UHCA votes in favor of O&H
After “a robust discussion of the advantages and responsibilities of an historic district and what designation would mean for the long term health of [the] neighborhood”, last night the Union Hill Civic Association endorsed the proposed Old and Historic District for Union Hill (with one vote against and one abstention).
It’s nice to see that the greater neighborhood is supporting preservation notwithstanding the current headliner issues with the CAR. Preservation is a good thing and Union Hill is a place worth preserving with its irregular streets and eclectic mix of houses and people.
Sounds like a positive move in the right direction for the neighborhood!
Sounds good… whatever happened with the neighborhood-wide vote back in Feb? I thought that that was the one that ultimately “counted”?
What’s the next step in the process to actually obtain O&H designation?
[...] «PREVIOUS / » [...]
I don’t have the final numbers on the neighborhood survey from February, but it has been reported that more than 60 percent of the responses were in favor of the district and only 32 percent were opposed. The response rate was higher than for the Church Hill North survey which bodes well for the proposed district.
Agreed, preserving older structures in Union Hill is a good thing, but not under the format of a city old & historic district and the subjective decision making of CAR.
Current membership of UHCA is roughly 20 individuals, and hopefully the new “membership by service in lieu of dues” policy will entice more people to join. Understand the scope of the UHCA endorsement of the O&H status when less than the current roster of 20 voted on that issue.
As far as numbers for the property owner surveys, of those responding, 54% supported, 36% opposed, 8% had no opinion, and 2% mailed back blank cards. This is diminished by the fact that of the whole of Union Hill 25.5% responded to the survey while 74.5% did not respond. That is nearly three quarters of a group not responding.
LC: Union Hiller is partially correct with the survey results. Your numbers do not include the votes of Union Hill’s largest property owner, Cedar Street Baptist Church of God who voted ALL of their properties in favor of the district.
The official results stand at 60 percent in favor, 32 percent against and a response rate of over 30 percent. The response rate is equal to the last successful Old and Historic District, Church Hill North.
What you do not know is that Better Housing Coalition mistakenly returned only one card in an attempt to vote all of its 20+ properties. BHC is likely the second largest property owner in Union Hill and they SUPPORT the district, which brings our actual survey results closer to 70 percent of respondents in favor and a response rate that exceeds Church Hill North’s.
I know you would like to dismiss the civic association’s nearly unanimous support of the O&H District because it is out of line with your view. I also know that if you had been in the majority on Wednesday’s vote, you would have found it much more legitimate.
Well, of course I would. Momentum is now favoring those in support. How many of those thinking the O&H district is a good idea will directly be effected? Meaning how many will go before CAR to eventually obtain permits to make improvements to their homes? I’m guessing very few. Actually, I challenge those supporters to attend some of the monthly CAR meetings to see first hand what some CAR members “want” or “would like to see”. Opposed to their charge of ruling how a plan adheres to the O&H guidleines (which have recently been under scrutiny).
More questions. Someone mentioned that in O&H districts, citizens could make commentary on plans (about window size or style for example). Are these suggestions documented in any way? Will the applicants know how these suggestions influeneced city staff or CAR members? Are there any safeguards against malicious commentary made as suggestions from any who might have a grudge or personal dislike of the applicant?
Or is all of this a grand idea as long as dosen’t affect you directly?
I am in favor of the O&H district in Union Hill and will be directly affected. I was directly affected in Jackson Ward 15 years ago and found the process I went through not onerous. The O&H designation is a grand idea whether or not it affects one directly.
If the votes have been counted and the yeas have it, then what’s the holdup? Shouldn’t it be a go then? What’s the next step?
LC, I’ll try to address your posts:
Post #6. Most local governmental elections have less than 35% voter turnout. Not counting the 4-year presidential cycle, which garners a higher turnout.
So, a 39% response rate to the surveys for Union Hill is, actually, pretty darn great. I also recall that CHN had about a 36% response rate. Laura Daab, please feel free to correct me on this, if necessary.
#Post 6. You refer to “subjective decision making” on the part of CAR. There are guidelines for each district. And as you know, there is always room for interpretation in every set of guidelines whether it’s building code, criminal and civil laws, municipal codes, etc. Judges interpret law, building inspectors interpret code, and so on. We all know there is some “wiggle room” in any set of guidelines.
Post #8. Your concerns about “malicious commentary” borders on fear-mongering.
City Historic Preservation Staff and CAR members review and take into consideration the remarks and comments of citizens regarding new infill and significant changes to buildings. They’re pretty good at discerning the valid vs malicious.
And yes, that citizen commentary/input is recorded by the city, and therefore public record. If you are concerned about “malicious commentary”, why don’t you ask CAR members or City Staff if they’ve ever witnessed it. I bet you’ll find the answer is “no, never”.
Post #8. Many of us who have voted in favor of the O&H District know we will eventually be effected directly by it b/c of something we want to do to our houses. We accept the greater good for the neighborhood in spite of the personal inconvenience a CAR or Staff Review might have. Keep in mind that a growing number of review items can be handled at the staff level and don’t require a CAR review (this will make things go faster for everyone.)
#Post 6. Your concerns about the current roster of the UHCA (it’s “small number”) is interesting. But, so what? This group simply endorsed the O&HD.
This group of 20+/- shoulders A TON of the volunteer work that happens in the neighborhood. From planting trees, to sidewalk & park clean-ups, to crime watch walks and feeding the CARITAS men who slept at Cedar Street Church for a week last month.
Being an active citizen in a civic association requires a sacrifice of personal time to this community. Many folks have difficulty finding time to meet and engage regularly in a Civic Association. But they’ll show up at the Night Out Against Crime festival or the annual picknic we have with Friends of Jefferson Park.
If we’re small in number, we are mighty in strength. This group does things for free that benefit everyone. Why shouldn’t the UHCA have the right to support an issue that directly effects it’s neighborhood?
Bulwinkle, the next step is a public hearing with the Commission of Architectural Review on Thursday, May 14, 2009, 6:00 PM-8:00 PM, in City Council Chambers (Richmond City Hall).
Union Hill property owners will receive a notice in the mail from the city about the hearing.
I applaud the very smart the step they are taking.
I was speaking to a woman who is looking to buy here in Church Hill last week. As she was telling me about the houses she had seen she commented that there was a big difference in some areas: architecturally, materials like vinyl siding, wild colors (she saw the orange house), a new construction modern a-frame houses in a block of old salt box homes, up keep in general and so on. I asked her what streets/addresses she was looking at. All the ones that she mentioned were out of the historic district.
It will set the bar a little higher and overall improve the value of their properties in time.
I received the final revised survey data, dated 4/17/09, from Tyler Potterfield at the Commission of Architectural Review.
The report stated that of the 30% who responded, 59% supported, 32% opposed, and 9% sent a blank card. This data does indeed include the votes of Cedar Baptist Church in its tallies.
30% responded, not OVER 30%, not 39%.
117 owners out of a total of 656 actively support the historic district- so what about the other 539 of us?
April, I am sorry that you feel left out of this process. All property owners were given the opportunity to express their opinions on the proposed district and a strong majority of those who chose to respond support it. In addition to the survey, all but one member of the Union Hill Civic Association voted to endorse the Union Hill Old and Historic District. It is important to note that the largest property owner not represented in the survey, Better Housing Coalition, also supports the district as the best means to maintain our historic housing stock and preserve our unique architectural heritage.
I encourage you to get involved with the Civic Association and share your views with your neighbors. We will be discussing next steps in the Old and Historic designation process at next Wednesday’s meeting, May 13, 7 p.m. at Cedar Street Baptist Church. Please come and bring a neighbor. As always, feel free to contact me by email with any questions: matthewconrad@gmail.com
Matt,
I don’t feel left out of the process in the least. I cast my vote when I responded to the survey. In addition, my husband attended two of the informational meetings on the proposed district.
I am glad to hear that the UHCA was able to come to a consensus concerning the historic district. However, based on the survey results, I don’t feel that the historic district has a mandate in the neighborhood of Union Hill. 70% of the neighborhood did not even bother to respond to the survey.
I don’t need to join the UHCA to share my views and have a voice in the neighborhood. Or do I??
The survey results can be obtained by emailing a request to T. Tyler Potterfield at Thomas.Potterfield@Richmondgov.com
This will include the final revised survey data (4/17/19) and a map overlay showing how each property voted. Mr. Potterfield responded almost instantly to my request!
[...] In addition, the updated response data has been released. The bulk of the neighborhood (70%) did not respond. Of the property owners that did respond, 59% voted in favor of the designation, 32% voted in opposition, and 9% indicated that they had no opinion or sent back a blank card. Of note, Better Housing Coalition, one of the largest property owners in the neighborhood, is said to be in favor of the O&H designation but is not included in the tally. [...]
UnionHillRVA:
In response to your question in #11, here are CHNOHD’s response rates from our designation efforts:
With our results we had 71% favorable with the survey results and when we added our signed petition results that were also accepted by the city as official responses, we had 76% supportive.
Our results:
587 property parcels
138-supportive from survey
42-supportive from petition
49-opposed from survey (3 multi-property owners)
9-no opinion from survey
1-changed from no opinion to supportive (added into the petition results)
237 responses total
41% response rate
Total of 76% supportive of the district. Opposed 21%, and the no opinion 3%. These were the numbers that were presented to the public. The map that has our survey results was presented as was the results of the petition and those numbers were combined and presented at all public hearings. The CAR staff report for CHNOHD should have this info.
the Union Hill Civic Association and UHO&H Initiative are nothing more than self-appointed, self-aggrandizing mouthpieces that, while recognized by the City (as any ‘civic’ org that wants to can be) are not recognized by the neighborhood, nor a ‘voice’ of the neighborhood– proven by the meager 18% positive response to their quest for invasive mandate against their neighbors.
@ #11: ‘greater good’ is terminology used to justify actions such as slavery, eugenics, etc. are you certain you’re comfortable using it as justification for causing your neighbors undue stress?
no matter how the effete dilettantes that are the UH Assoc. & UH O&H Initiative spin it, they don’t have consensus here. they have 18%.
ben, you have the math on your side. proponents of this dont want to let those kind of details get in the way. but the world is run by those that show up. so show up with some numbers. otherwise the proponents will be telling you what to do with your property and piling on the punishment cause you would not kiss the ring. public policy 101 department of community development
Ben, don’t you think references to slavery and pre or post Galtonian eugenic philosophy is a bit of a stretch considering the topic is neighborhood preservation?
interesting reads:
http://www.nh.gov/oep/programs/MRPA/conferences/documents/WhatAreHDsGoodFor-logo.doc.
http://www.state.sc.us/scdah/propval.pdf
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/hal_mhc_shpo_LHDManual_01WhyEstablish_161854_7.pdf
Ben,
I understand your frustration at having your view under-represented among those who have chosen to engage. You have been a vocal minority against this effort since the first meeting at EDI when you were the only person who spoke against the Old and Historic District.
Your disappointment at being in the minority is no reason to attack the civic association as ‘self-appointed’ or ‘self-aggrandizing.’ Your tone drips with desperation. What civic association isn’t self-appointed? It consists of those who care enough about their neighborhood and their neighbors to participate and volunteer. We would welcome the same from you when you are ready.
In defense of the UHCA: it’s funny how a civic association comes under attack when someone disagrees with an issue it’s members has taken a position on.
Nobody has a problem when members of the UHCA plants trees, pick up the trash, feed the homeless, or host a night-out-against-crime cook out.
But when they take a stand on an issue that impacts our neighborhood, be it a stadium, high-rise apartment building or a new zoning change, look out. The organization is suddenly under fire for having an opinion.
And you know what, the active members of the UHCA don’t always agree with each other. We debate, we disagree, we vote, and move on. Members continue to show up for the next meeting or activity even if they didn’t “win” on the last issue voted upon. We know we’re all in this neighborhood together, and we respect our differing opinions on the issues.
Just last week, the R63 Zoning initiative for Union Hill was approved by the City Planning Commission. Unlike the proposed Old & Historic District zoning overlay, there were no surveys for that big zoning change, which stands to have a huge impact on our neighborhood.
How did R63 emerge from 2 years of repetitive public meetings with Community Development Staff, when only a hand-full of Union Hill residents showed up to ask questions/learn about it?
It was overwhelming support of the UHCA that buoyed R63 to the next step: a City Council Vote. The zoning change germinated in the 5th floor offices of City Hall, and Community Development planners came out to the community to help it take root.
Lots of letters went out from the city inviting property owners to come to the meetings, learn about R63 and how it would impact the community. Did a majority of Union Hill property owners show up for those meetings? Hell no. Maybe they read-up on R63 (via city website,) thought it was a good idea, and just figured it would happen without their direct involvement in the process.
You don’t have to be a member of the UHCA to have a voice in the neighborhood’s future, but it sure helps.
Consider this: sometime, in the future, there will be something that might effect your neighborhood that you care deeply about. And, you might want to share this feeling with your neighbors in an efficient, organized fashion. You might actually want the UHCA to support a cause/event/activity that you think would benefit you and your community. That one selfish/unselfish reason why being a member of the UHCA is worth considering.
A civic association is a great way to share the good stuff in your ‘hood.
sorry ’bout the typos in post 23. should be “have” instead of “has”, and “plant” instead of “plants.”.
UnionHill… Typos? I didn’t see any stinkin’ typos. I was focused on the message. Well said :)