Shockoe Center planners lack deal for parking deck
The backers of a proposed ballpark in Richmond's Shockoe Bottom have not locked up access to a state parking deck on game days, despite a public claim that an agreement is in place.
Bryan Bostic, who is working to buy a minor-league baseball team to relocate to Richmond, was asked during a debate last week about the proposed Shockoe Center development whether his group had secured use of the state's parking deck at 14th and East Main streets.
"Yes, ma'am. Would you like to see it?" Bostic told debate opponent Jean Wight at the Public Square, hosted May 12 by the Richmond Times-Dispatch.
Wight, a Church Hill resident, responded that she simply was asking a question and wasn't requiring proof. But a day later, she contacted state officials and learned there's no such agreement, only discussions.
Pete Boisseau, a spokesman for Shockoe Center, said the developers have an "agreement in principle" for use of the state's 1,500-space parking deck. The agreement would be formalized as the Shockoe Center project progresses, Boisseau said.
He released an April 2 e-mail exchange between a representative of Bostic's group, Richmond Baseball Club, and Richard Sliwoski, director of the Virginia Department of General Services.
In his e-mail, Stan Joynes, an attorney with RBC, advised that Sliwoski likely would be contacted about after-hours use of the deck for Shockoe Center. Joynes added that it was his understanding that "parking would be made available consistent with the commonwealth's bond counsel's advice." Sliwoski responded, "exactly."
Sliwoski said this week that bond advisers would need to make sure that any outside use of the deck would not jeopardize the tax-exempt status of the bonds that were used for financing. That issue won't be studied, he said, until a formal proposal is submitted.
Wight said Bostic's statement was particularly disturbing because it came during a debate attended by Mayor Dwight C. Jones and City Council members.
Now, "I question their integrity on every other matter," she said of Shockoe Center's backers.
The ballpark is expected to attract, at most, 2,000 vehicles per game, according to the developers of Shockoe Center, which would include residences, hotels, restaurants and other uses.
Officials say the demand would be met by 4,100 existing spaces in decks and surface lots within a few blocks of the ballpark, as well as 820 new spaces that are part of the development's first phase.
In last week's debate, Bostic brought up the area's existing parking spaces in response to a comment from an audience member. Bostic's point was that many of the spaces are publicly owned and unused at night, when most games would be played.
"Let's leverage those investments" by making the deck available to baseball patrons, he said.
In 2000, when the city bought Main Street Station from the state, the city also agreed to a 30-year lease of 350 spaces in the deck at 14th and Main. The deal called for the city to pay $4.1 million when the deck opened in 2005, but city officials ultimately decided the spaces weren't needed, Sliwoski said.
"We mutually agreed that the state would let them out of their obligation," he said.
Contact Will Jones at (804) 649-6911 or
.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
Oneuser said “If you have to build one why not build it in the south side of Richmond? Easy access and certainly overlooked by Richmond for a long time.“
Even though this a late pipe dream, what do readers think of building a ballpark only two block easts of Legends Brewery deck? The view is stunning and the property (Reynolds Foil Plant) will be available (assessed value $12 million). What are the benefits and drawbacks?
jh28: The VCU Health System is in very close proximity (employees and students walk down that hill daily)to the Bottom so if we can dump millions down there to address the flood plain for a ball park why not health care?
As for spit shining the Diamond - it can be completely overhauled for a fraction of what these bozos want to spend in the Bottom.
The city already has a ballpark. If it did not make enough revenue why one throw good money after bad? Downtown is too congested why not leave the ballfield where it is? If you have to build one why not build it in the south side of Richmond? Easy access and certainly overlooked by Richmond for a long time.
If someone wants to build a $65 million development in a flood zone, then I say good luck. I do NOT agree, however, with city residents backing bonds with our taxes. As a city taxpayer, I could live with a portion of the sales taxes in the development area, going towards the project. I can agree with city concessions of certain right-of-way and LIMITED capital improvements to support the development. I can even swallow the lost tax revenue with any tax abatement.
I would have to kindly beg city council and the Mayor’s office, to decline any responsibility for taxpayer dollars to back these bonds. NO WAY!! This kind of backdoor, shady garbage has taken the shine off of this proposed development. I was warming up to the idea until these snake oil salesmen tried to pull the old “Hey brother, let me hold a dollar” trick. Looking at the website and the people/companies involved though, I can say that I am not too surprised. Same old tricksters playing the same old tricks.
The only interesting facet of this plan is a possibility of high speed rail. I don’t think that the city center is really the best place for that though.. I would put it in hanover or henrico.. and have a bus service that would go to downtown for the few people that might be coming IN to Richmond to work. By far the majority would be wanting to go to the DC area where there are higher paying jobs and more opportunity. But, we have to be careful about this.. do we really want to become a bedroom community for the Washington DC metro area?
It would not make any sense to sell that land to VCU. Why would VCU want land in a flood plain that is not connected to the main campus?
Secondly, if you think you can just spit shine the Diamond and bring a new team in and everything will be fine, you are very mistaken.
ramfan79: let me be clear - I did not call you a liar. I am referring to those proponents who are speaking to the public in an official capacity. I sincerely apologize it you thought I meant you - I absolutely respect differing opinions and mean no disrespect to you.
I hear the fat lady singing because the outrage over the foolhardy nature of this proposal is growing daily as more information about the true cost to taxpayers is revealed. I feel it’s only a matter of time before the proposal is tabled. I hope so anyway.
Finally - I want to see the revitalization of Richmond as much as you do. Maybe more - I was born here and intend to die here. I love Richmond and the surrounding counties. I just don’t want it on the backs of the taxpayers and at the cost of more important needs right now. Fund this thing 100% privately through 2030 and you won’t hear a peep from me. Table it until the economy is stable and we’ll resume talks. But rushing to push it through right now is wrong - and financially disasterous.
As for my ideas for attracting the masses - I don’t think we need a recreational hub to begin with. We have plenty of shopping, dining, and other entertaiment venues in and around Richmond already. With far less money spent, the Diamond will be great for baseball. So sell the land in the bottom to VCU and the VCU Health System and let them educate the next generation while saving the rest of the city - they have a proven track record on Broad, Main, and Cary Streets and enrollment they can barely accommodate now.
What say you to that?
dwntwnbooster: government is supposed to use tax money to improve the quality of life of its citizens with regards to health, safety, and security - not entertainment. Your argument that “most” of this funding is private does not hold water either because (broken record here) you are counting on revenue being generated by visitors who will never materialze. They didn’t come to the Sixth Street Marketplace; they aren’t coming to the Performing Arts Center; they aren’t coming to the Convention Centre; they aren’t coming to the Canal Walk. And asindicated by the posts andleter sto the RTD and teh speakers at the public forum, they have made it clear they do not intend to come to the Bottom. No visitors = no revenue. No revenue = money coming out of the pockets of the taxpayers, just as it is still coming out of our pockets for the aforementioned debacles.
We agree on NOTHING. I refuse to embrace yet another money pit dreamed up by greedy, dishonest developers and city leaders who ought to be using their time, energy, and resources on schools, infrastructure, and other needs that truly would improve the quality of life for all citizens -not just the minority who support this waste.
FYI: I thought I’d let the mayor pay for the lawyer - he seems pretty free with the cash. And “eating crow” is a well-known term that means having to “eat your words” because you have been proven wrong. And trust me - you’ll be plenty hungry.
Did I, as a proponent, blatantly lie about the parking deck situation, citycynic? I support the idea of bringing something exciting like this to downtown Richmond—that’s it. I still favor this coming to fruition and I can also certainly understand the stance of those that are opposed to it. It’s a matter of opinion really, and lo behold, not everyone is going to agree with you and your self-described cynical ways. Do you understand that? Or can you at least respect a different view than your own? I’m not so sure.
Meanwhile, you seem convinced that this parking deck issue is the nail in the coffin on the development. Hey, and if so, job well done, citycynic. Seems like your arm flailings and foot stompings on this forum board have done the trick. Team naysayer wins.. right? The fat lady sings because you’re convinced you’ve won the argument on a newspaper’s online message board?
Also meanwhile, I’m still waiting to hear some ideas from YOU regarding what the city can do for its downtown to enhance and create a recreational hub, something to bring people here in the evenings and weekends. If you think no such attraction is needed, then heck, just say so. You’re clearly dead set in your take on this issue and now with your aura and vision give us some alternatives in lieu of this idea. You conveniently didn’t bother to respond to this inquiry last time around, so please, Mr. cynic, give us some crackerjack ideas of what you’d like our downtown to have to attract the masses. Do you have anything to offer besides just rain clouds of doom and gloom?
I am not a lawyer. But I can tell you without hesitation that you have no case there. That’s the thing about a government, they can use tax money from the citizens who elect them to try and improve the quality of life for those citizens.
Remember though, most of this is private money, tax revenue generated by things purchased at the development.
And yes, the City would back the bonds as the fail safe if no one comes down there to spend money. But if people do go and spend money there, you won’t have to pay any extra tax to pay off the bonds.
So I guess we agree. We want people to go to baseball games in Shockoe Bottom and buy stuff so no money comes out of your pocket or mine.
Embrace this and don’t be a cynic! We all want good things for this city and region!
By the way, would you pay for the lawyer out of your own pocket and what was that crack about the crow? Beer offer stands.
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