Richmond Developments

[I miss RVA]

1 hour ago, Richmonder23 said:

Absolutely! I rolled my eyes quite a few times through that article. If these folks think Richmond is destined to look like Midtown Manhattan in a few years because of some rezoning, they've clearly never been to Manhattan! (Plus, what's so bad with looking like one of the country's most popular cities anyway?) NIMBYs have been holding Richmond back for far too long. I for one say - bring on the density - and height! 

AMEN, brother!!! I concur 100%  Trust me, the NIMBYs have been a thorn in the side as far as I can remember -- I've seen this kind of insipid mentality for more than 50 years (I started following how the city was developing while I was a kid growing up near Westover Hills. I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with Richmond borrowing from the design playbook of Midtown Manhattan - a jungle of towers of various descriptions, sizes, shapes would do us quite well! Do I want to see glass and steel towers along Monument Avenue or Hanover Avenue or Strawberry Street in The Fan? Of course not! But throughout downtown, the VCU area, all along Broad, Scott's Addition, the area north of Scott's Addition (where the Diamond is now), Manchester, Monroe Ward, MCV/Navy Hill area ... bring on the density, bring on the height. BRING.. IT... ON!!! No one is talking about attempting to turn West Avenue into the canyons of Wall Street. For the love of God. I wish we could dispense with this small town mindset and just stop it will all the "historic" BS - no one is looking to rip up The Fan and turn it into the Upper East Side. But packing high rises into every nook and cranny available downtown? And putting them up around VCU and all along Broad Street? HECK YEAH!!! We need density and height. Even with COVID, Richmond is doing surprisingly well! She has been on a great roll - let's do everything possible to KEEP the momentum going - NOT truncate it! IMNSHO, as far as Richmond goes, bigger is definitely better - and the more of it the better. Having an epic skyline that stretches from jam-packed "city centers" of Scott's Addition/north Scott's Addition to downtown, and across the river to Manchester... and the population growth that could come with that... man... THAT is a Richmond THAT CAN -- AND SHOULD -- HAPPEN - and it doesn't have to "sacrifice" any of the history or uniqueness of places like The Fan or Jackson Ward or Shockoe Slip...  If anything, having a major city of gleaming towers, high density, high rise offices, residential areas, great shopping, and bustling streets - would serve to ENHANCE areas such as The Fan or Jackson Ward, BRINGING OUT their uniqueness as great, historic urban neighborhoods nestled inside America's newest, really up-and-coming, premiere BIG city! I've never understood why the NIMBYs refuse to recognize that!

I realize that, unfortunately, COVID, could really be the monkey wrench... but wow... all things being equal, to see Richmond take off like this would simply be EPIC! And she'd FINALLY be living up to her vast, untapped potential to become a truly awesome BIG city. BIG. Not mid-sized... BIG.

[Richmonder23]

52 minutes ago, I miss RVA said:

AMEN, brother!!! I concur 100%  Trust me, the NIMBYs have been a thorn in the side as far as I can remember -- I've seen this kind of insipid mentality for more than 50 years (I started following how the city was developing while I was a kid growing up near Westover Hills. I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with Richmond borrowing from the design playbook of Midtown Manhattan - a jungle of towers of various descriptions, sizes, shapes would do us quite well! Do I want to see glass and steel towers along Monument Avenue or Hanover Avenue or Strawberry Street in The Fan? Of course not! But throughout downtown, the VCU area, all along Broad, Scott's Addition, the area north of Scott's Addition (where the Diamond is now), Manchester, Monroe Ward, MCV/Navy Hill area ... bring on the density, bring on the height. BRING.. IT... ON!!! No one is talking about attempting to turn West Avenue into the canyons of Wall Street. For the love of God. I wish we could dispense with this small town mindset and just stop it will all the "historic" BS - no one is looking to rip up The Fan and turn it into the Upper East Side. But packing high rises into every nook and cranny available downtown? And putting them up around VCU and all along Broad Street? HECK YEAH!!! We need density and height. Even with COVID, Richmond is doing surprisingly well! She has been on a great roll - let's do everything possible to KEEP the momentum going - NOT truncate it! IMNSHO, as far as Richmond goes, bigger is definitely better - and the more of it the better. Having an epic skyline that stretches from jam-packed "city centers" of Scott's Addition/north Scott's Addition to downtown, and across the river to Manchester... and the population growth that could come with that... man... THAT is a Richmond THAT CAN -- AND SHOULD -- HAPPEN - and it doesn't have to "sacrifice" any of the history or uniqueness of places like The Fan or Jackson Ward or Shockoe Slip...  If anything, having a major city of gleaming towers, high density, high rise offices, residential areas, great shopping, and bustling streets - would serve to ENHANCE areas such as The Fan or Jackson Ward, BRINGING OUT their uniqueness as great, historic urban neighborhoods nestled inside America's newest, really up-and-coming, premiere BIG city! I've never understood why the NIMBYs refuse to recognize that!

I realize that, unfortunately, COVID, could really be the monkey wrench... but wow... all things being equal, to see Richmond take off like this would simply be EPIC! And she'd FINALLY be living up to her vast, untapped potential to become a truly awesome BIG city. BIG. Not mid-sized... BIG.

110% agree. If Philadelphia and Boston can build big shiny buildings with vibrant districts around their history - and keep their historical neighborhoods intact and beautiful - why can't Richmond? I agree; no one is calling to even touch the Fan or Church Hill or wherever. There's so much development potential in Richmond outside of those areas - just look around to the sea of empty parking lots that is Monroe Ward, or Navy Hill, or the abandoned storefronts on Broad. There's SO much potential to be so much more than we are now. 

Edited July 25, 2020 by Richmonder23
Add sentence

[I miss RVA]

Totally onboard with you, Richmonder23. Philly and Boston are the very two examples I think of when discussing maintaining the historic component but not truncating Richmond and shoehorning her into some small cracker box a la Charleston or Savannah. Richmond has all the potential to be not the next Charlotte - but the next Boston. Not the next Atlanta, but the next Philadelphia. Monroe Ward fully makes up roughly 25% of "downtown" (if downtown is defined by the boundaries of Belvedere Street on the west, the river on the south and I-95 on the north and east. Jackson Ward is part of downtown. Navy Hill (as a neighborhood, the northeast quadrant of downtown) is part of downtown.  That sea of parking lots in Monroe Ward has been around ever since I can remember, and I'm 58 years old.

Can you imagine how that area could look and, all the more, FUNCTION, filled with a variety of high rise buildings of all shapes, descriptions, types, uses? Large concentrations of high rise residential, perhaps a heavy amount closer to the riverfront - with other such towers at prestigious addresses such as near the Hotel Jefferson (on the Main Street side, where there is developable land)... expansion of the primary office "CBD" westward beyond the boundaries of what used to be referred to as the old "Financial District" ... a full-on signature part of downtown - "City Center" - with a signature complex in that block of E. Grace between 6th & 7th (where the old May Company building used to sit) where there has been a parking lot for far too long (this block was part of the NH proposal) ... residential and hotel towers along Broad, Grace, especially extending westward toward VCU ... the entire MCV/NH area packed with high rises of all kinds... lots of residential.. expansion of the medical complex... more residential buildings up and down the riverfront... 

And that's just downtown... that's not accounting for the area around VCU along Broad, Grace, Main, Cary, up and down Belvedere Street from the edge of Jackson Ward south to the river... 

Or filling up Scott's Addition... or what that area immediately north of Scott's Addition from the Acca rail yards to I-95 might look like as envisioned in the Richmond 300 plan...

Or a much more robustly beefed up Manchester...

Imagine updating and expanding the PULSE lines -- replacing PULSE buses with light rail or street car service, such as exists in cities like Charlotte or Portland (Oregon) or Seattle... imagine PULSE lines identified by colors or by recognizable names... "the Broad Street Line" - "the Chamberlayne Avenue/Brook Road Line" "the Cowardin Avenue Line" "the Hull Street Line" "the Midlothian Line"  Imagine integrating Main Street Station into all of this... and including an express line connecting to and from RIC. Imagine a GRTC hub downtown that would coordinate downtown transit (regular bus) service - and maybe even the return of a downtown circulator -- or two -- that could connect the various downtown wards...

The possibilities of what Richmond can become are utterly endless and, really, the sky is the limit. And I mean the sky - Richmond MUST THINK both DENSITY AND VERTICALITY!!!! She MUST reach for the sky!! Strip off this "mid-size city" (i.e. small town) BS attitude and THINK BIG!!! Combining her rich history and unique urban neighborhoods with a gleaming new, high-density, vibrant cityscape complete with epic skyline(S) and multiple satellite "urban centers" (Scott's Addition, north Scott's Addition, Manchester, for example) - and big city transit... and a much larger CITY population than merely 232K (how about something closer to 700K or 800K!!!) and a doubling - or tripling - of the metro population (what about a metro population of closer to 5 million!!!)

MANNNNNN.,, that is a Richmond that I hope and pray to God every single day and night that I live long enough to see. Because I KNOW beyond any shadow of a doubt that THAT Richmond... would be spectacular!!

Edited July 26, 2020 by I miss RVA

[Brent114]

I am always disappointed when city leaders travel to places like Charlotte, Savanna or Tampa to see what Richmond can become.  Sunbelt cities never seemed like a good match for Richmond and they certainly aren’t aspirational.   Richmond should look to Seattle, Boston, Baltimore and Philadelphia (or Brooklyn) for inspiration.  Nothing under 10 floors should ever be accepted in the area that I Miss RVA defined (I’d add in the Chamberlayne Ave corridor too).  Monroe Ward should be filled with 20-40 story buildings.  No ground floor retail added unless the building is over 20 floors.  We need to seriously increase the downtown population in order to get the existing storefronts filled (the death of retail is real... it’s going to take serious numbers to keep businesses open). 

As for old and new...London, Paris, Buenos Aries, Moscow, Madrid, Milan....only the folks in this metro think it isn’t possible to highlight both. 

Edited July 26, 2020 by Brent114

[blopp1234]

7 minutes ago, Brent114 said:

I am always disappointed when city leaders travel to places like Charlotte or Tampa to see what Richmond can become.  Sunbelt cities never seemed like a good match for Richmond and they certainly aren’t aspirational.   Richmond should look to Seattle, Boston, Baltimore and Philadelphia (or Brooklyn) for inspiration.

As for old and new...London, Paris, Buenos Aries, Moscow, Madrid, Milan....only the folks in this metro think it isn’t possible to highlight both. 

Exactly, sunbelt cities have a completely different “bone structure” than Richmond, which is layed out like the previously mentioned northern cities. Richmknd shouldn’t focus on trying to become a sunbelt city in terms of planning because most sunbelt cities are planned quite poorly. Richmond has the “bones” to have one of the best transportation networks in the country with BRT, commuter and light rail branching  out to every corner of the city. Richmond could have all these if city and state leaders showed the ambition and didn’t let NIMBY’s stop every ambitious project that could help Richmond reach new heights. 

[whw53]

Site work has begun on the Stony Point Commons development. Another project into the 'orange'!

https://richmond.com/business/construction-to-begin-soon-on-a-59-unit-condominium-project-behind-stony-point-shopping-center/article_f5e5a022-27ad-5c8d-b3d4-357bfa5f20c9.html

[I miss RVA]

1 hour ago, Brent114 said:

I am always disappointed when city leaders travel to places like Charlotte, Savanna or Tampa to see what Richmond can become.  Sunbelt cities never seemed like a good match for Richmond and they certainly aren’t aspirational.   Richmond should look to Seattle, Boston, Baltimore and Philadelphia (or Brooklyn) for inspiration.  Nothing under 10 floors should ever be accepted in the area that I Miss RVA defined (I’d add in the Chamberlayne Ave corridor too).  Monroe Ward should be filled with 20-40 story buildings.  No ground floor retail added unless the building is over 20 floors.  We need to seriously increase the downtown population in order to get the existing storefronts filled (the death of retail is real... it’s going to take serious numbers to keep businesses open). 

As for old and new...London, Paris, Buenos Aries, Moscow, Madrid, Milan....only the folks in this metro think it isn’t possible to highlight both. 

AMEN, Brent!!! Very well said! Indeed, Richmond is NOT a Sun Belt city and for decades it has boggled my mind how and why the "Southern" aspect of those sprawling cities that mushroomed out of small towns are in any way how Richmond should design herself (and don't get me started on the nauseating Charleston/Savannah comparisons... dear God...)

Agreed - we could throw Chamberlayne Avenue (especially closer in toward downtown) into the mix... what a transition it would be coming in from the north on Chamberlayne to see the density ratchet up and up and up and up on the approach to downtown.

Your final point hits the nail right on the head - and I'd love to know why it is that for decades folks in Richmond have held that it is impossible to highlight both old and new - that it must be either/or. A zero-sum game. What ticks me off the most is that the NIMBYs and the preservation freaks are the worst offenders - that somehow a high rise building within 200 miles of one of their architecturally "significant" houses somehow "destroys" the "historic character"... as if a 25 story building at, say, Robinson and Broad somehow wrecks the ambiance of row houses at Robinson and Floyd. W..T..ever-living...F ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? Can someone PLEASE explain this to me?

Look at the Lee House on Franklin Street - having the 18-story 7th and Franklin Building (or whatever the name of the tower is nowadays) sitting right next door - IMO - not only does NOT diminish the architectural and historical significance of the Lee House - it enhances it. It shows that Richmond HAS changed from the 1860s - it is a much different - and BIGGER city today than in the 1860s - BUT - for all the modern skyscrapers and big city bustle, here is a small slice of real Richmond history, alive and well, close to 180 years after it was built, it's still there - a perfect blend of old and new. For Christ's sake, it's 160 years later. WHY do these folks INSIST that Richmond "must" look exactly as she did 160 years ago for the "character" to remain unblemished? Just because Charleston and Savannah took that approach does NOT mean it is the right approach for Richmond.  That lovely mix of old and new is part of the very fabric of cities like Boston and Philadelphia. Truly historic sites are preserved - and yet gleaming buildings rise 60, 70, 80 stories high just a stones throw from those 200-plus year old structures. I've had the pleasure of visiting those cities - and seeing new towers rise, for example in Center City Philadelphia just a block or two from a row of 200-year-old row houses makes those old row houses REALLLLY stand out as vital to the importance of the city! Those row houses will never be torn down. They've been preserved. But at the same time, no one is stopping more 70 or 80 story buildings from rising around them. Perfect blend of old and new.

I just cannot wrap my head around how and why Richmond can't get this concept. WHY must the city be embalmed in the 1880s?

Brent - your suggestion for Monroe Ward made me envision that area transformed from the sea of parking lots that exists today to a sea of high rises of every shape, size and description - a real mini-Upper East Side or Upper West Side kind of concentration of buildings that from an aerial vantage point would look STUNNING on the downtown city scape! Leads me to hope that if there are 20 to 40 story buildings packed tightly into Monroe Ward - then hopefully there might be a few 60 or 70 story buildings dotting the "CBD" landscape just to the east or north and east. I keep thinking of City Center as a real developmental focal point for downtown. Particularly if a new arena eventually gets built - and particularly with the Carpenter Center and Convention Center there - that entire multi-block stretch around Marshall, Broad, Grace, Franklin and from 4th or 5th to 7th or 8th could be its own ward named "City Center" ... and rather than 18 or 22 story buildings going up at the old May Company site - how about breaking the cap on the height limit and dropping something 40 or 45 (dare I push for 50?) stories there... as part of a multi-building complex. Integrate the historic old parking deck into the structure - but reach for the sky! Especially given the elevation at close to the crest of the hill approaching Broad Street - anything of that size could realllly be a signature tower on the skyline. I keep hoping for a 25-ish floor Hyatt Regency to go up in that area (perhaps north of Marshall as originally envisioned in the NH plan and apparently still in the works in the Richmond 300 plan(s)... having multiple high profile/big name convention hotels, the convention center, the Carpenter Center... the re-establishment of quality retail and entertainment/dining... and make sure both Class A office - AND residential are both part of the mix as well. A really well coordinated, designed and developed City Center section of downtown could be a fantastic anchor location in downtown that could go a long way to re-establishing the Broad and Grace Street areas there as a real go-to destination.

Want to maintain some connection to Richmond's history there? Don't truncate the buildings - but actually pay homage to Thalheimer's, Miller & Rhodes, Berry Burke, May Company, and many of the other fine retailers that once were the anchors there. This was once the retail hub of Virginia. Make City Center a true "hub" of downtown -- with signature towers, new retail, fine dining, hotels, entertainment, offices for new companies, and -- most importantly -- residents!
 

[I miss RVA]

1 hour ago, blopp1234 said:

Exactly, sunbelt cities have a completely different “bone structure” than Richmond, which is layed out like the previously mentioned northern cities. Richmknd shouldn’t focus on trying to become a sunbelt city in terms of planning because most sunbelt cities are planned quite poorly. Richmond has the “bones” to have one of the best transportation networks in the country with BRT, commuter and light rail branching  out to every corner of the city. Richmond could have all these if city and state leaders showed the ambition and didn’t let NIMBY’s stop every ambitious project that could help Richmond reach new heights. 

Very well said, blopp1234! Richmond's bone structure IS akin to a northeastern city - not a sprawling kind of southern boom city that mushroomed up from what was once a small town outpost or trading village. 

Your point about the NIMBYs stopping every ambitious project is absolutely spot on!! It has been a bane to this city for as far back as I can remember. The NIMBYs were yammering about preserving cobblestones in the 1960s and this or that "historic" house in the 70s and 80s. And all along, any project with any kind of density and -- particularly -- height -- that was proposed  within sniffing distance of one of these so-called "historic" buildings brought out the nit-wit brigade clamoring that Richmond's character was being "destroyed" ... same old BS argument - "we don't want to become a mini New York" ...  Oh FFS...

I think I just broke something in my eye socket from rolling my eyes so damn hard - LOL!!!

Edited July 26, 2020 by I miss RVA

[DalWill]

1 hour ago, I miss RVA said:

AMEN, Brent!!! Very well said! Indeed, Richmond is NOT a Sun Belt city and for decades it has boggled my mind how and why the "Southern" aspect of those sprawling cities that mushroomed out of small towns are in any way how Richmond should design herself (and don't get me started on the nauseating Charleston/Savannah comparisons... dear God...)

Agreed - we could throw Chamberlayne Avenue (especially closer in toward downtown) into the mix... what a transition it would be coming in from the north on Chamberlayne to see the density ratchet up and up and up and up on the approach to downtown.

Your final point hits the nail right on the head - and I'd love to know why it is that for decades folks in Richmond have held that it is impossible to highlight both old and new - that it must be either/or. A zero-sum game. What ticks me off the most is that the NIMBYs and the preservation freaks are the worst offenders - that somehow a high rise building within 200 miles of one of their architecturally "significant" houses somehow "destroys" the "historic character"... as if a 25 story building at, say, Robinson and Broad somehow wrecks the ambiance of row houses at Robinson and Floyd. W..T..ever-living...F ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? Can someone PLEASE explain this to me?

Look at the Lee House on Franklin Street - having the 18-story 7th and Franklin Building (or whatever the name of the tower is nowadays) sitting right next door - IMO - not only does NOT diminish the architectural and historical significance of the Lee House - it enhances it. It shows that Richmond HAS changed from the 1860s - it is a much different - and BIGGER city today than in the 1860s - BUT - for all the modern skyscrapers and big city bustle, here is a small slice of real Richmond history, alive and well, close to 180 years after it was built, it's still there - a perfect blend of old and new. For Christ's sake, it's 160 years later. WHY do these folks INSIST that Richmond "must" look exactly as she did 160 years ago for the "character" to remain unblemished? Just because Charleston and Savannah took that approach does NOT mean it is the right approach for Richmond.  That lovely mix of old and new is part of the very fabric of cities like Boston and Philadelphia. Truly historic sites are preserved - and yet gleaming buildings rise 60, 70, 80 stories high just a stones throw from those 200-plus year old structures. I've had the pleasure of visiting those cities - and seeing new towers rise, for example in Center City Philadelphia just a block or two from a row of 200-year-old row houses makes those old row houses REALLLLY stand out as vital to the importance of the city! Those row houses will never be torn down. They've been preserved. But at the same time, no one is stopping more 70 or 80 story buildings from rising around them. Perfect blend of old and new.

I just cannot wrap my head around how and why Richmond can't get this concept. WHY must the city be embalmed in the 1880s?

Brent - your suggestion for Monroe Ward made me envision that area transformed from the sea of parking lots that exists today to a sea of high rises of every shape, size and description - a real mini-Upper East Side or Upper West Side kind of concentration of buildings that from an aerial vantage point would look STUNNING on the downtown city scape! Leads me to hope that if there are 20 to 40 story buildings packed tightly into Monroe Ward - then hopefully there might be a few 60 or 70 story buildings dotting the "CBD" landscape just to the east or north and east. I keep thinking of City Center as a real developmental focal point for downtown. Particularly if a new arena eventually gets built - and particularly with the Carpenter Center and Convention Center there - that entire multi-block stretch around Marshall, Broad, Grace, Franklin and from 4th or 5th to 7th or 8th could be its own ward named "City Center" ... and rather than 18 or 22 story buildings going up at the old May Company site - how about breaking the cap on the height limit and dropping something 40 or 45 (dare I push for 50?) stories there... as part of a multi-building complex. Integrate the historic old parking deck into the structure - but reach for the sky! Especially given the elevation at close to the crest of the hill approaching Broad Street - anything of that size could realllly be a signature tower on the skyline. I keep hoping for a 25-ish floor Hyatt Regency to go up in that area (perhaps north of Marshall as originally envisioned in the NH plan and apparently still in the works in the Richmond 300 plan(s)... having multiple high profile/big name convention hotels, the convention center, the Carpenter Center... the re-establishment of quality retail and entertainment/dining... and make sure both Class A office - AND residential are both part of the mix as well. A really well coordinated, designed and developed City Center section of downtown could be a fantastic anchor location in downtown that could go a long way to re-establishing the Broad and Grace Street areas there as a real go-to destination.

Want to maintain some connection to Richmond's history there? Don't truncate the buildings - but actually pay homage to Thalheimer's, Miller & Rhodes, Berry Burke, May Company, and many of the other fine retailers that once were the anchors there. This was once the retail hub of Virginia. Make City Center a true "hub" of downtown -- with signature towers, new retail, fine dining, hotels, entertainment, offices for new companies, and -- most importantly -- residents!
 

Using history to justify their sense of entitlement and privilege.  The "NIMBY" collective are the honestly the status quo who wants their way of how Richmond SHOULD look in THEIR benefit (while suppressing a burgeoning population of fresh faces, talents and viewpoints of how the city can progress as the years pass). Give it some thought, because its more than just skyscrapers.

[I miss RVA]

6 hours ago, DalWill said:

Using history to justify their sense of entitlement and privilege.  The "NIMBY" collective are the honestly the status quo who wants their way of how Richmond SHOULD look in THEIR benefit (while suppressing a burgeoning population of fresh faces, talents and viewpoints of how the city can progress as the years pass). Give it some thought, because its more than just skyscrapers.

VERY well said!! I agree 100%. It's a truly sad state of affairs. I just wonder how and why Richmond has been so cursed with this mindset whereas other cities such as Boston and Philadelphia have not.

[whw53]

BIG NEWS was subtly introduced at City Council last night for Monroe Ward. Thalhimer submitted two potential SUPs to reduce parking requirements for existing buildings they own in Monroe Ward at 104 W. Franklin and 311 W. Franklin. No big deal right? However in the application report for each of these they make it clear they are doing this in order to build new multifamily developments along Grace Street, lots of which are currently serving the parking requirements for the Franklin St. properties. I attach the following links to the reports and the blurbs of interest. 

104 W. Franklin SUP : https://richmondva.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4602066&GUID=821BBDC3-3713-4522-BAEE-8C3A7EABE1BF&Options=&Search=

                 On behalf of the owner of 104 West Franklin Street, please accept this letter as the Applicant’s Report for a Special Use Permit request to reduce the required parking for an existing multi-family dwelling. With this application, Thalhimer Franklin LLC is petitioning City Council to reduce the parking requirement for the existing 204 apartments, which are served by both parking on-site and parking located in a surface lot within the block fronting on West Grace Street. The reduction in parking requirement would allow for property to operate independently with the 57 parking spaces available on-site. This would make the surface parking lots located at 104, 108 and 109 West Grace Street available for development in accordance with the recommendations in the Pulse Corridor Plan.

 

311 W. Franklin SUP: https://richmondva.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4602067&GUID=9A79DE39-8501-4806-B946-CEB7E518E3D1&Options=&Search=

On behalf of the owner of 311 West Franklin Street, please accept this letter as the Applicant’s Report for a Special Use Permit request to reduce the required parking for an existing multi-family dwelling. With this application, Thalhimer Franklin LLC is petitioning City Council to reduce the parking requirement for the existing 128 apartments, which are served by both parking on-site and parking located in a surface lot a block away. The reduction in parking requirement would allow for property to operate independently with the 29 parking spaces available on-site. This would make the surface parking lot located at 321 West Grace Street available for development in accordance with the recommendations in the Pulse Corridor Plan.

With this and Foundry Park being reawakened we may need a Monroe Ward/Financial District development thread. This is exciting. 

Edited July 28, 2020 by whw53

[I miss RVA]

WOW - this IS exciting news! That may explain why the preservation NIMBYs in these neighborhoods near the BRT PULSE line are soiling their trousers about the upzoning.

I did a little research and just the thought of high rise apartment buildings going up in this concentrated area which is currently its own sea of parking lots is extremely exciting. Have a look at these photos for an idea of the locations of the parcels in question. There is already precedent for high-rise residential either adjacent to or across a street from these parcels. Imagine if towers of at least similar height, density and size to the high rises that already exist there were to sprout up in the very near future. Let's hope heights aren't limited to merely 12 floors.

 

[whw53]

Both of these Grace St. properties have already been considered by the Pulse Corridor rezoning program last year when the attention was on Monroe Ward. While the zoning map south of Grace was redrawn as part of this action , the B-4 zoning along Grace was maintained. There were amendments to the B-4 zoning text that sprang out of this but essentially the height restrictions are the same - not to 12 stories but to the 4:1 inclined plane. So nothing along Grace St. really changed zoning wise except for the minimal changes to the B-4 allowances. I've linked a summary to the Monroe Ward Rezoning program below which describes this and the rest of the Monroe Ward actions that were approved. 

http://www.richmondgov.com/PlanningAndDevelopmentReview/documents/PulseCorridorPlan/MonroeWardRezoningSummary20190503.pdf

Edited July 29, 2020 by whw53

[I miss RVA]

14 hours ago, whw53 said:

Both of these Grace St. properties have already been considered by the Pulse Corridor rezoning program last year when the attention was on Monroe Ward. While the zoning map south of Grace was redrawn as part of this action , the B-4 zoning along Grace was maintained. There were amendments to the B-4 zoning text that sprang out of this but essentially the height restrictions are the same - not to 12 stories but to the 4:1 inclined plane. So nothing along Grace St. really changed zoning wise except for the minimal changes to the B-4 allowances. I've linked a summary to the Monroe Ward Rezoning program below which describes this and the rest of the Monroe Ward actions that were approved. 

http://www.richmondgov.com/PlanningAndDevelopmentReview/documents/PulseCorridorPlan/MonroeWardRezoningSummary20190503.pdf

Honest to God, I wish the city would get their heads out of their backsides and do away with the 4:1 limiter on height, especially for buildings that are facing wider thoroughfares. I (to a point) get not necessarily wanting to create areas where very little sunlight actually hits (recall the line from Elton John's 1972 song "Mona Lisas & Mad Hatters" describing the 'plight' of New Yorkers: 

 "... for unless they see the sky, but they can't and that is why... they know not if it's dark outside or light..."  -- clearly a reference to the high rise canyons of Manhattan. (Bernie Taupin was a sharp lyricist, to be sure!)

But this 4:1 thing almost certainly will prevent Richmond from ever getting some epic 50, 60, 70 (or taller) towers unless they're basically built on an island in the middle of nowhere... Amazingly frustrating, to say the least.

[whw53]

In parking garage news....

    1. Work has begun on the Science Museum Parking Garage and Urban Plaza project .... moving this into the 'orange' on the RVA Development Map.

    2. It looks like the Sauer Center Parking Garage has topped out. Does anyone know what is left to be built for that development? With the Whole Foods and the various renovations either done or wrapping up it seems this project is coming to a close? Was there supposed to be a new construction piece of this or was that swapped out for the parking garage? There have been a variety of renderings so I'm not sure what the final site plan was.

 

Edited August 1, 2020 by whw53

[Icetera]

On 8/1/2020 at 1:47 PM, whw53 said:

In parking garage news....

    1. Work has begun on the Science Museum Parking Garage and Urban Plaza project .... moving this into the 'orange' on the RVA Development Map.

    2. It looks like the Sauer Center Parking Garage has topped out. Does anyone know what is left to be built for that development? With the Whole Foods and the various renovations either done or wrapping up it seems this project is coming to a close? Was there supposed to be a new construction piece of this or was that swapped out for the parking garage? There have been a variety of renderings so I'm not sure what the final site plan was.

 

Wasn't there supposed to be a decent sized apartment component?

[eandslee]

This is the only thing I could find that is fairly recent:

https://richmondbizsense.com/2019/06/07/sauer-eyes-new-office-building-800-space-parking-deck-near-whole-foods/

I don't see an apartment component though. 

[Icetera]

1 hour ago, eandslee said:

This is the only thing I could find that is fairly recent:

https://richmondbizsense.com/2019/06/07/sauer-eyes-new-office-building-800-space-parking-deck-near-whole-foods/

I don't see an apartment component though. 

Digging around that may be for Phase 2.  It looks like the apartments were originally planned for on top of the parking garage.

[eandslee]

2 hours ago, Icetera said:

Digging around that may be for Phase 2.  It looks like the apartments were originally planned for on top of the parking garage.

In all honesty, I like this development for the fact that it is a development, but just look at the plans here - it is so suburban for its location (you'd never think this is close to downtown).  This needed to be a serious density project.  I'm talking about the fact that there should have been high-rise apartments built on top of Whole Foods, for example.  Then, there are the parking lots...what is this...Short Pump?  Disappointing to say the least, but I'll take the development for development sake.  Hope this thing morphs into something with a lot more density.

Edited August 3, 2020 by eandslee

[flaneur]

Re: Monroe Ward rezoning, that's a very positive development with strong potential for making those surface lots more financially appealing for infill development. I care less about height than holistic, thoughtful urbanism. I really wish we could adopt a form-based code. Re: CoStar's possible new office in Foundry Park, I'm hopeful that they will add critical urbanity and connectivity to that part of downtown. Almost everything south of Cary from Belvidere to the Manchester Bridge has a suburban office park scale and car-centric orientation.  This isn't a perfect example as it has plenty of flaws and is a larger mixed use infill project, but I think Baltimore's Harbor East offers some positives in how to enhance connectivity and integrate thoughtfully into an existing urban fabric, which that part of downtown woefully needs. Of course, I'd much rather have CoStar add a new building on Main, Grace, etc., to add to the part of downtown that arguably has the best urban fabric:) But if the river is the draw, then I hope they do it well so it is much more than office views.

 

Edited August 3, 2020 by flaneur

[Richmonder23]

3 hours ago, eandslee said:

In all honesty, I like this development for the fact that it is a development, but just look at the plans here - it is so suburban for its location (you'd never think this is close to downtown).  This needed to be a serious density project.  I'm talking about the fact that there should have been high-rise apartments built on top of Whole Foods, for example.  Then, there are the parking lots...what is this...Short Pump?  Disappointing to say the least, but I'll take the development for development sake.  Hope this thing morphs into something with a lot more density.

there shouldn't be any surface parking lots sitting on Broad. that should be goal #1 

Edited August 3, 2020 by Richmonder23

[I miss RVA]

3 hours ago, Richmonder23 said:

there shouldn't be any surface parking lots sitting on Broad. that should be goal #1 

A-FREAKIN-MEN!!!! I agree 100%, brother!

[Shakman]

I remember making the same comment about removing the surface parking lots.  Someone replied "then where will people park"?    

Edited August 4, 2020 by Shakman

[Icetera]

FYI: The CoStar conversation has been moved over to:

I will work to have to old Foundry Park thread resurrected and merge later.

[I miss RVA]

13 hours ago, Shakman said:

I remember making the same comment about removing the surface parking lots.  Someone replied "then where will people park"?    

Dear Lord... not sure I can eye roll any harder, to be quite honest.