Jump to content

Richmond Developments


Cotuit

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, eandslee said:

Should this project have broken ground already?  There was a lot of fanfare when the news of this was released…there was even preliminary coordination with the city to get this project moving and a goal to break ground in November. Well, that time has come and gone and I do t think I’ve seen anything happen on site yet. It is pretty close to the CoStar construction though. Anyone know anything?  Have permits been filed?

https://www.nbc12.com/2022/07/14/proposed-outdoor-amphitheater-come-downtown-richmond/?outputType=amp

Could be caught up in the slowdown in the pipeline due to higher construction costs and now the added problem in increased interest rates. A lot of projects seem to be taking longer and longer to get off the ground.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


On 12/3/2022 at 5:16 PM, wrldcoupe4 said:

The other one is the city center project with VCU. Was by there recently and seems like nothing is happening. Time for a Bizsense update. 

I know - this likely sounds very odd coming from me, given how uber "GO!! GO!!! GO!!!" as I am on being pro-development - but honestly I have absolutely no problem at all with this one (Block D) sitting idle. We can do WAY better a (hopefully) short ways down the road when inflation has cooled, interest rates are brought back down  and costs are more conducive to going big. Frankly, I hope these folks sell to an out-of-state developer (someone like an Avery Hall type of firm) and get someone in here to do this thing up right. Block D is supposed to be a one of the primary anchors to the eastern side of City Center - and the current plan couldn't anchor a Thalhimer-built suburban strip mall-car-wash and drive-thru Sheetz-fest, much less a redevelopment as absolutely critically important to downtown RVA as City Center.

It's a dumpster fire that needs to be jettisoned. We can do WAY better in a year or two, with (hopefully) a different developer. Let these folks concentrate their considerable efforts on Green City (and really do that one up right!) and the project they have slated for Westwood (a large apartment building, I believe) and leave downtown (and City Center in particular) to some heavy hitters who won't play around and waste a perfectly good developable block.

Edited by I miss RVA
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, wrldcoupe4 said:

The other one is the city center project with VCU. Was by there recently and seems like nothing is happening. Time for a Bizsense update. 

While we're at it, let's add The Project Formerly Known as the Admiral. Unless something has definitely gotten underway there - seems like that one is stalled in cricketsville as well.  This was supposed to have broken ground by the mid-to-end of last month, if memory serves. Maybe time for the RBS supersleuths to don their Sherlock Holmes caps and do some 'vestigating! :tw_thumbsup:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

My apologies if this is the wrong thread to post this in, I choose it because this will affect the guidelines for Richmond as a whole. But I saw that there is a draft appendix for the Richmond 300 changes and that the public can make comments on it. I'm curious to hear y'alls thoughts on the proposed changes as well as give anyone a chance to comment on it if they are so inclined.

https://richmond.konveio.com/richmond-300-appendix-d-draft

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Local chapter of the YIMBY action network has an inaugural event this Saturday th 25th. I just signed up for the mail list but do not know if i can make that date. I encourage everyone here to join. YIMBY provides bigger tent then some of the other groups like Coalition for Smart Growth etc. so will be interesting to hear of the the actions this group takes and what being involved will mean. A lot of us probably have an opportunity here to steer the course of this some. 

https://www.rvayimby.org/home

Edited by whw53
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/24/2023 at 6:49 PM, wrldcoupe4 said:

End of week good news (inspired by the ‘cheers’ in the City Center thread). Heard there was a meeting this week where Sauer Center announced phase 2 which will include 2 million sf of new mixed use development at a much denser level than phase 1. Groundbreaking next year. 5-10 year planned buildout. 

WHATTTTTTTTTTTTTT?????????????  REALLY??? Oh holy moly!!!  

@RVABizSenseMike-- do you have your Sherlock Holmes hat (press version, of course) ready? Methinks that some old-fashioned shoe-leather sleuthing is needed here. Inquiring minds want to know!

 

SnoopyDance.gif

Edited by I miss RVA
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/24/2023 at 6:49 PM, wrldcoupe4 said:

End of week good news (inspired by the ‘cheers’ in the City Center thread). Heard there was a meeting this week where Sauer Center announced phase 2 which will include 2 million sf of new mixed use development at a much denser level than phase 1. Groundbreaking next year. 5-10 year planned buildout. 

This really is a bolt out of the blue and something that could be HUGE for RVA and, boy oh boy, does it lend itself to more than a few speculative questions:

1.) So this is an EPIC jump -- from a phase 2 consisting of a 53K sq ft, 4-story office building (per RBS reporting in 2021) now to 2 MILLION sq feet of mixed use space. Mind you, no idea how much of it would be office space - but I can't imagine that Sauer is simply going to build out an enclave of 2 million sq ft (minus commercial/retail, etc. carve-outs) of primarily multi-family residential developments. So this leads to a couple of questions:

A.) Would Sauer be so bold as to build ANY of this (especially office space) on spec?

B.) Given all of the "big, heavyweight, uber-major projects" (that have been circling RVA like buzzards just waiting to swoop in) that Greater Richmond Partnership has been chasing down this past year -- particularly in recent months -- WHAT do the bigwigs at Sauer know that maybe hasn't been publicly revealed yet? Is there ANY chance they've gotten wind that among the many nets and fishing poles that GRP has had floating out in the business market waters, perhaps a VERY large fish took the bait and bit? And if so, perhaps they want to get a leg up on both other developers and also other parts of the city to pave the way for one of these heavy-hitters to plant their flag in "Midtown" Richmond?

C.) Given the location of their project (and what's the exact zoning of specifically where their property sits?) - would they need to file an SUP? And if their project looks to be something legitimately MASSIVE - even as far "north" as it is (as in AWAY from the Fan) - what's the over/under on NIMBY pushback & kvetching from the various Fan neighborhood association busybodies? (After all, it wouldn't be Richmond without the preservationist/it's too big/out-of-scale/it'll destroy the city's architectural heritage Gladys Kravitz types running around, waving their arms and screeching about this or that every time something new, big and potentially game-changing is proposed for the city.)

Guys - this really is potentially huge for the city, given the location. Particularly with Scott's in the midst of an epic construction and population boom; particularly with the Diamond District HOPEFULLY reaching the launch pad soon and new development getting ready to launch there; particularly with other projects on the move in and around downtown, ESPECIALLY City Center hopefully not too far behind the Diamond District to the launch pad; particularly with Manchester also in the midst of an unprecedented, epic construction and population boom -- this part of town with an epic development the size and scale about which right now we can only speculate - could really become a great connector of the areas of the city that have been the hottest.

Given all of this - it's a LOT to ponder about, folks.

Boy oh boy - did THIS news really get the heart pumping when I logged on this evening!

 

 

Edited by I miss RVA
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/24/2023 at 7:49 PM, wrldcoupe4 said:

End of week good news (inspired by the ‘cheers’ in the City Center thread). Heard there was a meeting this week where Sauer Center announced phase 2 which will include 2 million sf of new mixed use development at a much denser level than phase 1. Groundbreaking next year. 5-10 year planned buildout. 

What is the address for phase 2? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Guys,

This looks like a good story. It's behind the RT-D paywall. My subscription ran out and when I tried to renew it online just now, I kept getting server errors. (This has happened to me twice before - I've been unable to renew online and had to call them.) Their offices, of course, are closed for the day, so I'll try to reach them during "regular business hours". Meanwhile - would anyone be able to help make the content of this story available or give a good synopsis of what is being reported?

https://richmond.com/news/local/government-politics/parking-richmond-development-eliminating/article_567fcc5a-d2f5-11ed-910c-4b4500c03b5c.html#tracking-source=mp-homepage

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/5/2023 at 5:50 PM, I miss RVA said:

Okay - I was offline for a few days to celebrate Passover. Happily, I'm back on - my RT-D subscription is fresh and I just now read the article.

A few interesting takeaways for us to consider -- and a couple of questions I'd like to pose to our resident gurus @wrldcoupe4& @upzoningisgoodin particular (and any others who are expert in the CRE industry, PLEASE weigh in with your thoughts...)

The city is seriously moving toward elimination of parking minimums - and the Dept. of Planning and Development Review has proposed an ordinance that would eliminate parking minimums CITYWIDE.  The ordinance will go before the full Planning Commission, with a public comment period set for April 17, 1:30 p.m. (Hopefully, there will not be a ton of NIMBY pushback - but I fear there will be. If anyone is available to attend and offer support, PLEASE take the time to go to the hearing and speak in favor!) The Planning Commission will then make its recommendation and forward the ordinance to City Council - and the earliest that it could come up for a vote would be the April 24th meeting. (Watch the ordinance get tabled... UGH!)

I hope the city makes quick work to put this into place, particularly since it aligns with the RVAGreen 2050 sustainability plan as well as provisions of the Richmond 300 Master Plan calling for significant increases in housing density, particularly along current/existing as well as potential/proposed transit corridors. From the perspective of a layman, if this will encourage the development of more density and if it will facilitate greater project development as well as bolster establishment of additional legs of a potentially fantastic BRT system, I'm 100% in favor of it.

@wrldcoupe4& @upzoningisgood-- you have mentioned that lenders often impose parking minimums when financing projects. IF the city were to eliminate parking minimums, what impact would that have, if any, on lenders perhaps backing off mandating "x" number of parking spaces baked into each project? Is this something that could take a significant amount of time before we would see any impact on development... meaning... enough development would have to take place over "x" amount of years bringing in "x" number of people, moving the needle on constructing additional BRT service or expanding new local bus service? From a development standpoint, what's the upside to the city pulling away parking minimums?

Also - would we see, as the article suggest, a possible decrease in rental rates (if there are reduced construction costs) - and how would that impact developments from the standpoint of getting them to "pencil"? And if rents in RVA came DOWN a bit, would that reinvigorate Richmond's competitive status in attracting businesses/residents to move here as RVA could potentially offer a better value than larger, more expensive markets? Does the city's lack of buildout on public transit as a true transportation infrastructure (meaning, only one BRT line instead of five (or even just two for now) and not complete coverage by local bus service) also serve as a speedbump?

Any and all thoughts on this very much appreciated.

Edited by I miss RVA
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@I miss RVAThe advantage of getting rid of parking minimums is for smaller projects and for zones where the parking requirements may be onerous. In Nashville suburbs, it's not unusual to find parking requirements as high as 2 spaces/unit, which is nuts. Smaller projects by mom-and-pop firms might benefit because those firms are generally more willing to get "weird" and try out-of-the box stuff like parking less than 1 per bed. Institutional guys like Greystar and Crescent will still be parking one per bed.

 

You can make a low-rent growth, high-volume approach work--see Texas. Texas is also crazy cheap to develop in, partly because they don't place a ton of restrictions on you, partly because there is a lot of general contractor competition because Dallas and Houston have been growing for so long, and the land is easy to develop on because it is flat. However, construction costs have grown so much that the insane rents we see now are needed to make deals pencil. A lot of people think "greedy developers" are raking it in right now, but that's not true--return metrics are actually down from a few years ago as the explosion in construction costs has harmed deal quality everywhere in the country.

 

10 hours ago, I miss RVA said:

Also - would we see, as the article suggest, a possible decrease in rental rates (if there are reduced construction costs) - and how would that impact developments from the standpoint of getting them to "pencil"? And if rents in RVA came DOWN a bit, would that reinvigorate Richmond's competitive status in attracting businesses/residents to move here as RVA could potentially offer a better value than larger, more expensive markets? Does the city's lack of buildout on public transit as a true transportation infrastructure (meaning, only one BRT line instead of five (or even just two for now) and not complete coverage by local bus service) also serve as a speedbump?

If construction costs came down, you would see a lowering of the economic break-even point and new units entering the market. I think that would help attract businesses and residents. I think part of the reason RVA has grown faster than NOVA is the increased value proposition now that fewer people have to commute to downtowns for work. 

I don't think that only having one BRT line instead of 6 matters much as far as business relocation goes at the moment, but I think developing a culture of public transit (and biking) could allow the city to develop in ways that attract business in the future. Bluntly, the executives at the companies looking to move to RVA will not be taking public transit, so they would only care about transit in so far as proximity helps attract employees. NYC, DC, Chicago, and maybe Boston, SF, and Philly are probably the only markets where rapid transit access is high enough for high-end talent (rich people who have a lot of options and make a lot of money who businesses want to attract) to seriously value proximity to a rapid transit stop. However, people have also demonstrated that they will pay more (reveal a preference for) walkable, dense developments. Like, people pay a premium to live in the Fan, and it's not because the houses are 100 years old. While it's possible to develop row houses in a car-dependent manner (see Houston), dense walkability is typically easier (and safer, and more pleasant) if there are fewer cars, especially for small-scale retail, and that is only feasible with robust rapid transit. So, I think a wide-scale BRT system with 6 lines would be helpful in that it would enable denser, walkable (and with mass upzoning, cheaper) neighborhoods that people have demonstrated a preference for, and companies want to be where workers want to be. I don't think companies are looking at RVA and thinking "if only they had 5 more BRT lines!" Austin, San Antonio, Houston, Tampa, Nashville, Phoenix, Raleigh, and Orlando and doing just fine without a wealth of rapid transit options.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.