RECENT COMMENTS
Plans for a vacant 20 acres
The minutes from the February meeting of the Church Hill Association’s Zoning Committee have some info on Frank Wood’s plans to develop 20 acres at the east end of Clay Street:
Waite Rawls, John Whitworth met with Frank Wood who has plans to develop 20 acres in the 3520-3540 East Clay Street area. Some of the land he has already purchased and the other he is assembling from various owners. These include the trolley barn, the old trailer park and a small lot south of Government Road. The later is city owned.
Presently, it is zoned R-53 with a request to change it to R-63 to fit in with the developer’s plan to build a pedestrian single and two family residential community. R-63 allows commercial on the corners of the residential area. This designation is consistent with Union Hill and Rockett’s Landing. The area across Government Road owned by the city would also be R-63 to create a cohesive entrance to the community.
Do any of these developers and city planners ever consider roads? I remember when Williamsburg at Main was an easy turn at 7:30AM, just a few years ago. Now the cars stack up 50-100 deep to wait for the light to go right onto Main. With the advent of more Fulton Bottom homes and now plans for the above development, traffic is just going to get worse. Rocketts landing and greater poulation in Varina has also added substantially to the traffic on Main in Shockoe and Dock St. There are really no other road options (except Government through Churchhill, which is stopsign city. “Planners” don’t have to live in the messes they create. All they think about is the monetary gain and the future tax revenue, at the expense of the people living near the planning zones.
And another thing! What happened to someones excellent plan to turn some of the Fulton Bottom area into a greenway that would connect it to the rest of the city with pedestrian and bike paths? (John M – you posted a map of this plan awhile back) That’s a much better idea that would actually benefit the residents, rather than cramming them into tighter neighborhoods. So-called ‘growth’ without limits is a recipe for urban sprawl and lowered standards of living.
Wait wait don’t tell me — what about The King’s Retreat? Isn’t that planned for the trolley barn?? Is that part of this planned development? Does this mean The King’s Retreat is a step closer to happening?!
I foresee this becoming a very very long thread…..sigh.
I kind of think it’s not a bad idea, right now it’s a pretty unattractive set of properties. There is a lot of green space in Fulton Bottom that seems to get a lot of use although there seem to be some dead zones in it so I’m not convinced more is needed right there. I’m sure it will impact traffic – anyone know how many units are being planned?
@spacecat – Imagine the East End Greenway
greenway schmeenway…blah blah blah…we can’t afford to maintain what we’ve got! We NEED good solid development that brings in tax dollars and improves the entire neighborhood!
Want “greenway”?
The James River Park System is just down the street……it’s amazing.
I tend to agree with #4 – seems like it can’t get much worse than the trailer “park?” that’s currently on the site… though I’d like to see the new developers plan.
I also agree with #1 that the roads may need improvement. That was my main concern when the Fulton Stadium proposal was put forth a couple of years ago – the current road pattern doesn’t allow efficient traffic volume from that end of town to-from downtown.
If this could somehow be reconnected to the existing City road grid, a well designed urban mixed use development would compliment and enhance what already exists in Church Hill/Tobacco Row and fill the broken tooth between Rocketts and Church Hill. More pedestrians, people to patronize existing businesses and maybe some places for new businesses. How great would it be to have an urban grocery store in that old trolley barn? Other places where we could walk? What many of the nay-sayers in Church Hill cannot seem to understand (see, e.g., most objections to Shockoe Center) is that traffic becomes less of an issue when you can walk to the goods and services you use every day.
Homes, business, jobs and parks all go together. We need the first three so we can afford the last. These big contiguous tracts of land are rare in urban areas. A greenway connector would make a nice sweetener to any development proposal.
Anyone know how to reach Frank? I’d like to help visualize his project in 3D so everyone will be able to see what is in store for this great project before any shovels hit the ground.
Hey, with Velvet losing it’s ABC license and potentially on the ropes, we can hope that a new strip club will open in the trolley barn!
Please note that the residents of Fulton refer to the area simply as Fulton. Not Fulton Bottom. Thanks.
Velvet will not likely close. I heard the owner has made it through a couple murder investigations without ever landing in jail. I don’t think this little run in with the law will stop him.
I use “Fulton” when speaking with royalty, “Fulton Bottom” when speaking with ordinary polite company, and “Fulton Butt” when hanging out with my lowlife friends.
Isn’t this the piece of property across the street from Oakwood Heights, adjacent to but not in the O & H district? The zoning ordinance will govern, but I think R63 is pretty dense and will permit a lot of units.
I thought Fulton Hill referred to the elevated area above Fulton Bottom, which is next Gille’s Creek and Sugar Bottom at the base of the east end of Church Hill.
Fulton Hill is up the hill, yes, but there is no ‘Fulton Bottom’ per se — just Fulton.
Ramzi and john_m, I believe you are both correct. Names change over time, depending either informally on tradition or formally on municipal actions. In 1930, Fulton Park was formally renamed Powhatan Hill Park, for example. A “bottom” is simply a lower lying area of land at the base of a hill. It is not a derogatory term. It’s descriptive and easy to understand, thus encouraging its traditional usage. The land down the hill by the creek began to be called Fulton Bottom back in the 60’s. Many folks living there today call it Fulton Bottom — just ask the “Bottom Boyz”. These same folks call those up the hill “the hill people,” by the way. There is no right or wrong answer — it just depends on perspective. Interestingly, “Fulton Hill” also has at times been used to describe the entire area, including the lower, or bottom, part.
#16 and #18: The term ” Bottom” is considered derogatory by many Fulton residents. Fulton was one of the oldest, if not the oldest, settlements in Richmond. The razing of old Fulton in the 70s has left many wounds and scars.
Greater Fulton includes Fulton, Fulton Hill, Montrose Heights, and Powhatan Hill. If anyone is interested in the goings-on in Greater Fulton, there is a blog much like this one (greaterfultonnews.org). Lots happening.
It would be great to have a safe walking and biking path between Fulton and Church Hill. East End communities share many challenges and strengthening connections within the East End strengthens the whole East End.
@Ramzi, please note that the residents of Sugar refer to the area simply as Sugar. Not Sugar Bottom. Thanks.
But if you’re really our friend you could call us “Sugar Britches” or “Sweet Cheeks.” Your pick.
The old folks I’ve known always said Fulton Bottom. When I lived in Fulton Hill… it was Fulton Bottom. My great aunt who is 95 used to live in Fulton Bottom… so it was a name. However, it is also Fulton. Places can have dual names. If you REALLY want to get technical, I am sure Fulton used to be an Addition or a collection of Additions named after landowners before the subdivsions. Closer to the river there’s Nicholson’s Addition and Lester’s Additon as well as others. I still need to go back and look at older maps for them all. I have mapped the actual subdivisions of the Fulton area and really, I’d rather go by those names than a lumped name. That’s one thing that makes me mad about the city… NOTHING goes by its legal and correct name, however in the counties, everything is as it is and supposed to be. We need to teach people the truth and rediscover where we actually live.
Now to the subject, I am glad to at least have someone thinking of doing something with this land that’s just sitting there. I hope it can be attractive, peaceful, and help Richmond gain some more residents.
@ Cadeho: Do you have the legal names for all of Church Hill? I assume that all of it isn’t just called Church Hill but rather a handful of other names representing smaller areas (such as Union Hill, Fairmount and Chimborazo). I’d really be interested in learning all the names.
Cahedo is right – the folks that lived in Richmond in the 30’s, 40’s and 50’s refer to this area of Fulton Bottom.
Please, in respect for the residents of Fulton, many of whom grew up there, refer to the area as Fulton. Thanks.
#20 – I lived in the 100 block of N. 29th St. in the early 80’s and the area behind us was a hangout for a lawless element that was coming up the hill to break in to the houses in that whole neighborhood. We all knew the area as Sugar Bottom and still call it that today.
Just Asking, I think that was sarcasm.
Was the “horse lady” down there when you lived there? And the “house of sex and soul food?” The latter was written on the front door of one of the Sugar Bottom houses in the late ’70s/early ’80s when we used to drop a schoolmate off over there.
LOL @ people getting offended because we call it Fulton Bottom. It is at the bottom of the hill, yo. 😛
Next, the people of Shockoe Bottom will want to be called Shockoe.
Magneto, the oldest neighborhoods don’t have legal names, at least so far from what I’ve seen. What I need to research are the additions from the Adams. I’ve only seen one Adam’s Addition but not sure how far it went. However, other subdivisions I have. The area between about Q, 25th, Nine Mile, and 31st is a mystery. I’ve seen several names of possible subdivisions there but I’ll have to dig deeper.
Everyone I know that is from the Fulton area calls it Fulton Bottom – including those guys that meet for chess and conversation under the tree in the now vacant lot.
A member of my church was second generation born and raised in Fulton Bottom. In fact, his is the only remaining home left from the destruction in the 70’s. He calls it Fulton Bottom.
This sensitivity towards “Bottom” is not something from the old timers. It is a newer development.
As I see it, the folks that grew up in the area in 40’s and 50’s – before it was torn down -probably have the right name designation.
If it’s already been explained earlier in this thread, I apologize. But, why is it considered derogatory to refer to the area as Fulton Bottom? I never thought much about it but, it appears when viewing this area from above (Chimbo Park), this area forms a basin.
The local youth display a preference for “Fulton Bottom” (via Lil Scabz):
How about Gluteus Maximus Fultanimus?
It’s not offensive. It’s just inaccurate.
Fulton Bottom technically does not exist. It is not recognized in a tax search. And even if it were its own subdivision, that area has lots of sections. It’s Fulton Addition, Fulton Community Hill, Fulton Manor, Powhatan Heights, Montrose, and Montrose Heights that are encompassed by the vernacular of Fulton.
Not a big deal – just a matter or saying what you mean and being accurate, (if you care to), as the divisions are laid out in the present.
Thanks for the explanation Shannon. I guess it’s just like referring to everything on the eastern hill from downtown as “Church Hill”. But, it seems like folks on this thread really preferred that “Bottom” was not attached to Fulton because they felt it was derogatory. I really want to know where that is coming from. I’m assuming that “Bottom” is a reference to being at the base of a hill. It seems to fit in every other reference that I’m aware of (Sugar, Shockoe). To me, it doesn’t feel any less special to live at the base of a hill.
Talk about getting off track. Focus people, focus.
Back to the 20 vacant acres. This would be a good place for some high density, mid rise housing that would be affordable and convenient to downtown and the east end where jobs are. Kind of an extension of Tobacco Row or something like that. Establish a greenway along the creek.
Anne, please tell us more about “house of sex and soul food.”
Yeah, that would be a great way to finish surrounding Church Hill with vacant apartments. Note the ones that already exist next to the Chimbo market; although recently rehabbed, at least partially, they were derelict for years.
I live on Glenwood across from the vacant property and don’t care what goes there as long as it’s not low income. I’m ready to get out of this s***hole and need my property values to come up. I’m tired of the crime and traffic! If they put something here, I hope they widen the road and put some sidewalks. I’m sick of people on top of the hill (Fulton or Church or whatever you want to call it) almost running me over when I walk my dogs!
I don’t know if you noticed, but there is a pond on the property that is stagnant and breeding grounds for mosquitoes in the summer – it needs to be cleaned up.
P.S. I don’t consider myself to live in Church Hill or Fulton or Fulton Bottom. It’s just Oakwood and it’s ghetto as hell.
For those of you who are interested in Fulton’s history, John M. has started an good discussion over at http://www.greaterfultonnews.org.
Garry #38 – I lived briefly up on 32nd St. and used Glenwood as a quick way to get down to Gov’t Rd and then on to various east end errands. I noticed folks walking up and down the street (with and without dogs!) and tried to drive slowly. The lack of sidewalks was real evident.
If I were you, I’d watch this carefully, maybe contact the city’s Dept. of Community Dev. (or whatever it’s now called) on a regular basis to see what plans have been filed. Then if it seems that it might actually happen as a development, be really vocal about the need for sidewalks. The explanation above does say that the developer plans it as a pedestrian friendly development – so you should have a serious reason to loudly demand sidewalks down there!
Overall I think it sounds really positive for that area, though. Congrats to you for being a landowner down there right now, and best of luck.