Being that the property is privately owned, Mr. Grotelueschen has the privilege of building whatever he wants on the site as long as the use fits within the local zoning code (Central Business) and abides by local building codes.  However, being that the site is at the center of the downtown business district and historic center of the community, one may argue that the developer must respect the input of local citizens.  Some comments I have read on message boards go even further to suggest that downtown Champaign is somehow public domain and that the owner of the lot should build whatever is in the public’s best interest.  While I object to that assertion, now that the City has agreed to provide tax rebates, perhaps we the people should have more say in the project.

Those supporting the proposed nine-story 145 room hotel say that a hotel in downtown Champaign is needed to attract certain events to the area and will provide an influx of new business for downtown bars/restaurants/retailers.  Bruce Knight (Planning Director) points to other successful downtown districts and asserts that employment, entertainment, and residents are all required to create a “24-hour downtown”.  A hotel, while not providing permanent residents, provides a constant flow of visitors to the downtown district and is towards the top of the list of priorities for the City.

Opponents of the project question whether it is worth “spending” tax dollars to promote a redevelopment while the city is having trouble balancing their budget.  The vote for the tax rebate also comes on the heels of the approval of a 4 cent per gallon fuel tax which many citizens object to.  Other opponents feel as if this is another case of “corporate welfare” and wonder when other citizens will get rebates on the real estate taxes they pay for their properties.  I have also heard arguments that a hotel at this location will create too much vehicular and pedestrian traffic at this intersection.

So who has it right?  In my opinion, both sides make some good points.  City planners explain that without the project being built there would be no new food & beverage taxes, hotel-motel taxes, or real estate taxes generated, so therefore they are not “spending” any taxpayer money.  I also agree with the other side when they make the point that a development not requiring tax rebates might be a better use of the site.  Clearly the city council feels as if the hotel use being proposed now is better than waiting for a future development that does not require the rebates.  Had I been sitting in a council seat, I would have posed the question of demand.  Is there a study showing that there is demand for additional hotel rooms in the area, and if so, is there specifically demand for a hotel located downtown?

Being that Mr. Grotelueschen is a financial analyst, I would hope that he has studied the market to determine there is indeed demand for his $28 million hotel.  If that is the case, then I am in support of the project and of the tax rebates.  My reasoning is that if there is demand for more hotel rooms, then someone will build another new hotel somewhere in Champaign-Urbana.  And being that it is much cheaper to build a hotel on a greenfield site on the edge of town than redevelop an urban site, there is a high likelihood that a developer without rebates would choose the cheaper site over the urban site.  Since I support the further redevelopment of our downtown core, I view the rebates as a redevelopment incentive and nothing more.  Recent commercial real estate periodicals I read have frequently been touting the improving hospitality industry, including the upward pressure on average room rates and increasing occupancy rates.  Therefore, I believe that the city planners and council made the correct decision.

Matt Wavering is a commercial real estate broker with Coldwell Banker Commercial Devonshire Realty and can be reached at 217-352-7712 or mjw@cbcdr.com

It is a greater work to educate a child, in the true and larger sense of the word, than to rule a state. (William Ellery Channing)

As the quote above references, I believe that the most important thing that occurs each day is the interaction that takes place between our faculty, staff, and students.  With twenty-five years of experience in the Champaign Unit #4 Schools, I have witnessed first-hand the great things that take place in our district.  When asked why I wanted to take the position of Superintendent, I said and meant that I work with some of the best in the profession and am proud to be a member of this district and community. 

Our community expects and deserves the best from its schools, and I want to inspire a high level of confidence and trust in them.    In order to obtain this, there needs to be a strong partnership between the schools and the community.   I want to stay informed of the perceptions the public has of the schools and respond when necessary to questions and concerns.  As I begin to serve as Superintendent for the Champaign Unit #4 Schools, I welcome constructive feedback on how we can continue to improve the education of our students.

It is truly an honor and privilege to serve the students and families in Champaign, and I am committed to providing this community schools that provide the very best for its students.

Judy Wiegand

Gerard later introduced the idea to a group of local developers at the City’s September “Developer’s Luncheon”. He received a lukewarm response as there are still too many questions. Investors and real estate developers generally like the idea of making money, or at a minimum not loosing it all to a failed development. However, I applaud the mayor for posing the question and investigating the viability.

I happen to like the idea very much and have taken some time to examine the possibilities. Please keep in mind that my expertise is real estate and the overriding theme/topic of my articles on this blog are development, redevelopment, and commercial real estate related. Therefore, I will not try to act as if I know enough about the minor league baseball business to decide whether or not it is viable in Champaign. I also do not know if a minor league baseball park would be a good investment of public money nor do I know if a private developer could make money doing it on their own. What I do know is that there are communities smaller than C-U that have successful minor league baseball teams. I also know that a large project like a ballpark can help revitalize an area and bring tourism dollars to the community. That possibility in and of itself is enough for me to take a look at the real estate side of the equation.

After a little bit of research, it appears that a ballpark will require a minimum of a 400’ by 400’ piece of land. I suppose we could cut corners like those Bostonians did with Fenway Park in 1912, but assuming that there will be no “Green Monster” and considering seating, sidewalks, and setbacks, 400 feet seems to be the bare minimum. Pieces of “greenfield” (undeveloped) land of this size are difficult to find except on the fringes of the city. Since city planners have been pushing for redevelopment of “brownfields” rather than fringe development, we can pretty well rule out any fringe sites that would put a strain on infrastructure. I suppose it could happen from a private developer, but it would likely not receive much support from the city.

That turns my focus to the two areas that Gerard suggested in the aforementioned developer’s luncheon: downtown or near Interstate 74. If you read the above referenced News-Gazette article, you will notice that the mayor suggested the southeast quadrant of the Neil Street & I-74 interchange as a potential site. Transportation and ease of access are two major positives for an interstate site such as this. However, upon further review I have noticed that this irregularly shaped parcel would require additional assemblage in order to make the site large enough. That includes the demolition of a few single family homes and encroachment onto the water tower land to the east. And that is just for the ballpark itself; it doesn’t even take into account the need for additional land for parking.

A better site might be the vacant land west of the Za’s restaurant on North Neil across from Marketplace Mall (north of the mall‘s storm water detention pond). That property is owned by mall owners General Growth Properties and is simply excess land from Marketplace. Plans call for the eventual extension of Village Way (the access road) and allows for the future development of a few retail lots. The site is located just off of the interstate, has numerous restaurants and hotels nearby, and is entirely owned by a single party. Plus since it is a greenfield, it will not require any environmental cleanup and can utilize existing infrastructure.

Personally, I like the idea of a downtown or at least centrally located park that would allow for additional private redevelopment in the area. A site that would benefit the continued redevelopment efforts in the downtown area and provide food and entertainment options before and after game time. However, I have been unable to identify a site near downtown that is large enough to accommodate a ballpark. Any such site would require a substantial amount of property assemblage and would likely require the city to vacate at least one city street.

I would like to hear what other residents think of the idea and where they would like to see a minor league ballpark. Do you have a site in mind? If so, tell me about it and I will give you my thoughts.

Matt Wavering is commercial real estate broker with Coldwell Banker Commercial Devonshire Realty. He can be reached at 217-352-7712 or mjw@cbcdr.com

Mark your calendars! 

		2010
Business	Address	~ SQ FT	Tables	Chairs	Current Fee	Proposed Fee	Current per Seat	Proposed per Seat
Aroma	118 North Neil Street	70	3	6	$100	$140	$16.67	$23.33
Bacaro	113 North Walnut Street	84	2	4	$250	$168	$62.50	$42.00
Blind Pig	120 North Walnut Street	140	6	24	$250	$280	$10.42	$11.67
Blind Pig Brewery	120 North Neil Street	213	5	20	$250	$426	$12.50	$21.30
Boltini	211 North Neil Street	532	16	61	$250	$1,064	$4.10	$17.44
Café Kopi	109 North Walnut Street	190	10	29	$100	$380	$3.45	$13.10
Cowboy Monkey	6 Taylor Street	3,405	51	158	$250	$6,810	$1.58	$43.10
Escobar	6 East Columbia Street	400	8	30	$250	$800	$8.33	$26.67
Esquire Lounge	106 North Walnut Street	1,050	16	64	$250	$2,100	$3.91	$32.81
Guido's	2 Main Street	1,310	22	88	$250	$2,620	$2.84	$29.77
Jim Gould	1 Main Street	542	17	52	$250	$1,084	$4.81	$20.85
Jupiter's	39 East Main Street	80	3	9	$250	$160	$27.78	$17.78
Kofusion	1 Main Street	1,205	20	84	$250	$2,410	$2.98	$28.69
Memphis on Main	55 East Main Street	135	4	16	$250	$270	$15.63	$16.88
Pekara Bakery	116 North Neil Street	70	2	4	$100	$140	$25.00	$35.00
Radio Maria	119 North Walnut Street	510	11	44	$250	$1,020	$5.68	$23.18
Seven Saints	34 Chester Street	285	9	36	$250	$570	$6.94	$15.83
Espresso Royale Café	602 E. Daniel Street	200	5	15	$100	$400	$6.67	$26.67
Firehause	708 S. Sixth Street	556	10	20	$100	$1,112	$5.00	$55.60
Potbelly's	501 East Green Street	200	4	8	$100	$400	$12.50	$50.00
Noodles	528 East Green Street	200	6	12	$100	$400	$8.33	$33.33
Clyborne	706 S. Sixth Street	725	10	28	$100	$1,450	$3.57	$51.79
TOTAL		12,102	240	812	$4,300	$24,204
Averages		550.09	10.91	36.91	195.45	$1,100

The district has seen better days, but is currently emerging as a new target area for redevelopment and gentrification.  Previously considered to be too far from campus to attract students and university oriented retailers, the gradual revitalization of Downtown has now made Midtown attractive to older students, young professionals, unique restaurants, and local retailers.  The inventory of commercial buildings in the district and the recent beautification of the Boneyard Creek combine to make the area prime for investment and redevelopment.

My take on the district is that it could go one of two ways.  One, the City could offer financial incentives tied to development standards and requirements that force property owners and businesses to take the district in a direction dictated by planning staff.  The result would be a few overbuilt developments surrounded by blighted property, high rents dictated by construction costs not by demand, and unsustainable vacancy rates…not a pretty picture.  Two, the City could help direct redevelopment rather than dictating it, and let market forces, businesses, and property owners shape the future of the district.  This takes more time but is much more effective and sustainable long term.

My feedback to planning staff will be to provide some direction in terms of land use patterns and zoning, and let demand for retail and rental housing dictate the speed and quality of the redevelopments.  I envision an increased density of retail, office, and restaurant space along First Street, University Avenue, and Chester Street with remodeled apartments on the upper floors those buildings.  I also think that the new basin is attractive enough to increase the demand for traditional apartments along Second and Third Streets, between Springfield and University Avenues.  Increased demand will spur more redevelopment and renovations for those buildings, increasing rental rates and thus property values.  By far the toughest part of the district to redevelop will be the area west of First Street and east of the railroad tracks.  Currently, those blocks are dominated by service-related and industrial business, including contractors and automotive shops.  Again, some simple re-zoning that would allow those businesses to continue operating while providing future alternative land uses is the best plan of action.

So my fellow residents, what would you like to see in Midtown?  How should the City work with property owners and encourage investment/redevelopment?  The City is taking a proactive approach by holding an open house at Second & Springfield on Tuesday May 24^th from 4http://www.halfwayinteresting.com:00 PM to 6http://www.halfwayinteresting.com:00 PM.  In the event of severe weather, the open house will be moved to Minneci’s (First & Springfield).  The City of Champaign’s planning staff will be on hand to gather input from residents and to share their vision.  I plan on attending the meeting and will share ideas from Halfway Interesting readers if you feel inclined to post your thoughts and comments.

Here are some additional resources if you would like to explore this topic furtherhttp://www.halfwayinteresting.com:

East University Avenue TIF plan http://www.halfwayinteresting.com: shows details and history about the Midtown District and city incentives.

Champaign Center Partnership http://www.halfwayinteresting.com: all you wanted to know about Midtown including a map and calendar of events.

Matt Wavering is a commercial real estate professional with Coldwell Banker Commercial Devonshire Realty.  He can be reached at mjw@cbcdr.com or 217-352-7712.

In the next few months of the Champaign Community Schools Board of Education will be dealing with the issue of where to purchase land for a new campus for the current Central High School. While the majority of the comments below are my personal opinion, there are three caveats that I wish to state based on the views of the current School Board that are germane to this topic of discussion.

Furry Babies isn't exactly picky about who buys their puppies.  Their financing web page announces, "No Credit Check.  Everyone is Approved," and encourages customers to "Leave home with your furry friend today."  They also didn't seem to be too fussy about things like breed standards, judging by the "purebred golden retriever" I saw whose tail curled over its back.