Richmond Urban Design Committee Meeting: Fan Demolition Overlay and Shockoe Bottom Bollards, October 20, 2026

The Richmond Urban Design Committee met on October 20, 2026, to review two major items: a proposed Fan neighborhood demolition-control overlay district and a conceptual plan to pedestrianize parts of Shockoe Bottom with removable bollards. No agenda or minutes were provided with the source materials. The raw transcript opens with October 15, 2026, which conflicts with the supplied meeting timestamp of October 20, 2026; this summary uses the supplied date. Both agenda items received unanimous recommendations of approval.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Fan overlay: Historic Richmond spoke in support, calling the demolition overlay a great solution for the neighborhood after years of effort. Another online participant, identifying herself as a resident of the proposed district, also supported the overlay. No public opposition was voiced during the meeting, although the property-owner poll recorded 50 no responses.
• Shockoe Bottom bollards: Mr. White of the Shockoe Partnership supported the bollards, saying they would free police officers from standing beside patrol cars and allow proactive foot patrols. Cyan Crump of Historic Richmond gave conditional conceptual support, asking for a mock-up and material/installation details, and noted the benefit of moving the closure to 19th and Franklin Street to protect Mason's Hall and the cobblestone pavement. Mr. Braxton, a nightlife/RPD liaison, also supported the plan and asked that nightlife business access be maintained.

Discussion: Fan Neighborhood Demolition-Control Overlay (UDC 2026-15)

• Planning staff presented the overlay as a community-driven zoning tool requested by the Fan District Association. The proposed boundaries cover most of the Fan, with the applicant clarifying that the eastern boundary is Harrison Street rather than Lombardy, excluding VCU and existing older historic districts within the area.
• The overlay would prohibit demolition of contributing structures unless they are unsafe or dangerous as determined by the Building Commissioner, subject to appeal and a bona fide offer of sale requirement. It would protect whole contributing buildings, contributing front porches, stoops, and carriage houses or garages, as well as significant demolition visible from public streets or alleys. It would not cover non-contributing additions, simple garages, or individual features such as windows, doors, and chimneys.
• Staff said the definition of contributing structures would use the 1985 National Register inventory, including later amendments, and noted that a 2011 update added roughly eight structures. The city's Cultural Heritage Stewardship Plan definition would apply when a structure is not on the National Register inventory. Staff estimated, very roughly, that about 85% of Fan structures are on the National Register inventory.
• The code-required property-owner poll mailed about 2,400 notices and received about 900 responses: 850 in support, 50 opposed, and 3 unsure. After the official count, about 30 additional yeses and 5 additional noes were received. The applicant also cited 94.4% support from the poll and 94% support from an earlier Fan District Association member survey.
• Applicant Andrea Quilici, an architect and chair of the Fan District Association Historic Preservation Committee, said the effort had been pursued for 28 years and was driven by concern that redevelopment pressure could demolish historic houses. He said the Fan is on the National Register of Historic Places and the Virginia Landmarks Register, but those designations are honorary and do not prevent demolition. He framed the overlay as a first preservation step rather than a full Old and Historic District.
• A council member attending the meeting voiced full support for the proposal.
• Committee members raised concerns about clarity and enforceability: defining stoop and front porch, whether unlisted garages and outbuildings would be subject to discretionary staff review, conflicts with by-right accessory dwelling units, notification to future homeowners, and whether historic appeals should go to the Commission of Architectural Review rather than the UDC. Some members said the ordinance should be more black-and-white; others argued the case-by-case appeal process is acceptable.

Discussion: Shockoe Bottom Weekend Bollards (UDC 2026-18)

• Staff described the project as formalizing existing Friday and Saturday night ad hoc street closures by Richmond Police. It was presented as a conceptual location, character, and extent review, not a final design approval. The project would install removable stainless-steel bollards at five intersections: 17th and Franklin, 17th and Grace, 18th and Main, 18th and Grace, and, as proposed by the applicant, 19th and Franklin instead of 18th and Franklin. Moving the closure to 19th and Franklin was intended to avoid disrupting the cobblestone area and to prevent a difficult dead-end turn near Mason's Hall.
• DPW, RPD, and Mayor's Office staff presented the safety rationale: bollards would replace police cars and barricades, allow officers to patrol on foot, reduce the police-state visual environment, and align with crime prevention through environmental design. The project is funded by a Safer Communities grant; materials cost about $99,000. Bollards would be roughly 80 pounds, removable, fitted with reflective tape, and crash-rated to stop vehicles at 20-25 mph.
• The recommended staff conditions set street closures between 5 p.m. and 5 a.m. on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, with allowances for special events and coordination with businesses for deliveries. Current RPD closures are Friday and Saturday from 10 p.m. to 3 a.m. Staff also recommended considering the bollard finish in relation to the historic setting and carefully considering vehicle circulation.
• Committee discussion focused on bollard placement relative to crosswalks and ADA curb ramps. One member with emergency-response experience favored placing bollards about 10 feet back from the corner so emergency vehicles could pull off the travel lane; another member preferred keeping bollards outside the crosswalk to protect accessible pedestrian routes. Other topics included durability and handling, reflective versus illuminated bollards, storage, historic character, emergency access, and coordination with ride-share and Google Maps.

Key Outcomes

• Fan overlay (UDC 2026-15): A committee member moved to recommend approval of the proposed overlay district as modified by staff, with added language defining stoop, exempting outbuildings not listed on the National Register from demolition control with the intent to identify contributing outbuildings later, and including any subsequent amendments to the National Register. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. The item will go to the Planning Commission next Tuesday as a staff presentation, with a public hearing expected at a later meeting before the ordinance process continues.
• Shockoe Bottom bollards (UDC 2026-18): A committee member moved to recommend approval with the staff conditions; the motion was seconded and passed unanimously. The final review is expected to include a detailed depiction of the installed and removed bollard condition, exact bollard locations, final finish and product, emergency access and parking plans, ride-share and Google Maps coordination, and handling and storage details. Staff noted materials could be delivered in about eight weeks, with installation possible in early spring if orders proceed.