Jump to content

Carver District / Newtowne West / Allison District


whw53

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Icetera said:

I will second that.  This building could be integrated nicely into another taller structure on the adjacent undeveloped lot.

I can definitely go along with that concept! It's large enough that it could be integrated quite nicely into a taller structure next door.  That's a solid argument for retaining it (given its size and the fact that there is plenty of vacant land that could/should be redeveloped). Plus, as rjp212 pointed out, the streets there are narrow. Even with the upzoning in place, using the height regs for a B-4 district, that 4:1 ratio might not net a whole lot of height as it is. What's the old saying about a bird in hand...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

More lawsuits from the surrounding NIMBYs.   
 

“Inserting downtown, high-rise buildings around historic, mostly residential neighborhoods ... does not nurture what Richmond is in terms of its legacy and charm.”


Somehow though, multiple parking lots, suburban style drive thrus, and cheap metal buildings that are present now, are ok.  :tw_rage:

 

https://richmond.com/news/local/neighborhood-groups-file-suit-against-city-ahead-of-vote-next-week-on-pulse-corridor-rezoning/article_75a7e667-7048-550f-8d50-3e59b71f351d.html#tracking-source=home-the-latest

Edited by rjp212
  • Sad 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea - its unfortunate. I think council will buckle and the planners will have to reintroduce the rezoning package and place the B-4 areas to TOD-1. Not the worst thing in the world - there is always SUP  process a developer could go through - but so ...average. Sad part is I have heard no substantial reason why b-4 is a bad idea for this crucial area - not 1. Everything we know about urban planning and design, about urban economics and research in public transportation says we should open up the market to a max here. I think we have another opportunity though...I think Stoney is going to aim big north of here in the Diamond, hopefully more on this next year...this area is too far for the fanatical fanners to fret over but who knows how far that backyard of theirs' extends in their head. 

Edited by whw53
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, rjp212 said:

More lawsuits from the surrounding NIMBYs.   
 

“Inserting downtown, high-rise buildings around historic, mostly residential neighborhoods ... does not nurture what Richmond is in terms of its legacy and charm.”


Somehow though, multiple parking lots, suburban style drive thrus, and cheap metal buildings that are present now, are ok.  :tw_rage:

 

https://richmond.com/news/local/neighborhood-groups-file-suit-against-city-ahead-of-vote-next-week-on-pulse-corridor-rezoning/article_75a7e667-7048-550f-8d50-3e59b71f351d.html#tracking-source=home-the-latest

Well said, rjp212. My thoughts exactly.

I swear to God these people are so full of cow chips that it's gone BEYOND the level of absurd.

"what Richmond is in terms of its legacy and charm" ...  You know what?? F legacy and charm!! For Christ sake, highrise buildings EVEN ON BROAD STREET do absolutely NOTHING to diminish the Fan. They are out of their bloody minds!! I pray the judge throws this out. It's simply ridiculous.

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

2 hours ago, whw53 said:

Yea - its unfortunate. I think council will buckle and the planners will have to reintroduce the rezoning package and place the B-4 areas to TOD-1. Not the worst thing in the world - there is always SUP  process a developer could go through - but so ...average. Sad part is I have heard no substantial reason why b-4 is a bad idea for this crucial area - not 1. Everything we know about urban planning and design, about urban economics and research in public transportation says we should open up the market to a max here. I think we have another opportunity though...I think Stoney is going to aim big north of here in the Diamond, hopefully more on this next year...this area is too far for the fanatical fanners to fret over but who knows how far that backyard of theirs' extends in their head. 

IKR? I'm honestly surprised their backyard reach doesn't extend all the way to Manchester.

I've been accused previously of being the "old timer railing on Richmond" instead of celebrating her current growth. But THIS is EXACTLY what I was lamenting. THIS garbage has gone on my entire lifetime. THIS insipid mentality was the order of the day in the '70s, '80s, even the '90s - all the while the city was dying and rotting away, hemorrhaging population and tax revenue. Now that she's growing - and doing so better than ever - we have to fight back against the NIMBY mindset to ensure the city keeps rolling. Thank GOD Grey failed in her election bid. Can you imagine the damage she might have done as mayor??

I apologize to my fellow Richmondphiles -- who indeed love this city  -- for going nuclear on this issue. This particular problem -- and let's be clear, this issue IS A PROBLEM -- is my pet peeve of pet peeves and utterly infuriates me. Probably because I've witnessed this very thing for 50 years, I have absolutely no patience for it. Richmond is on a roll and needs to STAY on a roll!

This is such B.S.

Yes -zoning it TOD-1 still allows for SUPs - but you know these clowns will fight tooth-and-nail EVERY single project that comes along.  Agreed, Stoney has a big shell in his arsenal -- going north. What if the planners restructured the B-4 zoning such that they pulled it back ONE block to Marshall Street? I don't like the idea of giving in to these nutcase NIMBYs - but I'm curious if they'd back off then? Make it such that ANYTHING north of Marshall is fair game. If a developer wants to put a 150-story building up in the B-4 zone, so be it. Let it rise!! Give these NIMBYs a one-block buffer and tell them to sit down and STFU.

I just worry that with them, it's always "give an inch, they take a mile".

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

34 minutes ago, DalWill said:

 

That argument makes no sense. The judge will probably throw this out. The "high rises" ...

1. are actually mid-rise truth be told.

2. are facing the Broad Street corridor,  as well the Hermitage Road corridor; there is no potential threat.

3. is a smoke screen excuse for landlords/realtors to keep their grip on the neighborhood by decrease the competition that would have existed if the zoning was changed for higher floors(one of you mentioned this on reddit/RVA forums). Guess who else was also in that industry talking that mess-

Kim Gray.

Point three nails it.  My experience in the fan with landlords was negative to say the least.  If high quality, modern alternatives arrive, fan landlords will have to up their game substantially and it won't be cheap.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DalWill said:

 

That argument makes no sense. The judge will probably throw this out. The "high rises" ...

1. are actually mid-rise truth be told.

2. are facing the Broad Street corridor,  as well the Hermitage Road corridor; there is no potential threat.

3. is a smoke screen excuse for landlords/realtors to keep their grip on the neighborhood by decrease the competition that would have existed if the zoning was changed for higher floors(one of you mentioned this on reddit/RVA forums). Guess who else was also in that industry talking that mess-

Kim Gray.

Fully agreed. And why am I not surprised that Gray is talking this garbage?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Technically 20 stories is a high rise.  Richmond has a few high rises.  Skyscrapers are buildings over 500 feet.  We have none of those.

 

20 story buildings along that stretch of Broad wouldn’t even be visible from Grace Street.  The streets in the Fan are too narrow.  You cannot get far enough away from the row houses to see over them. 
 

and Majors is right.  It will take years, decades for there to be 20 story buildings along that stretch.  No one is clamoring to build those in Richmond.  A change in zoning =/= increased demand. 
 

Keeping property values low so that landowners can continue to make money off of their properties is a backward approach, IMO. They are asking the entire Richmond region to accept being held back until a few landlords  and restauranteurs get bored and decide to retire.   Making your properties/ services competitive is too much work for them.  It is easier to force the city to limit competition. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/7/2020 at 10:06 AM, Brent114 said:

Technically 20 stories is a high rise.  Richmond has a few high rises.  Skyscrapers are buildings over 500 feet.  We have none of those.

 

20 story buildings along that stretch of Broad wouldn’t even be visible from Grace Street.  The streets in the Fan are too narrow.  You cannot get far enough away from the row houses to see over them. 
 

and Majors is right.  It will take years, decades for there to be 20 story buildings along that stretch.  No one is clamoring to build those in Richmond.  A change in zoning =/= increased demand. 
 

Keeping property values low so that landowners can continue to make money off of their properties is a backward approach, IMO. They are asking the entire Richmond region to accept being held back until a few landlords  and restauranteurs get bored and decide to retire.   Making your properties/ services competitive is too much work for them.  It is easier to force the city to limit competition. 

There seems to be some variance into what qualifies as a "Skyscraper."  The common measurements are 100m (329') or 150m (493').  Emporis uses the 100m so that is what I use when referring to them as such.  With this, Richmond has 5 qualifying Skyscrapers:

James Monroe  137m (449')
600 Canal Place  127m (417')
SunTrust Plaza 122m (400')
Federal Reserve 120m (393')
Bank of America 101 (333')

Emporis uses over 35m (115') to classify High-Rise.
 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Icetera said:

There seems to be some variance into what qualifies as a "Skyscraper."  The common measurements are 100m (329') or 150m (493').  Emporis uses the 100m so that is what I use when referring to them as such.  With this, Richmond has 5 qualifying Skyscrapers:

James Monroe  137m (449')
600 Canal Place  127m (417')
SunTrust Plaza 122m (400')
Federal Reserve 120m (393')
Bank of America 101 (333')

Emporis uses over 35m (115') to classify High-Rise.
 

Wondering what it'll take for Richmond to get a 500-footer.  Or a 550... or a 600-footer...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, eandslee said:

City-freakin-Council needs to grow an F'ng pair and tell them - "NO MORE BS'ing around. Sit down and STFU" ... and just approve the up-zoning!! I mean for Christ sake exactly how difficult does this have to be??????

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just thought I’d get @I miss RVA in a tailspin! :rofl:

Now you can match a face to the names by watching this video:

https://www.wric.com/news/taking-action/no-benefit-in-high-rise-construction-neighborhood-groups-fear-20-story-buildings-on-broad-street/

It is incredibly unfounded what they are saying. 

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, eandslee said:

Just thought I’d get @I miss RVA in a tailspin! :rofl:

Now you can match a face to the names by watching this video:

https://www.wric.com/news/taking-action/no-benefit-in-high-rise-construction-neighborhood-groups-fear-20-story-buildings-on-broad-street/

It is incredibly unfounded what they are saying. 

ROFL!!! Thank you my friend! And just when i was just getting my blood pressure under control! :lol:

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Icetera changed the title to Carver District / Newtowne West / Allison District
  • 2 weeks later...

City has buckled on the b4

https://richmondbizsense.com/2020/12/10/city-withdraws-pulse-zoning-changes-plans-to-revisit-proposal-next-year/

Kim Gray rambling on about preserving 'historically black neighborhoods', comparing upzoning to 'poor highway projects', and saying she needs more renderings to visualize what a 20 story building looks like. Nothing of substance - bye Kim. 

  • Like 2
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.