Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

nilsrva OP t1_jdv4xrt wrote

Hey all,

At long last the CAR is receiving public comments tomorrow starting at 3.30 over the question of whether or not BustArt’s mural in Jackson Ward should be allowed to stay. I am very appreciative of the many of you who have written emails to the board already. Tomorrow however will be the deciding day, and the greatest impact you can have will be to show up in person or on MicrosoftTeams via this link

Here is the wall before and here is the wall after

Feel free to still write alex.dandridge@rva.gov with your comments, although I do not know how effective that will be. I am considering taking your comments are presenting them, so if anyone would like to say something but can not attend please drop me a DM with your comment, name, and address (internet strangers mean nothing to them, name/addy adds legitimacy)

In the interest of full disclosure I will also be arguing on behalf of my own right to paint a mural on a location in Church Hill, completely unrelated to BustArt’s mural. BustArt is a friend of mine, and it is via me and this sub that the homeowner was connected to him- however I did not paint this mural and it is not an artwork of mine.

27

fluufhead t1_jdv5j0f wrote

Are they worried it's going to turn kids into furries or something? I'm struggling to understand what reasons one might have for wishing this mural to be removed.

−1

bkemp1984Part2 t1_jdvefhy wrote

Man, before they built an apartment building beside me (not a bad thing), I had a wall that was super visible and 50 feet outside of the City Old and Historic District. Still not an awful wall for painting, but there is only about a 10 to 12 foot gap between the two buildings. People pass through all the time though, and it's visible from the street, so if this turns out badly for BustArt (or even if it doesn't) then I'd offer up my jawn.

7

bkemp1984Part2 t1_jdvf2fq wrote

Replying to nilsrva (#2,390,141)

I didn't even know about City Old and Historic Districts until I had my house a few years. As soon as a new property owner is registered to a Richmond address within one, they should send something in the mail informing owners of them. It's not hard to break the rules, even basic changes to appearance might need approval, not just stuff like murals.

6

PopularMedicinetoday t1_jdvso6j wrote

I’m on the Jackson Ward board reviewing and discussing this.

Before anyone rips my toe nails off: a lot of us are in a really difficult situation.

A lot of sides (there are more than just two) did not follow the proper steps while some are not consistent.

Let me just give an example: if the homeowner asked CAR for this mural he would have been denied. End of story. Then if he painted it then he would have been in big trouble. A much bigger headache than (s)he already has.

Another scenario is homeowner just went ahead and painted and didn’t ask for permission - this is what happened from what I am aware of. Now homeowner has a CAR problem.

Now, who is wrong? Well, just from that perspective one could say homeowner is wrong here…. BUT CAR hasn’t really been consistent. There have been other things that went up in JW that didn’t have CAR approval (and would have been 100% denied) but bc it already happened everyone just said “oh well” and moved on - that’s bc nobody complained (mainly).

There are also stories of residents spending $15k on windows and being forced to remove them bc it’s not in line with CAR.

Along with CAR not being consistent, I think we need CAR to get more realistic. They aren’t doing anything about graffiti to help an aging (and gentrifying of the poor) neighborhood but are going after a mural that covered up graffiti? Try removing graffiti off your brick and you will be hating your life AND they’ll just come back and do it again - it’s a quick crime that is such a headache.

CAR needs to come to 2023 age. Not allowing solar panels and murals and whatnot is silly.

I think this mural is doing a great job questioning wtf CAR is for and what they are doing with their standards. We can’t have a free-for-all in a historic area but we need flexibility. Homeowner should have asked permission but he would have just hit a wall - but that still pissed CAR off and from their point of view rightfully so - if they let him go then others will do it so they need to AT LEAST be a massive headache for him publicly even if they let him keep it.

Again, I’m in these meetings and I have some influence but it’s a very very tricky problem… lots of gray areas.

Im very much leaning on letting it stay and use this as an opportunity for conversation on modernizing CAR a bit. Very tricky.

I’ve been forced to replace my entire fence and porch bc of rot while my neighbors porch was in worse condition and there were abandoned homes down the street. It’s simply not fair that the policy seems to be “if someone complains then we do something about it” while they don’t enforce severe circumstances.

52

nilsrva OP t1_jdvwa4u wrote

Replying to PopularMedicinetoday (#2,393,780)

I appreciate your view on this. The artist of course had permission from the home owner to do the wall, and the artist being from Switzerland of course had no idea of CAR or anything of that matter. I too have wondered about the wild inconsistency of CAR in the neighborhood and their complete lack of action against the garbage going up around the area (both literal and figurative.)

I am also curious about the building across the street that is entirely covered in ivy. I think it is beautiful, but obviously completely obscures the brick and is of course actually damaging the building itself. But its been like that as long as I can remember.

I am openly completely biased in favor of the mural and murals in general, but that is not to say that I am against rules controlling how things look and have stated as such in other posts here. Paris looks like Paris because of such rules. But paint is not a structural change and this alley is just awful. The largest proponent of this wall is the direct neighbor this piece faces, which also seems like it should count for something.

I am also annoyed because in my separate dealings with CAR over a mural I want to do they are complaining about artistic decisions of mine which simply does not seem like something they should have a say on. Approve or disapprove of a mural and leave it there, dont tell me there is too much or too little of any element or color in the design.

27

Johnny_BigHacker t1_jdw9qgo wrote

Replying to PopularMedicinetoday (#2,393,780)

Absolutely go eat shit. They covered up graffiti. Nobody elected you or wants you. Last I checked most of you aren't even homeowners in the CAR districts (should be mandatory IMO).

If I wanted an HOA telling me and my neighborhood how to live, I'd go live in Short Pump.

−13

LostDefectivePearl t1_jdwairz wrote

Replying to nilsrva (#2,390,141)

Out of curiosity, has anyone compared this map to the historical red lining map of Richmond? It looked like a lot of overlap with red and yellow zones but I freely admit I could be confused by the red lining map.

https://dsl.richmond.edu/panorama/redlining/#loc=5/39.113/-94.57&adviewer=sidebar

Anyway. Is this hullabaloo about the murals just a way to exert control over the people in these neighborhoods? Sounds like it to me.

−1

zaramboart t1_jdwjn4q wrote

I live in JW, CAR has been painting over my neighbors murals this week next to my home. What was once a pretty bird and tree mural is now a sad plain beige color. What sucks even more is that they got beige over-spray all over our vehicles! I'm feeling really disappointed in RVA today. The vibrancy that once attracted me to moving here 7 years ago seems to be transforming into a cookie cutter NOVA hellscape at a disheartening rate. Hope City Council realizes that art in an arts district should be encouraged, not villainized. If concern is truly about it being in a historic neighborhood, then perhaps move the arts district location to a more welcoming part of town. *

5

Far_Cupcake_530 t1_jdwpa7k wrote

Replying to WhalerBum (#2,395,470)

You do not need CAR approval for painting something the same color. I suspect there is more to this story. You were probably reported by a neighbor because your were replacing woodwork with salt treated lumber, etc. CAR does not just cruise around looking for thing like that.

1

BreathAffectionate65 t1_jdwyqci wrote

This is stupid & a waste of time. Keep the mural & go find something important to take care of 😒

5

ZipWyatt t1_jdx9zl8 wrote

Replying to Johnny_BigHacker (#2,396,119)

My god man. This person took time out of their day to shed some light on a situation and you feel the need to come over the top and rip on them and it turns out they aren’t even guilty of what you accuse them of. Maybe time to step away from the keyboard and take some deep breaths outside.

11

Far_Cupcake_530 t1_jdxa8pa wrote

Replying to LostDefectivePearl (#2,396,229)

Which historic preservation map are you trying to erroneously connect to a racial injustice from the past? Would it be the one on Monument Avenue or Jackson. Ward? Both are historic districts that were voted into by property owners in that particular area years ago.

7

Far_Cupcake_530 t1_jdxaty0 wrote

Replying to bkemp1984Part2 (#2,391,705)

They do send something. You are also made aware of it when purchasing the property in one of these districts. All of the "rules" have wiggle room and that is why there are monthly meeting to appeal. There is a big difference between painting your white trim grey and covering the entire side of a building with a mural. Your neighbor, who likes the historic architecture, may not enjoy staring at a giant face because you like it and hired a friend to paint it.

3

Far_Cupcake_530 t1_jdxfxte wrote

Replying to nilsrva (#2,400,362)

Maybe the college of Bugs Bunny and Roy Lichenstein imagery evokes the civil right struggle as perceived by white kids who grew up taking ski trips and Bahamas vacations, but are now keeping it real by living in the city.

−3

dishka_223 t1_jdy9dxw wrote

If the mural featured a black female y’all wouldn’t say shit about it.

−5

plummbob t1_jdyfz1n wrote

>faded and discolored brick with graffiti is more in-line with historical standards than an awesome mural

​

i'm betting that will be their decision

2

bkemp1984Part2 t1_jdykoa7 wrote

Replying to Far_Cupcake_530 (#2,401,219)

I never said I was defending slapping up a mural without asking within one of these districts, or that I was against these districts with rules. I also understand how and why they work. Though I will say someone liking old architecture and the city having specific colors to choose from for a house are pretty different things.

I've known three people who said they got nothing in the mail about it and were not made aware of it during the buying process. I also just spoke to a code guy the other day who said they don't send anything.

Regardless, this is a common problem in this city, not just with things like mural. The city has a problem with people knowing they are in these zones and educating them as to what that means. It's not all their fault, but they're doing a pretty crap job at their end if they want these rules followed.

2

DJ_German_Farmer t1_jdzsd90 wrote

Replying to PopularMedicinetoday (#2,393,780)

I live in the Springhill historic district and can confirm that CAR’s inconsistency is the big problem. They allow developers to flout their own plans and do whatever they want, but homeowners have to justify replacing a window. It really is out of hand — it’s like what would happen if you gave the art kids in high school absolute dictatorial power. Their aesthetic opinions become law.

Our neighborhood confirmed that if you can get over 50% of owners to sign a petition you can start removing the old and historic district designation from your neighborhood. Don’t expect city hall to be nice about it though. CAR and their staff are very disrespectful and think our lives are their personal ideaboards.

4

Far_Cupcake_530 t1_je0581m wrote

Replying to DJ_German_Farmer (#2,414,048)

Oh yes, because their vast staff have ample time to parol historic districts. The board is not just "fancy architects". In fact, there is only one architect on the board. Most are volunteer citizens, usually nominated by the neighborhood associations who care about preserving the historic character of their neighborhood.

2

PopularMedicinetoday t1_je05mrw wrote

Replying to DJ_German_Farmer (#2,414,014)

Never knew that area was called springhill or that it's historic. Funny that they allowed those generic monstrosities of apartments to go up in that district.

I know the lines can be technicalities -get it a lot in JW when we randomly find out a developer's lot is not in the historic district and everyone is shocked - Looking at you "The Penny"

2

Far_Cupcake_530 t1_je069gz wrote

Replying to DJ_German_Farmer (#2,414,014)

Your neighborhood got over 50% of the homeowners to vote themselves into the historic district. That was all well and good when the historic tax credits were given out. Now you are mad when you want to replace an architecturally relevant window with a cheapie vinyl window from Lowes.

2

DJ_German_Farmer t1_je06b6e wrote

Replying to Far_Cupcake_530 (#2,416,243)

At this pt there’s only one architect but that has not been the case in the past. “Historic preservationists” with unchecked power are just as bad. History is only one factor in many of the issues neighborhoods face, and CAR is historically atrocious at balancing these issues fairly.

Sorry you don’t like my opinion.

1

DJ_German_Farmer t1_je06jqd wrote

Replying to Far_Cupcake_530 (#2,416,471)

Ain’t nobody got tax credits, but keep making things up. The neighborhood wanted to prevent condos and apartments from being built Willy nilly, it was a mistaken move that didn’t really work, a d now we’re stuck with it while the folks who voted it in moved out long ago

1

DJ_German_Farmer t1_je0743m wrote

Replying to PopularMedicinetoday (#2,416,314)

We’re sick of CAR. They don’t deliver anything but hassle and frankly very little is historic about our neighborhood. The impunity with which the commission acts is really mind blowing but most people don’t know just how unappealable their arbitrary taste-based, subjective decisions are.

I had to do a presentation before this board to put up a picket fence. It’s ridiculous.

2

DJ_German_Farmer t1_je07d7o wrote

Replying to Far_Cupcake_530 (#2,416,471)

Dodson built a house where they literally completely changed the plans they were following from what CAR approved. We appealed and they did nothing. I’m not mad that there’s a process; I’m mad that it puts actual homeowners in a bureaucratic nightmare while it lets big money developers do whatever they please.

2