Scott's Addition Development

[rjp212]

PDF of the Full Presentation:

http://richmond300.com/marketingMasterPlan/sites/default/files/GSAMtg3_DraftFramework_Feb18LowRes.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1_5yfHVsEL9sR_8pZZPF7BnGCMTbFaYSXL2vnDQf9Xu2COByRcK7mjUuA

[Shakman]

9 minutes ago, RVA-Is-The-Best said:

 

Sources say incoming Mayor Gray finds the plan 'exhausting', wants to issue an RFP for the corridor and study the potential further 

Hurray!  Let's do another study.

Edited February 19, 2020 by Shakman

[I miss RVA]

2 hours ago, Urbs42 said:

Thanks for sharing. Looks very ambitious.  

Not to pick at a fresh wound, but this vision seems exponentially more transformative for RVA than Navy Hill.  Sadly, it doesn't seem like the city is capable of bringing this to fruition. I hope I'm wrong.     

 

I hope you're wrong as well, but I tend to agree with you. Given the city's track record, with all the NIMBYs, is it a stretch to think Richmond can make this happen? If an anti-density candidate is elected mayor (GOD-FORBID!!), then what of something like this? Would she try to torpedo such projects?

[DalWill]

14 hours ago, rjp212 said:

Some pretty pictures from the Scott’s Addition Meeting today.   Conceptual plans on what they would like the neighborhood to develop into. 

photo credit:

https://www.facebook.com/ScottsAddition/

Those 5  BETTER NOT  find anything wrong with this!! 

[Icetera]

14 minutes ago, I miss RVA said:

I hope you're wrong as well, but I tend to agree with you. Given the city's track record, with all the NIMBYs, is it a stretch to think Richmond can make this happen? If an anti-density candidate is elected mayor (GOD-FORBID!!), then what of something like this? Would she try to torpedo such projects?

Currently, this is her district, hence not wanting competition from Navy Hill.

[I miss RVA]

1 hour ago, vaceltic said:

Explain this? Is Richmond 300 not the process the city is SUPPOSED to be doing to bring this to fruition? It's telling the developers how the area should develop.

What else do you envision the city having to do after this?

You'd like an explanation? OK - this is the kind of redevelopment that places such as Charlotte or Atlanta or NOVA can pull off because they don't have this group or that one so anathema to progress as does Richmond. ("but the schools!" "but the history!" "but the architecture!")

Our track record since 1970, unfortunately, speaks for itself.

 

[I miss RVA]

27 minutes ago, Icetera said:

Currently, this is her district, hence not wanting competition from Navy Hill.

That's certainly plausible.

Still - when has the Council ever shown itself to actually have a progressive mindset toward large-scale development that could actually elevate Richmond?

We can't overlook all the NIMBYs who don't want the traffic or don't want more people or fear this will somehow 'ruin' the history, yada yada yada. 

I'm 57 - and I hope and pray to see these awesome plans come to fruition in my lifetime.

[DalWill]

46 minutes ago, Icetera said:

Currently, this is her district, hence not wanting competition from Navy Hill.

But she kinda ruined her reputation so far, even if she does have supporters. Let see how this plays out.

[vaceltic]

1 hour ago, I miss RVA said:

You'd like an explanation? OK - this is the kind of redevelopment that places such as Charlotte or Atlanta or NOVA can pull off because they don't have this group or that one so anathema to progress as does Richmond. ("but the schools!" "but the history!" "but the architecture!")

Our track record since 1970, unfortunately, speaks for itself.

 

So, the Boulevard planning is out in the open - everyone can see the framework now - before any developers comes knocking with competing proposals.  I don't really understand why you are being such a negative nancy about the Boulevard plan?

Looks like the planning process is working great. Citizens can't complain about Boulevard when the opportunity to get involved in the planning process is here and now. This is the OPPOSITE of what Navy Hill was. This process is how development of public land should work. 

How much land in Charlotte, Atlanta, or NOVA are you even referring to that is public land being developed? I'd appreciate some examples, otherwise, its not an apples to apples comparison.    

 

Atlanta: https://atlanta.curbed.com/2020/2/18/21141160/atlanta-gentrification-westside-bellwood-quarry-park-construction-permits

Charlotte: https://www.wfae.org/post/charlotte-talks-mecklenburg-parks-bottom-national-rankings-new-parks-director-weighs#stream/0

NOVA: https://dcist.com/story/19/09/27/the-story-of-the-d-c-area-disney-park-that-almost-was/

 

Edited February 19, 2020 by vaceltic

[I miss RVA]

2 hours ago, rjp212 said:

PDF of the Full Presentation:

http://richmond300.com/marketingMasterPlan/sites/default/files/GSAMtg3_DraftFramework_Feb18LowRes.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1_5yfHVsEL9sR_8pZZPF7BnGCMTbFaYSXL2vnDQf9Xu2COByRcK7mjUuA

This plan is amazing! Let's hope that the powers that be have the good sense to do whatever is necessary to facilitate this coming to pass.

[I miss RVA]

48 minutes ago, vaceltic said:

So, the Boulevard planning is out in the open - everyone can see the framework now - before any developers comes knocking with competing proposals.  I don't really understand why you are being such a negative nancy about the Boulevard plan?

Looks like the planning process is working great. Citizens can't complain about Boulevard when the opportunity to get involved in the planning process is here and now. This is the OPPOSITE of what Navy Hill was. This process is how development of public land should work. 

How much land in Charlotte, Atlanta, or NOVA are you even referring to that is public land being developed? I'd appreciate some examples, otherwise, its not an apples to apples comparison.    

Celtic - I'm not being a Negative Nancy at all about the plan - the PLAN is fantastic! I question whether Richmond actually has what it takes to make it happen, particularly if past is prologue. I have seen FAR too many proposals that could have transformed Richmond into a truly major city either be voted down or die on the vine because of inaction by the  City Fathers over the last 50 years. I'm not concerned about publicly-owned land in CHA, ATL or NOVA.  I'm concerned about whether Richmond can get it done. And while I am grateful that this process is working correctly and, I would hope, has a greater chance of something positive being implemented (as opposed to Navy Hill) - this isn't a grouse about NH as much as it is a grouse about Richmond's god-awful track record.

Were you in Richmond in the late '60s-early 70s? Even though I was only a child, I recall vividly the excitement there was about how Richmond could be the "next Atlanta", particularly with the election of Tom Bliley as mayor. I recall the annexation battle with Chesterfield - the house I grew up in was technically in Chesterfield when we moved into it in 1964 - and I recall my folks were thrilled when we became part of the city. The political fights were a mess - yet there was a bullish feel to the city.

Charlotte was smaller than Richmond in 1970. She now has a population of just under 900,000 in the city proper and  in the 2.6 million metro. She is a top-tier, major-league city in every way, shape and form.

That could have -- and should have -- been us.

Edited February 19, 2020 by I miss RVA

[Downtowner]

Celtic - I'm not being a Negative Nancy at all about the plan - the PLAN is fantastic! I question whether Richmond actually has what it takes to make it happen, particularly if past is prologue. I have seen FAR too many proposals that could have transformed Richmond into a truly major city either be voted down or die on the vine because of inaction by the  City Fathers over the last 50 years. I'm not concerned about publicly-owned land in CHA, ATL or NOVA.  I'm concerned about whether Richmond can get it done. And while I am grateful that this process is working correctly and, I would hope, has a greater chance of something positive being implemented (as opposed to Navy Hill) - this isn't a grouse about NH as much as it is a grouse about Richmond's god-awful track record.
Were you in Richmond in the late '60s-early 70s? Even though I was only a child, I recall vividly the excitement there was about how Richmond could be the "next Atlanta", particularly with the election of Tom Bliley as mayor. I recall the annexation battle with Chesterfield - the house I grew up in was technically in Chesterfield when we moved into it in 1964 - and I recall my folks were thrilled when we became part of the city. The political fights were a mess - yet there was a bullish feel to the city.
Charlotte was smaller than Richmond in 1970. She now has a population of just under 900,000 in the city proper and  and 2.6 million metro. She is a top-tier, major-league city in every way, shape and form.
That could have -- and should have -- been us.

Amen to all of this. I couldn’t say it any better I think about this sort of thing all of the time. Richmond could of been so much more but it chose to dwindle away any chance it had at becoming some bigger and better and brighter. I question whether Richmond can pull this off too sadly nimbys will kill this before it even has a chance and say not on my dime or oh what about the schools. People in Richmond of that attitude are so fake. To be truthfully honest they don’t even understand the complexity of what has to happen in order for all of that to happen. First you need more development and growth to result in tax revenue to generate for money for the city for any of the services to get any better it seems like people forget what it takes for that to happen and just want to whine and complain. And at this point I would turn down anything in a project this big that doesn’t generate taxes. Looking at you state buildings aka vcu buildings state offices and even federal offices and buildings. I would only want commercial or residential to fully be implemented in a project this big unless the state or vcu or federal government agree to pay taxes on whatever they lease in a project this big. The city needs places for people to live to make services and businesses more feasible and to also attract other new businesses to the area. Apparently we are facing a shortage of places to live all across the metro area resulting in a sellers market here. It just baffles me how people want to whine and complain about any huge project that comes here when we need the revenue in the worst way possible. People cry and wonder why nothing gets better here. This has been a trend of this city for as long as I can remember. It’s very sad to see what could have been for Richmond when looking at other places that have thrived and used to be smaller or at least the same size as Richmond. I really hope I see the day Richmond gets out of the poor ole me attitude and the what about me attitude and can really boom and thrive.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DalWill]

16 minutes ago, I miss RVA said:

Celtic - I'm not being a Negative Nancy at all about the plan - the PLAN is fantastic! I question whether Richmond actually has what it takes to make it happen, particularly if past is prologue. I have seen FAR too many proposals that could have transformed Richmond into a truly major city either be voted down or die on the vine because of inaction by the  City Fathers over the last 50 years. I'm not concerned about publicly-owned land in CHA, ATL or NOVA.  I'm concerned about whether Richmond can get it done. And while I am grateful that this process is working correctly and, I would hope, has a greater chance of something positive being implemented (as opposed to Navy Hill) - this isn't a grouse about NH as much as it is a grouse about Richmond's god-awful track record.

Were you in Richmond in the late '60s-early 70s? Even though I was only a child, I recall vividly the excitement there was about how Richmond could be the "next Atlanta", particularly with the election of Tom Bliley as mayor. I recall the annexation battle with Chesterfield - the house I grew up in was technically in Chesterfield when we moved into it in 1964 - and I recall my folks were thrilled when we became part of the city. The political fights were a mess - yet there was a bullish feel to the city.

Charlotte was smaller than Richmond in 1970. She now has a population of just under 900,000 in the city proper and  in the 2.6 million metro. She is a top-tier, major-league city in every way, shape and form.

That could have -- and should have -- been us.

We are realizing our potential after years of doubt. We'll get there, eventually.

[I miss RVA]

12 minutes ago, DalWill said:

We are realizing our potential after years of doubt. We'll get there, eventually.

While I agree that we are finally getting on the stick and realizing some of our potential, the kinds of developments we are seeing now should have been happening 25, 30, 35, 40, 45 years ago. Richmond still has awesome potential -- but the competition today is far stronger than it was in 1970. Richmond had the edge 50 years ago on a number of cities, particularly in this region of the country, and has managed to fumble it away at the goal line. Repeatedly. 

As for getting there eventually - I've been waiting since I was a little kid for this city to really take off. (Long story as to how and why I became so interested in Richmond's growth before I had even turned 10 years old) ... I'm 57 now and pray to God that I live long enough to see Richmond join the major leagues. My long-standing fear is that I could live to be 100 and even THAT might not be long enough to see Richmond really get there. 

Edited February 19, 2020 by I miss RVA

[vaceltic]

54 minutes ago, I miss RVA said:

While I agree that we are finally getting on the stick and realizing some of our potential, the kinds of developments we are seeing now should have been happening 25, 30, 35, 40, 45 years ago. Richmond still has awesome potential -- but the competition today is far stronger than it was in 1970. Richmond had the edge 50 years ago on a number of cities, particularly in this region of the country, and has managed to fumble it away at the goal line. Repeatedly. 

As for getting there eventually - I've been waiting since I was a little kid for this city to really take off. (Long story as to how and why I became so interested in Richmond's growth before I had even turned 10 years old) ... I'm 57 now and pray to God that I live long enough to see Richmond join the major leagues. My long-standing fear is that I could live to be 100 and even THAT might not be long enough to see Richmond really get there. 

When I moved to Richmond in 2005, people who had never even visited here warned me about it, convinced I would get shot dead in the street because the crime reputation was so bad. That stereotype is completely gone now and Richmond is being recognized as a WORLD-CLASS destination by media all over the internet and in print. I've seen a complete transformation of Scott's Addition and Manchester out of NOTHING and almost complete gentrification of Church Hill since then, despite recovering from the worst recession since the great depression. Richmond is outpacing population growth in the surrounding counties RIGHT NOW. 

What you're asking for is happening, right now. Embrace it while its here!

[Icetera]

5 minutes ago, vaceltic said:

When I moved to Richmond in 2005, people who had never even visited here warned me about it, convinced I would get shot dead in the street because the crime reputation was so bad. That stereotype is completely gone now and Richmond is being recognized as a WORLD-CLASS destination by media all over the internet and in print. I've seen a complete transformation of Scott's Addition and Manchester out of NOTHING and almost complete gentrification of Church Hill since then, despite recovering from the worst recession since the great depression. Richmond is outpacing population growth in the surrounding counties RIGHT NOW. 

What you're asking for is happening, right now. Embrace it while its here!

The key take away is "while its here!"  Unfortunately, we still have to commute to the counties for employment and end up spending our money out there shopping and eating out (especially after the tax hike).  While we have encouraged some employers into the city, we have also pushed other jobs out to make way for new, mostly housing, developments (ABC, Game and Inland Fisheries, Tax Dept., manufacturing).  The city should be where people come to work, play, and shop, not the other way around.  While amazing, the housing boom of generic apartment blocks is occuring in nearly every urban center in the nation.  When traveling the country, they all seem to have a Scott's Addition and a VCU/MCV mass expansion.  Our uniqueness has been the history and relative density but we have also suffered from our small geographical borders allowing more efficient tax generators to develop just outside our borders without contributing to the necessary city services.  With Rocketts, Fulton Yard, Libby Mill and Scott's Addition 2.0, we may see a greater trend of hugging the edges rather than returning to the center for economic drivers.  When the boom ends, we may see the apartments drain right back into the suburbs unless we encourage people to stay.

[I miss RVA]

17 hours ago, Icetera said:

The key take away is "while its here!"  Unfortunately, we still have to commute to the counties for employment and end up spending our money out there shopping and eating out (especially after the tax hike).  While we have encouraged some employers into the city, we have also pushed other jobs out to make way for new, mostly housing, developments (ABC, Game and Inland Fisheries, Tax Dept., manufacturing).  The city should be where people come to work, play, and shop, not the other way around.  While amazing, the housing boom of generic apartment blocks is occuring in nearly every urban center in the nation.  When traveling the country, they all seem to have a Scott's Addition and a VCU/MCV mass expansion.  Our uniqueness has been the history and relative density but we have also suffered from our small geographical borders allowing more efficient tax generators to develop just outside our borders without contributing to the necessary city services.  With Rocketts, Fulton Yard, Libby Mill and Scott's Addition 2.0, we may see a greater trend of hugging the edges rather than returning to the center for economic drivers.  When the boom ends, we may see the apartments drain right back into the suburbs unless we encourage people to stay.

Icetera - you bring a very good point: "while it's here".  How long will the boom last? My concern for Richmond is that she is not yet big enough to withstand significant economic slowdowns to keep a flow of new development coming in. Outside of a total crash and deep recession, larger cities generally are better able to withstand these slowdowns from the standpoint of real estate development. Major new projects don't simply "dry up" in the top-tier cities during a slow economy like they typically have done in Richmond. A slow economy can grind the flow of new development to a halt - and Richmond needs the economy to remain strong to keep this momentum going.

[I miss RVA]

19 hours ago, vaceltic said:

When I moved to Richmond in 2005, people who had never even visited here warned me about it, convinced I would get shot dead in the street because the crime reputation was so bad. That stereotype is completely gone now and Richmond is being recognized as a WORLD-CLASS destination by media all over the internet and in print. I've seen a complete transformation of Scott's Addition and Manchester out of NOTHING and almost complete gentrification of Church Hill since then, despite recovering from the worst recession since the great depression. Richmond is outpacing population growth in the surrounding counties RIGHT NOW. 

What you're asking for is happening, right now. Embrace it while its here!

Good morning Celtic - I most definitely embrace the current upswing that Richmond is enjoying. I have been relishing this growth for the last several years and pray this boom continues unabated with no slowdown. It is something I am celebrating, to be sure.

As you have been in Richmond only since 2005, I'm not sure you can relate to the utter -- and repeated -- disappointments those of us who have seen what this city could have become have suffered for decades. What I am asking for (yes, is is happening now), I was expecting to happen in the 70s. I personally started "asking" for it publicly in the 80s, continued in the 90s and resigned myself in the early 2000s that the Richmond I envisioned was nothing more than a pipe dream.

in short, I have been asking and hoping and dreaming of this for 50 years. And, with very few exceptions, those asks have been denied, and those dreams have been shattered by divisive, corrosive, toxic politics, draconian demands and tactics by unreasonably over-the-top preservationists, and by economic slowdowns that thwarted promising projects before they got started. The victories of today pale in comparison to the litany of bitter defeats Richmond suffered as a city - defeats that held us back while Charlotte -- and now even Raleigh -- have raced past us and left us in their collective dust.

I have seen Richmond fumble away opportunity after opportunity after opportunity with cries of "but the schools", "but the traffic", "but the history", "but the architecture" ad nauseam, I'm not talking about only development of publicly owned property. Indecisiveness (caused by the ruckus raised by various NIMBY groups, and I include preservationists amongst the NIMBYs) by city fathers to approve proposals delayed many a project to the point that financing fell through or the economy soured, and the projects were shelved. Those shelved projects have never been dusted off.

I attended many community meetings, symposiums, public hearings and City Council meetings - and spoke in favor of projects as an interested citizen. I constantly communicated with my Council representative and asked for a positive vote on projects. I constantly wrote letters to the editors of various local publications. I had no financial interest in or tie to any of the projects. But I had an interest in and love for my hometown and a dream that she would become a top-tier city. For the most part, it was to no avail.

Downtown would have become a much more robust and dynamic place had those projects been able to move forward as proposed.

That said, perhaps you can understand my doubt surrounding Richmond's capability to pull off something as grand as the Scott's Addition master plan. The plan is fantastic. The transformation of the area would be EPIC. I am intimately familiar with Scott's Addition - my father managed a printing company in the 3400 block of W. Leigh Street. During some of my summer breaks from school, my mother worked there to pick up a few extra dollars, so rather than being farmed out to a summer camp or to relatives, I simply went to my dad's office. I used to walk over to the Curles Neck Dairy bar for lunch almost every day back then.

I'm thrilled by the prospects. But I am also jaded by five decades of failure to make big things happen. For me to be a believer, Richmond is going to have to "show me". Not to sound ungodly cynical, but I will believe it when I see it. I just hope I live long enough to see it.

Edited February 20, 2020 by I miss RVA

[rjp212]

According to SA’s Instagram page, they came through and planted about 130 trees today in the neighborhood.  Definitely a continued step in the right direction. 

[vaceltic]

I think you will. Raleigh and Charlotte metros operate with single government entities and can annex land. The Richmond region isn't like this and Richmond City cannot.

Infrastructure, infrastructure, infrastructure. If the Richmond region is going to compete with the Charlottes and Raleighs of the world, a regional approach to transportation infrastructure investment is the key to all of it. Rail, Road, Air, and Waterway. Increased Amtrak train service, BRT launch, and Port of Richmond expansions are all great moves.  In 1978, Charlotte completed a massive expansion of its airport to make it a national transit hub. However, saying the City of Richmond must make things happen, alone, is impossible for the grand things you are wanting. Richmond is the poorest city in the region by a mile - it cannot go it alone on massive infrastructure projects to keep the entire region competitive.  Henrico, Chesterfield, Hanover, New Kent, Goochland counties all have to be on board. 

[DalWill]

59 minutes ago, vaceltic said:

I think you will. Raleigh and Charlotte metros operate with single government entities and can annex land. The Richmond region isn't like this and Richmond City cannot.

Infrastructure, infrastructure, infrastructure. If the Richmond region is going to compete with the Charlottes and Raleighs of the world, a regional approach to transportation infrastructure investment is the key to all of it. Rail, Road, Air, and Waterway. Increased Amtrak train service, BRT launch, and Port of Richmond expansions are all great moves.  In 1978, Charlotte completed a massive expansion of its airport to make it a national transit hub. However, saying the City of Richmond must make things happen, alone, is impossible for the grand things you are wanting. Richmond is the poorest city in the region by a mile - it cannot go it alone on massive infrastructure projects to keep the entire region competitive.  Henrico, Chesterfield, Hanover, New Kent, Goochland counties all have to be on board. 

I have said (and we all agreed) that VA Legislation SHOT the Richmond region's potential in the foot due to the independent city-county structure.  Richmond is truly the county seat of Henrico. Both benefit from one another (even though Henrico is more affluent with more resources, they greatly benefit from LOCATION that the city has brought them).

Edited February 20, 2020 by DalWill

[DalWill]

3 hours ago, I miss RVA said:

Good morning Celtic - I most definitely embrace the current upswing that Richmond is enjoying. I have been relishing this growth for the last several years and pray this boom continues unabated with no slowdown. It is something I am celebrating, to be sure.

As you have been in Richmond only since 2005, I'm not sure you can relate to the utter -- and repeated -- disappointments those of us who have seen what this city could have become have suffered for decades. What I am asking for (yes, is is happening now), I was expecting to happen in the 70s. I personally started "asking" for it publicly in the 80s, continued in the 90s and resigned myself in the early 2000s that the Richmond I envisioned was nothing more than a pipe dream.

in short, I have been asking and hoping and dreaming of this for 50 years. And, with very few exceptions, those asks have been denied, and those dreams have been shattered by divisive, corrosive, toxic politics, draconian demands and tactics by unreasonably over-the-top preservationists, and by economic slowdowns that thwarted promising projects before they got started. The victories of today pale in comparison to the litany of bitter defeats Richmond suffered as a city - defeats that held us back while Charlotte -- and now even Raleigh -- have raced past us and left us in their collective dust.

I have seen Richmond fumble away opportunity after opportunity after opportunity with cries of "but the schools", "but the traffic", "but the history", "but the architecture" ad nauseam, I'm not talking about only development of publicly owned property. Indecisiveness (caused by the ruckus raised by various NIMBY groups, and I include preservationists amongst the NIMBYs) by city fathers to approve proposals delayed many a project to the point that financing fell through or the economy soured, and the projects were shelved. Those shelved projects have never been dusted off.

I attended many community meetings, symposiums, public hearings and City Council meetings - and spoke in favor of projects as an interested citizen. I constantly communicated with my Council representative and asked for a positive vote on projects. I constantly wrote letters to the editors of various local publications. I had no financial interest in or tie to any of the projects. But I had an interest in and love for my hometown and a dream that she would become a top-tier city. For the most part, it was to no avail.

Downtown would have become a much more robust and dynamic place had those projects been able to move forward as proposed.

That said, perhaps you can understand my doubt surrounding Richmond's capability to pull off something as grand as the Scott's Addition master plan. The plan is fantastic. The transformation of the area would be EPIC. I am intimately familiar with Scott's Addition - my father managed a printing company in the 3400 block of W. Leigh Street. During some of my summer breaks from school, my mother worked there to pick up a few extra dollars, so rather than being farmed out to a summer camp or to relatives, I simply went to my dad's office. I used to walk over to the Curles Neck Dairy bar for lunch almost every day back then.

I'm thrilled by the prospects. But I am also jaded by five decades of failure to make big things happen. For me to be a believer, Richmond is going to have to "show me". Not to sound ungodly cynical, but I will believe it when I see it. I just hope I live long enough to see it.

Most of our issues could be solved doing this....

You Paid For It: Visiting Nashville to see effects of city-county merger

[I miss RVA]

Celtic - regarding the need for a regional approach and the hinderance of the independent city system:  Understood and agreed 100%. That's been one of the biggest hangups from time immemorial. How and why the crafters of Virginia's state Constitution decided to segregate out cities from counties is the topic for another discussion. Suffice it to say, however, that it has been the bane of hopes for Richmond's growth as a region with every locality generally fighting for itself. 

Surprisingly, the independent city concept has worked in Baltimore and St. Louis - and the Tidewater region has figured out the basic premise of "a rising tide lifts all boats."

But for Richmond? This, good sir, is another part of why I have serious doubts about Richmond ever living up to her potential. If there was a final nail in the coffin, it had to be the annexation of Chesterfield in 1970. As with seemingly everything in Richmond politics, racial issues were at the heart of the annexation, and it was deemed to be so egregious that the state slapped a permanent moratorium on annexation - and while court cases were being adjudicated, there were NO local elections in Richmond city for seven years.  Thus, the 1977 City Council election was consequential as it ushered in a black-majority council for the first time in the city's history. The acrimony that followed for much of the next 10-plus years was beyond description.

In looking back, I find it somewhat miraculous that the James Center was built in the early-mid '80s, given the political and business climate in Richmond. And even then, a downturn in the economy resulted in a scaling back of the project. The James Center we see today is NOT the complex that was originally proposed. There were originally to be two additional office towers (one of 40 stories) and two high-rise residential buildings (south of the main row of office buildings). Those four structures were the victim of the economy.

To your point about regional infrastructure: absolutely it is a critical component of a region's cohesive and sustained growth. That there is the small level of GRTC service in the counties is quite remarkable, given the attitudes long-since voiced toward blocking it. Chesterfield has been the worst offender. My mother (peace be upon her) used to lament constantly about how particularly Chesterfield blocked transit service because, as was voiced by folks in her social circle, the county's attitude was "we don't want the riff-raff from Richmond coming out here." Doesn't take a rocket scientist to decode what THAT meant. (dog-whistles, anyone?)

Meanwhile, Charlotte has been merrily gobbling up swaths of Mecklenburg county for decades - and generally to the benefit of that entire region. But annexation explains only a part of why their population has grown so explosively.

As you mentioned, the 1978 expansion of Charlotte-Douglas was the key that unlocked the box of urban Miracle Grow. But want to know something? RICHMOND had first crack at landing the Piedmont Airlines hub that kicked everything off for Charlotte. Piedmont looked long and hard at Richmond and was quite interested in putting its hub here, given the Eastern Seaboard location and centrality in the mid-Atlantic region.

BUT... good ol' lack of regional "let's come together and make this happen" and a heaping sum of "but the schools" fiscal conservatism (sound familiar?) won the day. No one was willing to pay for the one thing a hub airport needs - parallel runways - much less expansion of the terminal. So in essence, Richmond told Piedmont "thanks, but no thanks. We'll be just fine."

The rest, as we know, is history.

Meanwhile, we celebrate RIC topping 3 million passengers in a year ... while CLT is clocking in at 46 million passengers a year.

Again ... it could have -- and SHOULD HAVE - been us!!

Edited February 20, 2020 by I miss RVA

[Icetera]

6 minutes ago, I miss RVA said:

'Understood and agreed 100%. That's been one of the biggest hangups from time immemorial. How and why the crafters of Virginia's state Constitution decided to segregate out cities from counties is the topic for another discussion. Suffice it to say, however, that it has been the bane of hopes for Richmond's growth as a region with every locality generally fighting for itself. 

Surprisingly, the independent city concept has worked in Baltimore and St. Louis - and the Tidewater region has figured out the basic premise of "a rising tide lifts all boats."

But for Richmond? This, good sir, is another part of why I have serious doubts about Richmond ever living up to her potential. If there was a final nail in the coffin, it had to be the annexation of Chesterfield in 1970. As with seemingly everything in Richmond politics, racial issues was at the heart of the annexation, and it was deemed to be so egregious that the state slapped a permanent moratorium on annexation - and while court cases were being adjudicated, there were NO local elections in Richmond city for seven years.  Thus, the 1977 City Council election was consequential as it ushered in a black-majority council for the first time in the city's history. The acrimony that followed for much of the next 10-plus years was beyond description. In looking back, I find it somewhat miraculous that the James Center was built in the early-mid '80s, given the political and business climate in Richmond.

To your point about regional infrastructure: absolutely it is a critical component of a region's cohesive and sustained growth. That there is the small level of GRTC service in the counties is quite remarkable, given the attitudes long-since voiced toward blocking it. Chesterfield has been the worst offender. My mother (peace be upon her) used to lament constantly about how particularly Chesterfield blocked transit service because, as was voiced by folks in her social circle, the county's attitude was "we don't want the riff-raff from Richmond coming out here." Doesn't take a rocket scientist to decode what THAT meant. (dog-whistles, anyone?)

Meanwhile, Charlotte has been merrily gobbling up swaths of Mecklenburg county for decades - and generally to the benefit of that entire region. But annexation explains only a part of why their population has grown so explosively.

As you mentioned, the 1978 expansion of Charlotte-Douglas was the key that unlocked the box of urban Miracle Grow. But want to know something? RICHMOND had first crack at landing the Piedmont Airlines hub that kicked everything off for Charlotte. Piedmont looked long and hard at Richmond and was quite interested in putting its hub here, given the Eastern Seaboard location and centrality in the mid-Atlantic region.

BUT... good ol' lack of regional "let's come together and make this happen" and a heaping sum of "but the schools" fiscal conservatism (sound familiar?) won the day. No one was willing to pay for the one thing a hub airport needs - parallel runways - much less expansion of the terminal. So in essence, Richmond told Piedmont "thanks, but no thanks. We'll be just fine."

The rest, as we know, is history.

Meanwhile, we celebrate RIC topping 3 million passengers in a year ... while CLT is clocking in at 46 million passengers a year.

Again ... it could have -- and SHOULD HAVE - been us!!

Hey now, RIC is 4.25 mil!  Also, I think Hampton Roads may be in even worst shape with regionalism than RVA, though there seem to be some big improvements over there recently.

[I miss RVA]

1 minute ago, Icetera said:

Hey now, RIC is 4.25 mil!  Also, I think Hampton Roads may be in even worst shape with regionalism than RVA, though there seem to be some big improvements over there recently.

Whoops!! I KNEW 3 mil sounded a little low! Sorry 'bout that!

Still ... when compared with 46 million ... the extra 1.25 million is almost a rounding error for CLT.  (just kidding!)

To an extent, yes Hampton Roads is really locked in - BUT they have done a very nice job of cooperating in a number of areas. Even being divided by the wide mouth of the James into an "upper" and "lower" Hampton Roads, that area has cohesiveness that the Richmond metro sorely needs. Mind you, they have their issues too. But dang it all - that area just seems to get things done!