 |
Crews overseen by J.P. Cullen work on the Judge Doyle Square
project in Madison on July 30. The Madison Finance Committee decided on Monday
to no longer negotiate with Gebhardt Development for the completion of part of
the massive project, which includes housing built on top of commercial space
and parking near Capitol square in Madison. The committee previously favored
Gebhardt because of its plans to place a large number of affordable housing
units in the complex, and in-part because of the company’s assurances it would
work with a union contractor. Now, with the Madison City Council’s approval,
city officials will instead work with Stone House Development, which has
previously said it would enlist the nonunion contractor Stevens Construction
for the project.
A Madison committee on Monday backed away from its previous
pick of a developer to finish the massive Judge Doyle Square project blocks
from the state Capitol, instead favoring a company that drew criticism for its
plans to hire a non-union contractor to build the project.
After emerging from a closed session, the city’s Finance
Committee voted to cut ties with Gebhardt Development, a company that the
committee had recommended in June for the completion of a mixed-use high-rise
atop a parking garage at Judge Doyle Square site.
The city instead will work with Stone House Development, the
favorite of city staff, and a target of union criticism for its plans to hire
the non-union contractor Stevens Construction for the project.
Stone House will
not be the first developer to work on the project.
A previous developer had cut ties with the city following a
legal spat. Proposals for the completion of the second phase of Judge Doyle
Square subsequently came not only from Stone House and Gebhardt but also the
Madison developer Mandel Group.
The committee chose Gebhardt in June in part because its $52
million proposal to build a 196-unit complex included plans for 78 affordable
apartments as well as market-rate units. Gebhardt, in other words, was
proposing to build more units for low-income tenants than other developers.
Stone House’s proposal is more modest. The developer plans
to have a 159-unit apartment complex with 7,000 square feet of retail space.
The $40 million project would set aside 37 units for low-income renters.
In coming out for Gebhardt, city officials could not
explicitly say they did not like Stone House’s plans to hire the non-union
contractor Stevens Construction. Instead, during a meeting in June, officials
were restricted to discussing contractors’ relationships with labor – a
consideration that a city attorney decided they could legally take into
account.
In now deciding to go with Stone House, city officials have
increased the chances that Judge Doyle Square will be finished by a nonunion
contractor. The full common council is likely to consider the recommendation in
favor of Stone House in September.
“Our negotiating team will move forward in that direction,”
said Madison Mayor Satya Rhodes-Conway.
A number of factors caused concerns about Gebhardt during
negotiations this summer. One big question was over Gebhardt’s initial plans to
separate the project’s low-income units from its market-rate condos in the
high-rise. That idea drew concern from some city officials, who wanted to have
low-income units scattered throughout the building.
Costs were also a concern.
Gebhardt had previously said it would the hire union
contractor J.P. Cullen to build the high-rise part of the project. Cullen was
in charge of the construction of the parking garage that the rest of the
complex will ultimately sit on.
But Otto Gebhardt, of Gebhardt Development, told the
committee on Monday that cost concerns had forced his company to part ways with
Cullen. Gebhardt, he said, was now in talks with other union contractors.
“I think from a city standpoint we thought this might be the
best match because they know part of the building that you're going to be
building on,” said Alderwoman Donna Moreland. “So it concerns me a bit that
they're not going to be a part of it anymore.”
No comments:
Post a Comment