Jackson Ward / Gilpin

[I miss RVA]

Part of this saga that may have been mentioned in this thread previously - but worth revisiting and questioning our resident gurus for their expert opinions: Mike's reporting indicated that despite putting the whole enchilada up for sale, lock, stock and barrel - the current developers would consider co-developing the project if they could get a second developer to join up with them to build out this project.

From Mike's reporting:

The Northmarq flier shows that SNP would be open to bringing in another co-developer, because it states that joint venture proposals would be considered. 

Gurus (that means you, @wrldcoupe4& @upzoningisgood) what say you to the prospects of this happening? Punchers chance? Snowball's chance? If you're betting the line, what are you taking on the over/under?

I mean, if it's nisht, then it is what it is. But I'd like your expert thoughts on this as even a possiblity.

 

Edited March 9, 2023 by I miss RVA

[eandslee]

3 minutes ago, I miss RVA said:

Part of this saga that may have been mentioned in this thread previously - but worth revisiting and questioning our resident gurus for their expert opinions: Mike's reporting indicated that despite putting the whole enchilada up for sale, lock, stock and barrel - the current developers would consider co-developing the project if they could get a second developer to join up with them to build out this project.

From Mike's reporting:

The Northmarq flier shows that SNP would be open to bringing in another co-developer, because it states that joint venture proposals would be considered. 

Gurus (that means you, @wrldcoupe4& @upzoningisgood) what say you to the prospects of this happening? Punchers chance? Snowball's chance? If you're betting the line, what are you taking on the over/under?

I mean, if it's nisht, then it is what it is. But I'd like your expert thoughts on this as even a possiblity.

 

I don't know how to answer your question here because I have no idea (I'm speculating that @wrldcoupe4 and @upzoningisgood don't either - it's probably anyone's guess), but I do want to point out the ray of hope in RBS's reporting...that is that SNP would stick around if it had a partner.  In other words, SNP's not totally abandoning the project unless another developer wants to come in and do it all themselves or if SNP had to do the project by themselves.  This just tells me that it's not the worst case scenario (as I had wondered and described in a previous post - my bad...didn't mean to go totally opposite on the optimism scale)...it's just not an ideal situation unless there is a partner.  More difficult to develop?  Sure.  Impossible?  Nah!

I guess we wait to see if SNP gets any bites.  This article only helps SNP advertise what they need to get the project moving again!  Fingers crossed they get some takers!

[wrldcoupe4]

Having literally no inside knowledge, my guess is that they had an issue with an equity partner dropping out or couldn’t get the financing to pencil so they decided to float the deal to the market. If they find a buyer or partner great, if not, they wait for there to be more liquidity and access to capital to move forward themselves. OR, they scale it down in some way. 

[I miss RVA]

2 hours ago, wrldcoupe4 said:

OR, they scale it down in some way. 

Bite your tongue!!! 

I hope and pray the Almighty was out shooting pool tonight at the Heavenly Pub and NOT online reading this -- a BIG short-circuit between your keyboard and God's eyes on this one point, my friend!

Mind you, I DO realize it's a possibility, but tbh, I'd rather wait a longer period of time and get this building (or something bigger) as designed than to have them truncate it down to yet another 5 or 6 over one box. If it takes a year longer to get the 12-story, 255-unit gem as designed for this sight - fine. So be it. It'll be worth the wait. But I sure as hell don't want them turning around in a few months and coming back with some kneecapped piece of junk a la what happened with Block D.

Some things are worth the wait, painful as waiting might be. This is definitely one of them.

Edited March 9, 2023 by I miss RVA

[Child2021]

I largely think the Costar project will be fine, since they probably (should have) locked everything last year or earlier this one.  I do think the Surf Park project, and the massive Varina project will be postponed, along with the Silo one. 

[I miss RVA]

19 minutes ago, Child2021 said:

... along with the Silo one. 

Bite your tongue!!

I'll say to you as I said to Coupe - I hope and pray the Almighty was out shooting pool tonight at the Heavenly Pub and NOT online reading this -- a BIG short-circuit between your keyboard and God's eyes on this one point, my friend!

I guess the encouraging thing is that Hourigan HAS started the process of demo'ing the Silos - and frankly that's not going to be done quickly. It'll take time to properly and safely bring the silos down - to clean and prep the site - and then move forward on construction. That extra amount of time built in that's tied up with demo'ing and removing the silos and all the subsequent cleanup and site prep might be just enough to allow the economy to shake out such that interest rates and construction costs start to roll back some. Even if there's a delay, I hope and pray Hourigan ultimately builds out the site as planned.

One other thing that's encouraging - RVA has a LOT of pans on the stove at the moment with projects of all shapes and sizes still rising all over the city. Perhaps @wrldcoupe4or @upzoningisgoodcan correct me - but barring something like a catastrophic/cataclysmic economic crash of 2008-level or worse (God-FORBID!!), we aren't going to see every single project just grind to a halt and stop. For as much as it's been a slow build-up to the level of citywide construction we've enjoyed the last three or four years, (meaning, we didn't go from 0 to 60 in 3.2 seconds) - I don't think we're going to decelerate from 60 to 0 either.

Who knows where we'll be a year from now.

[I miss RVA]

Welp... THIS certainly isn't good. Glad no one was injured (or worse!)

Wowzers -- the neighbor... imagine being awakened at 3 a.m. by the crashing sound of a collapsing wall next door... 

From WRIC-8 News:

https://www.wric.com/news/local-news/richmond/photos-wall-collapses-on-jackson-ward-house/

Edited April 17, 2023 by I miss RVA

[plain]

Hopefully this can be repaired and not condemned.

[I miss RVA]

10 minutes ago, plain said:

Hopefully this can be repaired and not condemned.

I'd rather the wall be fully REPLACED and not just repaired. The building is currently being renovated, so I'm sure the city won't just swoop in and shut the property down UNLESS there is significant structural compromise that would put the rest of the building at risk of collapse - in which case it would HAVE to be torn down as a matter of public safety.

I know that rubs some folks the wrong way - but there are times when practicality -- and not sentimentality -- must rule the day. Not EVERY old building in Richmond is "historic". Sometimes they're simply just "old". If they can be refurbished and maintained, all well and good. But if a building becomes a public safety hazard, then the correct thing to do is to remove it. Only a full inspection by the city's safety inspectors will be able to make that determination. The story didn't indicate who the developer is.

Edited April 17, 2023 by I miss RVA

[Brent114]

The building seems stable to me.  The brick is just a veneer. The framing/roof didn’t budge.  Throw up some brick and move on  

[I miss RVA]

10 minutes ago, Brent114 said:

The building seems stable to me.  The brick is just a veneer. The framing/roof didn’t budge.  Throw up some brick and move on  

I'm sure the city will green light it if it is indeed stable. While I'm no engineer and we can't tell but so much from news photos (whereas safety inspectors can give it a through going over), I agree it appears to be sound and hopefully won't be overly costly for the developer. 

[Shakman]

Well if an insurance company is involved then who knows, right?

[I miss RVA]

57 minutes ago, Shakman said:

Well if an insurance company is involved then who knows, right?

This is true. 

[ancientcarpenter]

On 4/17/2023 at 5:41 PM, Brent114 said:

The building seems stable to me.  The brick is just a veneer. The framing/roof didn’t budge.  Throw up some brick and move on  

Great time to add some windows

[I miss RVA]

52 minutes ago, ancientcarpenter said:

Great time to add some windows

Looks like there framing for windows - one larger one toward the front of the building, and a smaller one (probably for a bathroom) toward the back. 

[ancientcarpenter]

Very (early) good news:

The empty (4 or 5?) blocks of land behind  Club 533 (Jackson and 2nd st) is in "design" stage for market rate townhomes, mixed use apartments, and a hotel. My big push for this will be for more ownership (market and income driven) including a grocery store to top it all off!

There are no renderings until August 29 as the developer wants direct feedback from the community through multiple stages. 

 

As an FYI:

This is the 2018 article about this when it was originally in plans:

https://richmondbizsense.com/2018/09/07/mixed-use-development-rolling-jackson-ward/

Old rendering:

Edited July 19, 2023 by ancientcarpenter

[eandslee]

4 hours ago, ancientcarpenter said:

Very (early) good news:

The empty (4 or 5?) blocks of land behind  Club 533 (Jackson and 2nd st) is in "design" stage for market rate townhomes, mixed use apartments, and a hotel. My big push for this will be for more ownership (market and income driven) including a grocery store to top it all off!

There are no renderings until August 29 as the developer wants direct feedback from the community through multiple stages. 

 

As an FYI:

This is the 2018 article about this when it was originally in plans:

https://richmondbizsense.com/2018/09/07/mixed-use-development-rolling-jackson-ward/

Old rendering:

Great!  I just want to see density, especially in this part of town. 

[whw53]

No way we are getting a full service grocery store. Maybe a convenience of some type- the people behind Northside gourmet were supposed to open a similar concept at 1st and Jackson. Guess it fell theu. Maybe a dollar store could make it and some of those at least have fresh food. 

I hope RRHA makes it work this time- they broke this off 3 years ago with the same developer after pulling out the over a sale price that was unworkable. 

Richmond Free Press covered this in a series of articles I think are posted back some pages. 

[I miss RVA]

11 hours ago, whw53 said:

No way we are getting a full service grocery store. Maybe a convenience of some type- the people behind Northside gourmet were supposed to open a similar concept at 1st and Jackson. Guess it fell theu. Maybe a dollar store could make it and some of those at least have fresh food. 

I hope RRHA makes it work this time- they broke this off 3 years ago with the same developer after pulling out the over a sale price that was unworkable. 

Richmond Free Press covered this in a series of articles I think are posted back some pages. 

I have more than 50 years worth of total lack of faith in the RRHA after they wiped Fulton off the map. I realize it was "the times" and this kind of "urban renewal" crap was happening nationally - but I have NEVER forgiven them for completely bulldozing Fulton Bottom into the history books. I've also had a bone to pick with the so-called "historic" preservationists who lifted not one single finger in protest or in action on Fulton's behalf. I have been disgusted with both ever since.

[ancientcarpenter]

44 minutes ago, I miss RVA said:

I've also had a bone to pick with the so-called "historic" preservationists who lifted not one single finger in protest or in action on Fulton's behalf. I have been disgusted with both ever since.

In all fairness, the "historic preservationists" 50 years ago were defined by two groups:

1. Racist white people who were mostly keen on preserving their history

2. Black people who tried to preserve history but couldn't do much / were not heard b/c see point number 1 above

Edited July 20, 2023 by ancientcarpenter

[rjp212]

ZCLR was filed for 11-50 units at 316 W Broad St.   I'm not sure if that would include new build or just renovation of the existing buildings

[whw53]

Nice - will keep an eye on the CAR agenda. Any new build there will need to go thru that certification process.

[Shakman]

It's a deep structure so it can accommodate many units.

Edited August 17, 2023 by Shakman

[HRVA]

On 8/17/2023 at 11:55 AM, Shakman said:

It's a deep structure so it can accommodate many units.

The deep building is 318 W Broad. 316 is the tiny building to the right and includes the parking to the far right. They’d need a full buildout of the lot with at least three stories to even touch the low end of 11-50 units. 

[Shakman]

On 8/19/2023 at 5:16 AM, HRVA said:

The deep building is 318 W Broad. 316 is the tiny building to the right and includes the parking to the far right. They’d need a full buildout of the lot with at least three stories to even touch the low end of 11-50 units. 

Thanks for clarifying.  I should have just zoomed in to the picture.  Does the proposal include the adjacent lot with the "For Sale" banner?