Mangiamo/Paddock Place Residential Development

[GRLaker]

My hope is that they build the townhomes to match the look of the main house - tan stucco or brick, red tile roof, black windows, round pillars at the entrances. That would be a true nod toward the preservation of this home and property. 

I also hope that they are townhomes that go onto the market for sale and not rentals. I think the ultimate way to preserve something historical is to give people the opportunity of ownership of the property. Renting doesn't give that sense of ownership and can lead to a lack of appreciation for the historical value of the property.

[x99]

On 10/24/2017 at 8:33 PM, AG3 said:

They may need to pick an architect who understand this kind of development. Concept is great for the big building downtown, but not for this kind of work. Character drives everything, if the design is right people will get on board.  I wouldn't expect anything of significant architectural character from concept in this case.  Could be wrong - but haven't seen it from them anywhere else.

It isn't just Concept.  It's most of the major firms. They all have a(n apparent) serious lack of talent when it comes to strong residential or urban design language.  They need to hire a residential architect like Visbeen to do this.  On the commercial side, Cornerstone Architects did the condos by the Women's Center, 545 Michigan, and Fairmount Square.  Those projects are, BY FAR, the best "downtown" small-scale projects of the last 10 years.  And they are the best not just by a little bit.  By a country mile.    To be fair, once Integrated got dragged kicking and screaming by HPC on the Cherry/Eastern design, it wound up very nice (albeit unbuilt).  But they still have a bad tendency to try to sprinkle in some "pizzazz" that usually comes off looking hokey (just wait until the freakshow residential section of the old Wealthy McDonald's is done...).  50 College was okay, but it was still a little clumsy.  A hack like me shouldn't be able to doctor up their design with Microsoft Paint and have people saying it looks better than the architects.  Ah well, x99 deriding architects for designing urban junk is nothing new... 

Point is, you're right.  People hate most infill projects because they look like crap.  Instead of complementing the neighborhood, they tend to act as distractions and scream "LOOK AT ME I'M DIFFERENT AND NEW!!!".  Which almost never works for anyone but architects.

[GR_Urbanist]

16 minutes ago, x99 said:

o be fair, once Integrated got dragged kicking and screaming by HPC on the Cherry/Eastern design, it wound up very nice (albeit unbuilt). 

And we all now still enjoy a wonderful empty lot, a rotting shed, and two virtually abandoned buildings on a prominent corner years later.

So how did this work out for us that live near this or for the people that would have loved to live over here? "Unbuilt" is the key word here that needs to be avoided.

The HPC seems may have received enough negative feedback on some of their goof-ups to hopefully try to offer reasonable advice this time, not demand absurd expensive design elements or multiple inconsistent revisions at the behest of some "neighbor" they appoint to monkey around with the initial plans, that end up costing the developer thousands that they can ill-afford (because the HPC isnt footing the bill for anything). Which in the end will lead the the project being scrapped entirely, which does squat for the area.

Our illustrious new Dollar General, ugly expansion of Valley City Linens's bunker, and the still abandoned project at Cherry and Eastern ought to spur people in the area to be a lot more reasonable with a project like this so we can show that we are capable of more than obstruction and mediocrity. I hope...

 

 

[Ted]

5 minutes ago, GR_Urbanist said:

And we all now still enjoy a wonderful empty lot, a rotting shed, and two virtually abandoned buildings on a prominent corner years later.

So how did this work out for us that live near this or for the people that would have loved to live over here? "Unbuilt" is the key word here that needs to be avoided.

The HPC seems may have received enough negative feedback on some of their goof-ups to hopefully try to offer reasonable advice this time, not demand absurd expensive design elements or multiple inconsistent revisions at the behest of some "neighbor" they appoint to monkey around with the initial plans, that end up costing the developer thousands that they can ill-afford (because the HPC isnt footing the bill for anything). Which in the end will lead the the project being scrapped entirely, which does squat for the area.

Our illustrious new Dollar General, ugly expansion of Valley City Linens's bunker, and the still abandoned project at Cherry and Eastern ought to spur people in the area to be a lot more reasonable with a project like this so we can show that we are capable of more than obstruction and mediocrity. I hope...

 

 

Nobody struggles more with our friends at the city and our neighbors on citizen committees more than me, but, I think we need to keep proper score here. 

At Cherry and Eastern, the neighborhood and the developer are trying to thread a needle. Everyone has been working in good faith but it obviously hasn't come out of the ground yet. I expect that it will. The HPC doesn't have anything to do with the delays at that site.

The HPC approved the new building at the Dollar General site. A cynical lawsuit put an end to that project.

And, Valley City Linen's expansion lies outside any Historic District. Their expansion complies with the zoning ordinance and they've been willing to make changes based on community comments - all stuff good neighbors do. Valley City is a critical employer of people in our neighborhood. I'm thankful that they've decided to expand in place rather than leave the city. Pretty or not, that expansion is important and good.

[GR_Urbanist]

9 minutes ago, Ted said:

Nobody struggles more with our friends at the city and our neighbors on citizen committees more than me, but, I think we need to keep proper score here. 

Oh I didn't want to give the impression that it's all the HPC. Cherry and Eastern is all them IMO for nit picking the original plans to death. Blame goes to NIMBY's for the debacle of Dollar General, and in the case of Valley City, poor zoning regulations that allows for them to an unsightly blank wall along the street with virtually no objection.

 

My HOPE is that these various elements at play in the case of Mangiamos, work positively in partnership to help this project along, and not just serve up unreasonable obstruction that leave us with nothing because they pushed too far. Good faith simply can not be a fig leaf for failure to get this off the ground when you have a guy with money he wants to spend here.

[AG3]

3 hours ago, x99 said:

It isn't just Concept.  It's most of the major firms. They all have a(n apparent) serious lack of talent when it comes to strong residential or urban design language.  They need to hire a residential architect like Visbeen to do this.  On the commercial side, Cornerstone Architects did the condos by the Women's Center, 545 Michigan, and Fairmount Square.  Those projects are, BY FAR, the best "downtown" small-scale projects of the last 10 years.  And they are the best not just by a little bit.  By a country mile.    To be fair, once Integrated got dragged kicking and screaming by HPC on the Cherry/Eastern design, it wound up very nice (albeit unbuilt).  But they still have a bad tendency to try to sprinkle in some "pizzazz" that usually comes off looking hokey (just wait until the freakshow residential section of the old Wealthy McDonald's is done...).  50 College was okay, but it was still a little clumsy.  A hack like me shouldn't be able to doctor up their design with Microsoft Paint and have people saying it looks better than the architects.  Ah well, x99 deriding architects for designing urban junk is nothing new... 

Point is, you're right.  People hate most infill projects because they look like crap.  Instead of complementing the neighborhood, they tend to act as distractions and scream "LOOK AT ME I'M DIFFERENT AND NEW!!!".  Which almost never works for anyone but architects.

 You have to set your standards higher. or a case of - Desensitized. I know i was moving here from a place like Chicago where infill is done right. Ill give you this, in comparison to what we don't have - Fairmount and Park Row condos are better than most, but not the best and not by far for sure.   And outside of the design of Park Row condos,  they are so out of place at that location. 

[x99]

2 hours ago, AG3 said:

 You have to set your standards higher. or a case of - Desensitized. I know i was moving here from a place like Chicago where infill is done right. Ill give you this, in comparison to what we don't have - Fairmount and Park Row condos are better than most, but not the best and not by far for sure.   And outside of the design of Park Row condos,  they are so out of place at that location. 

They don't make a lot of sense on the site--they are designed to be facing a street--but it's about the last time I can think of where someone actually tried and did something other than bargain bin metal siding and an exterior design that could have been sketched up by a semi-talented 5th grader.  Storage building chic seems to be all the rage in Grand Rapids these days.  

And I won't get too far into what makes projects fail, but I don't think any of them have failed entirely because HPC panned into the design, neighbors objected, or lawsuits were filed.   Failures to execute more often than not can be chalked up to getting too far ahead of yourself before all of the necessary financing is lined up, or because zoning regulations intervened.  All of the griping in the world from whatever corner will not stop a project that complies with the rules and which is reasonably profitable.  If Gilmore has his cash lined up, and comes up with a "gotta have it" design aesthetic in this important location, he'll get his project, even if he might not quite get all of it.   Depending on the historic designation and the building design, I can see this sight plan perhaps being a little bit aggressive.

[GRDadof3]

11 hours ago, Ted said:

Nobody struggles more with our friends at the city and our neighbors on citizen committees more than me, but, I think we need to keep proper score here. 

At Cherry and Eastern, the neighborhood and the developer are trying to thread a needle. Everyone has been working in good faith but it obviously hasn't come out of the ground yet. I expect that it will. The HPC doesn't have anything to do with the delays at that site.

The HPC approved the new building at the Dollar General site. A cynical lawsuit put an end to that project.

And, Valley City Linen's expansion lies outside any Historic District. Their expansion complies with the zoning ordinance and they've been willing to make changes based on community comments - all stuff good neighbors do. Valley City is a critical employer of people in our neighborhood. I'm thankful that they've decided to expand in place rather than leave the city. Pretty or not, that expansion is important and good.

Well said Ted.

10 hours ago, AG3 said:

 You have to set your standards higher. or a case of - Desensitized. I know i was moving here from a place like Chicago where infill is done right. Ill give you this, in comparison to what we don't have - Fairmount and Park Row condos are better than most, but not the best and not by far for sure.   And outside of the design of Park Row condos,  they are so out of place at that location. 

Ummm, Chicago has plenty of infill projects not "done right." There are entire blogs devoted to bad Chicago architecture. 

But Fairmount Square is a pretty good project in my mind.  If this Paddock Place is done in the same vein, I think it will look great. It can actually be done better because the site is bigger. 

[GRDadof3]

8 hours ago, x99 said:

They don't make a lot of sense on the site--they are designed to be facing a street--but it's about the last time I can think of where someone actually tried and did something other than bargain bin metal siding and an exterior design that could have been sketched up by a semi-talented 5th grader.  Storage building chic seems to be all the rage in Grand Rapids these days.  

And I won't get too far into what makes projects fail, but I don't think any of them have failed entirely because HPC panned into the design, neighbors objected, or lawsuits were filed.   Failures to execute more often than not can be chalked up to getting too far ahead of yourself before all of the necessary financing is lined up, or because zoning regulations intervened.  All of the griping in the world from whatever corner will not stop a project that complies with the rules and which is reasonably profitable.  If Gilmore has his cash lined up, and comes up with a "gotta have it" design aesthetic in this important location, he'll get his project, even if he might not quite get all of it.   Depending on the historic designation and the building design, I can see this sight plan perhaps being a little bit aggressive.

As I've mentioned, if he does these as "for sale" units, he can command a better price and a higher quality design than building them out completely as rentals. He can even build them in phases since he OWNS the land. 

[GRDadof3]

22 hours ago, GR_Urbanist said:

And we all now still enjoy a wonderful empty lot, a rotting shed, and two virtually abandoned buildings on a prominent corner years later.

So how did this work out for us that live near this or for the people that would have loved to live over here? "Unbuilt" is the key word here that needs to be avoided.

The HPC seems may have received enough negative feedback on some of their goof-ups to hopefully try to offer reasonable advice this time, not demand absurd expensive design elements or multiple inconsistent revisions at the behest of some "neighbor" they appoint to monkey around with the initial plans, that end up costing the developer thousands that they can ill-afford (because the HPC isnt footing the bill for anything). Which in the end will lead the the project being scrapped entirely, which does squat for the area.

Our illustrious new Dollar General, ugly expansion of Valley City Linens's bunker, and the still abandoned project at Cherry and Eastern ought to spur people in the area to be a lot more reasonable with a project like this so we can show that we are capable of more than obstruction and mediocrity. I hope...

 

 

That project at Cherry and Eastern is back at the HPC again:

 

[GRDadof3]

In the HPC packet, letters against the Paddock Place project. It's going to be an uphill battle for sure. 

2 things: does anyone else find it unprofessional the comment about land in Rockford?

And does the EHCN Executive Director not know that the name is Mangiamo and not the possessive form Mangiamo's. Mangiamo means "Let's Eat" in Italian, it's not someone's name.

 

[GRLaker]

54 minutes ago, GRDadof3 said:

In the HPC packet, letters against the Paddock Place project. It's going to be an uphill battle for sure. 

2 things: does anyone else find it unprofessional the comment about land in Rockford?

And does the EHCN Executive Director not know that the name is Mangiamo and not the possessive form Mangiamo's. Mangiamo means "Let's Eat" in Italian, it's not someone's name.

 

1. I find a lot of what these NIMBYs and neighborhood associations do unprofessional and amusing.

2. People have a serious problem with pluralizing everything. It drives me absolutely bonkers when people say Meijer's. 

[thebeerqueer]

3 minutes ago, GRLaker said:

1. I find a lot of what these NIMBYs and neighborhood associations do unprofessional and amusing.

2. People have a serious problem with pluralizing everything. It drives me absolutely bonkers when people say Meijer's. 

While I understand how this comes across as NIMBY-ism, the task of neighborhood associations is to be a voice for neighbors. If the majority of neighbors voice opposition, it's the NA's duty to communicate that message and invite further dialog. Also, besides the pluralizing mistake, what's 'unprofessional' about the letter from EHCN? They've stated facts and left it open to further discussion. 

That being said, at least on the Westside, projects where concerns have been voiced by NAs, the Planning Commission tends to ignore it and just move forward. 

[MJLO]

I totally understand why the NA's are involved.  I think where the criticism starts to come in is that so many of the NIMBY voices are so hyperbole ridden it's hard not to read the cases they make without rolling eyes.   If in these situations they would have a voice that was unemotional and presenting a fact based case, the impression would be harder to refute. 

To be clear I don't think Neighborhood Associations are NIMBY's , but so many NIMBY's are hard to take serious.  They tend to come across as if they are fresh off the Mlive comments.   It's unfortunate these voices tend to represent the face of the rest of the neighborhood.

[thebeerqueer]

2 minutes ago, MJLO said:

I totally understand why the NA's are involved.  I think where the criticism starts to come in is that so many of the NIMBY voices are so hyperbole ridden it's hard not to read the cases they make without rolling eyes.   If in these situations they would have a voice that was unemotional and presenting a fact based case the impression would be hard to refute. 

Hmm, in this situation, the NA stated a fact that they hand't been contacted by the developer (which is usually recommended before presenting to any commission) but then did over-dramatize it a bit . I don't want to make too big of deal out of this but the NA's are in a tough place,  they receive little support from the commissions/City but are tasked with being the first point of contact for concerned and upset neighbors. 

[MJLO]

7 minutes ago, thebeerqueer said:

Hmm, in this situation, the NA stated a fact that they hand't been contacted by the developer (which is usually recommended before presenting to any commission) but then did over-dramatize it a bit . I don't want to make too big of deal out of this but the NA's are in a tough place,  they receive little support from the commissions/City but are tasked with being the first point of contact for concerned and upset neighbors. 

I don't think the example of the NA reply is that bad.    I do think the response could have been better thought out, but the jist made sense.   I felt the other reply was a bit weak in making the case,  came across less rational.  The situation more made me think of other NIMBY situations where the individuals are downright absurd in their claims.  Honestly the NIMBY's in the city aren't that bad.  The further you get out into the suburbs and rural areas,  the more egregious the examples become. 

[RegalTDP]

3 hours ago, GRDadof3 said:

In the HPC packet, letters against the Paddock Place project. It's going to be an uphill battle for sure. 

2 things: does anyone else find it unprofessional the comment about land in Rockford?

And does the EHCN Executive Director not know that the name is Mangiamo and not the possessive form Mangiamo's. Mangiamo means "Let's Eat" in Italian, it's not someone's name.

I wouldn't say the comment about Rockford was unprofessional, just not persuasive.  Like, what the heck does that even mean? 

When Mangiamo first appeared I thought it was a Maggiano's Little Italy.  I still get the names mixed up sometimes.

 

[GR_Urbanist]

I'm personally a bit disturbed by these letters. They do come off as snobbish and rude (sometimes the EHCN gets like that), especially considering how generous they have been in allowing the property to be used for community events the past few years.

I get people can, and they should, voice their opinions, but they have to remember that they don't have partial ownership over this property because they really like it, nor should they be making "demands" to essentially make them Jr. partners and co-developers, to implement what they want, when they have no money tied into this. 

They can make a statement without being so flippant and condescending. This is what causes everything to get more adversarial than it needs to be.  And I can only think that there wont be any more EH community events taking place on the grounds now. I know I wouldn't.

[GRDadof3]

1 hour ago, RegalTDP said:

I wouldn't say the comment about Rockford was unprofessional, just not persuasive.  Like, what the heck does that even mean? 

When Mangiamo first appeared I thought it was a Maggiano's Little Italy.  I still get the names mixed up sometimes.

 

Well to say that just places like Rockford have open land to build on? We post all kinds of projects that are being built in the city of GR on acreage. 

Also, to say unequivically that the proposal doesn't meet the two standards she puts up seems strange. Do ratty cracked parking lots fit the "historic" character of the property? How long have those parking lots been there? Probably only since the 60's or 70's? 

Wasn't Fairmount Square built around the ICCF/Blodgett Home in an historic district? That land behind the Blodgett Home was all open land, and I don't think any houses were torn down to build the townhomes. Did those townhouses ruin the historic character of the Blodgett Home? Not at all. 

Gilmore probably should have reached out to and met with the EHCN but knowing how long the HPC process takes, maybe he figured he'd have plenty of time to meet with them. Or that HPC might expect so many changes that it was premature to meet with them? Or maybe he met with the Eastown Association? 

Also, did everyone know that the section of East Hills where Mangiamo sits is called "Diamond Gate?" 

[Telecaster Rex]

23 minutes ago, GRDadof3 said:

Or maybe he met with the Eastown Association? 

Well that would be silly, since Mangiamo/Paddock Place is pretty clearly in East Hills.  Fuller is the border between the two NAs.  I know for a fact Greg Gilmore knows that.

[GRDadof3]

1 minute ago, Telecaster Rex said:

Well that would be silly, since Mangiamo/Paddock Place is pretty clearly in East Hills.  Fuller is the border between the two NAs.  I know for a fact Greg Gilmore knows that.

I'm just speculating.  

[Telecaster Rex]

Gotcha.  Yeah, I don't think Gilmore has met with anyone.  Think maybe he was hoping this would fly under the radar for a while.  But that's speculation on my part now, too.

[Morris]

 

They could get 8 to 10 more units on the "Event Lawn" !

41 townhouse?  Yes, sarcasm aside, it could be nice project, with less units, with real quality architectural style buildings that blends into the neighborhood, and make them condominiums, and not rental units. I could see 3 row buildings, that have an historical favor to them, connected in a couple of rows, making more green areas, and enough parking . Reducing the units to one row on the side streets, and in back, increasing the green area around the buildings, could make this a quality project.....unlike most of the others I see on here.....

[GRDadof3]

4 hours ago, Morris said:

They could get 8 to 10 more units on the "Event Lawn" !

That would look stupid.

Speaking of Fairmount Square and its similarities to this project, I was poking around streetview and noticed how fast street trees grow! From 2011 to 2016, amazing!

 

[ChevalierNoir]

23 hours ago, GRLaker said:

2. People have a serious problem with pluralizing everything. It drives me absolutely bonkers when people say Meijer's. 

 

All those people lived in Greenville in the 1930's. Sorry,