New Richmond Arena

[Icetera]

16 minutes ago, vaceltic said:

fund an extra 5,000 arena seats

Its not 5,000 new seats but 17,000 as the existing 12,000 are done.  It was never about adding more seats.  One way or another, the coliseum site needs to be redeveloped, the the street-grid restored, the undeveloped and underdeveloped  lots need to be opened for appropriate downtown scale development and city services need to be consolidated out of low-rise dilapidated facilities.  The best place for Social Services to move would be right on top of that GRTC Transfer Center.

Edited August 23, 2019 by Icetera

[vaceltic]

Not a waste of talent at all in fact. I've sent letters to the City Council members, attended Navy Hill meetings and raised questions, and will continue to do so as a concerned and passionate citizen of Richmond, when my availability aside from my full-time job and family allows.

[vaceltic]

24 minutes ago, Hike said:

Do they actually listen, ever see any evidence that it helped in other situations?  Good for you for doing these things, takes a special type of person to get and stayed involved, it's not easy standing up for something, so there's that.  I hike, pretty dedicated to that,  I could talk your ear off about trails, gear and in general anything pertaining to how lucky we are to have so many trails in Virginia that we can take advantage of.

I have raised concerns before about many things, but I am just one voice and there are alot of constituents raising many other priorities and problems (some that i've never seen, knew about, or experienced), but which certainly need to be addressed. I've always thought of my councilmember as a genuine, hard working person and fully support them.  Time will tell if my concerns about the proposal were well taken - they are politicians after all - as they need to present a public image of objectivity to absorb all the angles and opinions until they make their vote. 

[eandslee]

https://www.richmond.com/news/local/city-of-richmond/paul-goldman-appeals-general-registrar-s-referendum-decision-on-billion/article_4b199936-57c1-557f-8d10-f3335369acd1.html

Summary of article:

Goldman appeals the decision of the court that he did not have enough signatures to qualify for November’s ballot. He claims that more than 2K signatures weren’t counted and if so, would have been enough. The court claims he only had 9,941 signatures, but needed 10,340 to qualify. We’ll see how this appeal goes. Fingers crossed he still doesn’t have enough.

In other news, the citizen commission tasked to review the project picked the remaining members for nomination and need to be approved by Council.  Once approved, only then does the 90-day period begin to review the NH plans.  That means it will be early next year before this is even voted on (too much time transpiring for me).  They plan to get the public involved as much as possible.  The nominated commission members are:

• Richard E. Crom, an IRS analyst;
• Mark M. Gordon, a former Bon Secours Mercy Health executive;
• Grindly R. Johnson, Virginia’s deputy secretary of administration;
• Suzanne S. Long, a partner at Meyer Baldwin Long & Moore;
• Mary Harding “Mimi” Sadler, a historical architect with Sadler & Whitehead Architects;
• Michael J. Schewel, a former secretary of commerce and trade for the state;
• Corey D.B. Walker, a professor at the University of Richmond

[Brent114]

So, Leigh Street improvements are out. 

This makes the project more palpable to me actually.  I saw this as a colossal waste of money and an affront to Altria and the biotech park (unnecessary  expense of redesigning  a parking deck and rebuilding the loading/service area of Altria). 

From the Richmond BizSense article it appears that the north side of Leigh Street wasn’t going to be raised anyway (which was good for Altria and the biotech parking deck).  But that would have been an ever bigger waste of money. It wouldn’t accomplish anything with regards to making the area more integrated, there would still be a long gash separating he biotech park from the residential/retail part of the development. 

I doubt the state would have agreed to pay for the “improvements” anyway.  It was just another pipe dream upon which the financing is structured. 

[Icetera]

1 hour ago, Brent114 said:

So, Leigh Street improvements are out. 

This makes the project more palpable to me actually.  I saw this as a colossal waste of money and an affront to Altria and the biotech park (unnecessary  expense of redesigning  a parking deck and rebuilding the loading/service area of Altria). 

From the Richmond BizSense article it appears that the north side of Leigh Street wasn’t going to be raised anyway (which was good for Altria and the biotech parking deck).  But that would have been an ever bigger waste of money. It wouldn’t accomplish anything with regards to making the area more integrated, there would still be a long gash separating he biotech park from the residential/retail part of the development. 

I doubt the state would have agreed to pay for the “improvements” anyway.  It was just another pipe dream upon which the financing is structured. 

I imagine the parking deck would have used the same access as the below grade Altria ramp (Atlria building would not have been changed much).  The fact that they just rebuilt the two bridges over the viaduct would have seemed very wasteful, though.

[cbl1]

Several rather pro-arena articles in the Richmond Times today regarding possible uses of the new coliseum.

https://www.richmond.com/sports/college/plus/downtown-arena-could-benefit-from-not-having-a-sports-team/article_6b875a5c-349b-532a-bec1-4d40de474db2.html

https://www.richmond.com/sports/college/plus/vcu-ur-won-t-move-hoops-teams-to-downtown-arena/article_157a2e9c-8efb-5c01-8c3f-b56aba54f696.html

they are behind paywall .. but give views on various events that would happen in new coliseum - - with positive note that Richmond is in demand!

[eandslee]

Wish I could read them. Frustrating. I need to buy a subscription. 

Edited September 9, 2019 by eandslee

[Shakman]

Me too but I will give a "Like" reaction since it's in favor of a new coliseum.  

[DalWill]

10 hours ago, cbl1 said:

Several rather pro-arena articles in the Richmond Times today regarding possible uses of the new coliseum.

https://www.richmond.com/sports/college/plus/downtown-arena-could-benefit-from-not-having-a-sports-team/article_6b875a5c-349b-532a-bec1-4d40de474db2.html

https://www.richmond.com/sports/college/plus/vcu-ur-won-t-move-hoops-teams-to-downtown-arena/article_157a2e9c-8efb-5c01-8c3f-b56aba54f696.html

they are behind paywall .. but give views on various events that would happen in new coliseum - - with positive note that Richmond is in demand!

I could see Richmond with or without a ML sports team.  Don't see why we can't have one if the citizens in region  and surrounding areas of Tidewater and Appalachian parts would want one (if the support is really there).  Might be a clash with those who provide counterarguments.  If anything, we can be a great host.

And yes, the paywall is annoying, but understandable.

[cbl1]

I wonder if Richmond would come out in support of a G League basketball team.

I don't think anyone anticipated VCU or UR moving games to the new coliseum (except for special tournaments) … I think that was just a headline attention grabber.

Edited September 10, 2019 by cbl1

[jbjust]

30 minutes ago, cbl1 said:

I wonder if Richmond would come out in support of a G League basketball team.

I don't think anyone anticipated VCU or UR moving games to the new coliseum (except for special tournaments) … I think that was just a headline attention grabber.

The Wizards just built a new 4,000 seat arena for their women’s team and G-league team, unfortunately.  

[eandslee]

It’s 2 hours and 18 minutes long, but a good watch to get educated on what the Navy Hill project entails and what it will and won’t do.  A “must see” if you are into tracking this project.  Plus, you get some insight into what the planning commissioners are thinking.

Navy Hill Special Planning Commission from 10 September:

 

2 hours and 18

[Brent114]

That park in dearie is awesome.  I saw a thing about it on PBS or something. 

[Brent114]

I like it. 

I never saw the appeal of filling it in.

It may make for a better pedestrian experience (there is currently a sidewalk at grade that follows Leigh Street on the south side already so any improvement in that area would be marginal) but the idea is underwhelming and very expensive (and it turns out the westbound  lanes were never going to be raised anyway).

i like seeing roads carved out of the landscape.  That section of Leigh has a good feel to me.  Towns lay the roads over the landscape,  cities carve the landscape up to accommodate infrastructure.  

Edited September 20, 2019 by Brent114

[meegwell]

City property approvals...

 

https://richmondmagazine.com/news/news/planning-commission-navy-hill/

[Icetera]

The Marriot is being renovated again.  I found the below perspective on the Navy Hill project to be interesting:

The downtown Marriott renovations also come as the city is weighing the proposed Navy Hill redevelopment, which would include a 527-room Hyatt Regency hotel to supplement the Greater Richmond Convention Center.

Brewer said she welcomes the potential competition, which she said is needed in the Richmond market. While the Marriott, Hilton and other nearby hotels help put up convention center users, she said the center would better compete with other cities for larger events with more available rooms available in the market.

“We need another hotel of our size, which is what that Hyatt and the Navy Hill project are proposing,” she said. “There’s just not enough supply of large hotels that are in close proximity of the convention center for them to win those large pieces of business.

“Yes, it’s going to be competition, but it’s competition I welcome, because then we can pursue bigger pieces of business and compete with cities like Baltimore and Atlanta that we’re losing business to because we don’t have enough room nights.”

https://richmondbizsense.com/2019/10/18/downtown-marriott-begins-multimillion-dollar-renovation/

[cbl1]

I thought Navy Hill was just to support Beyoncé fans … you mean other people are going to come to the city?

[Shakman]

Awesome!  Now if they could give the exterior a little more glass and metal.  

[cbl1]

New Richmond Times article https://www.richmond.com/news/local/scrutiny-of-public-financing-intensifies-after-b-downtown-redevelopment-deal/article_1caab9eb-9ad0-5edc-86f7-03a695ec71c5.html

[cbl1]

another article from RTD https://www.richmond.com/news/local/proposed-coliseum-replacement-hasn-t-passed-richmond-city-council-yet/article_a9b37f50-47df-5084-b38f-b8af74bce4f2.html

Management company who has been selected to run the new coliseum will cover any operational loses (although they expect the arena to make money year 1).  This is same company that manages the convention center.  They have also agreed to spend $8 million furnishing the new arena.

 

 

Edited October 31, 2019 by cbl1

[cbl1]

Great article - love the people that always bring up 6th street marketplace in comments.   Totally different situation and objectives from the 1980s.   6th Street was an attempt to keep businesses from leaving …. Navy Hill is setup to give those businesses and people wanting to come back a place to come back to.   6th street marketplace with todays objectives would have been much more successful.

 

 

 

 

Edited November 5, 2019 by cbl1

[eandslee]

Latest news is that City Council will not vote on the Navy Hill development until early next year (2020).  What does that mean?  Not sure.  Hopefully, it means early January, but I doubt it.   It could still be a long road ahead folks!

[wrldcoupe4]

Seems like no surprise. They don’t get recommendations till late December from their commission reviewing the deal. 

[eandslee]

Well, it looks like it won’t be until at least March 2020 before we know, one way or another, whether the Navy Hill project will finally be built.  Council is hiring an independent contractor to review the plan which will have 90 days to provide council a verdict on their findings.  Funny, because despite all the objectivity the council is seeking, no matter what the findings are, at least two members of council will vote “no” on the project.  So why even go through the objective studies if it won’t cause council members to vote one way or another?  It seems like just a waste of time.  Anyway, happy waiting!  Reference article below:

http://m.richmondfreepress.com/news/2019/nov/22/pushback/