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
dogtown: your post was right on the money. ramfan79 has the audacity to mock the credibility of opponents while coveniently ignoring the fact that proponents have lost any shred of credibility they had by being caught in yet another blatent lie. He then blows the parking issue off as insignificant when in fact it has been proven that parking has been one of the main factors cited in the inability to lure people to the downtown area.
dwntwnbooster: I didn’t say the developers and mayor were giving up - I said the SHOULD give up. And since they are either too ignorant (the mayor is willing to risk bonds/credit based on a study he is “pretty pleased” with) or too greedy (developers stand to profit at the cost of the taxpayer)to stop this disaster on their own, it’s up to opponents to force them. So no thanks on that beer. You keep it - in your new stadium it’s gonna cost about $15 and you’re going to need it to wash down the crow you’ll be eating.
Opponents: does anyone out there know if there are legal grounds for stopping this project? I’m not an attorney but it seems to me there must be a way to halt the subsidizing of a private venture from being subsidized with with public funds when that very public overwhelming opposes it. Is there a lawyer out there?
citycynic- quite to the contrary. The City is looking at ways to tie in Shockoe Center with a slave memorial and a transit center for high speed rail. Does that sounds like they are giving up?
The Mayor said this has the potential to be “transformative.“ He spent $100,000 on a study and seemed pretty pleased with the results enough that the city is considering backing the bonds. Does that sound like they are giving up?
Bostic shouldn’t have been a jerk when he answered Mrs. Wight, but an issue like this certainly isn’t going to hold the project back. If they can work out the money and history then the only fat lady you’ll hear is the one singing the National Anthem on opening day 2012 in a beautiful, new downtown ballpark. If you are down there too, I’ll buy you a beer.
Ramfan79,
Uh, Bruce Springsteen? Or did he just hang around the area? Wasn’t it RPI then? Who cares?
Anybody who’s from Richmond or spent a significant amount of time in the city knows that it isn’t a big sports town, and never has been. An entire neighborhood is going to lose its character so that a few people can drink beer and eat nachos up in the stands while some overpaid athletes act like they’re playing good baseball. Frankly, I’d rather have a gladiator stadium.
Now we learn that there is no formal arrangement for parking and bond counsel will not investigate and opine until AFTER a formal agreement is reached! Enter a form agreement and only then determine whether the contract will stand scrutiny by bond counsel???? That’s absurd and very imprudent to say the least!
The degree to which pertinent information about this project has been withheld, misrepresented, or found not to exist is mind boggling. How anyone can have confidence in the likelihood of success of this proposal defies the imagination. The lack of complete, truthful disclosure and the paucity of pertinent information cries out loudly “LIKELY FAILURE RESULTING IN TAXPAYER BAILOUT”
First we learned 11% of the City’s credit capacity will be required, then that the disclosure of the projected numbers of fans in attendance and the average dollar expenditure per fan necessary to support the proposal may well be unrealistic (attendance certainly is far from guaranteed), and now, no formal parking arrangements.
How one can stand in public and tell half truths, as Mr. Bostic apparently did at the RTD Public Square at which this topic was discussed, suggests prudent decisions makers must view his proposal with extreme skepticism. The same applies to Highwoods. Neither impresses me as being a friend of taxpayers.
While I believe the City erred in committing taxpayer dollars for subsidies for Center Stage, at least the principal occupants, the Richmond Symphony and Richmond Ballet, are non-profit organizations that enjoy tax exempt status.
Why the City is even considering subsidizing the Bostic and Highwoods FOR-PROFIT proposals astounds me.
I’ll continue to say at every opportunity that given the severe needs in the City for improved infrastructure, social services, lower tax rates, and other NECESSARY city services, (including those ordered by the Courts, but remaining unsatisfied in relation to ADA, and sanctions imposed by the EPA), it would be approaching the criminal, and certainly represent malfeasance, for City Council to devote 11% of its remaining credit capacity to support for-profit endeavors for which the developers are not willing to fund completely with private funds. Not only are the proponents seeking taxpayer support for their own financial gain, they cannot even be completely truthful about the deficiencies in their proposals.
ramfan79: it’s time to admit defeat. This proposal is falling apart faster by the day.
Today the developers have been caught in yet another lie. They say they have an “agreement in principle.“ Are the new businesses and tax revenue they project going to meterialize “in principle”, too? Are the thousands of fans they promise will visit the Bottom going to appear “in principle”?
It’s over. The fat lady is singing my friend.
Olive,
Oh, come now—how many VCU alum do you know that come from NJ? And nothing against Jersey VCU alumni, of course. I have had the pleasure of traveling through the Garden State and will say I’m a fan of the privately run rest stops (hint, hint, VDOT). Much more practical than ones simply being shut down, IMO. A whole ‘nother can of worms.. I know, I know.
Dear Mr. Ramfan79,
And you are from what part of New Jersey?
Love, Olive
Here’s the deal, if your proposals cannot stand up to the questions, and challenges of the general public?
It’s a bad use of taxpayers money. End of story. Don’t try to blow sunshine, and tell me it’s gonna be “GREAT!!“ (rolls eyes)
I’ve lived in this city all my life, and I have seen some really bad usage of funds, and this is starting to smell just like the others!
So they don’t have a formalized parking agreement, but only one in principle, with the state? That actually makes sense considering the city has not given them the go ahead to build this thing. Without the green light to build, I would be surprised if there was any formal contractual agreement. However, Bostic probably shouldn’t have said “want to see it?“ to Wight.
“Now I question their integrity on every other matter?“ I wouldn’t go that far. Sounds like something formal wouldn’t be hard to acheive.
Jeez, wonder what else these planners are missing now? You’d think they would have all their t’s crossed and i’s dotted by this time… Wonder what they will have missed tomorrow.
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