Manchester Development

[Shakman]

23 hours ago, I miss RVA said:

I'll try to dig up the rendering later on today  - I think it MIGHT be four stories. The building footprint is smaller because of surface parking included with the development. 

Surface parking in an urban area.  ROLL DA EYES!!!

[Flood Zone]

Not ALL surface parking is bad!

It's just gotta be the right amount and in the right place and arranged in the right way. For example, the surface parking outside Cafe Zata in Manchester is perfect.

[Shakman]

On 2/1/2024 at 10:27 AM, Flood Zone said:

Not ALL surface parking is bad!

It's just gotta be the right amount and in the right place and arranged in the right way. For example, the surface parking outside Cafe Zata in Manchester is perfect.

I disagree.  Surface parking in an urban environment is a waste of space.  Open space where people can gather YES!

Edited February 2 by Shakman

[I miss RVA]

2 hours ago, Shakman said:

I disagree.  Surface parking in an urban environment is a waste of space.  Open space where people can gather YES!

And it's not like RVA lacks for either.

[whw53]

Alright UP - let's let City Council know we support this project on Hull St.!!!! PLEASE SIGN AND SHARE!!! 

https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/more-housing-for-hull-st?source=direct_link&

Edited February 9 by whw53

[Brent114]

Done.  Thanks for sharing 

[georgeglass]

6 hours ago, Brent114 said:

Done.  Thanks for sharing 

Also done and I really can't figure out why anyone would oppose this.  

[I miss RVA]

Here's the Times-Dispatch's reporting on the planning commission vote for the residential building planned for 14th and Hull. Bruce had a GREAT clapback for a reader who was bemoaning that the city is somehow "losing all of its 'historic' character" -- he said:  "Old slums aren't 'historic'. They're old slums."  Couldn't have said it better myself.

Also - a rendering I'm not sure we've seen before.

From Thursday's Richmond Times-Dispatch:

https://richmond.com/news/local/business/real-estate/richmond-hull-street-housing-residential/article_1f462f8a-c5e4-11ee-add8-97badba25a1f.html

[Shakman]

On 2/9/2024 at 3:53 PM, whw53 said:

Alright UP - let's let City Council know we support this project on Hull St.!!!! PLEASE SIGN AND SHARE!!! 

https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/more-housing-for-hull-st?source=direct_link&

It says website not available.

[I miss RVA]

9 minutes ago, Shakman said:

It says website not available.

My guess is that it had a time limit in terms of availability. 

[I miss RVA]

On 2/11/2024 at 9:51 AM, I miss RVA said:

FOLLOW UP 

Wasn't the SUP for this (14th and Hull) up before City Council this week? If so, quoting Richard Dawson, "survey says???" Hoping and praying it was approved and not either continued or worse.

Edited February 14 by I miss RVA

[I miss RVA]

12 hours ago, I miss RVA said:

FOLLOW UP 

Wasn't the SUP for this (14th and Hull) up before City Council this week? If so, quoting Richard Dawson, "survey says???" Hoping and praying it was approved and not either continued or worse.

UPDATE

Sad to report that the vote for this project was continued to the February 26th City Council meeting. Ugh...

[whw53]

Petition is back open and I will be resubmitting comments so give em hell!

Edited February 14 by whw53

[whw53]

FYI there is a special info and feedback meeting tomorrow hosted by Councilwomen Robertson on the 1401 Hull redevelopment. This is to take place at 6 pm at the Hull Street Branch Library (1400 Hull Street). I think Manchester Alliance is involved - if you can come out and say you support this development it would be meaningful - i'm sure the worst types will show up. 

[I miss RVA]

3 hours ago, whw53 said:

i'm sure the worst types will show up. 

You know it. The NIMBs are usually the loudest of the squeaky wheels. YIMBs HAVE to push back equally as hard.

As Captain Picard used to say: "...make it so!"

[I miss RVA]

The owner of four neighborhood markets across the city is planning to try to put a dent in the grocery desert that is Manchester. @RVABizSenseMike has reporting in today's RBS that Ezaddin "Dean" Alasad and his two cousins have purchased the three-story building at 1119-1125 Hull Street with plans to open a neighborhood market on the ground floor. The cousins own neighborhood markets in Barton Heights, Oregon Hill, Forest Hill and Scott's Addition. Bruce Milam pointed out in the comments that this operation would be in direct competition with Manchester Market in the 600 block of Hull Street for walk-up customers.

While it doesn't solve the issue of a legitimate grocer in fast-growing Manchester, it is a step in the right direction. The general "pause" in the booming development in Manchester (which, btw, @wrldcoupe4 correctly and accurately predicted last year) is a little unsettling, here's hoping that continued improvement in the economy - particularly cuts in the prime rate - will kickstart the continuation of the construction boom and we'll see Manchester's population continue to grow significantly and reach a level of population total, population density and income density to draw a full-size grocer to the district.

Either way - very glad to see more activity returning to Hull Street. Now if only we can get this five-story apartment building across the finish line at 14th and Hull. REMINDER - it's up for consideration before City Council next Monday.

From today's Richmond BizSense:

https://richmondbizsense.com/2024/02/21/cousins-look-to-manchester-to-expand-their-neighborhood-market-chain/

[rjp212]

It sounds like they're taking over the Max Market space too.  If so, that's a pretty decent-sized mini-market.

[rjp212]

On 2/9/2024 at 3:53 PM, whw53 said:

Alright UP - let's let City Council know we support this project on Hull St.!!!! PLEASE SIGN AND SHARE!!! 

https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/more-housing-for-hull-st?source=direct_link&

Man the Manchester Alliance is really turning into bunch of NIMBY Karens.  The local press doesn’t help either. 

[I miss RVA]

Welp -  It appears that the Box 2 is no more.

@RVABizSenseMike is reporting in today's RBS that Tom Papa, Fountainhead and WVS are downsizing and changing plans for the development that was originally going to be the 167-unit companion building to the Box; they're now planning 40 for-sale townhomes on the site. While for certain it'll be great to get some home ownership injected into Manchester, it's a bit disappointing from the standpoint of losing significant density. Part of their rationale for the change of course certainly makes sense - diversifying their offerings. They have a LOT of apartment buildings still in the works - including South Falls II, Plant Zero - and north of the river, Locks 7 & 8. From a business perspective, it definitely makes sense - and perhaps this gives Papa something he admitted previously was lacking - experience developing condos, which could positively impact the development of South Falls III down the road.

Still - it still also unfortunately points to the fact that high construction costs and still elevated interest rates are making it difficult to develop the bigger projects - and that smaller - yes you hear right - SMALLER - for-sale projects such as this one are more easily financed. Our friend Bruce is applauding this - and saying that the changeover to smaller for-sale projects from larger apartment developments is something he thinks will happen over and over. Forgive me, but I hope he's wrong on this. Mind you - I'm glad to see some home ownership in the mix - and it will definitely be a plus for Manchester to have more of this. HOWEVER - it does next to nothing to put a dent in the housing shortage, which as has been discussed by any number of experts in the field, can and does have an impact on growth. Nor does it do anything toward seeding the ground for a grocer to come into Manchester. I don't think grocers are going to be overly impressed by 40 condos with sale prices starting at $400K when they do market analysis for where to put a new store. They want density - yes, income density helps - but warm bodies help more. Even at only one person per apartment, the Box 2 could have had 167 people living there (and you'd have to figure at least SOME of those units would have more than one resident). Townhomes - are families going to settle in an urban-core neighborhood like Manchester? Maybe couples - but even then - at best - if every unit sold to a couple, there would be 80 people living there - a reduction of more than 50% of the density in that location.

That can impact things like grocers coming in down the road.

And I know - the developers don't care one iota about that, nor should they. They have to maximize their ROI. Totally get it. Still - I'm thinking more as an urban planner, looking at the bigger picture.

All of that said: I have mixed feelings about this. I'm glad to see condos entering the fray, but I don't want to see this become a rampant trend that starts tamping down density, size, and growth potential.

From today's Richmond BizSense:

https://richmondbizsense.com/2024/02/29/wvs-papa-to-build-dozens-of-townhomes-on-manchester-site-once-eyed-for-apartments/

[ancientcarpenter]

Any idea what the approximate count of units Papa has in store just in Manchester? Are we over 700+ with our guesses?

[I miss RVA]

1 hour ago, ancientcarpenter said:

Any idea what the approximate count of units Papa has in store just in Manchester? Are we over 700+ with our guesses?

Between South Falls II and Plant Zero... dunno about 700. Keep in mind Avery Hall's two towers combined will have fewer than 600 units between them. I want to say (without going back and looking it up) maybe closer to 400 total between the two projects Papa has in the pipeline for Manchester -- and even that might be a bit on the high side. I think with the Box 2 being apartments, it would have gotten us to between 500 and 600 total - but don't quote me.

Edited February 29 by I miss RVA

[123fakestreet]

I'm with Bruce on this. Ownership opportunities in the city are big, hope we see more of it.

More density would be nice, but it doesn't matter that much when you have a very "dense" building next to an empty lot. How about we put 2 less dense projects on both lots first? 

[Brent114]

I’m happy with this turn of events. 
I’d like more people but this provides just as much structural density, looks better and is a good  barometer for the neighborhood.   That they think they can sell 40 units at $400-500k is very encouraging. 
 

A summer start date is encouraging too. As I reported a few weeks back, the existing buildings at the site have already been razed. 

Edited February 29 by Brent114

[I miss RVA]

I'll be interesting to see how long it takes them to sell 40 units at half a million bucks a pop, particularly when the trend has been that the large apartment buildings (150, 200, 250 units, etc.) have generally been filling up within something like three or four months (I'm going off of memory, so don't quote me - I just recall hearing developers saying they can't build apartments fast enough because they're being snapped up right away). I can't necessarily see 40 units at that price in a market Richmond's size selling out in three or four months. I'm not even sure they'd fill up in six or eight months. I might be wrong - maybe they would, and if so, Mazal Tov!! I don't see it happening. We ain't Chicago or New York, where developers can sell 300 new condos at a MUCH higher price in a matter of a couple months.

It's all about demand - and while there's high demand for rentals in places like Manchester, Scott's etc., - I'd tend to think demand for half-a-million-dollar condos is going to be fairly limited.

[Brent114]

The townhomes across from Valero on Semmes sold very quickly.  They were the same price, maybe more.