Mayor’s legislation.

Richmond’s Tax Exemption by Designation Committee recommended AGAINST a real estate tax exemption for Venture Richmond, and the committee sessions generally focused on the amount of executive salaries, revenue sources and any duplication of city services being performed by each applicant. The other organizations that applied but did not receive exemptions were VMFA parking lots, Science Museum of Virginia properties, Family Lifeline properties, CHAT Property, Hands Up Ministries properties and Richmond Urban Senior Housing property.

On its application for real estate tax exemption for its amphitheater property, Venture Richmond stated that the property was in compliance with zoning codes. Yet the amphitheater above the canal is not zoned for an amphitheater. Venture Richmond also stated that it does not compete with other organizations in the marketplace, a contention that is disputed by private promoters. Venture Richmond also stated that it does not provide or deny services based on ability to pay, a contention that would be disputed by those not affording a ticket to Venture Richmond paid events.

According to a video-taped presentation given by Venture Richmond Director Jack Berry to the Oregon Hill Neighborhood Association, the intention of Venture Richmond is to rent out the amphitheater with no limitation on the number of events annually, and to serve alcoholic beverages on the property. Rental property generating income for the non-profit is generally not considered a charitable purpose for tax exemption.

I will be very interested to see how other local media covers this issue. Joined corporate and political power in Venture Richmond’s board that runs roughshod over citizen concerns is a real problem, whether the issue is the Tredegar Green amphitheater plan or the Shockoe stadium proposal.

Tax Exempt Status For Venture Richmond?

Posted on January 31, 2014 by Scott

Former neighbor and citizen activist Silver Persinger documented a very interesting part of a recent informal City Council meeting. Click here for the video.

From Docket Review portion of the meeting. Discussion of Ordinances 2014-2, 2014-3, and 2014-4.
Comments from City Assessor James Hester on Tax Exemptions [4:45].
Parker Agelasto asked if the administration had contemplated having Venture Richmond donate the land to the city to achieve the same result of exempting the land from property taxes. Jeannie Welliver from the City’s Department of Economic and Community Development seemed to be on the verge of melting down and looked physically ill [11:25]. Jack Berry then argued why Venture Richmond should be granted the exemption and was adamant that Venture Richmond was not interested in donating the land to the City [13:44].

Will Mayor Jones Destroy History?

Posted on January 27, 2014 by Scott

From C. Wayne Taylor’s website, City Hall Review:

January 27, 2014
VIA EMAIL TO:
Ms. Lou Brown Ali, Chief of Staff, lou.ali@richmondgov.com
The Honorable Mr. Baliles and Honorable City Council
City of Richmond
900 E. Broad St., Suite 200
Richmond, VA 23219 USA
Re: George Washington’s Canal at Tredegar Green
Dear Mr. Baliles and Members of Council,
Mr. Dwight Jones, Mayor of Richmond and President of Venture Richmond, wants to drastically reshape George Washington’s canal at Tredegar Green. Only a portion of the channel bottom would remain authentic.
Mr. Jones claims the canal berm interferes with visibility from the northern portion of Tredegar Green to the southern portion. Mr. Jones knows that raising the ground level of the northern portion of Tredegar Green would increase visibility to the southern portion.
Why is Mr. Jones proposing to lower the ground level of the northern portion of Tredegar Green?
Sincerely yours,
C. Wayne Taylor, Publisher
City Hall Review LLC
CityHallReview.com
Copy: City Clerk, Better Government Richmond, News media, Interested parties

City Planning Commission Postpones Vote On Amphitheater

Posted on January 22, 2014 by Scott

Excerpts From the Times Dispatch article:

The Richmond Planning Commission voted Tuesday to postpone a vote on Venture Richmond’s amphitheater proposal for Tredegar Green after hearing concerns about the possible impact on future plans to re-water the James River and Kanawha Canal.
…
But commissioners continued a vote on a final plan review until early March to allow the City Council to take up an amendment to Venture Richmond’s lease that would require the organization to raise the height of the canal towpath to about 85 feet if, at some point in the future, the planned 83 feet proves insufficient to allow boats to navigate the canal west to Maymont.
The vote was unanimous with the exception of Commissioner Melvin Law, who abstained. The lease amendment was raised as a solution after the Planning Commission was advised that it did not have the legal authority to attach a future obligation to the property that’s not directly tied to Venture Richmond’s plans.
…
“I don’t want to put it at 85 feet just because somebody from Oregon Hill wants it that way,” Berry said.

OHHIC Historical Documentation of the Site of Richmond’s Proposed Amphitheater

Posted on January 21, 2014 by Scott

Remember the 60 page report? Well now Charles Pool has expanded it to 106 pages. We can only hope intellectual honesty and historic fact will matter as the City decides on Venture Richmond’s plan. It is also important to again recognize that there is a compromise plan that Venture Richmond has so far ignored that would avoid cutting into the historic canal.

OHHIC Historical Documentation of the Site of Venture Richmond’s Proposed Amphitheater (final) January 2014

Because of its national importance, the James River and Kanawha Canal should not be altered, cut, lowered or filled for trivial reasons, such as for improving sight lines or making it easier to cut the grass. It is vital that George Washington’s 18th century canal be afforded the respect that it deserves so that this rare historic resource one day can be a restored “blueway,” a treasure for future generations of citizens of the Commonwealth.

Joint House and Senate Recognition of the James River and Kanawha Canal from 1989

Posted on January 17, 2014 by Scott

The James River and Kanawha Canal is on the National Register of Historic Places and was honored by a joint House and Senate resolution in 1989. George Washington’s canal has survived for 15 generations.

Will it be this generation that shows such a lack of respect for it that it allows Venture Richmond to cut away the historic tow path of the nationally recognized structure because it might block a spectator’s view of a pop band?

Oregon Hill

News For Oregon Hill, in Richmond, VA

Category Archives: Kanawha Canal