Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

GRDadof3

City Commission Agenda

Recommended Posts

Some interesting items on next week's City Commission agenda:

http://www.ci.grand-rapids.mi.us/meeting.p...450&type=agenda

7:00 p.m.

7) Communication from Bert Crandell, Alticor, regarding the proposal for the JW Marriott hotel

11) Public Hearings

) Tall House Brownfield Amendment

) 240 Ionia Brownfield Amendment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Dad: You missed the fact that the Alticor letter is supporting a proposal being considered by the Commission (Committee of the Whole Item # 6 dealing with Plaza Towers). Item 6 is much more interesting than Bert's letter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dad: You missed the fact that the Alticor letter is supporting a proposal being considered by the Commission (Committee of the Whole Item # 6 dealing with Plaza Towers). Item 6 is much more interesting than Bert's letter.

Welcome rnr-plnr! But you lost me. :P Isn't the deal with Plaza Towers just to enable work to be done on the riverwalk area there and the sculpture that is supposed to have running water? Or is that what you were referring to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome rnr-plnr! But you lost me. :P Isn't the deal with Plaza Towers just to enable work to be done on the riverwalk area there and the sculpture that is supposed to have running water? Or is that what you were referring to?

welcome rnr-plnr.... I have to wonder if that RnR has anything to do with .... RNR Development.... as in... Monte's/O'tooles :ph34r:

Just wondering... :whistling:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some interesting items on next week's City Commission agenda:

http://www.ci.grand-rapids.mi.us/meeting.p...450&type=agenda

7:00 p.m.

7) Communication from Bert Crandell, Alticor, regarding the proposal for the JW Marriott hotel

11) Public Hearings

) Tall House Brownfield Amendment

) 240 Ionia Brownfield Amendment

Is this an open meeting for the mornig of the 24th 830am--- room 901?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this an open meeting for the mornig of the 24th 830am--- room 901?

As far as I know, any of the meetings posted on their website are public meetings. But you may want to check with the City Clerk to be sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

rnr-plnr, it all makes sense to me now:

http://www.ci.grand-rapids.mi.us//download...e3d7b030f3c.pdf

Alticor was expressing their support for the DDA deal with Plaza Towers.

Also, it looks like Tall House and 240 Ionia got their Brownfield Redevelopment approvals. Anyone know what the next step is? If the use fits the zoning, do they just have to go before the HPC due to their locations in Heartside?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, guys, I don't have time to go back and find all the particular threads. I spend too much time on this already, gotta watch out for the job, ya know. Thought you might be interested in the City Commission meeting. Not sure when Minutes and the video will be available. It was a good one.

Tall House at 45 Ionia was first up. The developers were there - Mary Witte, George somebody, Jack DeBruyn of Design Plus. Rockford is construction and Second Story is sales. They described it as a $27 million project and were asking for an SBT credit. They've been approved for Brownfield already. They say the residential portion will house about 99 people. It is mixed use with a projected 18,000 sq. ft. retail and 26,000 sq. ft. office space. The parking will be underground, about 86 spaces. Residential is on floors 3-9 in a variety of sizes.

Commissioner, "Have you talked with Heartside."

Developers, "No."

Commissioner, "Will your condos be low income?"

Developers, "Not low income, but affordable."

Commissioner, "Define affordable."

Developers, "$150,000."

Audience: :lol:

The developers said they needed SBT relief to "level the playing field." If I took nothing else away from the meeting, it was that analogies are not a good idea in front of the Commission. But I will spare you the whole "define 'leveling the playing field'" bit. The Commission passed the motion to set aside the rules to hurry this through so they could make the next Brownfield meeting and I think they passed the SBT relief.

Next up was Fulton & Division (which is actually Ionia and Williams). Attorney John Byl really appreciated that so many people had shown up to support their project. Audience: :rofl: . The developers describe it as mixed use and the "gateway from the South to downtown." It's about a $20 million project, mixed use with a hotel component. Underground parking, two-tiered deck, environmentally sustainable (they'll try anyway, they said). Two floors of condos, 1500-1800 sq. ft. with "unobstructed views to the West." No public parking. Haven't met with Heartside. (Heartside, who are they?, Mayor who?)

Commissioner, "How much are your condos?"

Developers, "$300,000."

Audience: :shok:

Last, but not least, Garfield Park. I left the meeting at 10 and that was about an hour before it ended. Lots of impassioned statements made to the Commission. The best part was when the fellow speaking about how the Salvation Army was against gays and lesbians wouldn't stop talking when the Mayor asked him to, not even when he was told he was out of order, and then when the police chief got up out of his chair when the speaker approached the Mayor. Wham. Pow. No, not really. The speaker just wanted to hand the Mayor his materials. It was all quite civil. The chief was just making sure it stayed that way.

In short, Opposed - it's all about principal. For - it's all about the property values (okay, to be honest, they said it was all about "the kids" but it kinda seemed like it was all about "their kids.") East and South of the park were well represented. North and West of the park not so much. I'm still on the fence on this one but was happy to report to my parents that their property values were safe and might even go up. I don't think it's a bad thing, I'm just not convinced that it's not really a health club instead of a community center. The two questions I walked away with were "Does this really help the park, or just the indoor portion of it that the Army will own and maintain?" and "Is it a members only club?" For example, the facility in San Diego which apparently is the prototype, has a one time membership fee of $65 and yearly dues around $800. I'm not seeing the neighborhood kids North and West of the park ponying up that kind of money to swim (even if you knock it down to $35/mo. on scholarship). But the truth is, what I know about the Salvation Army involves Nathan Detroit and some dice. Maybe it can be a beautiful partnership. I just wish the Fors had not been so uncivil to the Againsts through the whole process. Maybe if a little tolerance had been shown (there wasn't just finger pointing in the neighborhood these past weeks, but finger flipping), everyone would have come to similar conclusions.

Gotta go. Dad, I'm on the Riverhouse thing, I promise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, guys, I don't have time to go back and find all the particular threads. I spend too much time on this already, gotta watch out for the job, ya know. Thought you might be interested in the City Commission meeting. Not sure when Minutes and the video will be available. It was a good one.

Tall House at 45 Ionia was first up. The developers were there - Mary Witte, George somebody, Jack DeBruyn of Design Plus. Rockford is construction and Second Story is sales. They described it as a $27 million project and were asking for an SBT credit. They've been approved for Brownfield already. They say the residential portion will house about 99 people. It is mixed use with a projected 18,000 sq. ft. retail and 26,000 sq. ft. office space. The parking will be underground, about 86 spaces. Residential is on floors 3-9 in a variety of sizes.

Commissioner, "Have you talked with Heartside."

Developers, "No."

Commissioner, "Will your condos be low income?"

Developers, "Not low income, but affordable."

Commissioner, "Define affordable."

Developers, "$150,000."

Audience: :lol:

The developers said they needed SBT relief to "level the playing field." If I took nothing else away from the meeting, it was that analogies are not a good idea in front of the Commission. But I will spare you the whole "define 'leveling the playing field'" bit. The Commission passed the motion to set aside the rules to hurry this through so they could make the next Brownfield meeting and I think they passed the SBT relief.

Next up was Fulton & Division (which is actually Ionia and Williams). Attorney John Byl really appreciated that so many people had shown up to support their project. Audience: :rofl: . The developers describe it as mixed use and the "gateway from the South to downtown." It's about a $20 million project, mixed use with a hotel component. Underground parking, two-tiered deck, environmentally sustainable (they'll try anyway, they said). Two floors of condos, 1500-1800 sq. ft. with "unobstructed views to the West." No public parking. Haven't met with Heartside. (Heartside, who are they?, Mayor who?)

Commissioner, "How much are your condos?"

Developers, "$300,000."

Audience: :shok:

Last, but not least, Garfield Park. I left the meeting at 10 and that was about an hour before it ended. Lots of impassioned statements made to the Commission. The best part was when the fellow speaking about how the Salvation Army was against gays and lesbians wouldn't stop talking when the Mayor asked him to, not even when he was told he was out of order, and then when the police chief got up out of his chair when the speaker approached the Mayor. Wham. Pow. No, not really. The speaker just wanted to hand the Mayor his materials. It was all quite civil. The chief was just making sure it stayed that way.

In short, Opposed - it's all about principal. For - it's all about the property values (okay, to be honest, they said it was all about "the kids" but it kinda seemed like it was all about "their kids.") East and South of the park were well represented. North and West of the park not so much. I'm still on the fence on this one but was happy to report to my parents that their property values were safe and might even go up. I don't think it's a bad thing, I'm just not convinced that it's not really a health club instead of a community center. The two questions I walked away with were "Does this really help the park, or just the indoor portion of it that the Army will own and maintain?" and "Is it a members only club?" For example, the facility in San Diego which apparently is the prototype, has a one time membership fee of $65 and yearly dues around $800. I'm not seeing the neighborhood kids North and West of the park ponying up that kind of money to swim (even if you knock it down to $35/mo. on scholarship). But the truth is, what I know about the Salvation Army involves Nathan Detroit and some dice. Maybe it can be a beautiful partnership. I just wish the Fors had not been so uncivil to the Againsts through the whole process. Maybe if a little tolerance had been shown (there wasn't just finger pointing in the neighborhood these past weeks, but finger flipping), everyone would have come to similar conclusions.

Gotta go. Dad, I'm on the Riverhouse thing, I promise.

good info, thanks PT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow! Nice report Paris Texas! :D I'll go along with the developer for Tall House and say that $150,000 is affordable now. At $150 a square foot, it's hard to get anything other than an efficiency for less than that. I can't believe that they have not talked to Heartside yet (or the HPC)? "George" is George Haworth of Spring Lake/Grand Haven.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.