Montgomery development news

[Capital Heights]

From the Montgomery Advertiser:

The City of Montgomery is creating a proposal to persuade the State Legislature to move the State House farther downtown.

The city is proposing that the State House relocate to the "lower Dexter Avenue area," but Montgomery Mayor Bobby Bright would not specify where at this time.

“This is a significant project and it needs to be out in the open, proudly and prominently displayed for visitors and legislators,” Bright said.

A six-member legislative committee has been tasked with looking into whether to renovate the aging State House or build a new State House. If the committee opts to rebuild, it will have to then decide where.

David Bronner, who as CEO of the Retirement Systems of Alabama, has overseen the construction of many of downtown Montgomery's landmark buildings, said he believes it all comes down to what legislators want.

“One group wants to have it downtown and another wants to have it up by the Capitol and another group says it should be attached to the Capitol,” Bronner said. “So you’ve got at least two or three plans floating around out there.

"And what the legislature is going to do – I just don’t know.”

Bright is pushing for the State House to be built farther downtown, creating what he called a "governmental mall."

"We are aggressively and actively making plans to give the very best proposal we possibly can to the state," Bright said Friday afternoon. "We hope they will determine our proposal to be the most feasible and practical plan for the money."

Bright would not elaborate on the details of the city’s offer, but he said the outcome would benefit both the state and the downtown revitalization effort.

-- Rick Harmon, Jill Nolin

[thoraudio]

let's all cross our fingers. One Court Square is where it needs to be.

[Fibb2000]

Wouldn't it be cool if they had light rail connecting it and the capitol..

[hiijakd]

maybe something like the old streetcar? that would be really neat.

[thoraudio]

bigger article this morning.

From the Advertiser.

Plan would move site of State House

The city of Montgomery is getting ready to pitch a plan to the state Legislature that would move the State House deeper into downtown Montgomery.

The city's plan envisions a new State House -- where the Senate and House of Representa­tives conduct business -- built in the "lower Dexter Avenue area," Montgomery Mayor Bob­by Bright said Friday afternoon. Bright would not specify the ex­act location.

Moving the State House, which is near the state Capitol, down Dexter Avenue would create what Bright called a "gov­ernmental mall," similar to the nation's Capitol complex in Washington.

The move also would help fuel downtown revitalization, which received a boost when the Renaissance Montgomery Hotel & Spa at the Convention Center opened earlier this year.

"This is a significant project and it needs to be out in the open, proudly and prominently displayed for visitors and legis­lators," Bright said.

The city's plan is only one of a handful being kicked around by a special six-person legisla­tive committee that is looking into what to do with the aging, cramped State House on South Union Street.

David Bronner, who as CEO of the Retirement Systems of Alabama has overseen the con­struction of many of downtown Montgomery's landmark build­ings, said it all comes down to what legislators want.

"One group wants to have it downtown, and another wants to have it up by the Capitol, and another group says it should be attached to the Capitol," Bron­ner said. "So you've got at least two or three plans floating around out there.

"And what the Legislature is going to do -- I just don't know."

Sen. Wendell Mitchell, D-Lu­verne, said he initially was a proponent of keeping the State House close to the Capitol. He said after the Montgomery Area Chamber of Commerce recently invited him to see a presenta­tion on moving the State House, he's no longer so sure.

"I am having second thoughts as to whether it ought to be located on Goat Hill," Mitchell said Friday. "I'll put it this way -- they put forth a very strong case for locating it down­town."

The city's plan includes a proposal for a parking deck and trolley line or shuttle service for legislators and visitors.

The Legislature has been meeting in the current building, which originally held the state highway department, since it was remodeled in 1986. Mitchell said he would not support a mea­sure to renovate the existing building.

"I think the restoration of a building that was never in­tended to be a legislative cham­ber is probably not a good in­vestment," Mitchell said. "To renovate it to meet the needs of the legislative body would be cost-inefficient for one thing and cost-prohibitive for anoth­er."

Not everyone agrees with that sentiment, though.

"As far as I am concerned, there's nothing wrong with the State House we are in," said Rep. Alvin Holmes, D-Montgomery. "I'm for staying where we are. ... Building a fine, plush office building isn't going to help get any bills passed."

But if a new State House is built, Holmes supports having it built on lower Dexter Avenue.

Rep. David Grimes, R-Mont­gomery, also thinks the legisla­tive body should stay in the cur­rent building.

"I don't see what the problem is. It's just a little crowded. The Senate could give up a little space, but that's not going to happen," Grimes said Friday.

But unlike Holmes, if a new State House is going to be built, Grimes wants to see it stay close to the Capitol.

Bright would not elaborate on the details of the city's pro­posal because it's still evolving, but he said the city's plan would benefit both the state and the downtown revitalization effort.

"We are aggressively and ac­tively making plans to give the very best proposal we possibly can to the state," Bright said Fri­day afternoon. "We hope they will determine our proposal to be the most feasible and practi­cal plan for the money."

State/Business Editor Rick Harmon contributed to this re­port.

[thoraudio]

same story different source. WSFA.com

AP NewsBreak: Panel favors building new Alabama Statehouse


Associated Press - April 12, 2008 4:14 PM ET

MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) - A legislative panel studying the future of the Alabama Statehouse agrees the leaking structure should be abandoned by the Legislature and a new building constructed.

The Legislative Building Authority is looking at building a 220,000-square-foot Statehouse and parking deck for about $170 million.

What they don't agree about is the location -- near the current site or, in a dramatic leap, at the far end of Montgomery's Dexter Avenue, creating a National Mall-type environment like Washington.

Senate President Pro Tem Hinton Mitchem of Albertville says the question is whether it's built behind the Capitol or in downtown Montgomery.

The Statehouse, where the House and Senate meet, is located diagonally across the street from the rear of the historic Capitol, where the governor has his offices.

Statehouse committee rooms are often filled to overflowing, and the House and Senate galleries sometimes run out of space for spectators. The roof has leaked off and on for years, and the bottom floor has moisture problems.

The Legislature created a six-member group last year to study whether to renovate the existing Statehouse or build a new meeting place for the House and Senate.

An architect's study says renovating the 45-year-old Statehouse would cost more than erecting a new building. The architect's study also pointed out design flaws that no one considered during construction in 1963 but that are now major problems in these security-conscious times.

[Capital Heights]

This must be the big development deal that has the potential to reshape Montgomery. I, for one, am fully supportive of the downtown idea. This could be the catalyst to re-energize Dexter Avenue and accelerate growth in this town.


AP NewsBreak: Panel favors building new Alabama Statehouse
4/12/2008, 1:38 p.m. ET
By PHILLIP RAWLS
The Associated Press


MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) — A legislative committee studying the future of the Alabama Statehouse agrees the leaking structure should be abandoned by the Legislature and a new building constructed.

What they don't agree about is the location — near the current site or, in a dramatic leap, at the far end of Dexter Avenue, creating a National Mall-type environment like Washington.

"The question is whether we build it behind the Capitol or in downtown Montgomery," Senate President Pro Tem Hinton Mitchem, D-Albertville, said.

The Statehouse, where the House and Senate meet, is located diagonally across the street from the rear of the historic Capitol, where the governor has his offices.

Its committee rooms are often filled to overflowing, and the House and Senate galleries sometimes run out of space for spectators. The roof has leaked off and on for years, and the bottom floor has moisture problems.

The Legislature created a six-member group last year to study whether to renovate the existing Statehouse or build a new meeting place for the House and Senate.

An architect's study said renovating the 45-year-old Statehouse would cost more than erecting a new building. The architect's study also pointed out design flaws that no one considered during construction in 1963 but that are now major problems in these security-conscious times.

"It's pretty substandard," said House Minority Leader Mike Hubbard, R-Auburn, who serves on the Legislative Building Authority and supports a new Statehouse.

The committee is looking at building a 220,000-square-foot Statehouse and parking deck for about $170 million.

The talk comes during an economic downturn when the Legislature is looking at cutting the budgets of many state agencies. The Statehouse panel hasn't decided on a financing plan, but it estimates the total cost over 30 years, including interest, will exceed $300 million.

One committee member, Sen. Roger Bedford, D-Russellville, said that shouldn't stop planning for the project.

"Whatever we do, we're going to be criticized for it, so let's do it right," he said.

At a meeting Thursday afternoon, the panel outlined two options:

_Keep the executive and legislative branches of government close together by shutting down one block of Union Street immediately behind the Capitol and building a wing on the rear of the Capitol for the Legislature to use.

_Create an extended, National Mall-type environment, with the Capitol at the head of Montgomery's main street, Dexter Avenue, and building a Statehouse six blocks away at the foot of Dexter Avenue, where a partially empty office building now stands beside the historic Court Square Fountain.

The state Judicial Building already stands near the middle of Dexter Avenue and most of the city's Civil War and civil rights attractions are nearby.

At Thursday's meeting, a majority of the members said they were leaning toward the downtown proposal, but they didn't take a vote. That's because there is more negotiating to do over financing before making a decision — possibly by next month.

The state pension program, the Retirement Systems of Alabama, has offered to provide financing for the Capitol wing idea, while the city of Montgomery and Montgomery County are offering to finance the downtown proposal. In both cases, the Legislature would have to repay the money.

The group's chairman, Rep. Richard Laird, D-Roanoke, favors the Capitol wing plan. He said RSA chief David Bronner's financing plan is better than the city's offer. But two committee members met with Montgomery County Commission Chairman Todd Strange and Mayor Bobby Bright on Thursday afternoon to negotiate.

Strange and Bright said they are determined to put together an offer that will sell the legislative committee and then the entire Legislature on the downtown location.

"It has the potential to revolutionize our capital city," Bright said.

That revolution has already started in downtown with an enlarged civic center, a minor league ballpark, an amphitheater, hotels and riverfront park all within walking distance of the proposed Statehouse site. A future step is a light rail system running the length of Dexter Avenue.

Despite the changes in downtown, Montgomery's main street has many empty storefronts from its long gone days as the city's fashion center. Bright and Strange see those vacant stores being filled by business associations and lobbying firms that want to be near the Statehouse.

"We want to see Dexter Avenue become a governmental mall," Bright said.


Copyright 2008 Associated Press. All rights reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
© 2008 al.com All Rights Reserved.

[bystander1]

I've never been too crazy about the idea of moving the state house to Court Square. I'm just not convinced that it will be the right impact that people think it will be.
The only way this will have a truly positive impact is if it is done in conjunction with the return of the rail trolley cars that the city and county claimed they would support in accord with the Dover Kohl master plan.
Other than that, it would seem absolutely too inefficient.

[bystander1]

Originally Posted by Capital Heights

This must be the big development deal that has the potential to reshape Montgomery.

Hmm, that's the conclusion I came to this morning too.

...I could be wrong, but I'd be surprised if it's not.

[hiijakd]

the statehouse is the announcement that i was told was the one that was buzzing around but i have known about it for a while. I wonder if it is one and the same.
hey, i'm running for mayor if bright gets the congressional job.
"berry for mayor "he doesn't have rich friends." sounds good as my slogan doesn't it?

[Scoots71]

safe to say that you'd get my vote.

[rbp]

Originally Posted by bystander1

I've never been too crazy about the idea of moving the state house to Court Square. I'm just not convinced that it will be the right impact that people think it will be.

Pros: You will have several hundred people in the state house including the legislators and their staffs. You'll also have nearly that many lobbyists in and out of there. All of these people will need places to eat, though the lobbyists will be likely taking their favorite legislator out to wine and dine.
The light rail would be a help assuming it would be open to everyone.
Some lobbyists/PACs may take up more of the office space available in the area, though probably only those already occupying space near the current state house.

Cons: It's going to take a serious amount of parking for all these people because they aren't likely to take public transportation.
While some of the legislative staff work year round, I expect most of the traffic in and out of the state house is only during session time and that's only about three months.

Biggest Con (pun intended) is the amount of money that would be spent to do this. They would likely have to raze whatever structure that's in place now to build this.

If they're going to build a new facility, Court Square would do a lot more for this city than pretty much anywhere else they could put it.

[bystander1]

Originally Posted by rbp

Pros: You will have several hundred people in the state house including the legislators and their staffs. You'll also have nearly that many lobbyists in and out of there. All of these people will need places to eat, though the lobbyists will be likely taking their favorite legislator out to wine and dine.
The light rail would be a help assuming it would be open to everyone.
Some lobbyists/PACs may take up more of the office space available in the area, though probably only those already occupying space near the current state house.

Cons: It's going to take a serious amount of parking for all these people because they aren't likely to take public transportation.
While some of the legislative staff work year round, I expect most of the traffic in and out of the state house is only during session time and that's only about three months.


Biggest Con (pun intended) is the amount of money that would be spent to do this. They would likely have to raze whatever structure that's in place now to build this.

If they're going to build a new facility, Court Square would do a lot more for this city than pretty much anywhere else they could put it.

Don't get me wrong, I surely know the pros of this project, I just think the cons of this project will out-way the pros because I just have hunch that they won't do it right because I'm not convinced yet that the city and county will finance the right amount needed to do it right, the limited space there, and because of government security issues that are more mandatory nowadays.

I can see it now... the beautifully redesigned Court Square and/or Court and Montgomery Streets will eventually have to be blocked or partially blocked for "government security" issues...
...Lack of adequate parking will mean the erection of a parking deck with no wrap-around store fronts or office/living space on top (because you know it won't be designed right)...destroying another "pedestrian friendly" city block and defeating the very purpose of so-called smart-growth regulations implemented for downtown. You know the preservationists and SG proponents are going to be all over this once the 'naked' parking deck rendering is shown...I really hope I'm wrong about all of this...

Any other time, you know I'm all for the much needed infill and parking decks downtown, but I know that this would not work well without the rail-cars helping to alleviate the obvious parking congestion problem that will surely be one of the main problems in getting this plan to work as intended.

Yes, yes...I know I say this without looking at the complete plan, but all I'm saying is that if it's going to be done, do it all and do it right the first time. Otherwise you are going to have a similar situation with the new Statehouse...but this time the problem will be outside space.

[ExpatBaman]

Originally Posted by bystander1

This man is serious about getting this project started. He deserves our support.

Completely agree. As both an event and agricultural venue, this facility is important for the city and the state.

Originally Posted by bystander1

Don't get me wrong, I surely know the pros of this project, I just think the cons of this project will out-way the pros because I just have hunch that they won't do it right because I'm not convinced yet that the city and county will finance the right amount needed to do it right, the limited space there, and because of government security issues that are more mandatory nowadays.

I can see it now... the beautifully redesigned Court Square and/or Court and Montgomery Streets will eventually have to be blocked or partially blocked for "government security" issues...
...Lack of adequate parking will mean the erection of a parking deck with no wrap-around store fronts or office/living space on top (because you know it won't be designed right)...destroying another "pedestrian friendly" city block and defeating the very purpose of so-called smart-growth regulations implemented for downtown. You know the preservationists and SG proponents are going to be all over this once the 'naked' parking deck rendering is shown...I really hope I'm wrong about all of this...

Any other time, you know I'm all for the much needed infill and parking decks downtown, but I know that this would not work well without the rail-cars helping to alleviate the obvious parking congestion problem that will surely be one of the main problems in getting this plan to work as intended.

Yes, yes...I know I say this without looking at the complete plan, but all I'm saying is that if it's going to be done, do it all and do it right the first time. Otherwise you are going to have a similar situation with the new Statehouse...but this time the problem will be outside space.

I agree that the cons are likely to outweigh the pros of this alternative, for the same reasons. This thing is likely to be done on the cheap. I hope it doesn't involve tearing down any buildings around Court Square other than One Court Square - that would be the last thing that downtown needs.

I'm opposed to the idea of extending the Capitol to the east and closing part of Union St. as well. I'd much rather see a new building on the surface parking lot to the east of the current State House, preferably built as liner buildings wrapping a parking deck for the Capitol complex. A five or six story structure there could provide buku office space and parking, and allow for a new public square on the surface lot between the current State House and the Folsom building.

[bystander1]

Originally Posted by ExpatBaman

Completely agree. As both an event and agricultural venue, this facility is important for the city and the state.



I agree that the cons are likely to outweigh the pros of this alternative, for the same reasons. This thing is likely to be done on the cheap. I hope it doesn't involve tearing down any buildings around Court Square other than One Court Square - that would be the last thing that downtown needs.

I'm opposed to the idea of extending the Capitol to the east and closing part of Union St. as well. I'd much rather see a new building on the surface parking lot to the east of the current State House, preferably built as liner buildings wrapping a parking deck for the Capitol complex. A five or six story structure there could provide buku office space and parking, and allow for a new public square on the surface lot between the current State House and the Folsom building.

Yes, you want to hope it's not done on the cheap, but you just know that without all the components done at the same time, it will be done that way.
Surprise me please surprise me.

And you're right. The idea of extending the Capitol to the east and closing part of Union Street is totally asinine. Utter foolishness.

...sorry, I don't mean to sound so pessimistic...

[hiijakd]

new justice league meeting this week?

[bystander1]

^ I would love to, but this week doesn't look too good for me personally.

[thoraudio]

I'm in, just me know.

[thoraudio]

the Great Thoraudio pontificates on the State House, and why it should be at the former 1 Court Square/Pizitz location.

1. Lower Dexter is d-e-a-d DEAD.

By my count there are 30 buildings fronting Dexter on the lower 2 blocks, not counting the recent parking deck cut through, or the empty space in front of the RSA deck.

By my count, there are 10 that are occupied.

Off the square, the First Alabama/Regions is running on e.... Commerce down to the hotel is empty, and court up to Byron's buildings is less than half.

Barring a 'Destination' store, retail isn't coming back down there.... Retail and Restaurants follow Rooftops (people).

So to get people down there, we need.... something. And my idea for an Arena there won't ever fly.

2. Govt. is stable. A state house will lock in usage for 40 years or more. What happens if you do draw a 'destination' store (like Bass Pro or Cabela's or similar) and the company goes bankrupt in 10 years or less. Stability breeds slow and steady growth.

3. One Court Square is a big stinking pile of poop. It has 0 redeeming features. As a matter of fact, if the whole block goes away, nothing is lost.... Nobel's is the only thing there worth saving.... and that can move.

If the whole block is used, there is plenty of room for a deck (there's already one there for One Court Square).

4. PR Stunts. Can't you just see a lawmaker grandstanding his way up Dexter to present some controversial legislation to the Gov.?

[OldCloverdale]

Originally Posted by thoraudio

the Great Thoraudio pontificates on the State House, and why it should be at the former 1 Court Square/Pizitz location.

...3. One Court Square is a big stinking pile of poop. It has 0 redeeming features. As a matter of fact, if the whole block goes away, nothing is lost.... Nobel's is the only thing there worth saving.... and that can move...

don't forget about what may be Montgomery's best restaurant, the Olive Room