A Resistance To Reflexively Go Along Part II: The River
There are few things I love about Richmond more than the river.
There are few things I care less for than raising the white flag on the last bit of land we could have as a centerpiece park and instead favor of a condo tower with limited access for the rest of us.
The Downtown Master Plan suggests green space along the river between Great Shiplock Park and the Rockett's site (view map here) and the Planning Commission meeting yesterday should serve as a warning that idea is in grave danger.
One place visitors always love to visit and marvel at when here is Belle Isle. They love that there is a park so unspoiled in the middle of the river. We have the opportunity to compliment that with an equally memorable urban park on the city's eastern edge.
If you ever go to DC, West Potomac Park is the home of the Cherry Blossom Festival and surrounded by the Tidal Basin, Jefferson Memorial, FDR Memorial, and Lincoln Memorial. It is a sea of tranquility in a city bereft of hardly any redeeming qualities. It is memorable to visit even if you do so every year. We need something like that and this is our last chance to get it done (FYI, there are no condos in West Potomac Park).
Ms. Lacy said in the Planning Commission (PC) meeting that this was our last chance to do the river right. If it is not a public park area with direct access to the flat water, it could be Echo Harbor condos.
From what I understand, Echo Harbor, if approved, has promised to grant passageway between its' footprint and the river, but that could be a narrow cow path or trail and they will not put in writing that it will be anything more than that.
PC Chairman Mr. Mills then said that development along the river was a foregone conclusion and it could be controlled in scale, mass and height, and that the document should reflect that and suggested mixed use as the best use of the land. He also said that private development of any green space would be better maintained because the city does not maintain the parks it currently has. Which sounds to me that a private company would own the land but grant "passage" to the public. That is inspiring.
Get your white flags ready, Richmond! We will surrender the last piece of direct riverfront to 170 condo owners to enjoy! To hell with the thousands of runners, canoeists, kayakers, fisherman, cyclers, and walkers that enjoy and are good stewards of the river.
The Dover Kohl (DK) consultants said that the map is not a definitive statement but ideas to aspire to and a guide; mixed use development is certainly possible, as well. But the word "aspire" is his point, which I think so many of us keep missing because it is not part of this city's vocabulary. It needs to be.
River access on this last plot of land is possible and aspirational now and for the city's future. If we stick a huge building up on it it is gone forever. The Flood Wall is a behemoth example of that.
Look at Portland's Waterfront Park and see what a park can be if we let it serve the general public.
This park includes a boat dock, disabled access restroom, fountain, historical site, paved paths, a statue, public art, trails for biking and visitor attraction, and WiFi. I don't see any condos.
Look how inviting and cool and hip that is and convince me a condo tower is a better use of our riverfront land (if your answer is we have Brown's Island, that is privately owned).
It is a shame some just think it's Sayonara, Lady James.
If we keep saying we want to be as cool as other cities, then when will we start acting like them rather than convincing ourselves that we know best because we are afraid to reveal we don't know nearly as much as we thought we did?
Sigh...............exhale.
Before I write us completely off, however, one of the better things I heard was that the PC members noted that many of the people that showed up at the 2nd public hearing had read the plan and their comments were evidence of that.
That is important because we need more knowledgeable residents aware of what is going on. John Sarvay 's coverage of this has been hands down the best of any publication in town and more public input is going to be important on this.
Sarvay summed it up best with a quote from the Crupi Report:
The area’s leaders ability to understand the problems that face the area is only surpassed by their inability to work together to solve the area’s problems and take advantage of its opportunities. As was true 15 years ago, the default position among area leaders is to make individual, tactical, project oriented decisions without the framework and benefit of an overarching strategic vision and plan. There is no compelling picture of the future that gets people excited.
It has people who are strong on execution but weak on seeing how all the pieces should fit together. They are weak on vision. They are like managers of a department that fails to recognize the impact their decisions have on the rest of the organization. There is either little “political” nerve and statesmanship or, the lack of clarity about the future prevents daring initiatives.
Hammer. Nail. Strike!
Which is why it is important residents not only inform themselves of these issues but become active and engaged in the process. It is important to let the Planning Commission know, the Dept. of Community Development, the Council, the Mayor, everyone.
It is bad enough that only a few of our leaders at any particular level or body seem to be daring and courageous enough to articulate a vision, think differently, call for bold action, and take a stand and make some hard calls that may ruffle feathers in the process.
Kohl's point on our all too ready willingness to go along with the consensus for stabilty's and cordiality's sake should hit home. For 60 years in planning in Richmond we have shown no resistance to ideas if we are told they will work (with or without proof). Nor do we stand to make bold or daring or out of the box thinking.
He is right in that we have always reflexively gone along with what we are told will lead us to the promised land. If at some point we don't show some resistance and fresh thinking, then the destructive pattern will continue until we have an entirely stale city and it is too late and we look back and say "damn why didn't we do something about that?"
Such stale thinking and constant acquiescence to the powers that be will never lead this city to aspire or inspire any type of vibrant future. Such a future is built on daring action (which is not the same as reckless), the ability to cordially disagree, putting aside narrow interests for the larger picture, and bold action that does not wait an eternity for consensus.
This riverfront park is such an example.
Until we figure that out, we will always be behind, struggling for air, choked by our own hand.
Aspiration and Inspiration are not four letter words, nor should they remain undefined within the city limits.
~
Tomorrow come back for Part III when the discussion turned to VCU. It's a do not miss.
A Resistance To Reflexively Go Along Part I
~~
There are few things I care less for than raising the white flag on the last bit of land we could have as a centerpiece park and instead favor of a condo tower with limited access for the rest of us.
The Downtown Master Plan suggests green space along the river between Great Shiplock Park and the Rockett's site (view map here) and the Planning Commission meeting yesterday should serve as a warning that idea is in grave danger.
One place visitors always love to visit and marvel at when here is Belle Isle. They love that there is a park so unspoiled in the middle of the river. We have the opportunity to compliment that with an equally memorable urban park on the city's eastern edge.
If you ever go to DC, West Potomac Park is the home of the Cherry Blossom Festival and surrounded by the Tidal Basin, Jefferson Memorial, FDR Memorial, and Lincoln Memorial. It is a sea of tranquility in a city bereft of hardly any redeeming qualities. It is memorable to visit even if you do so every year. We need something like that and this is our last chance to get it done (FYI, there are no condos in West Potomac Park).
Ms. Lacy said in the Planning Commission (PC) meeting that this was our last chance to do the river right. If it is not a public park area with direct access to the flat water, it could be Echo Harbor condos.
From what I understand, Echo Harbor, if approved, has promised to grant passageway between its' footprint and the river, but that could be a narrow cow path or trail and they will not put in writing that it will be anything more than that.
PC Chairman Mr. Mills then said that development along the river was a foregone conclusion and it could be controlled in scale, mass and height, and that the document should reflect that and suggested mixed use as the best use of the land. He also said that private development of any green space would be better maintained because the city does not maintain the parks it currently has. Which sounds to me that a private company would own the land but grant "passage" to the public. That is inspiring.
Get your white flags ready, Richmond! We will surrender the last piece of direct riverfront to 170 condo owners to enjoy! To hell with the thousands of runners, canoeists, kayakers, fisherman, cyclers, and walkers that enjoy and are good stewards of the river.
The Dover Kohl (DK) consultants said that the map is not a definitive statement but ideas to aspire to and a guide; mixed use development is certainly possible, as well. But the word "aspire" is his point, which I think so many of us keep missing because it is not part of this city's vocabulary. It needs to be.
River access on this last plot of land is possible and aspirational now and for the city's future. If we stick a huge building up on it it is gone forever. The Flood Wall is a behemoth example of that.
Look at Portland's Waterfront Park and see what a park can be if we let it serve the general public.
This park includes a boat dock, disabled access restroom, fountain, historical site, paved paths, a statue, public art, trails for biking and visitor attraction, and WiFi. I don't see any condos.Look how inviting and cool and hip that is and convince me a condo tower is a better use of our riverfront land (if your answer is we have Brown's Island, that is privately owned).
It is a shame some just think it's Sayonara, Lady James.
If we keep saying we want to be as cool as other cities, then when will we start acting like them rather than convincing ourselves that we know best because we are afraid to reveal we don't know nearly as much as we thought we did?
Sigh...............exhale.
Before I write us completely off, however, one of the better things I heard was that the PC members noted that many of the people that showed up at the 2nd public hearing had read the plan and their comments were evidence of that.
That is important because we need more knowledgeable residents aware of what is going on. John Sarvay 's coverage of this has been hands down the best of any publication in town and more public input is going to be important on this.
Sarvay summed it up best with a quote from the Crupi Report:
The area’s leaders ability to understand the problems that face the area is only surpassed by their inability to work together to solve the area’s problems and take advantage of its opportunities. As was true 15 years ago, the default position among area leaders is to make individual, tactical, project oriented decisions without the framework and benefit of an overarching strategic vision and plan. There is no compelling picture of the future that gets people excited.
It has people who are strong on execution but weak on seeing how all the pieces should fit together. They are weak on vision. They are like managers of a department that fails to recognize the impact their decisions have on the rest of the organization. There is either little “political” nerve and statesmanship or, the lack of clarity about the future prevents daring initiatives.
Hammer. Nail. Strike!
Which is why it is important residents not only inform themselves of these issues but become active and engaged in the process. It is important to let the Planning Commission know, the Dept. of Community Development, the Council, the Mayor, everyone.
It is bad enough that only a few of our leaders at any particular level or body seem to be daring and courageous enough to articulate a vision, think differently, call for bold action, and take a stand and make some hard calls that may ruffle feathers in the process.
Kohl's point on our all too ready willingness to go along with the consensus for stabilty's and cordiality's sake should hit home. For 60 years in planning in Richmond we have shown no resistance to ideas if we are told they will work (with or without proof). Nor do we stand to make bold or daring or out of the box thinking.
He is right in that we have always reflexively gone along with what we are told will lead us to the promised land. If at some point we don't show some resistance and fresh thinking, then the destructive pattern will continue until we have an entirely stale city and it is too late and we look back and say "damn why didn't we do something about that?"
Such stale thinking and constant acquiescence to the powers that be will never lead this city to aspire or inspire any type of vibrant future. Such a future is built on daring action (which is not the same as reckless), the ability to cordially disagree, putting aside narrow interests for the larger picture, and bold action that does not wait an eternity for consensus.
This riverfront park is such an example.
Until we figure that out, we will always be behind, struggling for air, choked by our own hand.
Aspiration and Inspiration are not four letter words, nor should they remain undefined within the city limits.
~
Tomorrow come back for Part III when the discussion turned to VCU. It's a do not miss.
A Resistance To Reflexively Go Along Part I
~~
Labels: development, downtown, river
posted by Jon Baliles | 8:25 AM
<< Home