http://fdhub.net/centerstage-needs-sunlight/#comment-151477

I do think the Boulevard site needs to be more than baseball as well. Movieland is great. Where is our Dave & Buster’s? Where is our paintball?

Will Boulevard include a VCU satellite campus?

In addition, where is the City’s emphasis on sustainability? More street trees? Where are the solar and green roofs? Green pavers for parking lots? Bike lanes? We might eventually get a Broad Street BRT or streetcar, but will it tie into a Boulevard one that goes to Byrd Park, the museum row, Movieland, the Diamond?

Just to speculate, on a scale of 1-10 (Worst-to-best-case scenario), where would you predict/peg either development at its’ completion? I don’t see either stadium plan as returning anything greater than a 4-6 in terms of satisfaction of stated goals. Baseball stadiums are limited use facilities with narrow possibilities, narrow audiences— ok. I just want a proper transportation system. If the baseball stadium fails in every regard, just let the transportation be stellar. If the city doesn’t botch that part of the equation, we’ll be in a good position to level the stadium in 25 years and build a new one somewhere else.

Movieland > Museums
I would suggest that suburbanites never venture anywhere without their car; Movieland and the Museums are really within 5 minutes of the stadium in this context.

Dwight Jones seems to get that, and is more focused on talking about how we get Shockoe humming with everything working together – GRTC hub, highspeed rail, slavery museum, ballpark and restaurants/retail. He doesn’t paint pie-in-the-sky fantasies of baseball saving everything; it’s just part of the overall plan.

That plan, of course, is pretty audacious, but I think the only way you can do something like that successfully is in one massive swoop.

So I think the future *potential* for the Shockoe site, though a gamble, holds far more promise than the best case scenario for the Diamond site.

Movieland is pretty walkable, but the Science Museum, R? Really? Richard’s strip club is closer than that. Hell, even Kitchen 64 is a hike with all the Interstate traffic.

So the Diamon site is cheaper, sure, but I just don’t see what it can become. We’d just have baseball again for the sake of having baseball.

You may be right. Perhaps the best strategy for those preferring the Boulevard would be to sell its advantages.

But for me that just wouldn’t be how I got to this point in the story. You see, mostly I am flat against the Shockoe Bottom Center concept. I believe it is the wrong way to use that land. The slavery market museum concept, the high speed rail and the GRTC plan are good ideas.

And, at this point it looks to me like the developers and Bostic have been less that forthright about what they’ve been up to.

As far as the Boulevard is concerned, mostly it isn’t Shockoe Bottom. Refurbishing or building anew there would bring regional cooperation back into the picture. A lot of supporters for the stadium in the Bottom don’t put much value in regional cooperation, but it looks to me like they just blow off anything that stands in their way.

Because Richmond is an independent city, not in a county, better regional cooperation is vital to Richmond’s future. The counties won’t get on board with a stadium in the Bottom.

Minor league baseball is not waxing in our culture. Only the best-run franchises make any money.

Counting on AA baseball to be a much bigger draw than the AAA R-Braves were is a reach. It’s surely not something that Richmonders want to take but so much of a risk on, money-wise. Especially when schools and general infrastructure needs are looming.

In my view, if it is a two-way question, Boulevard or Bottom? the Boulevard would win by at least a 2-to-1 margin.

But if a third option is added — no public funds for baseball! — well, I’m not so sure how it would turn out; a lot of people could care less that there’s no professional baseball being played in Richmond this summer.

1.) Pre-existing infrastructure. It’s already a stadium ready resource. Renewal, refurbishing, rebuilding; any plan for the Diamond will already be at least that much easier to complete. It’s location is not contested, the traffic patterns are established– simply, the land is already prepped to house a stadium. It’s the most reasonable location by default.

2.) Boulevard area attractions. Proximity to the Movieland theaters, Science Museum, and Children’s Museum make the area a logical place for family oriented developments.

Mayor Dwight left an interesting footnote to the Shockoe plan: In his comments to the latest feasibility report he mentioned the inclusion of a GRTC transfer station, but, more importantly, it’s (the development’s) compatibility with high-speed rail. I feel that if we are going to be hedged into a new stadium development, wrenching as many transportation improvements as possible out of the plan would be a tempting compromise (It seems that the only convincing argument for the Shockoe stadium is not the stadium, but what promises to built with it.).

Well, that’s just how honestly curious I am.

I’ve said it elsewhere, but Boulevard supporters would probably be better served by making a case *for* the Boulevard, instead of a case against Shockoe. Is there some hidden potential to the Diamond that I’m not seeing? Because I’m honestly curious how you guys think it would be better than it was before. What’s going to be different this time?

I’m not trying to be a troll, but I’m honestly curious, mostly because I never felt the Diamond was a very enjoyable place to watch baseball.

So what, exactly, is your best case scenario for the Boulevard?

For example: At first the city put in protections that would have halted CenterStage from coming and asking for more money from the city. This was done to mollify critics of the project. A few months later, thanks to council, those protections were taken out.

Why is that important? CenterStage’s private fundraising is now falling way short of projections. Guess who will make up the difference? The taxpayers.

I don’t have to tell you what the council is currently doing to the citizen-led Downtown Master Plan in order to kowtow to one condo developer.

This is why a referendum on the ballpark is the only way to go. You cannot trust this city council to do the right thing with the public’s money and resources — or even to take public sentiment into account. Just look at their record.

If a referendum on this happens, it should ask not just about the location, but also if we’re really comfortable buying the most outrageously expensive AA ball park in America.

(By the way, why aren’t the teabaggers protesting this thing? I can’t think of a more perfect example of bloat and wasteful government spending.)