342 replies to this topic

[wrldcoupe4]

Whoops! false alarm, best I can tell.... The hotel is actually currently being used for the shooting of Evan Almighty, the sequel to Bruce Almighty. Filming should last another 2 weeks or so. Steve Carrell (sp) and Morgan Freeman are in town... In fact, Carrell sprained his ankle while mingling with sheep in the street at 9th and main st's.

[TBurban]

wrldcoupe4, on May 14 2006, 11:49 PM, said:

Whoops! false alarm, best I can tell.... The hotel is actually currently being used for the shooting of Evan Almighty, the sequel to Bruce Almighty. Filming should last another 2 weeks or so. Steve Carrell (sp) and Morgan Freeman are in town... In fact, Carrell sprained his ankle while mingling with sheep in the street at 9th and main st's.

Haha, I saw them filming when I was downtown!  They had closed off a block somewhere around the Bank of America Building.  There were business people (probably minor actors) that just kept walking across the street and in between the cars they had setup.  Looked like they were filming some type of traffic scene.  Pretty cool!

Edited by TBurban, 15 May 2006 - 08:00 AM.

[burt]

Is it true that reconstruction of the John Marshall was called off because on subsequent inspections it was determined that the building had fallen into such decay that total gutting would be required?

Well, here's my suggestion - again!

UofR and VCU, get together, purchase the relic and do a total update and redesign.  Then move UofR's T. C. Williams Law School and applicable VCU schools into the massive structure.  The huge ballroom, convention hall and other large meeting rooms would seem to me ideal for academic use.  Imagine attending classes/lectures, etc. in a converted roof garden.  And there is plenty of residential space to house students, professors and visitors.

And it is only about two and a half blocks from the new Federal Court House and close to Government offices and Medical/Biotech facilities.

Those who wish to save Murphy's Hotel should find another use for it, because no matter how much reconstruction is done on that site, it could not hold a candle to John Marshall's potential.

And, oh yes - the rooftop sign would have to stay and be illuminated.

Edited by burt, 05 June 2006 - 08:47 AM.

[wrldcoupe4]

burt, on Jun 5 2006, 10:41 AM, said:

Is it true that reconstruction of the John Marshall was called off because on subsequent inspections it was determined that the building had fallen into such decay that total gutting would be required?

Burt, where'd you hear that?

[burt]

wrldcoupe4, on Jun 5 2006, 02:30 PM, said:

Burt, where'd you hear that?

I thought I read it here, but I'm absolutely positive I DID NOT make it up.  

Maybe it was in a Style or RTD article or on RCW.

Anyway, what do you think about my idea for the old hotel?  Don't you think it has merrit?

[frankliner]

As a UR student I definitely wouldnt mind living in the John Marshall!!! Good idea Burt, now if only the Trustees would use some of that $1.3 billion endowment and reassert UR's committment to this city!

[wrldcoupe4]

burt, on Jun 5 2006, 02:50 PM, said:

I thought I read it here, but I'm absolutely positive I DID NOT make it up.  

Maybe it was in a Style or RTD article or on RCW.

Anyway, what do you think about my idea for the old hotel?  Don't you think it has merrit?

I was aware that Camper was struggling to get his financing in place for the project. My most recent recollection is that all of the hallways would be kept in tact, including many of the old hotel doors (even though most wouldn't be able to open). I'll try to figure out what's going on there...

[burt]

frankliner, on Jun 5 2006, 04:37 PM, said:

As a UR student I definitely wouldnt mind living in the John Marshall!!! Good idea Burt, now if only the Trustees would use some of that $1.3 billion endowment and reassert UR's committment to this city!

Hiya Frankliner and welcome.

If the two Universities are serious about seeking a downtown campus to merge their respective Law and Medical schools, and if they are concerned about old classic downtown architecture, resurrection of The John Marshall makes a lot of sense to me.

[burt]

wrldcoupe4, on Jun 5 2006, 04:51 PM, said:

I was aware that Camper was struggling to get his financing in place for the project. My most recent recollection is that all of the hallways would be kept in tact, including many of the old hotel doors (even though most wouldn't be able to open). I'll try to figure out what's going on there...

That business about the hallways and room doors is old hat.  

The beyond-the-pale decay was reported recently - since I returned home from hospital.  Sorry I can't locate the source.

Edited by burt, 05 June 2006 - 03:14 PM.

[jonbeattie]

wrldcoupe4, on Jun 5 2006, 02:30 PM, said:

Burt, where'd you hear that?

Hey all,
Burt,
Last time I was through there to snoop I came away with the thoughs that what the developer wanted to do would certainly require gutting.  I read somewhere that the Lobby would be restored and the Ballrooms. But the majority of the place would be condo's with retail spaces available street level.  I still think that the city should have done something to help this   building before the Miller & Rhoades place, seems to me that M&R would be right across the street from the Marriott and they could have done something with that area ,  course just not the Market place of old.

On the Murphy hotel,  I still the the historical peeps were good about resisting the leveling of the item. Lots of history and charm.  Ok so it needs work after all theses year right ?  Might I mention that New is not always built the best ( or at least in this town ) Look at the 30 year old ( I think ) city hall that is falling apart.  

All of us of growing age need attention,  why wouldn't the buildings.

[jonbeattie]

jonbeattie, on Jun 6 2006, 08:44 PM, said:

Hey all,
Burt,
Last time I was through there to snoop I came away with the thoughs that what the developer wanted to do

BTW  Mayor Wilders take on this that it was a great project!  But we should remember that it was was a private project and the city was out of it.

The scuttle but from other scuttlebutters (sp) in the city we talked to was that in the begining Granger was trying to hold out for a Big developer to snag it from him so he could get $$ from the turnover. Then the developer could try to get city help,  Which doesn't seem to be happening either.

Personally I'm sad as the building is not only one of the cities markers but the inside was really quite nice in its day.  Many other cities seem to find this an attraction to history,  ours seems to have trouble with that..

[burt]

Well, Jon.  Would you rather see the Law School in a reconstructed beautiful building like the John Marshall or in the falling-apart Murphy which has a wonderful facade but crappy interior that would not provide nearly the space or configurations as the JM?

And forget discussion of what could have been with Millan Rhoads.  That's over and done with.

Come to think of it, your building would convert nicely to a Law/Biotech academic space.

[frankliner]

I think that the Murphy Hotel actually offers a good floorplan for a traditional dorm footprint (of course with alot renovation) but not the possibilities for classroom space that the John Marshall would have. However, it was my understanding that the building would primarily be used as a dorm and not as classroom space for people working at the new Federal Courthouse (directly across the street from the Murphy). One other thing about the Murphy, I think it's architectural style matches UR's campus well and would provide an interesting link in that respect.I think both locations have their pluses and minuses but the John Marshall would definitely be more impressive as a University-affiliated facility.

[burt]

frankliner, on Jun 7 2006, 12:48 PM, said:

I think that the Murphy Hotel actually offers a good floorplan for a traditional dorm footprint (of course with alot renovation) but not the possibilities for classroom space that the John Marshall would have. However, it was my understanding that the building would primarily be used as a dorm and not as classroom space for people working at the new Federal Courthouse (directly across the street from the Murphy). One other thing about the Murphy, I think it's architectural style matches UR's campus well and would provide an interesting link in that respect.I think both locations have their pluses and minuses but the John Marshall would definitely be more impressive as a University-affiliated facility.

And, if I may say so Frankliner, the JM's floorplan for a traditional dorm footprint far exceeds what old Murphy's could offer.  I like the old hotel's exterior but I cannot connect it in my mind with UofR's Tudor style.

Viva John Marshall!

[jonbeattie]

burt, on Jun 5 2006, 10:41 AM, said:

Is it true that reconstruction of the John Marshall was called off because on subsequent inspections it was determined that the building had fallen into such decay that total gutting would be required?

Well, here's my suggestion - again!

UofR and VCU, get together, purchase the relic and do a total update and redesign.  Then move UofR's T. C. Williams Law School and applicable VCU schools into the massive structure.  The huge ballroom, convention hall and other large meeting rooms would seem to me ideal for academic use.  Imagine attending classes/lectures, etc. in a converted roof garden.  And there is plenty of residential space to house students, professors and visitors.

And it is only about two and a half blocks from the new Federal Court House and close to Government offices and Medical/Biotech facilities.

Those who wish to save Murphy's Hotel should find another use for it, because no matter how much reconstruction is done on that site, it could not hold a candle to John Marshall's potential.

And, oh yes - the rooftop sign would have to stay and be illuminated.

Yes to the Roof Sign and hmmm  I'm just not sure of the Roof Top garden.  Are you speaking of the Starlight Ballroom on the Top most floor .  That would and certainly could be a lecture hall of sorts but the cislings are no where near high enough to make it an auditorium stlye class.  

Please correct me if I am wrong you guys but whats the draw back of the Murphy H?  The papers here stated that the city or state wanted to bulldoze the place because to upgrade it would cost more than a new building.  that said I refer back to Buildings in the city that are / have been successful in the budgeting the initial construction only a few years later in the life of the building they need overhauls.  The guts of the buildings always need something,  thats understood as rentee's need change.  But overhauls on the exterior due to city neglect is not a reason to me to level a building with good bones.  

On the other side of the coin as buildings go.  Love the new renderings of the towers that are planned and I think that they will add flair and coexist well with Richmond's current stuff.

I will probably be made wrong and certainly hope I am when its complete but, I think the Marshall would have outdone the new Miller & Rhoads hotel.  Current hotels are great and the entrance are fabulous ,  then you roll down the same hallways in every direction, Go in the Ballroom, Grand or not,  and find Retractable walls drop ceilings ect very ho hum in the ballroom worlds.  

I just simple want to will the Marshall to the hotel it can be      

Ps The new Marriott Lobby is nice,  Very regal very new age,  but the rooms and other ammenities lack what a ballroom should be,  course thats my opinion......

[frankliner]

The Murphy, in terms of large spaces on the bottom floors, does not have the capacity that the Marshall does (from what I have seen, I've gotten into the buildings but it's kinda hard nowadays). It also happens to not be as ornate (alot has been taken off during the state's wonderful tenure there including some nice balconies). However, the state has NOT properly explored the possibilities for private investment and gauging private interest in the Murphy. I think that is the only arguement that can possibly save it at this stage, opening the hotel to the possibilities of the market before making a decision (demolition) that will be final.

That being said, I still think the Murphy is a totally suitable location for the UR law location and I hope that they are still exploring these options (I had heard rumors both ways).

[burt]

The Murphy SITE, yes, but not the building, IMO.  

But, to each his own.

If an enterprising and risk-taking entrepreneur wishes to purchase Murphy's and convert it to other uses, more power to him/her.  But I hope he/she does a full inspection of its crumbling and buckling walls before committing millions of rehabilitation bucks.

[frankliner]

burt- I agree with you that it would be hard to rehabilitate the structure, there are some serious problems there. However I do not think it is past the point of no return yet and (more importantly) the state should at least see if there is private investment interest before making the decision to demolish. I think this is an important principle for historic structures.

[burt]

frankliner, on Jun 8 2006, 02:33 PM, said:

burt- I agree with you that it would be hard to rehabilitate the structure, there are some serious problems there. However I do not think it is past the point of no return yet and (more importantly) the state should at least see if there is private investment interest before making the decision to demolish. I think this is an important principle for historic structures.

Yes, Frankliner, but this has been in the public eye for months if not years.  Has any developer that you are aware of made a serious overture to purchase the building from the state?

The construction protection shed has surrounded the building for at least five years.  Plywood, or what could visually pass for same, has blocked out windows.  Some of the exterior brick walls are litterally buckling.   It's a mess, and I'm not saying that the State's mis-use and inattention has not contributed to its present condition.  I simply aver that Murphy's is not the answer to UR's needs.  Howsomever, I do like the exterior but care little for its old lobby and its very ordinary sleeping rooms.  (Look at old Richmond Hotel's lobby for style).

I would be very surprised if a developer were to come forward with a serious proposal for the structure.

[Shakman]

Once again, all is quite at the John Marshall.  Seeing a large building sitting empty in Downtown is sickening.