Plans call for:

* 200,000 s/f of Class A corporate headquarters-caliber office space
* 80,000 s/f of entertainment-oriented retail and restaurants
* 250 apartments (some overlooking ballpark)
* 300 hotel rooms (two hotels, one overlooking ballpark)
* 60 condominiums (some may overlook ballpark)
* 2 parking decks, plus surface parking, and
* Slave Trail and Heritage Center
* 1 ballpark; 8,500-capacity

The Ballpark:

* 6,500 traditional seats; 1,500 to 2,000 additional guests in restaurant/club, terraces, family zone, enclosed suites and picnic areas.
* Unique ballpark woven into the streetscapes of Shockoe Bottom.
* Adjoining historic buildings retained, restored and incorporated with rooftop “party decks” for groups.
* Extension of 17th Street Farmers’ Market as main promenade into ballpark including open air pavilion, Shockoe Square entertainment area, and an “entertainment alley” between the ballpark and existing nearby businesses.
* Designed for expansion to 8,500 seats

The Master Developer:

Highwoods Properties (NYSE: HIW) is a real estate investment trust that provides leasing, management, development and construction services. On September 30, 2008 the company owned or had an investment in 383 in-service office, industrial and retail properties encompassing approximately 35 million square feet and owned 619 acres of development land. Since January 2005, the company has delivered $505 million of new development.

Highwoods is the largest suburban office developer in the southeast, and the largest in the Richmond area. The Company has developed 29 buildings in the western Henrico/Innsbrook area and five in the Stony Point area. Highwoods also developed One Shockoe Plaza (headquarters for The Martin Agency) in the Shockoe Slip historic area.

The Team:

The development team includes Highwoods Properties; CMSS Architects; Timmons Group; SMBW Architects; Hirschler Fleischer; LeClair Ryan; Williams Mullen; Boisseau Partners; Richmond Baseball Club, LC; HKS; Morgan Keegan; and Historic Housing, LLC.
“

Do you see any benefit of redeveloping Shockoe Bottom?

The city is in need of development that will bring it back to life. Stuff like this is easy compared to changing minds of those who don’t care about education. We do have an image to patch and you know, we can fix both aesthetics and education at the same time, it’s just one will take a lot longer and probably more than a lifetime to accomplish.

I’m going to mention something relating to my previous post. Not that flood waters going down Ambler and 18th is a good thing. Perhaps the field can act as a retention pond sparing other businesses the same kind of damage seen in 2004.

I also was in MLK this past week, picking up an application for Appomattox. It was during classes. The school was clean, and the students and staff were totally hospitable toward me. The vibe was really nice – I have nothing negative to say about the people.

But I did notice a display case outside the cafeteria, with about 45 or 50 slots for honoring students with artwork or trophies. There were three or four lonely sculptures of animals on the shelves. They were totally cute (!) but it did not look like a vibrant use of the space, to me. Prime real estate to be showing off the great health of the community there.

Let me qualify to say that the school may very well have been in the middle of changing the display – I’m not sure. But if anything was missing overall, (to me,) it was the schwag that you see at Fox, Hill, Munford – the artistic attitude that can go far in showing the pride of a school – an environment that has a healthy love for itself. Personalization.

This is not meant as a negative statement. It’s just one person’s neutral observation. The décor was not lively, or aesthetically appealing the way that you tend to see in communities that are perceived as more thriving.

Bringing in more art programs, funding the schools so that teachers don’t have to come up off their own meager income to supply their students, and basically bringing our schools to a level that competes with other areas in our city, would go far for this area.

But as my dad used to say, you can’t worry about your head when you’re ass is on fire. Constantly dealing with emergencies, like we understand to be the case at Armstrong, for example, is not conducive to vibrancy. If we are offering our kids an education that will qualify them to be thieves for a living, (and assuming we are fine with that,) we are not developing a generation of season-ticket holders. In which case, the demographic for this Stadium depends on folks willing to travel.

I’m not saying that they are not there; I’d just like to see someone show us, from a qualification standpoint, that they are. Until some kind of evidence can show us the viability of this, I’d prefer to see the stadium idea put on the back burner, and this community backing investment in their own peeps.

I was at White Oak this morning, and it actually looks pretty nice. I’m not against development and improvement, by any stretch. But let’s take it easy with the Stadium. Hold off and see how the rest of it goes. What’s the rush, anyway? This should not be an impulse buy.

Gaston’s flooding was for us a once-in-a-lifetime event. We’ve had many tropical systems that did not do that type of damage before and since. The minor drainage issues that caused backups during normal storms have been fixed. Besides, if the valley floods from upstream again, this proposed super block may help channel the water along Ambler or down 18th. The rest of the water would under the old rairoad bridge under Broad. People have been for the Slavery Museum near 15th and Franklin but that also flooded in Gaston. So I guess it’s safe to do nothing.

From what I gather from the general attitude of the replies is that Richmond is better off doing nothing. We’re famous for doing nothing. Why stop doing nothing? Even if we built all new schools with all new technologies and everything surpassing the suburbs, the suburbanites still won’t flock to the city to live. They can demolish and rebuild JFK/Armstrong and place the same staff and students there and all you’ll get is the same old problems in a shiney, new place. Nothing there will change until the parents are forced to care and we find the best teachers. It also wouldn’t hurt to disperse the poverty and get the counties to share in the responsibility. So scream better schools all you want, you can get better school buildings, but throwing money at our schools won’t solve the problems students and parents themselves cause.

I agree we should bring the National Slave Museum here since they’re way behind in Fredericksburg. I’d rather have that built on Echo Harbour’s site though. I am all for brining more people into the city and luring the suburbanites to leave their stale sections of the county to spend some time and money in this living city. God knows people in the city are basically forced to go to their areas for lack of everything. Let us build and bring better businesses back into the city. The suburbs have robbed from us because of our do-nothing attitudes long enough. Let’s show them we can play as well.

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.

And not to get into a contest, but the actual money for every 203k that I have seen, and there have been a few, comes from banks – loans BACKED by HUD, but not directly from HUD. So you are correct in a sense. But not completely, because it is not HUD money, so much as HUD guarantee.

HUD was acting as a check and balance with the banks, saying, “if we are going to underwrite these loans, you are going to have to make people justify their worthiness several times over the course of disbursement – disbursement which, for reasons of fiscal conservatism, will be incremental.” HUD was there to check the banks and make sure the banks check the borrower. My question was related to where the checks and balances fall in this particular situation. From what I can see, the very fact that the investors refuse to be examined makes them totally unqualified to receive one red cent.

What do you think a bank would say if you were like, “Hey – gimme some money, okay?” And they were like, “Okay cool. Show me that you are worthy of the investment – send me your tax statements, let me look at your credit score and history, etc.” And you were like, “Nah. You don’t need to know that. Just do what I say, okay? I’m nice! And I am going to use the cash for something real pretty! I’ll even let you come over and play with it sometimes!”

They’d laugh their heads off (as they should!) thinking that it must be some kind of joke. And they’d laugh even harder if they saw the same face, coming back to try again in a couple-few years, same dialogue, no change in the approach or willingness for examination. It’s kinda hilarious, actually, if it weren’t so serious in this case.

As much as one might try to rationalize reasons that would justify investors refusing to participate in a viability study, whatever that entails, this means that they want more than they are willing to give right off the bat. Red flag.

So if HUD checked the banks in the measly 203k loans, who is checking the city if they are acting as the bank AND HUD, so to speak – giving cash (and/or services – including tax incentives) and underwriting, as well, on a massive scale. Who is going to make sure that everyone’s not, metaphorically, sleeping with each other? It happens. More often than not, it happens.

Please stop thinking, people, that baseball is fun. That Church Hill is neato. That other towns have cool stuff, so why can’t we… And yeah, Omlette, I’ve been around this country a bunch, spent a fair amount of time in every state, tons of cities, seen lots of stuff. I even own more than one property outside of Virginia.

Traveling is my crack. I go without luxuries all the time to save space in my budget for experiencing other places. (Ding! Priorities!) And the fact I have witnessed that other places have the economy and the interest to support these types of venues is simply not evidence that the same exists here. In fact, if you are new here, this is a great opportunity to learn something about Richmond, instead of trying to randomly overlay “truths” simply because they may apply elsewhere.

This whole situation needs to be looked at like a business, veeerrryyyyy conservatively. Much of this plan has quick fix, cheap rush mentality, written all over it. It’s indicative of a sick attitude, and it should – at this point – be seen that way.

Attention to this city’s foundation, and currently-unmet obligations, absolutely must come first.

http://www.inrich.com/cva/ric/opinion.apx.-content-articles-RTD-2008-11-01-0019.html

- The banks, bond underwriters, city, and whomever else is involved in the transaction will all review the project for viability and be there every step of the way with inspections before construction draws, etc.

- On a sidenote: the 203k program is a gov’t program and all that paperwork is gov’t required.

- For the TIF district the areas around the district typically generate increased revenue from the additional traffic, ppl living in the area, etc. If you want to know more about the pros/cons of those there are plenty of studies out there. But in reality, you get a new project with no current money out of the city, its all project based revenue.

-Review of viability? First its the ten or eleven investors in the project. Then the consultants they hire (I’d say they refused a feasibility study because they didn’t want to pay for it when there was so much negative push against it at that point). Then the city, the city’s bankers, the appraisers, the market study guys. AND US, which is why i keep saying if we think there are elements to this project that would make it better its up to us to voice them.

That’s the 64-dollar question. The main reason the project got killed before was the developers refused to agree to a feasibility study.

And with good reason. A feasibility consultant would ask disturbing questions like who would move into the hundreds of condos and apartments the developers propose to build in an already saturated area. And why would businesses come to Shockoe Bottom when they won’t go to the financial district downtown. Also, why would Richmonders support a minor league baseball team in the Bottom when they never did on the Boulevard?

In short, a feasibility study might kill the project. That’s why they refused to do one before. And that’s why they never will do one.

Reapportion, and the money could be spent anywhere it was found to be most needed. Where is that infrastructure money being spent now? Is there a big glut or something? Also, ever seen a bunch of sewers dug and roads laid? I have. Omigosh it is not cheap.

“The only money out of pocket for the city would be if the development could not make the payments.”

Does the city back me if I can’t make my mortgage payments? On the contrary. They get in line to get their share – in fact are first in line in a foreclosure situation, ahead of any other noteholders. The city is going to get theirs from the little guy, but, in effect, insure/underwrite this venture?

If so, then whose job is it at the city to review this company’s business plan for viability? (That’s a real question, because I don’t know.) Whoever it is, is it a person who has run successful businesses, and are they able to recognize, and call the developers on, any shortcomings? What is the reviewers’ authority to amend the plan for increased viability, if needed – or pull backing?

Also, I hope it is understood that reps from the city, paid by us, are going to need to stay heavily involved to audit the progress of the construction – for however long that takes. Or at least I would hope so, if the city is insuring the endeavor. (When 203K residential construction loans were still widely available, banks would be extremely present in the home renovation, requiring reams of paperwork constantly, and certain steps to be done their way.)

Someone(s) from the city are going to need to stay around and handy to enforce timelines, which are often missed completely in consruction – drawing projects out endlessly, everyone shrugging their shoulders. From an underwriting standpoint, I would like to see examination of the investors’ experience with grand-scale construction, as well. Do they even know what they are doing? Have they done it before, and if so, was the result good?

Again – this is a big risk for the city (US), and more investment than it may initially appear to be. How many books could one extra salary be for a position of overseer or liason buy?

I’d also still like to know more about this team is that is already coming here.

Lastly, how is it helping our area if any additional tax funds gleaned from the operation of this are given back to the private investors for 10 or 15 years to pay their bills? Wait a sec! I thought that one of the great things about this was the amount of extra cash this would bring through taxes – you know, to be invested in this community… If I am understanding correctly, any profit from this project is not given to the community, (major pep-rally type motivator,) but given back to the high rollers taking on this project.

So the trickle-down revenue argument for taking these risks isn’t even there anymore. At least not for this generation.

I like Resident’s analogy. It totally IS like putting a pool in behind a house that has problems with the roof. And saying that the revenue from the pool will pay for a new roof sometime, a decade or two down the road. What shape will the rest of the house be in by that time?

1) Money for infrastructure (that would be sewer, roads, etc.)…This money would likely come out of a pot of money designated for…. infrastructure, thus couldn’t be spent in the schools.

2) The financial backing of the city some post-ers are refering to is the ability to issue tax exempt bonds to finance (a portion of) the project. By the bonds being backed by the city it would allow a lower interest rate. The only money out of pocket for the city would be if the development could not make the payments. Each state is issued a certain amount of bond capacity they can use each year and the state then says we will use X% on housing, Y% on schools, Z% on economic development. This project would come from the economic/industrial development pot ..no money out of the schools’ pockets.

Two other items mentioned in the posts/powerpoint/news articles around money. 1) They are asking GRTC/VDOT/Federal Govt for money to upgrade the Main Street station. This money would come from funds designated for transportation. 2) Some type of TIF district. A TIF (tax increment finance) district is, basically, when the city takes an area, designates it as a TIF district and makes a note of the taxes generated in that area. The city then commits to use any tax revenue generated in excess of that level for loan payments on the project for a certain amount of years, usually 10 or 15. The idea is for the area to become an economic engine, which creates more tax revenue, that revenue finances the project, and at the end of the 10 or 15 years the city receives a boost in funding (and a nice project).

And,I am not even a sports fan. But, like I said, it was really fun. And, many local business bought boxes for the season (I know my employer did) and many people had season tickets. Who the heck buys season tickets for a museum? Or buys a box for a whole summer’s worth of employee appreciation days.

The Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control is a Commonwealth entity. It is the same in Charlottesville as it is here. It just so happens that the Richmond chapter has always been on some crazy power trip, and gone to great lengths to show its muscle.

I was actually working at the Moondance when we were smacked for an absolutely ridiculous violation – displaying a sign to promote an awesome band called the Ex-Husbands, that said “We serve beer colder than your ex-wife’s heart.” It was a great joke – and it was taken straight from the jacket of the CD. But you are not allowed to say beer. For real. So metropolitan, aren’t we?

Our local ABC should be forced to listen to the people, just like they have in CVille. They work for us, we don’t work for them. Citizens of CVille have no illusions about that relationship, and they behave like the bosses that they should. They don’t allow for the bullying and distracting that we pretend to have to contend with here.

If we really wanted change in that regard, affecting the flavor of our Downtown, we could force it like they did for the Mall. We just have do what it takes to say what we want, in no uncertain terms, and start behaving more like we are in charge. We are supposed to be in charge.

Charlottesville is a great town, and it’s a town has a sense of hope that matters. They know that they have rights and responsibilities to be directly involved in any decision-making process that affects them, on their dime. For them it is a matter of course.

A quick analogy…
You are a homeowner with a certain net annual income. You would like to make improvements to your home, but hey, it’s difficult in tight economic times. The roof is leaking, a window has a severe crack, and the hot water heater produces luke warm water at best. Do you repair the roof, window, or the hot water heater first? Or just install an in-ground pool in the back yard because it will enhance the property eventually? It’s called priorities.

If the Shockoe Bottom and Boulevard developments are 100% privately financed, well then, full speed ahead. Let private investors reap the benefits or suffer the losses of these developments. Do not gamble with taxpayer money when there are city services to be maintained and improved.

As for those who think big money will run the show, look, if I was a small business owner, I’d sure as hell rather move into a nice new restaurant space than spend a fortune renovating one of the abandoned buildings in Shockoe in order to get it up to code. You can only do something of this magnitude with city assistance, but it clearly doesn’t hurt the little guys.

Lower downtown in Denver is basically a 30-block version of what Shockoe could be under this plan. A few chains mixed in with nice local bars and a public tram that goes right to the Rockies stadium. It’s great.

Haven’t you guys been to other cities? Surely you know you’ve seen what works and what doesn’t.

From all the alternative ideas I’ve seen put forth in this thread, it sounds like the opponents would like Richmond to be some kind of pseudo-European Detroit, with outdoor dining and fountains scattered amongst the vagrants and smell of Shockoe.

The entire Shockoe proposal depends on the city’s financial backing. The taxpayers must promise to bail out the developers. This is corporate welfare.

But how can such a warm fuzzy project possibly fail?

The residential part may fail because the neighborhood already has so many condos and apartments. And new ones are coming online every day. Not to mention the number of existing units that are standing vacant. And don’t forget we’re in a recession.

The office park is risky, too. Look at the commercial vacancies downtown. Businesses won’t come to the financial district, yet we are supposed to believe they will come to Shockoe Bottom?

Finally, Richmond is not a baseball town. People never really supported the Braves. Except on fireworks night and when the final game was played. Even when the team made the playoffs very few people showed up. Baseball stadiums almost never produce a return on investment anyway – except to the team owners.

If the Shockoe stadium idea is so great why don’t they finance it with private funding? And if private money won’t go near it, why should the taxpayers?

I’d be interested to know what, in numbers, a small investment from the city would mean. Is that small investment more or less than the pricetag of books and salaries for more great teachers?

Someone said earlier in this thread that small business do not generally receive a great deal of financial support from the government for start-up. True. We have deductions, but the government is not giving me a gas card, on their dime, to make sure I can get where I need to be to do my job. If there are investors, why do they need the city? I have to do what it takes to maintain, or go out of business. Can’t the developers for this Stadium sink or swim in their own right? If not, why not? Red flag.

I’d rather see that happening, frankly. Just like it does with us little guys.

There is no Constitutional commitment to large scale enterprise. The forefathers hoped folks would always rock it out, sure, but they were actually against private enterprise on the government’s dime.

I’d like to see basic needs being the focus, first. I’m all about fun, but I don’t know that the Stadium justifies itself as a neighborhood boon the way that improving education around here would surely do.

And Tiny – my house ain’t worth no 400 grand, either. Not even. And it doesn’t mean that you or I are lesser people. Didn’t mean to come off as elitest. Just a figure I pulled out from a recent experience with a couple I was working with.

However, your statement that the health and viability of a person’s financial investment is not an important factor (when they are making choices as to where to spend a bunch of money) is completely inaccurate. (you said – most people do not purchase homes based on property values…) It’s just not true. Most people purchase homes based on just that – neighborhood property values. I see it constantly.

Smart investors don’t buy stock in candy because they like the taste of the product, as a general rule. If they do, they are considered pretty eccentric. Smart investors buy based on how well the product is holding its value – and what educated trends show to be potential for increase.

Qualified homebuyers are saavy investors, making a huge commitment. Pick-up games and coolness are great and all, but they simply do not sell houses. As much as we might like to think that coolness factor holds that kind of power, it doesn’t.

The question is, what is this community doing to make Church Hill a viable option all around, and remove the stigma that “it’s a nice place to visit, but I wouldn’t want to live there.”? And how are we insisting that the city support that, foundationally?

This is why budgetary apportionment is a huge issue for homeowners in Church Hill.

I love Elaine’s idea of starting with aesthetics, smaller investments that can increase appeal – saving more money in the limited budget to get the kids’ educational level up to a higher standard – at least perception-wise.
Not to mention that waiting 5-10 years for the benefits of a grand investment to trickle down is pretty harsh for the kids that are there, in our classrooms, right now.

I live in Church Hill because I have an excellent quality of life, not because the property values. While that may be one way of determining whether or not someplace is a good place to live, it is neither the only factor nor even the most important factor for most people.

What do I love about Church Hill? I love the kids on their bikes, the pick-up games at the courts, the Irish Festival, the Sunday Redskin parties, walking to school and church, my neighbors, the Clean Alley Rally, United House of Prayer, the Church Hill Ball, Patrick Henry Inn, Hill Café, Captain Buzzy’s, Que Pasa, Poe’s Pub (my apologies to all the other establishments – I love them, all though), sitting on my porch chatting with passing neighbors, youth league football, the Eric Schindler gallery, “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death!” and . .

Oh, I could go on and on. There are million reasons to love our area and enrollment in our local elementary schools increases every year. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t have problems, or that improvements aren’t needed. But, our community does not solely exist of middle-income home buyers or young families. There are many renters and neighbors of all ages and backgrounds that decide to call Church Hill home each year. What I have always loved about this area in comparison to the Fan is that once people move here, they tend to stay and the Fan has a more transient student population.

Now, back to topic. I believe a stadium would be a cool destination for the city (and the counties) and would benefit our community. I would rather baseball be our centerpiece attraction and NOT a Target.

However, this has already been covered in a similar thread.

http://riverdistrictnews.com/2008/06/14/why-does-the-farmers-market-suck/

Richmond in particular is incredibly committed to the Draconian ABC laws that inhibit this kind of growth and development. Charlottesville found a way to actually deal with the issue and got creative, which ended up benefitting everyone.
Transportation is a huge stumbling block in Richmond as well–for instance, Charlottesville has the free trolley that just makes a big loop and allows people to travel without having to park or to drink and drive.

In addition to that, the summertime stench of the bottom would be enough to spoil anyones appetite, and when the clubs start bumpin downtown no one wants to be out sitting in the middle of that, I can assure you.

Again, why are we still discussing schools?! They are seperate monies.

The most popular drag in Charleston, SC (which we keep comparing Richmond’s potential too) is chock full of chain stores in historic buildings and it looks great.

Franchise owners are locals in many cases.

If we want to see more small businesses in the project or in Shockoe in general, why don’t we request that as part of this project the city’s economic development dept. set aside funding to assist small/micro-businesses looking to open.

For me the topic is not the Stadium. It’s budget apportionment.

I offer them websites to get the facts. I invite them to speak with their peers and get information that way, too. I am not the source for anything but my own honest experience. I try to leave any opinions out of it.

It is not a direct comment against or for the schools when I am saying that it’s definitely a topic that comes up when I am talking Church Hill with younger families. It’s the, “yeah, but what are we going to do about the schools?” conversation. This is when I pass along some places where they can get info.

Attracting families with young children, or plans of having them, is a great way to improve the schools, too. However, it has been mentioned in other threads all over this site that lack of parental involvement is one of the challenges that this area faces. My experience is that most parents don’t have the interest or fortitude to trailblaze when it comes to their children. The city has to step in and show extra support in this case in order to ensure an educational experience that is as positive as possible. Not asking too much, really. That’s your real, “If we build it, they will come.”

With all due respect, Bill, I must say that your demographic of those moving to the city is not reflective of my personal experience. I work with lots of folks who want to live a young, hip, urban young parent’s life. In the city.

Plus, by the time folks are empty nesters, I honestly figure they can pay for their own entertainment. At least until all the kids areound here have the books they need, (really not too much to ask – again.) Especially if these empty nesters have a couple bucks in their pockets – bucks that a good education probably helped them earn.

Bottom line is that, in some cases that I have seen, clients make the decision to take their 400 grand and buy in Bon Air, deciding to take the more rural route, so to speak. While the price of the house down the street keeps dropping because of days on the market. That family might have even bought that house, too. They would have loved to, but… The health/perception of the health, of the schools just directly affected every neighborhood homeowner’s investment.

Honestly, it’s happened several times with clients of mine. Eventually, after looking at several in Church Hill that they absolutely adored, they ended up taking their money somewhere else.