A Closer Look At Riverside YMCA's Development Plans

[CityLife]

CityLife, what the hell would the Y go for that???  The Y has been trying to sell that property for 10 years.  Why would it turn around and sell the development rights at less than market value (and, yes, what you are referencing is less than market value).

How do you know what I'm proposing is less than market value? Are you saying that vertical development rights as part of a proposed building should be the same price as market value of virgin riverfront soil?

Perhaps I should simplify the concept, because I'm not sure you are quite getting it. The Y is proposing a 3 story building along the river. They could partner with a developer to build a mid rise building with residential or a hotel, with the developer paying for the increase in costs from the original three story proposal....plus an additional payment for the vertical development rights, and the increased costs for parking. Which obviously would be WELL below the cost of virgin riverfront land. The benefit to the Y would be the payment for development rights, which could be a flat amount or even a % of the developers profit, as well as the potential to be on higher floors with more scenic views of the river/DT, as well as more potential members of the Y.

Its obviously too late to even consider this...but I wish it was something that was at least explored. Hopefully a strong DIA will be able to facilitate better development and make deals like the above happen.

[MEGATRON]

I get the concept.  I think you are drastically underestimating riverfront vertical development rights.  Again, the Y has been marketing that property for over a decade.  It has looked at all sorts of alternatives.

[goldy21]

CityLife, what the hell would the Y go for that???  The Y has been trying to sell that property for 10 years.  Why would it turn around and sell the development rights at less than market value (and, yes, what you are referencing is less than market value).

How do you know what I'm proposing is less than market value? Are you saying that vertical development rights as part of a proposed building should be the same price as market value of virgin riverfront soil?

Perhaps I should simplify the concept, because I'm not sure you are quite getting it. The Y is proposing a 3 story building along the river. They could partner with a developer to build a mid rise building with residential or a hotel, with the developer paying for the increase in costs from the original three story proposal....plus an additional payment for the vertical development rights, and the increased costs for parking. Which obviously would be WELL below the cost of virgin riverfront land. The benefit to the Y would be the payment for development rights, which could be a flat amount or even a % of the developers profit, as well as the potential to be on higher floors with more scenic views of the river/DT, as well as more potential members of the Y.

And you continue to make assumptions that they haven't already evaluated myriad options by now.  What Megatron and I are saying is that they HAVE looked at a bunch of permutations and nothing has made financial sense.  If someone was clamoring to partner with them, then they would have done it by now.  Three years from now that might be a different story.  But in the meantime, they have a crumbling facility and enough fundraising momentum that they need to move forward based on status quo. 

[MEGATRON]

Thank you, Goldy.  The Y has been evaluating this for years.  Ideally, they don't build on the waterside of Riverside at at all and the Y has delayed as long as possible with the hope that the right deal would show up.

[CityLife]

goldy, I never once made an assumption. Just said I hope that the proposed option had been explored. Since you seem to know about the project, can you tell me if they tried to partner with developers on a taller building with residential or hotel uses? If they can't make a deal like that happen, can we expect them to be able to put together a good deal for the Riverside Avenue parcel when the market dictates?

Do you disagree with the scenario I proposed earlier about phasing it as a PUD to ensure that development occurs along Riverside Ave as conceptually proposed? Or is that just a ploy to make the project look more desirable to the public and the DDRB as Captain Z. indicated could be a possibility?

[iluvolives]

I prefer to have the Y on the parcel next to the river. Right now the area behind the Y along the riverwalk is probably the most utilized portion of the riverwalk. If you go there anytime on weeknights after 5:00 or on the weekends there are tons of people who meet to run/walk. i think if something else was built there it would be less utilized.