Jump to content

West Michigan/Grand Rapids Economy


GRDadof3

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, GRDadof3 said:

The Mackinac Center is flummoxed as to why Snyder's policies have not translated to the entire State. 

Grand Rapids: Michigan's Boomtown

http://www.mackinac.org/22205

It has nothing to do with Snyder’s policies.  GR is booming because of all the advice we give to developers here in the Grand Rapids UrbanPlanet sub forum, while the sub forums for the rest of the state are dormant.   

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites


1 hour ago, walker said:

It has nothing to do with Snyder’s policies.  GR is booming because of all the advice we give to developers here in the Grand Rapids UrbanPlanet sub forum, while the sub forums for the rest of the state are dormant.   

That's righhtttt!!!!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, joeDowntown said:

Haha. I would dare say that this forum is indicative of a certain amount of passion people have for our city. Maybe we're just a reflection of the whole?

Joe

Right. There are certainly metro areas in this country that are growing like crazy, that do not have a presence on UrbanPlanet. But I did read a study a few years ago that that citizens' affinity for an area directly correlates to economic growth, in many instances. 

But for a city of this size, I think UP does provide a feedback loop for anyone interested in development, whether it be architects, developers, property owners, investors, etc.. in this area. If you're interested in an area, the first place you go to find out more info is from the internet. And you're much more interested in finding out on-the-ground info at a place like UP than you would from reading the Chamber of Commerce's website. Or the local economic development website. They all look the same. They all have some flashy video that trumpets that city. 

But this economic study is about the entire METRO AREA. Frankly the unemployment rates in the city leaves much to be desired, still around 12 - 20% depending on the neighborhood. Yet the metro is 2.8% unemployment, and is growing at a breakneck pace of 3.5% - 4.5% a year, which has a lot of peoples' attention. Does the health of downtown lead to job growth both downtown and on the periphery? Does that confidence carry over to suburban employers and residents?

By all rights Grand Rapids should not being doing as well as it is. If you look at the inputs that we share with neighboring Michigan and Great Lakes metro areas: cold snowy climate, heavy reliance on manufacturing, massive globalization losses at some of the largest employers (Steelcase, Johnson Controls, General Motors, Frigidaire, Bissell, etc.), in a State with a two-decades long recession, no major university, not a lot of government related work, low post-grad educational attainment levels, mediocre population growth.

It would make a fascinating case study if someone were to dig into it more. Hmmmm.

What would be really cool to see is the data of the 50 or 100 fastest growing companies in West Michigan. The good ol "Book of Lists" doesn't show that at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, GRDadof3 said:

By all rights Grand Rapids should not being doing as well as it is. If you look at the inputs that we share with neighboring Michigan and Great Lakes metro areas: cold snowy climate, heavy reliance on manufacturing, massive globalization losses at some of the largest employers (Steelcase, Johnson Controls, General Motors, Frigidaire, Bissell, etc.), in a State with a two-decades long recession, no major university, not a lot of government related work, low post-grad educational attainment levels, mediocre population growth.

It would make a fascinating case study if someone were to dig into it more. Hmmmm.

I don't know if anyone here reads James Fallows' blog or follows his American Futures series, but earlier this month he posted Eleven Signs a City will Succeed.  I thought GR fares pretty well on his list (not least of all #11).

I think our biggest liability would be the lack of a research university, but GR has so much investment in higher ed right now it's clear we're doing all we can to mitigate that.  I also would say that Michigan as a state has strong public universities, which is definitely beneficial for GR. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, RegalTDP said:

I don't know if anyone here reads James Fallows' blog or follows his American Futures series, but earlier this month he posted Eleven Signs a City will Succeed.  I thought GR fares pretty well on his list (not least of all #11).

I think our biggest liability would be the lack of a research university, but GR has so much investment in higher ed right now it's clear we're doing all we can to mitigate that.  I also would say that Michigan as a state has strong public universities, which is definitely beneficial for GR. 

That was a good read. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Downtown livin' is easy — and expensive'

http://www.grbj.com/articles/84617

'Grand Rapids residents could better afford the available housing inventory if they made more money: Grand Rapids ranks 49th in net employment earnings out of 52 metro areas with a population of 1 million or more, according to Lou Glazer, president of Michigan Future Inc.'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
37 minutes ago, EastownLeo said:

A big part of this is  "KIDS"  Urban environments often don't have great benefits for kids.  In GR Education is a big part of this. Many people I know move out of the city for education.

I did the same thing when I was in the Millennial age group and had a two year old. I moved from Austin proper to Round Rock where homes were cheaper, yards were bigger and schools were significantly better.  All this talk of Millennials embracing the urban core was only a temporary trend IMO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The ATX said:

I did the same thing when I was in the Millennial age group and had a two year old. I moved from Austin proper to Round Rock where homes were cheaper, yards were bigger and schools were significantly better.  All this talk of Millennials embracing the urban core was only a temporary trend IMO. 

There's definitely a trend of younger people and empty nesters wanting to live in walkable areas. I know quite a few people my age who have abandoned their suburban homes and moved into downtown condos (or near downtown). But yes, the narrative that millennials have given up suburbs, cars and owning homes altogether is a false mantra that just gets repeated endlessly. I also know quite a few people making the move the other direction, to better school districts. 

I do think the burst of downtown development will last for the foreseeable future though. With major institutions making long term investments downtown, I see at least twenty more years of this trend of growth. It might slow for a while like it did in 2008 - 2012.  I predict the next recession will hit around 2019/2020, way smaller than the last one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is due to lack of choice rather than wanting to leave for the burbs. Few cities can support families well as the schools aren't usually good enough, its too expensive to have more than one bedroom, and public transit is lacking so you won't be able to rely on a bike or walking to get your child where they need to go.  There are obvious exceptions to this, but its true of most cities.

 

Solutions: Build more!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, EastownLeo said:

A big part of this is  "KIDS"  Urban environments often don't have great benefits for kids.  In GR Education is a big part of this. Many people I know move out of the city for education.

The larger urban question is to design a framework of housing options for families. Of course there is a migration. This can be seen in the census data where school age children shrink from elementary to high school. Off-setting this is the possibility of some decent housing in and near the city. These would be neighborhoods like the those off Leonard past Walker, or the Riverside and Coit neighborhoods on the NE side. And then there are the long-standing pockets throughout the SE side (e.g. parts by Garfield Park, Ottawa Hills and environs, the swath of housing out Burton etc.). There are places where many do stay. The drawback is generally that the square footage of houses of fifty years ago is smaller than that found in the burbs. So for a pack of teenagers, it may make sense to leave. As to the impact of the schools... in many ways that has already been decided through charters and school choice. Much of the NE and SE side is effectively not a part of GRPS, but instead sends students to Northview, East, Kentwood, etc.

This sets up two policy vectors: reinvent family housing in the City for the expectations of the middle class; second provide the educational opportunities that reward families for staying (here, for instance, the parochial schools stand out, but realistically, so does school of choice to East, or enrollment in GRPS specialty programs like the Montessori or the City-IB program.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, wmrharris said:

The larger urban question is to design a framework of housing options for families. Of course there is a migration. This can be seen in the census data where school age children shrink from elementary to high school. Off-setting this is the possibility of some decent housing in and near the city. These would be neighborhoods like the those off Leonard past Walker, or the Riverside and Coit neighborhoods on the NE side. And then there are the long-standing pockets throughout the SE side (e.g. parts by Garfield Park, Ottawa Hills and environs, the swath of housing out Burton etc.). There are places where many do stay. The drawback is generally that the square footage of houses of fifty years ago is smaller than that found in the burbs. So for a pack of teenagers, it may make sense to leave. As to the impact of the schools... in many ways that has already been decided through charters and school choice. Much of the NE and SE side is effectively not a part of GRPS, but instead sends students to Northview, East, Kentwood, etc.

This sets up two policy vectors: reinvent family housing in the City for the expectations of the middle class; second provide the educational opportunities that reward families for staying (here, for instance, the parochial schools stand out, but realistically, so does school of choice to East, or enrollment in GRPS specialty programs like the Montessori or the City-IB program.

The problem is, there aren't a lot of tracts of vacant land like they have in Detroit to create new "family" housing in the city. I hear that even Habitat for Humanity is having a hard time finding property to build on. 

In Kent County 25% of households only have one person. 50% are just two person households. So basically only half are "families with at least one kid."  I wasn't able to find data on what the city of Grand Rapids' makeup was. Anyone know? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, GRDadof3 said:

The problem is, there aren't a lot of tracts of vacant land like they have in Detroit to create new "family" housing in the city. I hear that even Habitat for Humanity is having a hard time finding property to build on. 

I've long thought that the only significant place left within the city to build a bunch of single family homes is if a developer somehow bought Kent Country Club. The idea has been discussed in this forum before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, getemngo said:

I've long thought that the only significant place left within the city to build a bunch of single family homes is if a developer somehow bought Kent Country Club. The idea has been discussed in this forum before.

That's one possibility. And it seems like part of it could be made into a new city park, as part of a development plan. It's a big piece of property, something like 120ish acres. It obviously has a lot of history but I hardly ever see anyone golfing there. And that big fence along Plainfield is rather imposing. 

There are other places too but most of them would require tearing down some existing homes. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/11/2016 at 8:58 AM, GRDadof3 said:

That's one possibility. And it seems like part of it could be made into a new city park, as part of a development plan. It's a big piece of property, something like 120ish acres. It obviously has a lot of history but I hardly ever see anyone golfing there. And that big fence along Plainfield is rather imposing. 

There are other places too but most of them would require tearing down some existing homes. 

Tear down and replace is already under way in EGR, I would think it a possibility in certain select neighborhoods initially. I keep wondering as well, what happens to all those post-war bungalows, particularly in the NE end? We're at 70 years or so, what comes next?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, wmrharris said:

Tear down and replace is already under way in EGR, I would think it a possibility in certain select neighborhoods initially. I keep wondering as well, what happens to all those post-war bungalows, particularly in the NE end? We're at 70 years or so, what comes next?

The only problem with that is the home prices are much higher in EGR than here. There is much less profit. This may change as property values continue to climb

 

it would be a shame if they replaced Kent country club with a crappy subdivision. I've only played it a couple of times but for a crappy golfer like myself (maybe better golfers too but I wouldn't know) it's a really nice course. I won't dispute that it is probably underutilizing the land though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jas49503 said:

The only problem with that is the home prices are much higher in EGR than here. There is much less profit. This may change as property values continue to climb

 

it would be a shame if they replaced Kent country club with a crappy subdivision. I've only played it a couple of times but for a crappy golfer like myself (maybe better golfers too but I wouldn't know) it's a really nice course. I won't dispute that it is probably underutilizing the land though. 

The problem is that it's a private club, and competing with a lot of other private clubs (even 4 of the biggest private clubs in the metro area combined forces recently to stay in business). And it would never make it as a public course. It's days are numbered. My guess is that most members there just use the clubhouse for socializing, and that wouldn't have to change. It could still be a private club. 

It wouldn't have to be a "crappy subdivision." In fact, it would have to be a mix of homes, condos and townhouses because of its size. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For years the course has been under utilized. The days of this club are not even close to numbered.  The money/people that are there would not allow this to happen in the foreseeable future. A ton of money has been infused into the Club.  There are 4, what I consider private clubs remaining in GR, I cannot see any closing anytime soon.  If one were, I would guess Blythefield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, ctpgr34 said:

For years the course has been under utilized. The days of this club are not even close to numbered.  The money/people that are there would not allow this to happen in the foreseeable future. A ton of money has been infused into the Club.  There are 4, what I consider private clubs remaining in GR, I cannot see any closing anytime soon.  If one were, I would guess Blythefield.

A ton of money was infused, what 10 years ago? ProgressiveAE did much of the design work I believe. 

There are way more than 4 private clubs, if you look at West Michigan. 

Egypt Valley, the 4 that have now combined memberships (Thousand Oaks, Watermark, Stonewater, Sunnybrook), Cascade Hills, Blythefield, Kent, Railside, Spring Lake CC, and Wuskohwan. There just aren't as many young people getting into golf like there used to be. Every year, a couple more (crappy) public courses close. The guys at Maple Hill told me that they make more profit on their driving range than on the golf course. 

I'm not suggesting that anything is in the works, or that anyone is looking at this (that I know of). But it is one of the last large contiguous pieces of land in GR. And the city certainly can't afford to buy it. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, jdkacz said:

Grand Rapids area ranked 13th despite being 'located off the beaten path'

GR grew nearly twice the national average, or 4x as much as some cities that I'd say are in the same league as GR. Hartford, Richmond, etc.

Year over year lists can be misleading, but this is great news.  Grand Rapids is playing with the big boys of economic growth - San Jose, Austin, San Antonio, Portland, Nashville... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.