Diamond Area / Hermitage Rd Corridor / Ownby District

[DowntownCoruscant]

21 hours ago, Downtowner said:

https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/endeavor-group-agrees-to-buy-nine-minor-league-baseball-teams/?fbclid=IwAR3YjsSXhXNeAmLGNOzstiuADXj57y1O41mqrXOsEWK8WRNgs-1uLYypkes
 

just thinking but wonder what could happen if the current owner of the flying squirrels sold the team to an investment group like this?  Would it be good or bad for us? 

I don’t really know what Endeavor’s purpose is here - and from what I understand many in MILB aren’t certain of it either - but my suspicion is it would not be good for you us. Syndicate ownership isn’t new to the minors (heck, the Squirrels aren’t our owner’s only team), but the end result of this is likely extreme cost-cutting homogenization. I can see controlling vendor costs as a reasonable measure, but my guess is these Endeavor team begin to lose whatever local flavor they have.

Or maybe it’s gambling. I can’t imagine there’s much betting on minor league baseball, but there’s betting on everything these days, and the 9 teams Endeavor has purchased already will play over 1,000 games over the course of the season. So maybe they’re trying to get in on the ground floor of some betting revenue. Who knows.

[I miss RVA]

While we wring our hands and pre-emptively lament the loss of the Squirrels, how about a fun little distraction from our friends at the Dogtown Dish - and a look back at baseball on Mayo's Island. I seem to recall that legend has it that Babe Ruth actually hammered a home run into the river (not a stretch, given the ballpark layout & the closeness of the water to the field itself) - still, a fun look back at how, at least 100 years ago, RVA wasn't quite as much the nervous-nelly as she is today when it comes to thinking outside the box.

https://dogtowndish.com/2017/09/21/baseball-mayo-island/

[wrldcoupe4]

I’ll just leave this here. 
https://richmond.com/sports/professional/squirrels-lou-dibella-says-we-don-t-have-a-lot-of-time-as-ballpark-plans/article_2ac3afe8-ce9f-5227-8d61-28e501def870.html#tracking-source=home-breaking

[I miss RVA]

42 minutes ago, wrldcoupe4 said:

I’ll just leave this here. 
https://richmond.com/sports/professional/squirrels-lou-dibella-says-we-don-t-have-a-lot-of-time-as-ballpark-plans/article_2ac3afe8-ce9f-5227-8d61-28e501def870.html#tracking-source=home-breaking

Thanks, Coupe.

Wow - this just boggles my mind.  The Squirrels are going to walk and we'll all be mouth-agape wondering why. Or worse, not giving a damn one way or the other (after all, we have museums, parks, history, the 'ruvvah'...) 

What does it take to light a fire under the city's tuchus and get them to get up and actually DO something? It's the seeming utter lack of urgency on the part of the city that has me baffled. They seem to be approaching this with about as much consequential concern as a football team trailing by 17 with six minutes remaining - and they run three plays off tackle. Nothing says "rally" like 'three yards and a cloud of dust.'

Can SOMEONE wake these people up, please???

[DowntownCoruscant]

I hear you. But this is SOP when it comes to new ballparks. Richmond City has Richmond City issues, I know, but there never has been a team owner who wanted a new stadium who hasn’t said a version of that quote. It’ll get done. Patience.

[wrldcoupe4]

You are very confident about this while the city has a very poor track record lately. Plus we have only been talking about a new ballpark for 2 decades or so. Are you bankrolling the stadium personally? If so, thank you. Not all heroes wear capes. 

Edited December 15, 2021 by wrldcoupe4

[DowntownCoruscant]

51 minutes ago, wrldcoupe4 said:

You are very confident about this while the city has a very poor track record lately. Plus we have only been talking about a new ballpark for 2 decades or so. Are you bankrolling the stadium personally? If so, thank you. Not all heroes wear capes. 

LOL!

Nah, it’s just that this is how these things usually go. Ah, but isn’t this Richmond, you might say, and isn’t Richmond incompetent or at least incompetentish, you might also say. Well yes, quite so, but the perception of suckiness is kind of inflated, if only on this particular issue,  because Richmond only kind of messed that up a decade ago.  

First, because it wasn’t a great plan. And second, because the Braves were certainly fine with leaving, kind of preferred it actually, and that’s not really a secret, because the idiots in Gwinnett gave it all way, as soon become apparent, and really not to Gwinnett‘a credit. And third, this is the owner speaking, not the guy involved in day to day operations or talking shop on the local level. My understanding, admittedly not based on anything more than third hand talk, is that things are a bit less stagnant than the quote implied.

At any rate, I’m not sure I’ve made many hot takes on this site, primarily because almost everyone here knows about buildings and business than me, but I’ll adhere to this one. At the end of the day, the ballpark gets done.

[I miss RVA]

19 hours ago, DowntownCoruscant said:

LOL!

Nah, it’s just that this is how these things usually go. Ah, but isn’t this Richmond, you might say, and isn’t Richmond incompetent or at least incompetentish, you might also say. Well yes, quite so, but the perception of suckiness is kind of inflated, if only on this particular issue,  because Richmond only kind of messed that up a decade ago.  

First, because it wasn’t a great plan. And second, because the Braves were certainly fine with leaving, kind of preferred it actually, and that’s not really a secret, because the idiots in Gwinnett gave it all way, as soon become apparent, and really not to Gwinnett‘a credit. And third, this is the owner speaking, not the guy involved in day to day operations or talking shop on the local level. My understanding, admittedly not based on anything more than third hand talk, is that things are a bit less stagnant than the quote implied.

At any rate, I’m not sure I’ve made many hot takes on this site, primarily because almost everyone here knows about buildings and business than me, but I’ll adhere to this one. At the end of the day, the ballpark gets done.

As I've said to our Charlotte-based CoStar tower prognosticator (and several other folks on here as well) -- from your keyboard to God's eyes. I pray you're right about this.

Forgive my cynicism - I've seen RVA call a few too many "red right 88" or "rocket screen" plays over the years to know better than to trust the city to do anything but fumble this away. I appreciate the passion of the Squirrels' guy in leadership - but I know damn well that RVA's track record in handling things like this is the live-action laboratory version of the adage of - "if RVA didn't have bad luck, she wouldn't have any luck at all"... at least when it comes to stuff like this.

Again, what I find particularly troubling is the apparent "lah-dee-dahh" approach that the city is taking ... like a football team with the ball on its own 20, down by 17, six minutes left in the game and they line up in a two-tight end formation and run the ball up the middle. Exactly what fire under the tuchus is the city waiting for?

What's needed is, quoting a song that Elvis sang in 1970 -- and I say this about this city all the time - "A little less conversation, a little more action please!!"

Edited December 15, 2021 by I miss RVA

[I miss RVA]

Some new reporting on movement toward at least getting something together regarding a new ballpark for the Squirrels. Something troubling though: According to John O'Connor's (RTD) story, there are now indications that he city is seriously considering relocating the spot of the ballpark BACK from Hermitage Road to Arthur Ashe Boulevard - contrary to what's in the Richmond 300 Plan. Typical of the city to totally FUBAR something when it gets involved in trying to LARP as a land developer. Also typical because I believe VCU may be partially to blame here - in that they've snatched up alllllllllllll this developable land along Hermitage - yet none of said land will be used for the ballpark, even though VCU is still an active participant in the process.

I don't like this at all. WHY EVEN HAVE A RICHMOND 300 PLAN or a Greater Scott's Addition SAP if they are going to simply be summarily ignored? That stretch of land along A.A. Blvd is FAR BETTER used for a satellite urban core as shown in renderings during the development of the R-300 Plan. I would MUCH rather see high-density, mixed-use, residential, high-rise development along that stretch of N. Arthur Ashe Blvd to establish this part of Greater Scott's (oh wait - excuse me - "The Diamond District") as a hot location for folks to live, work, have entertainment, restaurants, and retail.

THE BALLPARK DOES NOT BELONG ON THAT STRETCH OF A.A. BLVD!!! 

This is yet another fine example of the city's willingness shoot itself in BOTH feet. Quite frankly, I'd rather the ballpark go out to Green City with the arena than to torch what WAS a really solid, cohesive, common-sense, well-thought-out, well-designed plan for that northern part of Greater Scott's that called for developing a high-density urban center there. If I were a city planner and had put in hundreds - even perhaps thousands - of hours working on and developing the R-300 plan and the corresponding GSA - SAP - and if the city just willy-nilly torpedoed what could be a fantastic urban center by actually relocating the ballpark back to A.A. Blvd after we had specifically moved it out of that corridor FOR A REASON - I honestly think I would tender my resignation forthwith in disgust and in protest.

BTW - O'Connor does not provide details in the story - he just mentions it as something the city may end up doing.

https://richmond.com/sports/professional/this-could-be-biggest-week-in-flying-squirrels-history-ballpark-plan-coming-into-focus/article_7e3e0d63-fb29-5f30-a4b3-01a0aab12556.html#tracking-source=home-top-story-1

Edited December 27, 2021 by I miss RVA

[DowntownCoruscant]

{whispers} I actually prefer the ballpark on AA Blvd and was pretty bummed it was going to go on the Hermitage side.

[CitiWalker]

It think it would make more sense as far as traffic flow goes...depending on how parking is configured. In the current configuration of parking it makes more sense as it relates to the exits on I-95.

 

[wrldcoupe4]

The RFI is out:

https://www.rvadiamond.com/

City is looking for the developer to ideally fully, privately fund the new ballpark as part of the development.

[123fakestreet]

24 minutes ago, wrldcoupe4 said:

The RFI is out:

https://www.rvadiamond.com/

City is looking for the developer to ideally fully, privately fund the new ballpark as part of the development.

When they said last spring it would be out by the end of the year I didn't think that would mean literally with 3 days left to go.

Responses have to be submitted by Feb 15. Short list of contenders will be released in March of those invited to bid. Bids due in May. Final selection made summer 2022.

 

 

Edited December 28, 2021 by 123fakestreet

[DowntownCoruscant]

1 minute ago, 123fakestreet said:

When they said last spring it would be out by the end of the year I didn't think that would mean literally with 3 days left to go.

Responses have to be submitted by Feb 15. Short list of contenders will be released in March of those invited to bid. Bids due in May. Final selection made summer 2022.

 

 

That’s downright timely for RVA. They deserve half a golf-clap just for meeting their self-imposed timeline.

[upzoningisgood]

1 hour ago, wrldcoupe4 said:

The RFI is out:

https://www.rvadiamond.com/

City is looking for the developer to ideally fully, privately fund the new ballpark as part of the development.

People are going to freak out when the offers come in and there's no affordable housing anywhere in the plans. If you make a developer sink 100m into a project as a prerequisite, you can bet everything is going to be luxury and super-luxury because that's the only way the project could pencil out. Even so, I'm not sure Richmond's market is strong enough to support that level of development, although I would love to be wrong.

Edited December 28, 2021 by upzoningisgood

[I miss RVA]

Much as I want the ballpark issue settled so the Squirrels will stay in RVA, I honestly MUCH prefer THIS on A. A. Boulevard instead of locating the ballpark there - UNLESS somehow the two scenarios can be fully integrated. My fear is locating the ballpark right on A.A. Boulevard -- as is the current situation -- will result in little to no improvement to the area holistically vs what's there now. Whereas the below scenario would completely and utterly transform Greater Scotts and that entire section of the near northwest side of Richmond. Having population density, business density, retail, entertainment, variety, the possibility of hospitality, etc., in a dense urban core neighborhood is -- at least to my simple mind -- a much better and higher use for this land. Mind you - I'm IN FAVOR of ballpark development -- but I don't think this particular vision should be sacrificed to make that happen.

I know folks would freak about this - but quite frankly, I'd just as soon the ballpark follow the arena on out to Green City and we turn N. Arthur Ashe Blvd into this kind of dense urban satellite core. 

Maybe this highly urban scenario can still come to pass with the ballpark in the mix. I have my doubts, though -- and this urban core is much more important to Greater Scotts and to RVA. I don't fully understand how/why the ballpark can't be relocated.

It almost feels like VCU did a bait-and-switch on the city, which sucks.
 

Edited December 28, 2021 by I miss RVA

[Downtowner]

1 hour ago, I miss RVA said:

Much as I want the ballpark issue settled so the Squirrels will stay in RVA, I honestly MUCH prefer THIS on A. A. Boulevard instead of locating the ballpark there - UNLESS somehow the two scenarios can be fully integrated. My fear is locating the ballpark right on A.A. Boulevard -- as is the current situation -- will result in little to no improvement to the area holistically vs what's there now. Whereas the below scenario would completely and utterly transform Greater Scotts and that entire section of the near northwest side of Richmond. Having population density, business density, retail, entertainment, variety, the possibility of hospitality, etc., in a dense urban core neighborhood is -- at least to my simple mind -- a much better and higher use for this land. Mind you - I'm IN FAVOR of ballpark development -- but I don't think this particular vision should be sacrificed to make that happen.

I know folks would freak about this - but quite frankly, I'd just as soon the ballpark follow the arena on out to Green City and we turn N. Arthur Ashe Blvd into this kind of dense urban satellite core. 

Maybe this highly urban scenario can still come to pass with the ballpark in the mix. I have my doubts, though -- and this urban core is much more important to Greater Scotts and to RVA. I don't fully understand how/why the ballpark can't be relocated.

It almost feels like VCU did a bait-and-switch on the city, which sucks.
 

As much as I would love that kind of density along A.A blvd and as much as I want rva to go big or go home I doubt any developer would come close to that rendering of the Richmond 300 plan I just don’t think it would happen regardless as much as I would love that. We always get shot in the foot either way. I wouldn’t want to get shot in the foot twice due to the city giving us false hope with this rendering. I really want A.A blvd to look like that but I just don’t think a developer would pull off a real life replica of that rendering. We will have to see what kind of plan they come up with either way I’m not feeling good about it. Too many opinions on this like every big plan that we have planned. When I heard the city is leading the way with the development I thought navy hill all over again even with the developer paying for the whole thing. People in Richmond will just nimby this like everything else with no knowledge on learning every aspect of it. Same thing for the city center plan there will be some uneducated yahoo nimby against it for some of the dumbest reasons. They will see what about the schools or the roads or parks? The more I see the huge development plans proposed here I just don’t feel good about any of these because people want to cry and scream about it. 
 

 

 

this is coming from a big time baseball fanatic who has played since I was 5 and saw my beloved atlanta Braves win the World Series in 1995 and now 2021. 

Edited December 28, 2021 by Downtowner

[I miss RVA]

48 minutes ago, Downtowner said:

As much as I would love that kind of density along A.A blvd and as much as I want rva to go big or go home

I doubt any developer would come close to that rendering of the Richmond 300 plan I just don’t think it would happen regardless as much as I would love that. We always get shot in the foot either way.

I wouldn’t want to get shot in the foot twice due to the city giving us false hope with this rendering. I really want A.A blvd to look like that but I just don’t think a developer would pull off a real life replica of that rendering. We will have to see what kind of plan they come up with either way

I’m not feeling good about it. Too many opinions on this like every big plan that we have planned.

When I heard the city is leading the way with the development I thought navy hill all over again even with the developer paying for the whole thing.

People in Richmond will just nimby this like everything else with no knowledge on learning every aspect of it. Same thing for the city center plan there will be some uneducated yahoo nimby against it for some of the dumbest reasons. They will see what about the schools or the roads or parks? The more I see the huge development plans proposed here I just don’t feel good about any of these because people want to cry and scream about it. 

 

@Downtowner-- extremely well said. I couldn't agree more with you on all fronts. 

I'd like to tack on a few thoughts to some of the extremely important points you mentioned:

1.) No developer will come close to the R-300 rendering:  Fully agreed. I also don't see any one, SINGLE developer pulling this off. From the first time I ever saw that R-300 rendering, I never even once gave the slightest thought to one developer making all of this happen. I always had in the back of my mind that private developer(S) would make this vision a reality. One would develop a specific residential building (or two or even three, as is happening in Scott's right now). Another might develop an office building or mixed-use building. Yet another a hotel/entertainment/retail complex. All of which is why when the city announced that IT is going to LARP as land developer, I couldn't face-palm enough, because -- like you -- I saw Navy Hill allllll over again.

Unfortunately, THIS city's track record with public-private partnerships leading toward significant development projects is beyond abysmal. This is NOT New York, or Chicago, or Boston, or Philly, or Baltimore, where those cities in the past HAVE teamed with private developers to actually build something that works and that has helped their given city. For whatever reason, RVA either doesn't have the wherewithall or the resources and it CERTAINLY doesn't have the public backing to make an economic development project come to pass, much less succeed. As I've said previously, the city's BEST role is administrative. Handle the PLANNING and work on INFRASTRUCTURE -- those are two things that RVA is certainly capable of doing (even though they do as poor a job of handling infrastructure as they do an outstanding job of actually planning (R-300 is a GEM!).

Stoney simply needs to stop LARPing as "Bob the Builder" ... it's clearly not working.

2.) City shooting us in the foot/false hope with R-300 rendering: It certainly feels that way -- but the rendering is a demonstration of the city doing something it's actually good at doing: planning. The R-300 plan is hands down, bar none, THE BEST RVA master plan I have EVER seen - and I've thumbed through just about all of them that have been publicly available over the decades. The one problem with a master plan, however, is that even the BEST ones don't often give the road map of HOW to get there. We have a CLEAR vision of what the final result SHOULD be. That this particular vision happens to involve land that's currently owned by the city -- unfortunately -- comes with a lot of challenges that the R-300 plan can only address so far. It can recommend that the city sell the land, work with developers, etc., -- but it can't do much beyond that. Once the powers that be (in this case -- yet again - Stoney -- ) take off and run with it, all sorts of chaos can get introduced into an otherwise superb master plan. The vision for Greater Scotts and North A. A. Blvd is FANTASTIC! But letting the city get involved in the land-development part of the process is where we -- yet again -- fumble at the goal line or somehow call "Red Right 88" when a field goal could win the game.

3.) Not feeling good about it: Same here. I've not felt good about it from the very day the articles came out about the city getting involved and calling it "the Diamond District". In my mind, I saw someone standing in front of a nice, large paper shredder, shoveling copy after copy after copy of the R-300 plan and the GSA-SAP into it.

4.) NH all over again - even with the developer paying for it: Same here. What's more - this seems problematic on a bunch of fronts. Exactly how many developers will be willing to enter into a once-sided public-private agreement with a municipality? Seems like this is the city's/Stoney's knee-jerk pendulum swing back to the other side - the "corrective" to the "oops" part of the program that torpedoed Navy Hill. At what point will the city HAVE to relent and put money toward it? And even if they don't, I fear this project will carry the public perception of the city participating in the financial risk - which, as you've said, will bring the NIMBYs and their screeching about schools and parks out of every crack in the woodwork.

5.) The citizenry will NIMBY: Of course they will! As you said - not knowing jack squat about any of it. Even COSTAR has had a NIMBY voice raised - over on the RTD comments section - the day the big tower was announced, a preservationist stuffed shirt got on their exhorting CoStar to contact preservationists, do soil sampling, and to take all forms of ridiculous add-on measures that would no-doubt delay the project by God-Himself only knows how long - to "make sure nothing historic was being disturbed." I had to get on there and fire back and them and basically tell them to sit down and STFU - that enough is enough with this "historic" garbage.

To your point - the NIMBYs will cry about the schools... the parks... the architectural "heritage" (of what... 60 or 70-year-old parking lots??? Jesus - I'm honestly surprised the Grace Street and Fan association NIMBYs weren't out at Foundry Park protesting CoStar - claming that such a gorgeous glass tower on the downtown riverfront would somehow detract from and diminish the architectural "character" of their houses several miles away on Grace St or Monument Ave... ) Whether its a ballpark or a casino or even the awesome-looking dense urban core in the R-300 rendering, these greasy wheels will continue to squeal and squawk about their contrived NIMBY cause just to stop something that could move the city forward from happening.

 

Idk - I'm in your camp on this - I don't have a good feeling about this AT ALL.

 

 

Edited December 28, 2021 by I miss RVA

[DowntownCoruscant]

Richmond 300 looks super but is aspirational. A new Diamond is a practical reality-or at least the need for one is. There are many factors that make AA Blvd a better location for it than Hermitage. Better this gets done than potentially nothing. 
 

Edited to add: The RTD story notes there’s a 3:00 p.m. deadline on the due date. Who on earth makes something due at 3:00 p.m.? Why not 5:00 p.m. or as is increasingly common in these days of electronic submissions, 11:59 p.m.? A small detail, but it strikes me as so very odd.

Edited December 29, 2021 by DowntownCoruscant

[123fakestreet]

2 hours ago, DowntownCoruscant said:

Richmond 300 looks super but is aspirational. A new Diamond is a practical reality-or at least the need for one is. There are many factors that make AA Blvd a better location for it than Hermitage. Better this gets done than potentially nothing. 
 

Edited to add: The RTD story notes there’s a 3:00 p.m. deadline on the due date. Who on earth makes something due at 3:00 p.m.? Why not 5:00 p.m. or as is increasingly common in these days of electronic submissions, 11:59 p.m.? A small detail, but it strikes me as so very odd.

Like most local gov't bids they are required to submit paper copies of their response, and must be delivered in person. If it was at 5pm someone would have to stay late in the office to accept them.

[I miss RVA]

3 hours ago, DowntownCoruscant said:

Richmond 300 looks super but is aspirational. A new Diamond is a practical reality-or at least the need for one is. There are many factors that make AA Blvd a better location for it than Hermitage. Better this gets done than potentially nothing. 
 

Edited to add: The RTD story notes there’s a 3:00 p.m. deadline on the due date. Who on earth makes something due at 3:00 p.m.? Why not 5:00 p.m. or as is increasingly common in these days of electronic submissions, 11:59 p.m.? A small detail, but it strikes me as so very odd.

I think the handwriting was already on the wall what with a Wawa and a typical suburban-style little strip shopping center that got in under the wire before upzoning took place -- which is to say that putting a nicer/more modern version of what's already there (meaning the ballpark) will be one of the many factors that won't make AA Blvd a better location than it is now - which is really sad, because it has the potential to be a SO MUCH BETTER location than it currently is.

And if we put the ballpark there - where it's been since the days of Parker Field - it won't get there. Ever.

Unfortunately, when it comes to this city, some things just never change. The city may as well get rid of the TOD-1 zoning for that stretch of AA Blvd -because the way things are going, it will never be used. Just re-down-zone it back to whatever it was previously. Put the ballpark there with some well-designed, nicely-coordinated drive-through eateries, maybe a beautiful and authentic Motel-6 and, oh... PLENTY of parking, preferably SURFACE parking!! WOW - what an AMAZING part of the city we'll have! Talk about making RVA WORLD CLASS!!!  No wonder the city wants to rename it FROM "Greater Scott's Addition" because there will be nothing "greater" about it - and it will be about as night-and-day different from Scott's as it gets.

And to think the folks who will live at the gorgeous Novel apartments at the south end of this "Diamond District" will have THAT to see when they look out their windows.

Makes me wonder if there are any similar-sized sections of Henrico -- perhaps that stretch on the east side of U.S. 1 - at Brook Run -- that the board of supervisors might consider seriously upzoning so that a super high-density urban core - with plenty of retail, hotel, office, mixed use possibilities, all within a nice cluster of high-rise residential buildings could be built. Maybe "Greater Brook Run" or something -- a more compact, denser, more vertical version of Green City. Imagine that R-300 rendering for North A.A. Blvd right THERE! I-95 runs right by it. Or it could be built where the Brook Run Shopping Center is now - just redevelop that whole stretch of U.S. 1.  Make U.S. 1 there into what that rendering of A.A. Blvd would be. 

I bet the county could make it happen, too!

Edited December 29, 2021 by I miss RVA

[Downtowner]

12 minutes ago, I miss RVA said:

I think the handwriting was already on the wall what with a Wawa and a typical suburban-style little strip shopping center that got in under the wire before upzoning took place -- is that putting a nicer/more modern version of what's already there (meaning the ballpark) will be one of the many factors that won't make AA Blvd a better location than it is now - which is really sad, because it has the potential to be a SO MUCH BETTER location than it currently is.

And if we put the ballpark there - where it's been since the days of Parker Field - it won't get there. Ever.

Unfortunately, when it comes to this city, some things just never change. The city may as well get rid of the TOD-1 zoning for that stretch of AA Blvd -because the way things are going, it will never be used. Just re-down-zone it back to whatever it was previously. Put the ballpark there with some well-designed, nicely-coordinated drive-through eateries, maybe a beautiful and authentic Motel-6 and, oh... PLENTY of parking, preferably SURFACE parking!! WOW - what an AMAZING part of the city we'll have! Talk about making RVA WORLD CLASS!!!  No wonder the city wants to rename it FROM "Greater Scott's Addition" because there will be nothing "greater" about it - and it will be about as night-and-day different from Scott's as it gets.

And to think the folks who will live at the gorgeous Novel apartments at the south end of this "Diamond District" will have THAT to see when they look out their windows.

Makes me wonder if there are any similar-sized sections of Henrico -- perhaps that stretch on the east side of U.S. 1 - at Brook Run -- that the board of supervisors might consider seriously upzoning so that a super high-density urban core - with plenty of retail, hotel, office, mixed use possibilities, all within a nice cluster of high-rise residential buildings could be built. Maybe "Greater Brook Run" or something -- a more compact, denser, more vertical version of Green City. Imagine that R-300 rendering for North A.A. Blvd right THERE! I-95 runs right by it. Or it could be built where the Brook Run Shopping Center is now - just redevelop that whole stretch of U.S. 1.  Make U.S. 1 there into what that rendering of A.A. Blvd would be. 

I bet the county could make it happen, too!

As much as I hate saying this to move forward Stoney and just about the entire city council needs new life. Stephanie lynch Kristen Larson mike jones and Cynthia newbille and reva trammel all need to go. I hated to see Parker Agelasto get ousted for Stephanie lynch who I can’t stand at all. Really would love to have my former childhood neighbor Charles Samuel run again. One of the must genuine people I ever met along with his mom and dad who lived across from my parents house in James River estates in goochland. I don’t blame him for not running again and wanting to be with his family. Miss seeing him in council because I really felt like he wanted it to be a really great place to live and do business and raise a family. Then you had Kim gray take his spot I don’t understand how we replace good council members and then it gets wrecked with awful council members. I am starting to really believe there is not one person able to be elected who has leadership qualities or someone who is willing to stand up to the corruption and make Richmond an efficient ran city. 

[Urbs42]

Feels like a lot of hyperventilating on this forum. The RFI doesn't specify the ballpark must be on AA, and the RTD report doesn't name any sources, so take that with a grain of salt. See text pulled below. Also, it says the city may choose multiple developers. 

While the city has an abysmal record and we are all justified to be nervous they will FUBAR this development, I am heartened that the RFI actually has gone out, is very much in line with the 300 plan and lays out an aggressive timeline. We could very well have a developer(s) in place by end of 2022, with an approved site plan. After more than a decade of fumbling, it seems like we are seeing concrete progress that will move this area of the city in a positive direction. 

"The City desires to have a new baseball stadium within the Diamond District site, provided that the development of said baseball stadium does not require City financing or, in the alternative, minimizes any City financing to the greatest extent possible."

[I miss RVA]

Developer(s) might make me feel a little less nervous -- but there's a lot involved with this process that can very easily go a whole lotta wrong -- and the city's track record, by and large, has been "oh-for-_________" (fill in the blank with the number of choice). I've seen far to many swings and misses over the years to know that, indeed, the Mighty Casey does strike out (and does so quite regularly).

[I miss RVA]

In case anyone missed it, here is today's reporting from RBS and the RTD. Some actually really good details in the RTD article - details that make me feel quite a bit better about the whole shebang...

For one: the entire development site is 67 acres - and the ballpark component -- INCLUDING PARKING (which is being described as "limited parking" -- whatever that means) -- purportedly would take up a very small footprint of only 7 to10 acres-- leaving at least 57 to 60 acres available for high-density residential, office, hotel, retail, mixed-use development. We could get our rendering after all!! 

The proposed location of the new ballpark is just south of the current location of the Diamond, which is in the larger portion of the overall site - and would allow for the wraparound commercial development to take place and hopefully have significant size. It also would free up the ENTIRE northern part of the site for commercial development, and the current Arthur Ashe Center would be demolished to make way for the new commercial development.

One of the folks who was a key driver in formulating the Greater Scott's component as a member of the consulting firm AECOM has left that organization to join the city as a planner (according to RBS) and she is apparently heavily involved in this particular process -- THAT makes me feel a lot better. 

Okay - if the ballpark component -- soup-to-nuts -- will take up only roughly 1/7th of the total site footprint, I hope AND PRAY these folks (the city, the planners, any consulting firms (I think AECOM is involved as well) and -- of course -- the actual developers WILL NOT SKIMP on the high-density and the verticality. My biggest fear is that the ballpark will be surrounded by a bunch of low-density crappola like townhouses, a boutique hotel and some kind of three-level entertainment center. (GOD-FORBID INFINITE TIMES OVER!!!)  Okay - fine - locate the damn ballpark on A.A. Blvd - BUT OTHERWISE THINK BIG WITH THE OTHER DEVELOPMENT!!!  I know some folks like to argue against this concept when it comes to RVA developments, but in this case, SIZE MATTERS!!! Bigger IS VERY MUCH better! Time for this city to stop trying to lay down bunt singles when we're down by four runs with two out in the bottom of the ninth. SWING FOR THE FENCES!!

From RBS:

https://richmondbizsense.com/2021/12/29/city-issues-formal-solicitation-for-diamond-district-redevelopment/

From the RTD:

https://richmond.com/sports/professional/richmond-asks-developers-to-come-forward-for-diamond-redevelopment-project/article_b1dee2fc-d2dc-5e2e-82d1-d830fb6128d7.html#tracking-source=home-trending

Edited December 29, 2021 by I miss RVA