I have enjoyed reading the posts here for a number of years, and I have contributed when I could.
However, MichMatters when you decide to malign me in public with no facts to support your allegations, I have to question your motivations and facts.
I have been leading the effort on rejecting the current buy/sale agreement for the North Capital ramp. If anyone has questions as to why this is/was a bad deal for the City I would be happy to respond.
“Hewitt's no initiated anything or been pro-active on anything since he was elected, really.” Again, what facts regarding my record are you basing you allegation on?
Eric Hewitt
Councilman
ehewitt@lansingmi.gov
ebhewitt@sbcglobal.net
Home 487-9593
Office 483-4177
Hi Mr. Hewitt! I for one appreciate your openess and willingness to come on here and join the discussion. I would certainly be interested to hear your explanation for your vote. This group is probably biased towards supporting the sale of the ramp to LCC, but I think most of us will read your explanation with an open mind. And even though we may be biased, I think it's fair to say that doesn't negate the supporting evidence for why many of us support the sale. If this is too broad a request, maybe you could specifically speak to why you think holding out for $6/sq ft rent (vs. $12) and $100,00 more in sale price is worth LCC building a new ramp in that area? (Am I assuming incorrectly that you would have voted favorably for $6 rent and $2.8 million vs. $12 rent and $2.7 million?) One of the LSJ editorials last week referenced an estimate that the new LCC ramp would greatly decrease the revenue of the municipal ramp to something around $300k/yr. What are your thoughts on this?
Also, I can't speak for MM, but based on his suggestion that you haven't been pro-active, it would not be facts of your record, but the lack of facts that he'd be basing his allegation on. More specifically, one cannot offer facts of things that never occurred, so if you'd like to rebut the suggestion that you're not proactive, your best defense would be to offer examples of how you have been proactive.
In the past we have had topics run off topic, and since this forum is about development, I think it's fair to say the accusation of lack of proactiveness is specific to development issues in Lansing and not other issues. (e.g. maybe you've been very proactive on poverty, healthcare, etc. but not on development) So maybe we could keep the discussion about development.
The pro-sale side has done a pretty good job getting out a simple, easy-to-understand message as to why a sale was a good idea (ie, it's an old ramp facing increasing maintenance costs and competition from LCC's proposed ramp). The council members who voted against the sale haven't done as well at distilling a clear message. Especially when you consider the neighborhood group supported the sale and councilmember Jeffries, who tried to negotiate a compromise, flipped from a no vote to a yes vote. Folks just don't understand why council members Wood, Hewitt and Robinson voted like they did.
Knowing what I know now I do not support selling the North Capital ramp (NCR). Since the last time this was brought before the Council many things have come to light that have changed my stance. As urban policy junkies you need to ask yourself what drives development in a urban setting, and one of the top issues is the four block rule (Ref: Jane Jacobs).
Enterprise Fund
The parking system is funded through an enterprise fund. Revenues generated by the parking facilities are deposited in the fund to offset parking expenditures. Current operational expenditures for the parking system are $12M a year. For the past three years the revenues have been $10M or the fund has a structural deficit of $2M. 2010 projected revenues are $7.5M meaning we are now working with a $4.5M deficit. You may ask where did this deficit come from? The answer is the City sold the Police Post site, City Market, South Grand ramp, and is demolishing the North Grand expansion. Take the revenues generated and added expendatures from the NCR and you will add $1.5M to the deficit.
Expenditures
Most of the expenditures associated with parking services are related to employee cost. Maintenance of the parking facilities is provided by a limited number of employees (especially since we have gone to automated payment systems), which is not impacted by the removal a ramp. If the NCR were sold the administrative cost would have been transferred to the remaining parking facilities. Expenditures would have been added for leases to park City vehicles and employees at NCR.
Revenues (NCR)
The NCR has three revenue streams Parking, City Offices, and Gibson’s. Parking as it is currently configured earns $800,000-$900,000. City Offices generate $198,000 in rent, and Gibson’s generates $130,000. You may ask how does the NCR generate $198,000 in rent for City offices. Parking Services charges each department (PND, CDGB, Public Services) $15 per square foot for office space. This money is transferred from the general funds to the parking fund to offset the parking expenditures.
Future Revenues (NCR)
If LCC were to build a 600-850 space ramp wouldn’t this reduce revenues for the NCR, has been a very popular question (easy sound bite). No. The North Grand expansion currently has 620-680 permits. Approximately 200 of these are city employees that receive city subsidized parking paid into the parking fund. If we reassigned all of the permit holders to the NCR we would exceed the ramps capacity. Future development in the area will also add to the potential number people needing to park in the area.
Since most of the current spaces in the NCR are used by LCC, LCC buying the ramp would not have reduced the number of students parking in the neighborhood. LCC stated if they were to purchase the NCR they were planning to build on the top floor of the ramp reducing parking by 150 spaces with no plan to offset the reduction. LCC who is using most of the NCR parking stated they have a 100 space deficit going into the Fall semester, and needed to address the shortage this Summer. I expected the “green space” to have been used for this purpose, but I do not expect the surface lot to be a long term facility. Council and the Neighborhood should work together to restricted access to the new lot from Capital Ave.
After researching LCC's future development plans I knew LCC had three potential sites for a new ramp. The only one discussed (as a fear tactic) was the “green space” on Capital Ave. I also know with enough pressure they could be encouraged to move their site as it seems they have done. I also understand that LCC would rather have another building on the “green space” rather than a parking structure.
Future Parking Needs
During the discussions to sale the NCR, Mr. Bob Johnson was adamant there was a glut of parking on the North end of downtown. This was the reason he gave to support the sale of the NCR. On Wednesday May 13 in the budget hearing, Mr. Johnson stated there was a parking shortage on the North end of downtown. Due to this shortage the ramp, which had been in the planning stages for over a year, was needed on the East side of the Grand River. According to Mr. Johnson, this 401 space ramp with commercial space for lease (right across the street from the vacant Stadium District) is vital to the Lansing Center and development on the East side of the river.
The Christman Company’s Accident Fund (AF) project was supposed to have a 1200 space ramp built next to their building. This was reduced to 1000 spaces then reduced again to 850, and appears to be on hold. Anyone not able to park in the AF ramp and does not want to walk across the river will add to the number that would park at the NCR. Mr. Johnson provided a parking study within the past year that indicated the AF expects between 100 and 400 visitors daily to the AF site for business as well as shopping and dinning. No lot or ramp has been identified to accommodate these visitors.
Do not forget the 500+ new state employees that will be moving into the State Police Post with no additional parking facilities.
Structural Improvements
It was stated that LCC planned to put $5M into structural improvements and everyone took that to mean it would take $5M make the ramp safe. In reality the figure according to Mr. Johnson is between $1.5M and $2.5M and can be done over the next 10 years. The improvements are expected to extend the life of the ramp for more than 20 years. A $2M investment for a $20M return seems to be good business to me. The extra $3M LCC was planning to spend was to expand and update the first floor and add classrooms on the top floor of the ramp.
While this is somewhat detailed, I am sure I have left a few things out.
Eric Hewitt
Councilman
ehewitt@lansingmi.gov
ebhewitt@sbcglobal.net
Home 487-9593
Office 483-4177
You are correct it is hard to prove a negative and I have been asked to do that a lot the last few months. What I guess I should ask is what would MM consider a proactive stance or approach to development?
I have been pushing hard to have the Ranney Skate Park updated and minor enhancements mande to attract the 20 something’s and students. Adding and improving attraction such as this will encourage development in the area.
I had language added to the Michigan Corridor Authority (MCA) resolution to preserves at least on spot on the panel from Lansing for a resident from the area. This in an effort to ensure local residents and business owners are helping guide the development in the MCA.
I have been pushing hard for the Act 33 documentation to be completed with the Ingham County Drain Commissioner to allow development in the Eastwood area. Talk about a political nightmare, I would love to discuss the behind the scenes fighting and back-biting that has gone on with this one, but I cannot.
I worked with A’Lynne Robinson and Brian Jeffries to get the cell tower ordinance written and passed.
These are the ones I can talk about.
Need more for less than 15 months in office in my freshman year?
And yes, I have not been able to or effective in getting my message out very well on a lot of issues, but not from a lack of trying. I have talked to certain reports for hours never to have my comments added to a story. I am sure it would surprise you if I said there seems to be a bias in the reporting at certain media outlets. That is why I have been adding my own comments to the comment sections and rebuffing editorials as time permits. I am looking into ways to be more proactive in speaking to the 1st ward residents besides 1st Contact, which I hold every first Saturday of the month at Gone Wired from 10am to 12. June 6th will be the last 1st Contact for this Summer.
I appreciate your comments on the site Eric. It would be nice if other council members would let themselves be so open to comment in a thoughtful and engaging manner.
I second that Jared, taking the amount of time it must have took to put that much thought into your response is certainly appreciated. While we may not agree 100% on everything (no one ever does), that level of committment to think through the issues is encouraging for citizens. I also would love to see more engagement of this kind from others, and I welcome your comments on others issues on this website. Good luck commenting on the LSJ forums, don't get too depressed on there!
Thank you for your comments, and yes no one will always agree with me and I would not expect them to. I would be happy to hear what the group thinks we on Council can do to see development and growth in Lansing from a fresh perspective.
Comments
I have enjoyed reading the posts here for a number of years, and I have contributed when I could.
However, MichMatters when you decide to malign me in public with no facts to support your allegations, I have to question your motivations and facts.
I have been leading the effort on rejecting the current buy/sale agreement for the North Capital ramp. If anyone has questions as to why this is/was a bad deal for the City I would be happy to respond.
“Hewitt's no initiated anything or been pro-active on anything since he was elected, really.” Again, what facts regarding my record are you basing you allegation on?
Eric Hewitt
Councilman
ehewitt@lansingmi.gov
ebhewitt@sbcglobal.net
Home 487-9593
Office 483-4177
In the past we have had topics run off topic, and since this forum is about development, I think it's fair to say the accusation of lack of proactiveness is specific to development issues in Lansing and not other issues. (e.g. maybe you've been very proactive on poverty, healthcare, etc. but not on development) So maybe we could keep the discussion about development.
Enterprise Fund
The parking system is funded through an enterprise fund. Revenues generated by the parking facilities are deposited in the fund to offset parking expenditures. Current operational expenditures for the parking system are $12M a year. For the past three years the revenues have been $10M or the fund has a structural deficit of $2M. 2010 projected revenues are $7.5M meaning we are now working with a $4.5M deficit. You may ask where did this deficit come from? The answer is the City sold the Police Post site, City Market, South Grand ramp, and is demolishing the North Grand expansion. Take the revenues generated and added expendatures from the NCR and you will add $1.5M to the deficit.
Expenditures
Most of the expenditures associated with parking services are related to employee cost. Maintenance of the parking facilities is provided by a limited number of employees (especially since we have gone to automated payment systems), which is not impacted by the removal a ramp. If the NCR were sold the administrative cost would have been transferred to the remaining parking facilities. Expenditures would have been added for leases to park City vehicles and employees at NCR.
Revenues (NCR)
The NCR has three revenue streams Parking, City Offices, and Gibson’s. Parking as it is currently configured earns $800,000-$900,000. City Offices generate $198,000 in rent, and Gibson’s generates $130,000. You may ask how does the NCR generate $198,000 in rent for City offices. Parking Services charges each department (PND, CDGB, Public Services) $15 per square foot for office space. This money is transferred from the general funds to the parking fund to offset the parking expenditures.
Future Revenues (NCR)
If LCC were to build a 600-850 space ramp wouldn’t this reduce revenues for the NCR, has been a very popular question (easy sound bite). No. The North Grand expansion currently has 620-680 permits. Approximately 200 of these are city employees that receive city subsidized parking paid into the parking fund. If we reassigned all of the permit holders to the NCR we would exceed the ramps capacity. Future development in the area will also add to the potential number people needing to park in the area.
Since most of the current spaces in the NCR are used by LCC, LCC buying the ramp would not have reduced the number of students parking in the neighborhood. LCC stated if they were to purchase the NCR they were planning to build on the top floor of the ramp reducing parking by 150 spaces with no plan to offset the reduction. LCC who is using most of the NCR parking stated they have a 100 space deficit going into the Fall semester, and needed to address the shortage this Summer. I expected the “green space” to have been used for this purpose, but I do not expect the surface lot to be a long term facility. Council and the Neighborhood should work together to restricted access to the new lot from Capital Ave.
After researching LCC's future development plans I knew LCC had three potential sites for a new ramp. The only one discussed (as a fear tactic) was the “green space” on Capital Ave. I also know with enough pressure they could be encouraged to move their site as it seems they have done. I also understand that LCC would rather have another building on the “green space” rather than a parking structure.
Future Parking Needs
During the discussions to sale the NCR, Mr. Bob Johnson was adamant there was a glut of parking on the North end of downtown. This was the reason he gave to support the sale of the NCR. On Wednesday May 13 in the budget hearing, Mr. Johnson stated there was a parking shortage on the North end of downtown. Due to this shortage the ramp, which had been in the planning stages for over a year, was needed on the East side of the Grand River. According to Mr. Johnson, this 401 space ramp with commercial space for lease (right across the street from the vacant Stadium District) is vital to the Lansing Center and development on the East side of the river.
The Christman Company’s Accident Fund (AF) project was supposed to have a 1200 space ramp built next to their building. This was reduced to 1000 spaces then reduced again to 850, and appears to be on hold. Anyone not able to park in the AF ramp and does not want to walk across the river will add to the number that would park at the NCR. Mr. Johnson provided a parking study within the past year that indicated the AF expects between 100 and 400 visitors daily to the AF site for business as well as shopping and dinning. No lot or ramp has been identified to accommodate these visitors.
Do not forget the 500+ new state employees that will be moving into the State Police Post with no additional parking facilities.
Structural Improvements
It was stated that LCC planned to put $5M into structural improvements and everyone took that to mean it would take $5M make the ramp safe. In reality the figure according to Mr. Johnson is between $1.5M and $2.5M and can be done over the next 10 years. The improvements are expected to extend the life of the ramp for more than 20 years. A $2M investment for a $20M return seems to be good business to me. The extra $3M LCC was planning to spend was to expand and update the first floor and add classrooms on the top floor of the ramp.
While this is somewhat detailed, I am sure I have left a few things out.
Eric Hewitt
Councilman
ehewitt@lansingmi.gov
ebhewitt@sbcglobal.net
Home 487-9593
Office 483-4177
I have been pushing hard to have the Ranney Skate Park updated and minor enhancements mande to attract the 20 something’s and students. Adding and improving attraction such as this will encourage development in the area.
I had language added to the Michigan Corridor Authority (MCA) resolution to preserves at least on spot on the panel from Lansing for a resident from the area. This in an effort to ensure local residents and business owners are helping guide the development in the MCA.
I have been pushing hard for the Act 33 documentation to be completed with the Ingham County Drain Commissioner to allow development in the Eastwood area. Talk about a political nightmare, I would love to discuss the behind the scenes fighting and back-biting that has gone on with this one, but I cannot.
I worked with A’Lynne Robinson and Brian Jeffries to get the cell tower ordinance written and passed.
These are the ones I can talk about.
Need more for less than 15 months in office in my freshman year?
And yes, I have not been able to or effective in getting my message out very well on a lot of issues, but not from a lack of trying. I have talked to certain reports for hours never to have my comments added to a story. I am sure it would surprise you if I said there seems to be a bias in the reporting at certain media outlets. That is why I have been adding my own comments to the comment sections and rebuffing editorials as time permits. I am looking into ways to be more proactive in speaking to the 1st ward residents besides 1st Contact, which I hold every first Saturday of the month at Gone Wired from 10am to 12. June 6th will be the last 1st Contact for this Summer.
Eric Hewitt
Councilman