|
As
Yogi Berra would say, “It’s deja vu all over
again…”
The
dialogue on a new baseball stadium in Richmond’s
Shockoe Bottom is more than vaguely reminiscent of
another debacle that has finally been put to
wrecking ball – Sixth Street Marketplace (SSM).
Reading
and listening to the ongoing debate surrounding the
viability of a Shockoe Bottom location appears to be
an emotionally charged issue for most, yet I find
that neither side has either presented or asked the
more pertinent, and therefore salient, question:
Where is the research?
The
analogy to 6th Street Marketplace, the greatest
urban renewal debacle in recent Richmond
history, shouldn’t be lost in this debate for
exactly the same reason – lack of research
indicating demand, desire, or need.
The
feasibility study and economic model for SSM was
based upon Harborplace in Baltimore’s
inner harbor, the flagship for Rouse Development
that spawned urban “Festival Marketplaces”
around the country. No one questioned the lack of
research at the time. City boosters were mesmerized
with the “concept” and the potential it offered
to revitalize downtown Richmond. But, did anyone ask the intended suburban residents if
they would come? No. And therein lies the lesson.
To
make the numbers work, the developer continually
expanded the anticipated market and spending
projections for the two department stores, shops and
eateries of Sixth Street Marketplace. The final
report showed that the Primary Trade Area was a
radial that extended from the Potomac River
to the North
Carolina
state line. Did anyone question this exaggerated PTA
at the time? No. Did SSM draw large amounts of traffic from these outlying geographies? No.
Another
lesson from SSM is recalling who made the money from
a project that was touted to revitalize downtown,
fill city coffers and bootstrap the many “mom
& pop” minority-owned businesses in SSM. Well,
an analysis showed that Rouses’ development and
management company were the only ones who clearly
turned a profit – even as restaurateurs and
business owners were losing money. Monies assessed
for marketing and advertising were collected, but
never spent entirely as stated in the management
company’s marketing plans. So, the initial promise
– and promises – went unfulfilled.
Nearly
20 years later, we are confronted by an ad hoc
group, the Richmond Ballpark Initiative, lobbying to
build a new stadium in a controversial location
rather than renovate the old Diamond stadium just
off Interstate 64. Advocates of putting the stadium
in Shockoe Bottom, a historical neighborhood just
east of downtown, cite the example of other downtown
ballparks as evidence that it could stimulate
economic activity and development.
“Downtown ballparks have shown to be great engines
for economic opportunity in the areas that they are
built,” states the RBI website. “While some
cities have chosen to build a ballpark in a blighted
area to revitalize areas of public concern, other
cities have used the urban ballpark to create an
anchor for an already vibrant area to bring a level
of energy, activity, and financial value to the
properties and businesses located within its
district.”
The
first warning flag should be the
list of people behind the initiative. It
includes numerous lawyers, commercial real estate
people, engineers, a public relations company and
others who, though undoubtedly civic minded and
sincere, would have the inside track on getting a
piece of the project should it come to be. Wedging
its way into the collective consciousness without a
formal charter from any official body, this group is
asking for public funding assistance, including
monies already set aside for renovating the existing
stadium plus revenues from a special tax district.
Who will reap the benefits of the “new” stadium?
Given the history of the Sixth Street Marketplace,
the question needs to be asked.
The
second warning flag is the total absence of market
research, either reported in the press or on the RBI
website. What evidence is there to demonstrate that
a stadium in Shockoe Bottom is feasible?
The
cost of the proposed Shockoe stadium is $58 million.
The stadium backers would subsidize that by $18.5
million from the city of Richmond,
Henrico
County
and Chesterfield
County
already committed for the rehab of the Diamond. That
leaves about $40 million, some of which would be
paid for by means of a special tax district in the
Bottom. In theory, neighboring property owners would
be compensated for higher taxes by the economic
stimulus of the stadium and the higher property
values that ensue.
But
it’s far from self evident, despite the success of
downtown stadiums in other cities, that baseball
would make a good mix with the Bottom’s
entertainment-district ambience. Would baseball,
beer and hotdogs really complement the Bottom’s
nightclubs and restaurants?
How
much traffic is needed to meet the RBI’s financial
projections? How close is the match between the
people who patronize the Richmond Braves and the
people who patronize Richmond’s bars? Will suburbanites be more likely – or less –
to visit a downtown baseball stadium? How likely are
ticket buyers to combine a baseball game with
restaurant dining or clubbing?
There’s
no way to know until RBI does its homework. And what
should that include? Well, we could start by
surveying people who already attend Brave games at
the Diamond. A second cell should include people who
don’t attend games to see whether they would –
or not. Whatever the results, conducting elementary
market research would put a lot of arguments to
rest.
As
Yogi once said, “If people don’t want to come
out to the ballpark, nobody’s going to stop
them.” But, right now, nobody knows if they will
– or won’t.
--
May 24, 2004
|
