920 Cherry, ICCF/Blodgett Home and Fairmount Square

[ModSquad]

Who was the owner of those properties (if you don't mind me asking)?

Since it is a matter of public record, I guess I can out it out there. His name is Ollie Olsen.

[mateo]

I met last week with Mark Muller from Muller realty and development. They are doing the mixed use property a few doors down from Uptown Village. It is on the South side of Wealthy, I think the 900 block. Mark said he had hundreds of applications for his commercial spaces. He was turning them away by the dozens. He is getting $15 a sq. foot for them, which is not cheap. They are, however, having trouble renting the residential space.

I'm not entirely surprised about the residential space--there seems to be a glut of available rental units on the SE side right now (for rent signs everywhere) and (if i'm thinking of the right building) the price they are asking for the upper unit didn't look very realistic to me (1200+ for a 3 bdrm i think?) given the current market.

Good to see all this exciting stuff happening though.

[GRDadof3]

I'm not entirely surprised about the residential space--there seems to be a glut of available rental units on the SE side right now (for rent signs everywhere) and (if i'm thinking of the right building) the price they are asking for the upper unit didn't look very realistic to me (1200+ for a 3 bdrm i think?) given the current market.

Good to see all this exciting stuff happening though.

Why would they do rentals above that space (I assume we're talking about the old garage that was converted)? Why wouldn't they look at doing condos. I know people are going to be spitting at me, but with the 100's or 1000's of rentals on the market on the SE side right now, why add to the pile? You could probably sell the upstairs space to whoever rents out the commercial spaces on the first floor.

And don't be surprised if we continue to see all of the old apartment buildings converted to condos, like Stuyvesant, Stratford Arms, Mountainwood, Forbes, Logan, Croyden, etc.. (just giving you anti-condo people a heads up ) A lot of rental property owners are dying on the vine right now, and I'd rather see condos at these places than foreclosure signs, boarded up windows, blah, blah, blah.

[twoshort]

(just giving you anti-condo people a heads up )

I may have come accross as anti-condo in the past but I want to clarify. I feel there is a need for cheap rentals within walking distance of downtown and it troubles me to think that a lot of these are going to go condo. Luckily I think I've found what i'm looking for in Waters House.

[GR_Urbanist]

Why would they do rentals above that space (I assume we're talking about the old garage that was converted)? Why wouldn't they look at doing condos. I know people are going to be spitting at me, but with the 100's or 1000's of rentals on the market on the SE side right now, why add to the pile? You could probably sell the upstairs space to whoever rents out the commercial spaces on the first floor.

And don't be surprised if we continue to see all of the old apartment buildings converted to condos, like Stuyvesant, Stratford Arms, Mountainwood, Forbes, Logan, Croyden, etc.. (just giving you anti-condo people a heads up ) A lot of rental property owners are dying on the vine right now, and I'd rather see condos at these places than foreclosure signs, boarded up windows, blah, blah, blah.

From a guy who is losing his place for a condo, let me just cry a few sarcastic tears for the "plight" of the rental property owners.

When you see more and more people leave GR because their incomes cannot afford all these "wonderful" condos that are replacing all the apartments, will anyone cry for them too?

btw, I'm not "anti condo". I'm anti turn a perfectly good afordable apartment building into luxury, "trendy", "hip", "aint it oh so cool", $100,000.00+ so we can attract the "creative class" because we think thats what will make GR such a cool city, condos.

[torgo]

From a guy who is losing his place for a condo, let me just cry a few sarcastic tears for the "plight" of the rental property owners.

When you see more and more people leave GR because their incomes cannot afford all these "wonderful" condos that are replacing all the apartments, will anyone cry for them too?

btw, I'm not "anti condo". I'm anti turn a perfectly good afordable apartment building into luxury, "trendy", "hip", "aint it oh so cool", $100,000.00+ so we can attract the "creative class" because we think thats what will make GR such a cool city, condos.

You've definitely gotta have both. They both have their good and bad sides, but I don't think that we need to have every apartment owner convert to condos. A mix of housing options and prices attracts a mix of people.

[GRDadof3]

From a guy who is losing his place for a condo, let me just cry a few sarcastic tears for the "plight" of the rental property owners.

When you see more and more people leave GR because their incomes cannot afford all these "wonderful" condos that are replacing all the apartments, will anyone cry for them too?

That's where I am confused. When it appears that every 3rd house on the SE side has an apartment available for rent (and I don't get over to the SW or NW sides very often, but I know a guy that has had a rental available for over a year and can't find renters), how is it so hard to find an apartment that is affordable? I would imagine the owners are discounting rents at this point?

I don't think rental property owners are looking for pity (they could probably give two s**ts), but they have to face the realities of market conditions. And again, with loans available to virtually anyone with a job and $0 down, why not own? I wish someone would explain it to me, because I don't get it.

[GR_Urbanist]

That's where I am confused. When it appears that every 3rd house on the SE side has an apartment available for rent (and I don't get over to the SW or NW sides very often, but I know a guy that has had a rental available for over a year and can't find renters), how is it so hard to find an apartment that is affordable? I would imagine the owners are discounting rents at this point?

I don't think rental property owners are looking for pity (they could probably give two s**ts), but they have to face the realities of market conditions. And again, with loans available to virtually anyone with a job and $0 down, why not own? I wish someone would explain it to me, because I don't get it.

One of the problems is the fact that the areas where these apartments are located may not be the best locations to live, I drive through the SE side on my way to my parents house. I wouldnt want to have to rent in some of these places either and I'm sure many people in an area like HH, many of whom walk to work and school at night, wouldnt want to be there. Their could also be issues of the basic condition of the home/building itself. A renter cant make major changes to their place and if you see that the place is a mess then you know the owner isnt interested in keeping it decent. If the area is safe and the home is kept in just decent condition, people will rent there.

Part of me simply dosent belive that these owners are doing these conversions out of hardship. If they were, where are they getting the money for all the new high end stuff their stuffing into these converted condos? The only market conditions I'm seeing is a need to sell luxury "Urban living at its best." (written on the sign at the Puritan building)

It is a odd concept in this day and age, but many of us are not looking for loans and tricks so we can own a small piece of a building no matter how cool the place is supposed to be. Me and my wife want to own a HOME. We planned to rent so we can save and place a huge down payment on a house, a whole house. It's not too hard. But owning a 100,000.00 box that was converted from an apartment? Why? because of the new light fixtures?

[GRDadof3]

One of the problems is the fact that the areas where these apartments are located may not be the best locations to live, I drive through the SE side on my way to my parents house. I wouldnt want to have to rent in some of these places either and I'm sure many people in an area like HH, many of whom walk to work and school at night, wouldnt want to be there. Their could also be issues of the basic condition of the home/building itself. A renter cant make major changes to their place and if you see that the place is a mess then you know the owner isnt interested in keeping it decent. If the area is safe and the home is kept in just decent condition, people will rent there.

Part of me simply dosent belive that these owners are doing these conversions out of hardship. If they were, where are they getting the money for all the new high end stuff their stuffing into these converted condos? The only market conditions I'm seeing is a need to sell luxury "Urban living at its best." (written on the sign at the Puritan building)

It is a odd concept in this day and age, but many of us are not looking for loans and tricks so we can own a small piece of a building no matter how cool the place is supposed to be. Me and my wife want to own a HOME. We planned to rent so we can save and place a huge down payment on a house, a whole house. It's not too hard. But owning a 100,000.00 box that was converted from an apartment? Why? because of the new light fixtures?

I can understand some of that. The building owner only puts the high-end stuff in hoping to make it back on the sale (they don't usually pay cash for that stuff). The only problem with renting and saving is that the longer you go, the higher home values go (in desirable areas), and you've lost any momentum that you could get with saving. Let's say you put away $10000/year in savings for 5 years, that's $50,000 (forget about any interest gained, because it will be minimal in even a money market). However, the cost of homes in the neighborhoods you are looking at will go from $150,000 to $200,000. That $50,000 you slaved to save got you nowhere in relation to housing values (you're buying the same house). You could have bought at the $150,000, and might be sitting on a $200,000 house in five years (if values stay stable, which they do in the long run around here). Does that make sense?

Back to property owners (which believe me, I despised when I rented in college). If I were a rental property owner, I might be looking at the following scenario:

I have four units in my building, average rent $800/mo. After I pay the mortgage on the property, maintenance, taxes, insurance, etc.. I could NET maybe $1200/mo. However, if I can't seem to consistently keep one of the four rented or I have problem tenants who drive others away, now my net drops to $300/mo., which gets eaten up pretty quickly by other unforeseen costs of trying to attract renters, or I have to drop my rental fee. Or I could convert to condos (or sell it to someone like Cannon & Co.), and sell 4 units at $100,000/each. I put $50,000 into updating the property, and I walk away with $100,000 on the sale. No more headaches, no more middle of the night calls, no more noise complaints, blah, blah, blah. I have another job, and just don't need this crap.

I'm not trying to persaude you into doing anything, just showing it from the point of view of someone who rented for many years, but has now been a happy homeowner for 6 years. Good luck finding a new place. I have seen a number of places for rent just North of Fulton in Heritage Hill. That's got to be a decent area, isn't it?

[GR_Urbanist]

I can understand some of that. The building owner only puts the high-end stuff in hoping to make it back on the sale (they don't usually pay cash for that stuff). The only problem with renting and saving is that the longer you go, the higher home values go (in desirable areas), and you've lost any momentum that you could get with saving. Let's say you put away $10000/year in savings for 5 years, that's $50,000 (forget about any interest gained, because it will be minimal in even a money market). However, the cost of homes in the neighborhoods you are looking at will go from $150,000 to $200,000. That $50,000 you slaved to save got you nowhere in relation to housing values (you're buying the same house). You could have bought at the $150,000, and might be sitting on a $200,000 house in five years (if values stay stable, which they do in the long run around here). Does that make sense?

Back to property owners (which believe me, I despised when I rented in college). If I were a rental property owner, I might be looking at the following scenario:

I have four units in my building, average rent $800/mo. After I pay the mortgage on the property, maintenance, taxes, insurance, etc.. I could NET maybe $1200/mo. However, if I can't seem to consistently keep one of the four rented or I have problem tenants who drive others away, now my net drops to $300/mo., which gets eaten up pretty quickly by other unforeseen costs of trying to attract renters, or I have to drop my rental fee. Or I could convert to condos (or sell it to someone like Cannon & Co.), and sell 4 units at $100,000/each. I put $50,000 into updating the property, and I walk away with $100,000 on the sale. No more headaches, no more middle of the night calls, no more noise complaints, blah, blah, blah. I have another job, and just don't need this crap.

I'm not trying to persaude you into doing anything, just showing it from the point of view of someone who rented for many years, but has now been a happy homeowner for 6 years. Good luck finding a new place. I have seen a number of places for rent just North of Fulton in Heritage Hill. That's got to be a decent area, isn't it?

Thanks GRDadof3! It does make alot of sense. I just hope in the end good people who made their home here dont get lost in the numbers and get swept out of the city. Real estate is a business that is just as cold as any other. They have numbers that add up better than the ones they have now and thats where you go.

[GRDadof3]

Thanks GRDadof3! It does make alot of sense. I just hope in the end good people who made their home here dont get lost in the numbers and get swept out of the city. Real estate is a business that is just as cold as any other. They have numbers that add up better than the ones they have now and thats where you go.

I hope so too. It might be a tough couple of years until Grand Rapids shakes its addiction on manufacturing.

Edit that: MICHIGAN shakes its addiction on manufacturing.

[dbrok]

I hope so too. It might be a tough couple of years until Grand Rapids shakes its addiction on manufacturing.

Edit that: MICHIGAN shakes its addiction on manufacturing.

You are right on the money GRDadof3. Today's headline on Mlive is the surprise bankruptcy of Delphi. This could or will jeopardize over 14,000 jobs in Michigan.

One thing that irritates me about the article is the quote from our lovely governor.

"I am angry that this action occurs one day after headlines blared that Delphi employees were being asked to accept brutal, draconian pay cuts while upper management is being offered golden parachutes," Granholm said in a statement.

"Delphi's decision will undoubtedly have a ripple effect through Michigan's economy -- an economy already reeling from outsourcing" work to lower-wage countries, she said.

It seems like she's always angry, but what has she done to create jobs? She never does anything about it. Oh wait, she did visit Toyota in Japan and secured 200 jobs -- for 2009! In a state with a population of 10 million, that is just sad.

If Michigan wants to be cool, we need an incredible emphasis on small businesses. Tax breaks, grants, office space, resources, etc. It is the small businesses that become large and create thousands of jobs along the way. It makes no sense to me that she "is for the worker" and wants to create jobs, but runs as a Democrat and supports higher taxes. How can we have a roaring business environment if small business profits are filling the coffers of the state government? I think I saw somewhere that overall Michigan is in the top 10 for most taxes. This includes all like business, income, auto registration fees, etc. If Granholm wants us to be great, create the environment to do so. Oh wait, then she wouldn't have the backing of the unions and wouldn't be governor in the first place.

[GRDadof3]

Yah, Surprise! Delphi filed for bankruptcy! And they're still dishing out tax incentives to manufacturers. They just gave another huge one to Chrysler for an engine plant. When was the last time Chrysler made consistent profits??? I'm not trying to be a wet blanket or anything, but there are some serious realities that need to be dealt with in Michigan. The school funding system is out of wack, most of our highways are a mess, only two areas are showing any real growth (Ottawa County and the Ann Arbor area), and we have a bunch of knuckleheads on both sides in Lansing that care more about their stupid ideology than fixing things. Other than that, it's perfect

I actually think that Grand Rapids would stand a good chance of becoming the next great city in North America if it weren't for.........you guessed it!

And I don't think a change at the Governor's seat is enough, if you know what I mean.

What was this thread about originally?

[dbrok]

Yah, Surprise! Delphi filed for bankruptcy! And they're still dishing out tax incentives to manufacturers. They just gave another huge one to Chrysler for an engine plant. When was the last time Chrysler made consistent profits??? I'm not trying to be a wet blanket or anything, but there are some serious realities that need to be dealt with in Michigan. The school funding system is out of wack, most of our highways are a mess, only two areas are showing any real growth (Ottawa County and the Ann Arbor area), and we have a bunch of knuckleheads on both sides in Lansing that care more about their stupid ideology than fixing things. Other than that, it's perfect

I actually think that Grand Rapids would stand a good chance of becoming the next great city in North America if it weren't for.........you guessed it!

And I don't think a change at the Governor's seat is enough, if you know what I mean.

What was this thread about originally?

Excellent points. Something needs to be done, and done soon. I guess this topic was about cherry street or something Next time, I'll make sure I start a thread about the politics of Michigan.

[ModSquad]

That's where I am confused. When it appears that every 3rd house on the SE side has an apartment available for rent (and I don't get over to the SW or NW sides very often, but I know a guy that has had a rental available for over a year and can't find renters), how is it so hard to find an apartment that is affordable? I would imagine the owners are discounting rents at this point?

I don't think rental property owners are looking for pity (they could probably give two s**ts), but they have to face the realities of market conditions. And again, with loans available to virtually anyone with a job and $0 down, why not own? I wish someone would explain it to me, because I don't get it.

Just got back in town or I would have offered some insight on this post earlier. Actually the rental market in the greater Grand Rapids area is in its worst condition since 1972. There are 7,500 empty apartments in the greater Grand Rapids Area. Many large sized apartment complexes in Wyoming and "Rentwood" (Someone called it this in a previous post and I thought it was hilarious) are teetering on the edge of financial solvency.

So...what does this do to the rental market as a whole in Grand Rapids?

Renters have a huge choice and can rent the best apartments in the best condition in the best neighborhoods at the best rates. Consequently, landlords that have apartments or homes that are marginal or worse, or are in marginal neighborhoods are really hurting. Landlords in many of the marginal neighborhoods (we call them neighborhoods at risk) in which we work are selling their rental properties in droves. Drive down Madison between Franklin and Hall and you will see a glut of former rental properties for sale. (quick side note-I never say bad neighborhood. There are certainly bad people...but not bad neighborhoods, thus our coining the term at-risk neighborhoods)

Many rental property owners in decent neighborhoods who had used very very strict screening criteria are suddenly getting a bit lax. They will now accept renters with lower credit scores, not so great rental history, no rental history, etc. We are seeing neighborhoods that were once considered desireable get some tenants moving in that are not so desireable.

I guess what I am saying here is that the "inner-suburban ring," Kentwood, Wyoming, Walker, and some areas of GR Township, which had been experiencing some pockets of blight and disinvestment, may accelerate in this extremely poor rental market. Additionally, it is becoming more and more vogue to live in traditional urban neighborhoods. As large numbers of marginal former rental homes become available in neighborhoods that are becoming more desireable we could see many neighborhoods flip rather quickly. The Baxter neighborhood is a good one to watch in this regard.

Grdad-your hypothesis about landlords looking to flip their properties into condos is right on. Investors are not looking to buy residential rental income properties because you simply cannot make money in this rental environment right now. Many landlords that are lucky enough to have decent places in decent neighborhoods see condoing as their best financial option.

In Grand Rapids we are currently seeing a diaspora of the poor. A SIGNIFICANT amount of the drop in student population GRPS is experiencing this year is students from lower income families. The poor are moving back to the South.

The comments in this thread about Michigan weaning itself from a manufacturing based economy are right on the money. The next 5 years or so are going to be rough.

[mateo]

Yep. I have to agree that the next few years may be tough.

I attribute the poor rental market to the following factors:

1) Weak economy. Lose jobs (of any kind), you lose people.

2) Low Interest rates have turned many renters into homeowners (usually a good thing)

3) Stock market crash a few years back brought many new investors into real estate. This is not neccesarily a good or bad thing, but i have noticed that many new investors have disregarded the importance of positive cash flow, perhaps due to an over-emphasis (speculation) on appreciation potential. Some of the prices people want/expect for their real-estate simply bare no correlation whatsoever to income and are not sustainable. These newer investors will be the first to bail. I think we are probably going to enter a period of flat (or falling) real-estate prices.

4) New development (redevelopment) in certain areas of town (i.e. downtown, west side) has drawn some populations from one area to another. GVSU, for example, and some of the factory/loft conversions have drawn students from older neighborhoods to the downtown area. Again, not necessarily good or bad, but ... i sometimes question how freely tax credits are handed out for these new units when supply already exceeds demand.

I'm hoping that high energy prices (not that i love high energy prices) help to begin to draw people back into the core city. There are certainly big advantages in not having to drive everywhere...

[GRDadof3]

Just got back in town or I would have offered some insight on this post earlier. Actually the rental market in the greater Grand Rapids area is in its worst condition since 1972. There are 7,500 empty apartments in the greater Grand Rapids Area. Many large sized apartment complexes in Wyoming and "Rentwood" (Someone called it this in a previous post and I thought it was hilarious) are teetering on the edge of financial solvency.

So...what does this do to the rental market as a whole in Grand Rapids?

Renters have a huge choice and can rent the best apartments in the best condition in the best neighborhoods at the best rates. Consequently, landlords that have apartments or homes that are marginal or worse, or are in marginal neighborhoods are really hurting. Landlords in many of the marginal neighborhoods (we call them neighborhoods at risk) in which we work are selling their rental properties in droves. Drive down Madison between Franklin and Hall and you will see a glut of former rental properties for sale. (quick side note-I never say bad neighborhood. There are certainly bad people...but not bad neighborhoods, thus our coining the term at-risk neighborhoods)

Many rental property owners in decent neighborhoods who had used very very strict screening criteria are suddenly getting a bit lax. They will now accept renters with lower credit scores, not so great rental history, no rental history, etc. We are seeing neighborhoods that were once considered desireable get some tenants moving in that are not so desireable.

I guess what I am saying here is that the "inner-suburban ring," Kentwood, Wyoming, Walker, and some areas of GR Township, which had been experiencing some pockets of blight and disinvestment, may accelerate in this extremely poor rental market. Additionally, it is becoming more and more vogue to live in traditional urban neighborhoods. As large numbers of marginal former rental homes become available in neighborhoods that are becoming more desireable we could see many neighborhoods flip rather quickly. The Baxter neighborhood is a good one to watch in this regard.

Grdad-your hypothesis about landlords looking to flip their properties into condos is right on. Investors are not looking to buy residential rental income properties because you simply cannot make money in this rental environment right now. Many landlords that are lucky enough to have decent places in decent neighborhoods see condoing as their best financial option.

In Grand Rapids we are currently seeing a diaspora of the poor. A SIGNIFICANT amount of the drop in student population GRPS is experiencing this year is students from lower income families. The poor are moving back to the South.

The comments in this thread about Michigan weaning itself from a manufacturing based economy are right on the money. The next 5 years or so are going to be rough.

Maybe there is a silver lining, if more of these depressed homes become owner-occupied and they get fixed up. Organizations like Home Repair Services also offer building classes to help with this. Your mention of rentals in the outlying areas is funny, because I have heard of people in Cascade and Ada having to rent out their homes now. A guy I work with owns a sprawling ranch in a country-club community in Cascade, and he has had his home for sale for over a year, so now he has to rent it out (even though the association forbids it). I won't mention names. Weird stuff

[ModSquad]

Maybe there is a silver lining, if more of these depressed homes become owner-occupied and they get fixed up.

That is exactly what I am saying. I believe we are in the midst of a socio-economic transformation in Grand Rapids. It is and will affect housing, jobs, our economy, and our neighborhoods. Anyone in the outlying areas (Kentwood, Wyoming, Rockford, Cascade, etc.) that does not think this transformation will affect them is kidding him/herself.

There is definitely a silver lining in this transformation for urban Grand Rapids and a dark cloud for other suburbs that are not prepared.

[GRDadof3]

I think it is happening in areas around Detroit too. The previously hot Oakland County is now LOSING population. In fact the Metro Detroit area pop. is stagnating, but yet it keeps moving North and West. The only real development news they are talking about on the Detroit board is casinos! It makes me wonder if there was a closed door "come to Jesus" meeting with all the GR city leaders and local big wigs (Van Andels, Devos's, Meijer), and that is why we are seeing such a reinvestment in downtown and the eerie simultaneous announcements of VAI II, the medical towers complex, the new Marriott, and the new Cancer Center. Like they all could read the writing on the wall and said "Holy Shnikies!" "We've got to do something!"

[JPeac2]

That is a great picture of the old lady GRdad! If anyone can bring it back to its former glory Second Story and Bazzani can. Dosen't appear it's going to be an easy job though. To me this whole development is one of the more exciting projects going on around town. Restoration of a beautiful old building and great new town homes in a very cool urban neighborhood.

Bump for an old topic, but has there been any development on this?

[Nitro]

Bump for an old topic, but has there been any development on this?

I thought I replied to this yesterday but it didn't come up.

Demo of the additions onto the DA Blodgett building are coming down in Mid. Feb. They can't come down fast enough for me.

[GRDadof3]

I thought I replied to this yesterday but it didn't come up.

Demo of the additions onto the DA Blodgett building are coming down in Mid. Feb. They can't come down fast enough for me.

Can you (or someone) give us a heads up so that we can get pics?

[grcitydog]

Can you (or someone) give us a heads up so that we can get pics?

I live very close to this and look every day hoping that I will see construction fencing and demolition cranes, I will post as soon as I see some activity, which can't come soon enough.

[grcitydog]

We may have something real soon! It looks like there is a construction trailer on the west side of the building

[foo_gr]

This is one of the projects that I am most looking forward to seeing completed. The remaining facade on the old school is amazing.