21 Responses to “baseball in the Bottom?”

1. posted by john m at October 24, 2008 9:25 pm :
   

   Style has a good piece on this.

2. posted by Concerned reader at October 24, 2008 9:50 pm :
   

   Ouch! You have to hit a baseball pretty hard to get it up there…

3. posted by Scott Burger at October 25, 2008 9:20 am :
   

   Schools Before Stadiums!

   This is just another distraction from the schools. Richmond’s school buildings are the oldest in the state. Many of them are illegal, in violation of federal ADA law.

4. posted by hillkid at October 25, 2008 11:56 am :
   

   There are many studies out there showing that the building of baseball stadium in order to energize of city does not work. They tend to be an economic black hole.

   Same goes for over-sized convention centers…

   The powers that be seem hell bent on having this stadium downtown. Despite the ruckus made by the locals, it’s probably going to happen.

   I agree with #3. I don’t understand why officials get this wrong all the time. If you want to revitalize an area and stimulate the local economy, you have to fix the basic infrastructure first. That means fix schools, clean-up neighborhoods, fix roads and support small businesses, just to name a few. That’s what brings the people back to the city. Once you have that done, THEN work on the stadium, arts center, convention center…

5. posted by Mary Kroll at October 25, 2008 12:08 pm :
   

   The roads north of the farmers market are in a shite state and there’s no parking now as it is. These things would have to be improved dramatically *before* building a stadium and I just don’t see that happening.

   And what will happen to the farmers market during the months (possibly years) that the construction is going on only a few yards away? There are people trying to earn a living there.

   Not only should schools come before stadiums, but building a stadium before you’ve secured a team is just plain backwards.

6. posted by tiny at October 25, 2008 2:07 pm :
   

   I don’t know. There are many positives, but plenty of negatives as well. But, to wait until the schools are fixed – I just don’t know how long that would be.

   Mainly, we need to solve the drainage problem before moving forward. But all in all, I not against the idea.

7. posted by gray at October 25, 2008 7:53 pm :
   

   We should have a black history museum, a museum of slavery, and a memorial to all the slaves buried in the bottom. Imagine the tours. Some minor league baseball team barely brings in the locals. If you want international attention and tourism, give a true picture of your history.

   Digging a hole for a stadium in a flood zone is just plain stupid.

8. posted by Omelette at October 26, 2008 1:28 pm :
   

   I agree. We should preserve the condemned train station terminal and the gorgeous vacant lots that surround it for generations. Nothing should be touched in the pristine landscape that is Shockoe Bottom. No improvements needed! Change nothing!

9. posted by Hillmedic at October 27, 2008 12:48 am :
   

   Pristine landscape in Shockoe Bottom? Am I missing something? It will be impossible to recruit a minor league team with the current stadium situation on the Blvd. Thats why we lost the Braves. A new stadium downtown will stimulate financial activity and grown in the downtown area with an overflow of improvement in the neighboring communities. The domino effect to improved infastructure and stability to the businesses downtown will have a dramatic positive effect.

   I’m game. Play Ball!

10. posted by Pete at October 27, 2008 9:19 am :
    

    Are you serious thats the worst idea i have ever heard of. didn’t we already learn from our first mistake? Like richmond needs another baseball field nobody went to see the braves play when they wrapped their last season. build a skatepark, schools, indoor aquatic center, or parks for kids
    a damn amusement park with 4 rides would make more money and would be more fun lol
    obviously the people arnt looking around richmond to see the people that are hanging out and doing and its not involved around “SPORTS” we’ve got great bands coming out of here we’ve got alot of board sport enthusiast’s around. i guess all im getting at whether its a
    skate park or a school both would be better that a BASEBALL FIELD!

11. posted by Pete at October 27, 2008 9:34 am :
    

    your tax money at work LOL

12. posted by slipper at October 27, 2008 9:48 am :
    

    Sarcasm – Fail.

13. posted by Pete at October 27, 2008 11:18 am :
    

    Nothing failing here slipper just our pockets. So as you go cast your vote for McCain next week think about your failed pocket when your reaching in it and feeling your leg because you have no money, but there is a new baseball field with nobody there. where is the money going to come from to build this? Is the Commonwealth going to come up with a stimulus package and print more money? This is like building Kings Dominion inside of Bush Gardens pointless. Even if this does go down why is a Raleigh firm going to design it why cant it be a richmond firm that does it? its like our community leaders don’t care whether we make money or not its like they are making decisions based on there own hobbies and interests and not of the local tax payers.

14. posted by Ian at October 27, 2008 11:57 am :
    

    I think the Bottom is a great place for this stadium. I live in Church Hill and whether or not there is increased traffic from it I don’t care. I can’t imagine that patrons of the games will be parking 15 or more blocks away, uphill, just to walk to the games. They definitely will not be driving around aimlessly through the neighborhoods of Church Hill.

    Everyone is raving about the Historic District… THE WHOLE CITY is one big Historic district!!!!

15. posted by Ian at October 27, 2008 11:59 am :
    

    Also how come nobody is up in arms about GRTC’s plan to take over the train station warehouse as their new bus headquarters? That’s a much worse idea than a baseball stadium. Talk about a way to preserve history, putting a bunch of homeless and drunks on that “pristine landscape”.

16. posted by Shockoe at October 27, 2008 6:49 pm :
    

    Finally someone in Churchill with some sense!

17. posted by Ry at October 28, 2008 7:39 am :
    

    I agree with the comments that we should fund schools before ballfields, but the money requested from the city for this project would likely never go towards the schools. The developers include an element for the historic aspect of the area with the inclusion of a museum.

    These arguments are why Richmond struggles against the surrounding counties. No Change seems to be the fight song of Richmond. When you chase your team out of town, you have to build a stadium to secure a team, there are plenty of teams looking to move to a new location. If they can build that center out in Short Pump why can’t we make it work in Shockoe?

18. posted by Scott Burger at October 28, 2008 3:41 pm :
    

    “the money requested from the city for this project would likely never go towards the schools.”

    And why is that? There are choices being made here. CHANGE the schools already!

19. posted by Ry at October 30, 2008 7:35 am :
    

    Because the money they are requesting is for infrastructure. The remainder is not cash out the door (hopefully) but a guarantee. Neither of those would ever go towards schools.

    If we wait for schools to be changed in this town…. well lets just say it could be awhile.

20. posted by Scott Burger at October 31, 2008 5:20 pm :
    

    Money for “infrasture” could very well be directed towards schools. Its a matter of choices and priorities. I contend its a legal and moral crisis that Richmond leadership is not doing more to address the state of school buildings.

21. posted by hillkid at November 1, 2008 1:23 pm :
    

    This is a little of subject, but relevant to the discussion. Earlier this year I went to an all day seminar on tourism. It was lead by a well known and respected tourism industry consultant.

    She did not give Richmond, or it’s cultural institutions very high marks. She noted that the over-sized convention center was putting the cart before the horse. Similar projects in other city have failed miserably.

    She stated that the surrounding area from the convention center looked like a war zone and that folks researching cities for their conventions are really turned off by this. Conventioners do not want to walk out into a scary looking area that has nothing to offer. No restaurants, no clubs, no hotels (except the Marriot) no shopping within walking distance – there is nothing in Richmond near the center. And, predictably the center is not bringing in the revenues and people that it thought it would.

    She went on the evaluate the other local attractions and cultural venues saying that most of them our very outdated in their marketing approach. Must, dusty, boring…

    She also talked about how disconnected Richmond’s attractions are from one another. It’s very difficult for a visitor to navigate the various sites and the distances between them. There is no real collaborative “plan” to attract tourism.

    It was kind of amusing to see all these curators/directors sweating in their tweeds.

    Developing a stadium village is definitely better than a stand alone stadium. Probably something that the convention center project should have done.

    One of the big things that the consultant talked about is a self-contained experience, similar to a cruise ship. Everything under one roof, so to speak. Ease of use and convenience. That’s what the modern tourist seeks these days.

Leave a Comment