whitemice

Maybe, if you can/could build them at scale, which you cannot, so no. Yesterday we had a Strongtowns table at the city clean-up after-part in John Ball Zoo. I talked to someone whose response to ~2% of out-of-state ownership of SFUs was that Michigan based investors were also bad, and ... something. And he was a landlord! It's just wild how much many people are in love with this narrative of the evil investor - even many people who themselves are investors, yet they don't include themselves in the category. Other investors don't maintain their properties to the quality that they, of course, do [color me skeptical], so ... allowing anyone else to invest is bad? I've heard this argument, in person, from at least a half-dozen landlords [yes, Heritage Hill represent! ugh]. Once it goes there I just try to get out of the conversation. If an investor is in Grand Rapids and lives downtown in a condo, or out-of-city living on a river-front property in Rockford, or - as the person who own's the host next to mine - lives in a brownstone in Boston, why does it matter? I've yet to hear a concrete answer to that question. All three of those people [or corporations] can ignore me equally. I have attempted to contact the Bostonian who owns the next door property, and never had a response. Yet a property in any three of those categories would be subject to local certification and local ordinances [so I've used those, it's not that hard to make an negligent landlord feel pain - you can just continuously hit them with violations ]. Sometimes it is not even data which undermines the objections, it is the unasked questions.

There is a common myth that "out of state" developers, generally from "Wall Street", are hoovering up Single Family Units (SFU). And in the era of free-money-for-those-with-money [interest rates sub-3%] this phenomenon did occur in some places where various other economic factors were in play. That's not in dispute. But, did it happen in Grand Rapids? And is it happening in Grand Rapids? To the data! https://urbangr.org/TheMythOfTheHoover2024

A rare case when I am sad to see the "building" (which is actually several buildings) all have different ownership. The site is underutilized and the entire strip feels under maintained.

Huh. It's good press . . . but does that read like an AI generated article, or what? Start By Sharing Your City Name Organize Leaders In The Community Embrace New Industries For Growth Have Hard Conversations Play To Your Strengths What does #1 really mean? There's no example of #4? But I can see an AI picking up that term, especially if it was reading transcripts when Commissioner Joe Jones was around. #2 feels like the only item fleshed out to any degree. I dunno.

StrongtownsGR: A look at the phenomenon of Housing Step Down in a Grand Rapids neighborhood https://www.strongtownsgr.org/strongtowns-gr-journal/housing-step-down

For awhile they had excellent chicken wings. Then they dialed them down due to complaints they were too spicy. Or at least that was the story I was told by a staff member. Prior to the pandemic they had an good brunch menu. Other food and beer were OK. Excellent location. 15 - 20 minutes until the bus home? Grab a beer at GRBC. Did that many times. I also blamed the suburbanites for the "meh"ness; but they need a place to go, and these days feel the Bob/Arena district is largely for them. Cool, townies now have have alternatives aplenty. I'm happy to see so many people come downtown and are parted from their dollars. I was sad when the onion rings from the 28th St location did not reappear at the eponymous downtown location. Hope so, build outs take so long these days.

This. Effectively a static housing unit count, with declining household size [a nation wide trend] is a significant downward pressure on population counts. No, Kent County is strangling itself though [very misguided] regulatory capture in the housing market. Kent county's low growth number is attributable to the howling void which is local political leadership; a group of people psychologically incapable of urgency, pathologically afraid of confrontation. Grand Rapids has extremely low vacancy, if housing was built, it would fill, and population would go up. The scant amount of housing built fills very rapidly.

Agree; Calder Plaza is a money pit, this seems to mostly be about refusing to abandoned what was clearly a bad idea. There is no there there. Calder Plaza's soul is a parking ramp for office towers. Potted plants on top will not change that. So much resources that could be better deployed elsewhere.

I don't think they count. Outside of GR, Amway is not that well known a brand; especially among younger people. Everyone here knows who Amway is principally because of how obnoxious they are [both their leaders and their foot soldiers]. Most people have no idea who Perrigo is (vs. Blue Cross Blue Shield ? not even a comparison). Also neither of those companies are actually in Grand Rapids. Perrigo has an executive office here, for a hot minute; their real presence is in Allegan. Does Amway even have an office in downtown? They are in Ada. [do they have a sign downtown? I can't think of one]. Corewell is, now, probably our biggest name. We are never going to get a high-rise out of them. Acrisure is big in terms of $$$, but not in an industry which will be known on the street, also not going to yield a high-rise. I suspect any high-rise will be residential, with possible corporate tenants, like the Blue Water building. I can't picture a corporate office tower tenant choosing Grand Rapids; we don't have the employment pool to fill a tower, and we certainly don't have the housing to relocate a significant workforce here. Fortunately, we have have a great city at 4 - 12 stories; just as our species has been building cities for a thousand years.

Friendly wager? If there is a new "skyscraper" built in the next 10 years [excavation begins before 2034-03-11], if it happens in the current CBD I will buy you a beer, if it happens west of the river, you owe me a beer. I'd put by chips on the next [if there is a next] wave of tall development going up in the recently rezoned Front St area next to the river. Amenities are tipping towards the West Side (IMO), that plus the river as an asset, and the available land, favors the West Side IMO. Based on nothing but vibes I believe the CBD is not going to go up; and I'd quite happily be wrong. Des Moines is a state capital, and has a history with office-space heavy industries [insurance / finance]. Grand Rapids is not a capital, with a more industrial history. Aside of Steelcase GR is not associated with any nationally known brand vs. Blue Cross Blue Shield and Wells Fargo [for Des Moines]. I'm pretty much OK with that, having a foundation of cube farm industries hasn't proven to be a path to economic stability.

That's excellent; love to see density begin to move east. 181 units is a parking requirement of 272 spaces; at 80 (70% reduction) spaces that is a going to be a helluva parking waiver. This could really help with the revitalization of east Leonard, specially the CLAC (College, Leonard, & Carrier) business district.

I feel the same way. I have no objections, and I am a bit more positive; I think it will do fine. I can believe the economic return estimates, .... sure. This being paraded as "transformational"? Nah. The arena was transformational. The amphitheater sits at the bottom of the [current]" transformational" spectrum for me; it is activating a new part of town - help the West Side doesn't need - and the inclusion of the river trail is important, IMO. The river trail means that project is something which will be a benefit to residents day-to-day, regardless of events at the venue. That qualification is in my definition of "transformational" at this point. At this point in the city's evolution "transformational" is either a development of a previously unprecedented scale [1,000+ residential units] or a substantial investment in transportation infrastructure yielding a reliable high-frequency service. I am doubtful anything else can now qualify for that label. We are now in a time of incremental growth [incremental does not have to mean "slow"].

Agree. Also the amphitheater and stadium being built without on-site parking also increases amenity density. Agree. Both economic narrative [regardless of its veracity], costs, labor shortages, and high interest rates all lean against height. I am completely totally OK with 4 - 7 story infill. Four story buildings are sufficient to create a robust urban environment, support urban infrastructure, and local/neighborhood businesses. While neighborhoods of Chicago are corridors lined with 4 - 7 story buildings and otherwise 2 - 3 story structures. And those neighborhoods (generally) have all the stuff outlined in a 15-minute city.

The Planning Commission agenda item for the Soccer Stadium has appeared http://grandrapidscitymi.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=7464&MediaPosition=&ID=21931&CssClass=

What does this mean? The Bridge St district is right there. It does match the character of much of the West Side. There is metal siding all over the West Side on newer buildings.