Diamond Area / Hermitage Rd Corridor / Ownby District

[whw53]

I did my best to cobble together a thread name for how this area ( north of tracks, east of AA Blvd, and west\south of Interstate) has been referred to. I think this area will be a central discussion next year with ball park plans, Spy Rock's new construction along Overbrook (the first piece of which was granted a Land Disturbance  permit last week) , and an ever upcoming  RFP for the remaining city owned land here. Growth is headed in this direction. 

Ownby District is a Richmond 300 place name for the area around Overbrook-Ownby. It's the only name of the 3 I actually like. 

https://richmond.com/sports/college/vcu/approval-of-richmond-300-plan-is-really-important-step-toward-new-ballpark-vcu-athletics-village/article_9f70430d-e135-5b76-8543-cd263de1fa06.html#tracking-source=home-breaking

[Urbs42]

This area is so ripe for development.

Navy Hill was a risky attempt to create something massive out of very little, and taking that chance with public funding. By contrast, all the necessary ingredients are already in place here. Notably there is a  broad coalition of trusted partners in the mix, led by VCU and the Squirrels. There will be multiple responses to the RFP, and plenty of private investment to make this a reality. We just need strong leadership from the city to guide the process and not screw it up or bog it down.

I'm encouraged by the 300 plans. Here's hoping 2021 is the turning point where the vision and momentum starts to become reality.  

 

 

 

 

 

[whw53]

VCU gobbling up more land - this time taking a tract along Rhoadmiller. I know they want to have a big presence here but hopefully they don't overextend. I wonder if there is a site plan in mind or if they are just buying now and figuring it out later. Reason I say is I thought Rhoadmiller tracts were outside the Athletics Village project area based on an illustration in Richmond 300 plan which doesn't show that function extending that far south.

I know the plan is just a concept but its all we have so I'd be curious to see what the site plan would be - hopefully the facility , even with its less intense use, gives us some good urban design elements. It would be unfortunate if it turned into a string of  suburban style park facilities. Additionally I worry about VCU buying up all the edge properties simply to have control over the area. 

 https://richmondbizsense.com/2020/12/18/vcu-snaps-up-salvation-army-property-across-from-the-diamond/

Edited December 18, 2020 by whw53

[eandslee]

Maybe it’s for a bigger-than-originally-planned Athletic Village.  Would a larger baseball stadium require more space...especially, if Richmond lands the Nat’s AAA team later (requiring seating of at least 10K)?  Just a thought I had. 

[I miss RVA]

4 hours ago, eandslee said:

Maybe it’s for a bigger-than-originally-planned Athletic Village.  Would a larger baseball stadium require more space...especially, if Richmond lands the Nat’s AAA team later (requiring seating of at least 10K)?  Just a thought I had. 

Let's hope!

[Urbs42]

Still seems uncertain which side of Hermitage the stadium will go on. 

[whw53]

5 demolition plans were applied for this week to remove the old factory\industrial buildings at 1601 Overbrook. This is to be the site for the largest piece of Spy Rock's multi phase development at Overbrook & Ownby. 5 story 190 apartments on this lot if I remember that correctly. 

[whw53]

Update from BizSense on the Spy Rock projects at Overbrook & Ownby, Looks like the piece directly across from Hardywood at the SE corner of Overbrook and Ownby will be for sale stacked units, similar to the piece south of HW, instead of an apartment building. For the large 1601 piece they picked up on the demo plans as well - expiration date for the original demolition permit is June so should see some action there soon.

https://richmondbizsense.com/2021/02/09/more-pieces-for-hardywood-village-redevelopment-fall-into-place/

 

 

[whw53]

Good first step from the city. Very preliminary but at least it signals progress. Aside from prepping for the RFP it also starts the dialogue with surrounding property owners.

https://richmondbizsense.com/2021/02/12/greater-scotts-addition-rezoning-would-pave-way-for-arthur-ashe-boulevard-rfp/


I'm glad city is moving forward with this instead of thinking they needed to go back and tackle Carver/broad rezoning first. Hopefully both can move forward in first half of this year.

Sent from my SM-A600A using Tapatalk

[whw53]

Land Disturbance plan filed this week for the Boxwood site for townhome project. This is second piece of Spy Rock's 'Hardywood Village' project to move forward . This was also the site mentioned in bizSense that is switching from what had been an apartment concept to for sale stacked townhomes. 

[Urbs42]

On 2/12/2021 at 7:51 AM, whw53 said:

Good first step from the city. Very preliminary but at least it signals progress. Aside from prepping for the RFP it also starts the dialogue with surrounding property owners.

https://richmondbizsense.com/2021/02/12/greater-scotts-addition-rezoning-would-pave-way-for-arthur-ashe-boulevard-rfp/


I'm glad city is moving forward with this instead of thinking they needed to go back and tackle Carver/broad rezoning first. Hopefully both can move forward in first half of this year.

Sent from my SM-A600A using Tapatalk
 

Agree, always nice to see progress, but feels like dirt won't turn on the city-owned parcel until  Q3/Q4 of 2022. 

First pitch at a new squirrels/VCU stadium won't happen before 2024.  

[whw53]

This week's private sector driven TOD-1 rezoning takes the Cobb Lumber site from M-1 heavy industrial to our favorite transit oriented designation. It also includes the neighboring property controlled by the city for their ambulatory services. Curious as to why public parcel is included...maybe city saw opportunity to attach this adjacent parcel to private initiative or maybe private actor doing city a favor OR needs that parcel to be TOD-1 as well due to limitations that sometimes occur when differing zoning classes abut each other? Anyhow, I imagine any associated plans stemming from this are for the Cobb Lumber site - not the city parcel. 

 

[whw53]

VCU gobbling up more land off Hermitage. 3rd purchase on this block since December.

https://richmond.com/news/local/education/vcu-continues-property-expansion-near-planned-athletics-village-site/article_33dc4980-3915-5f2c-9bd1-f01782a387cf.html#tracking-source=home-trending

Sent from my SM-A600A using Tapatalk

[whw53]

Hardywood's second building has been vacated and demolished  over last couple days to make way for a portion of the Spy Rock's 3 tract project. (Hardywood has consolidated their Ownby operations back to their original building and renovated the outside space). 

[Icetera]

1 minute ago, whw53 said:

Hardywood's second building has been vacated and demolished  over last couple days to make way for a portion of the Spy Rock's 3 tract project. (Hardywood has consolidated their Ownby operations back to their original building and renovated the outside space). 

Original building?  I had thought they moved everything to the second building, of which I always thought was disappointing.  If they did in fact go back then that is so much better.

[whw53]

13 minutes ago, Icetera said:

Original building?  I had thought they moved everything to the second building, of which I always thought was disappointing.  If they did in fact go back then that is so much better.

I admit - I got into the craft beer game late - maybe i mis-understood which one was original and which one was the expansion. The building at 2410 Ownby right at Overbrook & Ownby is the one they renovated and landscaped recently - the one at 2408 is no longer. Under Spy Rock's plan I think the 2408 site will be townhomes or stacked condos. 

Edited April 22, 2021 by whw53

[Icetera]

1 minute ago, whw53 said:

I admit - I got into the craft beer game late - maybe i mis-understood which one was original and which one was the expansion. The building at 2410 Ownby right at Overbrook & Ownby is the one they renovated and landscaped recently - the one at 2408 is no longer.

Bummer, that is the newer acquisition.

[whw53]

More demolition activity headed this way - commerical demo plan files this week for the building  across  from Hardywood at 2413 Ownby . This lot I believe is also set to get townhomes and\or stacked condos under the larger Spy Rock development plan. Would love to see a full rendering of this entire 3 tract project because there's been some revisions since it was announced so it's not clear in my head what's going where. 

https://energov.richmondgov.com/EnerGov_Prod/selfservice#/plan/d7f1f81f-9ef7-4946-abcb-3b1d4651e330

[whw53]

Demolition has begun on the former industrial complex at 1601 Overbrook. This is to be the largest of the Spy Rock pieces along this stretch - 5 or 6 story L shaped building if i recall correctly. 

[whw53]

Planning staff introduced proposed zoning for Diamond area at city council yesterday - here are the existing and proposed maps provided. Hm looks to be more TOD-1 than I thought - i was was betting on seeing B-4 along the BLVD and the area to be in the RFP. Why limit to TOD-1 here - maybe to hold the developers to the form based controls of TOD-1 ? - they could easily set up a POD overlay to accomplish the same thing...a little disappointed but glad to see this action finally moving forward.

Funny - the Cobb lumber site is to be B-7 under this area wide zoning plan. We know they have a private sector initiated request in to take that to TOD-1 which exceeds vision of planning staff. C'mon lets get this area wide zoning right or we will have to continue down the track of parcel by parcel private sector rezonings for the next decade because planning staff shot to low. Quick fix - everything B-7 take to TOD-1, and everything TOD-1 put to B-4. 

 

 

Edited May 25, 2021 by whw53

[DalWill]

6 minutes ago, whw53 said:

Planning staff introduced proposed zoning for Diamond area at city council yesterday - here are the existing and proposed maps provided. Hm looks to be more TOD-1 than I thought - i was was betting on seeing B-4 along the BLVD and the area to be in the RFP. Why limit to TOD-1 here - maybe to hold the developers to the form based controls of TOD-1 ? - they could easily set up a POD overlay to accomplish the same thing...a little disappointed but glad to see this action finally moving forward.

 

 

OK. now I'm pissed off.

if we have a TOD-1, it BETTER look like this

Edited May 25, 2021 by DalWill

[I miss RVA]

Guys - maybe the answer to why it's like this is found in Richmond BizSense's interview with Kevin Vonck - acting director of the Department of Planning and Development Review.

I'm sure he's a nice guy and hopefully a skilled and good planner - but I'm troubled a little by his mindset - as -- unfortunately --  it certainly seems less aggressive and progressive than that of his predecessor - Mark Olinger.  Some things he said trouble me.

So - he states what we all know is the on-the-ground reality about the market factors that are part of the drivers of Richmond's now explosive growth (something we all here agree needs to be encouraged, not tamped down upon)

"Obviously, there are some areas of the city where we do need the zoning to catch up and reflect the market demand and development that’s occurring. We deal with a number of special-use permits because the market will maybe be ahead of where the zoning is at, and now that we have Richmond 300 in place, we have some guidance in terms of what the future land use should be in some of these areas."

BUT THEN - drops this little bomb that, to me, makes absolutely NO sense whatsoever:

"We want to do zoning that fits that, but I’ll say we don’t always have to go to the max intensity and density right away. There can be incremental steps of how we get to that land use, so it’s really important to have those conversations about what’s the next step."

To say that I am utterly flummoxed by this mindset is an understatement of proportions I can't even begin to describe.  First of all - WHY??? WHY NOT go to the max intensity and density right away? We're 50-years behind the curve as it is and have gotten bypassed by a lot of cities - including of all places RALEIGH. I don't see them soft-pedalling things. Richmond is on one helluva roll right now - WHY ON EARTH would we want to take our foot off the throttle??  Here's a ridiculous scenario I see unfolding - we try to incrementally increase intensity and density - and we get stuck with a bunch of relatively new 12-story (or smaller) buildings - and if a developer wants to come in and put up something 30 or 35 stories, say, north of Broad up along Hermitage Road ... will there even be available space for a developer to purchase, much less build? Are developers going to have to jump through the NIMBY-infested flaming hoops of the SUP process just to get a tower built? 

Incremental steps to get to that land use: how incremental? Is this a way to mollify the NIMBYs and then move things to the next level? But how long should this process take? And will it turn off developers who want to come in and put up buildings taller than the TOD-1 zoning will allow?  Again, how many flaming hoops of the SUP process must be endured? Just because we go to a B-4 zoning in that area doesn't mean 100-story skyscrapers are going to start magically appearing like they might in "City Skylines" ... let's be realistic. WHY LIMIT growth when the demand is there, when companies are either relocating to RVA or seriously looking into it, people are moving to the city from points across the county in droves, and developers are lining up to start building. 

I just don't think this is the mindset Richmond should have at this particular point. The city is absolutely on fire from a development standpoint. I'd prefer planners pour a little more gasoline on that fire instead of water.

Here's the interview.  From Richmond BizSense:

https://richmondbizsense.com/2021/05/25/qa-with-kevin-vonck-richmonds-acting-planning-department-director/

Edited May 26, 2021 by I miss RVA

[I miss RVA]

BTW - I love the concept of going from "Transit Oriented" to "Transit Integrated" ... that's EXACTLY where RVA needs to set her sights for a future target for planning and development.

How do we get there? I can tell you how NOT to get there - we don't get there by taking our feet off the planning and development throttle. Baby steps are NOT what RVA needs right now. PEDAL TO THE METAL.

[Urbs42]

What is the height limit of TOD-1?  

[wrldcoupe4]

12 stories