RECENT COMMENTS
Joel Cabot on Power Outage on the Hill
Eric S. Huffstutler on What is up with the Church Hill Post Office?
Eric S. Huffstutler on What is up with the Church Hill Post Office?
Yvette Cannon on What is up with the Church Hill Post Office?
crd on Power Outage on the Hill
Union Hill Civic Association votes overwhelmingly in favor of Shockoe Center
03/18/2009 8:47 PM by John M
The UHCA voted approximately 25 to 2 in favor of a motion in support of the proposed Shockoe Center development, with 1 abstention, at tonight’s meeting at Cedar Street Baptist Church. Discussion touched upon both citizen desire to see Shockoe Bottom developed and thriving and apprehension of the city being held ultimately accountable for funding the project.
Also from the meeting:
- A stop work order has been put in on the corner store @ Tulip & Venable, no kitchen for now. And it is officially for sale.
- Discussion of zoning, with a recap of last nights CHA meeting. Union Hill could be rezoned to R-63 by July.
- A recent survey of the neighborhood shows a strong majority in favor of a Union Hill Historic District. Next step is next CAR meeting.
- Crime report from Lt.Laino from Sector 111: no crime trends in Union Hill. It’s getting warm – lock your sheds! Already had 1 attempted lawnmower theft 2009.
- Interesting fact from Betty Squire: whomever gets elected to the City Council 7th District Seat in November will be sworn in very soon after, they will not have to wait until January.
Yes!
I’ve never been more pleased to be part of the Union Hill community than at tonight’s meeting. The civil and neighborly conversation focused on our neighborhood’s commitment to developing a walkable, sustainable community that provides access to housing for people at every stage of life.
For us, the ballpark development represents those ideals and provides jobs and access to services and goods for our community. Union Hill literally overlooks the proposed development and, while we haven’t given carte blanche to Highwoods, we have approved of the idea in concept and look forward to working with them to the benefit of the larger East End. We have reserved our right to comment on the details of the plan, as they become available.
Is there a cost to join the Union Hill Civic Association?
Tiny, the membership fee is $15 per individual or $25 per household. You do not need however, to be a paying member to attend the meetings, unless you want to vote. The meetings are usually held every 3rd Wednesday. Please come by and check us out. If you decide to become a member, there is always someone available at the meetings to collect dues. We have a great community here and would love to see more people attend and participate.
I would like to thank Matt Conrad for all of his great leadership, enthusiasm, and hard work during his term as UHCA President. We really appreciate everything you do for our community Matt.
Yeah…can’t wait to enjoy a game!!!
Hmmm, why no report on this in the Times Dispatch like they covered the Church Hill vote?
Newspapers and news organizations want things that are mostly negative and to stir up the public, sell papers and increase readership.
The news about the U.H. “Yes” votes on the Stadium and R-63 Zoning is that they are the opposite of the CHA’s votes.
It’s nice that *someone* in this town doesn’t want to look at rotting urban blight for the next 25 years. Hooray for someone adding another voice.
I will take this opportunity to say again, I’m SO OVER the Church Hill Association and their bloated sense of self-importance.
Jehovah, Seems ironic that you state in another post- “the parking problems and public drunkenness” about the Irish Festival; I’m guessing because it affects you, yet you seem to have no regard for the people with whom the shockoe center might affect. Sounds like a little bit of NIMBY syndrome.
Oh no Bob. I just can’t stand the CHA and their oozing self righteousness.
But actually the Shockoe Center will affect me, I live and work and pay taxes right here.
“A recent survey of the neighborhood shows a strong majority in favor of a Union Hill Historic District.”
Congratulations! Keep it going, you’re in the final stretch!
Shockoe ballpark gets support from civic group (RTD 3/20)
You have got to be kidding me?! The UHCA voted in support of ballpark in Shockoe Bottom?!?! Why and how is a ballpark in any way, shape, or form appropriate for ‘historic’ Shockoe Bottom.
April,
I have to ask you a couple of questions.
1. Do you belong to the UHCA?
2. Did you attend any of the meetings where the ball park was discussed?
3. Did you vote on the issue?
If you answered no to any of these questions and still want to bitch about this, I would suggest you join, attend, and vote.
It is a perfectly reasonable proposition to believe that a ballpark is appropriate for Shockoe Bottom. If designed in a human scale, pedestrian friendly, architecturally compatible, and surrounded by a mix of uses, including the goods and services that the adjacent neighborhoods want and need so badly, then it is a very good proposition.
Clearly part of the problem is people are envisioning a monolithic major league or even diamond-style stadium. Yankee Stadium is not proposed for Shockoe Bottom, folks. This would be a little double A park. Think Casey at the Bat.
I guess you need to ask the folks of Union Hill?
Perhaps the historic parking lots and nothing happening in years swayed their votes?
Cheeers to Union Hill.
All the Civic groups around have already drank the Kool-Aid that is nothing new.We still have to wait til City Council gets their little study back and then they will turn this from a Private venture to their little pet project. Hope you all like Ballpark Taxes because all of Richmond will be paying for them
Re: newspaper coverage. This is a direct result of the layoffs at the Times Dispatch. They simply don’t have enough bodies. And last night, there was a work session on the city budget, which was very contentious, and was also not covered. Not a conspiracy, just lack of interest by the Media General management.
I was just shocked to read that the UHCA supports the development. The UHCA is clearly passionate about historical preservation, why wouldn’t they want to promote the protection of historic Shockoe Bottom as well? To me, there is just a disconnect between those two ideas- they just don’t coexist in my mind! I am not a member of the UHCA, I did not attend the meeting, nor vote, but I still have a valid opinion on the baseball stadium issue, which I am free to express. I wasn’t saying that the UHCA should have done anything differently- obviously the members are free to vote as they please. I was just commenting on the issue in general. Ultimately, I doubt an endorsement by the UHCA is going to make or break the baseball stadium deal anyway.