Problems with ECIDA Process for J.N. Adam/AM&A project

By Chris Hawley

A newly revived request to secure $11 million in public funds for the redevelopment of the former J.N. Adam/AM&A's complex is a textbook example of how big government subsidies can reward inefficient economic behavior, which in this case would make possible the sale of a historic and architecturally significant property at a highly inflated price so it can be demolished to construct a substantially smaller building in its place.

In a downtown where vacant buildings and empty lots abound, the public should be asked to support only the projects that, like the LL Berger renovation and the new National Life Insurance building at Main and Chippewa streets, are attracting new investment to downtown through rehab projects and infill development that require minimal subsidies.

A corporate welfare project to demolish the entire J.N. Adam block for a "shovel ready" site when 42 percent of the surface area of downtown is already vacant and shovel ready cannot be justified.

The ECIDA is now considering this single response to a Request for Proposals (RFP) process that at least superficially considered renovation as a desirable alternative to demolition.

But because the RFP placed stringent requirements and an unreasonably expedited timeline on potential developers, it almost certainly doomed the prospect of any firm submitting a proposal to renovate the building.

By demanding that any proposal attract at least 250 new jobs to downtown, the RFP essentially limited the development options to Class-A office space --not senior housing, classroom space, loft condos or light industrial uses -- and gives the impression of having been shaped to favor a predetermined outcome.

That is, to legitimize the claim that starting from scratch is the only way to go.

The RFP process should be reopened, allowing all possible development scenarios to be considered, including the so-called "prolonged development scenario" that would likely be required in an adaptive reuse project.

As downtown's sole example of the early or "classical" Modernist style, JN's is synonymous with Machine Age notions of progress and modernity, its suave and streamlined quality described by contemporary critics as "rhythmic" and even "musical."

A more meaningful approach to revitalization will call for restoring a vital mix of new uses to JN's, however challenging the proposition.

The city should resist any call to act with "urgency" -- that is, without thoughtful reflection -- in devoting public funds to demolish a landmark of such singular quality.