Jump to content

Blue Bridge Ventures


twoshort

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 217
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Welcome to the forum Jack! I think you'll find most of the people in here are definitely in favor of underground parking. Thank you for coming in here and giving us your side of the story and offering to answer some questions (I plan to take advantage :P ).

I don't totally understand your math in this paragraph.

Building this ramp is expensive. It's all below ground (which drives up the construction cost dramatically), it's also next to the river; all the soil is heavily polluted; and bedrock is 7' below the surface. But the private project above will create new taxes - the City's share alone from real property taxes starts at $450,000 in the first year to reduce the costs of parking - bringing the real cost of parking below $21K per spot. The City would also have a new source of income taxes above the garage. The City's Parking Services Dept. projected that the garage will also make money for the City - with rates at that point of $125 per space per month (adjusted for inflation based on their cheapest garage today).

The way I'm reading it, it sounds like the ramp will be subsidized by the taxes collected from the project. Is this the case? and if so why is that fair?

Also... Bedrock at 7 feet :blink: Will we get to see some dynamite on site?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow! Welcome Jack Buchanan!

This fourm is becoming a media outlet all its own. Who needs the Press when we get the story straight from the newsmakers? And in this case it seems like the Press isnt telling the whole story.

I hope this project sails through without a hitch. Just what youve said sounds incredible. Dont be shy to tell us more about it. I can assure you we exist off of that type of stuff here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome to the forum Jack! I think you'll find most of the people in here are definitely in favor of underground parking. Thank you for coming in here and giving us your side of the story and offering to answer some questions (I plan to take advantage :P ).

I don't totally understand your math in this paragraph.

The way I'm reading it, it sounds like the ramp will be subsidized by the taxes collected from the project. Is this the case? and if so why is that fair?

Also... Bedrock at 7 feet :blink: Will we get to see some dynamite on site?

Sorry - I was doing my best to keep the reply brief - but here is how the math works: The City's annual debt payments for the entire cost of the garage is about $925K - so the $450K coming from the project brings the overall costs down almost 50%. The monies are captured by the City through the State's Brownfield program (normally the City wouldn't get much of these monies) and they can do this because this will be a public garage for the neighborhood. The money wouldn't exist if the project didn't exist, so it's not money that the City or anyone else is giving up.

If they put a ramp or lot on another block, then that property will come off the tax rolls and taxes being paid on that property would disappear (another cost of eating up property the City doesn't take into account). Any income taxes (or potential for more taxes) on that site would also be displaced.

With a combined public/private use on the site they keep the taxes they have and generate a lot more (especially new income taxes). This also enables the City to capture the TIF Brownfield - something they've never been able to do it before. In virtually all other cases the developers capture the TIF funds for thier own eligible costs - leaving no additional funds for the City's use (this may not sound fair but it's a key tool to what makes most downtown projects competitive with green suburban sites - but that's a whole other topic).

Is it fair in this case? We certainly will benefit by having a garage below our project, but it's not our garage and we'll have no greater rights to that garage than any other user (by law, we can't pay cheaper rates or secure long-term contracts for our tenants). If the project doesn't get built, there will be no new revenue - some of which will reduce the cost of the garage to a level well below what the City normally spends on construction costs alone for a ramp (and cheaper than the total costs of a surface lot).

They can build an above ground ramp on another site or on part of this one, but then the taxes from that site would dissapear. And any ability to share the veritcal use of that site and create another tax paying private use on it would go away. Besides - that pollutes what we think the project is all about (great design and greater density).

We think and hope the big picture view of the economics will get the City to start thinking more about below grade parking for future public ramps/lots. Imagine all the sites that could be better utilized , better designed and creating both taxes and parking revenue for the City (pick-up a downtown map and see how much is dedicated to parking).

And no - I don't think we'll need dynamite but we won't know until we get into it. And sorry for another long-winded explanation. I'll try to keep my replies brief from now on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the explaination. I dont totally understand the TIF credits, but I think I've got a general understanding of things. Basically you are sharing brownfield credit with the city instead of taking it all your self.

Another question - Are you planning to take a developer's fee for the ramp portion of the project?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The price that City staff calculated and proposed to us, and a number we've agreed to on a fixed price, includes a 1.57% combined contractor/developer fee. Obviously that number by itself isn't enough for a contractor fee alone (considering it's also an at risk contract if costs exceed projections) so we won't be taking a developer's fee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've engaged a prominent New York design team and intend to build a very contemporary yet urban mixed use project - including residential, office and entertainment use (a little over 300,000 SF). We've designed it in such a way to maintain our ability to create a visual and natural conectivity to the second block so that could be a natural future extension of the neghborhood.

If I may be so bold to ask, why did you feel the need to go to a New York design team for this project? We have plenty of local talant that is capable of designing a project like this.

It chaps my azz to constantly see higher profile projects in our area go to architects that are not from here. I guess I'm a shop local kind of guy.

Nitro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Jack:

Welcome. Nice to have you (if for no other reason than to defend yourself!). I have a question. I was involved with some projects in Atlanta where the land was tight, the first floor was retail, the next 6 levels were parking (nicely designed and lit) and then there was a "sky lobby" at 7th floor where the "towers" started. Would something like this be possible and save some of the headaches?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boy JackBBV, nothing like being the most popular guy in the room :P Welcome!!

For those of you wondering where this project is, here is an aerial (based on Jack's description and related articles):

post-2672-1132935635_thumb.jpg

Correct me if I'm wrong Jack, but I believe it is the entire block where the WAM building is, as well as parking that GR Spring owns now? BTW, if Zawacki doesn't move, does that kill the second proposed block, or is he moving for sure?

the next 6 levels were parking (nicely designed and lit) and then there was a "sky lobby" at 7th floor where the "towers" started. Would something like this be possible and save some of the headaches?
I don't think this is going to be a "tower" project, maybe 5 - 6 floors total? If you look at the site at about 200x500, that's a 100,000 sq ft footprint, and the whole project is 300,000. But I could be wrong.

If I may be so bold to ask, why did you feel the need to go to a New York design team for this project? We have plenty of local talant that is capable of designing a project like this.

Nitro, not to be a "non-local" guy, but even though there is a lot of architectural talent in the local market, if you look at the portfolios of past projects for local firms, I can't even find ONE project similar to this that anyone has done. Design Plus and Rich Craig are probably the only ones I can think of that are even close. If you're building a school, church, suburban office building, college campus, convention center, big-box retail store, or renovating an old building, then yes, you need not look any further than GR.

Jack: What's your timeframe if the city takes your offer (or comes back with something acceptable to you)?

And talking like this, you sound like one of us (and you're sure to get a lot of support here :D ):

But here is the real story on the parking. We want to build density in the area so that the project overall will be more attractive. Greater density means it can better support the entertainment and other amenities we plan for the area. We want to build an urban neighborhood - where retail works - and to do that you need a lot of people living and working there. Surface parking eats up a lot of land and looks like crap. Ramps look like crap and eat up chunks of land and air space. But underground space takes up space that nobody wants - and no one enjoys looking at parking lots or structures.

It's too bad you didn't do Icon on Bond, or the new Marriott. Keep us updated if you can.

BTW: you didn't break any of the rules regarding advertising your project as far as I can tell.

post-2672-1132935635_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nitro, not to be a "non-local" guy, but even though there is a lot of architectural talent in the local market, if you look at the portfolios of past projects for local firms, I can't even find ONE project similar to this that anyone has done. Design Plus and Rich Craig are probably the only ones I can think of that are even close. If you're building a school, church, suburban office building, college campus, convention center, big-box retail store, or renovating an old building, then yes, you need not look any further than GR.

Sorry Dadof, I can't buy into that one. This is nothing more then a large scale mixed-use urban infill project. Any of the big firms in town could handle this; Progressive, D+. URS, and potentially even Integrated.

Far too often there is a falacy that we need to look beyond our own region to find design talent for supposedly "special" projects. I would argue all day long that our local design pool could design anything we can conjur up in our heads.

Stepping off my soapbox........ :lol:

Nitro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry Dadof, I can't buy into that one. This is nothing more then a large scale mixed-use urban infill project. Any of the big firms in town could handle this; Progressive, D+. URS, and potentially even Integrated.

Far too often there is a falacy that we need to look beyond our own region to find design talent for supposedly "special" projects. I would argue all day long that our local design pool could design anything we can conjur up in our heads.

Stepping off my soapbox........ :lol:

Nitro

I know you could do it Nitro :thumbsup: And I'll bet a lot of architects in GR would LOVE to work on something like this rather than another Best Buy or elementary school. :P

And no, please don't say Integrated :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The price that City staff calculated and proposed to us, and a number we've agreed to on a fixed price, includes a 1.57% combined contractor/developer fee. Obviously that number by itself isn't enough for a contractor fee alone (considering it's also an at risk contract if costs exceed projections) so we won't be taking a developer's fee.

1.57% sounds really light.

How about your project with the Lear Plant..... What is the plan for the retail? Any new national or local tenants? I think I heard that the retail will be in new stucture and if so will it be walkable? Alpine North of 96 is very suburban, I hope this project will be more urban i.e. zero setbacks and parking behind new buildings. I understand the need to be tight lipped about things, but any info you can give us is greatly appreciated :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On one note, JackBBV, do you believe that GR should head into Light-rail as a mass transit option? Im glad you have a place where you can voice your side of the story, JackBBv. Thank you for the insight it is greatly appreciated.

Rizzo: I think light-rail will be great. It's a long-term process, so we can't handicap any momentum downtown GR might gain or have by limiting the infrastructure that's necessary to keep things going. Mass transit needs a mass - so GR can't limit itself in the meantime on doing what it takes to attract people into the City. I also think they ought to let real transportation experts work on this - and not let self appointed "City Leaders/Experts" oversee this. All this will do is slow down the process with people who don't know enough about planning or transportation.

And on Calder - again the Press. All who were involved in that now have trouble reading the Press for anything more than checking movie times. It is a poor reflection of this community. It was also an expensive lesson for us on how this City really works - a disheartening one but still a valuable eye-opener.

Nitro, it's a long story why we went out of town for design. We are going to be working in a big way with at least one local firm for a majority of the A&E. We met with a couple of firms and asked them to come up with some ideas. We weren't happy with what we were seeing. Some of it was because they tried to stay within the confines of what GR is used to - and we want something that's unusual here - something you would normally see in a major city. We really want a Richard Meier look - funky yet timeless - and we thought it best, after trying it locally, to go to some firms who could show us what we want especially since we had trouble verbalizing it ourselves. We found that the local firms we met with needed better direction and we weren't able to give it to them. I think, after this first phase, it may be easier to bring more of it home. I agree there are a lot of great firms here - I'm sorry we had to do this but we just felt it necessary in this case.

GRDadof3/GRguy: The layout of the project on the first block is pretty hard to explain electronically and if you wish you're welcome to come by our office and see the initial designs. It sits on the block like an irregular shaped "C", and it has some areas that are 2 stories tall (first floor has 25' ceiling heights) and a section that may exceed 15 stories. But a key desire for us was to have good connectivity to the second block (where GR Spring is) and to do that we wanted visibility of it from Monroe. If you saw the design you'd understand why above ground parking wouldn't work - even if it started on the second floor. We'd love to make life more simple in our dealings with City staff - but the parking issue isn't the real issue.

If we developed this project, GR Spring would move from both blocks. Parking for thier company is on the first block - so they can't operate by selling us part of their property. They want to move - - they originally approached us. And we want both blocks, otherwise the project won't have the impact we're planning for.

Lear is still undergoing a lot of thought. We would love the site to become something really dramatic and we're going to do the best we can but retail, more than anything else, is all market driven.

I hope my joining in on this discussion doesn't hinder any criticism of me, BBV or our projects. I feel like I'm invading this forum - even though I love reading it. Please don't hesitate to be blunt! I appreciate a critical viewpoint. I also appreciate the opportunity to clear up facts that I (strongly!) don't feel you were getting correctly from the Press.

Thanks-

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Jack, don't feel like you're intruding. None of us owns this discussion, and we all found our way here too, mostly because we were all excited by the changes happening around GR and to complain about things that we didn't like that were (are) going on. You may actually see some ideas here that might catch your interest, because there is an amazing group of people here.

Back to Richard Meier, he does some incredible work.

Feature0123_02x.jpg

BeachHouse-3.jpg

perry_west_pathfinder_2march03.jpg

mr-get2.jpg

http://www.richardmeier.com/#

That would be quite impressive to have a similar design mixed in with the older factories in that area. His designs remind me of Mies van der Rohe in a way. In fact, there is a house in Ada near Conservation that reminds me of Richard Meiers, probably because it was designed by Dirk Lohan (which also just struck me as how they got the Marriott job):

G350098.JPG

Countdown to Nitro showing up here to remind me of how little I know about architecture. ;) I would say so far you have our support, and pretty much most of us think you got hosed on the Calder Plaza deal.

- Jeff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Countdown to Nitro showing up here to remind me of how little I know about architecture. ;) I would say so far you have our support, and pretty much most of us think you got hosed on the Calder Plaza deal.

Oh come on now, I'm not that bad am I? One of my favorite Meier residences is the Douglas House in Harbor Springs. Although Post-Modernism isn't really my gig, I do think Meier is pretty cool.

Nitro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

slightly off topic, my Dad worked for Jim Douglas when he built the house in Harbor Springs. My Dad was the one paying the high design fees for Meier's design. The nice part was, when it was finished, Jim gave my Dad the keys for a weekend and we went up there. Awesome place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome Jack. I for one always thought the "get to zero" tactic for the Gallium project was bullcrap. Not to play DeVos vs. All other Developers but how in the heck did the J.W. Marriott get every subsidy in the world but Gallium had to get to zero?

I think the problem in Grand Rapids is that there are a lot of big egos. People who think they have all the power in the world and if they don't agree with the way a project is shaping up, the dig in their heels.

You have a lot of vocal allies on this board which actually seems to get more street cred. than any of us would imagine. :) Keep up the good work and keep us posted. Also let know if the Urban Planet Mafia needs to start inundating the local media and rebutting every stupid little thing they say!

GRDad, you need to get down to Jack's office and get some pics of this model! :)

Joe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome Jack. I for one always thought the "get to zero" tactic for the Gallium project was bullcrap. Not to play DeVos vs. All other Developers but how in the heck did the J.W. Marriott get every subsidy in the world but Gallium had to get to zero?

I think the problem in Grand Rapids is that there are a lot of big egos. People who think they have all the power in the world and if they don't agree with the way a project is shaping up, the dig in their heels.

You have a lot of vocal allies on this board which actually seems to get more street cred. than any of us would imagine. :) Keep up the good work and keep us posted. Also let know if the Urban Planet Mafia needs to start inundating the local media and rebutting every stupid little thing they say!

GRDad, you need to get down to Jack's office and get some pics of this model! :)

Joe

I went back through the posts and can't find a mention of a model :huh: But I'm sure some of us would love to stop in to see some drawings :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.