RECENT COMMENTS
JessOfRVA on then it happens to you...
Becky Metzler on Updated! Guess what's happening on Mosby/Venable?
Mary on then it happens to you...
Sid on then it happens to you...
Becky Metzler on Church Hill Startup Tackles Insurance for Freelancers
Neighbor on then it happens to you...
Dan Rooney on then it happens to you...
The most recent Echo Harbor renderings
05/19/2009 9:18 PM by John M
The folks behind the Echo Harbor proposal presented their most recent designs to the Church Hill Association tonight.
Click any of the images to view larger.
The view from Libby Hill park, including the eastern tower. When asked, the spokesperson said that they would not provide a rendering of the entire project from this perspective.
The eastern tower and part of the taller western tower, as seen from Dock Street.
Part of the taller western tower and the easter tower, as seen from the river.
did they provide any reason for the lack of complete rendering of the view from libby hill park? seems fishy?
They said it was too expensive.
That looks like ass
Because if this goes up there will be no view from Libby hill
Yes, the reasoning was that it was too expensive to show/provide the other views.
That is ludicrous comment. Even the most basic architectural package can print a view from hundreds of vantage points, elevations etc. We were shown what they wanted us to see; a limited view showing the lowest building.
Disappointing presentation. If you are going to put it out there, put it out there so the community has everything in perspective. Made them look suspect. In my opinion it was not a wise move last night.
Well all the pretty pictures don’t make this project any better or the fact they don’t have the zoning so all these picture won’t change that
I must’ve missed something. I thought everyone was concerned over the “historic view” down the river.(To the left of the gorgeous white concrete towers?)
Is that not the case? Is it the view to the west and south of Libby Hill and not the historic view that everyone is concerned about?
I also thought everyone was concerned that river access would be cut off (Actually it is right now as there is no access to this site.) Did the rendering not show a huge pedestrian plaza and connecting walkway to the ship locks and points east?
An article regarding how people are moving back to the cities.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30810275/
Good news in my book.
SBD- the trees in the park also block the view. Should we cut them down?
Love the strategically placed yachts. Nice touch in the middle of a recession.
PointCounterPoint as usual you miss the point the trees are part of the view. Your article did not point out Richmond as a City people are returning to. Not even on the list go figure. The nice rendering still does not take into account that when it does flood it will cover that entire walk way area? At least Rockets Landing made sure they were far enough away from the flooding area. So you can swim to the boats on their docks.
The boats came from the docks at Rocketts Landing. The shad are still running.
It’s a starter yacht. Hardly worth a second look.
Trees trump condos anytime and everytime.
This development should be voted down.
PointCounterPoint, it’s the entire panoramic view at stake, which is what Ross doesn’t get. We don’t like the silos either but they’ll soon be gone. It makes no sense to build bigger buildings next door.
The panoramic view is one of the last vistas we have in this city with such an expansive overlook of the city. From in front of the monument just down the stairs, you can view Fulton Hill’s Powhatan Hill Park, Rocketts Landing, Tree Hill Farm, and the entire southside of Richmond including our industrial might, the James flows beneath you to the south from the west past Manchester’s buildings, and to the west you can view Belle Isle, The Carillon, and the entire eastern skyline of downtown. It’d be better to look down upon Echo Harbour than have it be a wall.
I’m not as much against the project as I had been due to some of the changes, but I still would not like to the horizon broken. A little obstruction to part of the view could be tolerable. The view of southside can still be obtained from Franklin St. It’s just the expansive overlook would be forever damaged (these buildings could exist long after we’re gone).
I still find this project not the best use for this land. At the downtown masterplan charrette I suggested at my table that that land be used to build an acquarium. I wouldn’t mind a museum dedicated to Richmond’s maritime history there. Those would still generate revenue for the city. We can build condo towers anywhere else inside and within walking distance from downtown. The thing is, they don’t want to build towers elsewhere. If we did we could have a more built-up skyline and great infill projects.
However I would find it funny when peeping toms line Libby Hill for other views in the towers if they’re built.
Thank you for your honesty Cadeho regarding the view shed. Finally a person with purpose of clarity as to their objection.
Peeping Tom’s, though? Wouldn’t that apply to any Fan or Church Hill house in the city now? I wonder how NYC deals with this?
Even if you are for the project — is anyone excited about this design. It looks terrible..
I find it interesting that they will be undertaking a programme to beautify Libby Hill Park as part of the package. They want to sell condos which block the view fromm Libby Hill by promoting Libby Hill to potential buyers. What’s wrong with that picture?
I actually think the design is an improvement. It looks less like Miami and a little more like it’d fit in in Richmond.
Are you kidding me? What the heck is wrong with Libby Hill Park as it is?
It looks like a permanently docked cruise ship/ocean liner, especially in the first two renderings. The third picture is Atlantic Ave., Virginia Beach.
Well, at last, they finally cut the grass last week. That took an act of Congress. They even used community service workers. Thank you Betty Squire.
Maybe we could plant some trees?
The red brick color appears to be an homage to those that thought the first design was too Miami. Heaven forbid we should use modern materials in the 21st century.
I really like the design, mainly because it’s something different for Richmond. Not the best location, but I credit them for forward thinking architecture and not the same old stuff. I’m glad they included brick in the new design. I especially like the (what appear to be) 2 story lofts on the upper floors – think 20 ft. tall wall of glass. It looks like something you could see along the Thames in London.
I think Echo park is very Miami but when they finish it people at will have a Giant mirror to look at. My issue is they are building Condos and we have plenty as it is and they are vacant. Rockets Landing is far from full and we have enough vacant Condos in this area and we have no new Business or Jobs that would cause people to afford these places. Developers just want what they can make the most money on without looking at the fact they are late to the party.
PointCounterPoint the difference between Rockets Landing’s Dock and Echo parks is that it is real and not some rendering based on other areas. Reality always wins
I am sorry to have to use this word, but honestly, this design looks like shit.
It looks like a cross between an office block in Manila circa 1982 and a stacked version of Regency Square. Never mind the whole view shed issue (which is important enough), but the architecture is banal, boring, cheap, and pedestrian. Trying to pass it off without showing the context on its site verges on fraud.
Tell me this project will fail. It certainly deserves to.
I do like the Manila reference. At least it’s a new analogy.
They could just pile up the Doublewides up and attach steps and call it the Redneck Riverea and still do better.
Well we all have different tastes. I don’t see how it’s banal, boring, or cheap at all. How is glass railing cheap? Riverside/Vistas on the James is what I call boring, nothing new or imaginative about them – plain rectangular brick blocks with windows. Ignoring the less than desirable site factor, what kind of design would you propose instead?
ShockoeBottomDweller – true there may be a lot of vacant condos, but consider the future of the housing market (in a couple of years from now). I don’t really know many people that are looking to live in the exurbs – besides, not many builders are building there now anyways; and if they are they’re foolish. Interview any college student on where they want to live in the future and I guarantee you they’ll say they either want to live in the city (or close to it) or somewhere in the country – not in a boring, cookie cutter, everything-looks-the-same suburb. These people will have to go somewhere and my guess is they’ll pick something in the city like Echo Harbor. Also, consider all of the empty nesters looking to live in the city.
Yes, more people are flocking to the city, but few of them want to live in a boring, cookie cutter, everything-looks-the-same apartment in a complex like this. Most people want to live in neighorhood, not a manufactured community.
It’s not worth it. If this gets built, it will never go away and it will forever change the view and the riverside in a negative way.
Yes, more people are flocking to the city, but few of them want to live in a boring, cookie cutter, everything-looks-the-same apartment in a complex like this. Most people want to live in neighorhood, not a manufactured community.
It’s not worth it. If this gets built, it will never go away and it will forever change the view and the riverside in a negative way.
4EH it is one thing to prepair for a market but to build when you have No requirements and are building on whim is shortsided. Right now we don’t have business with Jobs that can support 300,000 condos with 150 dollar condo fees. Nor does it look like that will happen any time soon. The Burbs cost less to own and you may have to mow or have upkeep but your not paying Condo fees every month that will only be used when things are to worn down to be sellable.
tiny: What do you mean people don’t want to live in everything-look-the-same apartments? People live in Vistas, and Riverside on the James, and Rocketts… some people enjoy high-rise living (well mid-rise). Suburbs are “manufactured†and people still live there. Communities are made of people not buildings.
At this point you all are just coming up with irrational reasons to attack the project because you don’t want to lose the view. With exception to the loss of the view, Echo Harbor is a viable project and has a lot of things going for it. Don’t say people wouldn’t live there or like the design, some would.
Obviously, now is not the best time to be building luxury condos. However, that’s the developer’s call and it will be their loss if it’s not successful. It wouldn’t be done for at least another 2 to 4 years anyways probably. If you don’t realistically think the economy will be better by then go be depressed the rest of your life.
The main thing I wanted to do was just voice my opinion about the design, since I seem to be the only one that really likes it. Anyone else out there that likes it?
I also don’t understand the opposition to Echo Harbor.
I do like the treatment along the water front. Open, pedestrian friendly. The rest of the design, well, we’ve been given very limited perspectives to judge from.
However, I do see the point about the compromised view of the river. From the photos above it’s difficult to see just how much will be lost and that should be weighed considering the historic nature of the James.
I was there for the presentation. When I saw the slide above showing the view from the park I was shocked. My first thought was that it (the river) was gone.
Jeezly, I just noticed the ‘overhead’ drawing looks like the Titanic.
concerned citizen something tells me you don’t understand because you have no understanding of overdevelopment or the fact you think any type of growth is good when that is far from the truth.
I want Richmond to be a nice place. And this looks like someone wants to invest a lot of money making Richmond nicer – providing better access to the river, etc. (I’d love to be able to sit under those umbrellas and have a sandwich / coffee while looking out over the water.
I do have two concerns, however.
1) Richmond has a huge amount of existing vacant property, and yet keeps building more and more residential space. Seems that what the region really needs now is industry / jobs.
2) Won’t this flood?
Not that many people live in those developments. They are way under-filled. I continue to say no this project.
Normally I’m all in favor of redeveloping any crappy part of town, but I have to agree this is pretty pointless project.
Has anyone proposed some kind of boardwalk with just restaurants and entertainment to connect Rockett’s Landing with Tobacco Row? Seems like that would go over fairly well, with minimal public wrangling.
Plus, it’d be nice to see some developers pitted against each other. Competition is always good.
the restaurants/retail wont come till the population density and household income reaches a “safe” level. This project seeks to increase the population density kind of like tobacco row did (but probably on a smaller scale).
In the Fan District, where a corner shop or restaurant is within walking distance of most residents the population density is over 5000 people per sq mile, the Shockoe Bottom/Church Hill area isn’t 2000 people per sq mile.
@ omelette,
the area isn’t zoned for that plus its a floodplane/floodway. the ground levels of buildings in this area are going to be parking decks or empty space.
also, richmond isn’t really aggressive like Va Beach, Norfolk, McLean, Henrico, Chesterfield etc about new development. Richmond just waits around hoping some will propose something transformative. The other cities give developers the you scratch my back I scratch yours approach.
Look at Armada Hoffler and Va Beach approach to the Town center of Virginia Beach.
Arlington, Norfolk, Va Beach, Newport News, McLean/Tyson’s Corner are being rebuilt/built that way.
Omelette the key problem is zoning and that is the only reason these guys are not building now. But if Rockets Landing wanted to extend down that way with a board walk area and a small park area I would not argue with the idea. The other problem is Rockets is trying to be a Henrico based area because no one wants a condo in Richmond City.
Have a nice Ice Cream/Coffee bar and a Seafood type restaurant and maybe a wine and cheese shop.
SBD and Omellete
All of the land in that area, with the exception of the old terminal is privately owned. So there’s your competition, but what incentive is there for them to build a walkway that does not benefit them unless it benefits their tenants?
BTW- why hasn’t the restaurant in Rockett’s opened?
#37 is on the right track though – if you want this area to be filled with neat little cosompolitan botiques, cafes, coffee shops, pubs, clubs, etc. then you have to get the population density up to a level that can support them.
This is Virginia’s capital CITY, folks. If you don’t like big buildings then maybe a house in the country would be a better bet for you.
@ #12 it’s the entire panoramic view at stake
Cadeho, are you talking about this panoramic view or this one
SBD, is it your purpose to oppose any project anywhere that might benefit Richmond. You have fully 1/4 the comments on this thread. Like you do everywhere you try to dominate the conversation to kill the conversation.
pot and kettle?