Proposed: Echo Harbour

[Cadeho]

Thanks jc, welcome to this side!

Thanks for explaining that. I've been taking pics of the land this weekend and just looking into the water, I've always wondered how deep it is. To the right of Mayo Bridge yesterday the bottom looks shallow and it's sandy. I guess the recent flood added the sand and I see some new islands and new additions to islands.

[Cadeho]

Some pictures from last Saturday

They've taken parts of the wooden fence down. it makes great Ship Lock Park look like it's been extended.

From Ash St

[Shakman]

2-weeks ago, that backhoe was not there. I would not be surprised if it is for infrastructure improvements in anticipation of future development(s).

[wrldcoupe4]

It's about time the TimesDispatch decided to chime in....

N. Virginia Firm plans Echo Harhour

[wrldcoupe4]

check out the comments on the story I linked above...

[eandslee]

check out the comments on the story I linked above...

Looks like the debate is getting heated...it also appears that the opinions about the project are about 50% pro and 50% not in favor. I, personally do not like the design, but it's got nothing to do with the height of the buildings - I'm always in favor of going tall...yes, even on the river (call me wreckless!)

[wrldcoupe4]

More details on the Echo Harbour Proposal:

Riverfront Condos Will create 365 jobs

It almost seems like these guys are trying to beat Centennial Towers to the market, because they hope to complete Echo Harbour by the end of 2008.

some excerpts:

George T. Ross, who built downtown's Ross Building in 1965, said he hopes to complete the $215 million James River development by the end of 2008. He has asked the city to approve rezoning for the site and to give him permission to exceed a zoning-code cap on building heights.

The two 18-story towers he is proposing would stand on a vacant lot on the 3000 block of Dock Street, just east of Great Shiplock park.

Neighbors of Libby Hill Park say they're concerned the 206-foot-tall buildings would block one of the most popular overlooks onto the James, including the southward river's bend that inspired Richmond founder William Byrd to name his new city after Richmond upon Thames, near London....

Ross said he's planning to have about 240 condominium units in the building, ranging from less than 1,300 square feet to penthouses of 4,000 square feet. He expects to sell them for approximately $450,000 for the smaller units and up to $1.4 million for the largest units.

"We'll be marketing these nationally," he said.

As part of the project, the developer is offering to throw in refurbishment of Libby Hill and Great Shiplock Parks, public river access at the site, extension of the Capital Trail, and maybe more. They are not asking for any tax breaks or financial help from the City.

Residents on the Hill and elsewhere are concerned about how the view may impact the view from Libby Hill of the River, and more importantly, the river's bend. The developer argues that the only view his project will block is of the waste water plant across the river.

This guy built the Ross Building (Wythestone Plaza) in 1965, so he's been in the game for a while.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

[eandslee]

...And these guys are not asking for any tax breaks or money from the city (very rare)! All they want is the zoning changed to accommodate their height design (which I think the height is nothing to be worried about). The city would be stupid to not let this happen!

[Shakman]

...And these guys are not asking for any tax breaks or money from the city (very rare)! All they want is the zoning changed to accommodate their height design (which I think the height is nothing to be worried about). The city would be stupid to not let this happen!

Considering the fact that the so called view will be changed once Rocketts Landing is fully built.

[Cadeho]

More details on the Echo Harbour Proposal:

Riverfront Condos Will create 365 jobs

It almost seems like these guys are trying to beat Centennial Towers to the market, because they hope to complete Echo Harbour by the end of 2008.

some excerpts:

As part of the project, the developer is offering to throw in refurbishment of Libby Hill and Great Shiplock Parks, public river access at the site, extension of the Capital Trail, and maybe more. They are not asking for any tax breaks or financial help from the City.

Residents on the Hill and elsewhere are concerned about how the view may impact the view from Libby Hill of the River, and more importantly, the river's bend. The developer argues that the only view his project will block is of the waste water plant across the river.

This guy built the Ross Building (Wythestone Plaza) in 1965, so he's been in the game for a while.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

That says a lot! Apparently his architecture never left the 1960s! Mike Brady everyone!

Shakman, Rocketts doesn't BLOCK the view. They're at a distance that it doesn't disturb the anything.

Well if Libby Hill can get the view of the wastewater treatment plant block, and the people who live in these towers get full access to that... well I guess I have no complaints now.

[Shakman]

That says a lot! Apparently his architecture never left the 1960s! Mike Brady everyone!

Shakman, Rocketts doesn't BLOCK the view. They're at a distance that it doesn't disturb the anything.

Well if Libby Hill can get the view of the wastewater treatment plant block, and the people who live in these towers get full access to that... well I guess I have no complaints now.

I never said it will block the view however it will alter it.

[Cadeho]

I never said it will block the view however it will alter it.

Altering the view is not their beef, blocking it is and blocking it with something hideous should follow right behind.

[Shakman]

Altering the view is not their beef, blocking it is and blocking it with something hideous should follow right behind.

From the renderings I have seen, the view looking down river will not be blocked. These condos are before the bend looking down river.

[Cadeho]

It's not just about the bend, it's the view! You can see the ENTIRE HORIZON and with these buildings, that will be blocked. You can see more of the river than just the bend from up there. Do I have to meet you supporters up there to point it out?

[Shakman]

It's not just about the bend, it's the view! You can see the ENTIRE HORIZON and with these buildings, that will be blocked. You can see more of the river than just the bend from up there. Do I have to meet you supporters up there to point it out?

WE supporters would still support the project even if you do point it out.

[eandslee]

WE supporters would still support the project even if you do point it out.

I support the project regardless of what's left of the "view". It's not like millions of people are flocking to the Libby Hill to catch the same view that sparked the name "Richmond" for our city. In fact, I would venture to say that not too many people outside of Richmond proper really care. Richmond needs to be concerned with growing up. So what if it blocks a small portion of the "view"? I believe in preserving history, but when preservation interferes with progress to the point where you can't do anything because everything has "historic significance" is just plain stupid! Does that mean that you can't build anything here because Jefferson Davis walked here, or that slaves were sold here, or that the first union cannon ball in Richmond rolled down this street? No! How ludicrous! Grow up Richmond! Look forward instead of backward all the time! We've got enough preseved right now that will serve as constant reminders of our past both good and bad. Now let's move on!

[Cadeho]

My personal opinion is not about the historic bend of the James, but the view itself. There are limited areas in the city where you can go and see a panoramic view over the city, being able to see the horizon from one end of the hill past downtown. From Oregon Hill the view os just across the river and you can see the eastern horizon. From Jefferson Hill Park, you can see southside's horizon but Downtown and Church Hill block the rest. Well, I guess Chimborozo would be the next best view then once Libby Hill's is destroyed. We might as well wall in the river with skyscrapers to move the city forward. The only way to get a good view would be from the roof of a building with near impossible access. Imagine going to Tree Hill Farm and having that beautiful view of the city blocked by skyscrapers. What's the point? Is nothing sacred anymore?

[eandslee]

Is nothing sacred anymore?

Nope! And that view is definitely not!

[wrldcoupe4]

It disappoints me when people are more concerned with having tall buildings than helping to create a mix of old and new, which helps keep Richmond's unique urban fabric in tact. I fail to see the harm in both sides compromising... with development still occurring on the site but at less than 18 stories...???

[Cadeho]

I agree. I'm not against the devlopment, I just don't find it's responsible planning to trample over something a lot of people on the hill cherish just to have tall buildings. There's always an appropriate place for something. Never build it just to build it, then place it anywhere. It won't be bad if they lowered the height, It'll still look impressive on the bank, but be considerate.

[eandslee]

I agree. I'm not against the devlopment, I just don't find it's responsible planning to trample over something a lot of people on the hill cherish just to have tall buildings. There's always an appropriate place for something. Never build it just to build it, then place it anywhere. It won't be bad if they lowered the height, It'll still look impressive on the bank, but be considerate.

OK, OK, OK...I'll give into compromise (I love playing devil's advacate sometimes ). Still, everything around the city doesn't have to have some kind of historical significance. The line's gotta be drawn somewhere or else we'll never progress.

[Brent]

Fewer floors means fewer condos to sell which means smaller ROI. Fewer floors will result in the demise of the project. Best case scenario it will result in the shortened condos being built but the public access portion of the project scrapped.

[Cadeho]

Fewer floors means fewer condos to sell which means smaller ROI. Fewer floors will result in the demise of the project. Best case scenario it will result in the shortened condos being built but the public access portion of the project scrapped.

Fine let's make them 50 stories then.

Greed.

Greed.

Greed.

[eandslee]

Fine let's make them 50 stories then.

Greed.

Greed.

Greed.

It's not about greed, but more about surviving as a developer! They've got to be able to make enogh profit to make it worth the trouble to go through with this development in the first place. It's supposed to be a win/win situation - the developer helps the city by providing more housing for more citizens within the city and the developer also wins (if all goes right) in the form of profits. It's a business, not greed.

[Cadeho]

There are other places and ways to do this business with similar results but it will never happen. They always pick the worst projects for what they want to do, but never what needs to be done.

I guess everything has to bow to someone else's money they wish to throw around. I guess nothing is really more important than making a dollar by any means. Might as well build 30 story buildings lining the river. We have pictures of the way the river used to look. That's good enough.