Ballpark plan needs city help, consultants say
HIGHWOODS PROPERTIES
Shockoe Center would feature a ballpark, restaurants, offices, hotels and residences.
Consultants hired by the city of Richmond say it's highly unlikely that a ballpark development in Shockoe Bottom can be built without the city, in effect, co-signing for the loan.
Developers pushing for Shockoe Center, however, have said that tax revenue generated by the project would be sufficient to finance the $60 million stadium.
Mayor Dwight C. Jones released yesterday a preliminary report on the viability of Shockoe Center, the $318 million development that would also include restaurants, offices, hotels and residences.
The study calls the project "highly feasible" with city credit support and "highly unlikely" to be financed otherwise.
If city backing were provided, the ballpark could be financed at a substantially lower cost, but it also would use nearly 11 percent of the city's debt capacity, according to the report by Davenport & Co. and two other firms. The city also would be liable to cover bond payments if tax revenues generated by the development fall short of projections.
At a news conference, Jones said he has made no decision on whether the city should provide the public support to attract bond investors.
"We know that we have to do something" to make the project viable, he said. "If we determine it's in the best interests of the city, then we'll have to back it with our credit."
He did not rule out keeping baseball on the Boulevard or pursuing a stadium elsewhere, but he said he believes Shockoe Center could help transform the Bottom by overcoming the area's severe flooding problems and by positioning the city for funding to bring high-speed rail to Main Street Station.
"Let's be clear: I'm not the only decision-maker here," Jones said. "I'm sure that there will be competing ideas for how we bring Shockoe to its full capacity."
City Councilwoman Ellen F. Robertson said the suggestion of city credit support for the project "is a major difference from what we've heard at this point, but I agree with the mayor: It's worth evaluating."
The study says Shockoe Center would have to produce at least $67.3 million in annual sales to avoid tapping the city's credit support, assuming it's provided.
The $67.3 million would amount to a 2.1 percent increase in total citywide sales from 2008. The average increase was 3.9 percent from 2005 to 2007. Asked whether a 2.1 percent increase is realistic in an economic downturn, Jones described the amount as "not really too far a stretch."
Under its proposal, Highwoods Properties has called for financing the ballpark with tax revenues generated by private development that would occur simultaneously in Shockoe Center. The developers had recommended that approach to keep the ballpark from being a drain on existing city tax revenues, but they also acknowledged that their ability to sell the bonds was far from certain.
"This is a step in the process," Ralph L. Axselle Jr., an attorney for Shockoe Center, said after yesterday's news conference. The mayor has "offered us a path to go forward, and we'll take it."
In addition, Jones called for Highwoods Properties to work with other groups to coordinate their plans for the Bottom. In addition to Shockoe Center, the area is being eyed for a bus-transfer center, a black-heritage site, and high-speed rail.
"Smart people will begin to work together and to make sure that all of these competing interests are met," Jones said. "Clearly, a lot of stars have to line up for us to move forward."
The mayor set no timetable for a decision on Shockoe Center. Highwoods Properties had set Aug. 1 as a deadline for preliminary approval. Axselle said some decisions will need to be made by this fall to keep the ballpark on target for its planned opening in spring 2012.
Charlie Diradour, a real estate investor who has pushed to keep baseball on the Boulevard, called the consultants' report "the argument against" Shockoe Center.
He said he believes baseball can be accommodated on the Boulevard at a lower cost and potentially with support from surrounding counties. He said the city can't afford to dedicate nearly 11 percent of its debt capacity for a stadium.
"We've got schools that need to be built in this city, and the jail is in deplorable condition," he said.
The city spent $100,000 on the study, which was conducted by Davenport & Co. of Richmond, Economic Research Associates of Washington, and Chmura Economics & Analytics of Richmond.
The firms had endorsed the idea of a ballpark for the Bottom in a report last year to then-Mayor L. Douglas Wilder. A final report on the project's viability is expected in a few weeks.
Contact Will Jones at (804) 649-6911 or
.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
Amen Lance. ‘nuf said.
Just read these comments….not exactly a groundswell of support for a Shockoe Bottom Ballpark Development is it?
Lance
Given the state of the economy and the requirement for City funding this project is being tabled.
No Welfare For Baseball.
If the money is there the park will get built even if Taxpayers don’t spend a dime. The organizers will see the profit potential and put it up.
The fact that we’re being asked to back a losing proposition again (The Ukrops Performing Arts Center Boondoggle) means the profit is not there.
Holy Potential Conflict-of-Interests!
Let’s get this straight…. One of the largest seller’s of municipal bonds in Virginia, Davenport and Co, is the consultant who is producing a report which says…low and behold, Richmond needs to sell bonds to create one more public boon doogle…a City supported/ note guaranteed Shockoe Stadium. Who could have guessed that Davenport might want to potential line its own pockets? (Except for the unlikely event that they are barred from profiting from the project they will no doubt recommend.) Could this be the Big fox guarding the Big hen house, with a water pistol for security?
The there is this…the mind numbed math coming from the preacher, no I meant self promoting developer/mayor. Yikes. He says, that we only need for Shockoe Center to produce at least $67.3 million in annual sales to avoid tapping the city’s credit support.
Perhaps unintended, the preacher/developer/mayor and perhaps developer’s inspired trick enters right here, so watch very closely.
“The $67.3 million would amount to a 2.1 percent increase in total citywide sales from 2008.“ We got that. but…... the sleight of hand is that the $67 million needs to come from THIS Project. We’re in a deep recession with ever deepening unemployment. This project has NO tenants, NO leases, and NO SALES. IT IS JUST A PROJECTION . It’s the same as saying that like the Canal Walk, it will- very likely NEVER PRODUCE ANYTHING - except Mayor Jones’ inspired city/taxpayer debt service!
Realistic projections for retail sales in this city actually reflect a 10-15% reduction over the next 3 years. The suggestion of an increase of 2% or $67 million coming from this project is utterly preposterous.
A sanity test is in order. Is the project bankable? Absolutely not. That is the key. It is only PUBLIC/TAXPAYER CHARITY which could make this go. Plain and simple it’s economically infeasible unless the City Council can be duped into falling for this - just as prior councils have been duped into other boon doggles. Anyone remember the $3 million taxpayer funded skating rink downtown. Yep, we paid for that too! How about the $26 million which Robert Bobb and his misled council paid in cash to Crestar Bank? Right…ten years ago the city paid a bank $26 million of our dollars! Ask Viola Baskerville.
Here is the deal. The consultants may well have a conflict of interest as big as a barn. The developers may well sell their souls to the devil to get this done, and contorting a pro forma is as simple as 1,2,3. It’s what developers do.
Advance your clock three years. Here is what will happen: 1. The consultants will recommend the City financed project, 2. Council and the Mayor will embrace it. 3. It will be built, or at least the stadium will. 4. The surrounding buildings will either never be built, or they fail due to a lack of occupancy and no sales. 5. The developers will get their stadium and the Richmond taxpayer will be saddled with a large and avoidable debt for generations.
It’s like taking candy from a baby. It would be funny if it weren’t true. Watch for potential actions by Henry Marsh behind the scenes. Council will fall behind him like the pied piper, but then isn’t Henry getting paid? Hum. Little has changed in this often corrupt city known for Chuck Richardson, Leonidas Young, Hedgepath and Solomonsky. Only the names have changed, as the old 50’s tv story said, except that this time the innocent have not been protected.
Or particularly care to see an AA game. A whole bunch of really good Atlanta Braves players played right here in Richmond for the AAA Braves owned team then went to AAA. Your premise may be true but it seems a reach. Baseball is hardly a vibrant sport anymore. If memory serves they are the last big league team to own a AAA team because most aren’t profitable..the game is changing, I’ll give you that.
Lance
CommonSense…..You and the rest of the non-baseball people out there know little about the minor league system. A vast majority of current major leaguers played more games at the AA level than the AAA level. No one skips AA - plenty skip AAA completely. When a player makes it to AA in his early 20s, he has arrived. He simply needs a bit more maturation, fine-tuning and one last “test”. Thirty years ago it was a step-wise progression to the majors (A, then AA, then AAA, then the bigs) - not so today. AAA is a holding tank for spare parts. AA is where the young TRUE propects are playing. Bet you’ve never seen a AA game.
Regarding the flood plane argument: Didn’t a developer just build a luxary high rise condo practically on the river? Isn’t Rocketts Landing by the river? All those converted warehouses that are now apartments and condos, near the river right? So private developers are willing to invest their money in the area, but a ballpark is a flood risk?
squier13- The diamond cost $8 million and only took 6-7 months to build it in 1985. The city, Henrico and Chesterfield collectively only put up $4 million. Not apiece…COMBINED. Any wonder why the facility didn’t have a long shelf life?
Listen if the taxpayers of Richmond want to go on the hook for millions of dollars to finance a project that may or may not work let them.As for the ball team its a AA farm team for the Gaints. A team I have not followed since Willie Mays. They are in a different time zone.Now if this team was connected to Washington or Baltimore the impact would be far greater.
But maybe we should not rush, we could end up with the Giants, when California goes belly up, because of poor fiscal management. Just a thought.
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