Savoy Sale, Public Art ALIVE!

Savoy Sale
Pay the fines or repair or demolish the building, the city of Norfolk has told the owner of 161 Granby Street, dubbed The Savoy.

“Regarding 161 Granby, the court convicted the company in October of 9 property maintenance violations and given a $2500 fine on each charge,” said Norfolk spokeswoman Lori Crouch. “The fines are suspended pending full repair or demo by April 30th.” 

Bobby Wright, whose limited liability company, One Sixty One Granby LLC, owns the historic structure, said in an email he plans to sell the building by the end of February. 

Wright didn’t disclose who would buy the building, which is wrapped in scaffolding.

Wright bought the building in 2004 for $450,000 from Kernal Kesser Realty Corp., according to city records. 

The assessed value of the land has remained constant since 2008, according to city records. But the value of the building, despite code violations, has increased. 
 

Effective Date	Land Value	Improvement Value	Total Value
07/01/2012	$293,100	$773,500	$1,066,600
07/01/2011	$293,100	$506,200	$799,300
07/01/2010	$293,100	$506,200	$799,300
07/01/2009	$293,100	$506,200	$799,300
07/01/2008	$264,500	$136,100	$400,600

South Carolina-based U.S. Development promised to buy The Savoy, as well as the former Union Mission, in 2009.

The financial crisis and the tightening of lending standards delayed the sale of both buildings to U.S. Development.

The company sought financing guarantees through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Oppenheimer was supposedly the lender, with HUD as the guarantor.

Public Art Revival

Yesterday’s column, Public Art DOA, saying public art was DOA in the legislature was incorrect, and the city of Norfolk let me know it.

“Today’s article incorrectly represented the Council’s legislative priority regarding Public Art Installation Requirements,” said Norfolk spokeswoman Lori Crouch.

“Norfolk’s bill is HB 1960. It unanimously passed the House and now will be considered by the Senate. Here is the link to the city’s legislative agenda for your reference.”

But that’s only half of the story.

Del. Matthew James, D-80, filed two bills, HB 1969 and HB 1960, that if passed would waive the requirement under Virginia law that only certified contractors could install public art.

One bill, HB 1B 1969, died. And one bill, HB 1960, lived.

It was a master stroke by city officials.

Unfortunately, the legislative agenda posted three days ago, dated January 19, didn’t list the bill numbers, so in my haste I tagged James’ HB 1969 bill.

That’s my mistake.

Yet the legislative agenda to which I was directed yesterday named James’ bill, which has been approved by the House of Delegates and scheduled to be heard by the Senate’s committee on General Laws and Technology.

The two bills are nearly identical in language. Dig deeper, though, and you see, under section F, the microscopic differences.

HB 1960 

However, the installation of the artwork and related construction services offered or rendered in connection with such commission shall only be rendered by a contractor licensed or certified in accordance with this chapter. 

HB 1969
However, any related construction services offered or rendered in connection with such commission otherwise requiring a license under this chapter shall only be rendered by a contractor licensed or certified in accordance with this chapter.