While I do understand that Developers do have to "pinch pennies", you must understand that we must also "pinch pennies" when we chose where to spend our money. From reading your last post you seemed very well informed until I read your earlier posts. You stated that you feel sorry for the construction workers who had to do so much traveling. So much so that you chose another profession. Well how do you feel about all of the Lansing tradesmen who will have to travel this summer because the work that they should be doing was given to an out of town contractor. You also stated in an earlier post that Fryling would most likely be using subs from the Lansing area. This is totally false. Currenty, all trades on this project are from out of town. You also stated that that all the work would be done by union tradesmen, just from a differant area. Also totally false. There are no union trades currently on this project.
It is good that you and Concerned are bringing these topics to the forum. I think we all appreciate the conversation. I do hope that we (Lansing) can be self sufficient in the future, but our state is in need of being self sufficient. I think we should support the work that developers are doing to try and move residents back to our inner cities, and help the economy of Lansing.
The residents and businesses within the Stadium District will improve the economy and condition of this part of Lansing, and I think that is great.
It is very hard for a city when giving tax credits to a developer to require a developer use contractors from a designated area. The developer should have some freedom in choosing its employees, if it didn't it then the city would practically be the developer for the project.
That would be fine Jared, in todays slumping economy you would have contractors within town clambering to get on the bid sheet. I know of towns all over the state that do it. What a way to support your community and I don't see why strings can't be attached to an agreement when tax credits are being given out.
I have worked on smaller projects then this for Granger. The CATA building downtown for example is much smaller than this and Granger was the GC. Christman is in the middle of dorm re-models out to MSU which would be considered residential multi-family. No different than this building. And I'm sure that such a high profile building as this is that either Christman, Clark, and Granger would have be more than happy to do the work, with a competive bid.
As I have always said you get what you pay for and by hiring someone out of town they have no ownership in this building. Which will show in their craftsmenship and they will cut corners where ever needed to get under the bottom line. How easy do you think it will be to get them back here for warranty issues when this job is over? Do you think they will jump right into their service vans and run right over from Grand Rapids to fix a hinge, a leaking faucet, no heat in a unit, a leaking roof, air conditioning that won't work or a boiler that has gone down. Most companies will state that they have 5 year warranties on labor and materiales installed. Are you going to put up with this for 5 years? You'll be lucky to get them back in two days.
You're making an awful lot of speculation, and a lot of far-fetched ones, at that. I'm going to wait until it is up and running before I start talking about it being doomed before it even began. Regardless of what you've worked on in the past, you're really putting your credibility on the line, here, by exaggerating for effect with these baseless claims, accusations, and doom-and-gloom predictions. If I were to take your word, on this one, I'd probably believe that this was the end of the world as we know it. Are you honestly going to tell me that Granger, at this very moment, is building a shoddy project in the J.W. Marriott because "it's not my city"? This is exactly what you're accusing Fryling of. You can't have it both ways.
What you're saying and implying, in even more words, is that constructors only build their best projects in their hometown. That is completely ridiculous. Your concern was legitimate, at first, but the exaggerations and far-fetched claims and predictions make you look as if you have an alterior motive, here, and thus I'm not sure I can any longer take you seriously. You do protest too much.
Lmich, I'm not making any speculations to the project. I've been in the construction business for 15 years and have seen guys with the best intentions have problems or equipment fail. I would want someone whos local, who can come in a snap when something goes wrong and maybe they'll get someone locally for a service contract after the warranties run out. But during that time I have to rely on someone on the other side of the state fixing any problems that come up.
Do you honestly think that a construction worker who has worked twelve hours the day before and has a one hour drive to and from work eventually doesn't develope some lackadaisial tendencies. A guy gets burned out in a hurry, I've seen it many times.
Just one of many positve points to hiring local contractors.
Jared, I agree, which is why I'll end my part in this particular discussion about this.
I agree that with public money being given to these projects that the city should not only want, but have an obligation to, pressure, as much as they can, for any of these type of municipally-subsidized projects to use local contractors, architects, and other parties whenever possible. Perhaps, Lansing will get to the point, one day, where the city will have much more leverage in doing this, but that just isn't the case in a city looking for whatever it can get, at the moment.
However, I refuse to label this project an eyesore or failure just because the developed failed to use a local contractor. The Stadium District will be a shot in the arm to the near eastside area of downtown, and an excellent addiition to the urban landscape, local contractor or not, and I know most of you agree. Mr. Gillespie could have easily continued to develop subdivisions in the suburbs like the majority of the developers continue to do, but he's taking a chance on Lansing, and I welcome ANY developer, at the moment, looking to take a chance on a largely untested housing market.
Again, perhaps, when Lansing downtown development becomes more self-sustaining the city can afford to be more picky, but that is not the case. I'd love just as much as Concernedtaxpayer for the day when "Buy Lansing" will become the reality instead of the goal, but that is not the current reality of the situation. I'm satisfied that Gillespie used a great, un-and-coming local architect, and that is enough for me (and mos others) for the time being. I'm also even more happy that MICHIGAN-based parties are working on this. We can't afford these municipal wars when the whole state is going down. One has to be a pragmatist in tough times like these, not a narrow-minded ideologue.
Really, I don't believe that any of us are really on a different page. It simply seems that some are at the more extreme ends of the spectrum than others.
LMich, I'm happy to see that we at least agree on somethings. If we can buy from our neighbors we should try. We're all trying to make in this now trying economy and you'd be surprised how many local contractors we have that are more than capable of doing this work. Hell, thats what has made this town what it is. I've got a small list of local GCs that would be more then willing to look at anything you have.
Gillespie Group has sent me an email about the meeting to convince the city to allow the developers to use the roof of the structure for anyone interested:
"The date/time of this meeting is Tuesday, June 12th at 2 p.m. and will be held in the Department of Planning and Neighborhood Development’s boardroom located at 316 N. Capitol Avenue."
Comments
It is good that you and Concerned are bringing these topics to the forum. I think we all appreciate the conversation. I do hope that we (Lansing) can be self sufficient in the future, but our state is in need of being self sufficient. I think we should support the work that developers are doing to try and move residents back to our inner cities, and help the economy of Lansing.
The residents and businesses within the Stadium District will improve the economy and condition of this part of Lansing, and I think that is great.
It is very hard for a city when giving tax credits to a developer to require a developer use contractors from a designated area. The developer should have some freedom in choosing its employees, if it didn't it then the city would practically be the developer for the project.
I have worked on smaller projects then this for Granger. The CATA building downtown for example is much smaller than this and Granger was the GC. Christman is in the middle of dorm re-models out to MSU which would be considered residential multi-family. No different than this building. And I'm sure that such a high profile building as this is that either Christman, Clark, and Granger would have be more than happy to do the work, with a competive bid.
As I have always said you get what you pay for and by hiring someone out of town they have no ownership in this building. Which will show in their craftsmenship and they will cut corners where ever needed to get under the bottom line. How easy do you think it will be to get them back here for warranty issues when this job is over? Do you think they will jump right into their service vans and run right over from Grand Rapids to fix a hinge, a leaking faucet, no heat in a unit, a leaking roof, air conditioning that won't work or a boiler that has gone down. Most companies will state that they have 5 year warranties on labor and materiales installed. Are you going to put up with this for 5 years? You'll be lucky to get them back in two days.
What you're saying and implying, in even more words, is that constructors only build their best projects in their hometown. That is completely ridiculous. Your concern was legitimate, at first, but the exaggerations and far-fetched claims and predictions make you look as if you have an alterior motive, here, and thus I'm not sure I can any longer take you seriously. You do protest too much.
Do you honestly think that a construction worker who has worked twelve hours the day before and has a one hour drive to and from work eventually doesn't develope some lackadaisial tendencies. A guy gets burned out in a hurry, I've seen it many times.
Just one of many positve points to hiring local contractors.
I agree that with public money being given to these projects that the city should not only want, but have an obligation to, pressure, as much as they can, for any of these type of municipally-subsidized projects to use local contractors, architects, and other parties whenever possible. Perhaps, Lansing will get to the point, one day, where the city will have much more leverage in doing this, but that just isn't the case in a city looking for whatever it can get, at the moment.
However, I refuse to label this project an eyesore or failure just because the developed failed to use a local contractor. The Stadium District will be a shot in the arm to the near eastside area of downtown, and an excellent addiition to the urban landscape, local contractor or not, and I know most of you agree. Mr. Gillespie could have easily continued to develop subdivisions in the suburbs like the majority of the developers continue to do, but he's taking a chance on Lansing, and I welcome ANY developer, at the moment, looking to take a chance on a largely untested housing market.
Again, perhaps, when Lansing downtown development becomes more self-sustaining the city can afford to be more picky, but that is not the case. I'd love just as much as Concernedtaxpayer for the day when "Buy Lansing" will become the reality instead of the goal, but that is not the current reality of the situation. I'm satisfied that Gillespie used a great, un-and-coming local architect, and that is enough for me (and mos others) for the time being. I'm also even more happy that MICHIGAN-based parties are working on this. We can't afford these municipal wars when the whole state is going down. One has to be a pragmatist in tough times like these, not a narrow-minded ideologue.
Really, I don't believe that any of us are really on a different page. It simply seems that some are at the more extreme ends of the spectrum than others.
Christman Co.
327-5341
Granger Co.
393-1670
Clark Co.
316-7179
Nielson Co.
699-2101
Moore Trosper Co.
694-6310
Kares Co.
645-2661
"The date/time of this meeting is Tuesday, June 12th at 2 p.m. and will be held in the Department of Planning and Neighborhood Development’s boardroom located at 316 N. Capitol Avenue."