[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
Task 56	Richmond FINAL PRODUCT
FY 1995	CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION
ACT COMPREHENSIVE
PlN CONSISTENCY ISSUES


CITY OF RICHMOND

1996 MASTER PLAN UPDATE

Report to the City of Richmond
Department of Community Development on the
Potential Impacts on Water Quality of
Existing and Potential Land Uses
East of Interstate 95 and South of the James River

Prepared by the Staff of the
Richmond Regional Planning District Commission




















October, 1996

A Product of the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality's Coastal Resources Management Program
pursuant to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Award No. NA57OZ0561-01
and the Chesapeake Biy Local Assistance Grant Program: Grant Number 96-94

This document is funded in part by a grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The views
expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of NOAA or any sub-agencies.




US Department of Commerce
.POAA Coastal Services Center Library
2234 South Hobson Avenue
CharleCon, ;SC 29405-2413

Table of Contents





Study Area .1.............

Existing Land Uses.
	.......
..............2

Environmentally Sensitive Areas.
	.......
........3

Environmental Issues in the Study Area............	5

Development Strengths and Weaknesses .....

Related Environmental Issues .8.........

Actio,n Alternatives.
	.......
..............9

Recommendations.
	.......
...............10

Report to the City of Richmond
Department of Community Development
on the Potential Impact on Water Quality of the
Existing and Potential Land Uses East of Interstate 95 and South of the James River

For many years the City has been involved in an aggressive program to protect the natural
environment. One major element of this program has been the development of a long range strategy
to deal with the issue of the City's Combined Sewer Overflow. In addition, the City has been
involved in the development of a comprehensive set of plans, policies and ordinances to protect
water quality. These efforts were done in part to meet the requirements of the Chesapeake Bay.
Preservation Act, passed by the General Assembly 1988. Working with the Chesapeake Bay Local
Assistance Department (CBLAD), over the last several years the City has examined all of its water
quality protection programs. Specifically, the City's zoning and subdivision ordinances were
amended in 199 1. In 1993, the City adopted an Environmental- Element to the Master Plan. In 1994,
the City published the Chesapeake Bay Public Information Manual. Taken together,, the ordinance
changes, the Environmental Element and the Public Information Manual give the City a solid base
for protecting water quality and meeting the requirements of the Preservation Act. Some additional.
work is still needed, however, to come into full compliance with the provisions of the Act.

- Eurrently, the City is involved in an extensive update of its Master Plan. As part of this
update, the City contracted with the Richmond Regional Planning District Commnission (RRPDC)
to assist with the review of the City's Chesapeake Bay Programn. This program has been reviewed
by the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Board and found to be consistent with the Act's regulations
subject to the revision of certain elements of the Master Plan. City and RRPDC staff are currently
addressing these issues. One such issue was a request from the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance
Department that the City "reexamine existing and proposed land uses in the context of water quality
protection for the 1-95 floodplain area in the next Plan revision." The purpose of this report is to
examine this issue and present recommendations for consideration as part of the Master Plan update.

Study Area

The study area is the industrial area located east of 1-95, south and west of the James River
and north of the city limits. The area in q'uestion includes approximately 71 separate tax parcels of
varying size covering a total of 1,150 acres.' The study area does not, however, exist in a vacuum.
Arecent report by Dr. John Accordino of VCU states that the study area is part of a larger area of
approximately 3,700 acres which makes it the largest industrial area in the City.'


'A Land Use Plan for the Tidal James River Basin for the City of Richmond", prepared by David Maloney for
the Department of Urban Studies and Plarining, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, May, 1990,
page 1.
'Economic Element Part II, Industry Land Use and Development Implications, prepared for the City's
Department of Community Development as part of the 1996 Master Plan Update by John Accordino, Department of
I

Existing Land Uses
When one looks at the City's existing land tise maps or actually views the study area from
1-95 or Commerce Road, one sees an area that is predominantly developed as industrial or heavy
commercial uses. However, an examination of aerial photographs shows that a substantial portion,
perhaps half of the land area, is undeveloped. Examination of additional information, such as the
Environmental Elemnent of the Master Plan, shows that a large portion of the undeveloped land is
actually considered environmentally sensitive lands. (These are discussed later.) Following is a
brief discussion of the land uses within the study area.

On the north end of the study area is the City's sewage treatment plant. Immediately adjacent
and to the cast is Ancarrow's Landing, the only public access to the Jamnes River in the study area.
Located here are a boat ramp, associated parking and an area for bank fishing.

Accessibility to the entire study area is limited. This is due to elevation of 1-95 along the
entire western portion of the study area. In this particular area, access is via Brander Street which
passes beneath 1-95. In addition, traffic must also pass through a gate in the Richmond Flood Wall,
which can be closed in times of high water. All traffic to and from these two facilities must use this
one entrance.

To reach the portion of the study area to the south, one must travel back to Commerce Road
A short drive south brings one to Goodes Road, the second entrance into the study area. Again, one
must pass beneath 1-95 to enter the area. In addition, the south end of the flood wall parallels
Goodes Road west of 1-95.

Development in this area is limited to a petroleum pipeline company, a petroleum storage
facility and a large rock quarry. According to estimates, the anticipated life expectancy of the
quarry is up to fifteen years. However, certain factors could contribute to a portion of this site being
used by the owner for an even longer period of time. All of the material that is extracted from the
quarry is shipped by barge. Therefore, the only associated traffic is employees entering and leaving
the site. The location of the quarry immediately adjacent to the river is very important. A
significant factor in the price.of the delivered rock product is transportation. Material that can be
sent by barge can be priced very competitively.

Again, to move south in the study area, one must return to Commerce Road and travel south
to the intersection with Lumpkin Road. This road intersects with the major north-south access road
for the remainder of the study area--Deepwater Terminal Road. At the very north of this area is a
settling area used by Sunoco, a paper manufacturirig company. Three existing small settling ponds
are currently being reclaimed through a composting process. When this project is finished,


Urban Studies and Planning, Virginia Commonwealth University, 1 996.
2

sometime within the next ten years, one large pond will remain. This large pond will also be
eliminated once the current project is complete, again within a ten year time framne. Immediately
south is another large rock quarry. The life span of this quarry is approximately twenty to thirty
years. However, as with the quarry to the north, there are circumstances which could develop that
would keep this operation open for a longer time frame. Materials from this site are used for the
production of concrete and asphalt on-site, a portion of the material is shipped out via truck and a
small portion, approximately 5,000 tons per week, is shipped by barge, about one per week. This
operation contributes a high level of heavy truck traffic to Deepwater Terminal Road. For the
record, each of these two quarries mined between 900,000 and 1,000,000 tons of granite in 1995.

Immediately south of the quarry is a mixture of heavy commercial and industrial uses
including heavy truck and trailer sales and repair, chemical and petroleum companies and various
industrial sales and service companies. Also, located in this area is a large recycling operation
engaged in a variety of activities including the disassembly of automobiles. These activities will
soon include the disassembly of barges. Three of the uses in this portion of the study area have
docking facilities on the river.

Continuing south, one comes to the intersection of Bells Road and Deepwater Terminal
Road. Bells Road passes underneath 1-95, thereby providing the third and final access to the area
west Df the study area.. South of this intersection lies the Phillip Morris training center, warehouses
and the Port of Richmond Terminal Facility. The Port itself is a major water related use occupying
a substantial tract of land. Plans exist for expansion of the Port to the south.

To summarize, a visitor observing the study area frorm the western boundary sees a vital,
thriving industrial area. A substantial portion of the study area has been developed and is in use
currently. Uses in the northemn portion of the study area tend to be more land intensive, for example
the sewage treatment plant and the two quarries. Moving south uses become more varied and
include such uses as manufacturing, truck sales and repair, moving and storage companies, the
campus-like Phillip Morris training center and the Port of Richmond. Traffic volumes are high on
Deepwater Terminal Road and include a great deal of heavy truck traffic.' All of the buildings in
the study area appear to be in use. This in and of itself speaks well for this particular industrial area.
All of this gives the southern portion of the study area a real image of activity and prosperity. (This
is in contrast to the relatively quiet nature of the two northern portions of the study area.)

Viewing the study area from the river gives one a different prospective. From the river, the
study area appears quiet and fairly unspoiled. The topography and- natural vegetation hides much
of the industrial development. The only visible signs of industrial development along many portions
of the river are the loading facilities along the river and some towers which rise above the tree line.

Environmentally Sensitive Areas

The City's- stated objective for Environmentally Sensitive Areas, as found in the City's
Environmnental Element is to "continue to identify, protect, and enhance environmentally sensitive
3

areas within the city consistent with their role in the urban ecosysterm and contribution to water
quality." Due to their proximity to the James River, the environmentally sensitive areas in the study
area can have a substantial impact on water quality in the James River and ultimately the Chesapeake
Bay. Following is a brief description of the environmnentally sensitive areas in the study area.

I. Wetlands. Wetlands provide a numnber of benefits. Regarding water quality, wetlands serve
as filters, reducing the flow of sedimnents into water and reducing the flow of nutrients,
chemicals and organic pollutants into open water. In addition, wetlands help to reduce the
imnpacts of flood waters and protect upland areas from erosion. Finally wetlands ser-ve as
natural habitat for a variety of fish and wildlife.

There are two types of wetlands: tidal, which are formned and influenced by tides and non-
tidal, which are located adjacent to rivers and streams and in low areas. According to the
National Wetlands Inventory of 1990, there are no tidal wetlands in the study area. This is
due to steep slopes along a portion of the James River as well as the large amount of fill, rip
rap and other man made structures that have been constructed along the river over the years.
There are some scattered non-tidal wetlands. While these non-tidal wetlands may be
significant on one particular site, they are a relatively small portion of the entire study area.

2.  -Flood Plains. Perhaps the most obvious benefit that flood plains provide is the temporary
storage for flood waters. In addition, flood plains filter runoff, slow the velocity of flow
during floods and provide habitat for wildlife. Development in flood plains can work to
reduce the benefits that flood plains offer. The two northern portions of the study area are
entirely covered by the one hundred year flood plain. In the large southern portion of the
study area, the flood plain is reduced, but still covers approximately the entire eastern half
of the land. Fortunately most of the development is west of the flood plain. However, there
are some significant activities that are in the floodplain. One area that the flood plain does
impact is the Port of Richmond. And while the construction of the flood wall has limited
direct impact on the Port, there are some impacts that will be beneficial to the Port. During
*the analysis of the flood plain in the study area by Army Corps of Engineers, discrepancies
were found., This information has been forwarded to the Federal Emergency Management
Agency. Pre liminary informationt indicates that new flood plain maps will be drawn and that
the Port will gain some developable land due to a slight narrowing of the official flood plain.

3 .    Steep Slopes. Steep slopes offer a variety of benefits including wildlife habitat, wilderness
areas and buffers between land uses. Steep slopes can also have detrimental impacts when
improperly managed. Inappropriate development can reduce vegetation, leading to erosion
and water quality problems. The City's Environmental Element defines steep slopes as
areas with a minimum grade of 20%. These are found along the shoreline on the very
northern portion of the study area and in the areas of the sewage treatment plant. In the
southern portion, steep slopes run approximately through the middle of the study area until
one reaches the southern portion, where the steep slopes are closer to the river.
4

4.     The James River. The river itself is an important environmental element of the study area.
Not only is the river a receptor of any pollution that runs off the land; it acts as a conduit to
funnel that pollution downstream. While the river in the study area is essentially on its way
out of the City, there are potential negative impacts on downstream users. These potential
impacts include damage to fish, shell fish and adequate vegetation downstream as well as
potential negative impacts on water users downstream.

Environmental Issues in the Study Area

There is always a conceem when heavy commercial and industrial uses occur in close
proximity to environmrentally sensitive areas. These concerns include both the protection of the
environmental feature from encroachment as well as protection from the results of activities that take
place on the industrial or comnmercial lands.

Areas such as flood plains and wetlands have not always been looked upon as lands that need
to be protected. While our understanding of the role these areas play in the environment has
increased. there are still individuals that look upon these areas as "wasted space." This sometimes
leads to the filling of these areas for development or the dumping of materials that could be
detrimental to the resource and the water quality of the James. The extensive flood plains in the
study- area need to be viewed in light of the important environmental role that they play. The same
statement applies to wetlands.

Another issue related to the study area is the possibility of damage to the environment and
especially water quality through unintentional acts. There are activities in the study area that need
to use materials that are clasified as hazardous, somnetimes on a daily basis. Whenever this type of
material is used, there is the possibility that spills or other types of accidents can happen, no matter
how carefully the material is handled. If not noticed and properly contained, these accidents can
have significant impacts on environmentally sensitive lands.

Two sites in the study area-are on the EPA Comprehensive Liability Informnation Systern or
CERCLIS list. (These are more commonly referred to.as Superfund sites.) This is a list of sites that
are considered to be contaminated with hazardous substances. There are 17 sites in Richmond. The
two in the study area are Deepwater Terminal at 3400 D'Cepwater Terminal.Road and Philip Morris
at 4200 Deepwater Terminal Road. The CERCLIS is cumulative, however and does not take into
account sites which have been investigated and found to have low levels of contaminants or have
undergone cleanup. Once on the CERCLIS list, the site is never removed for any reason. Therefore,
the presence of a site on the CERCLIS list is not necessarily indicative of the level of severity of
contamination on a site.

Another issue that relates to the current uses relates to the point source dischargers. In order
for an industry to discharge water into a river or stream, the industry must meet Federal and State
discharge requirements. In Virginia, industries are required to obtain a Virginia Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System permit. While there are stringent rules covering the treatment of the water that

is discharged, there does exist the possibility of pollutants entering the stormn water runoff or effluent
that flows from these industries into the James. According to the Environmental Element, nine of
the 12 water point source dischargers within the City are in the study area. While some of these
discharges are from activities outside the study area and while these discharges are closely monitored
by the state, the fact that so many of these discharges are in this area provides additional
documentation as to the intensity of uses in this area. These point source discharges include Crown
Petroleum, Citgo Petroleum, the City's Sewage Treatment Plant, Colonial Pipeline, Tidewater
Quarry, Phillip Morris and Koch Fuels.

Part of the attraction of the study area is that it is adjacent to the James River. Besides the.
activity at the Port of Richmond, five other activities have and use river access. These include two
rock quarries, petroleum storage facilities and a scrape iron salvage operation. The latest informnation
available indicates that the existing facilities have the capacity to store slightly more than I18,000,000
gallons of petroleum. Should some type of accident or other activity happen, there is the potential
for some environmnental consequences. In addition, some of these facilities bring petroleum in on
barges. Again, the.chance for a spill exists, no matter how careful the operation is.

Another issue is non-point source or stormn water run-off. This is the rain water that runs off
a lot or street during a rain storm. If land is undeveloped, much of this rain water soaks into the
ground.and enters the ground water and eventually surface water. This soaking action is reduced or
eliminated when buildings are built or land is paved for parking. The City does have an erosion and
sediment control ordinance and the Chesapeake Bay ordinance to address this issue. However, a
considerable portion of the study area is outside the designed Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas.
Therefore there is a concern that untreated storm water carrying pollutants, such as sediments, oils
and other pollutants, may be quietly infiltrating the ground and surface water. To the benefit of the
area, a considerable portion of many developed lots are not covered by buildings or paving, allowing
the rain water to soak directly into the land, reducing runoff. At the same time, the types of land uses
that have been or are presently located in the area could have contributed hazardous materials into
the soils, increasing the potential fotr water pollution.

The purpose of this section is not to cause alarm, but to point out the very real issues that
must be considered in evaluating any industrial area and its potential impact on water quality. WVhile
there do not appear to be any environmen'tal problems in the study area, one must be aware of the
potentials that exist for problems that could have negative impacts on water quality in the James
River.

Development Strengths and Weaknesses

As pointed out in the aforementioned report by Dr. Accordino, a substantial portion of the
City's industrial land is located along the 1-95 corridor. While that report covered an area
substantially larger that the study arma several points discussed in that report also apply to the study
area. Following are some of these comments, modified or added to as appropriate for the study area.
6

Strengths
I.	A substantial part of this area is relatively flat and out of the flood plain.

2.	The area is visible and accessible from 1-95.

3.	The area is served by rail.

4.	Most of the area has adequate water, gas, sewer, electric and telephone services.

5.	All property is zoned M-2, which is the City's most intensive zoning and permits a
variety of commercial and industrial uses.

6.     While the intensity of uses in the area is rather diverse, the area itself is buffered from
incompatible uses by 1-95. As stated before, 1-95 is elevated along the entire western
boundary of the study area.

7.     Access to this area is favorable.  1-95 runs along the western boundary and
Commerce Street provides three access points into the study area.

8.     A considerable portion of the parcels in the study area extend from either Goodes
Road or Deepwater Terminal Road to the river. These sites offer opportunities for
some form of interaction with the river. One must note, however, that little has been
done by existing property owners to take advantage of the river and the views it
affords. Other than the few docks that have been constructed, there is very little
interaction between the existing uses and the river.

Weaknesses

I1.    The study area shares one problem with almost all the industrial areas in the City---
few large tracts. While this is a problem for industries looking for large sites, the
high degree of utilization of land in the study area indicates that some businesses
want smaller tracts.

2.     Whifle there are some substantial buildings in the study area, most are small relative
to the needs of many modern commercial and industrial users.

3 .    While the site is readily vi sible from 1-95, access to individual sites is limited. As
stated previously, there are four points of entry for the entire area. This is especially
a problem for the southern portion of the study area. Related to this is limited
parking at some sites which causes people to have to park off-site. Finally, while
transit lines run in close proximity to the study area the limited number of points of
7

entry reduces the attractiveness of using transit except for those with no other choice.
There is discussion of an additional interstate interchange at Bellemeade Road,
however, design constraints may prohibit the construction of access ramps that could
provide direct entry into the study area.

4.     One issue currently being addressed is conceem over potential hazardous materials.
Many potential purchasers are apt to be concerned over potential liability issues that
can be associated with older industrial areas. The city is currently conducting an
environmnental assessment. This may help allay the conceems of potential developers.

Related Environmental Issues

There are other factors that need to be considered in any analysis of existing and potential
uses for the land in the study area. First, since the study area is adjacent to the James River, the
entire eastern boundary along the river is a Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area (CBPA). While an
extensive discussion of Chesapeake Bay requirements is not possible here, suffice it to say that this
designation does give the City some added tools to use to protect water quality while allowing the
City to work closely with individuals interested in developing or redeveloping in this area.

- .Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas are made up of three components: Resource Protection
Areas (RPAs), Resource Management Areas (RMAs) and Intensely Developed Areas (IDAs). In
delineating RPAs the City has included tidal wetlands, non-tidal wetlands connected by surface flow
and contiguous to tidal wetlands or tributary strVams, tidal shores and a I100-foot buffer adjacent to
any of these features. RMAs consist of land areas contained within the I100-year floodplain, non-
tidal wetlands exceeding one acre and not included in an RPA and a 500-foot wide setback from the
edge of an RPA. In the study area, due to the RPA features along the river, for all intents and
purposes, the RPA can be considered to be the tidal shore and the I100-foot buffer, although there
may be individual cases where the RPA is wider. The RMA in the study area is essentially the flood
plain or a 500-foot setback from the RPA, whichever is greater.

The City has designated the Port of Richmond an Intensely Developed Area (IDA) as part
of it Chesapeake Bay Program. IDAs are areas of existing development and vacant land where
development is concentrated and little of the natural environment remains. IDAs are used to
encourage development where a net improvement in water quality is gained through application of
various water quality performance criteria, particularly storm water quality requirements. One
advantage offered to developers in IDAs is the possibility of the reduction or elimnination of the I100-
*foot buffer requirement normnally associated next to rivers and streams in a CBPA.

Another pertinent issue is the City's recommendation that a system of recreational trails and
bikeways be developed along the entire length of the James River within the City, including the
Study area. This trail system is envisioned as a linear park-like facility that would connect a network
of open spaces. Greenways, with a variety of surfaces, would provide pathways for walking,
jogging, cycling and other forms of recreation, as well as habitat and passageways for wildlife.
8

Finally, the Environmental Element of the existing Master Plan recommends the designation
of an Environmental Protection Area as an overlay to the zoning designation in the study area. As
proposed, this would encompass designated Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas and other
appropriate areas adjacent to CBPAs. This concept fits well with the greenway system discussed
above. The purposes of these EPAs would be to:

1.	protect water quality through the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Program;

2.	protect natural vegetation,

3.	develop continuous, non-motorized public access greenways or linkages; and

4.	protect wildlife habitat, valuable visual open space and other features which are
environmnentally sensitive.

The Environmental Protection Area Overlay offers the City an excellent opportunity to
develop an area that has both appeal to the general public and services to protect environmentally
sensitive features. The issue facing the City is how to best blend together environmental protection,
recreational opportunities and intensive industrial development.

Action Alternatives

After discussions with various City staff members, the City's Master Plan consultants and
others, three action alternatives were developed. These are:
I1.	Take no action, leave as is without any City action.

2.	Major intervention, such as down zoning.

3.	A  new approach which recognizes the importance of industrial and heavy
commercial development, takes advantage of changes in land use activity as it occurs
and recognizes the unique collection of natural resources along the Ja'mes River.

Altemnative I

Taking no action at this time would be the most conservative approach for the City. This
area is part of the large southern employment center concept that is being developed as part of the
new Master Plan. While the area does have sorme weaknesses, the variety of industries that manage
to thrive speaks to the desirability of this area for industrial and heavy commercial uses. To do
nothing, however, could let opportuni'ties escape. Two obvious opportunities are the quarries. While
many years will pass before mining operations cease, now is the time to begin to imnagine what could
happen at these two sites. In addition, a lack of action may lead to environmental problems which
could threaten economnic development in the area as well as surrounding 'neighborhoods.
9

Altemnative 2
Major intervention, such as down zoning to reduce potential threats to water quality is
another alternative. Admittedly, some of the uses could pose threats to water quality. Eliminating
these uses, over time, could lessen potential impacts on the James River and the environmentally
sensitive areas along its banks. However, making any changes that reduce tile ability of the City
to attract a variety of industries could have negative impacts on the City's entire economic base.
Industries have historically located in the study area for several reasons--appropriate zoning, access
to the river, and, in many cases, a need to be in close proximity to other commnercial and industrial
activities in the south part of Richmond.  These syrnbiotic relatio nships are necessary to any
economic base. Furthermore, the elimnination of the industrial and heavy commnercial activities and
the employment opportunities they offer may have a negative impact on nearby residential uses.

Alternative 3

The third alternative is to work with the private sector in the study area to develop a strategy
of private action and limited City intervention that will lead to the protection of sensitive
environmental areas and water quality, while respecting the industrial nature of the study area. At
the same time, this strategy should acknowledge the potential for change in land uses over time.
Thert are uses in the study area, such as the quarries, which will disappear over time. The strategy
must acknowledge this fact and allow for the redevelopment of certain parcels into uses that may or
may not be industrial or heavy comnmercial. Any changes must, however, be to uses that are
compatible or do not threaten this important portion of the City economic base.

Recommendations

Alternative 3 appears to offer the greatest benefit to the activities in the study area, residents
of nlearby neighborhoods and the city as a whole. To implement this strategy, the City must have
a clear, understandable and salable plan for dealing with the study area, now and in the future.

The adopted Environmental Element proposes the designation of an Environmental
Protection Area as an overlay to the Master Plan. This would encompass the designated Chesapeake
Bay Preservation Areas and other appropriate natural areas. This action could:

1I	act to reduce the potential for incompatible and inappropriate development in these areas,

2.	reduce the possibility of the loss of significant environmentally sensitive lands in the areas,
thereby increasing the potential for water quality protection along the river, and

3 .    increase the chances of protecting wildlife habitat and valuable visual open space.

The Environmental Element also proposes the creation of an Environmnental Protection
District overlay to the Zoning Ordinance. This would require a review of all development plans
I10

within designated Environmental Protection Areas. To accomplish these objectives, the City mnust
continue to work with property owners in the study area to explain the importance of protecting
environmentally sensitive lands. This work should focus on such issues as reducing storm water
run-off and striving to reduce the potential for environmental accidents as well as increasing the City
and the private sector's ability to deal with such incidents.

The City may want to go a step further if it is to address the issue of enhanced access. The
City should investigate the use of easements as a means of environmental protection. Using
easements would allow property owners to retain ownership, but could reduce or perhaps eliminate
the potential uses for which the property could be used. Easements could be strictly open space,
easements, precluding development, or be developed in a manner that allows some types of use
while retaining and protecting the natural environment. Tax incentives could be offered to property
owners who voluntarily give up some or all of the development rights on their property. Through
easements and other non-fee transfer arrangements, a system of traits could be developed that
minimized that amount of land taken off of the tax rolls and the City's maintenance exposure.

This concept could lead to a trail system that begins at the flood wall and runs as far south
as the Port. The trail system could be constructed to tie into other recreational opportunities along
the way. One trail could lead to Ancarrow's Landing, where bank fishing and perhaps other
recreational opportunities could be offered. Another opportunity is immediately north of the Port
where an observation deck could be built to allow observation of Port activities.

Opening this land to pedestrian and bicycle access would have several benefits. The land
adjacent to the river is not now visible to the public from within the City. Allowing access would
increase the awareness of the public and the City as to what is happening in the area between the
river and these industries. Second, this would give many city residents access to the river along this
portion of the James, especially residents who live south of the river.

Reuse of the quanry sites could also be examined as part of this strategy. At present, RRPDC
staff is not aware of any specific plans for the reuse of these sites. Based upon other such sites, one
might speculate that they will be left as very deep lakes. (The projected depth of one quarry is 450
feet.) A variety of recreational uses could be considered for these sites.

The future of this area could be a continuation of what is there now. Or a new development
pattern could be encouraged. A development pattern that continues industrial and heavy commercial
uses, but also integrates a variety of compatible land uses and recreational features that benefit a
larger segment of the City's population. To reach this potential, however, work must begin now
to get buy-in on a new development concept from existing land owners. And to do this, the concept
must demonstrate clearly saleable benefits to these existing land owners to be implemented. Once
this is done, exciting things not now imaginable may begin to happen.
II