I miss RVA

Let's hope something big!!

Ummm.... no... Midtown is to Manhattan as .... NOTHING is to Richmond. Apples to oranges. And the Village, SoHo, South Street, Chinatown, Little Italy - are ALL part of lower Manhattan and are referred to in local parlance as being "downtown" which is pretty accurate all-in-all. Yeah, there's plenty organic about the Navy Hill neighborhood... it has gone to seed (and did so 30, 40 -- or more -- years ago, not because of the Coliseum but because NOTHING WAS BUILT UP AROUND IT!!!) You can't get much more organic than going to seed. Why hasn't the area around the Capital One in DC flopped? Oh, maybe because there was other stuff built there and the arena was integrated into and helped enliven the area? Would you argue that D.C. "did not need" to build an arena downtown? If not, then why not? As for having a couple of nearby interstates, a Greyhound bus station and LIMITED downtown train service to M.S.S -- Richmond's transportation setup compared with (using your example) New York is utterly pathetic. If we're going to compare Richmond and NY in one area, then we must compare Richmond and NY in all areas. Oh, we shouldn't? Why not?

Agreed and well said, blopp1234. I agree that the housing component of NH was unquestionably the most important part, especially considering that the development plan ultimately reached south of Broad and put highrise residential buildings at the SE corner of 4th and Broad (old site of G.C. Murphy) and in the old "City Center" site (Grace between 6th & 7th). The other component of NH that was almost as important as the housing was having a 550-room Hyatt REGENCY hotel! Hyatt doesn't put "Regency" hotels in Podunk, Iowa. That it would have been (at least) 23-stories tall (and given that the room count continued to increase over the year and a half of the project's time of consideration, it would not have surprised me that the tower might have risen as high as 25 floors. Whether in actual feet it would have been the city's tallest building, it certainly would have been the city's tallest hotel -- and given the location at the top of the hill, it would have stood out prominently on the downtown skyline and would have been distinctive from all approaches (N, S, E, W)... ) Your final point absolutely nails it -- there is more street activity in lower Manhattan at 1 (or 2, or 3, or 4) a.m. than at any point of the day or night in RVA at peak times. Spot on. BUT THE SCHOO..... oh wait... they're all online now. Will there be online NIMBYs, I wonder??

You just proved my point, I Miss RVA. Calling your point a non-sequitur hardly proves it. Downtown (lower) Manhattan doesn’t need to be a tourist/ recreation destination because other parts of the city serve as that. No one cares that lower Manhattan is boring because it doesn’t matter. Richmond has no such "other part of the city" that is thumping 24-7 as does Midtown Manhattan. No one cares that lower Manhattan is boring because it doesn’t matter. You've obviously never been to New York. Ever hear of SoHo? The Village? Chinatown? Little Italy? South Street Seaport/the Seaport District? ALL are in lower Manhattan. Boring? Seriously? I want some of what you're smoking then. Would it make sense to put all of Mid-Town in a TIF to build an entertainment center in lower Manhattan? Doesn’t make sense in Richmond either. It's not needed in New York, particularly in Midtown. Developers have for decades been falling all over themselves to get some kind of foothold in Midtown Manhattan. Residential towers -- now well over 100-stories and 1,500-feet tall are sprouting like mushrooms in Midtown, particularly just south of Central Park. True - the big sea of parking lots is Monroe Ward -- Navy Hill is the sea of obsolete government buildings, boring parking decks and a dead hulk of metal that 50 years ago was a decent place to watch basketball (yes, I saw the Virginia Squires there when they made their stops in Richmond in the early '70s...) Tacky: like artificial, you've yet to explain and give any substance to this argument. If we're being honest and it's your opinion, I can accept that. I may not agree with it, but at least it is more plausible than the non-answers to the question I have posed (several times in various posts). To date, that question has not been answered, and "artificial" and "tacky" have yet to be defined and explained. Would you consider the new Opus apartment building slated for Lombardy and Broad to be an "artificial" or "tacky" development in the VCU area? If not, why not? Because public dollars aren't going toward it? What about all the new construction in Scott's Addition or Manchester... are those "artificial" or "tacky"? Again, if not, why not? From both functional and aesthetic standpoints, I see absolutely no difference between those developments and the ancillary components of Navy Hill such as the residential buildings in the eastern part of the development (they house people, they generally look fairly similar). To be honest, to have high-rise residential towers built at 4th and Broad (SE corner, where G.C. Murphy used to be), and Grace Street between 6th & 7th (the old "City Center" site) -- is EXTREMELY exciting! Every bit as exciting as the burgeoning skyline of Manchester or the rapidly growing sections of Scott's Addition. What about Dominion's new tower? Tacky? If no, how is it any different from the planned highrises that would be built as part of Navy Hill? The whole argument is a non-sequitur. If the biggest problem is that NH would have involved public money vs these other"organic" developments that are 100% privately funded -- then that's one argument. Aside from COVID, were the world not wracked by this pandemic, would you have a different outlook if some Daddy Warbucks who just happened to be Jeff Bezos rich somehow fell in love with Richmond and wanted to bring pro sports to the city and personally funded every thin dime of an 18,000-seat state-of-the-art arena? If you're saying that Richmond (for whatever reason) doesn't need downtown entertainment (particularly concerts, sports, circus, etc.) that other cities offer, are you also saying then that the planned 550-room Hyatt REGENCY hotel -- something you don't find built in "wide spots in the road" kind of towns is ALSO something Richmond doesn't need? Why not? None of this -- aside from not liking the public-funding aspect of NH -- remotely holds water with me. If you'd care to expound on all of this, I'm happy to listen.

Brent - with all due respect, there are a few problems with your arguments. Aside from the obvious difference in size between Richmond and the cities mentioned, it is a total apples-and-oranges comparison. Yes, there are sections of NY, London, Paris, Tokyo, Mexico City, etc. that are not 24-7 neighborhoods. But those cities in and of themselves are natural 24-7 cities. Richmond doesn't HAVE a 24-7 neighborhood ANYWHERE in town. And the Navy Hill neighborhood is barely alive during working hours as it is (unless you count people walking to and from cars twice a day as "alive" for a significant portion of that section of downtown). As for creating an "artificial experience" and suggesting the area doesn't "need" something to kick-start it, please help me understand. Given the vast sea of parking lots and the smattering of government buildings (many if not most of which are eyesores that serve to further the desolation of the area), building a handful mud huts and teepees would actually be an improvement over what's there currently from a liveliness standpoint in all honesty. How is it even remotely possible to make the claim the area "doesn't need" what you're terming an "artificial experience". What kind of "organic" experience should happen there? The one that's currently happening? It's gone to seed as it is - which certainly meets the definition of "organic". Do you consider Madison Square Garden "organic"? Having been to MSG on several occasions (as well as having passed through Penn Station on more than a few occasions) I certainly do not consider the Garden to be "organic" by any stretch. Plus to suggest that "downtown Manhattan" (from a different post, I believe) doesn't need to be 24-7 also holds little if any water. Why? Two words: MIDtown Manhattan, which has such amenities as the Garden, Times Square, Herald Square, etc., and abuts the Upper East Side, Columbus Circle, Central Park South, and Upper West Side (just to name a few very active Manhattan districts). Plus, as far as downtown Manhattan areas go, do Greenwich Village or SoHo roll up their sidewalks after 6 p.m.? Maybe if Richmond were actually a 24-7 city, I could see this argument. But let's get Richmond a 24-7 neighborhood -- even just one -- as a good starter before we start cherry picking about whether this or that neighborhood should or shouldn't get developed because whatever might go there "isn't needed."

Well said, Icetera.

Any pictures available?

These are great! Didn't realize the second tower near the 14th Street Bridge was so far along! Looking really good! Remind me again -- what is the project in the bottom two photos? (and the location?)

Mustang Sally must've helped with that rendering.

Nice classic Mustang in the artist's conceptual rendering, BTW!

I'm curious how C-19 will impact the census numbers.

Bittersweet for me. I'm thrilled that a new, bigger building will be rising on campus. But particularly my freshman and sophomore years (fall of 1981 through spring 1983), I had classes in that building. Ended up dating a girl from one of those classes for about a year. Wow - seems like an eternity ago - lol. Still, I'm glad to see VCU keeping the pedal to the metal with new projects. A bigger and better VCU helps Richmond.

Again, I would think places like NYC, where density is extremely high relative to other U.S. cities, would potentially scare people away from living in such huge population centers more so than locations in Virginia. Hopefully, Richmond will continue to see outstanding population growth. Relative to Norfolk, it does appear Richmond is growing at a much faster rate (whether or not Norfolk is growing or continuing to lose population) -- and hopefully, given the increased emphasis on density in areas like Manchester, Scott's Addition and now the VCU area, Richmond will continue to see more rapid growth and keep up momentum. Obviously the pandemic is shutting things down but we can only hope this will pass sooner rather than later. Stay safe and stay well, guys!

Mega cities like New York where the density is extremely high, I'd suggest folks might shun moving to such locations down the road. I'd tend to think Richmond likely won't suffer from folks afraid to live in cities. I'd argue Richmond is far from built out. Just look at the sea of parking lots that make up Monroe Ward. PLUS -- even if every square inch of land had a building on it, there is still room to build vertically. Richmond can and should strive to build skyward and increase her density. The city has a long way to go and hopefully will keep going 'up'.

Let us pray!

Fantastic! So glad to see the East End really buzzing with new development.

i fear this is but the first of many business casualties we will see forthcoming.

That's a good question. One wonders though - I'm guessing a building demo and cleanup will be far cheaper than a gut and renovation project. And in all likelihood, DE wants to hang onto the land, so selling the building likely won't happen. Plus - if we are heading into something as disruptive or worse than the Depression, there won't be anyone ponying up to buy anytime soon.

Somewhere, the NIMBYs are celebrating. "NO SHINY NEW THINGS FOR YOU!!!!" (Guys, please know this is said very tongue-in-cheek and isn't meant to demean the severity of this pandemic.) I hope you're right about doubting the demo date.

Let's hope under the current brewing economic circumstances this project gets under way and is actually fully developed. And -- YES to the re-title. Adding "Fulton" is a good idea. IKR? Given the current situation and not really knowing when things will stabilize both with the virus and the economy, I get nervous any time i come on here or look at the RTD or BizSense thinking there might be bad news of something getting delayed, paused or pulled off the table. Richmond's on too much of a roll - we can't afford something like that.

That being the case, curious then as to why the new 111 route would not be up and running as planned. I am concerned that the fallout from this virus situation will scuttle projects that are not already underway, and even then as the financial situation deteriorates until there is some stability, I wonder how projects already underway will be impacted? Seemingly more so than other cities, Richmond can't afford to have projects (planned or underway) tabled -- for whatever reason, when Richmond projects get delayed, they ultimately never happen.

If I were a bookie, I'm laying 5:2 it will end up a parking lot and 100:1 that a new tower won't rise on that spot in the next three years. Were it not for the massive disruptions caused by COVID-19, I might think the odds would be better. But I just don't see it.

Wow! Is the rest of GRTC shutting down as well?

Hoping VCU has a better year next season!

Awesome! Thanks! Great to have them all in one place. I wonder if we should have a sticky with all the live webcams that are running so that anyone could access them right from the main Richmond page of the board?