RICHMOND 300

A Guide for Growth

Designing an equitable, sustainable, and beautiful Richmond for its 300th birthday in 2037

⬚ figure

Master Plan City of Richmond, Virginia

Final | September 29, 2020 Amended | July 10, 2023

City of Richmond

Legislation Text

File #: ORD. 2023-281, Version: 1

To approve an amendment to the Master Plan for the City of Richmond, adopted by the City Planning Commission on Oct. 5, 2020, and approved by the City Council by Ord. No. 2020-236, adopted Dec.14, 2020, to incorporate the Priority Neighborhoods Master Plan Amendment designating Creighton Court, Fairfield Court, Hillside Court, Mosby Court North, Mosby Court South, and Whitcomb Court as priority growth neighborhoods.

WHEREAS, pursuant to section 17.06 of the Charter of the City of Richmond (2020), as amended, the City Planning Commission adopted and certified a Master Plan for the City of Richmond on October 5, 2020; and

WHEREAS, by Ordinance No. 2020-236, adopted December 14, 2020, the Council of the City of Richmond approved a Master Plan for the City of Richmond pursuant to a request by the City Planning Commission that the Council approve such a Master Plan; and

WHEREAS, the Priority Neighborhood Master Plan Amendment amends the Master Plan by designating Creighton Court, Fairfield Court, Hillside Court, Mosby Court North, Mosby Court South, and Whitcomb Court as priority growth neighborhoods; and

WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on April 3, 2023, for the purpose of receiving public comment relative to incorporating the Priority Neighborhood Master Plan Amendment as an amendment to the Master Plan; and

WHEREAS, by a resolution dated July 17, 2023, a copy of which is attached to this ordinance, the City Planning Commission adopted the proposed amendment to incorporate the Priority Neighborhood Master Plan Amendment as part of the Master Plan; and

WHEREAS, it is the consensus of the Council that it is in the best interest of the City of Richmond that the Council, for and on the behalf of the City of Richmond, consent to and adopt the aforesaid amendment to the Master Plan;

File #: ORD. 2023-281, Version: 1

NOW, THEREFORE,

THE CITY OF RICHMOND HEREBY ORDAINS:

§ 1. That the amendment to the Master Plan, consisting of a document entitled “Richmond 300: A Guide for Growth,” dated September 29, 2020, and last amended July 10, 2023, a copy of which is attached to and incorporated into this ordinance, as adopted by the City Planning Commission at its meeting on July 17, 2023, be and is hereby approved as set out in the City Planning Commission’s resolution of that date.

§ 2. That the amendment to the Master Plan adopted by section 1 of this ordinance shall supersede all other parts of the Master Plan adopted prior to the effective date of this ordinance with which it conflicts.

§ 3. This ordinance shall be in force and effect upon adoption.

DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW

CITY PLANNING COMMISSION

July 17, 2023

CPCR.2023.020

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND PLANNING COMMISSION

TO ADOPT THE PRIORITY NEIGHBORHOODS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE RICHMOND 300 MASTER PLAN

WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission adopted the Richmond 300: A Guide for Growth Master Plan on October 5, 2020 by resolution 2020.050; and the City Council approved said Master Plan by Ordinance 2020-236 on December 14, 2020; and

WHEREAS, City Council Resolution 2022-R015 tasked the City Planning Commission to prepare, submit to public hearing, and adopt an amendment to the Master Plan making certain changes to the Master Plan for the inclusion of Creighton Court, Fairfield Court, Gilpin Court, Hillside Court, Mosby Court North, Mosby Court South, and Whitcomb Court as priority growth nodes; and

WHEREAS, in response to City Council Resolution 2022-R015, the Department of Planning and Development Review engaged the public and the Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority to develop a draft Master Plan amendment that adds a Priority Neighborhoods section to the Master Plan and makes certain edits to text and maps throughout the Master Plan; and

WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on April 3, 2023 on the draft Master Plan amendments; and

WHEREAS, the Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority approved the draft Master Plan amendments on June 21, 2023; and

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Richmond City Planning Commission hereby adopts the Priority Neighborhoods Master Plan amendment, which includes a new Priority Neighborhoods section and amends text and maps to make references to the Priority Neighborhoods, to the Richmond 300: A Guide for Growth Master Plan, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission forwards the amended Master Plan to the City Council with the recommendation of approval.

[Signature: Rodney Poole] Rodney Poole Chair, Planning Commission

[Signature: Alyson Oliver] Alyson Oliver Secretary, Planning Commission

900 East Broad Street • Richmond, Virginia 23219 • (804) 646-3147 • askpdr@rva.gov • RVA.gov

(blank page)

INTRODUCED: November 9, 2020

AN ORDINANCE No. 2020-236

To approve the action of the City Planning Commission adopting “Richmond 300: A Guide for Growth” as the Master Plan of the City of Richmond, and to repeal Ord. No. 2000-371-2001-11, adopted Jan. 8, 2001, and all amendments thereto, with the exception of the Riverfront Plan as contained in Ord. No. 2012-202-190, adopted Nov. 26, 2012, the VUU/Chamberlayne Neighborhood Plan as contained in Ord. No. 2016-002, adopted Feb. 8, 2016, the Pulse Corridor Plan as contained in Ord. No. 2017-148, adopted Sept. 25, 2017, the Public Art Master Plan as contained in Ord. No. 2018-205, adopted Sept. 24, 2018, and the James River Park Systems Master Plan as contained in Ord. No. 2019-337, adopted Jan. 27, 2020.

Patron – Mayor Stoney

Approved as to form and legality by the City Attorney

PUBLIC HEARING: DEC 14 2020 AT 6 P.M.

WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission last adopted a new Master Plan for the City of Richmond on November 6, 2000, which Master Plan the City Council approved by Ordinance No. 2000-371-2001-11, adopted January 8, 2001, in accordance with section 17.06 of the Charter of the City of Richmond (2020), as amended; and

AYES: 9 NOES: 0 ABSTAIN:

ADOPTED: DEC 14 2020 REJECTED: STRICKEN:

WHEREAS, to facilitate the City Planning Commission’s performance of its duties under sections 17.04 through 17.06 of the Charter of the City of Richmond (2020), as amended, the City’s Department of Planning and Development Review presented to the City Planning Commission a new Master Plan entitled “Richmond 300: A Guide for Growth” and dated September 29, 2020, to replace the Master Plan adopted on November 6, 2000; and

WHEREAS, in its consideration of the proposed new Master Plan, the City Planning Commission received comments resulting from numerous meetings with individual citizens, civic groups, and City departments that would be affected by the proposed new Master Plan; and

WHEREAS, the Department of Planning and Development Review contacted 8,573 attendees, received 4,990 survey responses, hosted 111 “Richmond 300” meetings, attended 229 community and stakeholder meetings, reviewed over 2,000 comments, and received over 90 letters and electronic mail messages over the course of three years to create the new Master Plan; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of section 17.06 of the Charter of the City of Richmond (2020), as amended, the City Planning Commission held public hearings on September 21, 2020, and October 5, 2020, for the purposes of receiving additional public comments relative to the proposed new Master Plan; and

WHEREAS, following its second public hearing on the proposed new Master Plan, the City Planning Commission adopted a resolution, entitled “Resolution of the City of Richmond Planning Commission, Adopting Richmond 300: A Guide for Growth as the Master Plan of the City of Richmond” and dated October 5, 2020, a copy of which is attached to this ordinance; and

WHEREAS, the new Master Plan as adopted by the City Planning Commission on October 5, 2020, encompasses a plan for guiding and accomplishing a coordinated, adjusted, and harmonious development of the city and its environs that will, in accordance with existing and future needs, best promote health, safety, morals, comfort, prosperity, and general welfare, as well

as efficiency and economy in the process of development, as provided in section 17.04 of the

Charter of the City of Richmond (2020), as amended; and

WHEREAS, it is the consensus of the Council that it is in the best interest of the City of

Richmond that the Council, for and on behalf of the City of Richmond, consent to and approve the

new Master Plan;

NOW, THEREFORE,

THE CITY OF RICHMOND HEREBY ORDAINS:

§ 1. That the new Master Plan as adopted by the City Planning Commission at its

hearing on October 5, 2020, entitled “Richmond 300: A Guide for Growth” and dated September

29, 2020, a copy of which is attached to and made a part of this ordinance, be and is hereby

approved and from the effective date of this ordinance shall be the Master Plan for the City of

Richmond.

§ 2. That Ordinance No. 2012-202-190, adopted November 26, 2012, which approved

the Riverfront Plan, Ordinance No. 2016-002, adopted February 8, 2016, which approved the

VUU/Chamberlayne Neighborhood Plan, Ordinance No. 2017-127, adopted July 24, 2017, which

approved the Pulse Corridor Plan, Ordinance No. 2017-148, adopted September 25, 2017, which

approved the Riverfront Plan, Ordinance No. 2018-205, adopted September 24, 2018, which

approved the Public Art Master Plan, and Ordinance No. 2019-337, adopted January 27, 2020,

which approved the James River Park Systems Master Plan, all of which are hereinafter referred

to collectively as the “Amendments,” shall remain in effect and be deemed part of the Master Plan

approved by section 1 of this ordinance, provided, however, that all references to and illustrations

of “future land use map” and “future land use categories” in the Amendments shall be deemed to

refer to, and shall be deemed to be replaced by, the future land use map and future land use

categories of the Master Plan approved by section 1 of this ordinance.

§ 3. That Ordinance No. 2000-371-2001-11, adopted January 8, 2001, and all amendments thereto, with the exception of the Amendments, shall be and are hereby repealed.

§ 4. This ordinance shall be in force and effect upon adoption.

A TRUE COPY: TESTE:

City Clerk

CITY OF RICHMOND PLANNING COMMISSION

October 5, 2020

CPCR.2020.050: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND PLANNING COMMISSION

ADOPTING RICHMOND 300: A GUIDE FOR GROWTH AS THE MASTER PLAN OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND

WHEREAS, Section 17.06 of the City Charter authorizes the City Planning Commission to adopt a Master Plan; and

WHEREAS, harmonious development, a sound economy, attractive residential areas, and the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Richmond can best be achieved with the guidance of a long-range Master Plan; and

WHEREAS, the present Master Plan the City Planning Commission adopted on November 6, 2000, and the City Council approved by Ordinance No. 2000-371-2001-11 is now outdated; and

WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission appointed an Advisory Council by City Planning Commission Resolution 2017-79 to guide the planning process, the staff of the Department of Planning and Development Review held and attended hundreds of meetings and collected thousands of comments and survey responses over the course of three years to create the new Master Plan, and the Advisory Council recommended that the City Planning Commission adopt the new Master Plan at a meeting held on September 16, 2020; and

WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the Draft Master Plan on June 1, 2020, and a public hearing on the Pre-Final Master Plan on September 21, 2020 for the purpose of receiving public comment relative to the Master Plan; and

WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed plan, taken into consideration comments received at its public hearing, and received a report from the Director of the Department of Planning and Development Review, which is contained in the record of this Commission's proceedings;

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Richmond City Planning Commission hereby adopts the Richmond 300: A Guide for Growth Master Plan dated September 29, 2020 as the City of Richmond’s official Master Plan, which will supersede all parts of the 2001 Master Plan and all amendments thereto, with exception of the Riverfront Plan (Ord. 2012-202-190 and Ord. 2017-148), VUU/Chamberlayne Neighborhood Plan (Ord. 2016-022), Pulse Corridor Plan (Ord. 2017-127), James River Park Systems Master Plan (Ord. 2019-337), and

900 EAST BROAD STREET • RICHMOND, VA 23219 • 804.646.6304 • FAX 804.646.5789 • WWW.RICHMONDGOV.COM

Public Art Master Plan (Ord. 2018-205) (collectively, the Amendments) which Amendments shall remain in effect and be adopted as part of Richmond 300: A Guide for Growth Master Plan; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Amendments are deemed to incorporate the future land use map and future land use categories of Richmond 300: A Guide for Growth Master Plan; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission forwards the Richmond 300: A Guide for Growth Master Plan and the Amendments, collectively the 2020 Master Plan, to the City Council with the recommendation of approval.

[Signature of Rodney M. Poole] Rodney M. Poole Chair, City Planning Commission

[Signature of Matthew J. Ebinger] Matthew J. Ebinger Secretary, City Planning Commission

⬚ figure

Dear Fellow Richmonders,

I want to personally thank the thousands of Richmonders who have participated in creating Richmond 300: A Guide for Growth, the city’s updated Master Plan. An updated master plan built upon community consensus is an essential tool for guiding the future of our growing city and for ensuring that new development aligns with citywide goals.

Richmond 300 envisions an equitable, sustainable and beautiful Richmond that ensures a high quality of life for all existing and future residents. To achieve this vision, the plan includes goals to create and maintain high-quality neighborhoods, develop an equitable transportation network that prioritizes the movement of people over the movement of vehicles, foster a diverse economy, provide inclusive housing with access to quality housing choices for all Richmonders, and support a thriving environment with healthy air, clean water, and a flourishing ecosystem. This vision is embodied in and supported by 17 goals, 70 objectives, and over 400 strategies.

Richmond 300: A Guide for Growth is a visionary document that seeks to expand equity throughout the city and prioritizes impactful “Big Moves” that will forever change our city for the better. It plans to reconnect the historically Black neighborhood of Jackson Ward by building over the highway, create a redevelopment plan for Gilpin Court, and provide park access to allow all Richmonders to live within a 10-minute walk of a park – all initiatives founded in long overdue racial justice.

The work of Richmond 300 does not end with City Council’s adoption of the Master Plan. The next phase of the plan is the most important: implementation. To implement the plan as written, with all its focus on righting wrongs and building community, we need you to continue to support the vision and goals established in Richmond 300.

Stay involved. Take the time to read this plan and learn how you, as an invested resident, can use Richmond 300 to facilitate the growth of the city and build One Richmond.

With gratitude,

⬚ figure Mayor Levar M. Stoney

RICHMOND PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PDR

Dear Richmonders,

When we began pulling together Richmond 300 in 2017, as the first comprehensive update to the City's Master Plan in almost two decades, our goal was to engage a representative cross-section of the public and City staff to articulate a shared vision for the city. Through the voices of thousands of Richmonders—who gave their time and talent to this process—we are pleased to present to the citizens and other community stakeholders Richmond 300: A Guide for Growth.

Master Plans are clearly a product of their time. But more than that, well-crafted plans are stories; stories of the aspirations of the many who contributed to its creation, and who represent a collective voice guiding the future of the city. They guide and advise the Planning Commission and City Council on major land use decisions that will shape the city for decades.

Richmond 300: A Guide for Growth—the result of this collaborative process—is different than any of our previous Master Plans.

– Our first Master Plan of 1946 (Bartholomew) looked to the advent of the automobile and the movement of households and economic activity to the suburbs. The mixed-use character of the city was an issue. Today, Richmond 300 focuses on celebrating and building on the mixed-use character of Richmond to enhance an authentic urban experience.

– All of the Master Plans after 1946 were about managing decline. Today, after 20 years of population growth, Richmond 300 focuses on guiding the city's next 20 years of growth to help address the pressing sustainability and social-equity issues of our time.

– Richmond 300 reimagines areas of the city by revitalizing critical nodes and corridors, and creating entire new neighborhoods for the next 100 years; places that future generations will adopt as their own as these new neighborhoods grow and mature. Think about it: – The Southside Plaza area is a bustling center of South Richmond. – Route 1 is a beautiful mixed-use corridor. – Greater Scott's Addition, previously envisioned in earlier plans as only an industrial neighborhood, is a shining example of a 900+ acre collection of new mixed use neighborhoods, anchored by the visionary Crescent Park and a true multi-modal network.

But beyond the plan, Richmond 300 is just the first step in realizing the vision so clearly outlined in this document. The critical next step is implementation, using all of the tools the City has at its disposal, the expertise of those that build the city, and the continued engagement of our stakeholders in realizing that long-term vision. It will take all of us to create the high-quality, livable, and inclusive city that Richmond 300 establishes.

As we look to implement the plan, please stay involved and connected in the process as we will continue to need your voices.

Let's get started.

Mark A. Olinger Director, Dept. of Planning and Development Review

Rodney M. Poole Chair, City Planning Commission

(blank page)

RICHMOND 300

A Guide for Growth

City-Wide Master Plan City of Richmond, Virginia

Final – September 29, 2020 City Planning Commission Adopted – October 5, 2020 City Council Adopted – December 14, 2020

Amended – July 10, 2023 City Planning Commission Adopted Amended Plan - July 17, 2023 City Council Adopted Amended Plan - September 26, 2023

RICHMOND PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PDR

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This document reflects the consensus reached by thousands of Richmonders on guiding the future growth of Richmond. The content in this plan arose from the time, attention, expertise, and passion of thousands of people. The individuals listed here are elected officials, commission members, City staff, and citizens who participated in various Richmond 300 groups.

City Leadership Mayor Levar M. Stoney Lenora G. Reid, Interim Chief Administrative Officer Sharon Ebert, Deputy CAO for Economic Development, and Planning

City Council Andreas D. Addison 1st District Kimberly B. Gray 2nd District Chris A. Hilbert 3rd District Kristin Nye Larson 4th District Stephanie A. Lynch 5th District Parker Agelasto Former 5th District Ellen F. Robertson 6th District Cynthia I. Newbille 7th District Reva M. Trammell 8th District Michael J. Jones 9th District

City Planning Commission Rodney M. Poole, Chair Melvin Law, Vice Chair Max Hepp-Buchanan Elizabeth Greenfield David Johannas Vik Murthy Lenora G. Reid Ellen F. Robertson John Thompson

Advisory Council Members Rodney Poole Chair and Economic Development Working Group Member Max Hepp-Buchanan Vice Chair and Transportation Working Group Co-Chair

Burt Pinnock Vice-Chair and Housing Working Group Co-Chair Jonathan Bibbs Economic Development Working Group Member Mayda Colón – joined August 2019 Environment Working Group Member Cyane Crump Land Use Working Group Member Louise Lockett Gordon Transportation Working Group Member LaToya Gray Housing Working Group Member Bernard Harkless Economic Development Working Group Co-Chair Ashley Hawkins Housing Working Group Member Joyce Knight Housing Working Group Member Elyana Javaheri – resigned July 2019 Environment Working Group Member Preston Lloyd Land Use Working Group Member Monica Lozano Environment Working Group Member Jer’Mykeal McCoy Economic Development Working Group Member Jennifer Mullen Transportation Working Group Member Kendra Norrell Environment Working Group Member Gray O’Dwyer Land Use Working Group Member Damian Pitt Environment Working Group Co-Chair Ted Ukrop Land Use Working Group Co-Chair

Meredith Weiss Economic Development Working Group Member Olivya Wilson Housing Working Group Member

Project Management Team Project Director: Mark A. Olinger, Director, Dept. of Planning and Development Review Project Manager: Maritza Mercado Pechin, Planner IV, AECOM Deputy Project Manager, Content: William Palmquist, Senior Planner, Planning & Preservation Division, Dept. of Planning and Development Review Deputy Project Manager, Process: Marianne Pitts, Special Assistant to the Director, Dept. of Planning and Development Review

Dept. of Planning and Development Review Many PDR staff assisted in creating Richmond 300, including, but not limited to: Janell Baker Amy Burrell* Jonathan Brown Kim Chen* Land Use Working Group Co-Chair Alex Dandridge Anne Darby Chuck Davidson Matthew Ebinger Sandra Escorcia Chelsea Jeffries Carey Jones Leigh Kelley* Brian Mercer Richard Morton Yessenia Revilla Rich Saunders Josh Son* Josh Young

Technical Team Members Mayor’s Office Margaret Anderson Eva Colen Osita Iroegbu

Office of the Press Secretary Thomas Byrnes Jim Nolan Sam R. Schwartzkopf

Dept. of Economic Development Jane Ferrara* Economic Development Working Group Co-Chair Nick Feucht Paul McClellan Leonard Sledge Betty-Anne Teter

Dept. of Housing and Community Development Mary Blow Douglas Dunlap* Housing Working Group Co-Chair Wilken Fernandez Dan Mouer

Dept. of Public Works Travis Bridewell Brian Copple Jakob Helmbolt Kim Hines M Khara Lynne Lancaster Dironna Moore-Clarke Transportation Working Group Co-Chair Mike Sawyer Bobby Vincent

Dept. of Public Utilities Rosemary Green Grace LeRose Al Scott Jonathan Snyder

Office of Sustainability Brianne Mullen Alicia Zatcoff Environment Working Group Co-Chair

Dept. of Human Services Reggie Gordon Paul Manning Karla Ramos Roz Trent

Dept. of Parks, Recreation, and Community Facilities Nathan Burrell* Chris Frelke Heywood Harrison Deborah Morton Bryce Wilk

Public Libraries Scott Firestine

Office of Community Wealth Building Evette Roots

Office on Aging and Disabilities E. Yvette Jones Janei Lofty

Police Department John O’Kleasky Will Smith, Chief

Fire Department Melvin Carter, Chief Earl Dyer Anna Walker

Public Schools Ronald Hathaway Darin Simmons Jr.

Registrar Kirk Showalter

Richmond Health District Danny Avula Ruth Morrison Sarah Shaughnessy Elizabeth Theriault

Greater Richmond Transportation Company Raquel Aguirre Adrienne Torres

Richmond Housing and Redevelopment Authority Desi Wynter

Richmond Regional Planning District Commission (also known as PlanRVA) Barbara Jacocks Chet Parsons

Working Group At-Large Members

Land Use Andrea Almond Shawn Balon Eldon Burton Jeff Eastman Stacey Farinholt Tim Feehan Bruce Gould Timothy Hayes Dave Johannas David Lambert Charles Macfarlane Andrew Moore LaJuan Neal Clare Novak Cristy O’Keefe Jerry Peters Michael Phillips Andrea Quilici Brooke Saba McDowell Genni Sasnett John Sydnor Sarah Weisiger Alexander Winston

Transportation Jeisson Apolo Chris Bast John Bolecek Ross Catrow Zachary Hanson Phaedra Hise Jason James Diane Linderman Marc Lipschultz Josh Mallow Amy Nelson Andrew Payne Trip Pollard Nicholas Smith

Daniel Sonenklar Emily Thomason Michael Todd

Economic Development John Accordino Jack Berry Aisha Bullard Stephanie Culbertson Tim Davey Brittany Dubose Fabrizio Fasulo Sabrina Gross Colin Halligan Tierra Henderson Nathan Hughes Shanteny Jackson Jonathan Koes Bryan Laughlin Lucy Meade Andres Olarte Carra Rose James Seagraves Bruce Tyler William Weber Amy Wentz Anne Westbrook Michel Zajur

Housing Robert Adams Omari Al-Qadaffi James Armstrong Andrew Clark Sandra Crawford Phil Cunningham Gina DiCicco Jodi Dubyoski Joh Gehlbach Tracey Hardney Scott Carlton Hassell Willie Hilliard Lee Householder Jonathan Knopf John Le Christie Marra Lynn McAteer Charlene Pitchford Andrew Scudder Alice Tousignant Patrick Zampetti Mariia Zimmerman

Environment Rebecca Aarons-Sydnor Meade Anderson Gustavo Angeles Steven Carter-Lovejoy Martha Culpepper Nissa Dean Justin Doyle Emily Francis Evan Garrison Meghan Gough Stephenie Harrington Jeremy Hoffman Rob Jones Daniel Klein Mary Larson Trieste Lockwood Catherine Long Todd Lookingbill Channing Martin Susan Miller Ann Pierce Mary Rafferty Susan Robertson Bill Shanabruch Sheri Shannon Christopher Tabor Peter Thaler Mary-Stuart Torbeck Sean Welsh Anne Wright

Engagement Team Shannon Wilson-Gonzalez Prince Hudson Nury Mojica Michelle Mosby LaFonda Page Sequoia Ross Sherrell Thompson

Consultants AECOM, Project Management & Illustrations Center for Urban and Regional Analysis at VCU, Data Analysis DESMAN, Parking Study Elevation, Brand Identity *staff transitioned to new role during the process

Table of Contents

Introduction..........................................................1 Master Plan Purpose and Process ..........................................2 Master Plan Context......................................................4 Charting Richmond’s Future Growth.........................................14 Richmond 300 Plan Structure .............................................17

Vision and Core Concepts ........................................... 19 City-Wide Vision.......................................................20 Nodes................................................................24 Downtown Downtown Core.....................................................26 Monroe Ward ......................................................28 Jackson Ward .....................................................30 Shockoe ..........................................................32 Manchester .......................................................34 Greater Scott’s Addition..................................................36 Route 1..............................................................44 Southside Plaza Area.....................................................48 Stony Point Fashion Park.................................................50 Priority Neighborhoods ..................................................52 Future Land Use.........................................................78 Future Connections ......................................................98

High Quality Places ................................................107 Goal 1: Complete Neighborhoods............................................108 Goal 2: City-Owned Assets................................................114 Goal 3: Historic Preservation..............................................117 Goal 4: Urban Design....................................................122 Goal 5: Planning Engagement ..............................................131

Equitable Transportation............................................133 Goal 6: Land Use & Transportation Planning....................................134 Goal 7: Vision Zero......................................................136 Goal 8: Non-Car Network..................................................138 Goal 9: Streets, Bridges, & Connections.......................................148 Goal 10: Emerging Transportation ..........................................156

Diverse Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 Goal 11: Businesses & Jobs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 Goal 12: Tourism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 Goal 13: Anchor Institutions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168

Inclusive Housing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 Goal 14: Housing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172

Thriving Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 Goal 15: Clean Air. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184 Goal 16: Clean Water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188 Goal 17: Resilient & Healthy Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192

Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205 Metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207 Big Moves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209 Re-Write the Zoning Ordinance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210 Re-Imagine Priority Growth Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213 Expand Housing Opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221 Provide Greenways & Parks for All . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226 Reconnect the City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228 Realign City Facilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230 Reporting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232

Appendices Appendix A: Acronyms and Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A-1 Appendix B: Creating Richmond 300 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .B-1 Appendix C: Nodes Descriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-1 South Richmond – Western Nodes Stony Point Shopping. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .C-3 Shops at Stratford Hills. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .C-3 Stratford Hills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .C-4 South Richmond – Central Nodes Westover Hills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .C-6 Chippenham Hospital. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .C-8 Midlothian/Chippenham. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .C-9 Swansboro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .C-10

South Richmond - Eastern Nodes Hull/Warwick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-11 Hull/Chippenham. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-13

West End Nodes The Village . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-13 Broad/Staples Mill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-14 Westhampton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-14 Broad/Malvern. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-15

Near West End Nodes Carytown. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-15 Scott’s Addition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-16 Broad/Hermitage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-18 VCU/Monroe Park. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-19

North Richmond Nodes Azalea. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-20 MacArthur. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-21 Brookland Park . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-22 Six Points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-23 VUU/Chamberlayne. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-24

East End Nodes 25th and Nine Mile. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-25 Jefferson, Marshall & 25th . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-26 Fulton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-27 Rocketts Landing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-28 Appendix D: Updating the Master Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D-1

Supporting Reports (under separate cover) Land Use, Housing, Demographics, and Projections Report by CURA at VCU, 2018 Urban Design Typology Report by CURA at VCU, 2018 Insights Report, 2018 Community Consultation #1, #2, and #3 Reports, 2019, 2020 Parking Study Report, 2020

Tables

Table 1 // 20-Year Population Growth and Annexation, 1880-2019 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 Table 2 // Additional RRHA Housing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .76 Table 3 // 2016 Density Comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .110 Table 4 // Means of Transportation to Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .147 Table 5 // Top 10 Largest Employers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 Table 6 // Housing Sale Prices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173 Table 7 // Grocery Store Market Analyses Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201 Table 8 // Metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207

Figures

Figure 1 // Historic Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 Figure 2 // Population by Age, 2000-2018 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 Figure 3 // Population by Race and Ethnicity, 2000, 2010, and 2018 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 Figure 4 // Inflation-Adjusted Median Household Income, 1950-2018 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 Figure 5 // Housing Cost Burden by Household Income, 2000-2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 Figure 6 // Individuals in Poverty, 2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 Figure 7 // Population Lacking a High School Diploma, 2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 Figure 8 // Historic and Projected Population, 1910-2037 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 Figure 9 // Vacant Buildings and Vacant & Under-Developed Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16 Figure 10 // Nodes Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25 Figure 11 // Priority Neighborhoods Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53 Figure 12 // Population and Units in Large Public Housing Developments, 2019 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54 Figure 13 // Climate Equity Index Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55 Figure 14 // Future Land Use Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79 Figure 15 // Great Streets and Street Typologies Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .99 Figure 16 // Greenways & On-Street Bike Facilities Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 Figure 17 // Enhanced Transit Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 Figure 18 // Connections, Interchanges, and Bridges Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 Figure 19 // Existing Land Use Land Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 Figure 20 // Vacant Buildings and Vacant & Under-Developed Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 Figure 21 // Future Land Use Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

Figure 22 // Nodes Map with Illustrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

Figure 23 // City Buildings, City-Owned Land, and Other Key Ownership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115

Figure 24 // Historic Districts and Incentive Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117

Figure 25 // Year of Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119

Figure 26 // Urban Design Typology Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123

Figure 27 // Parks, Greenways, and On-Street Bike Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

Figure 28 // Pedestrian- and Bicycle-involved Crashes, 2011-2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137

Figure 29 // Walk Score® Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139

Figure 30 // Greenways & On-Street Bike Facilities Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143

Figure 31 // Enhanced Transit Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145

Figure 32 // Great Streets and Street Typologies Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150

Figure 33 // Connections, Interchanges, and Bridges Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153

Figure 34 // Parking Study Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155

Figure 35 // Economic Development Programs and Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163

Figure 36 // Top Ten Attraction Attendance, FY 2018-19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166

Figure 37 // University Enrollment, '00-'01, '17-'18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169

Figure 38 // Historic Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172

Figure 39 // Housing Cost Burden by Household Income, 2000–2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173

Figure 40 // Richmond Region Market Value Analysis, 2017 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175

Figure 41 // Existing Affordable Housing with Nodes and Enhanced Transit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179

Figure 42 // Watersheds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189

Figure 43 // Environmentally Sensitive Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191

Figure 44 // Percentage of Population within 10-minute Walk of Parks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194

Figure 45 // Parks, Greenways, and Bike Facilities Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195

Figure 46 // Comparison of Existing Urban Tree Canopy Coverage in Virginia Localities, 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196

Figure 47 // Urban Heat Vulnerability, 2017 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197

Figure 48 // Trade Areas Studied in the Grocery Store Market Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199

Figure 49 // Floodplains with Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203

Introduction

The Department of Planning and Development Review (PDR) developed this new city-wide Master Plan with extensive community engagement to plan for and guide Richmond’s future growth.

⬚ figure

Master Plan Purpose and Process

Purpose

The Master Plan is an important document because it provides a framework for the City, the development community, business owners, and residents to shape the growth of Richmond.

This Master Plan also sets the guidance to initiate and evaluate policies, programs, and zoning changes, and to guide the City's capital improvement plan.

Richmond is 62.5 square miles and is not allowed to annex land. The Master Plan helps determine how to plan for growth within the constrained footprint of the city. Furthermore, every jurisdiction in Virginia is required to prepare a master plan (also known as the comprehensive plan) per the Code of Virginia (§ 15.2-2223) and review it every 5 years.

Process

Richmond 300 was developed by thousands of Richmonders. The process to develop the Master Plan included reaching over 8,500 people during over 100 Richmond 300-sponsored meetings and over 220 civic association meetings, City Council district meetings, and festivals such as the 2nd Street Festival and National Night Out. During the planning and draft review process from September 2018 to August 2020, City Staff received and read nearly 5,000 responses to Richmond 300 surveys and over 2,100 comments on the draft Master Plan maps and content. In addition to the 21-member Advisory Council who dedicated 2.5 years to this process, another 209 people served on Working Groups to shape the content of the plan. Please see the Appendix for a detailed description of the community engagement process.

Master Plan Users

How to Use this Plan

Richmond 300: A Guide for Growth outlines a vision statement, goals, strategies, and actions that will shape our land, neighborhoods, and places. The plan will influence decisions made in the city for the next 20 years and serves several important roles: 1) Setting direction for City Administration, City Staff, and elected and appointed officials including City Planning Commissioners regarding the long-range needs of the city; 2) Informing non-profits, business owners, developers, designers, and builders of Richmond’s plans for the future and development priorities; and 3) Communicating the agreed upon future form of the City to provide citizens with a plan to hold decision makers accountable to achieving.

The plan consists of both written policy recommendations and maps, which should be used together when making decisions. Section 15.2-2224 of the Virginia Code identifies several methods available to local governments for implementation of the Master Plan, including a capital improvements program, a subdivision ordinance, and a Zoning Ordinance and zoning district map. In addition to these tools, the city creates plans in many areas including transportation, sustainability, water, sewage, public health, and economic development which support and implement the strategies within Richmond 300. These plans included but are not limited to the Bike Master Plan, the Vision Zero Plan, the RVA Clean Water Plan, the Richmond Connects Plan, RVAgreen 2050, the James River Park Master Plan, the Public Art Master Plan, and the Consolidated Plan.

The Master Plan is a “living document” and should be flexible to respond to changing conditions, modify existing policies, or examine an area of the city in greater detail. This document should be reviewed and revised at least every 5 years to reflect the availability of new implementation tools, changes in state and federal law, changes in funding sources, the results of monitoring the effectiveness of existing policies, and the impacts of past decisions, as well as to reflect changes in the community’s vision for the future.

Why is it called Richmond 300?

⬚ figure

In 1737, Richmond is platted by Major William Mayo for William Byrd II. Source: The Valentine

Richmond was founded in 1737. As we look forward to the city’s 300th anniversary in 2037, how do we want Richmond to look, feel, and work? How do we want our city to feel and grow over the next 20 years so that when we celebrate our 300th anniversary we are proud of where we are? Richmond 300: A Guide for Growth will articulate our vision for Richmond in 2037 and outline recommendations to get us there.

Master Plan Context

Richmond is on the map.

Richmond has been experiencing remarkable growth. Richmond added more than 32,000 residents between 2000 and 2019, as shown in Figure 1. Richmond's sustained growth in population is something the city has not experienced in over a century. From 2000 to 2019, Richmond’s population increased by 17% from 197,790 in 2000 to 230,436 in 2019. The last time the city grew over a 20-year period without annexing land was from 1920 to 1940, when the population increased by 12%. The last time the city population grew over a 20-year period by more than 17% without annexing land was from 1880 to 1900 ,when Richmond grew by 34%, as shown in Table 1.

Young adults and retirees are driving the growth, as shown in Figure 2. Population growth is driven by a number of factors—but mainly, Richmond's population growth comes from people leaving more expensive metropolitan areas in search of less expensive housing and a high-quality of life. Richmond has a higher growth rate in millennials and baby boomers as compared to the neighboring counties. From 2010 to 2018, the number of 25- to 34-year-olds in Richmond grew by 43% compared to 6% and 11% growth in Henrico and Chesterfield, respectively. During the same time period,

32,000+

number of residents Richmond added from 2000 to 2019

⬚ figure

FIGURE 1 // Historic Population Source: U.S. Census Bureau: 1910, 1950, 1970, 2000 Censuses, 2019 Population Est.

TABLE 1 // 20-Year Population Growth and Annexation, 1880-2019

Source: U.S. Census Bureau: 1910, 1950, 1970, 2000 Censuses, 2019 Population Est.

⬚ figure

FIGURE 2 // Population by Age, 2000-2018 Percentages shown are percent of that year's population in a given age group. Source: U.S. Census Bureau: 2000 Census, 2010 Census, 2015

the population of 55- to 74-year-olds grew by 38%, compared to 32% and 33% for Henrico and Chesterfield, respectively.

The racial composition of Richmond has shifted since 2000. Increases in White, Latino, and Asian populations are driving Richmond's growth, as shown in Figure 3. The number of Whites, Latinos, and Asians grew in population by over 32,000, 11,000, and 3,000 people, respectively from 2000 to 2018. The number of Blacks decreased by nearly 6,500 people over the same time period. The number of people identifying with Two or More Races increased by nearly 4,000. It is impossible to know which two races those individuals identify with, but irrespective, Richmond is becoming more diverse.

2000 Census

2010 Census

2018 1-Year ACS

Legend

• Includes some other race, American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, and Other Pacific Islander. ** The U.S. Census categorizes "Latino" as an ethnicity, not a race. Therefore, Latinos identify their race as White, Black, or some other race, as well as identifying their ethnicity as "Latino."

FIGURE 3 // Population by Race and Ethnicity, 2000, 2010, and 2018 Source: U.S. Census Bureau: 2000 Census, 2010 Census, 2018 ACS 1-Year Est.

Richmond’s growth has not benefited everyone.

Richmond’s poverty level remains persistently high. The poverty rate increased from 21.4% in 2000 to 25.5% in 2016 and has since decreased to 24.5% in 2019. Poverty rates are highly concentrated in certain areas of the city, particularly the East End which has the largest share of public housing in the city, as well as in large portions of the South Richmond, as shown in Figure 6. Between 2000 and 2014, the median household income in large areas along Route 1 in South Richmond decreased by more than 50%.

Inflation-adjusted median income has decreased. In absolute terms, Richmond’s median household income appears to be increasing, but when adjusted for inflation, median household incomes are lower than they were in 1990 and 2000, as shown in Figure 4.

Housing costs in Richmond have outpaced income growth for low- and very-low income households. According the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), from 2000 to 2016, the proportion of housing-cost-burdened households (spending more than 30% of income on housing) increased from 33% to 42%. There is a substantial need for more housing for very-low-income

24.5%

Richmond residents live in poverty

⬚ figure

FIGURE 4 // Inflation-Adjusted Median Household Income, 1950-2018 Source: U.S. Census: 1950-2000 Censuses, 2010 ACS 1-Year Estimates, 2014-18 ACS 5-Year Estimates

⬚ figure

HAMFI = HUD Area Median Family Income

FIGURE 5 // Housing Cost Burden by Household Income, 2000-2016 Housing cost burden has increased across all income levels between 2000 and 2016 and decreased slightly at some income levels between 2010 to 2016. Source: Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS): 2000, 2006-2010 5-yr average, and 2012-2016 5-yr average

and low-income households in Richmond and the Richmond region. Figure 5 shows that the number of families earning less than 30% of the HUD Area Median Family Income has been increasing, and within that category, there are more severely cost-burdened households.

Racial inequities persist in the local and regional labor market. Blacks are employed predominantly in low-wage occupations. White workers in the Richmond region are about three times as likely as Black workers to be employed in management occupations, which earn on average $128,000, the highest- paying job occupations (14.5% of white workers are in management position compared to 5.8% Black workers). Moreover, Black workers are more likely to be employed in the lowest-paying occupations, which pay on average below $27,000.

Education rates have increased across all levels since 1970 but parts of the Southside have experienced a decline in educational attainment since 2000. In 2016, 86% of Richmonders over age 25 had a high school diploma. Between 2000 and 2016, all areas of the city experienced a growth in high school graduation rates, except for parts of the Southside, which showed declining high school graduation rates. Between 2000 and 2016, as shown in Figure 7, in some areas of the Southside, one-third to over one-half of residents over 25 years old do not have a high school diploma. This trend is especially pronounced in neighborhoods along Hull Street and Route 1.

⬚ figure

FIGURE 6 // Individuals in Poverty, 2016 Source: U.S. Census Bureau: 2012-2016 ACS 5-year Estimates

⬚ figure

FIGURE 7 // Population Lacking a High School Diploma, 2016 The percentage of individuals over 25 who did not graduate high school. Source: U.S. Census Bureau: 2012-2016 ACS 5-year Estimates

Richmond's central location within Virginia and the East Coast makes the city well-positioned for economic growth and prosperity.

Richmond is located 90 minutes from the beach, the mountains, and the Nation's Capital. Richmond is an ideal place for commerce and innovation to thrive. Located at the convergence of I-95 and I-64, the highest navigable point on the James River, and the crossroads of multiple rail lines, Richmond's central location attracts businesses and residents. Businesses are keen on the Richmond's easy access to the interstates, marine terminal, airport, freight and passenger rail lines, and thousands of graduates of Virginia's exemplary colleges and universities. Residents are attracted to Richmond's roaring James River, easy access to mountain and beach vacations, historic urban authenticity, a culture that supports starting a new business, cultural and artistic vibrancy, higher-education opportunities, and lower housing cost (relative to other larger cities).

⬚ figure

Source: Department of Economic Development, City of Richmond

Richmond has an entrepreneurial spirit. In 2019, the Region was home to 42 Inc. 5000 firm (the fastest-growing private companies in the U.S)—compared to the Nashville Region, a celebrated entrepreneurial hub, which had 43 Inc. 5000 firms. The City of Richmond is home to two-thirds of the 42 firms. The businesses include finance and tech firms, as well as design and creative firms.

Richmond has a diverse economy with government and anchor institutions providing stability and innovation. As the Capital of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Richmond's government and anchor institutions provide a stable employment base and opportunities for public-private innovation and training. Virginia Commonwealth University's (VCU) Monroe Park Campus and VCU Health Campus have increased in student population by over 7,000 between 2000 and 2018. The growth of VCU and its investment in programs that spark innovation, like the da Vinci Center and the Brandcenter, have built upon and expanded the entrepreneurial and artistic spirit of Richmond.

Richmond's art and food scene are attracting national attention. In 2019, the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts unveiled a new statue, Rumors of War by Kehinde Wiley, which garnered national press for its commentary on Confederate monuments. The VCU Arts program has continued to be a top-rated public university arts program. Festivals like the Street Art Festival, Fire, Flour & Fork, and the Afrikana Film Festival invigorate Richmond's arts and food scene. Several Richmond restaurants and breweries have been featured in 10-lists by national press, and several chefs have been nominated for the James Beard Awards.

Business are expanding or relocating into Richmond. Companies with suburban headquarters, like Capitol One and CarMax, have opened large offices in the City of Richmond to help attract creative talent to their companies. The CoStar Group expanded from its corporate headquarters in Washington D.C. to open a research headquarters with over 700 employees along the James River near Brown's Island. Over the past several years, many small- and medium-sized private and non-profit companies have moved from suburban locations into revitalized neighborhoods like Scott's Addition and Manchester.

Richmond: A Very Brief History

The James River. The founding and growth of Richmond is tied to its location along the fall line of the James River. Goods such as wheat and tobacco came down the river from the interior, and sea-going vessels came up the river as far as they could to Richmond’s merchants and factories. The James River has not only served as a means of transportation, it has also powered mills and factories, making Richmond one of the most industrialized cities in the south in the late-1700s and early 1800s. With the expansion of the railroad and the invention of steam power in the mid-1800s, the canal and the river no longer formed the core of Richmond’s economic base. Today, the river is the heart of a linear park system on both banks.

1607

Christopher Newport and John Smith sail up the James River to the fall line, marked by rapids, where the Piedmont and Atlantic Coastal plain meet.

The fall line is the seat of the Powhatan chiefdom — a confederation of 14,000 to 21,000 Algonquian-speaking people — when the British arrive. From first contact, tensions are high between the Native peoples and the British and numerous battles ensue. By 1646, the Powhatan’s chiefdom ceased to exist. Following the 1656 Battle of Bloody Run, near Chimborazo, Native populations relinquish their lands in the Richmond area.

c. 1670

William Byrd I inherits the 1,800-acre Falls Plantation on the south side of the James River near present day Manchester. In 1678, he receives a grant of 7,351 acres beginning at Shockoe Creek and running upriver about 5 miles, including Downtown Richmond, the Fan, the Museum District, Windsor Farms, and more. The Byrd family holdings grow to over 79,000 acres in and around present day Richmond (outlined in red in the map below). In 1768, William Byrd III is forced to sell by lottery his holdings in Richmond and Rocky Ridge (Manchester) to pay his gambling debts.

⬚ figure

Growth and Expansion. Over 233 years, 1737 to 1970, Richmond would grow through a series of annexations of land from Henrico and Chesterfield Counties. These annexations were fueled by industrial and economic growth and the expansion of transportation systems — the improvement of roads and turnpikes, the introduction of a horse-drawn car line, the establishment of the first financially successful electric trolley in the United States, and the construction of highways. Additionally, later annexations were fueled by a desire by some political leaders to maintain a white majority of the population to retain control of the city government.

1737 Richmond is founded and the city is platted by Major William Mayo for William Byrd II. The streets and blocks run parallel to the James River and encompass an area of only 0.23 square miles. This geometry is repeated as the city grows and has influenced the design of the city for 280 years, only being modified to accommodate the turns in the river and topography.

1742 King George II grants a charter to William Byrd II to establish Richmond as a town.

1780 The state capitol is moved from Williamsburg to Richmond.

1782 Richmond is incorporated as a city with a population of 1,800 — half of whom are enslaved people.

1785 The James River Company is established to improve navigation through dredging, blasting channels through the rocks, and building canals in two places around the rapids.

1792 Thomas Jefferson’s “temple on the hill” is complete. The Neoclassical design of the Virginia Capitol building would influence architecture in the United States for decades to come.

⬚ figure

1819 By 1819, there are eleven plants processing tobacco, four iron works, and three flour mills in Richmond.

1820 By 1820, the Kanawha Canal extends 197 miles upriver from Richmond.

⬚ figure

Richmond: A Very Brief History (continued)

Commerce and Trade. Richmond’s location at the fall line of the James River established its prominence as a center of trade, industry, and transportation. During the 19th century, Richmond’s largest business by value was not tobacco, flour, or iron, but the sale of enslaved people. In the U.S., Richmond was second only to New Orleans in the number of enslaved people sold and traded.

1949 The streetcar system is dismantled.

1946 The first city-wide, long-range Master Plan for the City of Richmond is completed by St. Louis planning consultant, Harland Bartholomew, and adopted by the City Planning Commission and City Council.

1914 Richmond annexes Woodland Heights, Highland Park, Barton Heights, Battery Court, Brookland Park, and Ginter Park — developed as a result of the introduction and expansion of trolley lines. These areas carried deed restrictions prohibiting the sale or lease of properties to persons of color.

1836 The Richmond, Fredericksburg & Potomac Railroad becomes the first railroad to enter the City with a station located at 8th and Broad Streets.

1871 Jackson Ward is created in an attempt to contain and neutralize the voting power of Richmond’s recently emancipated Black population.

1940 The Richmond Housing Authority (now called the Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority) is established. The first public housing project in Richmond, Gilpin Court, opens in 1943.

1860 Richmond is the third most affluent city in the United States, boasting 91 factories.

1910 Richmond and the City of Manchester, former seat of Chesterfield County, merge. The city boundary crosses the James River for the first time.

1888 The first trolley car line in Richmond begins operation.

⬚ figure

Population Annexations

1957 Construction of the Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike (now part of I-95) is complete and Jackson Ward, a historically Black neighborhood, is divided in two by a major highway — resulting in the demolition of a significant portion of the neighborhood.

1970 Richmond City Council votes to clear Historic Fulton a predominantly Black neighborhood. Over 800 buildings on about 350 acres are demolished as part of an Urban Renewal Plan. The City also annexed over 20 square miles of land from Chesterfield County, which would end up being its last annexation.

1976 The Downtown Expressway opens to vehicular traffic. Construction of this highway involves demolishing portions of Byrd Park, Randolph, and Oregon Hill.

1979 The Virginia General Assembly adopts legislation granting counties meeting certain standards immunity from annexation by cities with a population over 100,000, thus ending the City of Richmond’s ability to expand its boundaries.

2004 Richmond adopts a "strong mayor" form of government.

⬚ figure

Annexations +22.61 mi²

Policy. Local, state, and federal policies and ordinances did much to shape Richmond, especially laws based on racial segregation and policies that prescribed where investments should be made. Richmond passed a residential segregation ordinance in 1911, which was determined unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1917. Despite this ruling, deeds still carried restrictions against leasing or selling to persons of color. The Home Owners Loan Corporation created "residential security maps," better known as redlining in 1935. These maps discouraged investment in certain areas. The Fair Housing Act of 1968 was designed to put an end to housing discrimination but it was not until 1975, with lending disclosure laws, that practices became more transparent. The disinvestment in and segregation of areas of Richmond made them easy targets for highway construction and urban renewal in the 50s, 60s, and 70s.

Charting Richmond’s Future Growth

No one truly knows how much the City of Richmond will grow over the next 20 years. However, having a strategy to manage growth is critical to ensuring that new development, if and when it comes, aligns with city-wide goals. The Center for Urban and Regional Analysis (CURA) at Virginia Commonwealth University developed three growth scenarios, as shown in Figure 8, with housing, land use, and population projections for Richmond 300 to establish several potential benchmarks to guide future growth.

Moderate Growth Projection

2037 Population: 260,000 people (increase of 40,000 compared to 2015)

• Assumes the continuation of the recent 15-year trend of attracting people of college age, young adults, empty-nesters, and retirees
• Continued out-migration of families with school-age children
• Assumes an annual growth rate of 0.76%—the growth rate that Richmond experienced between 2000 and 2015
• Potential new housing units need: Single-family: 8,179 Multi-family: 4,748
• Potential land demand (for housing, commercial, mixed-use): 1,800 acres

Strong Growth Projection

2037 Population: 300,000 people (increase of 80,000 compared to 2015)

• Assumes that Richmond will become increasingly attractive to young, working, and older adults
• Some families with young children will move out of the city, yielding a negative net migration for children 0 to 4 years old
• Assumes an annual growth rate of 1.5%—the Richmond annual regional growth rate projected by the University of Virginia Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service in 2012
• Potential new housing units need: Single-family: 15,804 Multi-family: 17,866
• Potential land demand (for housing, commercial, mixed-use): 2,900 acres

Aggressive Growth Projection

2037 Population: 340,000 people (increase of 120,000 compared to 2015)

• Assumes strong growth of families with children, young and old adults, and dynamic job growth within the city
• Assumes an annual growth rate of 2.5%
• Potential new housing units need: Single-family: 22,518 Multi-family: 27,086
• Potential land demand (for housing, commercial, mixed-use): 3,500 acres

⬚ figure

FIGURE 8 // Historic and Projected Population, 1910-2037 Source: U.S. Census Bureau: 1910, 1950, 1970, 2000 Censuses, 2019 Population Est.; Population Projections by the Center for Urban and Regional Analysis at Virginia Commonwealth University, 2017

A lot can change in 20 years.

Back in 2001, when the last city-wide Master Plan was adopted, the city was a fairly different place:

• Richmond was home to 32,000 fewer residents.
• The VMFA did not have a modern addition — the expansion and new campus design was unveiled in 2010.
• Richmond did not have a Folk Festival — it was established in 2005.
• The Mayor was elected by City Council — Richmond switched to a strong mayor format in 2004.
• Nokia was the largest cell phone provider. The Motorola Razr was released in 2003 and the iPhone in 2007.
• People rented movies from 6,500+ Blockbusters nationwide.
• VCU had 7,000 fewer students.

Room to Grow

Richmond’s 62.5 square miles provide ample opportunity to grow the population and the economy. As of a July 2020 field survey, there were 1,693 vacant buildings in Richmond, 20.6% of which had a property violation, and 7.7% of which were abandoned. The majority of the vacant buildings were residential structures (87%). In addition to the vacant structures, there are 3,595 acres of vacant land and 6,153 acres of under-developed land (where the building is less than twice the value of the land), as shown in Figure 9.

Manage Growth

Not all growth is good growth. Richmond 300 outlines strategies to intentionally grow Richmond equitably, sustainably, and beautifully. Using Richmond 300 as a guide, the City is in a position to become a welcoming, inclusive, diverse, innovative, and equitable city of thriving neighborhoods, ensuring a high quality of life for all.

⬚ figure

FIGURE 9 // Vacant Buildings and Vacant & Under-Developed Land Source: City of Richmond, Planning and Development Review, Assessor's Office (2019)

Richmond 300 Plan Structure

The Richmond 300: A Guide for Growth Vision is implemented via the Nodes Map, the Priority Neighborhoods Map, the Future Land Use Map, the Future Connections Map, and policy recommendations for land use, transportation, economic development, housing, and environment. This plan has six sections:

1. Vision and Core Concepts: includes the city-wide vision for 2037 and detailed descriptions of the core concept that drives the four important maps—Nodes, Priority Neighborhoods, Future Land Use, and Future Connections—that are referenced throughout the document.
2. High-Quality Places: includes recommendations related to land use, public facilities and public land, historic preservation, urban design, and public engagement.
3. Equitable Transportation: includes recommendations related to transportation planning, vision zero, bike/pedestrian/transit infrastructure, streets, and emerging mobility.
4. Diverse Economy: includes recommendations related to growing, retaining, and attracting businesses, tourism, and anchor institutions.
5. Inclusive Housing: includes recommendations related to housing.
6. Thriving Environment: includes recommendations related to clean air, clean water, and resilient communities.
7. Implementation: outlines how to implement Richmond 300 using metrics, 6 Big Moves, and reporting.

The Richmond 300: A Guide for Growth uses four key terms:

VISION: A statement articulating what we want our city to look and feel like in the future.

GOAL: Broad, long-term aim that defines fulfillment of the vision.

OBJECTIVE: Specific, quantifiable, realistic targets that measure the accomplishment of the goal.

STRATEGY: A policy, infrastructure improvement, partnership, or other activity required to achieve an objective, create a critical condition, or overcome a barrier.

⬚ figure

Plan Structure Diagram. Richmond 300 has four maps that present a growth strategy centered on great places and networks and 5 topics to achieve the 20-year city-wide vision.

Planning for a Post-Pandemic World

As the Department of Planning and Development Review (PDR) was in the midst of finishing up this draft Master Plan document, the World entered a global pandemic. The long-term effects of the pandemic on how people use and move around cities and neighborhoods are unknown. However, the U.S. has in the short-term seen many pre-pandemic trends accelerate during the pandemic, such as, an increasing economic disparity (particularly among Blacks and Latinos), an increase in teleworking, and an increase in biking and walking. The longer-term effects of COVID-19 are unknown but countless webinars, articles, and conferences are sprouting up as developers, planners, architects, demographers, public health experts, social scientists, and other experts discuss the potential effects of the pandemic. How will this pandemic affect life in cities? in America?

PDR hosted a questionnaire from April to August 2020 to gather Richmonders' ideas on how the pandemic may change how they live in Richmond. Some takeaways from the 536 responses received to the survey are listed below.

Outmigration: 52% of respondents believe there will be small out migration of individuals from the densest urban areas of the U.S. (such as New York City, Los Angeles, etc.).

Growth in mid-size and small cities, and suburbs: For individuals leaving dense urban areas, respondents selected mid-sized city (67%), suburban area (52%), and small city (36%).

Continued population growth for Richmond: 69% of respondents believe that Richmond will continue to grow at a steady annual rate of 0.87% (39%) or a moderate annual rate of 1.4% (30% ). One respondent wrote: "Current pandemic will not be a factor, but increasing costs of living in major urban areas will be. RVA has a lot to offer (and room to grow) while costs are significantly lower than NYC/Boston/DC Area."

More balconies and porches: The number one feature respondents (over 84%) believe individuals will want in their home is a private balcony or porch.

More sidewalks: 97% of respondents said that individuals will absolutely want to have sidewalks in their neighborhood in a post-pandemic society.

More teleworking: 97% of respondents believe that office workers will work much more (48%) or somewhat more (49%) than they did pre-pandemic.

More parks: 93% of respondents believe individuals will seek access to parks much more (53%) or somewhat more (40%) than they did pre-pandemic.

More bike riding: 88% of respondents believe individuals will ride bikes much more (39%) or somewhat more (49%) than they did pre-pandemic.

More walking: 92% of respondents believe individuals will walk for pleasure or exercise much more (45%) or somewhat more (47%) than they did pre-pandemic.

Return to transit: 36% of respondents believe individuals will ride transit a little less and 51% believe individuals will return to pre-pandemic transit use.

Prioritize pedestrians, bikes, and transit at the curb: Respondents believe the top users that should be prioritized at the curb are pedestrians (86%), bicycles (74%), and transit (55%) .

More digital engagement: 89% of respondents believe digital public engagement will be used much more (52%) or somewhat more (37%) than it was pre-pandemic.

CHAPTER 1

Vision and Core Concepts

Richmond 300: A Guide for Growth realizes the city-wide vision and goals by supporting the equitable and sustainable growth of Nodes throughout Richmond connected by viable commercial corridors. The Master Plan strengthens Nodes by aligning future land use, future connections, and public policy (related to land use, transportation, economic development, housing, and the environment) to increase the vitality of these critical emerging places within Richmond.

⬚ figure

City-Wide Vision

City-Wide Vision:

In 2037, Richmond is a welcoming, inclusive, diverse, innovative, sustainable, and equitable city of thriving neighborhoods, ensuring a high quality of life for all.

The city-wide vision is a wide reaching vision that touches on all aspects of city management—not just land use management—but also social and cultural aspects of city life that are not within the scope of this Master Plan document. This document focuses on land- and place-based strategies to achieve the city-wide vision.

Vision Values

The city-wide vision embraces several important values:

WELCOMING Feeling accepted and comfortable despite age, gender, race, sexuality, or income

INCLUSIVE Accepting differences and intentionally involving diverse opinions, attitudes, and behaviors

DIVERSE Intentionally creating a state of mixed people, institutions, and mixed-use places

INNOVATIVE Nurturing new ideas, methods, devices, or businesses

SUSTAINABLE Meeting the current environmental, social, and economic needs of our community without compromising the ability of future generations to meet those same needs

EQUITABLE Providing equal or equivalent access to goods, services, status, rights, power, and amenities

THRIVING Energizing communities with opportunities for and support of cultural, civic, and economic involvement

Vision Story

The city-wide vision story helps to illustrate how the city-wide vision could be realized in the lives of Richmonders in 2037. What vision story would you tell?

⬚ figure

In 2037, 6-year-old Isabella lives in a home that is affordable to her single parent, Alex.

⬚ figure

Her baby sibling, Miguel, attends a nearby daycare.

⬚ figure

Isabella attends a highly rated socio-economically diverse public elementary school.

⬚ figure

Alex has a job that pays a living wage and has the option to commute by transit.

⬚ figure

Isabella’s uncle Jack and his fiancé Mel just moved to Richmond from D.C. to work in the robust start-up scene. They live in a nearby apartment.

⬚ figure

Isabella’s grandparents, Jerome and Tonya, recently downsized and now live in an apartment above Isabella’s garage.

⬚ figure

All members of Isabella’s family thrive in Richmond because they can easily walk, bike, take transit, or drive to see friends and family, shop at stores, go to work, play in parks, and go to school.

⬚ figure

Topic Visions

Five topic visions speak to how the city should physically grow over the next 20 years.

⬚ figure

High-Quality Places

Richmond is a well-designed city of communities interconnected by a network of Nodes, public facilities, and open spaces providing services to residents, businesses, and visitors.

As the Capital of the Commonwealth, Richmond leads the region in high-quality business and residential growth. Richmond's unique neighborhoods and districts, both historical and new, support a diversity of uses, the equitable accommodation of all phases of life, and the efficient use of land to promote sustainable and healthy lifestyles.

⬚ figure

Equitable Transportation

Richmond prioritizes the movement of people over the movement of vehicles through a safe, reliable, equitable, and sustainable transportation network.

Walking, biking, and transit options are the most convenient and used forms of transportation in Richmond, thereby improving the natural environment and our health. Richmond's multi-modal transportation system is high-quality and easy for all people to use regardless of income and physical abilities, seamlessly connecting Richmond neighborhoods and attractions to each other, the region, and the nation.

⬚ figure

Diverse Economy

Richmond is home to a variety of businesses and industries that offer opportunities for quality employment and capital investment.

Richmond is a first choice location for businesses and investment because the city's transportation, housing, cultural, outdoor, commercial, and institutional amenities create a vibrant city. Richmonders of all income levels have opportunities for life-long learning and skill-building.

⬚ figure

Inclusive Housing

Richmond is a city where all people can access quality housing choices.

By preserving and increasing housing options, Richmond supports existing and new residents, regardless of income. As the city grows, Richmond provides options to existing residents, preventing involuntary displacement and reducing housing disparities. Housing is the foundation of inclusive Richmond neighborhoods that are walkable with adequate linkages to services, goods and open spaces.

⬚ figure

Thriving Environment

Richmond is a sustainable and resilient city with healthy air, clean water, and a flourishing ecosystem.

Carbon emissions are low, air and water quality are high, and city-wide solid waste production is minimal. The City is positively adapting to the effects of a changing climate, with a built environment that enhances and protects natural assets, including the James River. All residents have equitable access to nature and a healthy community.

Goals

Seventeen goals, grouped under the five topic areas, have objectives and strategies that provide policy, infrastructure, partnership, or other recommendations to achieve the topic and city-wide visions.

Nodes

Nodes are places in Richmond where people and jobs are today and continue to grow into the future. Nodes are the places of convergence of many uses and include offices, shopping, housing, and/or public gathering places as well as access to multiple modes of transportation.

Nodes are important places in Richmond and deserve special attention in the Master Plan to ensure that land use planning, transportation planning, and public policy align to make thriving crossroads in Richmond’s communities. The Nodes are places in Richmond that can either 1) accommodate additional growth in jobs and population or 2) are major activity centers today and should be preserved/enhanced. The Nodes Map, as shown in Figure 10, depicts the location and scale of each Node:

Regional/National Node: A center with significant cultural, entertainment, government, and business destinations as well as shopping, housing, and unique place-based attractions.

Neighborhood Node: A local crossroads typically within or next to larger residential areas that offers goods and services to nearby residents, employees, and visitors.

Micro Node: A notable place within a neighborhood that generally provides goods and services to the immediate residents but may attract visitors.

The Nodes map also highlights the Priority Growth Nodes where the City is encouraging the most significant growth in population and development over the next 20 years. This section of the Plan includes descriptions for the Nodes designated as primary growth areas.

Descriptions for all the Regional/National Nodes and the Neighborhood Nodes can be found in Appendix C of this Plan. Micro Nodes are not described in detail in the Plan, but are called out on the Node Map because the Micro Nodes provide mixed-use destinations within primarily residential areas and help create a unique sense of place within many of Richmond’s historic urban neighborhoods. Micro Nodes are a model for future development as new neighborhoods emerge.

PRIORITY GROWTH NODES

Downtown. As the regional center of employment, the Capital of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the home to a major state university and hospital system, the Downtown Area contains five sub-Nodes:

• Downtown Core
• Jackson Ward
• Monroe Ward
• Shockoe
• Manchester

Greater Scott's Addition

Route 1/Bellemeade Rd

Route 1/Bells Rd

Southside Plaza

Stony Point Fashion Park

⬚ figure

FIGURE 10 // Nodes Map Nodes are places in Richmond that can either 1) accommodate additional growth in jobs and population or 2) are major activity centers today and should be preserved/enhanced.

Downtown

Priority Growth Node A Node that is encouraging for growth in residents, jobs, and commercial activity over the next 20 years.

National/Regional Node A center with significant cultural, entertainment, government, and business destinations as well as shopping, housing, and unique place-based attractions.

Neighborhood Node A local crossroads typically within, or next to, larger residential areas that offers goods and services to nearby residents, employees, and visitors.

Micro Node A notable place in a neighborhood that provides goods and services primarily to the immediate residents but may also attract visitors.

Priority Growth Node Downtown — Downtown Core

Vision

As the highest density of office employment in the region, the Downtown Core continues to serve as the backbone of the local, state, and federal government in Richmond as well as a financial, insurance, bio-tech, and healthcare center. Over the next 20 years, the Downtown Core continues to transition from a primarily office district to an 18-hour district (18 hours of the day are lively and 6 are sleepy) with a mix of uses, including entertainment, residential, and retail uses. New infill development matches the intensity of existing buildings and includes active ground floor uses that enliven the sidewalks. Signature public spaces and greenways connect the Downtown Core’s sub-districts to one another and generate activity at the pedestrian level by increasing pedestrian, bike, and transit connections among the various sub-districts, plazas, parks, and the James River. City-owned property, such as the Coliseum, are redeveloped to foster a mixed-income, mixed-use development that enlivens Downtown by drawing people to Downtown in the evenings and on the weekend.

Growth Potential

In 2019, there were approximately 77 acres of vacant/underdeveloped land in the Downtown Core, representing 26% of the Downtown Core's total land area.

Primary Next Steps

• Coliseum Plan: Develop the Coliseum Area Framework Plan with community engagement (Goal 1).
• Coliseum Redevelopment: Create and issue a Request for Proposals for the Coliseum area using the guidance from the Coliseum Area Framework Plan to reposition City-owned assets into revenue-generating properties (Goal 1, Goal 2).
• Highway Capping: Examine process to sell the air-rights above the Downtown Expressway between Canal, Byrd, 6th, and 7th Streets (Goal 9).

⬚ figure

Downtown Core — Regional/National Node The seat of local and state governments, the financial/office district, the Canal Walk, Shockoe Slip, the Convention Center, and the Coliseum Area.

• Two-Way Streets: Continue to convert streets from one-way to two-way as appropriate (Goal 9).
• Life Sciences Cluster: Market and expand growth opportunities for life science-focused businesses and supporting entities clustered near VA Bio+Tech Park and VCU Health (Goal 11).
• Downtown Marketing & Services: Continue to market Downtown as a the cultural, business, government, and recreation destination of the Richmond Region and support cleaning, event, and placemaking services throughout Downtown (Goal 4).
• Riverfront Plan: Continue to implement the Phase 1 recommendations outlined in the Riverfront Plan to improve access from Downtown to the James River (Goal 4, Goal 17).
• Non-Car Connectivity: Improve non-car connectivity by encouraging urban design that promotes walking, continuing to improve transit access, and developing on-street bike facilities and greenways to Jackson Ward, the Riverfront (per the Riverfront Plan), Church Hill, and other areas (Goal 4, Goal 8, Goal 17).

⬚ figure

Coliseum Area Aerial The defunct Coliseum and expanse of vacant land and buildings around it present an opportunity for the City to fill a void in the middle of the Downtown Core with tax-producing properties and a building, use, and street network that connect the area to the larger Downtown community.

⬚ figure

Brown's Island Improvements Venture Richmond has undertaken a public process to implement improvements on Brown's Island identified in the Riverfront Plan. Source: Brown's Improvement Plan, September 2019

⬚ figure

Downtown to River Connections Since the Downtown Expressway acts a barrier between the Downtown Core and the James River, connectivity improvements, such as creating the 13th Street tunnel and capping the highway between 7th, Byrd, and Canal Streets, will help improve Riverfront access. Source: Richmond Riverfront Plan, November 2012

Priority Growth Node

Downtown — Monroe Ward

Vision

Monroe Ward is transformed from the detached parking garage of the Downtown Core into a significant residential and office mixed-use district between two of the region's greatest concentrations of activity—the VCU Monroe Park Campus and the Downtown Core. Historic buildings are preserved and complemented by denser development on vacant lots that generate activity. There is a critical mass of residents, shoppers, workers, and tourists who are attracted to the residential options, retail and restaurant destinations, jobs, and cultural attractions in Jackson Ward, the Arts District, and the Downtown Core. New pocket parks provide outdoor greenspace for Monroe Ward's residents, workers, and visitors, and are connected to other Downtown districts via greenways, bike lanes, and transit.

⬚ figure

Monroe Ward Conceptual Site Plan There is great potential for Monroe Ward to redevelop into a vibrant extension of the Downtown Core.

⬚ figure

⬚ figure

Monroe Ward — Regional/National Node Situated between VCU’s Monroe Park Campus and the Downtown Core, in 2020, Monroe Ward is home to many surface parking lots, several historic buildings, a restaurant row along Grace Street, and a scattering of newer buildings.

Growth Potential

In 2019, there were approximately 40 acres of vacant/underdeveloped land in Monroe Ward, representing 49% of Monroe Ward's total land area.

Primary Next Steps

• Transit: Increase frequency and hours of the #5 bus route that runs along Cary and Main Streets (Goal 8).
• Bike Facilities: Build bike lanes on 1st, 2nd, and/ or 3rd Streets (Goal 8).
• Grace Street: Convert Grace Street from 4th Street to Belvidere Street into a two-way street (Goal 9).
• Marketing: Promote Monroe Ward as a prime location to attract and grow target industries in corporate headquarters, professional services, and financial services (Goal 11).
• Greenway: Develop the Ashland to Petersburg Trail through Monroe Ward (Goal 8, Goal 17).
• Parks: Identify key parcels for creation of pocket parks (Goal 17).

Priority Growth Node Downtown — Jackson Ward

Vision

Jackson Ward has retained historic buildings and plays a leading role in supporting Black cultural and economic vitality. Jackson Ward continues to be a residential neighborhood with non-residential uses scattered throughout at corners and along major roads—such as 1st Street, 2nd Street, and Marshall Street. New infill developments incorporate high-quality architecture and complement the character of historic buildings. Jackson Ward is better connected to the rest of Downtown with the conversion of one-way streets to two-way, greenways, transit, a new park, and bridges connecting Jackson Ward to North Jackson Ward over the highway. Decking over the highway will reunite the two sides of Jackson Ward that were divided in the 1950s by the construction of the highway.

Growth Potential

In 2019, there were approximately 29 acres of vacant/underdeveloped land Jackson Ward, representing 33% of the Jackson Ward's total land area.

Primary Next Steps

• Highway Deck Study: Commence a planning study to analyze the feasibility of building a park, roads, and buildings over I-95 and I-64, reconnecting Jackson Ward and North Jackson Ward (Goal 8, Goal 9, Goal 17).
• Business Growth: Increase the number and support the growth of minority-owned businesses (Goal 11).
• Historic and Cultural Attractions: Maintain, grow, and market historic attractions such as the Black History Museum and Maggie L. Walker’s Home (Goal 13).
• Gilpin Court Transformation: Develop a plan with existing community input to include Gilpin Court and vacant land in North Jackson Ward to transform the neighborhood into a mixed-use, mixed-income, walkable, and transit-adjacent community that provides both housing and jobs for residents (Goal 1, Goal 14).

⬚ figure

Jackson Ward — Regional/National Node This Node centers on the Historic Jackson Ward neighborhood but also extends north slightly to connect to North Jackson Ward.

⬚ figure

Reconnecting Jackson Ward By capping the highway with streets, parks, and buildings, Jackson Ward will once again be one neighborhood.

⬚ figure

In 2017, the City's Public Art Commission unveiled the Maggie Lena Walker Plaza at a gateway to Jackson Ward.

Priority Growth Node Downtown — Shockoe

Vision

Shockoe is a national destination for historic tourism, education, and interpretation as well as a regional and neighborhood destination. Shockoe is connected to other neighborhoods and amenities, such as the Virginia Capital Trail and the Canal Walk. New development complements historic sites and supports public space amenities such as the 17th Street Farmer's Market Plaza, the Low Line, and a new park. Main Street Station continues to serve as the multi-modal transportation hub of Richmond by augmenting its offerings to include more transportation options and high-speed rail service. Uses around Main Street Station support the bustle of a train station with amenities that serve commuters, visitors, residents, and employment base.

Growth Potential

In 2019, there were approximately 44 acres of vacant/underdeveloped land in Shockoe, representing 35% of Shockoe’s total land area.

Primary Next Steps

Implement the recommendations in the Shockoe Area Plan, some of which include:

• Small Area Plan: Complete and adopt the Shockoe Small Area Plan (which is under development), as an element of Richmond 300 (Goal 1).
• Rezoning: Rezone the Shockoe area in alignment with the Future Land Use Map to allow appropriate growth while also protecting and enhancing significant historic sites (Goal 1).
• Archeology: Adopt an archaeological ordinance to provide guidance to public and private land owners in conducting and managing archaeological discoveries (Goal 3).
• Memorialization: Continue efforts to commemorate, memorialize, and interpret sites of historical and cultural significance in Shockoe. Advocate for additional state and federal funding to fund commemoration efforts (Goal 3).
• High-Speed Rail: Advocate for the creation of a high-speed rail station at Main Street Station

⬚ figure

Shockoe — Regional/National Node The oldest part of the city, this Node includes the original 1737 plat established by Major William Mayo.

⬚ figure

In 1737, Richmond is platted by Major William Mayo for William Byrd II and only includes 0.25 miles of land, known as Shockoe. Source: The Valentine

to further Main Street Station’s position as the regional mass transit hub with the convergence of rail, BRT, regional bus, and GRTC local bus routes (Goal 8)..

⬚ figure

⬚ figure

⬚ figure

⬚ figure

⬚ figure

The City is developing a Small Area Plan for Shockoe under the guidance of the Shockoe Alliance. The Shockoe Alliance's mission is to guide design and implementation of concepts and recommendations for the future of Shockoe as a holistic area rooted in history and informed by those with shared interests to advance these efforts in support of the mission. Shockoe was the center of the Powhatan Confederacy for thousands of years prior to the arrival of the British in 1607. By the mid-1840s, Richmond was one of the large centers of domestic trade in enslaved Africans [top left: Slavery Reconciliation Statue; top right: a Richmond Slave Trail Marker; middle right: site of the Lumpkins Slave Jail]. It was also a transportation and manufacturing Center [middle left: Main Street Station Head House; bottom left: renovated Main Street Station Train Shed].

Priority Growth Node

Downtown — Manchester

Vision

Manchester continues to increase in population and economic activity to support a thriving business corridor along Hull Street. The formerly industrial part of Manchester provides jobs as well as housing. Manchester is connected to South Richmond and the Downtown Core by a network of greenways along former railways, along roads, and along Manchester Canal. A variety of housing options in Manchester are available to low-, moderate-, and high-income individuals. Manchester's interconnected street grid is enhanced with street trees and improved infrastructure to support pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders.

Growth Potential

In 2019, there were approximately 162 acres of vacant/underdeveloped land in Manchester, representing 55% of Manchester's total land area.

Primary Next Steps

• Corridor Plan: Develop a corridor plan for Commerce Road with recommendations on how to transform the road into a Great Street with amenities such as buildings addressing the street, a greenway (the Ashland to Petersburg Trail), street trees, underground utilities, lighting, and other amenities and encourage redevelopment and business growth (Goal 1, Goal 8, Goal 9).
• Rezone: Rezone areas of Manchester in alignment with the Future Land Use Plan to allow residential development in the Industrial Mixed-Use areas that do not currently allow residential uses (Goal 1, Goal 14).
• Design: Implement design standards to create a high-quality, well-designed urban realm, including elements such as street lights and exploring the creation of signature public art (Goal 4).
• Riverfront Plan: Implement the Phase 1 recommendations identified in the Riverfront Plan for Manchester (Goal 4, Goal 17).
• Ped/Bike Infrastructure: Improve pedestrian and bike infrastructure to/from this Node, specifically

⬚ figure

Manchester — Regional/National Node Once a separate locality, Manchester merged with Richmond in 1910.

improving Manchester Canal, developing rails-to-trails greenways connecting to South Richmond, and developing the Ashland to Petersburg Trail. Advocate for state and federal funding for the canal and trails (Goal 8, Goal 17).

• Transit Alignment: With community input, develop a preferred alignment for a North-South BRT line through Manchester, either along Cowardin or along Hull Street, and then traveling down Midlothian, Hull, or Route 1 (Goal 8).
• Mayo Bridge: Develop and implement the plan for rehabilitating/replacing the Mayo Bridge that incorporates pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure (Goal 9).

⬚ figure

Manchester Conceptual Aerial Manchester's proximity to Downtown Core and the James River is strengthened over the next 20 years with investments in improving connections, such as enhanced transit on Hull Street, improved bridges, the Ashland to Petersburg Trail, and an improved Manchester Canal.

⬚ figure

Following the adoption of the Downtown Plan in 2010, the City rezoned about 700 properties in Industrial Manchester from M-2 (heavy industrial) to RF-2 and B-7, two districts that allow a mix of uses, including residential. Since the rezoning, Industrial Manchester has added several dozen new developments.

⬚ figure

Property owners have built low-scale infill residential developments, such as these two-family homes, in the primarily residential neighborhood of Manchester. New projects are designed to complement the "front door" character of Manchester.

Priority Growth Node

Greater Scott’s Addition

Vision

Greater Scott’s Addition is home to a series of neighborhoods that provide new employment and housing developments connected by a series of open spaces and a transportation network that support families and aging-in-place. The variety of housing options and employment in Greater Scott’s Addition provide opportunities for low-income, moderate-income, and high-income households. The Diamond is demolished and a new multi-purpose stadium is constructed along Hermitage. Uses along Hermitage, a public plaza, and the crescent park complement the new stadium development. Visitors to Greater Scott’s Addition have the option to safely arrive by foot, bike, transit, or car. Parking is centralized in a few parking garages to encourage users to park once and visit multiple destinations. The signature public park, a crescent park, between Ashe and Hermitage serves as a central convening space and is connected with greenways to multiple smaller public parks.

Growth Potential

In 2019, there were approximately 458 acres of vacant/underdeveloped land in Greater Scott’s Addition, representing 60% of Greater Scott’s Addition’s total land area.

Primary Next Steps

• Rezoning: Rezone Greater Scott’s Addition in alignment with the Future Land Use Plan (Goal 1).
• Request for Proposals: Issue a Request for Proposals to redevelop the City-owned land between N. Ashe Boulevard and Hermitage Road using the Greater Scott’s Addition Framework Plan and including elements such as crescent park, low-income housing, breaking up super blocks to create a street grid incorporating features that support walking, biking, and transit such as engaging architecture, public space, sidewalks, street trees, buildings built to the street, and street furniture (Goals 2, 4, 8, 9, 14, 17)
• Great Streets: Transform N. Ashe Boulevard and Hermitage Road into Great Streets, featuring buildings addressing the street, underground

⬚ figure

Greater Scott’s Addition — Regional/National Node This area has excellent access to I-95/I-64 and features the Baseball Diamond and primarily industrial areas that are transitioning to mixed-use.

utilities, street trees, lighting, enhanced transit, and other amenities (Goal 9, Goal 17).

• Bridge Feasibility: Increase connectivity and access among neighborhoods in Greater Scott's Addition by creating new bridges from Leigh Street to the Diamond, Mactavish Street to Rosedale Avenue, and Norfolk to Hamilton Street (Goal 9).
• Marketing: Market Greater Scott’s addition to grow, retain, and attract businesses in the target industries (Goal 11).
• Green Infrastructure: As part of the redevelopment of the Diamond site, develop a district-wide green infrastructure system to reduce flow of stormwater into the Combined Sewage System, reduce the heat-island effect, and increase the tree canopy, among other benefits (Goal 17).
• Housing: As part of the redevelopment of the Diamond site, create more housing, rental and ownership, at various price points, including units for low-income households (Goal 14).
• Park Creation: As part of the redevelopment of the Diamond site, develop a series of parks, including the signature crescent park, and

⬚ figure

Greater Scott's Addition Complete Street Illustration Streets for everyone designed and operated to enable safe access for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and transit riders while also incorporating stormwater infrastructure

investigate a funding source for park creation and maintenance, such as a bond or a special park district assessment to fund more parks in the area (Goal 17).

⬚ figure

Greater Scott's Addition Framework Plan This Framework Plan is the result of a planning process in 2019-2020 that included public meetings and three surveys with over 1,300 responses. The Framework Plan envisions several districts connected by a series of open spaces and Complete Streets (described on the next two pages).

Districts

A | GATEWAY DISTRICT

Regional destination for offices, shopping, and entertainment with landmark architecture

⬚ figure ⬚ figure

B | BALLPARK AND ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT

Lively community integrated with entertainment and a new sports venue

⬚ figure ⬚ figure

C | OWNBY DISTRICT

A core of dense mixed-use development employing the latest in sustainable practices relating to energy and water on a district scale

⬚ figure ⬚ figure ⬚ figure

D | ALLISON DISTRICT

Dense, compact, transit-oriented mixed-use development anchored by a reconnected street grid

⬚ figure ⬚ figure ⬚ figure

E | INDUSTRIAL MIXED-USE

Continued evolution of Scott’s Addition combining entertainment, residential, office, and light industrial uses

⬚ figure ⬚ figure ⬚ figure

F | OFFICE PARK

Office park development

Example Places in Other Cities

Open Space Network

1 | BALLPARK AND PLAZA Vibrant outdoor space activated by the baseball stadium

⬚ figure ⬚ figure

2 | CRESCENT PARK Signature urban public space with passive lawns and a relaxing atmosphere with integrated green infrastructure to support water quality (site for large-scale community events)

⬚ figure ⬚ figure ⬚ figure

3 | LANDMARK BRIDGE Bridge over the CSX tracks connecting the crescent park and development on the north side to the Pulse Corridor

⬚ figure ⬚ figure ⬚ figure

4 | SOUTHERN PARK Public space with sports fields and active-use areas for youth with integrated green infrastructure that supports water quality

⬚ figure ⬚ figure ⬚ figure

5 | PUBLIC FLEX SITE Space to meet future community needs such as a school, library, rec center, or public space

6 | PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE BRIDGE Safe and comfortable urban bridges over the train tracks

⬚ figure ⬚ figure ⬚ figure

7 | NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS Small Nodes of public space in which neighborhood activities are centered

⬚ figure ⬚ figure ⬚ figure

Example Open Spaces and Features from Other Cities

⬚ figure

⬚ figure

Diamond Site Potential Transformation The urban neighborhood created along N. Arthur Ashe Boulevard [top] is possible because the grand Crescent park [bottom] tucked in the middle of the site establishes a strong design edge, providing an oasis to enjoy nature, gather, and relax.

⬚ figure

Greater Scott's Addition Conceptual Aerial Crescent park, a signature element, anchors a series of green spaces that connect a new baseball stadium, residential areas, and employment.

⬚ figure

Priority Growth Node

Route 1 / Bellemeade Road

Vision

The intersection of Route 1 and Bellemeade Road is a walkable, well-connected, mixed-use Node with medium-scale buildings that are complementary with the surrounding single-family neighborhoods. Commercial development includes both neighborhood-serving commercial uses and job-generating businesses. The warehouses on the west side of Route 1 are redeveloped into a mix of medium-density residential projects and job-generating businesses. The apartment complexes at the southeastern corner of the intersection are redeveloped into medium-scale, mixed-use development that continues to provide affordable multi-family housing units in addition to market rate housing and commercial uses. The increased residential development along the corridors and in the neighboring Nodes establishes a market for services and amenities, such as a grocery store. New buildings address the corridors to create a pleasant pedestrian environment with parking minimized. Both Route 1 and Bellmeade Road are Great Streets with street trees, pedestrian amenities, enhanced transit, and greenways.

Growth Potential

In 2019, there were approximately 21 acres of vacant/underdeveloped land in the Route 1/Bellemeade area, representing 21% of Route 1/Bellemeade’s total land area.

Primary Next Steps

• Corridor Plan: Develop a corridor plan for Route 1 with recommendations on how to transform the road into a Great Street with amenities such as buildings addressing the street, a greenway (the Ashland to Petersburg Trail), street trees, underground utilities, lighting, and other amenities and encourage redevelopment and business growth (Goal 1, Goal 8, Goal 9).
• Rezone: Prioritize the rezoning of this Node to align with the Future Land Use Plan to encourage the residential development and economic revitalization of the corridor in a building form

⬚ figure

Route 1 / Bellemeade — Neighborhood Node

that improves the pedestrian environment (Goal 1, Goal 11, Goal 14).

• Greenway: Develop the Ashland to Petersburg Trail and provide enhanced transit along Route 1 (Goal 4, Goal 8, Goal 17).
• Transit Alignment: With community input, develop a preferred alignment for a North-South BRT line through Manchester, either along Cowardin or along Hull Street, and then traveling down Midlothian, Hull, or Route 1 (Goal 8).
• Incentives: Explore the creation of a Technology Zone and other new economic development incentives to encourage the economic revitalization of the Route 1 corridor (Goal 11).
• Quality Homes: Develop programs that permit homeowners to remain in their homes, in high-quality structures to limit the involuntary displacement of residents in the surrounding single-family neighborhoods (Goal 14).
• New Park: Transfer city-owned property to PRCF to develop a park within a 10-minute walk of this Node and host community planning sessions to develop ideas for the park design (Goal 2, Goal 17).

⬚ figure

⬚ figure

Route 1 Potential Street Section Transformation The existing street section [top] has more travel lanes than is necessary for the amount of vehicles that travel on Route 1. The street can be transformed [bottom] into a complete street with various elements such as outdoor seating, sidewalk trees, pedestrian-level lighting, on-street parking, enhanced transit, car lanes, median trees, and a wide greenway (the Ashland to Petersburg Trail).

Priority Growth Node

Route 1 / Bells Road

Vision

In 2037, the Route 1 corridor is home to a dynamic mix of uses with increased intensity at the intersection of Bells Road and Route 1. This intersection serves as a gateway into South Richmond from I-95, and Route 1 and Bells Road are Great Streets with sidewalks, street trees, pedestrian amenities, enhanced transit, and bicycle amenities. The commercial and mixed-use development along Route 1 provides neighborhood-serving shopping and service destinations in a building form that improves the pedestrian environment by locating the buildings close to the street, limiting driveways, and encouraging access from existing or new alleys. Predatory commercial uses, including pawn shops and check cashing businesses are limited. Office and industrial uses complement the nearby Port of Richmond and heavy industrial uses at the Philip Morris Plant. Vacant land on Route 1 and Bells Road is redeveloped to provide housing options at varying affordability levels in medium-scale buildings compatible with the surrounding residential area.

Growth Potential

In 2019, there were approximately 13 acres of vacant/underdeveloped land in the Route 1/Bells area, representing 34% of Route 1/Bells' total land area.

Primary Next Steps

• Corridor Plan: Develop a corridor plan for Route 1 with recommendations on how to transform the road into a Great Street with amenities such as buildings addressing the street, a greenway (the Ashland to Petersburg Trail), street trees, lighting, and other amenities and encourage redevelopment and business growth (Goal 1, Goal 9).
• Rezone: Prioritize the rezoning of this Node to align with the Future Land Use Plan to encourage the residential development and economic revitalization of the corridor in a building form that improves the pedestrian environment (Goal 1, Goal 11, Goal 14).

⬚ figure

Route 1 / Bells — Neighborhood Node

• Greenway: Develop the Ashland to Petersburg Trail and provide enhanced transit along Route 1 (Goal 4, Goal 8, Goal 17).
• Transit Alignment: With community input, develop a preferred alignment for a North-South BRT line through Manchester, either along Cowardin or along Hull Street, and then traveling down Midlothian, Hull, or Route 1 (Goal 8).
• Incentives: Explore the creation of a Technology Zone and other new economic development incentives to encourage the economic revitalization of the Route 1 corridor (Goal 11).
• Quality Homes: Develop programs that allow homeowners to remain in their homes in high-quality structures to limit the involuntary displacement of residents in the surrounding single-family neighborhoods (Goal 14).
• New Park: Identify land within a 5-minute walk of this Node for a new park, transfer land to PRCF ownership, and host community planning sessions to develop ideas for the park design (Goal 2, Goal 17).

⬚ figure

⬚ figure

Ashland to Petersburg Trail Conceptual Images The Virginia Department of Transportation is leading a multi-locality planning effort to create the Ashland to Petersburg Trail, a greenway (also referred to as a shared-use path) from Ashland to Petersburg [see right image for the trail alignment]. The Ashland to Petersburg Trail will run along the eastern side of Route 1 [see top image for the plan and bottom image for the section]. Source: Ashland to Petersburg Trail Study, Virginia Department of Transportation, February 2020

⬚ figure