Jump to content

Manchester Development


Richmonopoly

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, whw53 said:

Sweet!! Glad to see this moving forward.

Now, with so many projects underway, it's hard to keep track of what's going where. Do we know what's planned for this property?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


28 minutes ago, rjp212 said:

1212 Hull St is now on the market for redevelopment. Looks to provide two options for a 4 story mixed use building.

https://www.thalhimer.com/sites/default/files/listings_files/1212HullSt.pdf

What's the zoning for that parcel? If Thalhimer is marketing the site for sale, wouldn't it be up to the developer how large/tall to built? Why is it being marketed as a potential 4-story building? Am I missing something here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EXCELLENT commentary from Professor Slipek in today's Richmond BizSense about the whole Legends/Avery Hall highrises "lost views" flap in Manchester. Even the often unreasonably preservation-minded Dr. Slipek has come out indirectly in support of Avery Hall's development by directly addressing his critique of Legends opposition and the general NIMBY mindset relative to riverfront views -- and he rightly puts things in perspective by making mention of other -- larger -- cities that are famous for their vistas. Like many of us in our UP community here have suggest, Slipek CORRECTLY posits that Legends should embrace the opportunity to be patronized by MANY new customers and should seek to work with the developer to get a taproom located in the new apartment complex in order to gain even BETTER views of our growing city. I must say I was VERY pleasantly surprised that Dr. Slipek did not come down on the side of Legends. Rather, he came with very solid suggestions of how Legends could work with the developer - and - how the brewery could perhaps push the city for infrastructure improvements that are SORELY needed to accommodate Manchester's quasar-like explosive growth, both in terms of population and traffic. As he mentioned: new sidewalks... new/better lighting... more traffic lights... rethinking of one-way streets... are among the many things that the CITY could -- and frankly SHOULD -- step up to the plate and address as Manchester continues to boom. I am honestly blown away (in the best way possible) that he suggested that Legends should embrace their new neighbors and work together in a way that benefits everyone.

Excellent commentary. I have to give credit where credit is due. Given his decades-long and shameless bias towards preservation and often public bent against progressive development, he honestly surprised me with his take on this issue. I'm quite impressed and heartened, to say the least. Maybe I read too much into it - but in the court of public opinion (which at least here in our UP community, in commentary in both RBS and RT-D and on the RVA/Reddit pages appears overwhelmingly in support of the project) Slipek is considered by many as a heavyweight whose opinions at least count for something. For him to politely give Legends a patch for their kvetching (and if you know Yiddish you'll understand what I just said), is -- to me -- very encouraging.

https://richmondbizsense.com/2022/08/26/guest-commentary-moaning-over-the-loss-of-a-great-view-will-solve-nothing/

Edited by I miss RVA
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, I miss RVA said:

What's the zoning for that parcel? If Thalhimer is marketing the site for sale, wouldn't it be up to the developer how large/tall to built? Why is it being marketed as a potential 4-story building? Am I missing something here?

Zoning allows up to 5. I assume development plans have already been approved by the city so they are marketing it as such. 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/25/2022 at 2:14 PM, whw53 said:

Sampson coating adds a historic and charm layer to the neighborhood, and demolishing it down to a parking lot would be a travesty. Building could easily be converted to either apartments or office space, and perhaps both. I for one will miss it when it is gone, too much of Manchester is turning into the same style of architecture and keeping the historic industrial infrastructure adds character that frankly many of the new developments lack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ronsmytheiii said:

Sampson coating adds a historic and charm layer to the neighborhood, and demolishing it down to a parking lot would be a travesty. Building could easily be converted to either apartments or office space, and perhaps both. I for one will miss it when it is gone, too much of Manchester is turning into the same style of architecture and keeping the historic industrial infrastructure adds character that frankly many of the new developments lack.

I hear you and understand your position - however, I must respectfully push back on this point - One of the biggest things that has held Richmond back for the past five decades is the -- at times -- this almost 'death-grip' on old (and generally small) buildings, and what I personally view is an over-emphasis on character. Not EVERY old building qualifies as "historic" - and Manchester is transforming into a booming, urban-core residential neighborhood. For all the overemphasis this city places on architecture, may I gently remind folks of the architect's mantra and the core philosophy that has driven architects for centuries - form FOLLOWS function. If a developer comes in, buys the Sampson coatings building and replaces it with a four or six or eight-story (or larger!!!) residential building, the impact of that residential building will far and away be more beneficial to Manchester and the city as a whole than would be limiting what a developer can do with this property. Yes - old architecture is wonderful. It's nice to look at. But my friend, this city is growing and growing quickly. We don't need to be another Savannah or Charleston. That's not Richmond's place in this world. Much as I know that must disappoint some - it's simply a fact. Richmond is beyond both of them combined -- and we need to go FORWARD and reach for the stars - not bury our feet (and our heads) in the past. And while I do respect your position and hear you and understand where you're coming from, I have to say that I'm very grateful that Richmond -- FINALLY -- has shown enough fortitude to move away from this mindset of forcing us to hold on to EVERY OLD BUILDING - almost to the point of "God-forbid even one single brick should perish".  Please know I mean no offense in pushing back on this point - but I've seen where it (this overemphasis on preservation) has led this city. We have more than enough "historic" neighborhoods and architecture. We don't need to create more.  Let's not hold onto everything, which in turn, holds the city back in the process. Paraphrasing Moses' rather famous line to Pharoah in the classic movie "The Ten Commandments":  "LET MY CITY GROW!!!!"

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Brent114 said:

Concrete barriers and fencing is going up around the site of the new building on 2nd street.  It’s the five floor apartment building across from Caravati’s.

 

The old carriage houses (something of the sort) were picked over for parts then boarded up a few weeks ago.  I have a full view of this site from my living room and I’m excited to have something new to look at :) 

When concrete barriers and fencing go up, can port-o-potties be far behind? :tw_smiley:

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, wrldcoupe4 said:

All we need now is an update on the Silo redevelopment…

You took the words out of my mouth, @wrldcoupe4! I was just about to ask that very question. :tw_glasses:

Has there been any movement? I think the developers filed papers for land disturbance for the Silos site, yes? But that's been many many moons ago. Anything shaking on that front?

Edited by I miss RVA
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • 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.