Libbie Mill / Westwood

[plain]

8 minutes ago, I miss RVA said:

There honestly could be a silver lining, given that the city's portion of this property (which is what - roughly the 3/4 acre portion, no?) is zoned TOD-1. Perhaps a developer could build ONLY on the city portion - and pack 340 units into a 12-story apartment building on Broad Street. Mind you - I highly doubt the Motley folks would want to break up the parcel - but then again, who know - given what's happened, perhaps a developer who wants to build only on the city portion could convince them to split the property out and purchase only the part in the city.

It's ridiculous, though, that it would have to come to this - that the city/county can't cooperate and work together in 2023.

This, in my opinion, is actually a good way of looking at this situation. Think about it: if the county wants to play it like that, then the city could say ok, we'll play it like this. This could definitely play a role in creating a mid-to-highrise wall along that section of Broad, to the point where someone driving down the strip doesn't even notice the empty space behind such development. Split the parcel up, and let a developer with keen sense have at it with the sliver available to them inside the city limits.

 

While there's plenty of arguments that could be said against VA's Independent City structure, there's some good to it, believe it or not... Do you really think Richmond would be truly unique in its build and character if we were part of one of the counties? I think even more of the city would look like the suburbs, except with streetlights. 

 

The state law doesn't have to define how jurisdictions work with each other. Richmond and Henrico, at least from the outside looking in, seemed to work good together on Rockett's Landing, why not at this place?

[RVABizSenseMike]

20 hours ago, wrldcoupe4 said:

Too bad they didn’t get a quote from the county in the article.  Would like to hear their side of the story since this isn’t the best look for them. 

We were hoping to but the timing didn't work out. It's my understanding (but I emphasize that this is not RBS' official reporting) that the city utility line that's there is so small that the new development would have required new/more utility lines anyway. It's my understanding that once upon a time Motley's had a small building on that site that had minimal utility demands. I'm told that line was built to support one toilet/sink, not the 300+ that the new development would have required. 

The big thing here is that the majority of the project's land would have sat in Henrico, so the county has the rights to provide utilities, emergency services, schools, etc.. I believe this agreement between the city and county -- that whichever municipality hosts the majority of a project's acreage gets rights to provide its services -- dates back decades. 

Again, that's just what I've been told by smart folks who are familiar with how this stuff works. Furthermore, word on the street is this site on West Broad is getting loads of interest despite the utility situation. 

[I miss RVA]

2 hours ago, plain said:

1 & 1b.) Do you really think Richmond would be truly unique in its build and character if we were part of one of the counties?

1a. & 1b.) I think even more of the city would look like the suburbs, except with streetlights. 

2.) The state law doesn't have to define how jurisdictions work with each other. Richmond and Henrico, at least from the outside looking in, seemed to work good together on Rockett's Landing, why not at this place?

1.) Yes - I do.

Richmond would still have its iconic legacy neighborhoods with all their uniqueness if it still held the county seat of Henrico. There would have been no difference. You're speaking to the aesthetics of neighborhoods that were developed in a timeframe that spans from before the General Assembly changed the Commonwealth's paradigm of local governance for cities and states in 1871 until about the 1930s -- a span of 60 years forward from the time the independent city status went into effect. There would have been no difference.

1.a) To your assertion of the city looking like the suburbs: no, that wouldn't have happened, given the era in which suburbanization took place and how it came to pass. The city's legacy neighborhoods long since established. The end of World War II (and the return of millions of G.I.'s from overseas), the GI Bill, and the development of the interstate highway system in the 50s had far greater impact on suburban development in legacy cities. Keep in mind, Richmond is built like a traditional city of the Northeast, Rust Belt of Upper Midwest. It's NOT built like the modern southern "boomtowns" of the 1960s-and-forward. Connecting the county's seat of government to the city would not have changed the aesthetics of how RVA was developed a century ago.

1.b) You're speaking strictly to aesthetics. My reference of the failure of the independent city/county model is more directed toward function. Look at cities like Philadelphia, Boston, Pittsburgh... the county seats are all located within the city. There's no argument or disagreement about whether a specific jurisdiction (city or county) gets a certain development. A big project in downtown Boston benefits both the city of Boston AND Suffolk County - for which the traditional county seat is located in Boston. Chicago is part of Cook County. Something built in Chicago benefits both the city specifically and Cook county in general.

See where I'm coming from?

2.)  agreed that there should be nothing holding the city and counties back from working with each other. Rockett's is an excellent example.

Unfortunately, where state law comes in is that the current model artificially creates a "zero-sum game" mentality where one jurisdiction sees no direct, actualized "benefit" from something that benefits a neighboring jurisdiction. As applied to cities vs suburban counties, it's a set-up that leads to hyper competition and reluctance if not outright reticence to cooperation. Again - if Henrico's county seat were in the city of Richmond, as it was until 1871, there's be no issue at all, other than perhaps whether or not the city imposed additional fees, taxes, etc., on a property built within the city limits vs just across the border outside the city limits - and even then, a portion of those additional monies would benefit the county, if not directly then at least indirectly. We see this in Chicago all the time, with the city adding additional taxes or fees on certain services (restaurant, hotel, etc taxes in the city are add-ons that are not necessarily part of the mix in Cook County outside of the city - but there is an indirect benefit to Cook County). This same example, applied to Richmond under the independent city/county model, would keep ALL of additional money from added taxes and fees in the city - and the county sees no benefit.

 

Edited February 10, 2023 by I miss RVA

[Brent114]

We can’t know what Richmond would be like had it been part of Henrico.  I will say that I’ve always believed that Richmond languishing in the 70’s and 80’s is probably the best thing that could have happened to the city for it to retain what “old world” charm the city had (and has). 
 

With hundreds of square miles in which scared white people could hide, the downtown area could have been razed and rebuilt…like just about everywhere else at the time.  Richmond was too small and too broke to try massive rebuilding but with  the larger population and tax base from the county/city combined it may have.  They tried to level the Fan.  With more money and political power they may have been successful. 

Edited February 11, 2023 by Brent114

[upzoningisgood]

Weird thing about the Alliance deal is that the seller didn’t accept a retrade. I would bet hard money Alliance tried to get the land cost renegotiated after the utility thing came up and the seller said no. What I don’t get is why the seller thinks they could get better money for their land in this market. 
 

Oh well.

[I miss RVA]

18 hours ago, Brent114 said:

They tried to level the Fan.  With more money and political power they may have been successful. 

Citation needed!!! 

"They" WHO? WHO tried to level the Fan and WHEN?  WHERE specifically and HOW? With WHAT proposals?

I'm sorry @Brent114-- you need to bring SOMETHING to back this one up, otherwise such a broad-brush assertion is completely incorrect. And I'm not talking about a single project for an apartment building that would have knocked down a couple of old buildings on the edge of the Fan - that's still a possibility today depending on where. Are you talking about routing the interstate highway? Or the downtown expressway?  If that's the case, then you might be correct to a point. I recall reading about some of the history of routing I-64 and there had been discussions of a more southerly route - that would have carried the highway through Chesterfield and not Henrico and would have followed a path into the city similar to the Powhite Parkway and Downtown Expressway. Whether or not the routing would have been such that it would have razed the entire Fan to the ground would need to be researched - I can't comment entirely on that. Suffice it to say, the Downtown Expressway did MORE than enough damage to Randolph and carved a trench between Byrd Park and the southern portion of the Fan. 

Mind you I might be miles off base - but I don't recall any city proposals or programs - even under "urban renewal" - that would have demolished the Fan writ large. That I can recall, that was never in the city's playbook. Again, I might be wrong.

C'mon man - don't go down this kind of rabbit hole without facts.

Now - what the Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority DID DO was to COMPLETELY OBLITERATE FULTON in 1970 in under the auspices of the "urban renewal" movement - a terrible initiative that did as much to destroy central cities in the '60s and '70s as the routing of the interstate highways did in the '50s and '60s - destroying historically black neighborhoods in countless cities across this country. It's not enough that the highways plowed through legacy neighborhoods of POC. Urban renewal in the eyes of many seemed like an all-out effort to finish the job.

What happened to Fulton was an outrage and an abomination. There is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON ON THIS EARTH that Fulton could not - and should not - have been saved and restored, and those families who lived there NOT be displaced. I remember it happening and even though I was just a little kid at the time, I could not understand how or why it happened and was deeply saddened and very upset about it, even though at the time I was too young to appreciate the impact. I simply felt (maybe "knew" in the back of my mind) that it was WRONG what was happening. My father was devastated by it - blamed the city - blamed a lot of things, and in retrospect, rightly so. When I grew up, studied it and came to understand fully what had happened, I also was outraged by what I learned and remain so to this day.

What has made my blood boil even more about this: the very preservationists who were willing to just about lay down in front of city asphalt crews in protest to prevent the city from paving over the "cobblestones" (actually, they are "paving bricks") along Monument Avenue as part of Richmond's obsessive historic preservation movement were NOWHERE TO BE FOUND in 1970 to stand in the way of wrecking balls knocking down block after block after block after block of houses and apartments on Denny Street, or on 37th and 1/2 Street or State Street - and blocks upon blocks of storefronts on Williamsburg Avenue or on Fulton Street. There was nothing but the sound of CRICKETS coming from Richmond's historic "preservation" community when the city's OLDEST -- and arguably FIRST -- NEIGHBORHOOD was ostensibly plowed soup to nuts -- IN ITS ENTIRETY -- into the James River. 

The RRHA then turned around during the '80s and plowed Randolph under. What the Downtown Expressway didn't tear out, the city wrecking ball did. Again - under the auspices of "urban renewal". 

It is utterly disgusting. What happened to the people of Fulton and everyone in that community - all of her families, all of her institutions... two schools, 11 (yes ELEVEN!) churches... scores of businesses... is something for which (on a personal level) I have NEVER forgiven the city of Richmond, even though I don't have a stake in the game. Wrong is wrong. Period.

Edited February 11, 2023 by I miss RVA

[plain]

8 minutes ago, I miss RVA said:

Citation needed!!! 

"They" WHO? WHO tried to level the Fan and WHEN?  WHERE specifically and HOW? With WHAT proposals?

I'm sorry @Brent114-- you need to bring proof on this one. Unless you can cite this chapter and verse, that assertion is completely incorrect. And I'm not talking about a single project for an apartment building that would have knocked down a couple of old buildings on the edge of the Fan - that's still a possibility today depending on where. Are you talking about routing the interstate highway? Or the downtown expressway? 

C'mon man - don't go down this kind of rabbit hole without facts.

This actually did happen, but it was the city's leadership at the time that was leading the charge on this. And I'm pretty sure they were influenced by trends going on around the state and elsewhere (see below), as well as pure controversy. And this event is what led to The Fan and other neighborhoods to finally being protected. There are pictures online of both The Fan and the Museum District beginning to decline in the late 60's.

 

 

There is a reason I said what I said upthread, let me break it all down:

 

Richmond's suburbs, the way we know them today, did not develop in the earlier part of the 20th century. The ones that did was annexed by the city, also early in the 20th century (of course I'm taking about Highland Park, Bellevue, the former city of Manchester,  Westover Hills, etc). Those type of places were actually built like a "city".. an older grid style community, just less dense. When cities to our south/southwest began taking over land from their surrounding areas, some of which creating city/county governments altogether, those suburbs were of the post WW II variety: completely car oriented, no grid, no sidewalks, no mass transit, no walkability, no "true neighborhood". Cul-de-sacs, one way in/out. Virginia's suburbs of that period were/are no different.

 

If Richmond would've been a part of a Virginia county, especially during the 60's-90's, there's no doubt in my mind that the density wouldn't be there, its character would be diminished, and it would be a lot more cookie cutter. Look at Hampton Roads, and this includes Norfolk (I'm not dissing any of those cities, just saying this for context). Richmond was indeed built and functions like cities to the northeast, a look back at history indeed reveals this. Row homes, close to the curb homes, at least 2-story homes for the most part... until around 1970, this was most of the city. And not just downtown. The only other city in the state that could compare is Alexandria.

 

I was born in NJ and lived much of my life in VA (including Hampton Roads). I say this to say that there's a difference between northern suburbs and southern ones (or cities for that matter). The way that many places across the state just suburbanized in the latter half of the 20th century, I'm kinda glad Richmond at least stuck to it's urban nature, at least for the most part (we all know the bullcrap that went down with several neighborhoods).

[I miss RVA]

2 hours ago, plain said:

This actually did happen, but it was the city's leadership at the time that was leading the charge on this. And I'm pretty sure they were influenced by trends going on around the state and elsewhere (see below), as well as pure controversy. And this event is what led to The Fan and other neighborhoods to finally being protected. There are pictures online of both The Fan and the Museum District beginning to decline in the late 60's.

 

 

There is a reason I said what I said upthread, let me break it all down:

 

Richmond's suburbs, the way we know them today, did not develop in the earlier part of the 20th century. The ones that did was annexed by the city, also early in the 20th century (of course I'm taking about Highland Park, Bellevue, the former city of Manchester,  Westover Hills, etc). Those type of places were actually built like a "city".. an older grid style community, just less dense. When cities to our south/southwest began taking over land from their surrounding areas, some of which creating city/county governments altogether, those suburbs were of the post WW II variety: completely car oriented, no grid, no sidewalks, no mass transit, no walkability, no "true neighborhood". Cul-de-sacs, one way in/out. Virginia's suburbs of that period were/are no different.

 

If Richmond would've been a part of a Virginia county, especially during the 60's-90's, there's no doubt in my mind that the density wouldn't be there, its character would be diminished, and it would be a lot more cookie cutter. Look at Hampton Roads, and this includes Norfolk (I'm not dissing any of those cities, just saying this for context). Richmond was indeed built and functions like cities to the northeast, a look back at history indeed reveals this. Row homes, close to the curb homes, at least 2-story homes for the most part... until around 1970, this was most of the city. And not just downtown. The only other city in the state that could compare is Alexandria.

 

I was born in NJ and lived much of my life in VA (including Hampton Roads). I say this to say that there's a difference between northern suburbs and southern ones (or cities for that matter). The way that many places across the state just suburbanized in the latter half of the 20th century, I'm kinda glad Richmond at least stuck to it's urban nature, at least for the most part (we all know the bullcrap that went down with several neighborhoods).

Thanks for corroborating this. For the sake of clarity, can you elaborate further on specifically what the plan was that would have leveled the Fan?

For having grown up in Richmond in the 60s & 70s, I'm a tad surprised i  was never aware that the CITY itself was thinking of razing the Fan - that's not something I ever knew was even a possiblity - and - I've had a lot of books about Richmond in my home library for decades and I frankly don't ever remember reading about this. I'll have to do some research because I'd really like to know specifics.

Good analysis on the form of development - and good encapsulation of the history of how every growing "suburb" ended up annexed and part of the city - and, of course, Richmond and Manchester merged (I can't recall if that was Manchester's concession to ward off being annexed or how that came about). Where I grew up was in the final - 1970 - portion to be annexed.

Regarding density - from the '60s to the '90s, had Richmond been part of either county (Chesterfield and Henrico) - you're probably right - the density would not have been there. However, the stretch of time from before 1871 to the 1960s, I don't think there would be much if any difference in how the city would have developed - given that all of those new developments WERE part of the counties only to be annexed by the city.

[plain]

It wasn't going to be a full scale razing of the entire neighborhood, just demolition of homes that fell into "disrepair" (like they deemed Fulton Bottom in its entirety and most of Randolph and Jackson Ward). I'm pretty sure there would've been more empty lots around had this happened.

[I miss RVA]

On 2/11/2023 at 11:19 AM, plain said:

It wasn't going to be a full scale razing of the entire neighborhood, just demolition of homes that fell into "disrepair" (like they deemed Fulton Bottom in its entirety and most of Randolph and Jackson Ward). I'm pretty sure there would've been more empty lots around had this happened.

Okay - but as I said to @Brent114- some kind citation is needed on this. (I realize that may flat out not be possible - and that's fine. I just want to know more.)

We appear to have established the WHO (the city) - but specifically was it the RRHA?

WHAT SPECIFICALLY was proposed? WHEN was this proposed (this was in the '60s?) WHERE specifically in the Fan was this proposed? While I'm glad you and Brent are speaking from the same book, what you're pointing to DOES NOT support his assertion that "they were going to level the Fan" - and as such, a general A-bombing of the Fan does not sound like the case at all.

I flat out don't remember ANY of this happening - maybe either I was WAY too young when it was proposed and by the time I got onboard with RVA development in the early '70s it was off the table because of the general -- and correct -- shift to preserve the Fan. Was there public uproar over this? Undoubtedly there had to have been preservationist pushback - and while I recall there was ALWAYS somewhat of a preservation "element" to the Fan, it was never with the kind of urgency (save for the kerfuffle over paving Monument Avenue) that was apparent when it came to Church Hill, Jackson Ward, Oregon Hill or Shockoe Slip (and by extension, Shockoe Bottom). What's more, in all of the urban & regional planning classes I took in order to earn a minor in undergrad (I went to VCU), never once was there a single mention (much less in-depth discussion/analysis) of any public-urgency regarding the Fan due to the city's desire even to "cherry pick" demo'ing falling-down structures, much less pose a threat to full-scale razing. None. And historic preservation was absolutely part of the URP curriculum (I vividly recall the professor who taught the class - despite the fact that he and I argued and debated a number of points (because I was dug in at the heels against widespread "draconian" preservation tactics), I really liked him & I got an "A" in the class) and Richmond was the OBVIOUS live-action case-laboratory, given that this was at VCU.

What am I missing? 

Mind you - even as a rather virulent non-preservationist (I'm not 100% anti-preservation - folks shouldn't conflate the two)  - I always supported maintaining and preserving the Fan and was comfortable enough with the city's and civic community's efforts that the neighborhood would never - EVER - face the horrible, irresponsible, unconscionable fate that befell Fulton. 

Edited February 12, 2023 by I miss RVA

[Brent114]

I’ll see what I can find. There’s a famous photo of a woman blocking a bulldozer (most likely staged but you get the gist).  She is the patron saint of the Fan and out of her defiance the Fan Association arose.  The photo was taken along Monument Ave which at the time wasn't so  tony as to avoid the wrecking ball. 
The photo graced the walls of Fan restaurants in the 80’s. 
 

Edited February 13, 2023 by Brent114

[I miss RVA]

12 minutes ago, Brent114 said:

I’ll see what I can find. There’s a famous photo of a woman blocking a bulldozer (most likely staged but you get the gist).  She is the patron saint of the Fan and out of her defiance the Fan Association arose.  The photo was taken along Monument Ave which at the time wasn't so  tony as to avoid the wrecking ball. 
The photo graced the walls of Fan restaurants in the 80’s. 
 

Yep - I can't remember her name, but I can see the picture in my mind. It's in a number of books on Richmond (and Richmond history) - many of which I have but are currently packed away in boxes as I'm changing locations here. (Long story.) I remember seeing the photos in places like Joe's Inn and the Strawberry Street Cafe, (I can't remember if it was also at the Robin Inn- I think it was - and my first wife and I ate at Robin Inn once a week just about EVERY week when we lived in the Fan).

Staged or otherwise, I don't necessarily have a problem with the preservationists wanting to preserve Monument Avenue right down to the paving bricks. But I DO have a problem with these very same preservationists not demonstrating even a scintilla of such care and concern for Fulton and her many streets there that still retained paving bricks and streetcar rails right up until the day the bulldozers came and pulverized everything.

[wrldcoupe4]

They weren’t knocking down the fan, they were just planning to remove the bricks on monument and pave it with asphalt and she came out to block it.

[I miss RVA]

1 hour ago, wrldcoupe4 said:

They weren’t knocking down the fan, they were just planning to remove the bricks on monument and pave it with asphalt and she came out to block it.

That's why the assertion of plans to "level the Fan" absolutely floored me. I've never heard of such a thing until it was brought up and seemingly to a limited extent corroborated here. It was never - EVER - brought up in ANY of my urban and regional planning classes at VCU in the early-mid '80s, which -- at most -- was a decade or maybe two removed from when this (the purported plan to bulldoze the Fan) supposedly happened. Not one discussion from ANY of my professors about it - even in the historic preservation class. None. Monument Avenue "don't touch my bricks" lady, yes. Grind the Fan into limestone dust, no.

FULTON, on the other hand, WAS pulverized, soup to nuts. Even the streets were torn up and plowed under. In my life, never have I EVER seen anything like that. And Randolph wasn't much better, though at least they (RRHA) left the streets themselves & didn't peel them up, too. I guess that's something. 

Edited February 14, 2023 by I miss RVA

[Icetera]

14 hours ago, I miss RVA said:

That's why the assertion of plans to "level the Fan" absolutely floored me. I've never heard of such a thing until it was brought up and seemingly to a limited extent corroborated here. It was never - EVER - brought up in ANY of my urban and regional planning classes at VCU in the early-mid '80s, which -- at most -- was a decade or maybe two removed from when this (the purported plan to bulldoze the Fan) supposedly happened. Not one discussion from ANY of my professors about it - even in the historic preservation class. None. Monument Avenue "don't touch my bricks" lady, yes. Grind the Fan into limestone dust, no.

FULTON, on the other hand, WAS pulverized, soup to nuts. Even the streets were torn up and plowed under. In my life, never have I EVER seen anything like that. And Randolph wasn't much better, though at least they (RRHA) left the streets themselves & didn't peel them up, too. I guess that's something. 

Lot's of remnants of Fulton's infrastructure can still be found hidden away in the trees and parks if one strays from the paths, which is both interesting to find and sad to think amount what was lost.  Walking through the now sterilized suburb is so depressing.

While I doubt The Fan/Museum District ever saw plans to the extent of Fulton, I have no doubts that some large urbanization efforts were likely in play.  Areas such as Devil's Triangle (not the greatest place in the day) clearly lost some chunks of their historic fabric to automobile oriented low-density developments as well as stretches along Main/Cary.  How much of Broad was more like The Fan at one time?

[I miss RVA]

3 hours ago, Icetera said:

Lot's of remnants of Fulton's infrastructure can still be found hidden away in the trees and parks if one strays from the paths, which is both interesting to find and sad to think amount what was lost.  Walking through the now sterilized suburb is so depressing.
 

It is weird to encounter the remnants of what was a street or a sidewalk at one time - 10 or 15 feet of leftover pavement/concrete or curb... just sort of poking out of a small hump in grass. What's there now really is depressing - and to think it took the better part of a couple of decades to even get THAT. What replaced what was Fulton had - maybe - 25% of the density of the original neighborhood. And now we're stuck with this -- as you said -- sterilized suburb -- with no real density, no character, no urban grid, no urban ANYTHING, for the rest of our lives. It's heartbreaking, really.

[Flood Zone]

On 2/13/2023 at 3:45 PM, Brent114 said:

I’ll see what I can find. There’s a famous photo of a woman blocking a bulldozer (most likely staged but you get the gist).  She is the patron saint of the Fan and out of her defiance the Fan Association arose.  The photo was taken along Monument Ave which at the time wasn't so  tony as to avoid the wrecking ball. 
The photo graced the walls of Fan restaurants in the 80’s. 
 

Helen Marie Taylor - died last year well into her 90s.  In the 1970s, she protested the removal of the cobblestones from Monument Avenue.

[ancientcarpenter]

Blue Ridge Cyclery is opening permanent spot in Libbie Mill. Another tenant... and I'm happy b/c it's biking related  over 4k sqft

 

https://www.facebook.com/blueridgecyclery1/

[whw53]

Construction has started on Spy Rock's project along Dabney. Site is cleared and equipment on site.

Sent from my SM-S908U1 using Tapatalk

[I miss RVA]

22 minutes ago, whw53 said:

Construction has started on Spy Rock's project along Dabney. Site is cleared and equipment on site.

Sent from my SM-S908U1 using Tapatalk
 

Question: That's not the 10-story apartment building, is it? (Or is it? ) 

[wrldcoupe4]

 I think this one is 4 or 5. 

[eandslee]

I think this is the best place for this one, but were we aware of this project already?

https://www.wric.com/news/local-news/henrico-county/160-apartments-to-replace-office-building-in-willow-lawn/

[I miss RVA]

6 minutes ago, eandslee said:

I think this is the best place for this one, but were we aware of this project already?

https://www.wric.com/news/local-news/henrico-county/160-apartments-to-replace-office-building-in-willow-lawn/

Yep - we've had reporting on this building previously - but it's good to have this update on file so that we can link the progress of this project going forward. VERY glad to know that the county has approved demo'ing the old office building on the county portion of the land on which the new building will rise.

QUESTION to our gurus: what's the deal with the county SPECIFICALLY kiboshing three-bedroom apartments? Why would developers be restricted to building just studio, 1 and 2 BR units?

[wrldcoupe4]

On 3/5/2023 at 4:49 PM, whw53 said:

Construction has started on Spy Rock's project along Dabney. Site is cleared and equipment on site.

Sent from my SM-S908U1 using Tapatalk
 

This one is really coming along. Not really vertical, but soon. It feels a bit lonely at the moment to be honest. 

[I miss RVA]

3 hours ago, wrldcoupe4 said:

This one is really coming along. Not really vertical, but soon. It feels a bit lonely at the moment to be honest. 

 Any chance of... umm...  ??