Jones ready to play ball with new stadium study
RELATED |
Will baseball work in the Bottom?
Apparently so, according to a new study that Richmond will release portions of today.
Mayor Dwight C. Jones plans to release the executive summary of a review by Davenport & Co., which already had endorsed the concept of a minor-league baseball stadium in in Shockoe Bottom in an earlier study commissioned by then-Mayor L. Douglas Wilder.
The Jones administration is hinting that Davenport's new study reflects favorably on the $318 million Shockoe Center proposal by Highwoods Properties, which would bring baseball to the Bottom as part of a huge mixed-used development.
The city also suggests that Jones will be looking to the surrounding counties as the city works to bring minor-league baseball back to Richmond after losing the Braves this year. A city news release issued Friday said the "report cites the proposal as a potentially very attractive economic development opportunity for the city."
It goes on to say that Jones is "more confident in his knowledge of the implications of the proposed project. We now have information that we can share with stakeholders as well as our regional partners as we work to chart our course from here. All of the implications have to be considered, and I'm prepared to outline the steps necessary to move this matter toward a conclusion."
The $100,000 study was conducted by Davenport & Co. of Richmond, Economic Research Associates of Washington, and Chmura Economics & Analytics of Richmond.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
marclips: “Virginian - the people who control a toll road should be the people who have to deal with the smog and the noise every day, and the ones who paid for it, not those who merely drive it. By your logic Richmond should have a vote on the Chesapeake Expressway since Richmondites sometimes drive it on the way to OBX….“
marclips, that is absolutely NOT what I am saying. The City does NOT own the RMA roads and the City taxpayers have not and will not pay for it, just as the City does not own I-95 and Henrico doesn’t own the airport. The City does, however, control the board of the RMA. The RMA DOES own the roadways and is responsible for paying off the bonds from toll revenue.
I’m not suggesting there is anything illegal with this arrangement. What I am suggesting is that a metropolitan authority ought to be controlled by the localities that makeup the metro area. It’s not the Richmond City Tollroad Authority, it’s the Metropolitan Richmond Authority.
Virginian - the people who control a toll road should be the people who have to deal with the smog and the noise every day, and the ones who paid for it, not those who merely drive it. By your logic Richmond should have a vote on the Chesapeake Expressway since Richmondites sometimes drive it on the way to OBX.
Radicalone - if you think traffic is all that bad in Shockoe Bottom during rush hour, you really need to get out more and experience some real city traffic. Richmond is blessed to have low congestion levels for a City its size. Anyway, a baseball game doesn’t start until 7:00 weekdays, after all the businesspeople and state government workers have left.
To everyone - I think the most important question has been answered, which is that the developers did a good job crunching the numbers in the sense that they believe that this development will be a success and the independent evaluation agrees that this has a strong likelihood of success.
dogtown, thanks for acknowleging that we’re all entitled to our own opinion. In this case, however, I’m more interested in facts. There is not a single word in your post or on the RMA website that contradicts anything I have written.
The bonds were not issued by the City and neither the City nor its taxpayers are on the hook for their repayment. The city loaned money to the RMA. This money has been and shall be repayed. If the loan had come from a bank, should the bank appoint the majority of RMA board members? If the money had come from Chesterfield, should Chesterfield appoint a majority of the RMA board? This argument is a red herring.
The City wanted the toll roads because it thought they were in its best interest. If you disagree with that, you should blame your city and those who made those decisions, not county dwellers, who had no say in the development of the toll roads and who continue to have no say in their current operation.
If this “development” is financially viable in this current economy.. then the developers should have no problem building it and paying for whatever it takes to fix the traffic situation and to adapt for any higher utilities needs (water, sewer etc..). I don’t know why anyone feels the “need” to fill a void. There are a lot of shopping and entertainment options in the City.. some more patronized than others. Just because there isn’t anything there.. doesn’t mean there necessarily should be something. From the comments on the boards.. there seem to be a few folks who would like to see a bottom stadium.. a few that feel that the old one would be fine.. and a few that don’t think baseball will flourish at all. If the planners could show more about their development plans and how baseball wouldn’t be the make/break part of the plans.. then maybe folks would be more interested in hearing about it. I just don’t see baseball getting enough people in their cars.. there will have to be a lot more.. and other events the facilities could host.
BaseballMe: the Downtown Master Plan has entire chapters full of development ideas for the Bottom. It was created and approved by city residents and passed by Council, despite their resistance and continued dilution of its ideas. I’m surprised you aren’t familiar with it since you have lived here throughout the entire process.
But instead of doing what city voters and taxpayers ask for, the city leadership sells out to developers time and again. We ask for better schools, transit, and infrastructure. Instead we are compelled to buy America’s most expensive AA baseball stadium built in a flood zone.
“I’m fed up with the self-serving whining of the suburban counties who want as much as they possible can get so long as their tax money does not have to pay for it,“ said commenter Dogtown.
DITTO. Me also.
Virginian: You are entitled to your opinion - it happens in this case your are entirely wrong. Please see the following from the RMA Web site:
“Why isn’t there equal representation on the RMA board?
When the RMA was originally established, the City of Richmond lent the Authority $10 million. The money was used as the reserve fund required to issue debt to construct the expressway system (see bond questions below). The $10-million debt was repaid when the bonds were refinanced in 1992.
In addition, during the earlier years of operation of the expressway system, the City provided additional operating subsidies that have resulted in more than $47 million in subordinated debt (principal and interest) that the RMA owes the City. The other localities have not provided any financial assistance or subsidies to the expressway system.“
The next time you suburbanites who wish to have Ricmond’s taxpayers subsidize your life style, I’d suggest a little research into the facts before you assert that City’s “disproportionate financial investment” is incorrect.
Stop whining. Enjoy your suburban lifestyle in areas where you don’t have to deal with the homeless and disadvantaged that disproportionately reside in the City and for which City taxpayers- not you suburbanites - provide social services
I’m fed up with the self-serving whining of the suburban counties who want as much as they possible can get so long as their tax money does not have to pay for it.
I’ve been in RVA for 3+ years and not 1 time in these years have I heard anyone bring another idea to the table of how to use the open, run down space in the middle our downtown, not 1 idea.
What I have heard is the need for retail, shopping, restaurant, a more urban area of town. Well it seems NO one is paying any attention to the plans which also call for ALL of the above…outside of baseball there are plans for restaurants, hotel, grocery store, housing etc, exactly what everyone has been wanting for years…so what in the world is the problem?
Maybe we shouldn’t call it Baseball in Shockoe, maybe we shoulc call it Development in the Bottom and see what everyone thinks…it is the SAME thing people.
I have lived in 14 different cities in my life and I have never seen a city talk and talk and talk and talk and actually get very little done. We all want this great metropolitan city, which is user friendly and convenient but when it is offered up to us we seem to throw our hands in the air and complain. Seems there is no way to please anyone.
I’m sure of this IF there isn’t a stadium built downtown then a surrounding county will eat it up and make it great…that will leave all of us to complain how someone else lost it!
Give me Development in the Bottom!
You want a good independent resource for baseball in the bottom? Try Ballpark Digest (http://www.ballparkdigest.com/news/index.html?article_id=1470). It also highlights that the ($100k times two) study indicates the development would BARELY provide enough revenue to allow tax-increment financing for the stadium. So, if I’m hearing it will BARELY pay for this, I would say NO STADIUM IN THE BOTTOM!
wr70beh: this plan calls for city taxpayers to back $60 million in bonds for the construction of a publicly owned stadium.
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