6 Highrise Towers for Portsmouth Waterfront!
#181
Posted 01 November 2006 - 01:38 PM
#183
Posted 19 February 2007 - 07:32 PM
#185
Posted 21 February 2007 - 09:09 AM
I'd love to see something exciting come of the old Portside area. I thought one of Portsmouth's biggest mistakes was getting rid of that entertainment facility years ago and "redirecting attention" to High Street Landing. The problem with High Street Landing is that, while visitors arriving there are close to the main street of Olde Towne, the first couple of blocks are just parking lots and ugliness. Visitors wonder, "am I lost?" "is there really anything worth walking down this street for?" If attention is to be focused at High Street, make it an active, exciting, and inviting place! What Portside did well was that it greeted visitors right away and was a great hangout for locals. Friday evening happy hours were always lots of fun as people sat outside drinking beer, chatting and laughing. Always a great start to the weekend.
#186
Posted 14 April 2007 - 11:41 AM
#188
Posted 24 April 2007 - 04:15 AM
Quote
Two years later, city officials have scrapped development work on the south side - save for plans to build a Circuit Court - and have instead turned their attention to the hotel at the northernmost point of downtown.
Quote
#189
Posted 24 April 2007 - 05:18 AM
vdogg, on Apr 24 2007, 05:15 AM, said:
This is actually not very good news. This is only one piece of property. The article said that plans for the property that had already had recieved proposals was shelved. And that the property was going to be used for the circuit court building. Exactly what Gindroz warned against.
#190
Posted 24 April 2007 - 06:12 AM
urbanfan, on Apr 24 2007, 07:18 AM, said:
I fail to see how a couple hundred million dollars worth of development in downtown is not good news. If you read through the article, there are a lot of valid reasons why the south side property was put on hold as well as the north pier being shelved for now.
Those being:
Quote
City leaders spent much of 2006 weighing proposals for the site. A developer was chosen but no agreement was ever reached, Lynch said.
Initial estimates found that it would be too expensive to provide infrastructure such as parking at the property, which juts out into the Elizabeth River, said city engineer Richard Hartman. There also was some concern about whether the pier could support a high-rise building and how much foundation work would need to be done, he added.
Taken into context, the fact that 3 developers have been chosen to develop any of the Portsmouth waterfront is very good news.
And the property you are referring to had only received 1 proposal. The Holiday in site is the one that has received several. They are simply going with the more economically viable location.
#191
Posted 24 April 2007 - 06:20 AM
Quote
The publicly-owned property was the cheapest and easiest option for locating the court, Councilman Doug Smith told residents last week. Lynch added that his department is marketing the North Pier site with hopes that another company will submit a redevelopment plan.
"That doesn't mean it won't happen in the future," Heretick said. "But given the realities facing us right now, we needed to go to the Holiday Inn site."
The circuit court is going on a 2.5 acre lot across from city hall, not the north pier site itself.
#192
Posted 24 April 2007 - 07:40 AM
vdogg, on Apr 24 2007, 07:20 AM, said:
The circuit court is going on a 2.5 acre lot across from city hall, not the north pier site itself.
Yes, we've gone from 6 high rise towers, which you might as well shelve all that. To reinventing a piece of property that yes is in a state of disrepair. There are three proposals, but only to redevelop this one site. I fail to see how this is good news in any form. There is a reason Gindroz gave the city a plan. That is to follow through with it. Norfolk did and with great success. Not to mention that it may have been expensive to develop the previous lot that was empty. But how much more expensive do you think it's going to be to have to demolish the existing buildings, grade, drive piles and then we all know that there is going to be lots of money asked for from the city which they don't have to provide help with the parking structure and street, drainage improvements. I don't see any good from this. All I can say is I hope they have some great business lined up to fill the space, otherwise this thing could be a disaster.
#193
Posted 24 April 2007 - 09:24 AM
#194
Posted 24 April 2007 - 02:40 PM
#195
Posted 24 April 2007 - 03:10 PM
vdogg, on Apr 24 2007, 03:40 PM, said:
I will also sound unenthusiastic as I'm about to run off to dinner then class in a bit (
#196
Posted 24 April 2007 - 03:26 PM













