Jump to content

majors2410

Members
  • Content Count

    63
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

7 Neutral

About majors2410

  • Rank
    Unincorporated Area
  1. First off there is no plan for commuter rail. Virginia Railway Express is commuter rail. Commuter rail would be trains from Ashland, Petersburg etc bringing passengers into the city. The only rail planned in the future is INTRAcity (amtrack. Businesses and hotels are downtown why would you drop passengers off here. This plan was all wrong right from the statement that downtown is moving to the boulevard. This area is experiencing the development it is because of the availablility of ugly surface parking. Around 90,000 people work downtown. That's not going to change. The plan in Richmond is for BRT to serve commuters into the city.
  2. I think this is another example of the strong suburban bias that still exists in the Richmond area. Its the same mindset that has people wanting more parking downtown when downtown has way too many parking lots now. If the county's grow as much as these projections show there will be total grid lock in the built up areas. That will cause even more people to move to the City. That can't pave their way out of what they continue to build out there and they are not even looking at public transportation.
  3. How about building a brewery in the heart of Richmond on Broad St downtown in the commercial district? Just one near all the entertainment venues would be great.
  4. If the proposal had been to tear down brick buildings to build this I would have been completely against the proposal. But, very little would be torn down to accomplish much needed development. People need to walk around there and actually see how much vacant land is there. I was stunned by the amount of destruction the first time I walked it in along time. Total destruction of a neighborhood. Also, its one thing to be against the development but to constantly suggest that the Mayor is proposing this as a way to make money for himself is beyond belief and shows what kind of people are opposing it. We should thank developers that want to invest in downtown. They could be doing the easy thing and build in short dump.
  5. So the wackos are now saying all that ugly asphalt is historic. Never heard of a historic parking lot before.
  6. The developers of this project should be thanked for investing their capital in downtown Richmond. There is nothing bad about this project. There needs to be a lot more traffic downtown. Its the central business district. If you don't like congestion move.
  7. The folks on that hill are nimbys and they are ruining downtown Richmond's redevelopment. This looks like a great project. Some residential mid-rises are really needed downtown.
  8. I think it would be better if BRT went to Chimborazo Park anyway. These comments are all the more reason. Serve a city neighborhood. Hell with anything in selfish henrico.
  9. Nice to get rid of another one of the worst surface parking lots downtown. This will be great for the area.
  10. If the ball park is in a pedestrian accessible area many people walk bike or take transit to the ball park. It is all about where the park is located. In the bottom at least 25% to 30% of the trips will be made by walk, bike or transit. No one walks to a game at the diamond because you can't. Thinking that no one will walk is a big part of the problem. The games are very popular. People will go to the games.
  11. Shockoe bottom still needs something on all that ugly asphalt. I don't see anyone building anything else there. Everybody is missing the big picture here. A stadium downtown is accessible to pedestrians, bicycles and by city bus. The boulevard site is accessible only to cars. No one ever walks to a game at the diamond. Huge deference that all the proponents of the Diamond seem to miss. Less pollution and traffic in the bottom. The boulevard is better for the counties and their to selfish to help pay for it.
  12. Its been many years since Richmond has been on any high crime lists. Its much safer to live in the city than it is to drive a vehicle in the grid locked suburbs. People like you keep perpetuating a completely inaccurate perception.
  13. So is that Richmond on the James pdf a study or an actual development proposal? I think those pacels have different ownership. Developing that area is critical to having a viable river front. Originally Rocketts showed a walk along the river with restaurants and shops but its never happened. Some sort of river walk with commercial is desperately needed in this area..
  14. The counties are at the problem not the city. All the tax base is in the counties and they wont share at all.
  15. This will be an exansion of the existing structure. The time frame in the article is correct. I believe the plan is to build the expansion in the area between the existing library and Park Ave.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.