Jump to content

New projects on the West Side


GRDadof3

Recommended Posts


2 hours ago, thebeerqueer said:

I couldn't agree more. 

I wouldn't say its overly Scandinavian just well thought out, comforting and expertly executed. That pork shoulder gives me all the life. 

I had lamb chops last night with gnocchi, a special they were running. So good. And that pickling they do, especially with hard-boiled eggs, is really tasteful. Dude, I'm drooling just thinking about it! 

I can't wait to hang out on the patio this Summer. As an aside, my wife and I had a reservation in River House for a condo before it was built, and cancelled it like a lot of people did. We lament about it all the time. Walk to the West Siiiidde! lol  Might be time to buy a downtown "cottage" investment property (but I don't really want Union Square). 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And there is the progressive west side attitude we've grown to love! Wouldn't increased density allow growth without sprawl?

and what was the portion about parking changes? I had no clue what they were trying to say. Something about no parking requirements for developments that have an onsite bike wash and beard trimming facility? Or maybe I read it wrong. :)

Joe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, joeDowntown said:

And there is the progressive west side attitude we've grown to love! Wouldn't increased density allow growth without sprawl?

and what was the portion about parking changes? I had no clue what they were trying to say. Something about no parking requirements for developments that have an onsite bike wash and beard trimming facility? Or maybe I read it wrong. :)

Joe

I just realized this article is about a month old. Weird that it showed up on my radar today. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GRDadof3 said:

I just realized this article is about a month old. Weird that it showed up on my radar today. 

The near west side(Lexington to 131) really is prime for development as there are acres of parking lots butting up against 131.  Perhaps it's a strategic move by the city to help momentum continue given the current parking situation east of 131.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, GRDadof3 said:

I find it hard to believe the city would have a meeting about a sixteen story ordinance on the West Side if there wasn't a 16 story building being proposed...

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2017/02/west_side_neighbors_fear_displ.html

 

 

I attended the follow up meeting with Commissioner O'Connor and Shaffer and they both stated that they don't know of any 16 story in the works. 

16 hours ago, joeDowntown said:

And there is the progressive west side attitude we've grown to love! Wouldn't increased density allow growth without sprawl?

Did you attend the meetings? Did you listen to the concerns of the neighbors? Unless you did, that is some 'progressive attitude' right there.

The title of the article is misleading about what the genuine concern is; that a sixteen story building could be built within 100 feet of single family dwellings, not so much displacement. The proposed changes would be going from a max of 5 stories all the way up to 16 stories by right, that's a pretty drastic change without substantial data to back up why these changes are proposed. I can only speak for the John Ball Area Neighbors NA; we're all for the surface parking lots being developed and activated but with respect to preexisting low density neighborhood. We're supportive of the 16 stories right along the highway. We're asking for a significant step down from the max of 16 to the low density neighborhood on the west side of Seward. . Would you want a 16 story built across the street from your house when you believed that only a five story structure could ever be erected there?

Edited by thebeerqueer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, thebeerqueer said:

Did you attend the meetings? Did you listen to the concerns of the neighbors? Unless you did, that is some 'progressive attitude' right there.

Ah, you got me. But I don't think I need to attend meetings to know the pattern/history of reluctance (or downright NIMBYism) of the west side.

Joe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, joeDowntown said:

Ah, you got me. But I don't think I need to attend meetings to know the pattern/history of reluctance (or downright NIMBYism) of the west side.

Joe

Understandable. I didn't mean to come off too sharp.

There are a lot of people working hard on the westside to drag the rest of the westside into the 21st century. Specifically with this issue of the downtown overlay district, I feel our commissioners, planning, DGRI, etc ... understand that we're not opposed to building up the near westside, just with consideration (as it is called out in the city's master plan) to the low density neighborhoods to the west. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, thebeerqueer said:

Understandable. I didn't mean to come off too sharp.

There are a lot of people working hard on the westside to drag the rest of the westside into the 21st century. Specifically with this issue of the downtown overlay district, I feel our commissioners, planning, DGRI, etc ... understand that we're not opposed to building up the near westside, just with consideration (as it is called out in the city's master plan) to the low density neighborhoods to the west. 

The problem is, how can you move into a low density neighbourhood 300m away from the downtown of the second largest city in the state and expect it to remain low density? It's like those people that move into the immediate ring of the exurbs expecting it to remain and not turn into suburban sprawl. You want low density? move to the suburbs. It makes little sense to keep it as it is. IMO

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, gvsusean said:

The problem is, how can you move into a low density neighbourhood 300m away from the downtown of the second largest city in the state and expect it to remain low density? It's like those people that move into the immediate ring of the exurbs expecting it to remain and not turn into suburban sprawl. You want low density? move to the suburbs. It makes little sense to keep it as it is. IMO

A lot of those people have been there for 15 - 20 years, before the recent boom. Growing pains are called "pains" for a reason. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

gvsusean, GRDadof3 hit the nail directly on the head. In fact, many of the residents close to Seward have been there for a generation or more. Some even remember being displaced during the construction of US-131. So it's all about being sensitive to those concerns while still allowing progress to continue. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GRDadof3 said:

A lot of those people have been there for 15 - 20 years, before the recent boom. Growing pains are called "pains" for a reason. 

Isn't the west side primarily rentals now?  What proportion represents that long term segment?  20% and declining?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There can't be many that actually moved for the construction of 131 unless they were just a kid back then or they are quite elderly. 131 was built in that area in 1957 - 60 years ago.  I'm 67 and remember going with my dad to pick his mother up from the Dutch language service at the Netherlands Reformed church where the SB131 Leonard on ramp is today. The church was one of the last buildings left in that area.

How many of those homes are still owner occupied? My wife and I lived in a 2nd story apt - owner lived downstairs on the near west side when we were first married 1975-1979. The neighborhood had lots of owner occupied homes. Same neighborhood today - lots of rental properties.

If I look at the downtown area, redeveloping to the west is logical. GVSU is a big driver, the action on Bridge Street / Street area is another. So are the old factories along Seward north of bridge. If Michigan hadn't suffered the "lost decade", this would have happened 10 years ago.

Most folks don't like change but nothing stays the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to be a critic of the West Side NIMBYism.  I have no problem admitting the hyperbole that comes out about change from that neighborhood can make my eyes do a complete 360 degree rotation.  The actual truth is over the last few years the city has simply done what it has felt is necessary in terms of zoning and approvals, and have seemingly by-passed the neighborhood associations outside of paying them lip service.   At this point the NIMBYism is little more than noise.  It doesn't have the clout it used to in terms of tying plans up like it did even 5 years ago.   I think that signals that a good chunk of the resident base over there has actually started becoming used to the change.  Perhaps a lot of them even welcome it and the increase in property values that follow.   The histrionic minority will always be there making news regardless, such is the case anywhere.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should have phrased it better, even in the beginning of the neighborhood, it was almost destined to be replaced. The architecture isnt substantial like in Heritage Hill to warrant protecting. Maybe back 70 years ago people didnt think about expansions the way people do now? Regardless, unless the house has been passed down for generations, the expectation that that neighbourhood would stay the same should have lessened each successive owner. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I look at it this way: if I own my property, I say build away! All around me! Big expensive homes and condos! It's not like a 16 story building is going to be all Section 8 housing. Most new development only helps your property values. 

If you're stuck renting, then it's certainly a different conversation. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, GRDadof3 said:

I look at it this way: if I own my property, I say build away! All around me! Big expensive homes and condos! It's not like a 16 story building is going to be all Section 8 housing. Most new development only helps your property values. 

If you're stuck renting, then it's certainly a different conversation. 

A lot of people on the west side don't care about property values.  Property values just mean more taxes to them. They don't plan on moving and want to stay as long as they can.  Only if they planned on selling do property values make sense, and they only see increase value and density pulling away the things they may like about their block.

Edited by EastownLeo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, EastownLeo said:

A lot of people on the west side don't care about property values.  Property values just mean more taxes to them. They don't plan on moving and want to stay as long as they can.  Only if they planned on selling do property values make sense, and they only see increase value and density pulling away the things they may like about their block.

Property tax values (via Proposal A) are capped at the rate of inflation. And with the recession a few years back, a lot of people saw their assessed values actually decline. My guess is those people's property taxes are very close to what they were in 2009. 

If you're on a fixed rate mortgage, that payment also doesn't go up when property values around you increase. It's too bad a lot of this isn't taught in school. Instead we learn about polynomial regression curves that 1% or less of the population uses in his/her daily job. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, GRDadof3 said:

Property tax values (via Proposal A) are capped at the rate of inflation. And with the recession a few years back, a lot of people saw their assessed values actually decline. My guess is those people's property taxes are very close to what they were in 2009. 

If you're on a fixed rate mortgage, that payment also doesn't go up when property values around you increase. It's too bad a lot of this isn't taught in school. Instead we learn about polynomial regression curves that 1% or less of the population uses in his/her daily job. 

I am mainly talking about many of the long time residents that are some of those raising their voices against this.  Owners that have been in their homes for 20+ years.

I understand that the prospect of development around you can scare you.  With increased development comes, cost, traffic, changing of the makeup of your surrounding area.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, EastownLeo said:

I am mainly talking about many of the long time residents that are some of those raising their voices against this.  Owners that have been in their homes for 20+ years.

I understand that the prospect of development around you can scare you.  With increased development comes, cost, traffic, changing of the makeup of your surrounding area.  

You made the statement that increased property values just means more taxes. I get that THEY are saying that but it would help if they were educated on the matter. I would hope that anyone on this forum is educated enough to get that. Increased property values increases wealth, helps with retirement, and a million other positives, if you own your home. Increased crime, parking issues, traffic, I can understand those complaints. Although increased development usually diminishes some kinds of crime (assaults, drug trafficking, B&E's) and increases others (DUI's, car break-ins, public intoxication, etc..)

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
11 hours ago, GRDadof3 said:

Ferris Coffee, being offered for a cool $7.5 Million. At that price, I see it remaining as an industrial facility for a while. 

http://mls.carwm.com/listing/30048277

Ugh, I've grown accustom to having a great coffee shop within walking distance to my house. I understand that they wont be moving all that far away but I'm just whining. Hopefully The Rower's Club opens soon (last I heard was mid-April) and there will be options.  

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.