RECENT COMMENTS
City Council votes 7-2 to consider amending the Downtown Master Plan
The RTD is reporting that City Council voted 7-2 to keep alive a series of controversial amendments, a possible boon for the proposed Echo Harbor development. The amendments will now be forwarded to the Planning Commission for consideration and then sent back to the council for a final vote.
The decision came despite an outpouring from residents who urged the council to keep the plan intact and river views protected. Richmond founder William Byrd II is said to have named the city after observing the James from what is now Libby Hill Park and being struck by similarities with the River Thames in the English borough of Richmond upon Thames.
“It’s as important as any view in the entire country,” said Joe Carr of Church Hill.
One amendment would designate the Echo Harbour site for future development with details to be determined. The Downtown Master Plan, adopted by the council last October, shows the site as a city park or a private development with public access to the waterfront.
James E. Ukrop, chairman of Ukrop’s Super Markets Inc. and First Market Bank, urged the city to move aggressively to buy the property and develop it as a park. “Future generations will look back and applaud our actions,” he said.
Can anyone clarify who voted for/against the measure?
TAGGED: Echo Harbor
I’m against destroying the view that named our city.
John, Have you conducted a poll on the Echo Harbor development?
Charles Samuels and Chris Hilbert voted against the amendments.
(sorry to re-post, but I got an “error” message when I submitted the first time, so I don’t know if it went through)
is there a coordinated effort to oppose echo harbor (ie. facebook fans of baseball in shockoe/on the boulevard)?
murden
i got an email from hilbert saying he and samuels opposed.
Why is did Bruce Tyler even vote? Isn’t his firm doing the architectural design work for this project?
If that isn’t a conflict-of-interest, I don’t know what is.
Many thanks to Hilbert and Samuels for trying to protect the view of the river.
he should not be voting on this issue
“the view that named our city”
It’s a nice story and may be true, but is there any evidence? Is there any historical documentation?
The current view is very far from pastoral.
Libby Hill Panorama
Richmond on James vs Richmond on Thames.
Paul
you are a poor camera man if that is the “best” photo you can get from the top of Libby Hill. Historical or not, removing the obstructing concrete towers and replacing it with a park would improve said view. Replacing with an even taller condominium, sadly, would not.
Get a grip people. Echo is going to happen and its nothing you can about it. There is much support for a project that will provide 300 or more permanent jobs. The hell with the view. There is one association that is against it which CHA. Hell, I don’t care about no view, this city has been blocking black folks views for a long time.
The view the city was named after is EAST not South. The concrete plant is more in the way than Echo Harbour will be. I’m not 100% for the project but as long as it looks good, it will only help our neighborhood. I don’t really like the baseball stadium either, but that’s just because this is 2009, not 1909, and the number of people who would go to those games could fit in St. John’s Church. I’m all for progress in general, even if it means I can no longer see the sewer treatment plant across the river. I am so sick of everyone trying to save every piece of blighted land in the city. These are the same people who didn’t want Rocket’s Landing built because it would be more trash and people in the city. WHAT!?! Does anyone realize how bustling the riverfront used to be 150 yrs ago? There were so many boats you couldn’t see the water! Maybe condos are not the best idea, but some kind of progress is! Down with vacant lots full of garbage and surface parking lots! Up with new business!
Anthony,
“Hell, I don’t care about no [sic]view, this city has been blocking black folks [sic] for a long time.”
And, this is supposed to make it right to continue to do so?
Why not build a state-of-the-art Career and Technology High School that could train students and re-train other citizens for the “green jobs” that are coming?
Such an endeavor would not only employ people, but would train them so that they could find additional employment in the future.
Once the project is completed, Anthony, there would be no such thing as a “permanent job.”
Think BIG PICTURE.
I am adamantly opposed to this project. When Ukrops says the land should be developed as a “park”, what does he mean?
When will the vote be held?
I guess it will be Betty Squire who will be representing Church Hill on this vote. What is her stance?
You know what this city needs? More condos? Don’t think so. In my current search for a home, my realtor and mortgage broker begged me to NOT consider buying a condo since the condo market is about to completely fall out. Condos throughout Church Hill and the rest of the city are currently being rented out because nobody is buying them. This project does not make sense on so many levels, not to mention it will take away a potentially great green space and view.
Somebody explain to me how these will create 300 permanent jobs? Will this development even employ local people?
I am adamantly opposed to this project as well. With the right organization, we can fight it and win.
The emails about this yesterday asked for several things.
1) Protect the view. There is nothing in the proposed amendments that affects in any way the view from Libby Hill down the river (to the east). Echo Harbor, one of the ugliest buildings I have ever seen, is not in the east viewshed.
2. Oppose the amendment concerning the “Architect of the Commonwealth”. The amendment asks the state to designate an Architect of the Capital, a chnage which Rachel Flynn agreed to. By what logic do the “demanders” think that the city master plan can compell of the Commonwealth of Virginia to do anything?
3) Protec the park to the east of the downtown development. What park? The master plan called for acquiring land in the future, unknown price or solurce of funds, for “open space”. There is not now a park there, except Great Shiplock, which remains, and there is no plan to develop such a park.
This pot was stirred by a couple of people who were aware in November-December of the details, and chose to wait until the weekend before the council meeting, when people did not have the chance to response.
I should point out the first photo is not mine. john_m posted it once or twice before.
Regarding photos in general, they allow you to zoom in on just what you want to see, but standing on Libby Hill gives you the broader view, warts and all. I still haven’t seen a rendering of the view with Echo Harbor. If someone has one, post it here.
I like the idea of preserving open land but where’s the money going to come from for that? And who’s going to pay for the upkeep? Mr Ukrop sounds full of helpful ideas but I’d like to see him put his money where his mouth is.
Also…Rockett’s Landing has been a good addition, and (I know this opens a new can of worms) the proposed Marina would be a great addition to the city too.
If the opposition would take their heads out of the sand long enough to visit other cities they would see for themselves that revitalization CAN be done in a beneficial way. This city is consumed by negativity!
I say build the ballpark. I say develop the riverfront. And I say build the Marina. Richmond has great potential, but if the naybobs ahve their way, it will just decay.
Like a tree, if you ain’t growing, you’re dying.
Rabbit,
Funny, it feels more like we’re swimming in some seriously shark-infested waters right now and as we all know, if a shark isn’t eating, it is dying.
I am so tired of the City of Richmond getting ripped off by developers and unscrupulous politicians.
Just please don’t put a highrise there and make sure the riverfront remains available to the public. The river is one of the coolest things about Richmond; if the riverfront is plastered with private condos, the public will lose access.
Rabbit, I don’t think development along the riverfront is the issue here. While I can’t speak for anyone other than myself, I think most people are open to development along the riverfront. I am completely fine with Rockett’s Landing. I am excited about the marina and the possibility of the stadium. However, I do have a serious problem with destroying a valuable piece of real estate with some poorly conceived monstrosity. Having an ugly half vacant condominium complex blocking a fantastic view in Richmond and occupying space which could be used for a much better purpose does not equal beneficial revitalization.
As far as preserving open land, I am sure whatever money that was going to go to these developers would be happily put towards a nice park along the riverfront. I am positive there are more organizations and people with money that would support a green space/park along the river, than people/developers who support Echo Harbor.
We have quite a bit of outstanding city park land on the river already (Great Shiplock, Belle/Browns, etc) but lack significant pedestrian/retail/eatery development. This should be developed with the viewshed in mind and more park land is not needed. I look forward to actually being able to walk down to Rocketts, Echo Harbour and all the way up Belle Island on a developed walking path. Build it!
Wasn’t there some push to get the developers to lower the height of the buildings? Did anything ever happen with that? I’m shocked anyone would want to build a structure that would forever be known as the building that ruined the view that named Richmond.
FYI: Ukrop definitely puts his money and time where his mouth is, but you can’t expect him to be able to fund every public service he supports. I think the fact that he voices his views is more than most ‘leaders’ in this town do.
I think restaurants or retail there would be great. Why put condos there?
For those who want a park on what is now private property east of Great Shiplock, let me make a suggestion. Donate money to the Richmond Recreation and Parks Foundation. Designate it for riverfront parkland development. Since RRPF is tax exempt, you even get a federal deduction. And it’s your money you are spending, not someone elses.
residential development is not real economic development. residential development is a tax burden not a tax benefit. say no to condoms. say yes to developing a commercial and industrial base. there are plenty of old houses (to be fixed, at less than the cost of new construction) in existing residential neighborhoods and satisy the housing demands.
That river doesn’t belong to CHA. Don’t forget it.I’m sick and tired of the CHA.
say no to condoms?
Anthony,
And, the river doesn’t belong to you, either. There are plenty of people out here who are sick and tired of your high-handed WTF attitude. Why can’t the politicians remember that they are here to serve the people, instead of servicing the developers. You can bet that there will be people studying those campaign contributions most carefully.
Isn’t ironic, that Samuels and Hilbert get it and the rest don’t?
At least there is no more Pantele, whose main contributor was the developer for this project.
But, I see anthony’s point of view, although I disagree. There was no reason to “edit” his previous comment with [sic] notations. That was just rude and condescending.
I second Joe’s view point –
Why not build a state-of-the-art Career and Technology High School that could train students and re-train other citizens for the “green jobs†that are coming?
I’ve never noticed black or white – that’s just my make up – but I do see the poor, the under educated and what leads to crime and the fall of a community.
This city is OURS. We all have a voice. Use yours and make your point. I’d rather see my tax dollars going to build a life through education rather than another baseball stadium.
Pantele’s main contributor was the developer for what project? Echo Harbor? Pantele is a huge proponent of Scenic Virginia and very good friends with the Executive Director – that being said, I know first hand that Pantele is for keeping the view at Libby Park.
Deanna, I agree that the city could also use better teaching and retraining services, but I don’t think the options that are currently out there are being fully utilized. If you support job retraining you should voice your support to your representatives. Small Business Development Centers are one of the programs that have had decreasing funding over the recent years and is one of the programs localities are cutting all across the state to make up for budget deficits. IF we fully support programs like the SBDCs we’re way more likely to get more similar ones….
Anyone who is interested in helping push the business community to work with the school system to make a “Career and Technology School” happen, should definitely read about Bill Strickland, an amazing man who has made a miracle happen in Pittsburgh.
If Pittsburgh can make it happen, I don’t see any reason why some determined people in Richmond couldn’t make it happen here.
Follow the links below and if you are interested in working together to create something like this for Richmond, please e-mail me at Wolfies@aol.com.
http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/17/genius.html
Genius at Work
With his potter’s hands, Bill Strickland is reshaping the business of social change. His Pittsburgh-based program offers a national model for education, training – and hope.
http://www.wqed.org/mag/features/0108/strickland.php
about BIDWELL
The 40-year-old Bidwell Training Center, which Strickland took over in 1972 from the Rev. James Robinson, who was head of the center for four years, is another component of the MBC, attracting adults from all over the region for career training.
“These are people who are on public assistance or had a job and lost a job,” says Strickland. They can study to become culinary artists, chemical laboratory technicians, medical claims processors, medical coders, health unit coordinators, pharmacy technicians and more.
BTC enrolls an average of 200 adults a year and assists an average of 400 in academic and support programs. Recent placement rates for graduates stood at 86 percent, according to Ken Husselton, director of student services.
Nancy Hessler isn’t a typical Bidwell graduate. She hadn’t lost a job. This single mom worked two jobs: waitressing at a North Side restaurant and working as an assistant sommelier at a Mount Washington restaurant. She was not really from an underprivileged background, she notes.
At the suggestion of a friend, she went along to take a test at BTC to see if she qualified for the chemical laboratory technician program. She scored 93 percent. She signed on in 1991 and took the year-long course.
Strickland recommended her to Bayer Corp. in Robinson Township, where she has worked ever since. “I just wish I had done it 10 years earlier,” she says.
The story doesn’t end there, though. Bayer paid her tuition at Duquesne University, where she completed a Saturday accelerated bachelor’s degree in communications in 2005.
——————————————————————————–
HOW-TOS for success
Foundations have been very supportive of Strickland over the years. What’s his secret? “Good results. Get the results and be able to validate what you do. That is, good management, good financial record keeping, good performance measurements and a high-quality day-to-day management in terms of facilities.
You didn’t walk though a metal detector to get in here. If you went to Oliver High School, you’d have to. That impresses foundations – that we have been able to create a positive learning environment in an inner-city neighborhood.”
And Strickland has even more to say on the subject: “The center, its faculty and other kids change behaviors. You have to build something that looks like a success, and people will be successful. If you build something that looks like a prison, they will act like prisoners.”
And the cost to MCG or BTC participants? There is no cost. Strickland gets the money from a variety of sources – from foundations, from schools for services rendered, from the government, from sales of jazz CDs, orchids and more.
Strickland isn’t out of ideas. He wants to duplicate his work in 100 centers around the country and even 100 more in other countries.
“It’s a logical extension to what he is doing,” says Glenn Mahone. “He is a highly sought-after speaker,” he notes. When he talks in other cities about what he’s doing, the reaction is everybody wants one.
So far three are up and running: in Cincinnati, San Francisco and Grand Rapids. The National Center for Arts and Technology will provide technical assistance in operations and programming to affiliated centers for five years.
While branching out nationally, Strickland is focused locally, too. He wants to deepen vocational programs and reach into the Mon Valley.
No, he doesn’t plan on retiring. “I’m going to play this hand out,” he says, while admitting that the MBC board is beginning to recruit for future leadership. Mahone would like to see a three- to five-year search with plans for an overlap of executives.
“Even if I step down, I’ll just go down the street and run the national-centers division or something,” says Strickland. “I spent my whole 60 years in six blocks,” says this man who grew up on Rush Street. “I’ve lived here; I’ll die here. I’m not going anywhere.”
Geographically, no. Otherwise, on the scale of dreams and accomplishments, he’s been to the moon and back. With orchids.
I think you are mistaken, Forward Thinker, about Pantele’s ties to developers. Here is a link to an old post: http://cjwn.net/news/2008/05/29/pantele-launches-bid-for-mayor/
Look at post #4 by Don (from the Save Richmond blog.
The amendments are most definitely about Echo Harbor and the interests of other developers, and Tyler should not be involved given glaring conflict of interest. It’s depressing that no one on the council seems willing to call him on that.
Keep in mind that this is not JUST about Echo Harbor, though. It’s about whether or not the city is willing and able to articulate a vision of what it wants to be and stick to it, even when developers don’t like it. And with the river, it will be better in the long run for both the general public and for development to NOT let its banks become the private playground of the few who can afford the condos. The idea of making the Tarmac property a park is that we will work toward having a continuous band of green along the river and not just a patchwork. The river is a wonderful but underutilized public recreational place, but it will not remain that way with huge condos. They may say they’ll include public access, but you can be sure that not everyone will be welcome.
Regarding the Echo Harbor building height — I’ve been told they won’t shorten it because with fewer units they wouldn’t make $$.
Someone (Wolfe or Joe Richmond) needs to
get the information about Bill Strickland’s successful program to the community (TD/Style) and to the members of Council. The new mayor supposedly wanted to do something with education. Perhaps he will listen and send some funds that way.
Also, in relation to the proposed developments, Shockoe Bottom Stadium, the Boulevard stadium, Echo Harbor, consider who on Council is backing which developers. Will they simply make a
trade so everyone will be happy? Obviously, we know where Bruce Tyler
stands. What about the other Council
members? Pantele’s gone, but has anyone
picked up where he left off? Who’s backing Ukrop’s interests?
The failure of USSR should make anyone regard a “master plan” as nothing but a joke
I am glad to forward it along to the Mayor and all Council members. It also helps if citizens press the case as well. The more, the better. I am glad Strickland’s accomplishments impressed you, Ms. Paulette. I urge everyone to take the time to read what I posted and make sure your friends and neighbors do as well. Let all school board members know that you would appreciate it if they would do something extraordinary and get Bill Strickland to visit Richmond and let the powers that be know that there are some things more important than baseball stadiums.
I am glad to forward it along to the Mayor and all Council members. It also helps if citizens press the case as well. The more, the better. I am glad Strickland’s accomplishments impressed you, Ms. Paulette. I urge everyone to take the time to read what I posted and make sure your friends and neighbors do as well. Let all school board members know that you would appreciate it if they would do something extraordinary and get Bill Strickland to visit Richmond and let the powers that be know that there are some things more important than baseball stadiums.
I think JJames really summed it up (post #35). This is not a race issue. I am in that park several times a day, and it is rare that there isn’t at least one car parked there with a visitor sitting and enjoying the (ahem – scenic, if urban) view. I would estimate that about 75% of those admiring the view are African American.
This is not only about particular developers and one piece of property, it is about Richmonders making choices about what they want their city to look like and include, and where they want their tax dollars spent, and making voices heard to representatives.
Echo Harbor is NOT a done deal. Enough public interest in this could make the difference between approval or not.
I was surprised to find out recently how incredibly HUGE the condo development is supposed to be. When people say it blocks the view, that’s what they mean – it blocks the whole view from the current towers to the other condos already down there. If that info is true (I haven’t seen a drawing either – anyone got one???), I am willing to put some of my private time into opposing this.
What worries me is that I don’t yet see an organized group opposing it by getting the info out.
Here is a link on CHPN to a photo of artists’ renderings of the proposed site, as of Sept. 07: http://chpn.net/news/2007/09/22/1048/
And it isn’t only CHA that has registered as being opposed. Here’s a link to a statement from Historic Richmond Foundation in Oct. 06: http://www.historicrichmond.com/echoharbor.html
Which leads to this question: there are a lot of different numbers being slung around. 300 jobs, 425 jobs (for 180 units? how does that work). 180 feet high, 206 feet high, 1000 feet long, something much less…
In my experience in Reston/Herndon and again in Tucson AZ (two good examples of out-of-control growth with some unpleasant outcomes), once the redistricting is done, developers tend to change the plans to whatever they calculate will make the most money. Agreements to “develop public access ways” evaporate and the developers are let off the hook when they can show that they ran out of money before getting to those. Heights suddenly increase, agreements about leaving trees standing, working with existing watersheds, or other reduction of impact on the environment are forgotten.
I’m just sayin’.
are there any other drawings of the proposed development on line?