|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
April 27, 2001Commons board OKs Minervini proposalLocal developer's plan for renovating Building 50, Subarea 2 passes in 7-4 decisionBy BILL O'BRIENRecord-Eagle staff writer TRAVERSE CITY - In a historic vote for a historic structure, a divided Grand Traverse Commons board Thursday night approved a redevelopment plan for Building 50. By a 7-4 margin, the board approved a redevelopment agreement with local developer Ray Minervini that will give his team up to one year to inspect massive Building 50 to determine if the building can be renovated. If it's feasible, developers will then get an option agreement for the nearly 30-acre Subarea 2 district at the Commons which includes Building 50. But the decision didn't come until after more than two hours of intense bargaining between developers and the Commons board, after an apparent breakdown in communications between attorneys resulted in dozens of final details being hammered out at the meeting. "I'm overwhelmed by the vote of confidence from the community, and from the board," a relieved Minervini said following the vote. "When we stepped up to the plate we knew this could happen, but it's only going to happen with continuing support from the community - and the Commons board." While a formal agreement still needs to be finalized by attorneys, the basic planks of the Minervini proposal - assuming he eventually gets the option for the property - are: - Developers will commit $1.5 million to putting a new roof on the structure to prevent further damage of the building. Minervini said portions of a temporary roof could go on sooner, possibly even this year, once the "due diligence" inspections of the structure are completed. - The team will also commit to developing a 20,000- to 30,000-square-foot "pod" of Building 50, with the Commons board providing a dollar-for-dollar match in construction costs for that phase of the project with the proceeds from the sale of other land at the Commons. The plans had the near-unanimous support of nearly everyone in the 120-person audience, as several area residents felt the proposal was both consistent with the Commons' district plan and being offered by a local development team with strong ties to the area. "My question is why wouldn't you accept this proposal," Chris Maxbauer-Mox told the board. "I don't see a whole lot of people standing in line behind (Minervini) to take his place." But not everyone was behind the proposal. Some Commons board members were skeptical about Minervini's financial capacity to handle the project, which some officials estimate could reach $50 million for all the buildings in Subarea 2. "All I ask for is reasonable proof that they have the experience and the ability to carry this out," said board member Jack Bay, who joined members Bob Bach, Tom Nichols and Bob Forsman in voting against the agreement. But other board members argued that no plan would be "zero risk" for the Commons board, and felt that Minervini was worth the chance. "If there wasn't a risk, all these buildings would've been redeveloped 10 years ago," board member Matt McDonough said. "If the board waits for a perfect opportunity to come along, it never will." "We know it's no guarantee," board member Dan Tholen added. "But somewhere we've got to trust somebody, and I'm willing to go with a local guy." Members Carol Hale, Beth Knol, Richard Crowe, John Pelizzari and Chairman Brad Barnes also voted in favor of the agreement. The vote concluded months of arduous negotiations between developers and the Commons board, and even while some skepticism remains, Commons officials urged all sides to get beyond their differences and work toward the goal of saving Building 50. "In the last few years the community has come apart over this, instead of coming together," Hale said. "But we need the help of the entire community to make this work ... this is a huge, complex project that needs everyone's understanding." |