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
Cabbage when you find an investor that wants to build on the Manchester site, they will be more then happy to talk to you I bet. Until then, with no funding for that site, it’s just a pretty picture.
At this point I’m worn out by the whole debate (maybe that was the strategy of the naysayers all along). I say just scrap all of these ideas and forget about the whole professional baseball in Richmond concept. This city doesn’t deserve it.
Let’s just admit we’re a second rate city and begin to act and plan accordingly. Let’s focus on State Fairs and parades and leave the innovative projects to the more progressive thinking cities in the state.
I say give the Diamond and the land to VCU and let them find a way to develop it. Oh, by the way, don’t think taxpayer dollars wouldn’t be involved in that project too.
Besides, VCU has figured out an effective formula to get things done in this city despite people trying to block progress by claiming an old horse shed was “historic.“ Wonder how many people have visited the alley to see the “historic” horse shed people tried to use to block progress.
While we’re at it, lets just keep the Coliseum going for another generation. Maybe in a few years the Coliseum will be so old and run down it to will become “historic” and then we’ll have to keep it for ever. Maybe we’re already there. Didn’t Elvis once play at the Coliseum? Guess we gotta keep it now. It’s “historic.“
Here comes the fanguy with his insults as his only input to the discussion. if you don’t see it his way you are wrong wrong wrong. Wondered where he has been.
Jim23832, if you really feel that way, you’ve got bigger issues than worrying about baseball. You might want to move to the hills, dig a bunker, crawl in, and turn on your short wave radio.
The ODP plan and the Boulevard site are both great. I’m really looking forward to seeing the renovation of what is now the Diamond into a nicer facility. They should have done this project 5 years ago, we might still have a team.
Personally I think the Shockoe stadium plan is a nightmare, and the talk about Manchester is a pipe dream. The ODP plan is the only realistic one of the three.
I don’t feel safe at any of the proposed city of Richmond locations. If the city takes the tax dollars and spends them on providing for safety, then the attendance dollars will pay for the upgrades and repairs. Now, I’m confident that they will never do that, so just make sure that none of my Chesterfield tax dollars ever go towards the upgrade or new location!
Thanks for the info and the links! I didn’t realize that the Manchester idea had been explored to this extent at all. There’s no flood plain to worry about, no slave jail to impinge on and no transit center to conflict with. On the negative side, a retail or apartment/hotel component might be a hard sell there, at least for awhile.
<<<The Manchester site was recommended in the 2007 Crupi Report….... We pay national planning consultants to put these reports together, our leaders should at least read it. Where are our leaders on this issue anyway?>>>
I spoke at the Ballpark Public Square about the Manchester Site; I sat down with Kathy Graziano last August and showed her a power point (it’s now over 235 slides) of what other minor league cities have done with ballparks (unique features, etc.) - she was very gracious; I spoke briefly with Ellen Robertson after the Public Square and she wanted to hear more; I’ve e-mailed Former Mayor Wilder, Mayor Jones and all of city council three times about the Manchester site. No Replys. I truly believe they think I’m nuts. They haven’t been pro-active in the this ballpark issue, they simply react to the “plan du jour”.
markiemarkwine The Giants do play in downtown San Francisco, I’ve been to AT&T Park, it’s awesome! I’ve also been to Fenway, PNC Park, Camden Yards and Wrigly. All in urban environments, all great experiences. You watch the game, have a few beers or dinner before or right after after the game, great vibe. The Verizon Center in DC is a great example, so many things going on in that area. All the old stadiums and all the new ones are build in urban setting. The 60’s/70’s/80’s era stadiums were built in the ‘burbs and they’re getting replaced one by one with urban stadiums since the since Camden Yards opened in the early 90’s.
I support the Bottom plan but would like to see the Manchester site explored s well. Honestly the Boulevard site, while close to my house, still leaves me flat. The Manchester site was recommended in the 2007 Crupi Report. See section 1:38 at http://www.grcc.com/files/Putting_The_Future_Together_FINAL.pdf There’s a nice illustration of a ballpark on the Manchester site facing the skyline. We pay national planning consultants to put these reports together, our leaders should at least read it. Where are our leaders on this issue anyway?
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