The presentation was a little campy. I agree the developers went over board in making us feel a little “privileged” at having their project in our neighborhood.

However, the drawing presented to the good people of Church Hill in that packed parish house was done using CADD- by a local architecture firm. If you don’t believe them to be accurate we only need to request an elevation and give them to any impartial architecture or engineering firm to validate them. The opposing drawing referred to as representing what things would “really look” was just that- a sketch by hand done w/o prior knowledge of the buildings latest design phase or representative of what was presented that night. And to top it off- it was a terrible architectural drawing. (I apologize to whoever worked on the drawing) In my opinion, that other drawing was as campy and disingenuous as the pomp and circumstance from the developer.

Secondly, there were several newspaper articles leading up to the presentation in Style, RTD, and the Free Press describing City Council, the Mayor, and our Planning Dept. as either supporting the project, having no objections, or simply of no opinion. So it was apparent that the developers had gotten a green light from our City officials well before they came to our packed meeting. Which I might add, should have been where they started.

As we push to have all Church Hill residence participate in shaping development in our community lets take the high road and not resort to gimmicks and showmanship to make our voices heard. (I wanted to use smoke and mirrors but I like J’s use of that much better)

On another very important and related note:
One of the real issues here is zoning. Regardless of the passions for the neighborhood we all have very specific rights on our property given to us under current zoning laws and regulations. Sometimes these rights don’t match with our vision of what our neighborhood should be. Please go to
http://www.ci.richmond.va.us/departments/communityDev/DownTownMasterPlan.aspx
to learn more about our Planning Department’s current initiative to implement a Form-Based zoning code. This is a proactive approach to zoning that will really help coordinate our vision for the City and what is allowable by zoning.

Cheers

I’m not sure how height figures into it at this point. Maybe they could make the ground lower next to the river or make it higher on Libby Hill. As for moving streets, why don’t they just move Libby Park a little to the west instead?

One question Bridg. Is four a super majority? There are nine council members. Also, is height still an issue? I don’t have a clue what the latest proposal involves so far as height (perhaps they haven’t said?!). All I’ve seen is the ‘move Dock Street’ which I STILL think is a nebulous idea at best and have no clue who would pay for it.

But unfortunately for the Echo Harbor folks, the meeting did not go well. Their slick hustle resembled a wild-west medicine show, and the neighbors were hostile at being treated like rubes who just fell off the turnip truck. They asked disturbing questions about who the principal developers are and how the project will be financed. Their audacity was offensive to the Echo Harbor reps who refused to answer such inappropriate and annoying questions.

At one point the presenters displayed drawings of how the viewshed would look from Libby Park. Then a CHA member presented his own drawings of how it would really look, according to calculations made from plans the developers submitted to the city. As things went from bad to worse, several residents demanded to know whether the city is going to pay for the roads and infrastructure necessary for the project. One cynic even suggested that taxpayers could actually end up as losers if the project is built.

The meeting was not a complete disaster, however. The parish house was packed to the rafters with concerned Church Hillians. After the vote was taken and the smoke cleared, 2 people had actually voted in favor of the project. While this must be comforting to the Echo Harbor publicity team, don’t expect them to show up at a CHA meeting again any time soon. And forget about seeing any pictures of how the viewshed will look from Libby Park.

Thus, the Echo Harbor project is stalled due to opposition from city zoning administrators, the mayor, and the citizens. The developers’ only recourse now is to buy enough Council votes to override their opponents. Their chances are pretty good, though, given the city’s sordid history of ignoring residents in favor of developers.

The bottom line, and the purpose of my post, is that overriding an existing law (the Zoning Ordinance) requires a super majority in City Council. Four council members must vote against the project in order to kill it. Can you think of 4 councilors who will oppose it? I can’t.

Ciao,
Bridg

Meanwhile, it is street-level, grassroots events such as Curated Culture’s First Friday that have been transforming downtown, not willy-nilly development and endless subsidies and perks to campaign contributors.

Try a little experiment the next time you are at a candidate’s forum: Ask the would-be mayors (especially those who have been in a seat of power for seven years) what they have done to help support First Fridays.

We know these leaders can find tax dollars to spend on such things as “Party Patrols” and endless subsidies to CenterStage. We know they can find $600,000 to give to connected property owners based on mere “letters of intent.” We know that they can find millions in taxpayer dollars to give to expanded convention centers that destroy huge swaths of historic Richmond and fail to meet their original projections. We know they can stand by twiddling their thumbs while the Broad Street CDA reneges on promises and wastes millions and leaves us without downtown parking.

But ask these leaders what they’ve personally done to help find funding and resources for First Fridays– something that is actually transforming and changing downtown for the better — and get ready for the silence. [The city doesn't mind taking credit for FF though - have you noticed?]

At this point, you can bet that if a council or mayoral candidate hasn’t been clear with voters about his/her stance on the Echo Harbour project, that he or she will support the project once the election is over. So if you have questions about where a candidate stands on the issue, it is time to demand a clear statement from them.

Tobacco Row and Rocketts were years and years in the planning, and their plans were made very public. Plus, the late Bill Abeloff had many many backers, and he was riding a wave about adaptive reuse of old manufacturing buildings, for both projects. My sense, and it’s just that, is that these folks are just trying to piggy back onto something, but they have not shown the public much in the way of plans/renderings/etc.

And where in Church Hill do you live now, Paul?

“these developers are giving us a choice”/i

No, that is the choice we have been making for 40 years. We get to choose now.

So these developers are giving us a choice of destroying a historic view or tearing up the environment, i.e. farmland, in the county? They sound like nice people worthy of respect.

you have hit right on it. the big point is that there are a lot of people out there who have a different vision of what responsible development is, and are more than willing to wait for it. i for one am not willing to jump on board the George Ross train just because the are the only ones out there (which they are most definitely not, there are many examples of great redevelopment going on in the city) and are ready to build a monstrosity tomorrow. oooooohhhhh…money money money. some things i value much, much, more.

I’ve lived on Chimborazo and loved it. I love Libby Hill. I look out my window at the James River and the Jefferson. It’s not a pristine view, but I value it. Living in cities means complromise. It also means toleration and respect for differing opinions.

Again, get your investors together and your lawyers. Prepare for years of hearings, cheap shots from politicians and activists. Then build you projects

It’s not a hostile environment for developers, just that development/developer. I’m sure all the places I listed if considered would clear every hurdle. Besides, you seem as if you don’t like urban views. Please stay away from Libby Hill Park, Chimborozo Park, Jefferson Hill Park, The Virginia War Memorial, Oregon Hill Park, Gambles Hill, Powhatan Hill Park, or any hill in Richmond with a view if you detest views or urban life so. If you think the only vista worthy of preserving is one that looks upon a pristine landscape, the mountains are only a relatively short drive.

All we ask is George Ross and his goons redesign and consider what Richmonders regard as important, not his pockets.

Paul (and Bill) – I figured the slave trail would shoot down that idea, but only if someone tried to built right on it. Cadeho has offered so much more.

And yes, Bill, I have driven over there, not just directly to Ancarrow’s but all around. I disagree with the idea that the sewage treatment plant knocks Manchester out of the contenders, and I leave the rest of the argument to Cadeho, who sounds very involved and as if he’s done a lot of homework, plus he attended the charrette.

Chapel Island: Maybe they can find a way to build over the tank that’s just sitting there and impacting access to the river for the public. Build Echo Harbour there with towers. It’s look great from I-95. Also, a museum dedicated to Richmond’s nautical history would be fitting there because of the Trigg Ship Company.

Dock St: What a wasteland are the blocks east of 21st. At the downtown master plan charrette, I suggested at my table something I’ve always envisioned for the floodwall itself. Build mixed-use development straddling the floodwall. Dock St could be lined with shops above flood level with parking below which have the façades of storefronts. They could build more condo towers over the floodwall along the canal near 14th and the triple crossing as well as the Reynold’s/Alcoa parking lot.

The Alcoa site: Once Alcoa moves, the land along the canal will be open for development into a canalside village. I also suggested at the charrette following through with plans to connect the original canal or create an extenstion to connect with the Haxall. Then if we can convince NewMarket Corp to stop hording the old canal bed for themselves, new locks could be created at 5th and Tredegar and the canal reconstructed there to at least Maymont (again wrestling the canal away from other companies and property owners). I’d rather reconstruct the canal all the way to Buchanan or maybe just Lynchburg and have canal batteaux cruises. The whole canal down to the Richmond Dock could be used. Then one can hop on a cruise from here to Norfolk and back.

The Richmond Dock: Again at the charrette, I suggested an idea a few of us at RichmondCityWatch and Urban Planet would love to see. Line the dock with what we call “ship shops.” They can be various types and styles of ships.

Foundry Park: While the Federal Reserve and MeadWestvaco are building on the site, the 5th and Tredergar side is completely free for(a)tower(s) and shops.

Proposed Echo Harbour site: Again at the charrette, I recommended a public aquarium be built. Tall ships can dock there and those cruises to Norfolk can start there.

Main St from Peebles to Nicholson: While I believe Rocketts Landing will be developing this area, I can imagine seeing that curve after Nicholson on the east side lined with a retail village. Restaurants could be built over Water St like the Intermediate Terminal builing. Rocketts is going to transform that entire area into an economic powerhouse for the city in a more responsible manner than Echo Harbour.

Main and 25th: Why is there a vacant lot left at that corner? Why hasn’t another building been built? It’s been fenced off for about 12 years! Then across the street is no better. Those lots are screaming for development.

Main and Peach: A midrise condo or mixed-use development of 5 or 6 stories can rise across from Rockettsview.

Dock and Pear: They recently demolished a building at this corner. I’m not sure what plans they have for it, but if they don’t, here’s another site.

Williamsburg Ave: We still need to find some use for the Fulton Gas Works. It could make the city millions. There’s also a warehouse across the street just screaming for new life.

South of Ancarrow’s Landing: I have heard that this is being eyed for development. I have walked this area from the park southward directly across Rocketts Landing. While it is along the route of the Colonial Pipeline, streets could be built on top of it instead of doing like they did in the west end by putting people’s yards over it. A development here would compliment Rocketts Landing if not developed by the same people. The water treatment plant as far as I have been able to find, does not smell from Brander St, nor I-95. If it smelled, Libby Hill to Powhatan Hill would be unbearable in a west-southwest breeze. The main culprit for any smell is the paper mill. There’s also another industrial site along I-95 too far south of the water treatment plant that smells like a stockyard (perhaps that’s what it is).

Paul, I hope I found your answers and your opportunities for viable commercial and residential development within the city near the river that eldued you so long.

Two words – Slave trail

The problem here, as I see it, is that investors … want to build on that success

That’s what investor’s do.

The south end of the Lee Bridge could be our Roslyn

I’m guess Scott B and some others on Oregon Hill would object to that. The fact is most of the James is off limits. We have a wonderful James River Park System which we don’t fund or staff. The new Master Plan sets aside the remaining waterfront as park land. Meanwhile Richmond needs million’s of dollars to repair it’s infrastructure and schools.

I agree that we should look at other areas. Have you driven down to Ancarrow’s and seen the area that you have to go through? Also, the sewage treatment plant is not exactly the best of neighbors and will not help property values! I don’t want to see Echo Harbour take our view, but Manchester, is not, unfortunately, the answer. I think River Towers had the right idea many years ago. The south end of the Lee Bridge could be our Roslyn (on the Potomac, south of Georgetown in DC for the newcomers in the area). Just a thought.

The problem here, as I see it, is that investors are seeing that Church Hill, Tobacco Row and it’s neighbors, plus Rockett’s, are now successful, hence they want to build on that success, not other less fertile ground at the moment. There are probably quite a few opportunities if one takes into account the areas on the south side of the James River.

Where would those be?

i am a firm believer that constructing highrise condos on the water is not the only way to make money in this town

So am I.

we really could use some dining options on the waterfront,

I agree.

not everyone can afford a 400k condo

Certainly no me.

there is a great view from Libby Hill, …(gritty as you may think it is

As previously stated, I love Libby Hill, grit and all. It’s our oldest and most historic neighborhood, but it is also in the heart of an urban area

we definitely can come up with something better than what Echo Harbor is

Where are your investors?

show me what the project will actually look like from Libby Hill

I’d like to see that too.

We can invest in better, smarter development and Echo Harbour is not either one of those.

My point is that Libby Hill Park is not the serene view of Richmond on Thames. It is a nice place, one of my favorites, to which I bring all visitors, but a quick glance around takes in a gritty urban environment.

Without rehashing all the previous arguments, I believe a major investment like Echo Harbor brings value to the city and doesn’t destroy the serenity of Libby Park. I also think it would open up access to the river to many people. The Capitol Trail could still run along the river. People could picnic or dine riverside.

If you (not you personally) are opposed to it you need to consider what the short term and long term costs are to driving away that investment. Too many people hurl epitaphs, but don’t have answers.

Vice President Marianne Pastor heavy industry does not fit in with the neighbors in Manassas.

“Quite candidly, the real estate we’re sitting on is not necessarily at the highest and best use fabricating steel,” Pastor told the Times-Dispatch. “We aren’t exactly the darlings of the neighborhood.”

JT, you have to reread what I said. You’d only be hanged and paved if you support the project as is with no compromises or redsigns not to have such a huge impact on the view and to look like Richmond instead of a beachfront hotel.

I don’t think anyone wants to destroy the project, but it has to be done the right way. I don’t think anyone has any problems what-so-ever with Rocketts Landing or any of their proposed towers. I can’t wait for their 13 story building at Nicholson and Main. It’s not blocking any views because it’s far enough away. Nothing is at the foot of Powhatan Hill Park that destroys its view of downtown and southside. Rocketts is far enough away that the view is enhanced and not stolen.

Why is no one speaking up on this issue? And why the McQuinn silence on the entire project?

By threatening to pave over individuals, assuming questions are potshots, and trying to define my views on neighborhood organizations as simplistic, I will assume you want to take this discussion to a level I don’t really want to go.

As a member of CHA and 15 year resident of our neighborhood I only hope you dont have the same reaction to others who seek clarification on this important issue.

Best of luck.

Just curious to why negotiation and compromise are not getting the energy and creativity given to defeating Rockets and Echo.

Just one more request- have g, Bill Hartsock, or Cadeho, ever met with the developers of Echo or Rockets to express concerns and negotiate for design concessions? I’m curious as to how many residence on the Hill have actually meet with these people and discussed their concerns before threats of burial are thrown around?

Bill- the high rises proposed by Rockets would most definitely destroy the view sheds of Fulton Bottom and Fulton Hill. Why was no one protesting that development?

seriously. lets have a meeting.

Echo Harbour is simply the wrong development for the site. It would be a wall at the end of the hill which would destroy the panoramic view of the city that many enjoy. The horizon would be broken and a select few would get the view unbroken. The Canal Walk can be extended the right way through this property. It can be developed to fit its surroundings and not be built as a tower. The developers of the proposed buildings just below Jefferson Hill Park on both the 1800 and 1900 blocks of Marshall knew what was appropriate for the site. Imagine that view hindered by towers. I can’t think of too many cities that have viewsheds like we do and I can’t imagine any reason that justifies destroying them. The developers and those associated with Ross’ Echo Harbour need to go back to the drawing board and think about the future instead of the money they’ll make for the moment.

Ross already has a building downtown. Maybe he should go back and fill in some of those ugly surface lots with towers. Maybe he should get in the business of building on Shockoe Bottom’s empty lots. No towers there, but they can generate tax revenue for the city much better there with condos, apartments, and retail. There are places all over the city that could be built to increase the city’s tax base… but those places are still being ignored. The riverfront should belong to the people forever.

Should Echo Harbour get the green light from the city, sacrificing one of the city’s public cherished views for some man’s greed, they might as well sacrifice Libby Hill Park itself for a hilltop condo project.

btw- After the Irish Festival I thought Blackfin was supposed to be an Irish Pub- not a sports bar. Very disappointing.

The highest tower in Echo is over 15 stories as I recall.

Also, Rocketts village is not obstructing views, while the Echo project — whose style seems more appropriate for Miami Beach — would simply obliterate the views citizens now have from Libby Hill.

How can you assume that the condos will be sell so easily? I just don’t buy it.

I don’t speak for Bill Pantele. I don’t campaign for him in online. The question is. Is this the right thing for Richmond? On that we might disagree.

Do we both care deeply about Richmond. I think so.

OK, you have the last word, sort of. I made my case, you made yours. I love Richmond and I’ll grant you the same.

From a press release received today:

*****

Goldman for Mayor – 13 June 08 – For Immediate Release

Goldman opposes Echo Harbor says “Grey/Jones/Pantele can run but they can’t hide” as Joe Louis pointed out many years ago.”

Goldman says that “as lawyers, my friends Mr. Grey and Mr. Pantele know that silence is considered acceptance” in these kinds of matters.

(Richmond) – Paul Goldman, candidate for Mayor, said today that “it is telling that I remain the only leading candidate for Mayor willing to protect the Riverfront and all it means to the future of our City by stating my clear and principled opposition to the Echo Harbor project that continues to receive political aid and comfort from my opponent’s continued refusal to join me in public opposition.”

In a statement, Paul continued:

“Given the news in today’s RTD concerning yet another twist and turn as regards City Hall and it’s activities over time, the Echo Harbour proceeds apace.

Indeed, as the project’s lawyer, James W. Theobald told the RTD today, the “the original plan” is the one they are still determined to build.

Clearly, the continued silence of Mr. Grey, Mr. Jones and Mr. Pantele is giving him and the Echo Harbour developers hope that should any of them get to be Mayor, then the sky is the limit (to use a pun) for this High Rise project that will destroy one of the great scenic treasures of Richmond.

So while I am the only candidate willing to do the right thing and state my public, principled opposition to Echo Harbour, and thereby protect the Riverfront for future generations, I believe the public is on my side.

It is time to say No, once and for all, to Echo Harbour.”

I did not personally attack you.

Developing this premise-”Jobs, tax revenue, residents are good things for Richmond.” Okay. But it still illustrates that it is shoddy design.
“Well It may not be pretty. It is out of character for its environment. And It’s presence angered a neighborhood- but come on! Jobs, tax revenue, residents!
When was the last time you looked at a fine building and say “Wow! Look at all that tax revenue?”
Richmond needs to fix its existing neighborhoods and infrastructure- before “adding on”. Yes put in a park/marina but putting an isolated skyscraper on that site would give the building a false sense of importance.
When you drive down main street going east. Your view is terminated by the Soldiers and Sailors monument. It is an architectural device to signify “something important” is happening up there- so lets go look.
A highrise just states “Wow! I have 650sqft condo”.

Paul, Will Pantele be making money off this project?