Diamond Area / Hermitage Rd Corridor / Ownby District

[Brent114]

I’m not against moving the station (though it’s childish to move around existing and working services ).  The center of gravity is moving towards the current location though and Greyhound isn’t here to serve downtown, it’s here  to serve all of metro Richmond.  If there’s a push to move the station, I’m not aware of it. There’s a push to make it disappear (seeing poor people is  such a downer while I’m eating tacos) but that’s not a plan to replace it.  The cart is way before the horse here and it’s more likely that we will just lose the station in the city than a new shiny one will be built downtown. 

I cannot understand the desire by some on this thread to move jobs and services out of the city.  It takes magical thinking to believe we’ll be left with a more dynamic neighborhood after we remove all economic diversity, travelers and employers.  

Edited January 21, 2023 by Brent114

[Hike]

I do like the idea of an integrated service into a convenient location, not convinced that’s Main Street station, perhaps adjacent, but doubt that will happen. How about back on broad street, like it was until 1985, I think near 4th and broad was the location. In 1982, when I first moved here, I would go there, probably once a week, and pick up shipped supplies being transferred from elsewhere. Yes, goods were shipped on the bus. Does anyone remember this location?

 

Edited January 21, 2023 by Hike

[123fakestreet]

Some kind of transfer plaza at Main St Station always made sense to me, whether its Greyhound or GRTC.  There was swaths of surface parking there, much of it undeveloped because it's a flood plain. Well what is a transfer station? Largely a big parking lot, just with some cover and a small building.  Seems like a good fit for those surface lots, plus integrate buses into the train station for a transport hub.

[wrldcoupe4]

7 hours ago, Brent114 said:

I’m not against moving the station (though it’s childish to move around existing and working services ).  The center of gravity is moving towards the current location though and Greyhound isn’t here to serve downtown, it’s here  to serve all of metro Richmond.  If there’s a push to move the station, I’m not aware of it. There’s a push to make it disappear (seeing poor people is  such a downer while I’m eating tacos) but that’s not a plan to replace it.  The cart is way before the horse here and it’s more likely that we will just lose the station in the city than a new shiny one will be built downtown. 

I cannot understand the desire by some on this thread to move jobs and services out of the city.  It takes magical thinking to believe we’ll be left with a more dynamic neighborhood after we remove all economic diversity, travelers and employers.  

The outcome really has nothing to do with anyone here or maybe even locally. A German company bought the business but not the real estate. The former owner now wants to dispose of the real estate. They’ll do so to the best buyer. Did the new owner of the business structure a long term lease on the real estate as part of the sale to protect their operation at this location? Is it something short term that favors the owner of the land? Does the owner of the business have a different model regarding bus stations/terminals? Could the new German owner of the business step in and buy the real estate to preserve its presence here? Ultimately the choices these two entities have made will dictate the outcome here, and that has nothing to do with classism. 

[I miss RVA]

@Brent114-- respectfully, my friend, I HAVE to push back.

Location/access to interstates: The Main Street Station location is as advantageous to Greyhound having access to I-95/64 as is A.A. Blvd, with a negligible distance difference from MSS to on/off ramps. That's a wash.

Classism: How so? Particularly when the CITY ITSELF has baked into master plan after master plan after master plan the proposal to consolidate ALL ground transit -- rail, interstate bus, city bus (local and express) at Main Street Station.  WHY on earth would you choose to play this card when what we're looking at is a common-sense issue from an URBAN-PLANNING/DEVELOPMENT perspective? How is this about "shuffling poor people away from __________________" -- Just so you know - for the record, and I won't go into detail, but I actually would qualify as one of those "poor people" you're asserting you're defending. No one needs to know the circumstances as to why this is the case - but if it's strictly on a dollars and cents level, I 100% qualify - and I won't go any further into it because it's a personal issue. (Which leads me to wonder - are you speaking purely from an economic standpoint, or from another, additional/different perspective that's not limited strictly to finances? Because if it's financially based, I absolutely qualify as "poor people" - and that's not an exaggeration.)

And even with THAT said - I 100% support relocating Greyhound downtown to Main Street Station - because I don't in any way see it as a class/socio-economic (whatever else fits this) issue. I'm seeing it PURELY from an urban planning and development view. Given the shift in land use in Greater Scott's, the station on the parcel on which it currently resides is NO LONGER the highest and best use of this land. As we've discussed on many other threads, cities grow, they transform, they evolve. This is one of those cases. 

As for the R 300 plan being "garbage" - apologies, but I wholeheartedly disagree, simply because I have been following and studying Richmond's master plans since the 1980s - and the Richmond 300 plan is -- by far -- the best, most comprehensive, most well-thought-out plan, particularly relative to what has preceded it that I have read. Is it perfect? Of course not. But it IS light years better than what was on the books since the '80s.

As for were this a light-rail station- it's highly unlikely that a light rail station would have anywhere close to the footprint of the bus terminal. They (light rail) are located on dedicated rail right of ways that would preclude development unless the train station were to be integrated into the development or the development was built immediately adjacent to the train station (which we see all the time in NOVA, for example). The very small footprint of a light rail station makes this argument a complete apples-to-oranges comparison.

As for proposals to put a train station in Greater Scotts - yes, that was floated several years ago. However, Amtrak and the other governmental powers that be (plus the rail partnerships that are seriously pushing for COMPLETE restoration of rail service to and through Main Street Station) long-since kiboshed the idea because a station is simply not needed there. Staples Mill in the northern burbs - and MSS downtown are quite sufficient to handle any/all rail travel through metro Richmond. And, back to the argument of downtown vs non-downtown - it just makes more sense to have the city's primary rail center downtown, where all the action is.

Greyhound Station serving only downtown vs the entire metro: Sooooooooooooooo... are you telling me that Greyhound stations in Washington, Philadelphia and Boston serve ONLY downtown Washington, Philly and Boston because they're located there, and not in another part of town? Or do they serve the ENTIRE D.C., Philly and Boston metro areas? Care to correlate that to Richmond? As for Washington and Boston, their bus terminals ARE INTEGRATED INTO THE TRAIN TERMINAL LOCATION - which is EXACTLY what the city of Richmond has been advocating for the past 40 years be done with putting Greyhound at Main Street Station. 

So PLEASE, my friend - kindly explain to me how putting Greyhound at Main Street Station would be ANY different than how Greyhound is established in Washington, Philadelphia or Boston? Because frankly - I ain't seeing it.

You may ask - why did I not mention New York or Chicago? Both of those metropolitan areas are SO large that they require THREE Greyhound terminals to effectively serve the area. (NYC with over 20 million and Chicagoland with 10 million - and in both cases, covering a HUGE swath of land). Both cities have a centrally located terminal (downtown Chicago, midtown Manhattan) and one north (Chicago - in the NW suburbs, NYC in far northern Manhattan, just north of Washington Heights) and one south (Chicago on the SE side, NYC in Brooklyn). Those are unicorns simply because of the sheer size of both cities and both metros. HOWEVER - the primary stations are directly in the heart of the city - downtown Chicago, midtown Manhattan.

Desire to move jobs/services out of the city: Specifically WHO is calling for that? If that's aimed at me, my friend, then I humbly invite you to carefully re-read EVERYTHING I have posted regarding moving Greyhound to Main Street Station, because it is as clear as day that I personally do not want Greyhound leaving Richmond in any way, shape or form. It would be a HUGE - and I do mean - HUGE loss for the city (were it to relo to the 'burbs) or - worse - a loss to the metro if they moved out of metro RVA altogether. No - I desire quite the opposite - bring them downtown, put them in the middle of the action in new digs, whether its carved out of the train shed of MSS or in a new facility built immediately adjacent to the station. Create a DAZZLING multi-modal transit hub in which Greyhound will be an INTEGRAL part of the success. If the city is serious about creating a true transit hub - then it should partner with the CVTA, the state and the federal government for sufficient funding to get such a downtown terminal built so that Greyhound doesn't have to foot the bill (or at least such that Greyhound would be able to partner with the government coalition and invest in the terminal so that they have an ownership stake in the transit hub).

The part of your argument that I DO agree with is the concern that we'll simply lose the location in Greater Scott's well before anything shiny and new is constructed downtown (or anywhere else). THAT is, quite unfortunately, a very real possibility, and this is absolutely where the city, the CVTA and perhaps even the state need to step in and try to broker a solution (the solution being - bring the Greyhound terminal back downtown!!)

 

 

Edited January 21, 2023 by I miss RVA

[I miss RVA]

9 hours ago, Hike said:

I do like the idea of an integrated service into a convenient location, not convinced that’s Main Street station, perhaps adjacent, but doubt that will happen. How about back on broad street, like it was until 1985, I think near 4th and broad was the location. In 1982, when I first moved here, I would go there, probably once a week, and pick up shipped supplies being transferred from elsewhere. Yes, goods were shipped on the bus. Does anyone remember this location?

 

Love the classic photo of the old downtown Greyhound station at 412 E. Broad Street - between 4th and 5th, where the southernmost portion of the convention center stands today. Especially relative to the current station in Greater Scott's, this was a very small bus depot -- surprisingly small in fact -- and not consistent with the kinds of terminals seen in bigger cities of the day. Unfortunately, this depot had a very much "small(er) town" look and feel to it. Ditto the former Trailways bus depot farther east on Broad Street, near City Hall.

[I miss RVA]

RBS is reporting that the proposed 7-story apartment building, slated to rise on Ellen Road just west of the Diamond District now appears to have an anchor ground-floor tenant. HCA is planning to place a 12,000 square foot free-standing emergency center in the new apartment building - with an address of 3054 N. Arthur Ashe Boulevard. The state approved HCA's certificate of public need filing back in October, green-lighting this portion of the development. The facility will include 12 beds, a CT scanner and a pharmacy.

While an emergency care facility in a primarily residential building may seem odd, I'd like to point out that I myself have gone to such a facility here in Chicagoland (in downtown Evanston -  just north of the city of Chicago). The facility is located on the ground floor of a high-rise residential building - and from all indications, it does not present a conflict in terms of the building having plenty of residents. It's an interesting concept, and I think it can work in Richmond as well.

According to Jack Jacobs' reporting, the facility is anticipated to be operational by Q4 of 2024 - which, if I'm reading tea-leaves correctly, the apartment building itself will be (more-or-less) complete by that time. And if THAT'S the case, that means construction will likely start this year - and according to the story, the site of the building HAS BEEN CLEARED. VERY good news all the way around.

Expect another crane to pop up in Greater Scott's at some point in 2023.

From today's Richmond BizSense:

https://richmondbizsense.com/2023/02/16/hca-planning-free-standing-emergency-center-across-from-the-diamond/

 

Edited February 16, 2023 by I miss RVA

[wrldcoupe4]

So what are the mock-ups for?  Definitely not this building. 

[eandslee]

Whoa man!  Watch out over on the RBS website today, especially, if you click on the story on the Diamond…lots of discussion, debate, and opinions are flying!  I think RBS touched a sensitive nurve with this story, but I gotta tell ya, it’s kind of wrong to force the city to make $3.5M in upgrades to a facility that’s about to be torn down…on the flip side, Richmond has had years (dare I say, decades) to build a new ballpark!  Either way, this new stadium will not be ready in time for the 2025 season. How is that going to play out?  Heck, shovels should be hitting the dirt no later than mid March and we haven’t even seen a rendering!  None of the prep work (i.e. permits, etc.) has even started.  This is a disaster in the making for sure. Why can’t the city get their crap together!  Geez!

https://richmondbizsense.com/2023/02/23/mlb-required-upgrades-to-the-diamond-could-cost-city-3-5m/

[Hike]

17 minutes ago, eandslee said:

Whoa man!  Watch out over on the RBS website today, especially, if you click on the story on the Diamond…lots of discussion, debate, and opinions are flying!  I think RBS touched a sensitive nurve with this story, but I gotta tell ya, it’s kind of wrong to force the city to make $3.5M in upgrades to a facility that’s about to be torn down…on the flip side, Richmond has had years (dare I say, decades) to build a new ballpark!  Either way, this new stadium will not be ready in time for the 2025 season. How is that going to play out?  Heck, shovels should be hitting the dirt no later than mid March and we haven’t even seen a rendering!  None of the prep work (i.e. permits, etc.) has even started.  This is a disaster in the making for sure. Why can’t the city get their crap together!  Geez!

https://richmondbizsense.com/2023/02/23/mlb-required-upgrades-to-the-diamond-could-cost-city-3-5m/

Yeah, saw this too, just shook my head and thought man, the continuing saga of the baseball stadium. I thought like you did, can’t there be some exception knowing a new park is very close. But yeah, it’s not like we didn’t know for years, maybe they can come up with some compromise that could reduce this cost, since it’s all just going right in the landfill shortly, we hope so anyway.

Edited February 23, 2023 by Hike

[Flood Zone]

Putting two and two together, this is the "penalty" for the new ballpark not being ready by OD 2025.

Baseball is my favorite thing in the entire world -- and I'm happy to pass it along to my son, who lives and breathes baseball, whether it's travel ball, MLB the Show, or any number of YouTubers he watches -- but man oh man is MLB a cartel. And MLB taking over the minors is, on the whole, not a good thing. 

Edited to add: Parney was quoted the other day in the newspaper. He doesn't have a care in the world; everyone knows the ballpark is coming, so it's all good in the long run. 

Edited February 23, 2023 by Flood Zone

[I miss RVA]

2 hours ago, eandslee said:

Whoa man!  Watch out over on the RBS website today, especially, if you click on the story on the Diamond…lots of discussion, debate, and opinions are flying!  I think RBS touched a sensitive nurve with this story, but I gotta tell ya, it’s kind of wrong to force the city to make $3.5M in upgrades to a facility that’s about to be torn down…on the flip side, Richmond has had years (dare I say, decades) to build a new ballpark!  Either way, this new stadium will not be ready in time for the 2025 season. How is that going to play out?  Heck, shovels should be hitting the dirt no later than mid March and we haven’t even seen a rendering!  None of the prep work (i.e. permits, etc.) has even started.  This is a disaster in the making for sure. Why can’t the city get their crap together!  Geez!

https://richmondbizsense.com/2023/02/23/mlb-required-upgrades-to-the-diamond-could-cost-city-3-5m/

I think there-in lies the point: the city has had 10, 15 even 20 years now to address this, and the powers that be really only got up off the couch and took some kind of legitimate, substantive action AFTER their feet were held to the fire at the prospect of losing a SECOND minor-league baseball team. You'd think that the Braves having walked outta here a decade and a half ago would have been enough of a clarion wakeup call. And even then - we STILL DON'T EVEN HAVE A CDA IN PLACE TO SORT OUT SELLING BONDS, MUCH LESS STARTING ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION!

HOW is it possible that the city is STILL foot-dragging this issue SO badly? Loads of hoopla about the process. Lots of press. Lots of announcements and photo ops and beautiful renderings and bids for firms competing to win the development. And here we are - two years out to MLB's imposed deadline - WHICH THE CITY HAD KNOWN ABOUT WELL BEFORE THEY EVEN PUT OUT THE RFP - and we don't even have the CDA established, we don't have the first bond sold, we don't even have anything remotely resembling an ACTUAL "final" rendering of the first phase (much less the rest of the overall 15-year redevelopment) - much less shovels of dirt being flipped over south of the current ballpark.

While I can't say I blame folks over on RBS for kvetching about the $3.5M renovation outlay being imposed by MLB. One of the respondents nailed it - if it's about structural integrity and public safety, then AMEN - get the dangers FIXED - make repairs - but the batting tunnel? Clubhouses? As Tony Soprano would say - "fuggeddabouddit..."  But flip side - I can see where MLB is coming from. Much as we would like to say "we're building a new stadium" - until the overseeing authority has been established, until the bonds have been (or are being) sold, until the dirt has been flipped - MLB can look at the property and CORRECTLY say to us - "NO YOU AREN'T - NOT YET, ANYWAY. SAVE THAT ARGUMENT FOR WHEN THE BALLPARK IS UNDERWAY."

The city has backed itself into a pretty ridiculous corner (rather typically, based on the the track record of the past 50 years) - and MLB ain't playing around.

And frankly, folks, I think it's exactly THIS kind of bungling of amenities that keeps RVA in that weird place of being passed over when it comes to relos - and why cities like the two-headed Hydra in Carolina or Music City or Austin or many other cities that GET THIS STUFF RIGHT - don't have these kinds of screw-ups - and why potential relos don't pass on them.

What's the old adage? The more things change, the more they stay the same... 

Edited February 23, 2023 by I miss RVA

[123fakestreet]

1 hour ago, Flood Zone said:

Putting two and two together, this is the "penalty" for the new ballpark not being ready by OD 2025.

Baseball is my favorite thing in the entire world -- and I'm happy to pass it along to my son, who lives and breathes baseball, whether it's travel ball, MLB the Show, or any number of YouTubers he watches -- but man oh man is MLB a cartel. And MLB taking over the minors is, on the whole, not a good thing. 

Edited to add: Parney was quoted the other day in the newspaper. He doesn't have a care in the world; everyone knows the ballpark is coming, so it's all good in the long run. 

Yep. Agree with others this is a frustrating waste of money. One thing if it was required maintenance but they are actually building new structures just to tear them down.  That said they rules were clear and city dragged it's feet, this is what you get.

Hopefully the city can negotiate something - we spend this money but get an extra year (seems like we'll need it) to build. Or not all of the requirements need to be completed.

[Flood Zone]

30 minutes ago, I miss RVA said:

HOW is it possible that the city is STILL foot-dragging this issue SO badly? Loads of hoopla about the process. Lots of press. Lots of announcements and photo ops and beautiful renderings and bids for firms competing to win the development. And here we are - two years out to MLB's imposed deadline - WHICH THE CITY HAD KNOWN ABOUT WELL BEFORE THEY EVEN PUT OUT THE RFP - and we don't even have the CDA established, we don't have the first bond sold, we don't even have anything remotely resembling an ACTUAL "final" rendering of the first phase (much less the rest of the overall 15-year redevelopment) - much less shovels of dirt being flipped over south of the current ballpark.

Although I understand the frustration, respectfully, what we're being told from the Squirrels themselves is not a story of lack of diligence. The opposite, actually. We're a long way from the days of bellicose Lou DiBella quotes. Here's Todd Parnell quoted in the Times-Dispatch just two days ago:

Though ground has not yet been broken, Parnell said, “there’s work that goes on with that project on an hourly basis, pretty much, seven days a week. Hopefully we’ll have things we can say publicly soon, but we appreciate the work that the city and developer are doing on it.

 

This is definitely the time, and this is when it’s happening, and everybody’s working beyond diligently to make it happen as expeditiously as possible.”

 

[I miss RVA]

27 minutes ago, Flood Zone said:

Although I understand the frustration, respectfully, what we're being told from the Squirrels themselves is not a story of lack of diligence. The opposite, actually. We're a long way from the days of bellicose Lou DiBella quotes. Here's Todd Parnell quoted in the Times-Dispatch just two days ago:

Though ground has not yet been broken, Parnell said, “there’s work that goes on with that project on an hourly basis, pretty much, seven days a week. Hopefully we’ll have things we can say publicly soon, but we appreciate the work that the city and developer are doing on it.

 

This is definitely the time, and this is when it’s happening, and everybody’s working beyond diligently to make it happen as expeditiously as possible.”

 

Very glad to see that behind-the-scenes work is going pedal-to-the metal on this. My issue is that it wasn't enough to lose one minor league team - that we had to be threatened with the loss of a second club - and EVEN THEN it's only now with our backs against the wall that the powers-that-be are going full-tilt (and frankly it looks like they're in scramble mode - the same way many of us (myself included) did in undergrad (and maybe even grad school, too!) when we've had all semester (or term) to work on a major research paper and waited until two or three days before it was due to even begin researching it, much less writing it.)

How and why this whole process has taken THIS long to even get started - much less reach this point of scrambling to pull it together - is beyond me.

[Flood Zone]

@I miss RVAThe dirty little secret is the R-Braves wanted to leave. People don't like to hear that because we loved the Braves -- personally, I spent so many nights at Parker Field & The Diamond, even got to shake Hank Aaron's hand on Parker Field's last night -- but it's true. By the time the Ballpark-in-the-Bottom fizzled out, the Braves already had a sweetheart deal with the Gwinnett yokels in hand. (Which, by the way, those same folks immediately came to regret. Despite bluster that the ballpark would pay for itself from "day one," five years after the park opened, they had borrowed an additional $30 million to pay for cost overruns and also diverted nearly half-a-million per year in hotel taxes from its tourism fund.)

Set aside the city's ineptitude for a moment. It's my fervent belief that the process of building a ballpark should be hard work and only come together after thorough and perhaps lengthy consensus. This is because, no matter what anyone says, ballparks (especially minor league ones) are not money-makers in and of themselves; rather, they are more or less a symbol of civic pride or a luxury for public entertainment. It's vital, therefore, that as many people as possible are on-board and details are scrutinized so that the deal does not ultimately become a disaster. Have faith in your market and do not act according to Organized Baseball's timetable unless you absolutely need to do so. Patience sometimes pays off, and I think it will here. (Less the pathetic $3.5 million penalty for not having two tunnels, or whatnot, or for not meeting a wholly arbitrary deadline for opening the new ballpark.)

[I miss RVA]

32 minutes ago, Flood Zone said:

@I miss RVAThe dirty little secret is the R-Braves wanted to leave.

People don't like to hear that because we loved the Braves -- personally, I spent so many nights at Parker Field & The Diamond

...even got to shake Hank Aaron's hand on Parker Field's last night

By the time the Ballpark-in-the-Bottom fizzled out, the Braves already had a sweetheart deal with the Gwinnett yokels in hand. 

Set aside the city's ineptitude for a moment. It's my fervent belief that the process of building a ballpark should be hard work and only come together after thorough and perhaps lengthy consensus. This is because, no matter what anyone says, ballparks (especially minor league ones) are not money-makers in and of themselves; rather, they are more or less a symbol of civic pride or a luxury for public entertainment. It's vital, therefore, that as many people as possible are on-board and details are scrutinized so that the deal does not ultimately become a disaster. Have faith in your market and do not act according to Organized Baseball's timetable unless you absolutely need to do so. Patience sometimes pays off, and I think it will here.

(Less the pathetic $3.5 million penalty for not having two tunnels, or whatnot, or for not meeting a wholly arbitrary deadline for opening the new ballpark.)

Good points, @Flood Zone... a few thoughts:

1.) Braves wanted to leave: Unfortunately, this is true.

2.) Loved the R-Braves: Same here - my brother and I practically lived at Parker Field when we were kids. Even as adults, I spent many a summer night enjoying Braves baseball at the Diamond before moving to Chicago in 2001.

3.) Shook Henry Aaron's hand: I did as well. I met Mr. Aaron -- and as an AP sportswriter covering the Diamond's opening night in 1985 -- I interviewed him. (And yes, after the interview, I geeked out and got his autograph as well!) The press box wasn't fully finished. Not all of the fixtures had been installed yet, and it even lacked a sufficient number of folding chairs to accommodate all the reporters who staffed the opening. I was 22 years old at the time - so I gave up my chair to an older reporter from the RT-D. My best friend in undergrad (VCU) was covering the ballpark's opening for the VCU student newspaper - and he also gave up his seat to an older reporter. In order to actually score the game, I had to kneel at the desk/table instead of sit (and I only stood between innings to relieve my back - I couldn't score the game standing).

NOTE: I found a picture in the RT-D archives of the Diamond's opening night - AND I FOUND MYSELF IN THE PICTURE!  I was one of three sportswriters who were kneeling at the desk - one of the other two was my best friend from VCU. He's two "seats" down the table from me in the RT-D photo (in the next window to the right).  *SEE BELOW*

4.) Process - long and hard work: I can't disagree with you. Good points. I'm fine being patient - but my issue isn't with how long the process takes. My issue is that the city waited to even START this process until MLB pressured them with the loss of the Squirrels. The process can take five years if necessary - just don't start it from a "backs-against-the-wall" position, you know?

5.) Tunnel penalty: Yep - the $3.5M is a penalty, to be sure. A procrastination penalty. If the city had started years earlier, we wouldn't be tagged with this expenditure to repair a facility that should have already been in the rubble pile by now.

[eandslee]

5 minutes ago, I miss RVA said:

 

Love this!  Hey you, in the press box!!  You look so young!  

[I miss RVA]

19 minutes ago, eandslee said:

Love this!  Hey you, in the press box!!  You look so young!  

 Hmmm...

Oh yeah... 

I WAS!!!  

[Brent114]

It won’t come as a surprise to anyone here that I’d rather lose the  Squirrels than be subject to extortion by MLB.  
 

This new demand is utterly ridiculous.  These upgrades can’t even be completed this year can they? They will only exist for one season before being demolished.  
 

Flood Zone got it right.  Baseball doesn’t make any money and the city is already spending too much money on it, IMO. Just say no.  They aren’t going to kick the Squirrels out this season (that ship certainly has sailed by now).   There is no amount of due diligence that can make a minor league baseball filed anything other than a money pit.   I love the idea of my fellow Virginians enjoying an afternoon watching baseball in Richmond but it would be cheaper for the city to just give everyone train tickets to Washington to see the Nationals instead. 
 

And not to get off topic but the chatter about the Commanders moving to Virginia needs to be shut down like yesterday.  

 

[123fakestreet]

4 hours ago, Flood Zone said:

@I miss RVAThe dirty little secret is the R-Braves wanted to leave. People don't like to hear that because we loved the Braves -- personally, I spent so many nights at Parker Field & The Diamond, even got to shake Hank Aaron's hand on Parker Field's last night -- but it's true. By the time the Ballpark-in-the-Bottom fizzled out, the Braves already had a sweetheart deal with the Gwinnett yokels in hand. (Which, by the way, those same folks immediately came to regret. Despite bluster that the ballpark would pay for itself from "day one," five years after the park opened, they had borrowed an additional $30 million to pay for cost overruns and also diverted nearly half-a-million per year in hotel taxes from its tourism fund.)

Set aside the city's ineptitude for a moment. It's my fervent belief that the process of building a ballpark should be hard work and only come together after thorough and perhaps lengthy consensus. This is because, no matter what anyone says, ballparks (especially minor league ones) are not money-makers in and of themselves; rather, they are more or less a symbol of civic pride or a luxury for public entertainment. It's vital, therefore, that as many people as possible are on-board and details are scrutinized so that the deal does not ultimately become a disaster. Have faith in your market and do not act according to Organized Baseball's timetable unless you absolutely need to do so. Patience sometimes pays off, and I think it will here. (Less the pathetic $3.5 million penalty for not having two tunnels, or whatnot, or for not meeting a wholly arbitrary deadline for opening the new ballpark.)

Screw the Braves. The Squirrels are a much better organization, they understand the family entertainment business, they are connected to the community and we are so much better off with them than the Braves.  I can't stand the Braves and their attitude like the city (us) owed them something.  Good riddance.

[I miss RVA]

1 hour ago, Brent114 said:

This new demand is utterly ridiculous.  These upgrades can’t even be completed this year can they? They will only exist for one season before being demolished.  
 

And not to get off topic but the chatter about the Commanders moving to Virginia needs to be shut down like yesterday.  

 

1.) Agreed. If there are public safety concerns, then by all means, address them. Aside from that - it's BS - particularly with a new ballpark (allegedly) on the way.

2.) AMEN to that! I absolutely don't want some damn Dannydome being built, which is what I think all of their plans are calling for. Totally sucks.

[Wahoo 07]

16 hours ago, I miss RVA said:

 

I didn't know that Elton John chalked the infield for the R-Braves.  Who knew?

Edited February 24, 2023 by Wahoo 07

[I miss RVA]

3 hours ago, Wahoo 07 said:

I didn't know that Elton John chalked the infield for the R-Braves.  Who knew?

I thought the VERY SAME THING!! WHO KNEW that the "Madman (from) Across the Water" a.k.a. "Captain Fantastic" a.k.a. "The Rocket Man" himself was chalking batters boxes for the R-Braves! 

His weave was looking robust - way better than in the '70s, I see. 

[Hike]

3 hours ago, I miss RVA said:

I thought the VERY SAME THING!! WHO KNEW that the "Madman (from) Across the Water" a.k.a. "Captain Fantastic" a.k.a. "The Rocket Man" himself was chalking batters boxes for the R-Braves! 

His weave was looking robust - way better than in the '70s, I see. 

I had the albums you mention but wore the grooves off of Goodby Yellow Brick Road.