Community and Council Pressure on
Planning Commission to Consider
LED Advertising Signs in Richmond?
By Marilyn Langlois, Richmond Planning Commissioner
Richmond's Planning Department staff are currently working on a proposed modification in the sign ordinance to allow for LED advertising signs with changing images under certain circumstances. The proposal will first be presented to the Planning Commission to make a recommendation to the City Council, possibly at the May 1 Planning Commission meeting. We'll keep you informed if this date changes.
After participating on an ad hoc committee of Planning Commissioners and Design Review Board members, I continue to have serious concerns about the advisability of allowing LED signs in Richmond. It would set us down a slippery slope of ever-increasing and constantly changing garish visual images advertising mostly products for big corporations.
These types of LED signs are extremely distracting to drivers. They are designed to try and keep drivers' eyes looking at them and their contents for a longer period of time than stationary signs, and that's what the advertisers want too. I want drivers focusing their attention on the road.
The proposed ordinance changes would allow for large, billboard sized LED signs at major shopping areas such as Hilltop and Macdonald/I-80, after going through the DRB and getting a conditional use permit from the Planning Commission. Depending on design requirements these could be either horizontal (what the advertising companies prefer) or vertical (as recommended by DRB member Mike Woldemar). Another provision would allow for sign companies like Clear Channel and CBE Outdoors to get a permit for LED billboards at major shopping areas if they agree to permanently remove some of their other stationary billboards in other parts of Richmond.
There is currently a somewhat smaller LED sign with changing images at Pacific East Mall, which was installed during a time when such signs were allowed only after following a specific approval process (including noticing the neighbors and vetting through DRB), In that case, the required process was not followed, however, and the legality of that sign has been questioned. Since then, the ordinance was modified to prohibit LED signs.
The big sign companies are garnering support from businesses at Hilltop with the promise of erecting a big sign to advertise the Mall free of charge, but at what price? I doubt people will be any more likely to go to Hilltop Mall if LED signs are introduced there. A big billboard with changing images will draw attention to the various products advertised on those LED images, and not to the stationary listing of businesses affixed to part of the sign. Besides, there are other reasons why Hilltop businesses are struggling. Could it be that the presence of Walmart has caused many of them to fold, as has happened in other cities? Why doesn't Walmart (one of the world's wealthiest corporations) pay to erect a visible, attractive stationary sign that lists all of its Hilltop neighbors?
If the proposed ordinance is adopted, what if Hilltop businesses still don't do any better after the LED sign is in place? We'd be stuck with the constantly changing advertising slide show there and most elsewhere in the city.
Mitchell Throws Out General Plan?
When "Maximum" is not Maximum
The Richmond General Plan 2030, adopted after years of intensive discussion and review, provides among many other things, that the height of buildings in "Medium-Density Residential" areas shall be "Up to 35 ft."
But Shea Homes wants to build a development that includes buildings up to 46 feet in height. In order to accommodate Shea Homes, Planning Director Richard Mitchell has interpreted the General Plan to say that the 35 ft. height limit in Medium-Density Residential areas is really the "average" height of all the buildings in the project. Thus even though over half the buildings in the planned project are at least 46' in height, when averaged with other buildings, the entire project meets the 35' height limit.
If this interpretation stands there is really no effective height limit on buildings in these areas, potentially making every limit in the General Plan meaningless.
On the good side. If Richmond lets this interpretation go through then the next time the police stop you from exceeding the speed limit of 35 miles an hour, you can point out that your average speed since you left home (maybe including stops at red lights) was really much less.
This issue will undoubtedly make its way to the Planning Commission and City Council.
Dedication of Bobby Bowens Progressive Center
Speakers at the ceremony included:
Honoring Bobby Lee Bowens, brave Black American soldier, committed Black Panther, dedicated health care worker, Richmond activist and community educator
BOBBY BOWENS PROGRESSIVE CENTER
Lucretia Edwards is the model of the citizen-activist. For some 50 years she led the way in Richmond in the fight against racism in the city, for opening the Bay shoreline to all of its citizens, against the polluters, and for empowering neighborhoods.
Following is an article Lucretia wrote describing the beginnings of a system of functioning neighborhood councils in Richmond. We have come to accept these councils as normal, and do not realize that most cities in this country do not have them and therefor are missing a very vital democratic institution. The article is still used by the Pt. Richmond Neighborhood Council to help orient newcomers but it deserves a far wider circulation. -- Margaret Jordan
Dear Neighborhood Councils,
A long time ago, in 1956 to be exact, I (then a newcomer to Richmond) had the job and excitement of being involved in the formation of the first Neighborhood Council in our city. This made quite an impression upon me, and I have followed the waxing, and waning, and waxing again of this concept in Richmond ever since. It seems to me that this manifestation of democracy has great merit, in that it is a simple and pleasant method of bringing people together and getting things done, in which everyone can join according to his or her inclination and ability.
Appreciation of this form of participatory democracy has grown in my mind during the recent cynicism and deterioration of the political process, and I am grateful to have had in my life a mechanism which provides both hope and inspiration. Though not all the people in our city believe in or avail themselves of Neighborhood Councils, it occurs to me that we are fortunate in our city to have this process in place. Which brought me to the realization that many people take Neighborhood Councils for granted, since they do not know much about the origin of the idea. This exceedingly brief digest of the Neighborhood Councils initiation and progress is an effort to correct this lack of knowledge (or absence of memory), in the hope that it will provide recognition and appreciation of a positive asset which is happily available to us.
The Story Begins
The development of Neighborhood Councils in the City of Richmond came about, because of the upheaval of the city, occasioned by the Kaiser Shipyards that were located in Richmond during World War II.
The African American population of the city at this time was 270 persons, almost all of whom lived in a 4 block area in the northern part of the city. Then World War II brought the Kaiser Shipyards to Richmond, and in 1942, the population jumped to 50,000, in 1943 to 93,776, and by 1946 it hit its peak of 110,000. To house these workers 17,000 units of Lenham Act War Housing units were built on the empty lots on the south side of town. The shipyard workers were recruited throughout the United States, and a great number came from the southeastern part of the country. A high proportion was African American, primarily from the rural agricultural areas of Texas, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Louisiana and Mississippi. From the same states and at the same time, Caucasian workers were recruited, and southern blacks and southern whites carried their historical and cultural frustrations and hostilities with them.
One of the factors that perpetuated the confusion of life in Richmond at this period was the fact that most of the people who came during the war years did not have any feelings of belonging to the City. It was not possible when they came pouring in to give them this feeling, since the City was hard put to simply house them. Also, there was the opinion that the newcomers were only in Richmond as temporary workers. Subsequently, many of the residents who came as shipyard workers had no feeling of participation in the life of the City, and no sense of responsibility for the welfare and future of the City. They might experience strong emotional feelings of pride and commitment to the neighborhood in which they lived, but for the city of Richmond, their feelings ranged from indifference to annoyance.
In 1956, the Group Work and Recreation Section of the Contra Costa Community Welfare Council inaugurated a pilot demonstration project in the North Richmond area, to determine how best to provide for the needs of the neighborhood through more effective health, welfare, and recreation services.
The neighborhood people originally felt that what they most needed to bring them together, and provide a centering of the community was a building, a community center. But after a year of hard work in small groups and large groups, in surveys and discussions and study, the people came to feel that what they really needed was a more effective means of communication with the world outside their somewhat isolated and segregated boundaries.
Neighborhood Councils, a new concept brought from the east coast (where it had been borrowed from early colonial history and Town Hall meetings) were described and the neighborhoods decided that they liked the idea. So, in 1956, the North Richmond Neighborhood Council was formed, the first neighborhood council in the San Francisco Bay Area.
Funds ($19,566) were secured from a small family foundation in San Francisco, the '
1958 Four Neighborhoods were active. They program was financed by the Columbia
1959 Six Neighborhood Councils were active. The Program was financed by the Columbia Foundation and the contract with the City of Richmond. The Columbia Foundation funds were running out. An exploration of other funding sources, including a request to the United Crusade, for financial support was unavailing. The Columbia Foundation gave an additional $1,500 as a "rescue" grant.
1960 Eight Councils. Program financed by the Columbia Foundation and the contract with the City of Richmond. (The Redevelopment contract was not renewed). There was a request in the 1960-61 Budget for the two staff jobs for this program, which was turned down due to an austerity budget.
1962 The Neighborhood Council program is to continue on a half-time basis until July 1st, at which time the City will once again consider its contract with the West Contra Costa Community Welfare Council (staff member Arnie Leonard replaced by Ed Grosselfinger).
The problem faced by the Neighborhood Council movement was not failure, but success. The idea, once launched, was instantly popular, and with good staff work and training, the Neighborhood Councils were speedily organized. They made many requests of the administration and City Council of the city of Richmond through the Coordinating Committee of Neighborhood Councils, requests that were reasonable and usually granted.
But the City Council was increasingly alarmed at the growing power of the citizen groups, and refused to budget funds for staff that would accelerate the progress already made. Gradually funds were squeezed down, and when the proposal was made to have a Human Relations Commission in the City of Richmond, it seemed a natural development and a comfortable solution that funding for staff should be diverted to the new Commission.
So for a time, the Neighborhood Councils, as a viable element in the life of the City, went into a decline through lack of the nourishment of robust funding. But an interesting thing happened. During the few stimulating, triumphant years of the Neighborhood Councils early development (1956-1963) a network had been established throughout the City. Black and white people worked together on projects for their neighborhoods, and then for larger projects that affected all the neighborhoods. Friendships were made, trust was created, and success was experienced. People realized that what they did, working together, made a difference—that they could be responsible for change. Citizens had experienced democracy in action, and it was exhilarating!
During President Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty, Richmond, because .of its history .of problems, was eligible, and the recipient of, federal funds for many different projects. One of them was the Model Cities Program, and it was because of it that the Neighborhood Councils experienced a renaissance. One of the stipulations for acceptance of a Model Cities program was a Citizen Participation element. Remembering the success of the Neighborhood Councils, the City reactivated the Councils in order to meet the criterion.
The Neighborhood Council provides the machinery far citizens to function directly in shaping their awn community life. When people help to plan programs and shape policies, as they do in a Council and in the Coordinating Committee of Councils, they understand and believe in what they are doing far better than when this work is done far them and presented as an accomplished fact. For along with the long hours, hard work, and responsibility needed, goes a sense .of pride and involvement. The Neighborhood Council ideas can restore the old-fashioned meaningfulness and friendliness of cooperative community living, and can enrich the lives of those willing to undertake the creative hard work necessitated by this form of group dynamics.