Roger Berg appeared at the Evansville Planning Commission on Tuesday night to present the site plan for the new Economy Store. Click on the audio to hear his presentation.
powered by Audioblog.com
MP3 File
After the presentation, I had a chance to ask a couple of questions. The original presentation almost a year ago had visualized the apartments on the top floor to be "market rate" apartments, and indeed it seemed so, given the fine materials described and shown in the site plan. I asked Roger Berg after the meeting how this was consistent with the Wisconsin Commerce Department Grant that normally requires the apartments to be low or moderate income apartments. Roger replied that due to the lower rents that are possible in Evansville, the rents that will be charged in the upper apartments will be in the moderate category. In summary--Evansville is not Madison for rental rates.
The other thing Mr. Berg stated was that his objective for the project was not profit--that the vision for the project was very long term. A high percentage of the contractors to be used in the building will be local.
Stay tuned to The Evansville Observer as I cover the transformation of the Old Ace. Remember---I just ask the questions. I leave the answers to others. Stay tuned.
The Evansville Observer Archive: The unofficial history of Evansville, Wisconsin from 2005-2013: Thousands of Video and Audio and Articles; Free: To Search scroll to the Search this Blog line and enter name of person, topic, or issue. Then scroll up to see all articles. Or use Google Search by topic. Enjoy.
I strongly suspect that low or moderate income apartments standards is set by the gov. not by what local contractors think. In this case being the grant is coming from the state, those standards would be set by the state. State money , state guide lines.. When using those terms, as I found out in a phone call, its based around the federal poverty line. You can not say that these would be moderately priced apts, based on Madison. We are not madison. I think for all the money they want from the city, tax payer money, they should give something back, and have a set amount of apts, set a side for the low income. It kind of upsets me that these contractors who are involved with this, have money, are receiving grants and tif.. money. Then they don't want to have to low income apts. Just seems to me the rich getting richer, and we poor tax payers are paying for it.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if anyone is as tired of all of this as I am. I went to a couple of these meetings, and it sounds nothing more to me than the good old boys club, scratching each other's back, to make something work, that really should not happen at all. I think the only way people are going to think this is at all legal, is if this group of men uses there own resources.
ReplyDeleteexplain to me packerfan how making low income housing is giving back to the community? To me it is giving back to a select few. Kind of sounds like inclusionary zoning, so I guess you kind of contradict yourself when you say we are not like madison.
ReplyDeleteSlammer for all the ' supposed' fund raising you have claimed to have done in the past, it really sounds like, you watch out for you first.
ReplyDeleteMy point being is , you can't compare madison rents with Evansville. They don't get 900.00 a month for a two bedroom here.
Really, low to moderate income housing will be determined by the state and federal gov.
It won't matter what you think, or Packer fan, or what the contractors think. The state sets these guide lines.
Go to the site and read the grant, really the big issue is, they are trying to get around having to do whats set forth in the grant, but yet still get the money. I really don't see that working, but there are people who push things long enough and they end up getting what they want even when its wrong.
Another thing Slammer, low income housing is every where not just madison, Evansville has low income housing. You should be greatful for what you have, and not deny some one housing because maybe you can afford it but they can't .
Its giving back to the community by having shelter, housing for a family that might not be able to afford it with out the low income housing.
I think what gets under peoples skin is they want to profit from this project, which they need to be able to do. But they are
ReplyDeleteNo. 1 getting Tiff money, tax payer money.
2. Applied for a grant to help pay wages and now want to get the grant money w/o complying with the guidelines. Which are union wages, not always union labor but wages. I am sure its all local bids they took, what does that really say, they want the work done, but not pay a fair wage. If I were them I would be very embarrassed to even be arguing this point.
3. Applied for a grant to help with the housing part, and don't want to comply with the guidelines for this grant either.
I think if they want to only go by their rules, they need to pay for it 100%, it really sounds like its all about greed.
"The other thing Mr. Berg stated was that his objective for the project was not profit--that the vision for the project was very long term."
ReplyDeleteI think the above statement as far as profit is generally regarded as disingenuous and that is what gets under people's skin.
Even if people are being cynical and his motive is not profit, he still should follow the guidelines if he wants grant money.
Randy maybe you do not get my point, when packerfan made by having the store make low income housing as part of any deal. If they decide to do this on their own record more power to them.
ReplyDeleteI do not like the fact they are receiving grants and tiff money above the 20% that was apparently a rule written in pencil and only certain people can change.
I have no problem with low income housing I have no idea what gave you that idea. my beef with packerfan is the fact he wants a requirement for the contracters to have to do that. That is what inclusionary zoning is.
Again my beef is as follows No extra TIF money (above the 20%), no stupid grants, no inclusionary zoning
I have a correction for Slammer and I am sorry if how I wrote it confused him. I do not care if they make it a requirement for them to have low income housing. My point was if they are going to get a grant, they need to be made to follow the rules like everyone else before they get the money.. and they are trying to get around that.
ReplyDelete