Diamond Area / Hermitage Rd Corridor / Ownby District

[ancientcarpenter]

On 5/9/2023 at 10:34 AM, rjp212 said:

It was in the link to the ordinance you posted.  Seems the Fall Line is going to be a prominent feature of the park.

 

Fall Line being in the middle of it is genius. Not only will it bring more people into that area (customers + activity) but it will also be a great midway point for bikers to take a break. As an avid biker, this will be a beautiful ride and stopping point to relax. 

[123fakestreet]

On 5/9/2023 at 10:42 AM, I miss RVA said:

Oh wow - now that's REALLLLLLY cool!!!

Man - especially if we can get some decent height and density in this development, when this is fully built out, it has the potential to be amazing.

This stuff looks cool but in reality it never plays out this way. No one will use it, it will just end up overgrown with weeds and litter and be a big eyesore and maintenance expense for the city. No thanks, shrink it down by 2/3 and give me more buildings.

[wrldcoupe4]

Great vision, but am also concerned if the city is maintaining this. It will look terrible within a few years if they maintain like so many other places - cutting the grass to 1/2 inch and hitting all the nice plantings in the garden beds with weed trimmers.

This will also be a really nice option for the larger homeless population that stays nearby instead of huddling under the overpass.

[Flood Zone]

1 hour ago, wrldcoupe4 said:

Great vision, but am also concerned if the city is maintaining this.

That's the million-dollar question there. (Probably literally.) If enough is set aside for upkeep, it will become a destination.

[I miss RVA]

3 hours ago, wrldcoupe4 said:

Great vision, but am also concerned if the city is maintaining this. It will look terrible within a few years if they maintain like so many other places - cutting the grass to 1/2 inch and hitting all the nice plantings in the garden beds with weed trimmers.

This will also be a really nice option for the larger homeless population that stays nearby instead of huddling under the overpass.

Very true on all points, Coupe, especially with the city in change of maintenance. Could really turn ugly if we aren't careful.

@123fakestreet-- to your point about shrinking the size of the green space and boosting the building count - that was my first thought/reaction when I saw the preliminary conceptual renderings. I can't disagree with you at all - I'd like to see the amount of construction -- particularly residential/mixed use -- beefed up. One concern that I've had is that the developers were taking a more "cost-friendly" option by increasing green space and reducing the overall scope/amount of physical construction. Perhaps that's how they won the bid? Who knows. But it's a lot cheaper to build a park than to build a group of apartment buildings and office buildings.

I love the fall-line concept and do think it's pretty cool -- but they could pull this off with a slightly smaller footprint, allowing for increasing the density of construction. But from a dollars and cents standpoint, I'm not holding my breath on that happening.

[123fakestreet]

https://www.nbc12.com/2023/06/06/richmond-lays-out-next-steps-diamond-district/

 

Plans has seen delays due to rising interest rates

Landing being handed to EDA

Community development authority being craeted to manage the rest

 

[rjp212]

On 3/23/2022 at 6:22 PM, eandslee said:

Just FYI (in case y’all want to do some research):

The list of finalists:

• Diamond District Gateway Partners

• MAG Partners

• Richmond Community Development Partners

• RVA Diamond Partners

• Vision300 Partners, LLC

• Weller Development Company and LMXD

Good quote from the RTD article:

While specific details of each team's developments plans are still under wraps, the city is seeking to build a new stadium for the Flying Squirrels baseball team and transform the area into an "urban village" that may include apartments, office space, restaurants, retail stores and a signature high-rise building.

Not sure if we ever saw the renderings from some of the others before the cut, but here's what Diamond District Gateway Partners had planned.

 

In my opinion, this proposal was too tame.  Too stale and nothing special.

Source: https://baskervill.com/project/diamond-district/

Edited June 20, 2023 by rjp212

[Flood Zone]

"OK, picture the B&O Warehouse in right field ... but as nondescript apartments!"

[I miss RVA]

Man... I know it lacks a ton of height (though the really bulky building about a block past center field is actually 14 stories -- kinda "sneaky" height) - but I REALLY like this design. The density and massing is GREAT - and they don't waste a ton of space by planting a golf-course-sized park in the middle of everything.  LOVE the urban streetscapes - and the street going north from the ballpark very much akin to the "Concourse" in the Bronx. 

Holy moly - I would have been happy to see this get built out. No wasted space - tons of density - good massing - yeah, limited height (only one REALLY tall building) - but all-in-all, not bad at all.

Am guessing the city RJ'd this because green space is a LOT cheaper to build - more buildings/more density = more cost. That kinda ticks me off. RVA doesn't lack for open spaces right now . What we lack is density. We need to focus on bulking up density and bulking up urban streetscapes before we start going overboard with throwing uber amounts of green/open space into developments. Just my two shekels.

Edited June 20, 2023 by I miss RVA

[rjp212]

I disagree, the massing is the worst part. It's megablock after megablock.  You can build density without the typical 'texas donut'.

 

[I miss RVA]

While I agree partially with you (yes, there are better ways than the "Texas Donut") - respectfully, I MUST push back on the other half with a HUGE NO.

PLEASE - we don't want -- or need -- anything "Charleston" here. Let's leave "Charleston-style" IN Charleston and push hard for "big city" developments. And let's PLEASE stop emphasizing form and architecture over function. What Richmond needs is density, not pretty architecture. And we sure as hell don't need any kind of development that will give anyone any hairbrained ideas about eventually imposing architecturally-based (and usually draconian) restrictions and constraints on what can be built and in what form it can take. We have enough of that in this town already. We don't need more.

Mind you - I DO realize that the Texas Donut design wastes a TREMENDOUS amount of space that could be better used for residential and/or commercial purposes - and I 100% agree with you that it's far from the best solution. But forgive me - we already have enough "architectural 'character'" in places like the Fan, Church Hill, etc. What we lack are "big city" districts, filled to bursting with high-density, bulk, height. The Diamond District absolutely should NOT look like the Fan. Two-story houses are a total waste of space and should be disallowed in the Diamond District up front on general principle due to their complete and total inadequacy in terms of mission fulfillment of the district.

"Covers every inch of the block" is EXACTLY what I prefer to see. Can it be done better than with a Texas Donut? Of course! Very much so.

If we need to introduce more space for light, more windows, etc. - then why not bisect the block with a small street (something larger/slightly wider than an alley) serving as a "spine" and on each side build a set of six-story (or taller) back-to-back, street-facing rows of apartments (something akin to six-story Baltimore-style rowhouses). That replaces the huge "hole" in the donut (the parking decks) with useful residential space. HOWEVER - it creates another practical problem - where do people park?

Mind you - while I'm ALL-IN on pushing hard for breaking RVA from its car dependency - a complete lack of parking isn't going to fly in current-day Richmond.  I hate that fact every bit as much as you (and many others on here) do - but we have to face the reality that RVA is not anywhere CLOSE to being at a level yet where a developer can come in and just build without including parking. We'll get there at some point - but we're not there now.

That (providing at least SOME amount of parking) - much as it makes my teeth hurt to say it (because - again - I'm 100% ALL IN on mass transit) needs to be accounted for.

What would be a better solution would be two taller (say 10-12-14-story) apartment buildings with integrated and/or underground parking positioned next to each other on the block. We have to account for parking whether or not we want to. And we need to bulk this city up and stop trying to emulate a small town that looks pretty but is a far cry from anything big city.

Just my two shekels - offered with the fullest respect.

Edited June 20, 2023 by I miss RVA

[rjp212]

"Charleston style" is just in reference to the neighborhood layout, not the architectural style.  Nor was I stating they should only be 2-4 story buildings.  What I am stating is even at 2-4 stories, you can  get just as much density in that layout as you can with a mega-block structure. It also is more inclusive for a variety of incomes and adaptability as the neighborhood evolves.     

This was my favorite of the 6 because it involved a variety of shapes and sizes.

Even with the winner, you still get buildings that have variety and can be re-purposed.

Mind you they're all concepts and will be changed.  However, mass does not equal density or "big city". 

Edited June 20, 2023 by rjp212

[I miss RVA]

22 minutes ago, rjp212 said:

"Charleston style" is just in reference to the neighborhood layout, not the architectural style.  Nor was I stating they should only be 2-4 story buildings.  What I am stating is even at 2-4 stories, you can  get just as much density in that layout as you can with a mega-block structure. It also is more inclusive for a variety of incomes and adaptability as the neighborhood evolves.     

This was my favorite of the 4 because it involved a variety of shapes and sizes.

Even with the winner, you still get buildings that have variety and can be re-purposed.

Mind you they're all concepts and will be changed.  However, mass does not equal density or "big city". 

I think your fav was my fave as well.   LOVED the height and massing, and indeed, the variety - wow - looking at it compared with the concept of the winner - the winner pales in comparison.

You're right though- the final product will be different from what's depicted in the conceptual renderings. At least somewhat. I hope and pray they knock back some of that golf-course in the middle - it's too much. The first one (of the two shown above - your favorite) is very much "big city" - and looks really good. Would love to have seen that get built. And that central street - a real "promenade" or "concourse" - wow... really has a nice urban feel to it. Unlike this huge serpentine park in the winner's proposal. Maybe RVA could host the 2040 PGA championship in that park. Jesus - it's just too much. WAY too much. I get wanting green space, but frankly this is ridiculous. It's fully a third of the overall space. We don't need that much open/green space - Richmond is NOT Manhattan or Brooklyn, where green space is at a premium.

I can't help but really feel that the city selected this one to save expense because landscaping, laying sod and planting trees doesn't cost NEARLY as much as building high-density buildings and carving out proper street patterns. Man - the more I see the winning selection, the less I like it in quite a few areas, even though there is some nice height sprinkled throughout. Could do without those small townhouses in the far northern quadrant, too - I'm all for home ownership in the district - but build some condo towers for Christ sake.

Edited June 20, 2023 by I miss RVA

[Brent114]

I’m with Imiss.  The proposal posted above is way better than what was selected. 
 

What  we are ending up with has all of the massing and urbanity of Willow Lawn Drive.  

Edited June 20, 2023 by Brent114

[I miss RVA]

11 minutes ago, Brent114 said:

I’m with Imiss.  The proposal posted above is way better than what was selected. 
 

What  we are ending up with has all of the massing and urbanity of Willow Lawn Drive.  

It really feels like the city gave us "meh" (though there are elements that I DO like - don't get me wrong) - but they wimped out on density and massing (and as you said - pure urbanity) to get this thing on the cheap. Grass is a helluva lot cheaper than brick or glass or concrete. Trees don't cost nearly as much as buildings do. A huge serpentine park doesn't cost as much as building in a proper street grid with full infrastructure.

And the lack of urban look and feel is really disheartening. Mind you, where they DO plan buildings, they did include some nice height and good massing (though those little townhouses in the far northern end need to go.) But damn... you could land a jetliner in that park. And Richmond's not lacking for open/green space. This is not New York City. Believe me, I wish it was. But it's not.

[Flood Zone]

13 hours ago, Brent114 said:

What  we are ending up with has all of the massing and urbanity of Willow Lawn Drive.  

You could do a lot worse than Willow Lawn Drive. Pleasant, walkable, nice people near there....

I'm with RJP. And with everyone else, it seems, on what was the No. 1 proposal that wasn't selected.

[I miss RVA]

2 hours ago, Flood Zone said:

I'm with RJP. And with everyone else, it seems, on what was the No. 1 proposal that wasn't selected.

!!

Yeah - that one really was the best of the bunch. Really a shame it wasn't selected. It really had almost all of the elements we want for the Diamond District. Betcha it would've come with a much higher overall price tag, too.

Edited June 21, 2023 by I miss RVA

[Brent114]

3 hours ago, Flood Zone said:

You could do a lot worse than Willow Lawn Drive. Pleasant, walkable, nice people near there....

I'm with RJP. And with everyone else, it seems, on what was the No. 1 proposal that wasn't selected.

I actually really like the look of Willow Lawn Dr. 

[whw53]

These were just initial concept renderings though right - i think block by block as the project is built out in phases we will see more architectural diversity that what was provided orginally. 

Edited June 21, 2023 by whw53

[I miss RVA]

16 minutes ago, whw53 said:

These were just initial concept renderings though right - i think block by block as the project is built out in phases we will see more architectural diversity that what was provided orginally. 

I would tend to think so, yes. Design elements may carry forward from concept to more concrete plans - and I would tend to think that size, scale, massing, etc. would very likely carry forward. Exact, specific, granular design elements probably will vary, particularly related to fluctuations in construction costs, interest rates, financing, etc. I'd tend to think, however, that where there's, say, a 15-story building for a specific location in the conceptual depiction, the final product LIKELY will be a 15-ish-story building (maybe plus or minus a couple of floors). Mind you, that's a VERY uneducated layman's guess. Perhaps our outstanding resident gurus could offer some clarity on how this process works in reality.

[123fakestreet]

Went to the Wawa on AA today. I don't go there a lot, but whenever I do that place is slammed. I imagine a Sheetz or other similar competitor has got to be itching to get on  that stretch of AA ASAP.

[I miss RVA]

52 minutes ago, 123fakestreet said:

Went to the Wawa on AA today. I don't go there a lot, but whenever I do that place is slammed. I imagine a Sheetz or other similar competitor has got to be itching to get on  that stretch of AA ASAP.

Please God... no!!

That whole stretch of A.A. Blvd has long-since been up-zoned to TOD-1, hasn't it? I know that horrid suburban strip shop thing/carwash/ WaWa/Burgermeister/WHATEVER got in before it was up-zoned.

[wrldcoupe4]

That part of the Blvd is wrecked with fast food, gas stations and car washes. Welcome to Richmond!

[I miss RVA]

44 minutes ago, wrldcoupe4 said:

That part of the Blvd is wrecked with fast food, gas stations and car washes. Welcome to Richmond!

Just wait 'til the Diamond District is built out - we'll have fancy schmancy on one side of the street, and schlocky and schlubby on the other.     

Imagine - two beautiful, large apartment buildings - the Thalhimer one on Ellen Road, and the Novel just before the bridge bookending so much shtus.

Edited July 21, 2023 by I miss RVA

[123fakestreet]

15 hours ago, wrldcoupe4 said:

That part of the Blvd is wrecked with fast food, gas stations and car washes. Welcome to Richmond!

I said over a year ago about the development in this area I see most of it as going to be very suburban strip-mall-esque because it's catering to vehicle traffic off of 95. I know that's not at all what people want, but I think that's going to be the reality.

Edited July 21, 2023 by 123fakestreet