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
Shockoe again comes up as potential ballpark location
07/31/2012 7:57 AM by John M
After years of focus on the Boulevard, Shockoe Bottom is back in play as a potential location for a new ballpark. Officials with the Richmond Flying Squirrels and the Greater Richmond Chamber confirmed Monday that their conversation about a new baseball stadium has shifted to the Bottom.
Three of the top 4 all-time most-commented stories here on CHPN came over a 15-day span back in 2009, all regarding the previous proposal to build a baseball stadium in Shockoe Bottom.
I am SO hoping this comes to be. This would be a huge asset for us. Having this park would help keep downtown from turning into a ghost town after 5, would bring more folks from the suburbs downtown so they can see that the city isn’t so scary after all and would give us all something to walk to.
I’m a huge proponent of this idea. I would love to see a stadium in the bottom.
Just thought I’d throw in my initial support for this as well. I look forward to more details on the official proposal.
What is needed more than anything on this issue is for someone at City Hall to just decide something already. I have never seen a more indecisive body than our city government.
Anyone want to bet this latest change ends up in yet another study being commissioned? Or bet on whether the final tab for all the studies ends up costing more than the ballpark itself?
Just freaking decide already. Either site has its merits but the current ballpark is fading quickly and something needs to be done.
Also interesting is how the city/counties relationship is becoming strained as of late. Perhaps we should let the counties worry about solving the traffic issues their commuters cause and stop supporting stuff like the Route 5 corridor. Build more decent housing options and better mass transit infrastructure downtown and let the counties deal with their sprawl issues if they won’t play ball.
Wow, this would be fantastic for the city, downtown, Shockoe Bottom and Church Hill. But as we know, previous initiatives have shown that Church Hill won’t support Shockoe Bottom development for various reasons – so I’m not even thinking about holding my breath for this one. During the last Shockoe baseball park/Camden Yards proposal, I felt like I was one of four people in Church Hill to support the idea. With that said, it’s nice to see the initial posters’ favorable remarks. I can at least daydream for the moment about a nice Bottom venue replacing the parking lots and other visually stimulating landmarks…………..
I’m also a proponent of the idea. However, two things that need to be addressed before: 1) traffic getting in / out of the bottom and 2) parking.
John, traffic and parking ought to be easy. Most baseball games happen at night and on weekends when traffic is light. As for parking, there are thousands of nearby parking spaces that won’t be occupied during those times. Proximity is a problem, but a well staffed shuttle service should get people in and out relatively quickly. As for me, I’ll be walking from home or taking the bus. There are hundreds of new residential units being added to downtown/Shockoe/VCU/Manchester area every year.
Anybody who knows me knows I think this is the perfect location for a ballpark. The day I’m sitting a downtown ballpark sipping a beer, watching the trains, interstate traffic and the lights of downtown will be a happy day for me.
@6 – I don’t know the site plans for this one but it seems that the big sprawling lots at the bottom of Broad (not the slave burial grounds but the ones that are still parking lots) would be a great location. Easy access to the interstates and then a couple parking decks could be built between there and the Farmer’s Market (between Broad and Grace). Parking decks in general in that area would be awesome since the current usage is so inefficient.
1. Camden yards is a poor model to use as a guide just as Inner Harbor was a poor model for Sixth Street Marketplace. The expected Camden Yards boon of business and housing did not materialize. The Hilton Hotel next door is closing because their expectation were not met.
2. If the expectation is the ball field will improve business so dramatically, why have no new businesses opened near the existing location to take advantage? The crowds have been good at games, yet I do not see clamoring for a spot to put in a new business.
3. The ball field is a walled garden that is vacant 75% of the year. It shuts out the surrounding neighborhood and entraps the spectators for 2-3 hours. There is little to no free interaction with the surround area during games.
4. Shockoe Bottom’s problem will not be solved with a ball field. One robbery or shooting in the proposed parking area and attendance will evaporate. Without a concerted effort by the city and law enforcement to tighten control of the unsavory elements and drunken idiots who frequent that area, the Bottom will remain a victim of its clientele. This has been an ongoing problem since the first round of revitalization in the early 90’s. The city has refused to act until there is a shooting and has ignored the area the rest of the time.
This would be a huge win for the Bottom, Church Hill, the City and the region. Based on the Times Dispatch article, however the Counties have bailed on the City. The TD comments are filled with all kinds of vitriol about how no one will come to the City. Aren’t all of us in Church Hill proof againts that view?
If any naysayers ever want a real grocery store convenient to the Hill, real goods and services, this kind of project is how it is going to happen. Otherwise you are going to get VCU/MCV parking decks down there. Count on it.
Isn’t everyone sick of talking about baseball in the bottom?
How much time can everyone waste beating this dead horse?
Absolutely put the ballpark downtown! No, it won’t solve all problems for Shockoe Bottom, but it’s a start.
The Bottom is a disaster right now and it needs a catalyst to provide some momentum. The naysayers in Church Hill that did everything short of rioting in the streets the last time this idea gained momentum prior to the housing crash don’t look so wise right now. The Bottom remains abandoned and has NO momentum. Not again, there is a tremendous amount of support this time around.
Go Shockoe Bottom ballpark!!
My message to Richmond decision makers (or non decision makers as is typically the case): Go For It! Stop the endless pondering and pull the trigger! Downtown ballparks in the place of vacant lots are a good thing which has been proven successful all across the country. Time to step up and take the city to the next level. Let’s Go!
I completely agree with JohnQ. This is a terrible idea. Traffic on Broad St during rush hour near 18th has already become a nightmare with all the cars turning left to go into the new condos in the Cold Storage and other surrounding buildings. We certainly do not need to add to that congestion.
I grew up in the suburbs of Baltimore and went to many Orioles games at both stadiums. Anyone who says a stadium is good for surrounding businesses doesn’t know what they are talking about. Part of the experience of going to the game is eating and drinking AT the stadium. Very few people, if any, go to other businesses when heading into town for a game. The only other businesses that will benefit are the parking lot owners.
And to the poster mentioning nighttime games not being a problem…5pm, 6pm, 7pm games will all mean more people on our already congested roads during rush hour.
@9 – I don’t know what you are basing your statement that Camden was a failure on but as a former resident of Baltimore I can assure you are incorrect. Downtown Baltimore used to be a miserable shithole that nobody in their right mind went to.
Now at least some parts of the city have become tourist friendly. There ARE a number of restaurants around the stadium that benefit from the ballpark traffic. Beyond the immediate game day impacts, there are also second order impacts as people who never would have ventured downtown see that there are fun things to do there and it’s not so bad and then return at other times.
Here’s an article about the Camden effect on Baltimore:
http://www.forbes.com/2009/04/14/baseball-camden-yards-lifestyle-sports-baseball-stadiums.html
To folks whining about traffic, ballgames rarely if ever start before 7 on weekdays. That gives plenty of time for downtown workers to get out before the crowd starts coming in. Some of those downtown workers may even want to stay for the game once in a while before departing to the suburbs.
Best of all for us Church Hill’ers, studies have found “significant positive effect on the value of surrounding houses” when new stadiums have been built.(Feng & Humphreys, 2008)
@15 – Cited facts about Camden Yards and home values instead of conjecture, thank you!! I can tell you I certainly supported Inner Harbor restaurants and bars when going to the ballpark – before and after the game. Why would I want to pay ballpark prices for food and drink when there are plenty of better places available? I wholeheartedly believe home prices would not be negatively impacted should the Bottom be fortunate enough to get a ballpark.
@14 -Traffic is a nightmare and congested?? Really?? Man, you should see my daily commute. I’m seriously happy to make it back to Richmond where there is -no- traffic to speak of, and plenty of options if there’s ever a wreck.
I live in Church Hill and I love the idea of a stadium in the Bottom. I lived in Buffalo, NY for over 12 years and had the pleasure of going to Bisons (a Triple-A team) games downtown. There are few examples of Buffalo doing anything right in the 20th century but building their baseball stadium downtown is one.
When I first saw this post, I said to myself “Oh, here we go again. Time for more NIMBY comments on CHPN.” I’m so happy and encouraged to see that I was completely wrong (so far, at least) and that a majority of the comments are in favor of this initial idea. 🙂
@Magneto, the negative nancies are sure to come out of the woodwork, just give them time. The positive crowd needs to gain the upper hand and be the voice that is heard this time. We cannot get drowned out by all the negativity and small minded thinking that resists any/all change at all times. Let’s do something positive!
I am really glad to see all of the positive comments about baseball in the bottom. I am fully in support. I am also glad to see that city is going it alone. It’s about time. Henrico and Chesterfield were never going to get on board, so now the city can develop this project with its own priorities at the top of the list…economic development, infrastructure improvement, etc…let’s just hope city hall doesn’t screw it up.
All they’d need to do is dig up old designs, and dust them off, maybe update them…
I vote yes!!! Assuming it’s done right why wouldn’t a ballpark in the Bottom be an awesome idea? My wife and I moved up from Raleigh a couple years ago and we miss going to Durham Bulls games. That’s a great example of a beautiful stadium in a tight area done right.
If you’re complaining about traffic I think that’s absurd. We live in a city with a major interstate running through the center. There’s always going to be more people, more traffic, and higher taxes in a growing city.
Mike- I also use to live near Boston so yes while there are other places that have worse congestion than we do, that is NOT relevant to the point I was making. The new condos have already created more congestion at the string of lights at 17th and 18th on Broad and they are just condos. Imagine what the traffic will be like when we add ballpark traffic to it as well. I don’t want our traffic to end up like it is outside of DC or Boston 😉
We need this project to attract the development we need to make Church Hill independent from Short Pump and White Oak Plaza! Give me Shopping Liberty…Dump the Pump!
Bring on the stadium!
I think the reception may be a little warmer than it was in years past as:
a.) folks are realizing that development is coming one way or the other to this area. It’s probably better to have it happen in ways that would work with the community rather than through more sprawl. If we get this project, it will provide a great source of entertainment that is walkable and hopefully will bring a few folks that would have otherwise lived in the burbs back downtown – and thus more demand for infrastructure that would support us vs. the commuters.
b.) the economic side effect for us of having this attraction nearby should be positive and now that housing bubble has collapsed, a lot of us are more in tune to the need to build up our real estate values. In 2008-2009, there was a lot less sensitivity towards doing things to make our property more attractive because folks still believed housing would always rise anyway.
c.) we’ve got a lot of new people in the conversation who have moved in here in recent years attracted to the value proposition that a walkable neighborhood offers. For these folks, this is exactly the kind of thing that they want to see.
@24 – if you used to live near Boston, how can you say that folks going to ballgames don’t support nearby businesses? You must never have been near Fenway during your time up there. The Cask ‘n Flagon and all the other bars on Landsdowne would be nothing more than a holes in the wall dive bars right now if it weren’t for Fenway.
An extra on ramp onto 95 from the Bottom should be more than enough to disperse the traffic after the game if it’s even needed. We are already moving far more people than this stadium would hold in and out every day at 9 and 5. I don’t think moving a small fraction of that again at 10 when the games let out will break the infrastructure.
Please stop throwing out poor excuses that have no grounding in reality. It has been shown time and time again that ballparks do produce more revenue for the restaurants nearby and the traffic issue is vastly overblown. Perhaps if this park was going in by St. John’s Church it would be a mess but the sites under consideration are a short fly ball from a major interstate that can handle that traffic, especially during non-peak times.
The Squirrels play 142 games a year, only half of those are home games, what does the stadium get used for the other 294 days of the year? Just curious.
@29 – schools get used only 180 days a year. Churches get used only 52 days a year. City Hall is useless 365 days a year What does it matter? If its worthwhile for those days, it doesn’t.
Another non-sensical red herring argument.
Host VCU games, state tournaments, concerts, maybe NCAA playoffs to name a few. I’d go there just to run the bases.
There’s a new page on Facebook just getting started out.
I Support Baseball in Downtown Richmond
The Church Hill / Bottom area needs all the development it can get. It’s been stagnant too long.
Being it on! The bottom really is the only place for the stadium. It can support the restaurants and bars required to make coming to a game a great experience. You can park once and walk for there to eat and then see a game. We have the canal walk that is just waiting to be embraced and used to its full potential. There are so many mid-size cities that have put their stadiums in the same kind of urban setting as the bottom and they’ve been wildly successful. The only thing this picture needs is more retail and would be easy to attract.
@30 Alex, what did I do to deserve that? I wasn’t making an argument, I was just asking a question because, like I said, I’m curious. But even if I WERE concerned that the stadium would be too much effort for too little use, that’s not a “non-sensical red herring argument,” that’s a legitimate concern, even if people like you don’t find it to be a justified one. Address the concern, don’t resort to name-calling.
@31 Thanks for answering the question, Paul, I figured it wouldn’t go unused for the other 80% of the year. I just wasn’t sure how it would get repurposed.
I do have further questions / concerns / red herrings:
1. What would be the funding for it? How much taxpayer money is being chipped in and in what form? My preference is for as little as possible, let the developers get private funding.
2. A stadium would be attracting more cars while at the same time taking away existing parking spaces. That’s not necessarily a deal-breaker, look at NYC: lots of attractions, parking sucks, but it’s a great place to be. Still, even if some new parking decks get thrown in with the stadium, we shouldn’t be surprised if parking becomes more of a pain in the neck. Such is the price of success.
3. What would the stadium’s proximity be to Lumpkins Jail (or any other historical site)? Are they going to be at odds, or is there a way to make this a win-win for both?
Sorry if you feel I blasted you. I’m just getting tired of the knee jerk complaints from people who just don’t want change and are trying to latch onto any weak argument they can find to justify why this shouldn’t happen. There are some real concerns that do need to be addressed but there’s also a lot of non-issues that are getting thrown in here and are muddying the waters.
1. is certainly a valid concern and I agree that the developers who get rich off this certainly need to pitch in. As excited as I am about this project, I don’t want the city giving out sweetheart deals. This is the real crux of the discussion and the more we can focus on this, the better chance that something gets decided and it’s a good decision.
2. Parking doesn’t seem like an issue to me. Ballgames will fall at times when most of the parking infrastructure that is in place for the daily commuters currently sits vacant. Drive around downtown and Shockoe Bottom at 7PM and see if you have a hard time finding a parking space. And that is with terribly inefficient parking layouts in place right now. Almost everything is single tiered and if we turn a few of those wide open fields into parking decks it should be plenty of spaces. It would also make daily parking better than it is now and will have benefits for the area in general. Plus, unlike the current site, many folks can walk to this location.
3. Turn Lumpkins Jail into a bullpen or dugout. There’s too much historical crap that nobody visits downtown and that’s holding this city back.
(In all seriousness, I think it’s likely that the site is likely to be a little farther away but if it is close by, perhaps Lumpkins can be incorporated into the complex in a way that brings more focus to the site that currently gets little visibility.)
Also, I pray that neither David Johannas nor Joshua Bilder have anything to do with this project or we’ll end up getting a stadium that won’t be suitable for baseball, sits on top of the slave burial grounds and looks like a metal turd with blue and red stripes painted on it.
Alex didn’t you hear? At the last city council meeting the new design for the baseball stadium was approved…oh wait a min that was just Joshua Bilder getting appointed to the CAR…so anything is possible.
I think the real question is are there better sites for the ballpark than the Bottom.
Compared to leaving at the Diamond- the Bottom is far more expensive.
Compared to Manchester the- the Bottom is far more restrictive in design and site.
Compared to all of the them its far more environtaly an historically challenging.
Also, the last go around issues like serious concerns about the sound coming from a stadium in the middle of a valley- loud! Also, although Paul has mentioned fantastic ideas for the 80% or more time this multi- million dollar investment will lay idle none of those events occur now in the existing Diamond. Maybe a new location would change that maybe not.
Thanks John,
There are no guarantees, but a premier stadium in a premier location just demands use. it should be the go to venue for tons of activity. It will be the highest profile facility in Richmond, maybe the state of Virginia. It will get people off the freeway better than any “Welcome to Richmond” billboard.
Here’s a bit of news that didn’t get much attention. from some people who should know.
Richmond urged to build stadium downtown”
Richmond just needs to look at all the other mid-size cities that have had the courage and the foresight to revitalize their formerly abandoned and decaying downtowns with baseball stadiums. The list is endless and the success is virtually guaranteed. Noise is not an issue – we have an elevated highway and train tracks going through that area already. The train would get bonus points with kids – they love trains.
Staying at the Diamond is the most expensive option of all because the tenant – the team – knows that is a poor location, so they will leave altogether for another region.
JohnQ
To answer question number 2, the only way to build in the undeveloped lots (the parking lots) in the Bottom is to build access above the flood elevation. That is too expensive for the private sector to do without a public component. Mom and pop don’t have the money to build a bridge from 16th Street to a parcel above the 100 year flood line. Based on the condition of the Winfrey cottage, neither does the slave museum. If the “bridge”was part of the expense of a ballpark, however, mom and pop, and a museum, could hitch a ride!
If it’s too expensive for the private sector that implies the project isn’t a moneymaker, right?
I mean, if the stadium is projected to be “virtually guaranteed” like Lucky Canine claims, wouldn’t the private sector be all over it and not requiire any tax payer funding?
So, the solution to the poorly managed traffic flow in down town is to bring in even more traffic?
Without factoring in construction costs, this plan would still cost millions and millions just to buy the buildings that would need to be demolished to make room for a ball park.
I agree with ray / #44. I’m always worried when I hear that some project is a guaranteed money-making venture but they somehow can’t line up enough private capital to make it happen.
Plus, one of the issues with a downtown stadium isn’t financial, it’s the matter of the Lumpkins Jail site. You have to spell out what’s going to be done with that historical site that people find acceptable and that’s compatible with a stadium. That’s not a money issue, that’s a vision thing. It’s going to require a lot of specifics ahead of time about what the final product will be.
And until that’s resolved, is there even much point getting into details about the finances of it all?
It’s amazing how people can hear but not listen. Public infrastructure is the sole way any private development can occur in the bottom because of the FEMA boundaries. So if there is no ballpark, then it will be solely parking decks (and maybe a museum) at 100% public expense. If you add a private component, then the public expenses are actually less. It’s really about time amateur hour was over around here.
What #47 said…
I know I’m going to get blasted for this but I’ll say it anyway. Who really gives a fuck about Lumpkins jail? If folks want to sit whining about how the ballpark will sit unused sometimes, how much does this get used? How about that big field under the interstate? If the goal is to raise awareness of the sorry history of this area, how about building something that will draw folks down here and work that history into the design? As it stands, these things are just crumbling.
It seems like some folks are just starting with the answer that they don’t want a ballpark and then working backwards, grasping at straws for why it won’t work.
#49, agree, wish there was more progressive thinking on the hill…embracing development in the bottom is a ‘no brainer’
Alex…you are a study in contradictions. On one hand “preserve, preserve, preserve” on the other “who gives two shits about history”. Which is it? We must preserve if it means you stand to make money off the deal but when the preservation is just for the sake of history and isn’t lining your pockets, then the history isn’t worth anything…literally and figuratively.
How much wealth and prosperity did the DIAMOND bring to its current neighborhood?
Why would it cost more to rebuild there than to buy and level businesses in another part of town?
@51 – no contradiction here, I’m looking out for my home value. I’m not shy about admitting that. I respect folks that are pure preservationists and/or build it all types but I’m looking out for my own interests. The city won’t do it so if I don’t, who will?
Better home prices tend to have a nice correlation with quality of life which is ultimately what all of us care for. When we live in neighborhoods with declining home values its usually not a positive trend even outside of the direct financial impacts.
What are your principles here? It sounds as if you disagree with me on both so I’d be curious to see how you rationalize those two? Or are you just trying to pick a fight?
@52 – not as much as it could have because there’s nothing to walk to. It’s purely a drive, see ball game, go home thing. Better planning would help capture some of the potential benefits.
I see it the same as Alex does in regard to the stadium. In Greenville SC, they’ve capitalized their Reedy River warehouse district. A combo feeling of a little more family friendly Carytown – lots of to places shop and eat – meets Shockoe Bottom – a brewery and some bars – and then they added a minor league baseball stadium. People come for the river and the park, to shop, to eat and to see baseball. They also have a performing arts center, but we have Alley Katz and some other more bar like venues. Even when it’s not baseball season, there are plenty of people down there because just walking along the river is a huge draw in and of itself. People drive downtown just to go for a walk along the Reedy River and have lunch or dinner. I will do that with my husband when we visit family there next month. Richmond is a much larger city and could support a larger area – all the way from Belle Island to Shockoe Bottom. And the Reedy River is a freaking bubbling brook compared to magnificent James.
@51 – By the way, you do realize I don’t stand to make any more money off this than any of our neighbors. We all win when smart development occurs in our neighborhood. It’s not just my pockets that will get fuller.
Since you basically admitted that these things I’m lobbying for will result in better home values, you must realize that everyone would benefit. Are you proposing we do stuff that hurts your neighbors property values? Isn’t that a bit selfish?
I never said one way or another how I felt about the ball park. I simply wanted to state your historical preservation strangely enough falls along interesting lines.