Jump to content

Blue Bridge Ventures


twoshort

Recommended Posts

Split Rock is on Tuesday's agenda:

http://www.ci.grand-rapids.mi.us/meeting.p...441&type=agenda

as well as resolutions approving amendments to the Brownfield Plan for The Fitzgerald and the building that will house Founders (Imperial Metal Products).

I also see that Belknap is seeking Neighborhood Enterprise Zone status.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 217
  • Created
  • Last Reply

"Who keeps the metric system down?

We do, We do

Who leave Atlantis off the maps?

Who keeps the Martians under wraps?

We do, We do"

/obscure?

Not really, Simpsons.... =)

How come everytime Blue Bridge Proposes something it's always grander and better that most developments (I'm assuming Split Rock is...) and the Press looks for every angle do shoot it down?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, obviously Logie has some kind of problem with Jack. Who cares which politician Jack supported. He has a legal right to do so. It would interesting to see who Logie's contributors were in the past and see if they had any ties to local development.

By the way, I support replacing city hall with a convention hotel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something tells me there is a lot more at work here then even the Press is suggesting (on Logie's side). Who is Logie protecting? Which commercial brokerage or developer is he in cohoots with downtown that stands to lose on this deal (Grubb&Ellis maybe?). devil.gif

You're right, it just doesn't make sense why Logie would be so against Blue Bridge. It seems like he's way overreacting. I don't know about Grubb&Ellis, but Logie was at the opening of Grand Central Market which was a Rockford venture. On the other hand though, Rockford did work on River Bank Books and Heartwell was there instead of Logie, so who knows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right, it just doesn't make sense why Logie would be so against Blue Bridge. It seems like he's way overreacting. I don't know about Grubb&Ellis, but Logie was at the opening of Grand Central Market which was a Rockford venture. On the other hand though, Rockford did work on River Bank Books and Heartwell was there instead of Logie, so who knows.

Blue Bridge Ventures is disappointed in the decision today, and believes it reflects a deeply troubling lack of accountability and good faith within City Hall. It also represents old ways of thinking that will continue to hamper our growth and push business away while our suburbs and competing communities move forward.

At this point we will review all of our options regarding this project and determine the best course in the weeks to come.

Perhaps most disappointing is the continued willingness of leaders past and present to stifle valid new ideas and aggressively smear the reputation of good individuals in the process. Given the many unquestioned and unchallenged misrepresentations, misstatements and misinformation regarding this project, it is hard to imagine a more hostile environment for innovation or progress.

We worked with the city

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blue Bridge Ventures is disappointed in the decision today, and believes it reflects a deeply troubling lack of accountability and good faith within City Hall. It also represents old ways of thinking that will continue to hamper our growth and push business away while our suburbs and competing communities move forward.

At this point we will review all of our options regarding this project and determine the best course in the weeks to come.

Perhaps most disappointing is the continued willingness of leaders past and present to stifle valid new ideas and aggressively smear the reputation of good individuals in the process. Given the many unquestioned and unchallenged misrepresentations, misstatements and misinformation regarding this project, it is hard to imagine a more hostile environment for innovation or progress.

We worked with the city

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jack says:

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).

Another major fact missing from the cost per spot comparison is the real cost of building the other ramps the City has built. The cost to build this below grade ramp is what staff proposed to us in July - and a number we committed to build it for. When the City announces to the public what it cost them to build a ramp - they only disclose the actual construction costs. They don't include land costs (becuase they usually already have ownership of the land) nor do they include other soft costs such as architectural, engineering, financing... so the per spot they quote as a historic comparison isn't entirely accurate. They proposed the number to us based on their historic experience for construction of above ground ramps (they used $27K per spot) and then they added the soft costs which got it to the number of $42k per space. This number is accurate for all in costs - but deducting the TIF they gain by the project above the costs are reduced to less than $21K.

The Grand Rapids Mess says:

"City administrators say Buchanan's ramp is overpriced at almost $43,000 per space. They point to other developers who provide their own parking for about $25,000 per space. They offered to build a garage next door to Buchanan's project for $27,000 per space. Buchanan refused, saying it would be a waste of prime real estate."

Based on the track record of the Mess, I'm going to go with the complete truth more likely coming from BBV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think some kind of citizens group with everyone here on the boards participating. "Citizens Forward in Grand Rapids." I honestly don't think someone could pass fraudelant development to the commision without someone saying. Am I smelling to much into this? Why does this smell fishy? I thought Logie was such a champion for development.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if this was linked somewhere or not:

Figures, Facts, Questions, Accusations, and other fun things

For those of us not in development this whole situation is very confusing. Alot of 'he says this, but he's wrong' and 'they say this, but they're wrong.'

WOW!!! I am neither a developer nor a political advocate - but that letter written by Logie seemed very unprofessional and almost (dare I say) like a kid throwing a trantrum to make sure he gets his way. That is not the type of accusational, finger pointing letter I would expect to get as a commisioner. His point could have been made in a more professional demeanor.

Oh crystal ball....do we see a scandal in our future??? :ph34r:

My 2 cents...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WOW!!! I am neither a developer nor a political advocate - but that letter written by Logie seemed very unprofessional

Take away the veiled accusations of buying board members, and the illegality issue and I think what logie is saying is that this is too risky a venture for public tax dollars. Reading his letter makes it seem like this is a bit too risky. Can someone tell me in laymans terms how this is such a secure deal? All I'm sayin is that if the parking spaces aren't full, the taxpayers are losing money and this development is a bit outside of the city core.

I really have no idea what i'm talkign about, I'm just curious about the risk involved. I'm sure BBV has mitigated the risk as much as possible, I just want someone to explain it to me :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, what a catch!

That's unbelievable. I like how he slips that into paragraph ten, way down at the bottom. The worst part is, a former mayor is citing the Press's "speculations". He doesn't even know for sure if there are 5 prepared to support the proposal!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unbelievable.

The article in the paper I just received is formated differently than the one previously linked. Headline: "Developer helped backer in City Hall -- he contributes to campaign of James White, who pushed parking-ramp plan."

They turned focus away from the proposal and vote and instead are suggesting corruption. Regardless of whether or not the proposal is a good one (we haven't seen anything here), this is completely irresponsible of the Press.

And as far as Logie is concerned, his rational is all in the first paragraph: "If my bias against his ever being partner with our City is what you want to use to discount my further remarks in this letter, you may stop reading now."

You're not the mayor any more Logie. Stop trying to run the show.

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.