Preface Added Following the Release of Code Refresh Draft 2.0

Dear Mayor Avula,

We appreciate the work that your administration and the Planning Department have done regarding the Code Refresh for Draft 2. PDR was open to considering resident feedback during the review of Draft 1, and their responsiveness to this feedback is appreciated. Code Refresh is a momentous effort, and we understand there is still much work left to be done, reviewed, and discussed. Our hope in this request is to discuss improvements to the current process that will foster greater collaboration and a more thorough process, ultimately for the benefit of all residents and stakeholders.  

CODE REFRESH NEEDS A PROCESS REFRESH

Dear Mayor Danny Avula,

Pivotal and monumental decisions are being made that will shape the future of Richmond for generations to come.  While we understand the factors that have necessitated a city-wide zoning reform, this process should not be rushed.  The rezoning effort should provide ample opportunity for collaboration between the City administration and the Richmond Community, which will result in an outcome representing all stakeholders.  This will not happen if the current Code Refresh process continues unchanged.

We, the undersigned representatives of the Richmond community, urge the City administration to immediately implement a new process for Code Refresh.  The main reasons for our request are outlined below:

TRUE COLLABORATION BETWEEN RESIDENTS AND PDR IS ABSENT

·        PDR must focus on neighborhood-specific workshops for collaborative discussions and feedback, not open houses, panel discussions, or interactive maps.

·        City-led panel discussions and open houses for Draft 1 drew 198 attendees across (4) sessions.  The interactive map received 620 unique commenters.  With a population just above 230,000, participation has been negligible. 

·        Drafts need more time for thorough review.  Draft 2 is being released within a busy holiday season. Comments are tentatively closing in January, which leaves little time for participation.

·        PDR did not conduct widespread outreach.  It was incumbent upon neighborhood/civic associations to inform residents about Code Refresh. 

·        There is a current imbalance of influence favoring the development community.  The process needs to reflect the broader interests of all stakeholders.

A PUBLIC AND TRANSPARENT DUE-DILIGENCE EFFORT THAT SHOULD INFORM REGULATORY REZONING DECISIONS IS LACKING

·        An update to the Richmond 300 is scheduled to occur in 2026.  This update should be completed prior to the finalization of Code Refresh.  This update must also be conducted with proper public engagement.

·        Comprehensive infrastructure plans and studies in coordination with the proposed zoning are missing from the process to date.

·        Inventories of current infrastructural needs have not been provided, and a lack of funding prevents these from being addressed.

·        Richmond 300 recommends prioritizing incremental development of growth areas.  An option for phased, incremental rezoning has not been presented. 

·        There has been no response from leadership regarding how upzoning without inclusionary zoning or other financial measures will ensure affordable housing options.

We appreciate your consideration of our request as we look for opportunities to collaborate with the City.  One of our members will be contacting your office to coordinate a meeting to discuss how we can re-envision this process together.