I miss RVA

I hear where you're coming from - but how do you propose the city handle attracting developers who are willing to invest in the kinds of projects Richmond is enjoying if you are so intent on small lot size developments? I understand what you mean - these isolated rather desolate single buildings sitting alone in the middle of a four-square cityblock with large courtyards surrounding it look like Dallas or Houston or wherever. But do you chase away a high-dollar, high density project just because it might not "fit" a desired urban fabric? I realize Richmond300 and in particular the zoning specs for Pulse corridor developments have quite a bit of specificity regarding limiting setbacks - building out to sidewalk, really creating an urban environment - a highrise office tower can be designed to fit that. HOWEVER - watch the city relax that a bit if a developer buys a large parcel of land, wants to put up a 40-story $800M tower? Again, I understand your argument - but it makes no sense to keep imposing more and more and more restrictions on what gets developed. It's the kind of thing the NIMBY preservationists constantly do. Regarding the building in question, pre-Covid, some very close friends of mine I stay with in Brooklyn any time I am in New York live just a couple of blocks away from a building very similar to the one on this block - the main difference being the building in Brooklyn is 9 or 10 stories tall vs this building's height of 3 stories. My "Brooklyn" comment came directly from the mental comparison to the building with which I am familar in Brooklyn.

NICE! Love the way the building fills up the entire block. We need a lot more block-fillers in the older neighborhood to boost density and the urban feel. Again, I get that strong "Brooklyn" - "Baltimore" - "Philadelphia" vibe seeing this project.

Excellent!!

OK - to clarify - construction fencing that was already up has been taken down? Or additional construction fencing waiting to be installed is what's laying on the ground? I don't follow. Does this look like things are definitely moving forward?

AMEN!!! And the thing with a pointy-top building - a decent sized part of that height is in the sloping crown - and the length of any spire that may top the tower - so the development cost SHOULD be quite a bit less than building out actual occupyable floor space to the same height. BOA in Charlotte is impressive at 60 stories - and the one in Atlanta is slightly shorter - but the actual pointed top AND spire - WOW... that is a gorgeous building! And so long as a spire is considered "integral" to the architecture of the building - and isn't considered "separate from" the building (like a communications mast) - it is counted toward the building's overall height. If a developer utilized stair-stepping in the body of the building - they may be able to get around the 4:1 ratio limiter - and with sloped reductions that lead to a tall spire - it's not inconceivable that a tower could "steal" an extra 100 or so feet beyond the highest occupied floor. So what might only be a, say, 550 foot tall building with a flat top COULD be upwards of 700 feet if done correctly. Fully agreed - if NOVA -- which aside from flight-path considerations for DCA doesn't care one iota about limiting height -- cracks that 700 or 800 foot mark - it's game over. Next thing you know, someone will come in with a 900-footer. Then a 1K footer. And so on. Richmond? Yeah... right... I doubt any of us will live long enough to see a 900 or 1,000-foot-tall building in Richmond. And quite honestly, that's just plain sad.

The mechanical level would be counted in the height - but the communications spire atop the building would not since it is not an integral part of the architecture. That makes me pine for a pointy-top building. Atlanta has several... ditto Philly... of course New York. While I love damn near EVERY new highrise that goes up downtown, I do wish we'd get a few pointy-top buildings - they would be taller if for no other reason than there are enherant setbacks that would "techically" meet the 4:1 B-4 height limiter (which I still say is TOO draconian - why not at LEAST 8:1??) If a building stair-stepped its way up - then had a beautiful sloping crown that ended up in a point with an actual spire, Richmond could easily get a 600 or 700-foot-tall building. Too bad developers haven't gone that way here yet. The BoA building in Atlanta is an outstanding example. Gorgeous building.

Really nice! I'd love to see more in-fill developments like these in the East End.

What I'm loving about these 4 story condo/apartment projects in the older neighborhoods is that they are giving those locations a real Brooklyn, Baltimore, Philadelphia kind of "feel"to them - the streetscape on those blocks becomes something very commonly seen in those cities. Seems like a LOT of the new development in the older neighborhood are taking on this character - and it's transformative - bringing a LOT of the urban northeast to Richmond. Glad to see Richmond breaking out of the strictly "southern style" mode with these kinds of projects. Throw in the bigger projects - such as in Manchester, Scotts Addition, the Opus on Broad - the new place at 25th and E. Main ... and that ratchets up that northeastern urban feel even more. I'm loving every second of this! Just consider how many projects are currently on the table - and if they all get underway before the end of the year - or in early 2021 - within the next 12-18 months, Richmond will have been transformed quite dramatically yet again! What an AMAZING evolution the city is enjoying right now!

FANTASTIC news!!! What are the nearest cross streets north and south of this project?

yeppppp... the shadow that ALWAYS goes in the OPPOSITE direction of the Fan given the fact that both the Fan - AND THE SUN - are positioned SOUTH of Broad and shadows bend NORTHWARD year around. OH THE DARKNESS... (for part of Lowes...) ROFL!! YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!! And the timing - coming a day and a half after the non-vote debacle... reminiscent of Michael Jordan's EPIC dunk over 7"0 Mel Turpin in 1987 when the Bulls visited the Jazz and a Utah fan yelled at Jordan "how about pick on someone your own size" after he dunked over John Stockton on a mis-matched switch off. After Jordan posterized Turpin, he yelled back at the fan - "it THAT big enough for you?" LOVE IT!!! Posterize these chumps!!!

True - but I can't help but wonder if a hotel had, say, 5 or 6 (or more) floors than City Hall - would they be about the same height - or might the hotel be even a tad taller?

We can only hope!! Haven't seen any further movement on that. OMG - if that block gets redeveloped and the 20-story building rises at the north-end of the block along Leigh - THAT WOULD BE EPIC for the northern part of the skyline. If built as rendered, that is a fine looking building - and being two stories (plus crown) taller than the Outpatient building would be fantastic. From this perspective, although it would be angled relative to the camera position, it would present the narrower profile. Can you imagine looking at downtown from a north/south perspective? Either north of the I-95-64 ramps - or even from Manchester? OK - here's another one to consider: what if (even without NH as a project) Hyatt comes in and builds that 550-600 Hyatt Regency north of 6th & Marshall? It would have the same profile as the new/proposed office building we're discussing here - but could be 23 (25 maybe?) stories tall! It would far-and-away be the tallest building north of Broad and one of the tallest in the city. Picture THAT guy just to the right of the Coliseum in this picture - about where that big hole in the roofline of the buildings there is. Man oh man... Throw in City Center - if THAT complex ever gets built - south side of Grace between 6th and 7th - in this picture it would fill in that spot just to the right of the CNB building. (OFF TOPIC -- I still remember the original set of letters that graced the top of that building - they would change color depending on the weather - red meant hot, green meant cold, I forget what white meant, and if it was flashing on and off, it meant rain was in the forecast.) Anyway - if City Center gets built - and has ANY kind of size/height to it - imagine THAT bad boy right smack in the middle of that gap between the CNB building and the Monroe building in this picture. And what I'd love to see - the southern half of this view being at least partially obscured by a forest of new high-rise buildings in Monroe Ward. Imagine so many new residential towers (maybe a few office buildings) that this view would be dramatically changed. Holy wow... EPIC...

Apologies for the graininess. I took the picture that appeared in this morning's RTD story about the Council re-zone vote debacle - blew it up and cropped to emphasize the skyline. In this shot from the VCU campus - notice how much the new MCV/VCU Outpatient Hosptial building stands out on the north end of the skyline. It's taller than one might think, relative to the skyline - and really makes a bold visual statement. It'll be really interesting to see this same perspective when the G.A. building and the new Children's Hospital expansion are complete.

He's TOTALLY full of crap. WTF is this "undermind the archetectural integrity of existing neighborhoods" BS??? I could understand his position if someone was actively proposing putting a 100-story glass tower on Monument Avenue. As much as I want progress and am pro-development at almost all costs, even **I** would oppose such a proposal. But for Christ's sake - HOW... HOW does having taller buildings on the NORTH SIDE OF BROAD "detract" from the Fan? How does having towers up and down Hermitage Road - especially going farther north where there only exists either vacant lots or abandoned industrial buildings "detract" from the Fan? HOW can putting a highrise up at Hermitage and Leigh "undermine" existing neighborhoods?? SERIOUSLY!!! I want to know! Turning that part of Richmond into something akin to Midtown Atlanta is a win-win in every possible way for the city. Increased density. Increased population. Increased tax revenue. Increased viability for retail and other business. Reduction in desolate, run-down real estate. How is a complete overhaul - replete with highrise development - ANY different than what's happening in Scott's Addition on Manchester? Simple: IT'S NOT!!! And they worry about 20-story buildings - REALLY???? I'd be more worried about developable land sitting there rotting for a few more decades while Richmond blows YET ANOTHER golden opportunity to step up to the big leagues. Maybe I'm missing something, but a YES vote on zoning is such a slam dunk it's ridiculous. EVERYONE WINS!!! A growing Richmond is a better Richmond. A bigger Richmond is a better Richmond. Yeah, I'm P.O.'d to the point I am spitting nails right now. As I mentioned previously, this up-zoning is light-years more important for Richmond than NH EVER was. There's no comparison. Much as I would have liked the components of NH to get built, I understand why it was/is problematic. But THIS??? The city wouldn't have to invest a single dime - all the development would be organic. Big Richmond players are ready to step up to the plate with Louisville Slugger in hand to hammer a few home runs out of the park for the city. A total "hit the reset button" of this part of town would be an epic game-changer for Richmond -- and make that 340,000 population figure by 2037 more reachable (maybe even higher!!) This is as important as Jet Blue coming here with direct flights to Vegas and LAX. So WHAT exactly is the hangup? Thank you kindly!!

"Architectural integrity" ... Jesus Christ, just gag me already. WTF is the matter with these peoploe?? It's NOT like someone is proposing to put a 100-story glass building on Monuement Avenue! Having bigger buildings on Broad Street "detracts" from the Fan ... HOW??? And since the zoning would cover areas WELL NORTH of Broad - can someone PLEASE explain to me how having a 16 or 20 story building at Hermitage and Leigh will detract from the Fan? These nutcases just don't want Richmond to BE ANYTHING. God-forbid she actually become a REAL city!!! eandslee: do you have the link to the RTD article handy?

Shaking my head. Utterly, grossly and profoundly pathetic... With THIS Council, ANY delayed vote is a harbinger of doom.

Thank you kindly! WOW - I need to read these story comments more regularly! Hmmm... wonder exactly what new projects are lurking just off stage? I'm salivating now thinking about it.

WHY WHY WHY WHY can't they just effing VOTE on this damn thing???? Can they get their collective heads out of their backsides for once and just do their jobs? And do something POSITIVE for the city? Much as I would have liked NH to come to pass this past year, THIS up-zoning change, quite frankly, is light years more important than NH EVER was. IT IS A CRITICAL RICHMOND GAME-CHANGER. It needs... NEEDS... to happen. Jesus... They CANNOT -- MUST NOT -- MESS THIS UP!!! How to find out if it was placed on the consent agenda?

In today's RBS?

Midlothian-based Village Bank is opening a branch in Scott's Addition - it's first branch inside the city limits. How about that, folks! https://richmondbizsense.com/2020/09/28/midlothian-bank-swooping-into-scotts-addition-with-branch-in-the-nest/

“We have the potential to develop almost a new neighborhood that a market like Richmond has never seen before, but which is very common in all other major markets — particularly throughout the Southeast,” she said. “We understand the importance of that, and that we get one shot and it has to be done very well.” The more I think about what Ashley Peace is saying - the more I see this part of town becoming something akin to Midown Atlanta - which has it's own very distinctive skyline. Now - no clue how Atlanta's actual city population may grow or decline over the next 17 years - BUT - if Richmond were to hit the projected 340,000 city population by 2037 - and Atlanta city stayed more or less the same (currently 420,000) - while there obviously would still be a HUGE difference in the metro population size, the CITY population size would not be all that different - just 90,000 give or take. Were Richmond actually able to maintain a really hot growth rate past 2037 - wouldn't it be something if in, say, 25 years Richmond passed Atlanta in population. Vastly different metro populations, I realize, but it would certainly be interesting to see!

Again, PLEASE GOD!! Now here's where archetecture could REALLLLLY make a difference. Most of the mock-ups we see show buildings with flat tops. Ok... how about something a little fancier with a pointed top? Maybe with a spire on top? Atlanta, Charlotte, Philadelphia (just to name a few cities not named New York or Chicago) sport such spire-topped towers on their skyline. What about a 20-plus story building on that Broad Street DMV/Sauer Center site that rises 500, or 600 (or more) feet including the spire? Who says the tallest building in Richmond necessarily has to be downtown? Spire-topped buildings -- properly designed -- usually have sufficient progressive setbacks that even with the city's rather low-budged 4:1 setback/height ratio (I'm sorry - can we make it 8:1? 10:1? or more?) especially given the width of Broad Street, and we could REALLLLLLY get a signature-height building with a signature point with a spire on top. Keep in mind that so long as the spire is actually built into the archetecture of the building and is seen as an integral design element - and not just a communications town a la City Hall - it counts toward the height of the building in feet. So what if Richmond gets a 600 or 700-foot-tall building on Broad Street that perhaps as much as 20 percent is the declining slope plus spire? It would be pretty darn awsome is what! Good God, I'm gonna be on pins and needles until I hear news about tonight's vote.

Agreed... although the farther west along Semmes it may get tricky with all the older, large single-family houses. STILL... it could work. Honestly, boost the 3-plus to 6 (or more) plus, and you've REALLY got something. AND... I'd love to see sprinkled in that development swath along Semmes/Hull more 10, 11, 12 (or more)-plus story building popping up. Mix the bigger buildings in with the smaller ones. How about some taller buildings along the Cowardin Ave (and farther south along US 301) corridor? Ditto Commerce Road. Bainbridge Street. Stockton Street. LOTS of opportunity to get some taller development plugged in. I love how in Scott's Addition (and this is related to the PULSE re-zoning, isn't it?) we're not seeing much of anything shorter than five stories. Here's hoping that 12-story envelope starts getting hit - and pushed - there soon. Imagine getting a north-south PULSE corridor extending down Belvidere, across the Lee Bridge, down Cowardin to 301 and continuing south. That opens up that entire area for much higher-density development and more height. A win-win for Richmond no matter how you slice it.

PLEASE GOD let this rezoning pass!!! OK - to rebut some points from folks quoted in the RBiz article: “City Hall is 19 stories tall. Can you imagine that next to the Fan? It just doesn’t make any sense,” said Jonathan Marcus, a West Grace Street resident and president of RVA Coalition of Concerned Civic Associations, which is part of the group that includes associations for Carver and Newtowne West. YES!!!! I can TOTALLY imagine it! PLEASE GOD IT SHOULD COME TO PASS!!! The Fan and the entirety of Midtown will benefit GREATLY from taller, higher-density buildings along and north of Broad. NO ONE is talking about putting up a 100-story building in the middle of the Fan, for Christ's sake. Will these folks PLEASE wake the F up???!!! Looking at the renderings in the RBiz article - someone please tell me: HOW does this type of development "diminish" the quality of the Fan - or Richmond - in any conceivable way? I'm just not able to wrap my head around that level of BS. HOW exactly does a 16-story building on W. Leigh Street - or buildings taller than 12 stories on Broad or Hermitage "detract" from the Fan? Can someone PLEASE explain this to me? There's more. This from Ashley Peace, president of Sauer Properties: “We have a lot more to do and a lot more that we can do, and we’ve just been waiting to see if the city was going to pass this rezoning initiative, because that really would give us the flexibility to develop a Class A mixed-use project there,” said Peace, who told the commission such development would include medium- to high-density uses including office and residential. “We have the potential to develop almost a new neighborhood that a market like Richmond has never seen before, but which is very common in all other major markets — particularly throughout the Southeast,” she said. “We understand the importance of that, and that we get one shot and it has to be done very well.” HELLO!!! McFLY!?!?! What's not to like about this? This is the kind of stuff Charlotte, Atlanta and, by way of a better comparison, Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore ... have done FOR YEARS!!! It's Richmond's turn! That we have a big player like Sauer ready to step up to the plate to hammer a few home runs out of the park for Richmond SHOULD excite EVERYONE! Has anyone reached out to their Coucil representative to put their voice in for a YES vote on rezoning? Time's ticking - maybe take 1 or 2 minutes this afternoon and put that phone call in - or send that email. Let the Council know that there is ample support for this rezoning to pass. It is a MUST for Richmond -- and I believe it will be a game-changer every bit as important as the Jet Blue direct-flights to the west news we got a couple of weeks ago. Let's go pedal-to-the-metal to turn Richmond into the major city she can be!

Hear!! Hear!! (as the old-time Brits & early Virginians would say. I agree with you 10,000% Brent. Man oh man... WTF was his problem with BRT for Christ's sake? He's all the way over in Oregon Hill - what's his deal? Absolutely spot on. They should flush this BS comparison to Charleston down the toilet -- and set their sites on cities like Boston or Philadelphia if they want a city to model/emulate. I honestly don't get these nutcases. Maybe you can help me understand. You mentioned you're close to them ideologically. How so? I'm asking legitimately hoping you can help me understand their position - because from an urban planning, economic growth, "what's best for Richmond" (or ANY city for that matter), their position makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever - and never has. I'd love to understand this. THANK YOU!!! That's an ideologic uppercut that NEEDS to be delivered to these nutjob "historic" (hysteric is more like it!) NIMBY preservationists.