Church Hill Association votes NO on Shockoe Center proposal

“there were allegations that some of the evening’s new members had their dues paid by the developer or another interested party and had pledged to vote in favor of the development.”

Actually there were several folk standing outside paying for people’s memberships. I was told Mr Thweat is the one funding the free dues. I know this is true because they paid for my membership tonight. Allegedly Mr. Thweat is for the stadium, however, he doesn’t live in the area. The folk outside made a point of saying that we’re going to vote the way we want. Several friends obtained the free memberships because they wanted to vote on the North of Broad mixed use issue and when they found out it was postponed they bailed before the meeting even started. Paying for my membership certainly didn’t buy my vote.

I wonder if the historic church in which we held our meeting tonight would have been “developed” if the CHA had reviewed the developer’s plans way back when.

Wow, I’m surprised it was that close, actually. Interesting that the focus was on funding … not history, not noise, night light. I wonder how many of those in attendance actually understand the funding and how it differs from prior plans.

As for the membership scandal, one must ask, just how legitimate is a body that purports to speak for a community when that body will only allow those who can afford to join to have their voice heard? Not very. “Old” and “white” is not the only Church Hill that matters.

Why would you accept a free membership from someone when you knew the intentions behind it? Seems to me that you are condoning that kind of unethical behavior whether they “buy” your vote or not.

I don’t think that the “bought” votes had much influence over the end result. I know for a fact that there were many legitimate members (meaning members who are long standing and paid for their own votes) who are in favor of the stadium. Just outnumbered by the opponents, that’s all – and not by as much as I had thought. 60/40 is pretty close really. No surprise with the results considering that the CHA tends to be development phobic most of the time.

I, for one, would sure like to see folks under 40 get involved with that group. It could use an influx of fresh thinking and different perspectives. The CHA has always been older, but the past five years or so, CHA meetings feel like an AARP meeting at the local retirement community. Definitely NOT representative of our community as a whole.

In 3 years, the Washington Nationals AA farm team will be playing in Shockoe Bottom. Give me baseball in the bottom, or give me death!!!

Style Magazine now Church Hill sounds like the only people drinking Kool Aid is Shockoe Bottom Association and he wants this so he can open a Brewery

It is time that the tired old politicians of Church Hill realize that they don’t control everything. Henry Marsh is bought and paid for by the developers. Interesting the high moral tone against those who were willing to let their membership dues be paid — but the lack of awareness that Sen. Marsh is on the payroll of the development company.

#10: You make a couple of interesting points. What if the development included a Whole Foods? How many in CH would support it then, discreetly, of course?

I’m all for developing the Bottom since it’s really quite sad and has so much potential to be a vibrant urban environment.

There will be no Whole Foods…no Fresh Market…no Trader Joes….no Ukrops.

Hell, even in good economy, this area just can’t support another supermarket –we simply do not have the population base for it. Even double the number of people living in this market area and stores like these still won’t make it.

Let’s get real here.

FanGuy, Jake Stew;

Wow, what a really clever couple of anonymous guys you are. Snooty old white people. What a zinger! You been reading “The Community Organizer’s Guide to Race Baiting” by Al Sharpton?

It’s interesting your sudden concern for the downtrodden, under-represented of Church Hill. Of course you would have to come over here to find out what such people think, because there are no downtrodden and precious few black people in the Fan and the other white enclaves you carpetbaggers are preaching from.

Funny, other than minions of those receiving money from the developers, I’ve never heard the lack of a baseball stadium among the many complaints of the neglected citizens of the East End.

Your claims are cowardly and despicable. Anonymous is fine if you’re adding reason and information to the debate. It is not acceptable if your purpose is to divide and stir racial animosities for your personal gains or the personal gains of those you identify with.

You have not helped your cause. Even if you don’t represent the people behind this project, they’re tarnished by this display. If we don’t understand the financing of this deal, it’s because of the information supporters have provided.

Your real problem is we understand it too well. Tax money will be diverted to support a project that has the implicit backing of the city and developers will profit.

The Church Hill Association is flawed, as any organization is flawed. But by conscious decision it is open to all without qualification. That openness was abused last night.

Decisions are made by those who bother to show up. If the neighborhood doesn’t agree with the stance of the Association, it would be easy enough to change. Any opinion not represented is due to lack of effort, not conspiracy.

I suggest that if this is the best you can do, keep it to yourself.

Keith (#23), sorry, but I am just reporting the facts. The CHA is mostly white, mostly older. You can’t vote unless you pay to join. That’s hardly a good recipe for a representative body if you are talking about Church Hill, don’t you think? There is nothing race baiting about that.

There were not 200 people at the meeting. It was about 100 as the number of votes show. I hope’younger’ and more “fresh thinking’ and non white folks choose to be more active, come to meetings and have their opinions count. It’s easy to not take part and complain about the results. Join CHA and change it. I’m an unashamed member of AARP!

# 21 Ray– according to the developers there is a major national chain that is not yet in Richmond that wants to move into Shockoe Center. Of course, you can’t go public with something like that until there is actually a Shockoe Center in the works.

No Fanguy…you totally can go vote without paying…they had people there paying FOR you to vote, as long as you promised you would vote their way…

#29 shockoe – Yea, I heard the guy say that too but he said a lot of things that just don’t fly in the real world.

For instance, he said there would be 175,000 sf of retail/restaurant space in phase 1 of the project. 175,000 square feet! Do you have any idea what the size of the typical restaurant is in the Fan? Answer – 2500 to 3000 square feet!

But lets be generous and say the average size is 5000 square feet. That means their proposal would antiscipate having about 35 (175,000/5000) new resturants!

Oh, but I forgot about this un-named supermarket the Highwoods guy, who is, after all, trying to put the best face on his project, talked about. So let’s say some cash rich (got to have cash to build since there is no credit available these days), risk taking food reatiler that is willing to A) Ignore the fact there are at least 6 major supermarkets within a 10 minute drive, B) Ignore our relatively small population base which barely supports the one larger store that can be considered within walking distance of the Bottom (the Market at Tobacco Row which almost shut down 4 years ago due to lack of business), and C)Ignore an economy that has been especially brutal to any retail enterprise , decides to plop a 25,000 square supermarket in the project. Still leaves about 150,000 square feet — enough for 30 new restaurants. Great, let’s eat!

Don’t get me wrong. I like the idea of having a stadium in the Bottom. But, the proposal has got to be realistic and not ultimaetly be a burden to the taxpayers.

You want different reporting? Try having different facts? Don’t blame Style for simply holding up a mirror.

I say “Hallelujah!” that Scott Bass actually sought out independent research. I thought he was actually kind given that Highwoods doesn’t even have this project listed on the website.

Highwoods Properties has previously announced major new projects in Richmond that it later walked away from. Here is an image of the planned Canal Landing project that would have been downtown:

http://www.richmondcitywatch.com/mod…

In this March 2003 article, Paul Kreckman “anticipates the building will be 75 percent leased by the time it is tenant-ready in 2005”:

http://www.virginiabusiness.com/edit/magazine/yr2003/mar03/river.shtml

In this February 2004 Style Weekly article, he says “finding the tenants shouldn’t be a problem”:
http://styleweekly.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid9B6FFC446FF7486981EA3C0C…

Style Weekly article, he says “right now, there doesn’t appear to be enough tenants to build a large office building.”
http://styleweekly.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid9B6FFC446FF7486981EA3C0C3C…

This website page confirms that the office project was canceled in 2005:

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id158401

This web page describes its replacement, a residential project named Vistas On The James:

http://www.richmondcitywatch.com/bd_item.php?building_nameVistas+On+The+James

Keith West:

Thanks you for your comment #23 to “FanGuy” and “jake stew.” I would extend that response to “JoeRichmond” who’s comment “Interesting the high moral tone against those who were willing to let their membership dues be paid — but the lack of awareness that Sen. Marsh is on the payroll of the development company.” is equally as despicable.

As a long time resident of CH, I can tell you that many of the people at last night’s meeting are hard working, middle class folks who are not rich. Many of us moved up here years and years ago when NO ONE would put their foot in this neighbohood including FanGuy, JoeRichmond and jake stew. Housing was cheap then and us working folks could afford to buy here then. Since then, we have worked and saved and hopefully will be able to retire with some semblance of an adequate fixed income. Some of us are already there, some of us have some time to go, if we can ever retire.

Yes, CH has seen an influx of the NOVA rich retirees over the past 5 years now that CH is cool to live in. But most of them are South of Broad and in the minority. The entire city including the Fan (FanGuy), Northside (JoeRichmond) and Shochoe (jake stew?) has seen an influx of same into your hoods, so cut the crap.

As for the whores and hypocrites that took the bribe last night to join the CHA – shame on you!!!

Gray:

If you ever had any credibility on this site it is now gone. Do you teach your kids to take bribes? And don’t ask john_m to remove this personal info since you come on here all the time and talk about better schools and better lives for all of us demanding transparency, at City Hall and with Developers,etc.

You say cheap? Cheap of character more like. Everybody in this hood can afford a $25 membership to the CHA if they so choose. They do not have to be bought. Where there is a will there is a way.

Gray, you review restaurants all the time on this blog. You can afford to take your family to Mama Zu’s and Patrick Henry’s, etc, but can’t afford a CHA membership? And then you and your cohorts leave in the middle of the meeting because your pet project was not voted on?

Keith West is right, for all of you who think that the CHA is bad organization – screw you. The organization is made up of folks who are trying to take an active part in our community whether we agree or not with each other. It’s $25 well spent, in my opinion, even when the vote doesn’t always go my way.

Are any of you CHA bashers active in a community organization without being bribed into joining? No, I didn’t think so.

#36 – Well said, hillkid, well said.

#36, I voted no to the stadium. The people outside St. John’s did not in anyway tell us their views on the ballpark or how we should vote. If they had done so, I would have stood up in the middle of the meeting and announced it myself. Accusing me of something I didn’t do -accepting bribes -is libel thus a crime. You also stated another untruth, “And then you and your cohorts leave in the middle of the meeting because your pet project was not voted on?” I stayed for the stadium vote.

Guilty mom, what happened to you should be reported.

No surprise that the vote was somewhat close if people were paid to vote for the
project. Somehow that seems illegal, at
least unethical. Were these salesmen for
memberships directly connected to the de-
velopers or just residents of Church Hill
who wanted to put some money behind the way
they wanted their vote to go? Haven’t we
seen enough fraud on the national scale
without sinking this low locally? See
House of Cards on CSNBC.

I think the Onion already covered this meeting:

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/39453

The response by the CHA is dissapointing, especially becuase financing was the main concern.

There are some other valid concerns (quality of life, changing demographics and population dynamics, all of which I think could be successfully addressed) but it sounds like the finance argument is just lack of understanding. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I’ve yet to see an intelligent discussion of pros and cons by folks who understand how the financing would work. Until we have that discussion, a “no” based on financing seems short-sighted.

Next, I’m concerned the ballpark will be built in Short Pump (or somewhere else) and the city will be even more abandoned by the counties.

Last, its ok to compare the demographics of the CHA to Church Hill itself to see if its truly representative. And clearly its not. However, folks in the “CHA Demographic” are clearly much more likely to engage and give civic input… whatever the answer is, its not easy.

As a under 40 Church Hill dweller, I’m dissapointed about the “no” vote and hope it can be overcome. I wasn’t at the meeting because I was doing other community work (I know that sounds like a lame excuse, perhaps it is)

edg:

It’s certainly your right to not want to participate in the CHA, however, you rationale for staying away is lame.

Squeeky wheels is exactly what the CHA or any community organization needs! I don’t agree with everything the CHA votes on either, nor do I like how the meetings are run as of late, but I stick with it because my community is important to me and my voice counts no matter how little.

I think that you would be surprised that there are quite of few of us that don’t toe the traditional CHA line, we’re just outnumbered on occasion – so what?

Don’t be a baby and take your ball and go home! Come back. Get involved. Bitch. Or are you afraid that your neighbors won’t like you anymore? This isn’t high school. It’s our civic right and responsibility to take a stand and be involved in our local and national affairs.

The $25 membership fee goes to taking care of our community. It also helps to pay for a membership meeting with free foods and drink as well as picnic beverages three times a year. The free stuff is worth it alone.

Stephen W/Post #46. You’re right the financing for this project (as currently proposed) is a conundrum.

Fortunately, there are some folks/taxpayers in our community who do understand it, and I refer you to posts by John Gerner (disclosure: my husband and a veteran in the leisure/mixed use development industry) on this site.

Specifically Post #319 within the thread “Poll shows increasing support…” http://chpn.net/news/2009/02/09/poll-shows-increasing-support-for-baseball-in-shockoe

Al Sharpton is for a stadium in the bottom.

Maybe I should join the CHA, but I’d rather be a member of another organization that more fairly represents the viewpoints of the Church Hill/East End folks I know. I am glad of the preservation work that CHA has accomplished, but I feel it is a bit out of touch with our issues that touch our neighborhood.

Is the more relevant issue not ” the pimping and whoreing” but wether these new members will continue to show up. Won’t the proof of sincere interest be in the participating. Members of CHA will be working along side the City in Libbey Hill Park this Saturday planting and mulching.

23rd and diverse, that is exactly right. If these folks were headed over to the meeting anyway, I don’t see the harm in paying for their memberships. $$$ is just an impediment to participation, and CHA does want participation from a broad spectrum of the Church Hill community, doesn’t it???

I joined the CHA last night for the 2nd time since I have lived on the hill. I was approached walking into the meeting last night with $25 dollars cash. I refused even though I support the development. Not all new members last night took the dough offered. Last night I heard many people making blanket statements that all new members were bought, people should have to present their drivers license to prove they live where they say the do and that CHA should consider a 30 day awaiting period for new members before they should be allowed to vote. Please understand that issues such as this are going to bring neighbors out that you may have not seen before or that are not as active in your organization. If these new members presented the required fee even if you suspect they have been “bought” then their vote counts regardless if you deem it proper or not. Please stop trying to create more barriers to divide our neighborhood and let’s just all agree to disagree in a civilized manner.

The big disappointment of the evening was that the “discussion” was cut short after 5 people spoke against the proposal while others in favor had their hands raised to speak. Granted the individual who Called the Question, was someone in support of the development, who just wanted the voting to happen because it was getting “late” though I hope that person understands in hind sight they did no justice for their cause. CHA spent more time discussing and debating how the matter was going to be handled and how discussion time would be allotted then actual discussion on the matter at hand.

Having lived here in this neighborhood for sometime I still see a location in the city that is letting the voices of a few dominate the discussion. I don’t see this tied to just one issue of race, rather as an issue of many components that make up our landscape – socio-economic, race, ageism, etc. As a thirty year old I see the same people that welcomed me into this neighborhood back a few years ago now stating that I don’t understand the “real” history of this neighborhood. I may not in your eyes but what I do see is a group fighting for the status quo, to “protect” the historical integrity of the neighborhood and to keep progress at bay. If you want people that are not sixty years older and over to stay in the neighborhood then you have to understand that schools, roads, services, property values, high speed rail, blight, etc. are not going to improve or be delivered if the neighborhood does not develop a more progressive outlook. The city is in trouble for many reasons; however, this city and its residents have an opportunity to at least work with the people proposing this development to reach a compromise that I believe could be acceptable to all!

“Having lived here in this neighborhood for sometime I still see a location in the city that is letting the voices of a few dominate the discussion.”

This is what I have been saying all along. Everyone does have a right to their opinion, but it really does feel like these vocal few think they speak for everyone in the neighborhood. And, they do not. Every thread about this ballpark gets spammed with numerous and lengthy comments from the same few people who do not support the development, and they drown out the voices of the people who do support the project.

For better or for worse… the city, the neighborhood, the Church Hill Association, (and indeed the whole world) is run by people who show up to meetings (a friend told me that, who might read this).

So, as much as I don’t like the CHA overly quick decision, I wasn’t there to disagree. And it now appears like they speak for all of Church Hill.

Scott, please don’t speak for the citizens of Richmond in thanking the CHA. I think you’d find the majority of us support this project and those that don’t often don’t understand the financing. Also please explain how building a mixed-use project where cracked surface lots now sit empty is “paving over” a community? I think the opponents of this project have lost touch with reality and are simply grasping at straws. The details of this project have been well thought out and presented to the community in a very open fashion. It’s time Richmond moved forward wit this project. As another poster stated, the longer we push this off, the more we risk losing.

Well The more the Developers talk the more people see this for what it is. Funny how a little reality can make people consider saying NO to the deal

Don’t you think it is important to check out the company that is purporting to do everyone a favor by coming to the bottom with this project?

Highwoods Properties has previously announced major new projects in Richmond that it later walked away from.

Here is an image of the planned Canal Landing project that would have been downtown:

http://www.richmondcitywatch.com/modules.php?namegallery2&g2_itemId333

In this March 2003 article, Paul Kreckman “anticipates the building will be 75 percent leased by the time it is tenant-ready in 2005”:

http://www.virginiabusiness.com/edit/magazine/yr2003/mar03/river.shtml

In this February 2004 Style Weekly article, he says “finding the tenants shouldn’t be a problem”:
http://styleweekly.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid9B6FFC446FF7486981EA3C0C3CCE4…

However, in this November 2004 Style Weekly article, he says “right now, there doesn’t appear to be enough tenants to build a large office building.”
http://styleweekly.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid9B6FFC446FF7486981EA…

This website page confirms that the office project was canceled in 2005:

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id158401

This web page describes its replacement, a residential project named Vistas On The James:

http://www.richmondcitywatch.com/bd_item.php?building_nameVistas+On+The+James

Before everyone jumps in bed with this company, don’t you think it is important to check out some of the promises they have made in the past?

Highwoods Properties has previously announced major new projects in Richmond that it later walked away from.

Here is an image of the planned Canal Landing project that would have been downtown:

http://www.richmondcitywatch.com/modules.php?namegallery2&g2_itemId333

In this March 2003 article, Paul Kreckman “anticipates the building will be 75 percent leased by the time it is tenant-ready in 2005”:

http://www.virginiabusiness.com/edit/magaz…

In this February 2004 Style Weekly article, he says “finding the tenants shouldn’t be a problem”:
http://styleweekly.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid9B6FFC446FF7486981EA3C0C…

However, in this November 2004 Style Weekly article, he says “right now, there doesn’t appear to be enough tenants to build a large office building.”

http://styleweekly.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid9B6FFC446FF748…

This website page confirms that the office project was canceled in 2005:

I know this may be more “homework” than anyone cares to do — but I am a staunch believer in giving people information upon which to base their decisions.

I also believe that people can connect the dots and understand what is happening if given some critical facts.

There are other interesting information sources. Market reports on the Richmond metro area are not encouraging.

http://www.thalhimer.com/market-reports/by_market/C6/

The latest office report —

http://www.thalhimer.com/reports/2008/4Q08%20Richmond%20Office%20Report.pdf

The latest retail report —

http://www.thalhimer.com/reports/2008/4Q08%20Richmond%20Retail%20Report.pdf

Elsewhere, developers are canceling and postponing new development projects. Below are examples:

“Simon Puts Brakes on Development”
http://www.globest.com/news/1337_1337/indianapolis/176636-1.html

“Few new shopping centers while economy’s dropping”
http://www.miamiherald.com/602/story/882587.html

Colonial’s Lowder Sets ’09 Priorities
http://www.globest.com/news/1340_1340/other/176699-1.html

FYI – Bostic and Kreckman were on Doc Thompson’s radio show (and it didn’t sound like Doc was all that sold on it) today answering questions for callers (both for and against). They mentioned a website with the development information will be up shortly.

They have also asked each of the community groups to form a committee they can meet with to bring information to the community group and questions to the developers from the community groups.

Hopefully, with these we can get some of the questions answered and improvements we would like to see made.

FanGuy, If you’re so certain that a stadium is the right thing for the bottom, why don’t you move out of the fan and into the bottom? Then you can really be walking the walk and talking the talk. I would not presume to join the Fan District Association, since I don’t live there. Why don’t you move to the area, Shockoe Bottom, and join THEIR association?!

And hey, CHA is so diverse, they’ll even let you join when you don’t live here. But I’m sure they’d appreciate it, if you are a member, if you show up for all meetings, and volunteer for committees….instead of joining to sway a vote on a single issue.

JoeRichmond, please keep it up. I for one appreciate your posts.

Queen Mum, #35 – and weren’t the hours supposed to be restricted? Sure, I remember all those promises, and more!

It certainly is true that a few very anonymous and aggressive opponents of this project have spammed this sight to death. Baiting those that disagree with you is a tried and true tactic which quickly degenerates into name calling and slander. It’s very easy to do and very difficult not to strike back in kind.

The CHA is entitled to it’s opinion. It’s clear from this website not everyone agrees.

The vote is in and the membership (old, new or paid for), has made known it positon. Discussions and debate will continue until the next big issue. Warnng, warning!, that next issue is not Oakwood Heights my friends … it is Echo Harbour which lurks in the shadows. Beware the Jabberwock and don’t dissapate all your energy, time and efforts on this any longer. What is done is done and what will be will in months and months more of discussions on the stadium etc. Save your vitality and don’t fritter it away fussing and fighting. Because EH is slowly, silently, secretely, spinning its morbid web. Clearly when it comes to size, impact on history, enviornment, the neighborhood, the community, City and Commonwealth – Echo Harbour absolutvery ely dwarfts the stadium in eall aspect of enormity of its negativity for ALL.
Beware the Jabberwock –

john, it’s interesting that this site on
Churchill votes no, has had 78 comments,
but it has been pushed out of sight by
5 other articles which have received few
comments. This article has been up only
about 24 hours.

How long was the site “Poll shows 75% in
favor of ballpark” posted as the first
article? Just curious.

Thanks for allowing this discussion to
be aired.

Anna(83)”With the proposed bill, 2.5% of those tax revenues STILL go to the city;”

What state do you live in? In Virginia the 5% sales tax is a state tax; 4% goes to the state, 1% is rebated to the locality. The state is allowing the diversion of 2.5% of their 4%. 2.5% NEVER went to the city – and certainly won’t as a result of this. I could have sworn that I’ve read that the financing plan envisions the RSFA getting the city’s 1% of the sales tax, the city’s 6% meals tax, and incremental increases in the city’s real estate taxes. And this morning, the T-D reports that the corporate side of Shockoe Slip’s hospitality industry has objected to our legislators asking that this tax break be re-considered.

Wow. And I mean WOW!

Buying votes, or attempting to buy votes? Nasty business. Really, really unreal. Just does not bode well, and I think this warrants deeper investigation.

I’m not a lawyer or a cop, but isn’t this illegal? Can we be absolutely positive who is paying that person in the knit cap? Seems like there would be some kind of criminal charge that would apply.

I wasn’t there, but I couldn’t help envisioning the scenario, the insult of the offer, and a response that might sound something like, “No thanks. But I’ll give you $50 to get the hell out of my face, jackass!”

But that’s just me.

Have you been south on 95 lately as far as Roanoke Rapids? If you have you couldn’t have missed the Roanoke Rapids (Randy Parton) Theater looming over the interstate. Interesting parallels between it and the ballpark- use of TIF’s for financing, local developers in complicated relationships with politicians trying to secure public funds, unrealistic expectations papered over with boosterism. Read all the gory details here and see if they don’t sound familiar:
http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/series.html?id=31

a shorter version is here:
http://www.capitol-monitor.org/its-your-money/the-randy-parton-theater-a-com.php

If you just want the punchline: The project has failed miserably, resulting in a discredited mayor, lawsuits, and a sellout to a third party with a huge loss to taxpayers.

Why not?

not roanoke. it’s roanoke rapids. which is even harder to be compared to richmond.

i think what we all want to know is: who gets to play the randy parton roll on the lifetime made-for-tv movie?

i don’t get the big deal. these are interested individuals from the community who wanted to have a say. whether they paid their dues or had someone else pay them seems immaterial. i paid my dues that night as well, and if someone had offered to pay for mine i would have taken them up on it.

There have been a couple of comments here that suggests the CHA always apposes anything which could “adversly impact” the Church Hill community. I am a member of the CHA and I believe the following would suggest CHA members do not always reject new ideas. Here there was apparent concern about a significant increase in Church Hill traffic. The open discussions with the Developer and the reasoning it was approved is illuminating.

Reverend Delores L. McQuinn, The Church Hill Association,
Vice President, Richmond City Council, P.O. Box 8031,
City Hall, Suite 305, Richmond, VA 23223.
900 East Broad Street,
Richmond, VA 23219. October 17th 2007.

Reference: The Rocketts Landing Re-Zoning Proposal.

Dear Reverend McQuinn,

The Rocketts Landing Developer met with our members on September 18th and fully outlined their proposals for the site. As you were present at the meeting I hope you will concur that the presentation was very informative, and they responded very openly to the many questions raised by our members. Of particular concern was the impact the additional traffic would have on Church Hill and other areas of the City due to both the future development of Rocketts Landing and the additional developments in Henrico County. We urge both the City and Henrico County to start working together to minimize this challenge to our community.
Clarification was also sought, and obtained, that there were no flood problems, that all the safety services would have acceptable access and that the proposal fully met all the other requirements of the River Front zoning ordinances.

Their representative, Mr. Bill Axselle, also met the Board on October 4th to respond to our further questions. He provided us with additional information and at that meeting it was agreed the Board would place a strong recommendation at the next monthly meeting of our Association that we should support the rezoning proposal.

At our meeting yesterday evening our members unanimously voted to accept the Board’s recommendation.

The investment to be made into our local economy is a vote of confidence in our City, and esthetically we believe it’s an appropriate use of that section of the James River.

Please would you convey our endorsement of this investment to your council colleagues when you come to review this re-zoning proposal.

For and on behalf of the Church Hill Association,

I might have come to the meeting if I had known that they were handing out free memberships. We stopped paying to be members several years ago when we realized that the CHA (as it currently stands) will never support the sorts of projects that we support. Namely, my household supports 1) Neighborbood Businesses — CHA endorses parking and hours restrictions that make it impossible for restaurants to survive; 2)Mixed use/Mixed income projects — CHA is unwilling to be flexible in its understanding of scale and (historical) appropriateness; and 3) Enterprise Zones — CHA is resistant to the corner commercial model proposed by Flynn and the planning department.

Gordon Godfrey Resist Gordon Godfrey

the only reason lard-ass bostic and developers want citizen input is so they can draft a strategy to bamboozle the public, i dont trust them one bit, as soon as the opportunity arises they will trick and stick it to the taxpayers

OK gang its time to move on.
Some writers are right and we are spending too much time on this in light of our economy, the needs of the poor, education in our City and Commonwealth and other community issues.
107 comments are nearing enough for community venting, basic catharsis and group therapy.

Chris:
24 out of 40 new memberships were bought.

#107 – First, this issue is not dead; in fact the wording offered by Mr. West will allow it to be revisited should CHA’s membership wish to do so. Please consider joining if you have not done so already.

As far as your comments and other comments similar regarding “spending too much time on this in light of our economy, the needs of the poor, education in our City and other community issues” the City is facing tough time as we all are. The only the way the City will be able to focus on the issues referenced above is by generating revenue; which our City does lack in comparison to others of similar make up prior to these uncertain times.

Based on the information I have researched, the proposed site is 22 acres of undeveloped land that currently generates $95K in tax revenue. According to the articles and meetings I have attended, this proposal is offering $318MM in investment that generates $3.7MM annually in City revenues on top of the bond debt service. Also it has been communicated that after the bonds are paid, all revenue goes to the City and State.

It has also been communicated that the City will not make any expenditure if private money doesn’t materialize then the project won’t happen.

The project is asking for $8MM from the City for public infrastructure to serve Ball Park and area surrounding. Any development in that location would require that type of money to that to improve the area’s infrastructure.
The other battle cry from those opposed is the issue regarding the bonds. The bonds absolutely are no obligation to the City. The City creates the Authority; which owns the Ball Park. The bonds from private investors fund the construction. Those bonds are repaid, among other things, by tax revenue generated by new development within the project. The City does NOT guarantee the bonds. Upon a failure, the bonds are secured by the revenue and the Ball Park itself. Upon payment of the bonds, the Authority will own the Ball Park free and clear, with a lease to the ball team.
#103 regarding the flood plain matter – The City is not doing anything about this issue now! I would suppose they don’t have the funds to do so or they would have. The proposed plan offers a concourse around Ball Park that provides FEMA-required emergency access to buildings within the flood plain development; provides almost 4 acres of green space – 4 more acres than exists now!
I agree that there are still questions to be answered and further detail to be provided. Get involved so the issues important to each of you can be brought to the table and addressed.
Folks all of this information was obtained simply by reading articles, attending meetings and listening to all the information with an open mind. I did not really have an opinion on way or the other until I realized that this could be a wonderful opportunity for the City to obtain some much needed revenue to do the things we all want them to do – better schools, roads, services, tax breaks for those in need, the list goes on. The City cannot provide better services until more money comes in – kitchen table economics!

You can’t kill something that is too stubborn to die they feel they have too much in this to care about anyone but the people they know they can sell. They could just wait another 3 years. Face it as long as that property is there they will try personally I would love to see VCU get the property and build there and then they might consider someplace else to try to sell the pixie dust and baseball

And if VCU gets it, there will be no review by city planning, no adherence to the downtown master plan by VCU, and no tax revenues. Good deal, huh?

Brian:

Forgot to mention post #20. Ms. Clarke went door to door on Sunday offering free memberships and trying to “sell” folks on the stadium. I know others that got the knock on the door also.

So, yes people were encouraged to vote in favor of the stadium.

#113 – “personally I would love to see VCU get the property and build there and then they might consider someplace else to try to sell the pixie dust and baseball”

Now THAT’S an idea, do you know anyone at VCU who is involved in real estate, could you approach them about it?! That would cure this problem once and for all! LOL! Hope it doesn’t sound like I’m making fun, – I actually agree with you. Unfortunately, I think Trani’s departure has taken the wind out of their sails for awhile but you never know.

forgive the wordoes above …. my keyboard is acting up tonight.

I repeat: Hillkid — and just when I was thinking that you and FanGuy must be brothers …whose mother named you after where she met your respective Daddies.

I have talked to several people today who all said that they accepted the free memberships much the way you accept door prizes when you attend certain functions.
Nada a one voted in favor of the stadium. I see their acceptance of the free memberhip as example of “Urban Guerilla Warfare.”

Ever heard of the Guerilla Girls? Check this out:

http://www.guerillagirls.com

Reading all of this what really stands out is the unwelcome return of Hillkid and her bullying. It was embarrassing at the meeting when Mr.Hillkid stood and tried to make ass of himself after being MIA for months and here we go with more of the same from the louder one. Stop calling people out when you can’t post under your real name either.

I am not trying to force feed anything – just supplying relevant information to this discussion instead of throwing around statements lacking factual substance.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Though I wonder how #124 knows what is needed and not needed in our City?! I wish that individual would provide reasons to their position. If you are against this proposed development then please offer up factual reasons for your position and not just invoke the “because I said so or I know more than the rest of you” statements.

I also find it interesting that Shockoe Bottom Association the closest to the proposed site voted in favor of the development and they would be more inconvenienced then residents of Church Hill residents.

Several forums offered by the Highwoods, Timmons, Richmond Baseball Club and at times, individuals who work for the City have addressed this proposal; they provided some detailed answers to most of the issues and questions batted around this topic. Have those opposed to this development gone to any of these meetings to at a minimum truly learn what they are proposing and to ask your questions? If you have not done so then maybe you should reserve your comments until you hear both sides.

My fear is this development is going to happen and Church Hill “leadership” will be stubborn by digging their heels in and this area will not be involved in ensuring are concerns and positions are not represented. Leaving those perched on the Hill to complain that “we” did not have a say or were not included, etc. Hope I am wrong and that all will work for a common purpose of developing our City responsibly while still moving in a more progressive direction.

As I have said before the Shockoe Bottom’s Association’s head is hoping to build a Brewery in the wake of all of this seems a tad self serving but hey just ask him about it. My deal loz2hi is that we can develop without a Ballpark and do alot better but no one wants to see that or do any research they take the words of people who are selling this Boondoggle and taking it all for gospel.

Your Forums are not for ideas because they already have nearly the exact same plan that they had when we said no the last time some years ago.They added a few more bells and whisles and have some people convinced because they look to profit but at the expence of everything else.

Hey you think you have the answer and I suggest you have not done enough research but I am betting that is not stopping you from discounting anything I have to say. Funny Being behind the scenes watching these things play out you do get a much different understanding of what is said in public and what is actually arranged but since I lack “factual substance” but can quote all the attempts by other cities who have tried this deal and failed and you seem to discount it you will have to learn from your own mistakes I guess I have to watch it happen all again and watch as you get to complain when it all goes south.

The human behind the hillkid persona has talent in character development and writing. He should become an actor or playwrite. What a waste to use such talent as a weapon against neighbors.

The CHA welcomes ALL NEW MEMBERS.

129/hood1st:

Thanks for the backhanded compliment, I think.

Who are you to speak for the CHA, even if your statement is hard to refute?

The question is, does the CHA welcome and condone the shenanigans that took place regarding the purchasing of memberships the other night? I think if you took a vote on that, the answer would be “no.”

#132:

Neighbors who accepts funny money only hurt themselves.

Far be it from me smacking someone who is try to converse versus the usual name calling and dismissive additude most have used. loz2hi the idea for ballpark in Shockoe Bottom is far from a new concept and this new plan may add a few more features and insentives but it is the same basic plan. The only thing that changed was we don’t have a Team to move and they have burned bridges with the AAA association and now the AA association for trying to recuit without permission.
The Ballparks location covers property they don’t own nor does the City the owners the Lovings have not done anything with the property since they left after the last Warehouse fire and I doubt they will do stuff considering they changed their base of operations.
But there is more info out and about I really don’t feel like going through mostly stats figures and the idea that they have to attach Baseball and Apple pie to sell Improving an area they just want to reap.

Good luck on the research I think if you read more posts you will see why there is frustration with opposing opinions. If your still for the Ballpark in Shockoe Bottom after you find everything out then your welcome to your opinion but I am sure you will find where most of us have issues.

Sorry, here’s the correct address for Thweatt:

106 North Eighth Street, Suite 1
Richmond, Virginia 23219
(804) 644-1964

you can’t blame people for questioning or being suspicious of moles, especially after the membership shenanigan’s. Who knows what else they have pulled? Look at the dirty dealings re: the Oakwood project? It’s sad, but it’s pretty hard to know what the real truth is. And whether you are connected or not, it’s your side that got caught doing less than admirable deeds.

Loz2hi, before you are frightened off by SBD’s rebuttals of your logic, let me point out a couple of things:

1) Minor League Baseball’s AAA International League (not an association, by the way, and the IL is only one league at the AAA level) would most likely be happy to come back to Richmond if a) we built a new stadium and b) if there were a team available to be bought.

As for the AA “association” (read: Eastern League) being turned off to Richmond? They’re upset the name of the team got leaked, mainly because it may affect the attendance of the named team THIS season. Most teams that are sold are struggling attendance-wise, new stadiums typically solve those issues, especially when a metro area of 1.2 million people is involved.

Please don’t substitute your guesses for facts, especially when your knowledge is limited to calling it an “association” as if there is one body that rules each level instead of individual league presidents located in various parts of the continent (i.e. the International League, Pacific Coast League, Mexican League).

2) I’d like more examples of projects that include BALLPARKS that have failed. The Norfolk Waterside project is kinda close, but even if you lump in the ballpark, its still a marginal opposing example at best. The ballpark down there draws quite well, but to expect it to usher people over to Waterside by foot is like asking families to walk their kids from the Diamond to Broad Street (oh wait, I think that’s an idea some people have).

We, the proponents, have given lots of examples of how AA and AAA ballparks have helped out the surrounding area’s economy. Its not that we don’t see your examples, or even disagree with them (they’d be great, if say, private investors were proposing a huge shopping center in the Bottom), its that they don’t have the same ties to the project because of the baseball aspect. You may make jokes about the apple pie aspect, but having a stadium within *comfortable* walking distance of Richmond’s historical sites will help the community and local businesses. It will bring them back into the spotlight; something the status quo (like “Club Velvet”) work against.

Again, the examples proponents have provided are Durham, Toledo, Memphis,

Anna, here’s another question. The RFP for Shockoe Center was received in late ’07. The R-Braves were still here; the City was allegedly still negotiating with them. Why was this wonderful plan never pitched to the Braves?

Oh boy, oh boy!

shockoecenter.com is on-line!

Actually it’s just the Highwoods corporate home page. There’s no mention of Shockoe Center, Boulevard, or baseball.

Ramzi/#140:

“In case it hasn’t occurred to you, you can’t buy votes when there’s a secret ballot, it’s better known as campaigning.”

Excuse me? Of course you can buy votes with or without a secret ballot. You are naive to think that this funny money was not meant to buy votes.

I believe it is you who is bickering. If you haven’t noticed, I’m not the only one who sees this funny money as a huge problem (see Williams article today in the RTD.)

Ms. Clarke’s address is public record (RTD) and fair game in this thread. Sending her money back is the right thing to do whether you or gray or anyone else thinks so or not.

This thread is about the CHA meeting the other night and the vote taken there along with a discussion about the free memberships. There are other threads to discuss the stadium, and in my opinion it has been exhausted. My comments are relevant to this thread like it or not.

As for your statement, “She was using her own money” You are wrong! She was, by her own admission, using money given to her, allegedly, by a representative of Al Thweatt.

Trying to “pad” the vote of any organization, by whatever means, is wrong, People who accepted money for membership, are encouraging that practice, no matter how they voted. I understand someone being offered the money and thinking, “oh great, a freebee.” But as we all know, very few things are actually free. And by encouraging these behind the scenes dealings and machinations, we will create a political environment for which we will all pay dearly, down the road.

By all means, e-mail Betty Squire at Bett1705@aol.com and make your concerns known.

Other citizens need to let everyone on Council know that this whole matter is becoming an embarassment for the City.

How dare some people try so blatantly to treat people as if we are mere pawns to be moved about a chess board? How dare they manipulate neighbor against neighbor?

Why can’t they put the stadium on the Boulevard? What is the problem with that? What a waste of space and good will.

McQuinn, Marsh and minions need to understand that the poor people in the 7th district are not theirs for the manipulation. Maybe back in the day, these politicoes could get away with this, but even “poor” people are a whole lot more sophisticated today than they were 30-40 years ago.

If this nonsense doesn’t stop, someone needs to figure out who will run against McQuinn this fall when she actually has to run for House of Delegate’s seat as opposed to having Mayor Jones place the crown on her head like some rhinestone tiara.

And, someone needs to get ready to challenge Marsh as well. Enough is enough.

First things first: Make McQuinn work for the vote. This stinks and she needs to be held accountable. Perhaps there is an explanation, if so, the voters of the 7th District deserve to hear the answer from McQuinn herself.

And, King Henry has been strangely low-profile and silent through here. He is, afterall, representing this ball club in the bottom business. Is it with his blessing and at his behest that these shenanigans are going down?

He needs to be held accountable by the people of the 7th District. How dare he allow anyone to treat people as if their vote is so cheap?! How dare he allow this to happen. He represents these baseball people, he needs to tell them to stop.

We need to remind him that he is SUPPOSED to represent the citizens before he represents the businessmen on this one.

Bryan Bostic’s previous group (Richmond Ballpark initiative) optioned the purchase of Shockoe Bottom buildings in 2004, as noted in the middle of the right column in this Thalhimer MarketBeat Snapshot:

http://www.thalhimer.com/old/reports/2004/1stQTR2004.pdf

If he or his current group still has these options, or has similar options, this would be quite interesting. Since his new group (Richmond Baseball Club LC) is proposing to be the developer of the new stadium, he could essentially be negotiating with himself for the purchase of property in Shockoe Bottom using public money generated by the bonds.

150Anna said “Add that to the fact that they weren’t run by a local group”

Let’s see, the R- Braves were here for 42 years but they’re not a “local” group. Highwoods Properties is a Raleigh based firm with a local branch office for +/- 10 years – and they are a “local” group. And Bostic’s fantasy investors? “Local” of course – because they say so.

ptaylor – you, sir, have made your last rude comment to me. You can say you disagree with me, you can say you think I’m wrong, but calling me a liar and using such strong language as “pimping”…I’m not ok with it.

I say “I’m sure” because it doesn’t make sense that they didn’t pitch it. I’m sorry for my semantical error – I didn’t expect you to take it so literally, after all I’m just a fan.

By “not a local group” I mean that the Braves were owned by the big league team and not a local group of investors. Minor League Baseball has pointed out that local ownership works better in communities (I read that in an article on milb.com, can’t remember which one; I read lots of things on there). Highwoods is not the group buying the team, Bryan Bostic is, and he’s very active in his community. Also, if you look up Peter Kreckman, you’ll find that he has had a long history of experience here including owning a local development company that he started up in 1984. He merged his comapany with Highwoods 11 years later. Go read his company profile before you accuse me of lying about my identity again.

Liberty – the new movie theater is not something that will help baseball. First of all – you’re not going to walk from a baseball game to go see a movie. Second – you’re not going to want to walk down the boulevard across the train tracks with your family. Aside from kitchen 64, what other restaurants are there? I’ve avoided that area once the R-Braves left…fill me in.

As for the AA stadium comment – if we were to get a AAA team, the stadium plans would have to be upgraded. In order to have a AAA team, your stadium must seat a minimum of 10,000 people. The current plans call for a max of 8,500 (I think) and is no more extravagant than the current stadiums that have been built as far as the ballpark itself goes (meaning seats, suites, party decks, picnic areas, 360 concourse, etc.). My ***guess*** would be the price tag is to accomodate the drainage issue and the buildings that will surround the stadium.

Again, I must stress that this discussion needs to remain more civil than it has. I don’t appreciate being called names and I don’t think anybody else does either. You can get your opinion across without being so aggressive that you offend your own neighbors (and by neighbors I mean everyone in Richmond is in this together, not just Church Hill or the fan or the Northside). Seriously, we all need to act like adults.

Another thing to keep in mind is: Remember all the buzz when riverboat gambling was “hip”, and it was going to bring in mega dollars, and employment? Just like in Atlantic City? Did it help fix up the town, or was it sent out of town into certain persons open pockets?

No, what I am saying is at one time, Riverboat gambling was going to be the savior for many Cities and Towns, with all the empty promises of employment, and monies coming back into the Cities. It turned out to not benefit the Cities, only a certain few. They even tried it here serveral times, but people learned by example of other places, including MS, IA. Now we are getting fed the same thing, but this time it’s baseball.

Anna-how do you know people wont go to a movie and a ball game? oh yeah i forgot youre a know it all. bostic sure has you brain washed. your logic is twisted, you say we get a ballpark plus all this other entertainment stuff if we develop the bottom, then you say people who go to ball parks only go to see a game, nothing else. With only a portion of the money for the new stadium I’m sure the boulevard could have more entertainment venues, sell some bonds Ptaylor puts you in your place every time so quit cryin about it. i dont trust bostic as far as i could throw that whale.

Ptaylor far from puts me in my place – he falsely calls me a liar and accuses me of being in the back pocket of the developers. Given that both those statements are wrong, I’d say he throws around some personal insults which sound pretty good, but do little to advance the substance of his argument.

Baseball and movies are not complimentary activities. I doubt many people would sit through a 3 hour baseball game that starts at 7ish, and still even be able to make it to a movie. Even if they could, would they want to sit around for another 2 hours? And spend at least $10 on a movie ticket after the relatively cheap alternative of a baseball game?

MAYBE there are some people who would make a 6 hour activity of it on a rare day-game, but I think common sense, or even time management would steer people away from that option. Its not me “knowing it all”, its actually thinking through that scenario.

The point I make with baseball working BETTER in the bottom is that the pedestrian culture is already there; the more people friendly streets, as opposed to 4 lane nearly highways.

I NEVER said people will only go to a ballgame no matter what, I said that people will only go to a ballgame if its on the Boulevard because you drive there, park in the easily available surface lot, and drive home because you don’t want to walk down the Boulevard with your kids. On top of that, unless this movie theater does *really* well, I think you’ll be hard-pressed to get substantial traffic on the Boulevard in the offseason to patronize restaurants and other retail, whereas the Bottom supports such business year-round already.

As for the Convention Center that existed, this is the article I read tat gave me the impression that the 6th Street Marketplace was meant to be supported by the “to be built” GRCC:

http://www.virginiabusiness.com/edit/magazine/yr2002/mar02/broadst.shtml

I particularly liked the quote that says the 6th Street Marketplace and other city center things failed because they were trying to force the market where they did not want to go(as opposed to all the renovations being done at the time on the Canal Walk)…I think this statement could apply to trying to transform the Boulevard into something it is not instead of developing the naturally pedestrian Bottom.

Finally – how do none of the taxes generated go to the taxpayers? The bill calls for only part of the tax revenues generated to go towards paying off the bonds. Not all of them.

And, for the third time, will somebody answer this question: If you destroy the Diamond to build a new stadium, where will the team they’re buying this year play? Where will VCU play?

Again, I don’t think (notice this is an opinion, I certainly don’t profess to know everything that goes into building or remodeling a stadium) renovations will work as far as keeping costs low…check out the newer ballparks seating charts and you’ll see why there is much in the way of structural differences. Also, given the wording of the comments from MiLB, I don’t think they’ll settle for anything less than a new stadium deal…not just renovations.

RE #162: yes, yes and yes. great points.

RE #148: “People who accepted money for membership, are encouraging that practice, no matter how they voted.”

Nope. I know that I have stated that I, personally, would not be able to do it – just my achilles heel, people attempting to control me. But in concept it’s kind of a great way to stick it to the attempted manipulators.

Not sure, but I’m pretty sure VCU does pay to use the Diamond.

Also, and again, Peter Kreckman’s company may have merged into a NC company, but he has managed either his or a branch of Highwood’s development company in Richmond for at least 24 years. Apparently he did consulting before that, though the information on what that entails is limited. Stop acting like they’re outsiders just because the firm Kreckman merged into is based in NC.

Furthermore, there WAS competition for the plan the city chose. Its called a RFP – request for proposal, meaning the city requested proposals for a ballpark and anybody who wants to draw up a plan may do so (there could be restrictions on what type of companies are able to respond, I really don’t know, my knowledge of RFPs is limited to the definition). The city board (I think) chose the proposal by Highwoods.

Have we yet reached the law of diminishing return re: the utility of these conversations on the stadium? Let us not get target-fixed on one issue and forget the others. Tonight big-doings and votes at City Counsel on Oakwood Heights and James River Park Conservatory Plans. Will such concerned citizens be there to speak up and make an inpact or sitting at their computers yet writing more notes to each other on the stadium?
Remember Echo Harbour and the amendments to the Downtown Master Plan?
Will these actions let the fox into the hen house.

According to the developers propoganda about the shockoe site theres gonna be no extra cost to the taxpayers…EXCEPT- the money to upgrade the utilities, lol, im sure this is gonna be a real good deal for the taxpayers. Of course this figure is elastic and IM sure its gonna be more expensive than less expensive, when isnt it when the govt. gets to work. So instead of spending all this money upgrading utilities and whatnot for the shockoe site, which i havent even heard any quotes of how much this is gonna cost the taxpayers, Why not just spend this money upgrading the diamond and using a lil capital to assist more private development around the diamond? Do you suppose someone who owns alot of property around the shockoe site is pulling in political favors from their little political friends.

Joe,

Have you even read the book “Field of Schemes”? Googling a topic does not make you an expert in that field. I really don’t know how you can compare the new Yankee Stadium to the project in the Bottom. Many of the proponents of the project have actually lived or at least spent significant time in a city with a downtown ballpark. If you were to spend time in a minor league city with the same population as Richmond you would see the reality of the situation; and if you are looking for equivalent cities or ballparks to compare this to, look at cities like Memphis, Durham, and Louisville – not New York.

I love when folks try to check each other on blog etiquette. It makes me smile.

I wonder if someone could provide a link to a comprehensive set of rules for participating in a local-based online community forum…

Jim,

Reading a book doesn’t make one an expert. Never has. But, I now have this book and am half-way through it. Do you want to borrow it?

There are examples in it of stadium boondoggles “from Baltimore to Cleveland and Minneapolis to Seattle and dozens of places in between.”

Tiny,

I do that because some people do not trust links to unknown sites and I know you have very little free time to read anything. Therefore, I try to make it as easy as possible for you.

Actually, the longer the post, the least likely it is the other readers will read all of it. This is basic journalism / technical writing. The only ones that are going to read that whole thing are those on your side. It’s much better to make your point in smaller slices.

Its Toledo, from the images I’ve seen on their website, and from an article I’ve read (I would link it, but it was a while ago and I’m not sure where it was posted) its been a great success in the area. Also, using google maps streetview I’ve been able to view the area its in…it looks really nice.

“the developers made an assumption based on very preliminary or incomplete data.”
keep up the great work geniuses

After hearing what was said at the Feb. 10 meeting at Holton Elementary, I have to ask at least 2 questions of the Highwoods Development team and Mr. Bostic: 1- Is a baseball stadium the only structure known to all of mankind that can be built in the Shockoe area flood plain (you talk as if it is); and 2- Does the mystery team Mr. Bostic is bringing to Richmond HAVE to play in a stadium built in Shockoe, or can we build a new stadium on the Boulevard and they’ll be just as happy there? Those 65 acres on Boulevard are already paid for and don’t require any leases or purchases to build on it. Sounds like a little less overhead to me!

Anna, thank you for your contributions and rational, factual responses. I’ve grown just a little be tired of this, which I think is the design of the full time anonymous spammers on this thread.

C’mon Gray, why stop there? Why not plant a grove of money trees???? I know, we could build a rainbow that spans interstate 95, and on one end of it we could have a giant pot of gold! That would be swell!

Anna, your points are well stated. I think you are wasting your efforts in this thread though. Maybe you should write a letter to Style in favor of the ballpark and see if they will actually publish it.

Paul Hammond, who are the anonymous spammers? I actually know many of the folk on this thread, except for Anna. Anna hasn’t even stated where she lives. For all we know she lives in NC. The state and city tax rates she mentioned in post #83 aren’t Richmond’s or Virginia’s. She should submit a piece to style but she’ll have to give a real name for them to publish it.

Fanguy, aren’t the developers the ones promising money trees and a pot of gold?

Boulevard is not feasible for the following reasons:

The diamond was outdated when it was built. It was the last of the large major-league-style monolithic stadiums built for the minor leagues. It is steep, dark in the corridors, cramped, yet too big (so it always looks empty, even with a crowd – exception was perhaps the 4th), uncomfortable, stark (huge monolith in middle of parking lots), pedestrian unfriendly, poorly designed boxes, inconvenient concession areas, no room for family areas, etc. No ball team wants to play there. Just like no department store wants to go to Clover Leaf no matter how much you clean it up, no team wants to go to the Diamond, even if it is renovated.

Also, there isn’t enough room at the Boulevard for a critical mass of private development to sustain a TIF plan like the one in the bottom. You can’t move the Ashe Center from the site politically, you can’t afford to move the public works lot, the soccer field is staying, and VCU wants a tennis center there. So all that means no room for any supporting mixed-use development. Taxpayers would have to pay for every cent of a Boulevard rebuild or renovated stadium straight from their pockets.

“Just like no department store wants to go to Clover Leaf no matter how much you clean it up, no team wants to go to the Diamond, even if it is renovated.”

So VCU baseball would turn the Boulevard ballpark down if offered? I think you are full of it.

“that the developers are paying for up front here for the private development.”

If this is true why aren’t developers already paying for the infrastructure needed to abate possible flooding?

You guys are just twisting in the wind.

Allow Shockoe Bottom to develop a multimodal transportation center and a slavery museum. Allow Boulevard to develop baseball and recreation. Both with greeness and shopping/restarants galore. This is what the people who LIVE here want.

I wonder how many times I have to say this If the City still needs to fix the flooding issues in Shockoe Bottom what did they do with the over 2 million they spent on fixing the cisterns and drainage they did already?

And once again I ask if they use the outfield for drainage where does it go to? Sounds like we would do better to put a water polo field you supply the horse with water waders and Shockoe Bottom will provide the water. When the Diamond had those flooding issues the team did not play so you want to cut a season down further during the rainy months?

SBD, again with the AA “association”…you really have no idea what you’re talking about when it comes to MiLB. Its the EASTERN LEAGUE. JUST the eastern league. There’s no “AA” president. And its a sale to Bostic’s group Richmond Baseball Club…not a trade.

I believe its the sale that actually has been approved, or is in the process of being approved, while the application to MOVE the team from Connecticut is pending the analysis of the plans to build a new stadium since they’ve stated that there’s no way they will be ok with staying in the Diamond. In fact, I’m pretty sure MiLB has made it abundantly clear they want to be in Richmond so long as the stadium issue is settled.

The reason the Defenders are struggling is because they don’t have the population OR the weather to support a full-season minor league team. Its not the Sawx (yes, thats bostonian for Red Sox) that draws no matter how cold. The mayor of Norwich even said (in the article that either you or JoeRichmond posted in here) that they would love a short-season team.

While I may assume some things about the psychology of consumers (and trust that I hold those as opinions, and not fact), I do understand the structure of the minor leagues.

Gray, those greenspace ideas would be great, but I’m pretty sure the tax payers would have to foot the bill for them since greenspace typically doesn’t generate ROI (unless, of course, its the outfield of a ballpark). Now are cherry blossoms more important than schools?

Also, regarding the necessary changes that need to be made to the Diamond make it a “modern” ballpark, I’ve posted numerous links on numerous threads of what a successful minor league park looks like – again, try the Greensboro, Toledo, or Durham seating charts. Notice how none of those stadiums have the bulky upper bowl that the Diamond does, and instead they have numerous suites, party decks, and picnic areas. Is it possible to somehow disconnect the upperbowl and airlift it out?? 🙂

And yes, I’m from NC, too. Awesome. Instead of arguing my points, just discredit my opinion based on where I live.

My unawareness of the tax rate has nothing to do with where I live, I mispoke, I just didn’t feel the need to waste space with a rebuttal when you already corrected it – I had meant that the state tax portion that goes to transportation and schools would not be touched.

Gray #197, I think we see the TIF style finance in different lights – not sure where the bridge between our views is.

I like your style and your comments. I’m just trying to throw it out there that those other green ideas would probably cost taxpayers a lot more than they would seem. The unfortunate (or fortunate?) reality is that a simple park isn’t going to attract development to pay for it or provide the needed infrastructure (everything in the flood plain needs a bridge to it, to belabor the bridge reference).

So while your (good) ideas are technically possible, they are not feasible.

Scott,
Who is stopping “Shockloe Bottom from developing a multimodal center and a slavery museum?” More to the point, who is paying for it? It’s been 4 years since Paul Goldman said we needed no public participationn in development in the Bottom, that the private sector would handle it. Lovely new shopping, offices and residential developed in the Bottom in the past four years. I was just driving down E. Broad Street today marvelling at all the new development along that stretch.

Thanks neighbor for the kind words, however, I believe the ballpark will cost Richmonders millions and will require yearly subsidies like the art center. So what would provide jobs year round and attract tourists from other states?

http://riverdistrictnews.com/2009/02/26/slavery-museum-for-shockoe-bottom/

So we don’t spend public dollars for infrastructure because that would aid this development. Do we spend public dollars on infrastructure that would aid the ACORN proposal? Do we spend the infrastructure dollars without any development plan, simply because we ought to do a better job in SB in handling stormwater, even if the area stays undeveloped?

I have always questioned how the millions and millions have been spent on stormwater in Shockoe Bottom.
Its a valley basin that empties to the river. Its natural stormwater system, namely Shockoe Creek, has been forced underground, while all the surrounding forest that used to soak up much of the rain is gone. Now maybe daylighting the Creek is not possible now, and maybe we can’t bring back all the woods, but I would suggest that any serious attempt to deal with stormwater in Shockoe Bottom needs to consider the original problem, and not just slap on more concrete, pipe, and man-made configurations.
The proposed baseball stadium is not a solution. I would still like to see Highwood’s detailed engineering plans posted here. The Style article suggests they do not exist and would be extraordinarily costly if they did.

Pardon me if I do not place a great deal of credence in a poll that includes maybe a hundred people. And since this deal is involving MILLIONS of dollars of taxpayer money from across the city, I am stunned that anyone would have the nerve to suggest in these economic times that this oughta be a project that Richmonders embrace. The reasons against this far outweigh even the best reasons presented by its proponents — including those who live in North Carolina.

Anna, cut the bull. Fanguy lives in the fan and supports the stadium…has anybody called him a liar? If my friend who lives in Chesterfield and supports the stadium came online, no one would call him a liar. I can’t help but think you won’t disclose your state because you live so far away that it would be absurd for anyone to believe you’re blogging about the stadium in the bottom because you love baseball so much.

Joe,

You won’t accept poll results that show hundreds of people want the stadium in the Bottom (including the neighborhood association that would be directly affected by the development); but you are willing to state that Richmond “would go crazy” for an NBA team because certain members of your family like basketball?

Jim —

Don’t you tell me what I will or won’t do — aren’t you being awfully high-handed here?

You are ignoring my point that this will effect the entire city and you want us to place credence on a poll that involves maybe 100 people.

Do you think that a poll has no scientific basis whatsoever involving maybe 100 or so people should drive a decision that involves MILLIONS UPON MILLIONS of dollars?

Are you nuts?

And, just because some low-rent basketball team with a stupid name didn’t take off in Richmond more than a decade ago, you think that if there were to be an announcement that this city were to be the home of a SERIOUS NBA team, that this town would not go CRAZY?

Tell Vanna you need to buy a clue, Jim!

This idea is being driven by a bunch of rich people who want to get even richer — what they don’t realize is that we are living in tough economic times. Please read the newspaper, people. The “stimulus” is not restoring jobs …..

RE: #214 – Well said.

I wish that folks would understand that Government is a business, and our way of doing things here in Richmond has historically been bad business. We have seen it proven time and time again.

Even if we take out of the equation the abusiveness of the condition of our school system, the joke of the condition of our roads, and the other money spent masterbatorily used by our small-town bigwigs to pat each other on the back – this is still a poor business model. The ROI doesn’t work, and to allow any, and I mean ANY room for the attitude that we will “work out the niggling details later,” is begging for trouble. Anyone who has been involved with any type of construction or building will tell you that there are enough details and surprises that pop up, even in the most well-formed model. Those would need to be addressed along the way, even in a plan that made sense from the get-go. Which this one doesn’t.

I have said this before, but I don’t mind repeating it: Informed citizens have a responsibility to stand up and speak out against the thoughtless waste of our money – it is the antidote for the us-and-them, victim mentality that keeps people, and localities, down.

So while some may think that the vocal folks on this forum are nothing but a bunch of ankle biters, I maintain that spending millions of bucks on anything because it is *neato* is so ignorant that it is almost beyond belief. This is not a monopoly game. This is our cash, and it is excruciatingly obvious that our city’s funds are needed at the foundation, rather than blowing them on cotton-candy proposals with so many unaddressed variables that it might actually be funny if it were not so tragic.

I agree with Justin who aptly posted “That’s right: the last thing Richmond needs is more jobs and higher property values. We must respect the historic nature of Shockoe Bottom with cracked, decaying parking lots and strip clubs!”

Indeed. By all means, Preserve Blight, Resist Change, Foster Crime, Flee & Sprawl to Suburbia….it’s the Richmond Way!

JR,

So let’s get an NBA team. Go for it. Of course we would be the smallest NBA market in the country. Then we would have to rebuild the Coliseum to NBA specs. But wait, weren’t we discussing redeveloping Shockoe Bottom. I forget.

Gray,

I live walking distance to the bottom if it matters. I’ve spoken publicly and privately about this issue, on and offline. I either use my real name or a part of it.

****

I’m willing to accept that most people here either live in or near CH or SB, but that doesn’t make any one opinion more or less qualified.

I’ve always liked the idea of a downtown SB ballpark, for a lot of reasons. One of them is that it is NEATO, but I’ve never used that term. Mostly though is because I want Richmond to be an outstanding city and break down the political and cultural barriers that drive businesses and people away. I want to make Richmond a safe, attractive place for both suburbanites and urbanites and I’d love to see the bottom and all of it’s attractions crawling with people from the city, the burbs and beyond.

Joe,

I am not telling you what to do. However, when you make claims that no one wants this development please show me some data to prove this. Any poll that I have seen (and not just the one on CHPN) has shown most people in favor of the project. How can you accuse me of being high-handed when you are the one posting links to Auschwitz websites when discussing a ballpark development in Richmond, Virginia?

Let’s take a look at your Richmond would go crazy for the NBA hypothesis. First of all, do you know the population of an NBA town? Richmond is not even on the NBA’s radar. Richmond wasn’t even in the discussion for and NBA Developmental League team. Secondly, you mentioned in an earlier post “How many citizens will be able to afford upwards of $35 a ticket (single) to take their families and children to a baseball game?” when discussing the Shockoe Center. Have you been to an NBA game recently? The cheapest tickets in the house are $35 (although the Wizards now have some for $20). I ask you, how many people will be able to afford the $300-$400 for a courtside seat at an NBA game in Richmond? You also claimed that getting an NBA team would require no new development since we have not one, but two facilities for basketball. Once again, have you been to an NBA game recently? There is absolutely no way that an NBA team would play in either the Coliseum or especially the Seigel Center. And if you want to look at finances, newer NBA franchises such as Charlotte are already in trouble and in danger of moving only 5 years after they started in Charlotte. So no, personally I don’t agree with you on numerous levels that an NBA franchise would be successful in Richmond.

Joe,

First of all, you were the one that brought Auschwitz into this whole debacle of a discussion in the first place so think carefully before placing blame. It was actually a despicable move on your part and has debased any real commentary you have. I simply made reference to the NBA information to show how “out of touch you are” and who exactly needs to “buy a clue.” But thanks for not actually answering any of those questions. It shows that you have none.

So let’s get back to the real discussion shall we? Earlier in this post you mentioned the book Field of Schemes. When asked for actual information that could pertain to this discussion you simply referenced quotes from the back page of the book. You can not compare the development in the Bottom with boondoggles “from Baltimore to Cleveland and Minneapolis to Seattle and dozens of places in between.” So what have you learned from this book about Minor League stadiums built in an urban environment? Please give us some facts.

For all those who may have *forgotten* by now, Highwoods is the major developer seeking to bring this project to Richmond.

Why no mention of Richmond by the *home* office team?

http://www.confluenceresearch.net/docs/Stadiums.pdf

Note, pls. Page 8 — “If the state of the local economy is at all in a downturn, it is very hard to justify public expenditures, or even financial backing, of any kind for projects that are not directly related to the public good.”

Page 13 — Appendix A, Summary Statistics for Affiliated Minor League Ballparks [Really cool chart here w/some very interesting numbers that are at odds w/those presented by the proponents of this project].

Page 15 — Has the Pacific Coast League Summary. [Again, includes some interesting numbers that are at odds w/ numbers presented by proponents of this project].

http://primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/16602

Sorry the link above did not work — this one should. ~ JR

Joe,

Great job at avoiding both the questions that Anna and I have posed. But thanks for the link about Kansas City Power & Light District (which is again completely unrelated with completely different figures and doesn’t even have a ballpark – it does however have your basketball arena). Keep up the great investigative work!

And to answer your question to Post 228: Why would they discuss a proposed project (i.e. one that has not happened yet) on a conference call about their 4th Quarter Earnings in 2008?!? I am not sure what you are trying to prove with this one. There is the elusive answer to your question. Now it’s your turn. Please show us your evidence against recent Minor League stadiums in an URBAN setting.

Here was the only answer I ever received to “where should the team that RBC is buying THIS year should play if they knock down the Diamond and rebuild on the Boulevard?”:

“Gee, Anna, nobody told “Bostic & His Boyz” to buy a team for $15 freakin’ million dollars!”

The price is what most teams around that level (or AAA for that matter) go for, so I’m not sure what that criticism is supposed to do.

The main point though? I’ve seen just about every opponent to the stadium criticize the developers for trying to build us a stadium when we “don’t even have a team.” Well now they’ve very nearly got one – its literally a “build it and they will come” situation as the Eastern League wants to make sure there will be a new stadium in the works. So what now?

Winston – I’m not terribly familiar with that part of the MRA, but from what I’ve seen on google maps, I think I’d have the same issues here as I would on the Boulevard. Those issues being that its not already a pedestrian area like the Bottom is, and that the 4 lanes of traffic don’t easily promote that.

My opinion is, if we can’t put the stadium in a pedestrian area (like the Bottom), then you might as well build it out in the surrounding counties. An area typically favors pedestrians or motorists, not both. At least it can’t benefit, I mean hurt (?), the city out in Chesterfield or the West End.

JoeRichmond, if I were to go back and try to answer every question you’ve ever asked, my head would be spinning at the amount of times I’d have to repeat myself…again. That doesn’t mean I, or anyone else, have ever not answered one of your questions, it just means I think you’ve ignored the ones that we’ve answered time and time again.

You went to the trouble of citing a book that could have some bearing on the situation, but we’re all waiting to see if it actually speaks of minor league developments in urban areas.

Actually, the Boulevard location is both pedestrian and motor friendly. I’ll also check out the Hull and 7th -I would think that might be pedestrian friendly given there are sidewalks in the area -but I don’t know about easy highway access.

The only reason you want to talk about the book is that you DO NOT want to talk about the other questions I have asked. The book has plenty to say, but it is not about Highwoods or this development proposal. There are lesson to be learned there …. and there are answers needed here.

Why didn’t the Highwoods Home office even mention Richmond in the analysts phone conference?

SHOW US THE MONEY that exists independent of what you want from taxpayers in tough economic times.

Anna #237: “Well now they’ve very nearly got one – its literally a “build it and they will come” situation as the Eastern League wants to make sure there will be a new stadium in the works.”

I seem to recall that you were adamently against the “build it and they will come” position earlier. You actually said that Sixth Street Market was a “built it and they will come” approach that failed, and was related to the convention center, because you were too young to remember that there already was a convention center when Sixth Street Market was built.

I realize that you are VERY wise on minor league baseball, and you think you know everything there is to know about financing, TIF bonds, bonds in general, the current financial picture for cities, urban planning, baseball stadiums, baseball parks, flooding, engineering of FEMA areas, more urban planning, etc etc – but please, tell me WHY you think that being able to WALK to something either before or after a baseball game is a good idea?! You seem to think that a “pedestrian friendly area” is necessary for a baseball stadium. Why?

Winston #236 – sounds good to me. It’s close to Legend’s brew place, that’s good for beer drinkers. I’m waiting to be attacked with sharp sticks for saying that….actually, it’s closer to the Canal Walk that Anna seems to think is such a great pedestrian destination (why, I don’t know, there’s nothing there but a canal).

Anna, anna, anna…
More than a week ago, I provided a link to a post on Buttermilk & Molasses (from last September as I recall) that clearly showed the Robert Bobb Group’s schematic of a ballpark located wherer the Vehicle Maintenance Facility is now. The original RFP for the Boulevard site specified that the developer is responsible for relocating the vehicle facility. I don’t have time to track the link down again.

From the R T-D of 2/24:

“Minor League Baseball’s vice president for legal affairs, Scott Poley, said yesterday that construction of a downtown ballpark isn’t the only way to relocation approval. “Something like they did in Albuquerque could work,” Poley said.(speaking of Richmond)” The Eastern League is not adamant on a new stadium. But you seem to have the inside scoop on everything, so the EL”s VP is a liar. And Anna is ,of course, correct. Assuming Bostic gets a team, they can play anywhere they want as long as RBC, LC can afford a stadium. Bostic’s group doesn’t have $70 million. Too bad. They’ll play when and where the taxpayers decide. This thread started off on the subject of the CHA vote. They voted no. The SBNA voted yes. Neither vote has any meaning. Civic associations aren’t footing the bill here.There are no issues before local government at this time. This project is nowhere near ‘ shovel ready.’ This must pass multiple levels of scrutiny by outsiders. The developers are creating artificial floodplain – which requires review and approval by the Army Corps of Engineers. The developers must acquire the land for the ancillary uses.The developers must obtain construction financing; they must acquire permament financing. Commercial mortgage underwriters will be demanding verifiable rational economic and cost projections, not hype and opinion.

Jim and Anna,

Is this “Urban Enough” for you — the Memphis stadium is struggling (one of the examples Jim used) and one of the “minor league developments in urban areas” that Anna asked about. The Memphis article is at:

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2008/Apr/24/new-redbird-has-tough-goal-fill-the-park/

Memphis is also one of the three examples used on page 16 of the developers’ “Shockoe Center – 40 Frequently Asked Questions and Answers.” The Q&A is at:

http://pharrout.com/~hillsand/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/shockoe-ctr1.pdf

http://www.insidebayarea.com/sports/ci_11752027

Anna,

The questions about the conference call were definitely NOT answered.

Sure, Jim provided words, but his words ducked the real issue, i.e., why was there no mnetion whasoever of a planned developemnt upwards of $300-plus million dollars in the discussion of FUTURE plans of the company?

Why is there no mention of this planned stadium, retail build out and more in this conversation or on their website?

If I were a stockholder in Highwoods, I would want to know how they plan to address the significant drop in the value of their stock over the past two years.

http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=HIW#chart3:symbol=hiw;range=2y;indicator=volume;
charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=on;source=undefined

Peak stock price was more than $46 two years ago. Current price of $21 is less than half that amount.

Anna,

Might I suggest a possible resolution to this situation?

I cannot imagine a worse time to attempt to get government and the public to buy into what can only be seen as a “nicety” and not a “necessity” for our daily lives.

Instead of asking the citizens of Richmond to foot the bill and liability for this stadium, why don’t the proponents attempt some regional cooperation and bring all parties to the table? The federal stimulus will only provide temporary help for Richmond and the surrounding localities.

One good thing that might come of the “troubles” that have best our nation, state and region could be that we are all forced to re-think assumptions about one another.

Isn’t it about time that we get to know our neighbors better?

Just in the central Virginia region alone, thousands of workers have lost their jobs in layoffs, factory shutdowns and corporate bankruptcies in the past year.

What offends most of all about this stadium is the rigidity in the thinking of the proponents of baseball in the bottom.

Anytime anyone suggests an alternative, i.e., the Boulevard, we automatically are attacked for not getting with the developers “program.”

It is as if you are all saying that it is either *your way* or *no way* and given a choice like that, I think most people recoil and prefer *no way.*

The citizens of Richmond have just gone through four years of being bullied by the Wilder administration and we are, frankly, more than a bit sick and tired of seeing the tactics continue.

The recent brouhaha in the 7th District concerning who would serve a Council member to replace Delores McQuinn is evidence that the *new boss* appears to be *same as the old boss.*

The wholesale unwillingness on the part of the proponents to consider a scaled-back version or another location is troubling, to say the least.

The SB proponents really come off as bullies here from attacking individual posters to attempting to impugn the integrity of respected citizens in our community and of professional journalists at Style Weekly.

Just something for us all to think about.

Anna,

If the developers didn’t *need* help from the city, why does it matter whether Jones and the Council members think this is a good idea? If the project didn’t *need* help from the General Assembly, why does it matter?

You and I both know why — the financial structure that is being proposed involves public money. You cannot dismiss the behavior of the city officials inthe past who allowed themselves to be bamboozled by fast-talkers talking big stuff. I still have not received a satisfactory answer as to why Highwoods is not publicly owning any piece of this project, according to their own home office? What is up with that?

The players in this little drama are not virgins trapped in the forest. They have all been here before. I do not respect their lack of wisdom or the amount of money they have foolishly wasted. Never mind the many promises that have been made — by officials and developers alike — which have never materialized. Honestly, we would be crazy if we DIDN’T bring this up.

Those who question the public necessity of this project (and others) have a right to feel victimized. It is our money that has been absconded with and it is our public trust that has been abused. Fool us once, shame on you. Fool us twice, shame on us.

When I think about the $3 million we are still paying on the CDA, I can’t help but wonder how schools could have been made ADA compliant or renovated with that money. We could take the money that has been wasted and continues to be wsted and invested in taking the public buildings in the city “green.” We could use this money to train young (and old) so that they will be able to get the “green” jobs that will be part of the nation’s economic reovery.

What about the athletic facilities of RPS Schools? These are shameful and the school system is proposing to cut the sports programs even more.

Thus far, this project proposes no effort to give back to this community, simply to take from it in terms of taxes and future revenue.

Unless you all can come up with an idea that will actively give back to the citizens and children of this city, I honestly don’t see why the needs of a baseball stadium should be placed before any other need.

And, I also don’t understand why the needs of PRIVATE business people should be placed over the needs of other private business people already in our city.

What is up with not doing your due diligence with the restauranteurs in Shockoe Slip?

As proposed by Highwoods, the stadium will be paid for by bonds (borrowed money) issued by RFSA, a to-be-created government entity. The money will be repaid through the increase in tax revenue generated by sales in the development zone. If sales are not sufficient and the debt cannot be repaid, RFSA will be the one responsible for the debt, not Highwoods. Since RFSA is a government entity, it means the taxpayer will be ultimately responsible for the debt if the development fails. This information is derived from the Q&A link that JoeRichmond provided above.
If this project gets off the ground, Highwoods will be the head developer and will parcel out work to other developers, contractors, etc., which is standard procedure, but keep in mind that this is how they make money. If the project is successful, they’ll make more money from managing properties, etc, but if it tanks they will still have made millions along the way. Just by getting the project approved they will make money.
My take on the city’s position is that they think that this will be a solution to the drainage problem in the Bottom. Tax revenue from the development will be used to repay money used on the drain system. The down side is that if revenues are not as projected then the city will have just spent a ton of money that it didn’t have.

I will crunch some numbers tonight and I hope others will as well.

I, too, have tried explaining things to you and am trying very hard not to take offense when you personally attack me and accuse me of not reading explanations proffered by other proponents of SB stadium. I simply disagree.

And, just because I disagree with your take on the numbers does not mean that I am either illiterate or ignorant. You do yourself a disservice when you resort to such insult.

Can you, or any of your developer friends point to ANYTHING that has brought 500,000 people into one part of town? Reasonable people should be able to disagree.

The baseball stadium in the bottom will not change the flood plain issues, nor will it “Save Richmond.”

I thought the Performing Arts Center was supposed to do that. Guess there just aren’t that many people really excited about opera.

You are dishonest when you say that I said there was NO good in having the stadium there. I never said that.

I have said that it needs to be scaled back and if you are so hellbent on having a stadium, what is wrong with the Boulevard location other than the fact that the developers do not own as much land around the Bloulevard location as they do in the Bottom?

Money is driving this deal and I think we need to find out who owns the land in question in order to understand why there is this shrill insistence that the Bottom is the only place it can be.

Does anyone have any current information concerning the City’s plans to develop the Boulevard from Broad Street to Hermitage Road? What will happen to that area if the Diamond is not rehabbed for use as a baseball stadium?

Last I heard, Robert Bobb was a key figure in that planning.

Ramzi – if the City itself is not a guarantor and does not execute a guaranty, there will be no City obligation. The bad examples everyone cites involved some document like a guaranty that hooked the City. No guaranty, no hook. Also, according to the Q&A, most of the revenues will come from real estate taxes not just sales taxes, real estate tax amounts being money the various private owners and developers would have to pay no matter what their “success”.

Also, Neighbor, care to cite the authoritative source for your statement to Ramzi? Where is the legal basis for the conclusion? Ramzi’s comments are consistent with materials distributed by the developers themselves and with comments made by John Gerner.

Thank you, crd! Glad for the research assist!

Ugh, this already got deleted once while I was looking for a number…here we go again:

Here are quotes from what JR said in #261:
Thus far, this project proposes ***no effort*** to give back to this community, ***simply to take*** from it in terms of taxes and future revenue.

Unless you all can come up with an idea that will actively give back to the citizens and children of this city, I honestly don’t see why the needs of a baseball stadium should be placed before any other need.”

And now 265 after I asked how there was NO community benefit:
“You are dishonest when you say that I said there was NO good in having the stadium there. I never said that.”

If the project proposes “no effort” to benefit the community, how does it produce any good? Did I miss something?

Also, regarding your ‘sports hero’ comment – have you ever talked to a minor league baseball player? Many of them (not all, but most of those who volunteer for community outreach) are very humble, hard-working early 20-somethings who work hard for very little money in order to fulfill their dreams. Most importantly, kids can identify with these players through sports/baseball – and if that makes them listen to “work hard for what you want” and “make school a priority,” can you really argue with their influence?

I respect that you regard public servants highly, I do as well – but I don’t think its fair to judge these young, talented adults who are pursuing their dreams. Isn’t that important to teach children, too? Not to mention, very few minor leaguers actually make do make it despite it all – many become your teachers and police officers, and local coaches.

Finally, because this is getting long, I took 10 seconds to come up with something that has drawn 500,000 people to Richmond. I picked a random year, 1995. The attendance? 524,210. The team? The Richmond Braves.

I was going to respond to the article posted by crd when I thought it referred to the Kannapolis Intimidators, a minor league team in the same town. Alas, its another random project for another non-MiLB purpose.

Yes, I see how the last couple of paragraphs applies, and I agree, the Diamond site would be ‘easier’ – but considering the failures of that site and all the reasons I’ve sited why the Bottom is much better for baseball, I still think the expense would be worth it as long as an acceptable financial plan is reached.

Anna, give up! You are talking to a wall. Although your efforts are admirable, they might be better spent talking to those with an open mind, and to those who will treat you with less venom. I mean, I see we are 275 posts into this thread, and some people are still harping on the issue of whether the bonds will even get sold. (CRD’s post # 272). If they don’t understand the basic point that if the bonds don’t get sold in advance, the project doesn’t move forward and the City doesn’t contribute a dime, then they will never understand any point you make.

I find it amusing that JoeRichmond calls you a professional blogger when the guy has every other post in this thread.

*what happens to those less fortunate

Nice work Anna, there is a time to call it quits, at least for a while. I know you, FG, myself and others are getting tired of repeating ourselves and ad hominem attacks. I’m quite sure there will be other opportunities and venues. Feel free to look me up.

Since the sports authority will own the
stadium, will the City be able to collect
real estate taxes on the stadium? If not,
taxes on $85 million worth of real estate
is a huge loss for the City. No wonder
the team doesn’t want to own the stadium.
It seems that everyone is making money
except the City taxpayers.

Bla Bla Bla ( saying something about Anna working for the Project and that she lives somewhere like NC or something) Lets face it this could go forever and everyone is going to keep their opinion. Anna why not use your zeal for baseball for good? ( and if you think supporting this boondoggle is you still need to do some more research and not into the team the effects of Failures in Ballparks and teams to draw enough fans to maintain viable running) Bla Bla Bla Bla

Excellent post. I am dealing with a few of these issues as well.
.