The Locks at 321

[benstyree]

I've been waiting for someone to point this out, but the article indicates that SunTrust was vacating 187,736 sf. on Main St. to lease 53,000 sf. at 321.  Right below that, it says that SunTrust now plans to lease 75,000 sf. through 2028, so this still creates a net loss of 112,736 sf. leased space downtown.  Even if they were to build 321 as designed now with no tenant, there would be 165,736 of empty space between the two towers (112,736 vacated in SunTrust Center + 53,000 at 321), whereas if SunTrust moved as planned, it would be 187,736.  In sum, SunTrust is vacating 2x the space in SunTrust Center than it planned to lease at 321 and the net change in empty space downtown is minimal between both scenarios...only leaving us without a new tower in the skyline.  I'm still hopeful that it'll get built sooner rather than later.

Edited October 26, 2016 by benstyree

[wrldcoupe4]

Yep SunTrust is rearranging where their folks sit within the region. They did a big lease out in Innsbrook. 

[RiverYuppy]

Let's hope they aren't planning on shipping more employees out to the county.

[blopp1234]

Sad about the height reduction and new design of the tower, but from the description, it should help engage the street front and canal front much more. I just can't get over the design of the building.

https://richmondbizsense.com/2017/11/20/58m-12-story-tower-slated-along-canal/

[eandslee]

Oh bloody hell - terrible design, terrible height!  It’s going to look so out of place right next to the much taller Riverfront Towers. Bad, bad, bad!  Don’t like it at all - looks like a big ice block.  It will be nice to have more residents in that area, but other than that - terrible!

[RVA-Is-The-Best]

man that thing is...  dire isnt it.... 

[Brent114]

Yup.  It’s pretty uninspired. 

 

[eandslee]

Not much else to say other than WVS needs to cancel this design, go back to the drawing board and start all over.  I'm not quite sure what they're thinking.  This sort of thing belongs in Scott's Addition or in the Bottom - not in the middle of the financial district...and right on the riverfront.  Seems to be a complete waste of prime real estate.  I know that they can do what they want (within city zoning laws), but Richmond deserves much better than this.  I don't know why I'm taking this so personal, but I'm pretty frustrated by the design.  I hope this goes nowhere.  I'd rather see nothing and wait for something much better than just settling for this.  Totally deflated.

[blopp1234]

They just need to change the facade in my opinion. The height isn't bad and it added canal presence, but the facade of the building is flat out ugly, kinda like the old Richmond Plaza building.

[CitiWalker]

Wow...very dull and boring looking....I'll pass...lol.

[eandslee]

32 minutes ago, blopp1234 said:

They just need to change the facade in my opinion. The height isn't bad and it added canal presence, but the facade of the building is flat out ugly, kinda like the old Richmond Plaza building.

Well, while they're at it fixing the façade, they can fix the height too!

[Shakman]

My day just got deflated.

[RVA-Is-The-Best]

Still waiting patiently for the day demand calls for building all residential high-rises a la Nashville/Raleigh/Charlotte....

[drayrichmond]

well this design sucks, that's all I can say.

[tparkerzut]

Agreed design sucks, mostly the facade. But I still would rather have this than nothing. I think it's time to consider that Richmond may never be a very tall city, and that's OK. Height is not the only defining factor of a successful city, in fact there are plenty of cities with very tall buildings that have sprawling suburban feeling urban cores. I would rather have 10 story buildings on every block than one 600' 'signature tower' in downtown. After Dominion announced their headquarters at the height that it is I've kind of given up hope that we will have a much taller skyline.

[Wahoo 07]

2 hours ago, tparkerzut said:

Agreed design sucks, mostly the facade. But I still would rather have this than nothing. I think it's time to consider that Richmond may never be a very tall city, and that's OK. Height is not the only defining factor of a successful city, in fact there are plenty of cities with very tall buildings that have sprawling suburban feeling urban cores. I would rather have 10 story buildings on every block than one 600' 'signature tower' in downtown. After Dominion announced their headquarters at the height that it is I've kind of given up hope that we will have a much taller skyline.

Regrettably, I agree.   It should be noted that many European cities lack substantial height but offer a compact, cosmopolitan, human-scaled, urban experience.  Perhaps this is Richmond's destiny.  This will be an improvement over the status quo, but that feels a like a consolation prize.  Hopefully, this is just a starting point and WVS will adjust their plans.  This is a key parcel and a major gateway to the canal/riverfront.  Richard Souter is correct when he states that this will increase the vitality of the Canal Walk.  However, that is no excuse for a rather banal box.  What goes here matters.  

Edited November 21, 2017 by Wahoo 07

[blopp1234]

Sadly I have to agree. For some cities, height just isn't their thing. I think Richmond will turn out to become one of those cities (as much as I don't want it to).  Richmond could very easily resemble a more European city with American architecture. I would definently be willing to give up height if we could get density and transit that has plagued most US cities. Let's just hope that which ever path the city takes, it builds transit capable of sustaining this growth.

Edited November 21, 2017 by blopp1234

[RiverYuppy]

I don't think we should give up hope on some towers yet.

You have to look at Richmond as a whole.  Neighborhoods like Manchester, Scott's Addition, and Shockoe Bottom have been slinging apartments and office space on the market at an unprecedented pace.  

Building tall buildings is expensive.  If you're a developer, you're probably looking at the hundreds and hundreds of apartment units coming on the market in Richmond that are taking advantage of lucrative tax credits or (now prime) land that was bought for close to nothing.  Do you really want to be the van guard of high-rise apartments when we're unsure at what point the absorption rate will slow down?  When all of your competition is working on significantly better margins than you?

Also, while not big brand new buildings, within the last 5 years the 15th (First National Bank) and 13th (Central National Bank) tallest buildings in RVA both were completely converted to apartments.   We also had The Edison Apartments (> 10 floors) come on the market recently as an historic rehab.

If I were a high-rise apartment developer, I wouldn't want to compete with those for unsure market absorption.

The same goes for office space.  You have Manchester and Scott's Addition slinging out new office space continuously.  Especially if you're cobbling together tenants rather than renting to one who has needs that could not be met by an office in Scott's Addition, Manchester, The Fan, etc.

The good news is that abandoned warehouses are drying up quick and there is no more land near downtown to be had for pennies.  Once this happens, the prime place to add more units and office space will be downtown and the only way to financially justify building on such high valued land will be to build big and tall.

 

EDIT:  To give an example, the rehab of the 23 story CNB cost ~$20m + ~$5m purchase to get ~200 apartments.  They also get historic tax credits.  This new 12 story apartment with ~240 apartments is going to cost ~$60m not including accusation fees.   The square footage is probably a bit different, but you see what new development has to compete with right now.

Edited November 21, 2017 by RiverYuppy

[eandslee]

35 minutes ago, Wahoo 07 said:

Regrettably, I agree.   It should be noted that many European cities lack substantial height but offer a compact, cosmopolitan, human-scaled, urban experience.  Perhaps this is Richmond's destiny. 

I'm not going down that easily.  I think there is still a tall future for Richmond.  Sure, it can be depressing sometimes to see these sort of proposals, but we can help affect some change in the way developers are thinking now.  I'm not going to leave it up to fate.  I'm going to, at least, be vocal about my opposition to things like this large cube WVS wants to plop down in a prime location.  If WVS wants to stay in the good graces of the community, they will change their design, but we have to let our views be known!

[Icetera]

10 minutes ago, RiverYuppy said:

Also, while not big brand new buildings, within the last 5 years the 15th (First National Bank) and 13th (Central National Bank) tallest buildings in RVA both got completely converted to apartments.   We also had The Edison Apartments (> 10 floors) come on the market recently as an historic rehab.

Well said.  Also add the recent conversion of #12, 8th & Main (20 floors).  I still wish Dominion would sell their old tower for conversion and built the second tower West of their site but oh well.

[drayrichmond]

Well here's the RTD article for the "tower":

http://www.richmond.com/business/local/story-apartment-tower-slated-to-rise-in-the-locks-development/article_ad9b7177-4ed7-549a-847e-75ecf89fd003.html

the sites set for demo Dec 4th

I'm still kind of mulling it over, it's better than nothing, but it's still not great.

[RVA-Is-The-Best]

11 hours ago, Icetera said:

Well said.  Also add the recent conversion of #12, 8th & Main (20 floors).  I still wish Dominion would sell their old tower for conversion and built the second tower West of their site but oh well.

Thank you! I'll admit I actually like One James River Plaza and kind of am going to miss it when it is inevitably torn down for the 2nd twin....would much rather they expand downtown westward by building on one of the large, whole city block sized (!!) lots in Monroe Ward.

 

I actually don't mind seeing  Richmond become a dense, endless stretch of continuous 8 to 15 storied buildings. One big long ''high spine'' from what actually is downtown right now to Monroe Park where VCU has the tall dorms. The bland but tall buildings on Franklin like the old Radisson (currently Graduate Hotel) in Monroe Ward can serve as the connecting pieces. Monroe Ward IMO is the biggest opportunity this city has.

[Downtowner]

I seriously can’t get over the fact it’s only 12 floors on prime land and right next to riverfront plaza awful awful it dwarfs this new apartment building. I’d hardly call it a tower. I hope city council scraps it. Let someone else come in and build something taller on it. Such a shame.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wahoo 07]

10 hours ago, Hike said:

 Chiming in, finally, on this one.  Trying to remain positive over the new design,  yeah i wish it was the tower that was proposed. Feel the building now is so deep that taller and narrower may have been better proportion but it looks to be this one so will have to get along with it.   My hope is it turns out better in reality than in renderings.  Also think the hotel on the opposite end balances the development,  bookends of similar sizes complimenting each other, will have to wait and see.  I can't tell if it will stand out and look odd or will river front towers look dated because of it. 

With regards to the new Hyatt, that was my thought as well.  I suspect that, without a hotel component, going too vertical here was too risky financially for WVS.  Whatever happens to the site, there  needs to be  a strong, conspicuous pedestrian link from the CBD to the canal on 10th Street. 

Another quibble with the rendering:  it shows the project keeping the diagonal parking on Byrd street.  Those spaces should go and the sidewalk extended outwards.  It could create a pleasant, pedestrian friendly promenade that provides another connection between neighborhoods.  Lining it with trees would help buffer the view and sound of the interstate too.  Not a big thing, but it would be an improvement. 

[wrldcoupe4]

23 hours ago, RiverYuppy said:

I don't think we should give up hope on some towers yet.

You have to look at Richmond as a whole.  Neighborhoods like Manchester, Scott's Addition, and Shockoe Bottom have been slinging apartments and office space on the market at an unprecedented pace.  

Building tall buildings is expensive.  If you're a developer, you're probably looking at the hundreds and hundreds of apartment units coming on the market in Richmond that are taking advantage of lucrative tax credits or (now prime) land that was bought for close to nothing.  Do you really want to be the van guard of high-rise apartments when we're unsure at what point the absorption rate will slow down?  When all of your competition is working on significantly better margins than you?

Also, while not big brand new buildings, within the last 5 years the 15th (First National Bank) and 13th (Central National Bank) tallest buildings in RVA both were completely converted to apartments.   We also had The Edison Apartments (> 10 floors) come on the market recently as an historic rehab.

If I were a high-rise apartment developer, I wouldn't want to compete with those for unsure market absorption.

The same goes for office space.  You have Manchester and Scott's Addition slinging out new office space continuously.  Especially if you're cobbling together tenants rather than renting to one who has needs that could not be met by an office in Scott's Addition, Manchester, The Fan, etc.

The good news is that abandoned warehouses are drying up quick and there is no more land near downtown to be had for pennies.  Once this happens, the prime place to add more units and office space will be downtown and the only way to financially justify building on such high valued land will be to build big and tall.

 

EDIT:  To give an example, the rehab of the 23 story CNB cost ~$20m + ~$5m purchase to get ~200 apartments.  They also get historic tax credits.  This new 12 story apartment with ~240 apartments is going to cost ~$60m not including accusation fees.   The square footage is probably a bit different, but you see what new development has to compete with right now.

Absorption isn't really the issue (there's plenty of demand) so much as it the current market rents. New, highrise construction is EXPENSIVE, and our rents do not support the cost. Even if a developer wanted to build it, a lender wouldn't lend on it. Rents are appreciating and we are getting close, but we're not their yet. 

Office space is a little different, but similar. With very rare exception, speculative office space with no leasing commitments does not happen in a market like Richmond (all new office buildings downtown have had a committed anchor tenant - Williams Mullen Center, MWV, Gateway Plaza - McGuire Woods, Riverside - Troutman Sanders, etc etc). Again, no one would lend on the project (see  the dead Locks at 321 project). And new office rents need to be much higher, a prospect for which most companies in Richmond have no interest.

We're getting closer on the market rents for residential, and if the tax bill kills the tax credit program (I'm very opposed to killing the program), it will likely escalate rent costs given pent up demand, in turn making new construction more feasible. The market will need adjustment. Lenders, developers, and residents have grown accustomed to the structure the tax credit program has provided.