Shockoe Center planners lack deal for parking deck

» 35 Comments | Post a Comment

MICHAEL PAUL WILLIAMS: Baseball in the bottom, they will come (VIDEO)

Richmond-Connecticut baseball deal remains on hold

PDF: Executive summary of report
RELATED
  • Jones ready to play ball with new stadium study
  • Baseball in Richmond
  • Shockoe Center
PUBLIC SQUARE
  • Is Shockoe Bottom The Best Place for a New Ballpark?
VIDEO:
  • Baseball in Shockoe Bottom, Pt. 1
  • Baseball in Shockoe Bottom, Pt. 2

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

 
View More: shockoe center,shockoe bottom,shockoe ballpark,minor league baseball,city of richmond,baseball panel,
Not what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
 

Advertisement

Reader Reactions

Flag Comment Posted by ramfan79 on May 21, 2009 at 6:58 am

The venom is really starting to flow full from the more bitter critics here.  Olive, your little snips in that last paragraph are about on par with Ms. Wight’s quotes from an earlier article.  “Throw your balls and have your special-price seating,“ she said in a May 13 story.  The clear personal sourness put into condescending words here isn’t helping your credibility in the argument much.  The opponents best weapon against the SC development in the city-assistance-in-financing factor—I’d stick to that.  Personally, I don’t see the parking issue in today’s story being a huge gash in the plan’s momentum.  This thing wouldn’t be up and running until three or four years from now?  You’d think things could be figured out by then ... *ahem*.

Flag Comment Posted by TheGoodShepherd on May 21, 2009 at 6:45 am

Whoa! More details slip into the light!  This SC deal exists only in the minds of RBC and the developers. SC should be build only if taxpayer money is NOT involved.

Flag Comment Posted by gavaklla on May 21, 2009 at 6:43 am

I think a stadium in the Bottom would be nice, but it seems like the plans are falling apart. OH NOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!

Flag Comment Posted by Olive on May 21, 2009 at 5:55 am

Why not just knock down the state Capitol Building instead?  That would make for prime parking space, and the GA could meet in the baseball stadium when they’re in session.

Richmond has already destroyed the majority of its once-beautiful historic fabric in the name of parking anyway, might as well finish the job.

I have yet to hear any mention of improving public transportation to ferry throngs of baseball fans to this glorious eyesore.

Just imagine how quaint Shockoe Bottom will look during the off-season…discarded hot dog wrappers and popcorn boxes swirling gently around along deserted streets, winos hanging around looking for something to eat among the debris.

I can’t wait!

Flag Comment Posted by Opinion8d on May 21, 2009 at 3:32 am

The ‘Shockoe Planners’ have no deal for anything. At least not yet. Even the baseball team purchase is only hanging on by a thread now.

How about instead of trying to use city/taxpayer dollars against the wishes of the majority of citizens, offer investment shares to raise the capital to individuals and businesses in and around the community. Those who want to support the ballpark, can. Those who do not, are not forced to.

I would imagine these well-heeled developers have probably thought of this. But you know why they’re not bringing it up? Because they want to keep all profits for themselves.

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.
Click here to post a comment.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Online Features
Blogs
DataCenter
Videos
Weekend
 

Advertisement