Shockoe Bottom

[wrldcoupe4]

Think that is still happening as well. 

[I miss RVA]

1 hour ago, rjp212 said:

Concept for the Watkins Cottrell building.   Personally, I love it!  Seems very Scandinavian to me.   https://www.baskervill.com/project/watkins-cottrell-concept/#!

Okay!! Very creative and unique. I like it!   

[whw53]

mark yer calendars! - March 23rd! 

https://richmondbizsense.com/events/the-future-of-shockoe-bottom/

[eandslee]

7 minutes ago, whw53 said:

mark yer calendars! - March 23rd! 

https://richmondbizsense.com/events/the-future-of-shockoe-bottom/

Are you going?  It's a bit pricey...even for a virtual ticket.  We just need one of us to attend and provide the rest of us a report.  I wonder just how much insider information we'd gain for going?

[I miss RVA]

4 hours ago, eandslee said:

Are you going?  It's a bit pricey...even for a virtual ticket.  We just need one of us to attend and provide the rest of us a report.  I wonder just how much insider information we'd gain for going?

Plus RBS archives all of these events after the fact on their website, no?

[ancientcarpenter]

19 minutes ago, I miss RVA said:

Plus RBS archives all of these events after the fact on their website, no?

They do but you have to pay per event for the recording...

[I miss RVA]

2 hours ago, ancientcarpenter said:

They do but you have to pay per event for the recording...

Here's the archive. The cost is $22 per event - but they have all their past events listed - so we can cherry pick. I know I'm in all likelihood going to get the Manchester, the 2021 Eco Forecast, and the Construction and Design videos at some point. And I believe if we buy a recording, we get to keep it - which might be handy to have for future reference.

What's the cost to actually attend?

https://richmondbizsense.com/events/video-archive/

[whw53]

On 3/8/2022 at 10:01 AM, eandslee said:

Are you going?  It's a bit pricey...even for a virtual ticket.  We just need one of us to attend and provide the rest of us a report.  I wonder just how much insider information we'd gain for going?

I'm going to plan on watching virtually - i'll take notes. 

[whw53]

TOD-1 rezoning filed today in the upper Shockoe valley area. 

https://energov.richmondgov.com/EnerGov_Prod/SelfService/richmondvaprod#/plan/7608f850-d7b2-411d-a0ee-7559c8049504

 

 

 

[I miss RVA]

Interesting piece by the legendary Ed Slipek in today's RBS. My only real disagreement with him is on imposing height restrictions of four to five stories on new infill development. Such a restriction is overly draconian IMNSHO - and quite frankly I think unnecessary. No one is talking about putting a 40-story building in the middle of the bottom - but if developers want to come in with 6 to 8 to 10 story buildings (or more) provided zoning regs allow, then I fail to see the issue. I'm not a fan whatsoever of attempting to "re-constitute" history in terms of architecture. Artificially imposing architectural restrictions, 25-foot lot widths and five-story height restrictions will make the entire concept look fake and contrived (at least that's how I see it.)  He talks about building density in the Bottom. You're not going to get REAL density by limiting infill projects to  four-or-five stories.

I'm surprised he's not giving birth to livestock over the Bakery Lofts project that comes in at an earth-shattering 12 stories. OMG!!!! 

Here again is THE classic example of the VERY mindset that has held Richmond back for easily more than 50 years. This myopic thinking is the very thing I kvetch about all the time.  The preservationists do this constantly. It is their mantra. It's not enough that they are willing to (metaphorically) spill their own blood to save every brick of every old building. It's that they then feel it is THEIR Divinely-ordained right to impose ridiculously draconian restrictions on new development coming in. Again, no one is going to drop the Burj Khalifa in the middle of the bottom. But I don't see a problem if some of the new infill gets built out to 8 or 10 stories -- particularly if a given block falls within TOD-1 zoning. They need to stop trying to turn  RVA into some kind of cute little living-history museum. These kinds of heavy-handed restrictions on development do a disservice to the actual history of the neighborhood and are not only unreasonable but, from an urban planning perspective, irresponsible.

May I remind Mr. Slipek that form FOLLOWS function, not the other way around.

https://richmondbizsense.com/2022/03/18/guest-commentary-developers-of-shockoe-bottom-should-keep-it-tight/

Edited March 21, 2022 by I miss RVA

[I miss RVA]

On 3/16/2022 at 8:21 PM, whw53 said:

TOD-1 rezoning filed today in the upper Shockoe valley area. 

https://energov.richmondgov.com/EnerGov_Prod/SelfService/richmondvaprod#/plan/7608f850-d7b2-411d-a0ee-7559c8049504

 

 

 

I meant to comment on this last week. Isn't this part of a stretch along that eastern slope, tracking north to the Leigh Street Viaduct where both the Richmond 300 plan AND the Shockoe Bottom SAP are calling for high-density residential development somewhere in the 12-story range? I seem to recall seeing that such density and height was recommended for this stretch east of I-95.

Obviously - as we've seen - not every project that rises in a TOD-1 zone actually hits 12 stories - but we can always hope for, if nothing else, double-digit floor height.

From the Shockoe Bottom SAP:

 

[whw53]

Ok I came late to the BizSense bottom meeting and will rewatch later. First panel was soley about the heritage campus and obstacles, timeline there. The second panel was mostly retail related - changing retail patterns, how can city incentivize active storefronts, impact \ opinions on the 17th st market redevelopment. 

BIG DROP although it was briefed over was that the Loving's site north of Broad is in early stages of a development that will include 4 towers totaling over 1,000 units - it will include a grocery store amongst other amenities like extra parking for the heritage campus etc. We knew a development is planned here due to the spot rezoning about a year ago and that grocery store was hinted (see page 1 or 2 in this thread) - but 4 TOWERS, OVER 1000 UNITS?? those towers should be over 10 stories i imagine if they are to account for that many units, right??

[I miss RVA]

1 hour ago, whw53 said:

Ok I came late to the BizSense bottom meeting and will rewatch later. First panel was soley about the heritage campus and obstacles, timeline there. The second panel was mostly retail related - changing retail patterns, how can city incentivize active storefronts, impact \ opinions on the 17th st market redevelopment. 

BIG DROP although it was briefed over was that the Loving's site north of Broad is in early stages of a development that will include 4 towers totaling over 1,000 units - it will include a grocery store amongst other amenities like extra parking for the heritage campus etc. We knew a development is planned here due to the spot rezoning about a year ago and that grocery store was hinted (see page 1 or 2 in this thread) - but 4 TOWERS, OVER 1000 UNITS?? those towers should be over 10 stories i imagine if they are to account for that many units, right??

To clarify - that's the big area just north of Broad, east of the train tracks and west of 17th Street, yes?

Wow - you're trying to make my week for a second week in a row, my friend.    First the news last week about the tower at Fourshee & Grace. Now the big 4/1,000 group. HO-LEE MO-LEE!!! 

Edited March 23, 2022 by I miss RVA

[ancientcarpenter]

2 hours ago, whw53 said:

Ok I came late to the BizSense bottom meeting and will rewatch later. First panel was soley about the heritage campus and obstacles, timeline there. The second panel was mostly retail related - changing retail patterns, how can city incentivize active storefronts, impact \ opinions on the 17th st market redevelopment. 

BIG DROP although it was briefed over was that the Loving's site north of Broad is in early stages of a development that will include 4 towers totaling over 1,000 units - it will include a grocery store amongst other amenities like extra parking for the heritage campus etc. We knew a development is planned here due to the spot rezoning about a year ago and that grocery store was hinted (see page 1 or 2 in this thread) - but 4 TOWERS, OVER 1000 UNITS?? those towers should be over 10 stories i imagine if they are to account for that many units, right??

2022 will be a year of tower renderings and cranes...unless we get hit with a recession - hope I didn't just jinx us!

 

Going off of the future Admiral building coming (soon?) in Jackson Ward, it is 12 stories at 250 luxury units. It would be great to see that go up in Shockoe. VERY excited about the grocery store potential!

[Hike]

3 hours ago, whw53 said:

Ok I came late to the BizSense bottom meeting and will rewatch later. First panel was soley about the heritage campus and obstacles, timeline there. The second panel was mostly retail related - changing retail patterns, how can city incentivize active storefronts, impact \ opinions on the 17th st market redevelopment. 

BIG DROP although it was briefed over was that the Loving's site north of Broad is in early stages of a development that will include 4 towers totaling over 1,000 units - it will include a grocery store amongst other amenities like extra parking for the heritage campus etc. We knew a development is planned here due to the spot rezoning about a year ago and that grocery store was hinted (see page 1 or 2 in this thread) - but 4 TOWERS, OVER 1000 UNITS?? those towers should be over 10 stories i imagine if they are to account for that many units, right??

Ok, now I think I see why Ed Slipek was talking about building height here in a recent bizsense article,  linked below.  He must have seen the Loving site planning and is reacting. Read his commentary, he's suggesting lower heights for scale and reverence to the historical time period and context as it applies to the potential museum nextdoor.

https://richmondbizsense.com/2022/03/18/guest-commentary-developers-of-shockoe-bottom-should-keep-it-tight/

[Icetera]

15 minutes ago, Hike said:

Ok, now I think I see why Ed Slipek was talking about building height here in a recent bizsense article,  linked below.  He must have seen the Loving site planning and is reacting. Read his commentary, he's suggesting lower heights for scale and reverence to the historical time period and context as it applies to the potential museum nextdoor.

https://richmondbizsense.com/2022/03/18/guest-commentary-developers-of-shockoe-bottom-should-keep-it-tight/

I can understand that, to a degree, on the block with the existing Lovings warehouse (which he references), but North of Broad heck no.  Build it up!  That height needs to balance out the burial land that cannot be developed.

Another thing missed is that due to flood concerns, many of these projects will probably be looking at flood resistant ground floor usages such as garage parking, which is not realistically feasible with only a few floors per structure.

[Hike]

6 minutes ago, Icetera said:

I can understand that, to a degree, on the block with the existing Lovings warehouse (which he references), but North of Broad heck no.  Build it up!  That height needs to balance out the burial land that cannot be developed.

Another thing missed is that due to flood concerns, many of these projects will probably be looking at flood resistant ground floor usages such as garage parking, which is not realistically feasible with only a few floors per structure.

His commentary does seem to imply south of Broad, likely not an issue for north of Broad.  I was unaware these were separate developments or even that there was something brewing other than the museum and surrounding area, so exciting news on both sides of Broad street.    

[I miss RVA]

47 minutes ago, Hike said:

Ok, now I think I see why Ed Slipek was talking about building height here in a recent bizsense article,  linked below.  He must have seen the Loving site planning and is reacting. Read his commentary, he's suggesting lower heights for scale and reverence to the historical time period and context as it applies to the potential museum nextdoor.

https://richmondbizsense.com/2022/03/18/guest-commentary-developers-of-shockoe-bottom-should-keep-it-tight/

With all due respect to Ed Slipek, he's full of it.

He's been beating this sorry, worn-out drum of height restrictions since time immemorium. I'll reiterate what I wrote above in response to his nonsense and I'll include the two excellent points you made for reference:

Height restrictions:

Such restrictions as he is proposing are overly draconian, and quite frankly 100% unnecessary. No one is talking about putting a 40-story building in the middle of the bottom - If developers want to come in with 6 to 8 to 10 -- or even 12 story buildings provided zoning regs allow or an SUP is granted because the request is deemed appropriate by city planners, then I fail to see the issue, particularly when developers building in older parts of RVA have a proven track record or showing sensitivity to the surrounding urban fabric through creative design - and the new zoning regs address many of these issues regarding setbacks, scale, parking, etc.

Scale & refernce to a historical time period/context:

I'm not a fan whatsoever of attempting to "re-constitute" history in terms of architecture. Artificially imposing architectural restrictions, 25-foot lot widths and five-story height restrictions will make the entire concept look fake and contrived (at least that's how I see it.)  He talks about building density in the Bottom. You're not going to get REAL density by limiting infill projects to  four-or-five stories.

Here again is THE classic example of the VERY mindset & myopic viewpoint that has held Richmond back for easily more than 50 years.  The preservationists do this constantly. It is their mantra. It's not enough that they are willing to go to the mattresses to save every brick of every old building. It's that they then feel it is THEIR Divinely-ordained right to impose ridiculously draconian restrictions on new development coming in. Again, no one is going to drop the Burj Khalifa in the middle of the bottom. But I don't see a problem if some of the new infill gets built out to 8 or 10 or 12 stories -- particularly if a given block falls within TOD-1 zoning. They need to stop trying to turn  RVA into another Charleston or Savannah type of  living-history museum. These kinds of heavy-handed restrictions on development do a disservice to the actual history of the neighborhood and are not only unreasonable but, from an urban planning perspective, irresponsible.

Once again, I would like to remind Mr. Slipek that form FOLLOWS function, not the other way around. And as both an architectural historian and a professor of architecture at VCU, quite frankly, he should know better.

Edited March 23, 2022 by I miss RVA

[Hike]

22 minutes ago, I miss RVA said:

With all due respect to Ed Slipek, he's full of it.

He's been beating this sorry, worn-out drum of height restrictions since time immemorium. I'll reiterate what I wrote above in response to his nonsense and I'll include the two excellent points you made for reference:

Height restrictions:

Such restrictions as he is proposing are overly draconian, and quite frankly 100% unnecessary. No one is talking about putting a 40-story building in the middle of the bottom - If developers want to come in with 6 to 8 to 10 -- or even 12 story buildings provided zoning regs allow or an SUP is granted because the request is deemed appropriate by city planners, then I fail to see the issue, particularly when developers building in older parts of RVA have a proven track record or showing sensitivity to the surrounding urban fabric through creative design - and the new zoning regs address many of these issues regarding setbacks, scale, parking, etc.

Scale & refernce to a historical time period/context:

I'm not a fan whatsoever of attempting to "re-constitute" history in terms of architecture. Artificially imposing architectural restrictions, 25-foot lot widths and five-story height restrictions will make the entire concept look fake and contrived (at least that's how I see it.)  He talks about building density in the Bottom. You're not going to get REAL density by limiting infill projects to  four-or-five stories.

Here again is THE classic example of the VERY mindset & myopic viewpoint that has held Richmond back for easily more than 50 years.  The preservationists do this constantly. It is their mantra. It's not enough that they are willing to go to the mattresses to save every brick of every old building. It's that they then feel it is THEIR Divinely-ordained right to impose ridiculously draconian restrictions on new development coming in. Again, no one is going to drop the Burj Khalifa in the middle of the bottom. But I don't see a problem if some of the new infill gets built out to 8 or 10 or 12 stories -- particularly if a given block falls within TOD-1 zoning. They need to stop trying to turn  RVA into another Charleston or Savannah type of  living-history museum. These kinds of heavy-handed restrictions on development do a disservice to the actual history of the neighborhood and are not only unreasonable but, from an urban planning perspective, irresponsible.

Once again, I would like to remind Mr. Slipek that form FOLLOWS function, not the other way around. And as an architectural historian and professor of architecture at VCU, quite frankly, he should know better.

I jumped on my computer to make it easier to type and now see you already discussed this earlier and up the page already.  On my phone, it's a page earlier and missed that, sorry for the repeat on your part.  I think that having a pocket surrounded by larger scale, like proposed, would be a nice compliment to a more contextualized series of buildings that are honoring the museum and surrounding grounds. Walk in a more urban landscape and then enter a "traditional" zone for lack of a better term.  Like the liberty bell plaza/national historic park in Philadelphia?

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Liberty+Bell/@39.9497098,-75.151767,448m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m12!1m6!3m5!1s0x89c6c8830b04502f:0xce39e053fb81ef23!2sLiberty+Bell!8m2!3d39.9496103!4d-75.1502821!3m4!1s0x89c6c8830b04502f:0xce39e053fb81ef23!8m2!3d39.9496103!4d-75.1502821

 

Edited March 23, 2022 by Hike

[I miss RVA]

7 minutes ago, Hike said:

I jumped on my computer to make it easier to type and now see you already discussed this earlier and up the page already.  On my phone, it's a page earlier and missed that, sorry for the repeat on your part.  I think that having a pocket surrounded by larger scale, like proposed, would be a nice compliment to a more contextualized series of buildings that are honoring the museum and surrounding grounds. Walk in a more urban landscape and then enter a "traditional" zone for lack of a better term.  Like the liberty bell plaza/national historic park in Philadelphia?

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Liberty+Bell/@39.9497098,-75.151767,448m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m12!1m6!3m5!1s0x89c6c8830b04502f:0xce39e053fb81ef23!2sLiberty+Bell!8m2!3d39.9496103!4d-75.1502821!3m4!1s0x89c6c8830b04502f:0xce39e053fb81ef23!8m2!3d39.9496103!4d-75.1502821

 

YES! Excellent analogy! I have often thought of exactly this kind of juxtaposition of old/historic/small and new/modern/tall development in Philadelphia when considering how RVA could best mesh the two together. Philly and Boston are cities that pull this off VERY well. New York does, too. But to your point - this is exactly how RVA could -- and should -- approach it, rather than blanket-imposition of draconian restrictions to satisfy the Ed Slipeks and preservationists and NIMBYs of the world.

As for the redux on my commentary - I think perhaps it's a message that needed to be restated/repeated. It's a theme we can't pound on hard enough, IMNSHO. As much as many in our community here are loathe regarding comparisons of RVA to cities like Atlanta or Charlotte, I am equally loathe regarding the comparisons to Charleston or Savannah. We DON'T NEED TO BE LIKE THEM! Two living-history-museum towns are plenty! We don't need a third one,, and we sure as HELL DON'T NEED TO BE that third one.

[Hike]

16 minutes ago, I miss RVA said:

YES! Excellent analogy! I have often thought of exactly this kind of juxtaposition of old/historic/small and new/modern/tall development in Philadelphia when considering how RVA could best mesh the two together. Philly and Boston are cities that pull this off VERY well. New York does, too. But to your point - this is exactly how RVA could -- and should -- approach it, rather than blanket-imposition of draconian restrictions to satisfy the Ed Slipeks and preservationists and NIMBYs of the world.

As for the redux on my commentary - I think perhaps it's a message that needed to be restated/repeated. It's a theme we can't pound on hard enough, IMNSHO. As much as many in our community here are loathe regarding comparisons of RVA to cities like Atlanta or Charlotte, I am equally loathe regarding the comparisons to Charleston or Savannah. We DON'T NEED TO BE LIKE THEM! Two living-history-museum towns are plenty! We don't need a third one,, and we sure as HELL DON'T NEED TO BE that third one.

Well done, thought the liberty bell is exactly like what this could be.  My wife and I went to Williamsburg yesterday, yes, yes we did and have to say,  it's pretty sleepy there.  It needs more "other" things to do to compliment the very traditional feel of everything there.  We have really liked the rural feel of the town,  gardens, etc. but they lack staff and it suffers, in fact,  the park suffers in general, fewer people going, even before covid. Everything within 20 miles is like going back in time,  and I think that hurts it more than it helps it.  The Liberty bell park is cool, mid rise lunch, cross the street and through the trees,  history..

Edited March 23, 2022 by Hike

[I miss RVA]

14 minutes ago, Hike said:

Well done, thought the liberty bell is exactly like what this could be.  My wife and I went to Williamsburg yesterday, yes, yes we did and have to say,  it's pretty sleepy there.  It needs more "other" things to do to compliment the very traditional feel of everything there.  We have really liked the rural feel of the town,  gardens, etc. but they lack staff and it suffers, in fact,  the park suffers in general, fewer people going, even before covid. Everything within 20 miles is like going back in time,  and I think that hurts it more than it helps it.  The Liberty bell park is cool, mid rise lunch, cross the street and through the trees,  history..

Very well said. Re: Philly - I have often - OFTEN - said that if there's a city that RVA should look to for inspiration (not necessarily to "emulate" - I think we go down a rabbit hole of very silly and fruitless debate when we say RVA "should be like... yada yada..." ... but for inspiration, it's Philadelphia. It's been quite a number of years since I was last in the City of Brotherly Love, but every time I've ever visited, I've loved it there. Even considered moving to Philly on more than one occasion. It's one of my favorite cities in the country. They get it right. They have history that RVA can only DREAM of having (and vice versa - I'm not downplaying our history!!) - but LOOK at their massive - MASSIVE skyline! THIS is a city that's not afraid AT ALL to embrace growth, change, development - and knows how to do so without sacrificing history. RVA could go to grad school from Philadelphia on how to mix the old and the new.

The preservationists and NIMBYs would all be relegated to sitting in the corner - facing the wall. 

Williamsburg: Also one of my favorite places to visit - for far different reasons. My first wife & I honeymooned there. My 2nd wife and I visited there several times (she was not from Virginia - and fell IN LOVE with Williamsburg). I went there multi-dozens of times as a kid - my mother was a Williamsburg-a-holic ... and every year in grade school until about the 7th grade or so featured a trip to Williamsburg, usually as part of history class or social studies/civics class. I have lots of fond memories and would love to take my kids there at some point before they're all grown up and on their own.

THAT SAID - it's basically a living history museum. A history "theme park" in a manner of speaking. Okay - fine. But do we want that for Shockoe Bottom? PUHHHH-LEEEEEEAZZZE!!!!  If ANY of us on here say "yes" to that question, then I recommend a visit to any of the fine psychiatric facilities around the RVA metro area for a full evaluation.

After I read -- and digested -- Mr. Slipek's commentary for the umpteenth time, and read the reader comments, my thought was - "so, do these folks think that business owners, shopkeepers, workers at the museum, etc., should dress up in period clothing like they do in Colonial Williamsburg? Will that become de facto the standard - the REQUIREMENT - for doing business in the Bottom?" Because if THAT's what the area would devolve into, then we're in serious trouble as a city. That's all I'm going to say about that.

Edited March 23, 2022 by I miss RVA

[Downtowner]

39 minutes ago, I miss RVA said:

Very well said. Re: Philly - I have often - OFTEN - said that if there's a city that RVA should look to for inspiration (not necessarily to "emulate" - I think we go down a rabbit hole of very silly and fruitless debate when we say RVA "should be like... yada yada..." ... but for inspiration, it's Philadelphia. It's been quite a number of years since I was last in the City of Brotherly Love, but every time I've ever visited, I've loved it there. Even considered moving to Philly on more than one occasion. It's one of my favorite cities in the country. They get it right. They have history that RVA can only DREAM of having (and vice versa - I'm not downplaying our history!!) - but LOOK at their massive - MASSIVE skyline! THIS is a city that's not afraid AT ALL to embrace growth, change, development - and knows how to do so without sacrificing history. RVA could go to grad school from Philadelphia on how to mix the old and the new.

The preservationists and NIMBYs would all be relegated to sitting in the corner - facing the wall. 

Williamsburg: Also one of my favorite places to visit - for far different reasons. My first wife & I honeymooned there. My 2nd wife and I visited there several times (she was not from Virginia - and fell IN LOVE with Williamsburg). I went there multi-dozens of times as a kid - my mother was a Williamsburg-a-holic ... and every year in grade school until about the 7th grade or so featured a trip to Williamsburg, usually as part of history class or social studies/civics class. I have lots of fond memories and would love to take my kids there at some point before they're all grown up and on their own.

THAT SAID - it's basically a living history museum. A history "theme park" in a manner of speaking. Okay - fine. But do we want that for Shockoe Bottom? PUHHHH-LEEEEEEAZZZE!!!!  If ANY of us on here say "yes" to that question, then I recommend a visit to any of the fine psychiatric facilities around the RVA metro area for a full evaluation.

After I read -- and digested -- Mr. Slipek's commentary for the umpteenth time, and read the reader comments, my thought was - "so, do these folks think that business owners, shopkeepers, workers at the museum, etc., should dress up in period clothing like they do in Colonial Williamsburg? Will that become de facto the standard - the REQUIREMENT - for doing business in the Bottom?" Because if THAT's what the area would devolve into, then we're in serious trouble as a city. That's all I'm going to say about that.

I love Philly. Love the old feel of it and the newer feel as well with liberty place which is one of my favorite set of towers in the entire country. Also love the other tower in there skyline as well.. well at least the tallest ones. It’s one of my favorite Urban cities in the entire country. I even loved parts of suburban Philly. My mom likes to go to king of Prussia to the huge mall there. I think it’s the second biggest mall in the country. Also loved the liberty bell park. Rittenhouse square is really nice too. There was also a museum I remember that had sculptures of all the presidents. I think it was called something like the congressional museum can’t really remember honestly. Oh and the cheesesteaks are the best. And the reading terminal market is the best. So many vendors from all sorts of religions and other nationalities. A ton of Amish and I think Quaker’s too. But yes love Philly.

[I miss RVA]

14 minutes ago, Downtowner said:

I love Philly. Love the old feel of it and the newer feel as well with liberty place which is one of my favorite set of towers in the entire country. Also love the other tower in there skyline as well.. well at least the tallest ones. It’s one of my favorite Urban cities in the entire country. I even loved parts of suburban Philly. My mom likes to go to king of Prussia to the huge mall there. I think it’s the second biggest mall in the country. Also loved the liberty bell park. Rittenhouse square is really nice too. There was also a museum I remember that had sculptures of all the presidents. I think it was called something like the congressional museum can’t really remember honestly. Oh and the cheesesteaks are the best. And the reading terminal market is the best. So many vendors from all sorts of religions and other nationalities. A ton of Amish and I think Quaker’s too. But yes love Philly.

I think the first time we went was in the early 70s. For years, we had pix my mother took of my brother and me standing by the Liberty Bell - this was back when it was still inside of Independence Hall, before it got moved outside. I recall taking a trip to Philly again in 1984 and more pix standing by the bell - only this time in the pavilion outside of Independence Hall. I made several trips to Philly in the early 2000s (I was between marriages and was dating someone who lived there. She's a Philly native so I got the skinny on a lot of cool 'city' stuff that just further drove home my view that what Philly had done, RVA can do.)

Indeed, Philly is one of those cities that got it right.

[I miss RVA]

7 hours ago, whw53 said:

Ok I came late to the BizSense bottom meeting and will rewatch later. First panel was soley about the heritage campus and obstacles, timeline there. The second panel was mostly retail related - changing retail patterns, how can city incentivize active storefronts, impact \ opinions on the 17th st market redevelopment. 

BIG DROP although it was briefed over was that the Loving's site north of Broad is in early stages of a development that will include 4 towers totaling over 1,000 units - it will include a grocery store amongst other amenities like extra parking for the heritage campus etc. We knew a development is planned here due to the spot rezoning about a year ago and that grocery store was hinted (see page 1 or 2 in this thread) - but 4 TOWERS, OVER 1000 UNITS?? those towers should be over 10 stories i imagine if they are to account for that many units, right??

Question: is this (yellow box) the location where the four towers would be built? Second picture is same location looking north from Broad St.

If not - where specifically are we talking about the towers being built?

 

Edited March 23, 2022 by I miss RVA