Ballpark plans mean big makeover
In the debate over a new ballpark for Richmond, one proposal envisions a remodeled Diamond, top, while another foresees a ballpark development project in Shockoe Bottom.
|
MORE: • Transformation theme shared by ballpark plans • Comparing two of Richmond's ballpark options |
Transformation is the shared theme of two ballpark plans for Richmond.
In October, Highwoods Properties proposed Shockoe Center, a development that includes a $60 million ballpark that would transform Shockoe Bottom. A minimum of two years would be required to build that stadium, if the proposal gains city approval.
Then, last week, Opening Day Partners presented a $28 million transformation of The Diamond on the Boulevard, a facility that opened in 1985. Just about everything but the field and part of the lower bowl would be demolished and removed, with a modern ballpark constructed on the stadium footprint, according to Maryland-based ODP. The transformed Diamond, says ODP, could be ready for baseball next season if construction begins Aug. 1.
Richmond officials continue to study the Shockoe Center proposal from Highwoods, which is based in Raleigh, N.C., and has an office in Glen Allen.
Meanwhile, Opening Day Partners wants a chance to meet with area leaders to discuss its proposal for reinventing The Diamond, whose condition influenced the Atlanta Braves to move their Triple-A franchise to Georgia after last season. ODP Chairman Peter Kirk said Thursday that he's discussed the plan with Mike Berry, the general manager of the Richmond Metropolitan Authority, which owns and operates The Diamond. Kirk has yet to speak with city officials.
In its present state, The Diamond remains a short-term solution for Richmond's next baseball franchise. City officials continue to seek a long-term solution to where baseball makes sense in Richmond.
Mayor Dwight C. Jones last month acknowledged that based on what he had heard so far, "there is clearly no consensus on which direction to go in."
Contact John O'Connor at (804) 649-6233 or
.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
kdm98, we simply don’t need to continue to support sprawl style development. Henrico and Chesterfield can’t keep up with the new infrastructure and schools necessary to support these new developments as is. Classroom overcrowding and terrible traffic are symptoms of this. Despite recent progress the City center still has some gaps to fill and we should focus on making it more appealing to new businesses, tourists, and residents. The City is the regions ambassador. When tourists come here they visit downtown, not Glen Allen or Midlothian. While they may be nice places to live they don’t serve as much of a draw for young professionals or new businesses. It seems to me the main arguments I read against building in the Bottom are all based on fear of the City, not any grand vision of the regions future or sound economic policy. Why should we cater to fear when we can continue downtown revitalization and change people’s misconceptions instead?
citycynic - what did I say that is considered an insult?
Richmond is a second rate city? That is rapidly becoming more fact than opinion.
Residents using a “historic” horse shed to block progress? That’s a fact.
We should focus on parades and fairs? Without quality facilities we will continue to experience rapidly declining entertainment options in this city. If we want to be South Hill, Virginia lets try to be the best small town in the state and stop pretending to be a major city.
Coliseum comment? The fact that there’s very little energy to get rid of that dump of a facility is a clear example of the thinking of the folks in this town. Entertainment is not a priority here.
Let’s just embrace the “Richmond Way” to do things here and move on.
I think after the ballpark opens in the Bottom - because I’m on a personal crusade to make sure it does, each patron should be asked for their zip code when they purchase their ticket. At the end of each season, the City can tally the admissions info and send a bill to each major surrounding county for their percentage of the season’s patrons. Anyone not from Henrico, Chesterfield, Hanover, Goochland, New Kent, Charles City, Hopewell, Colonial Heights, or Petersburg would be paid for by the City.
Then we’ll see who’s really using the facility and it can be paid for accordingly by all who use it. None of the RMA’s money should be used because they’re partly to blame for this debacle. If they had taken care of the Diamond, it wouldn’t be falling apart. If they would contribute to an advisable solution, our AAA team wouldn’t have left, or we would have secured a new team by now.
I would be leery of anything Mike Berry thinks is a good idea. He’s looking for a cheap dump to satisfy the region’s need for a stadium - maybe subconsciously, but there’s a pattern of frugality. For $28 million, we can only be guaranteed to get a severely sub-par stadium that will be difficult to develop around because not enough money was spent. The developer is out-of-town and will have no long term ties to the project, so when the difficult decision comes and there’s not enough money to build what has been shown, he’ll either toss in the extra money - which would make it equal in cost to The Bottom - or he’ll reduce the quality to keep the $28 million promise. Either of these solutions is bad because it leaves 2 of Richmond’s critical areas underdeveloped. The City should charge these guys a large sum of money for horrible urban planning because it would be another 25 years before we get a chance to fix their mistakes. Check out what ODP has brought to other areas - http://www.openingdaypartners.com. While there is a lot to say for the family-friendly pieces (which The Bottom site will also provide), for the most part their stadiums are sub-par in attendance and quality. I’ve based this on a cross-reference between ODP’s site and MiLB.com.
The Diamond was built in 8 month on a low budget in 1985. It doesn’t make any sense to repeat the same mistake over again simply because it’s already in place. This proposal for the Diamond will prohibit the one thing that consistently makes ballparks successful - surrounding, integrated development. We need a neighborhood ballpark, not an eyesore that doesn’t architecturally, culturally, or historically represent Richmond in ANY way.
Much of the cost for The Bottom is associated with infrastructure that will be required for ANY development to take place, unless it’s an 8-block public park for the foreseeable future. If the City got on board with the project and started presenting the opportunities, the high attendance and participation would pay for the improvements FOR the City.
So the real question is: Do we want to buy a Pinto so we can say we got a good deal on it? As a taxpayer, I would be furious to own a bad, cheap investment like what is being presented for The Diamond.
I’m not sure why everyone is so desperate to put this in the Bottom. Richmond is a city with a strong suburban base. Why not cater to that base. You could go out on the 288 corridor and make a nice place with ample parking and great access. I am a regular listener to Greg Burton’s show on 950 and he is a big proponent of the Bottom, but I just don’t buy it. It sounds like the proposal is all about building up the businesses there. This targets the young, single males. I don’t think that group will sustain baseball for the long run. You need the families, the ball teams, etc.
Looks like the RiverDistrictNews and Church Hill People’s News websites are both down.
Here is another link.
http://richmond-telegraph.blogspot.com/2009/06/robertsons-town-hall-meeting-davenport.html
Why don’t FanGuy’s links work????
FanGuy’s link doesn’t work, and neither do his arguments. Priceless!
Virginian - Absolutely. It is ridiculous to think redisdents from the counties isn’t responsible for the lion’s share of those working, eating, and enjoying entertaiment in the city.
Robmo35: big words - impressive! If I didn’t know better I’d think you were trying to one-up me…
FANGUY the link doesn’t work.
Ah citycynic you hemaphroditical, multiracial miracle. Is there anything you haven’t been or done? Your constant attempts at oneupmanship are as tired as your arguments, which now seem to center around insulting other posters. You go girl/boy
Post a Comment(Requires free registration)
- Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
- Respect others.
- Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
- See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Advertisement