The majesty of democracy occurs in small, tightly packed rooms where people speak their minds about what's going on in their neighborhoods. One example occurred on Wednesday evening at the Firehouse Theater. (Full disclosure: I'm a co-founder, past president and current board member. Just so you know.)
A capacity crowd — about 120 people — filled the seats, and some even stood for a discussion that might seem rather obtuse in other places. Members of the city's Commission of Architectural Review explained what they do — assist in the process of creating Old and Historic Districts — and why, then they took questions and some berating from audience members.
The meeting was organized by Church Hill resident Laura Daab (whose efforts recently got an OHD designation for a portion of Church Hill located north of Broad) and facilitated by the Alliance for the Conservation of Old Richmond Neighborhoods, the Historic Richmond Foundation and the Department of Historic Resources.
The first OHD, created in Church Hill in 1957, has today evolved into a citywide patchwork of 15 districts, 19 historic sites, and 3,327 properties within the designations. These are a large and component part of what gives Richmond its Richmond-ness. Going without them would mean, well, losing most of what 's good about Richmond.
As was emphasized several times, CAR doesn't impose an OHD on anybody. The neighborhoods must ask for the designation, and it's up to City Council to approve it. CAR serves in an advisory role before, during and after the process.
Once a district is labeled OHD, then residents must adhere to certain criteria designed to keep what the place was noted for to begin with. But of late, there's been some friction and frustration with CAR, that it doesn't do enough (its final word isn't law; Council may choose to ignore it — and does); that it promotes snitching among community members who may want to drop a dime on somebody they don't like; and that it does too much.
A recent example concerned Council's approval of the proposed Oakwood Heights condominium project in Church Hill, overriding CAR's concerns. This spurred a lawsuit by some residents of Church Hill against the decision. Now, Council has chosen to "review" the authority of CAR. Which is making the preservation-minded nervous.
Then there's CAR's refusal to allow a resident to install an antique fence around her house because, in CAR's view, no such fence had ever existed there.
People who live in old houses and communities do so for very personal reasons, and thus, passions can run high, particularly when one side or the other seems not to be playing fair. During the public comment, there was praise for CAR and what it does — and potentially what it should be able to do — while there was also vociferous criticism and occasional confusion (plus some shouting outside on the sidewalk).
Several pages of notes were taken on a big pad up front that will provide agenda items for future discussions.
A big matter on the minds of many was the question of affordability versus compliance; of vinyl siding on older homes, when vinyl is cheaper than paint; of modern replacement windows on 19th-century houses; of absentee landlords and houses owned by trusts or estates of squabbling families. CAR can't seize properties in the hands of negligent owners.
Subjects ricocheted around: VCU's perceived end-runs around preservationist policy; the new lights installed in some parts of the Fan ("the same kind they have at Short Pump," the speaker observed, to applause); the use of "false historicism" when giving permission for in-fill or "rehabilitation" of properties. Former dancer and present musician and theater director Jim Daab (Laura's husband) gave an example of a classic ballet troupe given a score to a dance that is incomplete by 64 bars. Knowledge of the music, the composer and the period can result in a satisfying interpretation of what should've gone there. But you wouldn't drop a wild Twyla Tharp routine into the middle of a French or Russian ballet.
Laura Daab gave one of the night's best descriptions, "This is like arguing the Constitution or the Talmud," she told the panel. "We may not agree on each point, but we need to reach a consensus of opinion and form a realistic policy."
The next meeting date hasn't been scheduled. But there's going to be plenty to talk about.
For Church Hill People's News' take on the meeting, go here.
