New Construction and Renovations in the Heartside District

[GRDadof3]

Do you know what they'll be using on the first floor? Does this mean construction will begin soon?

Joe

No, doesn't say. That's just from reading the July planning commission's meeting minutes.

[GRDadof3]

Construction has begun.

[GRDadof3]

Big project coming to Heartside, infill on Commerce and renovation on S. Division. It's not really a BIG secret, but I'd rather the story get told by the organization that is doing it. Developing...

Also, 35 Oakes renovation should be starting soon.

[GR_Urbanist]

Is this part of that other mystery project?

[joeDowntown]

Cool. Is this going in where there is a surface lot for sale?

Any word on a restaurant for 38 Commerce? Such a great building. A shame to see the ground floor under-utilized.

And GRDad, is the 'Big Project' separate from the infill on Commerce? I have a feeling my parking spot across from Hopcat is about to be gobbled up.

Joe

Big project coming to Heartside, infill on Commerce and renovation on S. Division. It's not really a BIG secret, but I'd rather the story get told by the organization that is doing it. Developing...

Also, 35 Oakes renovation should be starting soon.

[GRDadof3]

Cool. Is this going in where there is a surface lot for sale?

Any word on a restaurant for 38 Commerce? Such a great building. A shame to see the ground floor under-utilized.

And GRDad, is the 'Big Project' separate from the infill on Commerce? I have a feeling my parking spot across from Hopcat is about to be gobbled up.

Joe

Yes, sorry. I meant "big project coming to Heartside: infill on Commerce and renovation on S. Division." It's all connected.

[Veloise]

http://www.mlive.com/business/west-michigan/index.ssf/2011/10/dilapidated_structures_transfo.html

"At Serrano, a factory built in 1917, the renovation preserved heavy timber beams and other features to create 15 urban-style loft apartments. Brookstone officials said it took about three weeks for Serrano fill up after they began accepting applications."

[GRDadof3]

http://www.mlive.com...es_transfo.html

"At Serrano, a factory built in 1917, the renovation preserved heavy timber beams and other features to create 15 urban-style loft apartments. Brookstone officials said it took about three weeks for Serrano fill up after they began accepting applications."

I'm hoping to go to the open house today. Looks pretty sweet. (and not the project I was referring to in my above post, fyi)

[mgreven]

Big project coming to Heartside, infill on Commerce and renovation on S. Division. It's not really a BIG secret, but I'd rather the story get told by the organization that is doing it. Developing...

Is this what you're referring to?

http://www.mlive.com...big_bet_on.html

Looks like a big project - they're building like crazy there in Heartside.

Actually I just re-read what you said - renovation on Division. Maybe this is different? Is there more space for infill on Commerce?

Edited November 25, 2011 by mgreven

[joeDowntown]

Looks like a great project. I like the mix of market-rate and 'working-class' apartments.

There are still a few spots on Commerce that are open that could be used for infill.

Joe

Looks like a big project - they're building like crazy there in Heartside.

Actually I just re-read what you said - renovation on Division. Maybe this is different? Is there more space for infill on Commerce?

[GRDadof3]

Nope, not the project I was referring to. The one I was talking about is on Commerce. Infill. It's coming, don't worry.

I said I thought Heartside stood a chance of being the best urban district (live, work, play) in all of Michigan...

Is this what you're referring to?

http://www.mlive.com...big_bet_on.html

Looks like a big project - they're building like crazy there in Heartside.

Actually I just re-read what you said - renovation on Division. Maybe this is different? Is there more space for infill on Commerce?

[mgreven]

Nope, not the project I was referring to. The one I was talking about is on Commerce. Infill. It's coming, don't worry.

That's great that there's even more…I won't worry too much. =)

[fotoman311]

Nope, not the project I was referring to. The one I was talking about is on Commerce. Infill. It's coming, don't worry.

I said I thought Heartside stood a chance of being the best urban district (live, work, play) in all of Michigan...

If/When the Urban Market gets developed and if ICCF manages to land a decent grocery store at Wealthy and Division, they'd definitely have a strong case. So many amenities would be within easy walking distance.

[joeDowntown]

I still think the concentration of missions will be an opposition to growth in the area. Maybe not so much the 2nd story up, but to get a thriving, walkable commercial area at street level. These new developments will help, but I still wonder if the area will reach its full potential. I hope it does.

Joe

Nope, not the project I was referring to. The one I was talking about is on Commerce. Infill. It's coming, don't worry.

I said I thought Heartside stood a chance of being the best urban district (live, work, play) in all of Michigan...

[John E]

I still think the concentration of missions will be an opposition to growth in the area. Maybe not so much the 2nd story up, but to get a thriving, walkable commercial area at street level. These new developments will help, but I still wonder if the area will reach its full potential. I hope it does.

Joe

I agree but the Missions and support facilities have been there for many years and moving them is not feasible. The street level could be used for advertising or murals with the inside area used for storage or private offices and the like.

~John

[jas49503]

I agree but the Missions and support facilities have been there for many years and moving them is not feasible. The street level could be used for advertising or murals with the inside area used for storage or private offices and the like.

~John

why not? the goodwill building had a for sale sign on it recently. if someone were to buy it they would not be obligated to renew their lease and could do what ever they wanted with the building. there is no reason that the same thing couldn't happen to all the other missions in the area. it will take a while but eventually it will happen. could take 50 years but it seems inevitable.

[John E]

Is the Goodwill store at that location having budget difficulties due to it's location?

Should all homeless and people with substance (including alcohol), mental difficulties be put into camps?

Are we living in a "prison planet" as it is?

[gvsusean]

Is the Goodwill store at that location having budget difficulties due to it's location?

Should all homeless and people with substance (including alcohol), mental difficulties be put into camps?

Are we living in a "prison planet" as it is?

not put into camps, but also not concentrated to a one block area of the middle of DT.. maybe one in each city "section" or something would be better

[joeDowntown]

It's an obstacle to future growth. I don't think anyone said to move people into camps. But anyone who says missions are not an obstacle to growth in that area are lying to themselves.

I'd love to see examples of other cities where missions mesh seamlessly with a healthy, thriving neighborhood. If there are any, it could be a model for this area.

Joe

Is the Goodwill store at that location having budget difficulties due to it's location?

Should all homeless and people with substance (including alcohol), mental difficulties be put into camps?

Are we living in a "prison planet" as it is?

[RegalTDP]

John, the "camp" dynamic is exactly what's brewing in downtown GR now. We have a population of homeless that spends 24 hours a day on the same city block, and a wider swath of society that spends 24 hours a day avoiding that block, and their two paths need never meet. We're effectively segregating the homeless population as it is. That's not a healthy dynamic, and it's impeding the neighborhood's growth.

Not that I would ever fault the missions for locating themselves where they felt they were needed. From a charitable perspective, they shouldn't move to place where they're less accessible. But from a planning perspective, it's a problem for Heartside.

I'd love to see examples of other cities where missions mesh seamlessly with a healthy, thriving neighborhood. If there are any, it could be a model for this area. Joe

For what it's worth, Boston has St. Francis House and the Center for Homeless Vets in extraordinarily prominent locations - not far from Boston Common and the Freedom Trail, respectively. They don't disguise themselves at all. I think missions can mesh with a well-developed neighborhood, but in South Division's case, how to get it started is the challenge.

Edited December 2, 2011 by RegalTDP

[joeDowntown]

Herkimer to be renovated / expanded with new 5 story infill project on Commerce:

http://www.mlive.com/business/west-michigan/index.ssf/2011/12/historic_former_grand_rapids_h.html

I'm pretty sure this is what GRDad mentioned. There is still a surface lot north of the United Way Building that is on the market and begs for infill.

Joe

[sfloria]

Sounds great! I'm glad there is more infil going into the southern part of downown. Lots of things brewing near Wealthy now! I just hope that Dwelling Place uses better materials than what they put on the Verne Berry Place. VBP could've looked much better with decent materials.

[x99]

I'm all for urban development, but this is again something where the reported facts just don't make sense. An investment of $28 million into a project that brings only 100 apartments? That's a cost of $280,000.00 per apartment. When typical unit costs are going to be closer to $50,000 to $60,000 for cheaper apartments, that leaves about $20 million in excess costs. Maths:

$800/mo*12=9,600*100=96000/month total income. 96000*100=$960,000 gross rents. Assuming operating costs at 50%=480,000.00 ... at an 8% capitalization rate the "reasonable" expenditure would be $6 million.

That just doesn't wash with a $28 million project, so they must be getting more than $800 a month ... But assuming relatively standard returns, they would have to be pulling $3,200.00 a unit to make this thing work just as apartments. That's not going to happen. There's an extra $20 million pouring into this thing that has to come from somewhere. My question is this: WHERE? 100,000 square feet of commercial at $15 a foot? Good luck with that. My guess is that Brownfield makes this "affordable" for the developer, which basically means taxpayers are subsidizing the heck out of this proposal when the state is already broke. If I'm incredibly far off, I'd love to see a set of numbers where this works without huge taxpayer subsidies.

I've got to wonder whether stimulating an artificial demand is a long-term sustainable solution for downtown. All of this construction in Heartside is nice to see, but who in the world is paying for it? Why are we paying (apparently) huge sums of money to subsidize above-market-construction-cost low-income housing downtown? joeDowntown's point that the missions are an impediment to continued non-shelter growth is, from a practical perspective, probably valid. It's one that we've discussed here many times before. Is financing a bunch of subsidized housing that much more sustainable a path? If the goal is to provide low-income housing, doing it downtown is not a cost-effective use of money. On the other hand, if the goal is to promote downtown development at any cost, filling that housing with low-income folks makes no sense. Why is it such a noble social goal to put low income developments in the downtown area? Because the suburbs don't want or won't take them?

I love to see the development. I'm just not sure I understand the rationale behind a lot of it. Hopefully, this all works itself out, but I would be much more comfortable if it were private capital at risk and not (as I suspect) the State's diminishing resources.

Is this what you're referring to?

http://www.mlive.com...big_bet_on.html

Looks like a big project - they're building like crazy there in Heartside.

Actually I just re-read what you said - renovation on Division. Maybe this is different? Is there more space for infill on Commerce?

Edited December 6, 2011 by x99

[gvsusean]

I'm all for urban development, but this is again something where the reported facts just don't make sense. An investment of $28 million into a project that brings only 100 apartments? That's a cost of $280,000.00 per apartment. When typical unit costs are going to be closer to $50,000 to $60,000 for cheaper apartments, that leaves about $20 million in excess costs. Maths:

$800/mo*12=9,600*100=96000/month total income. 96000*100=$960,000 gross rents. Assuming operating costs at 50%=480,000.00 ... at an 8% capitalization rate the "reasonable" expenditure would be $6 million.

That just doesn't wash with a $28 million project, so they must be getting more than $800 a month ... But assuming relatively standard returns, they would have to be pulling $3,200.00 a unit to make this thing work just as apartments. That's not going to happen. There's an extra $20 million pouring into this thing that has to come from somewhere. My question is this: WHERE? 100,000 square feet of commercial at $15 a foot? Good luck with that. My guess is that Brownfield makes this "affordable" for the developer, which basically means taxpayers are subsidizing the heck out of this proposal when the state is already broke. If I'm incredibly far off, I'd love to see a set of numbers where this works without huge taxpayer subsidies.

I've got to wonder whether stimulating an artificial demand is a long-term sustainable solution for downtown. All of this construction in Heartside is nice to see, but who in the world is paying for it? Why are we paying (apparently) huge sums of money to subsidize above-market-construction-cost low-income housing downtown? joeDowntown's point that the missions are an impediment to continued non-shelter growth is, from a practical perspective, probably valid. It's one that we've discussed here many times before. Is financing a bunch of subsidized housing that much more sustainable a path? If the goal is to provide low-income housing, doing it downtown is not a cost-effective use of money. On the other hand, if the goal is to promote downtown development at any cost, filling that housing with low-income folks makes no sense. Why is it such a noble social goal to put low income developments in the downtown area? Because the suburbs don't want or won't take them?

I love to see the development. I'm just not sure I understand the rationale behind a lot of it. Hopefully, this all works itself out, but I would be much more comfortable if it were private capital at risk and not (as I suspect) the State's diminishing resources.

well, if these are low income apartments then the rent will be subsidized by the government. Subsidized rent has differing amounts based upon ability to pay and the developer has to decide how many of each type of unit will be available (or rather the government decides). Therefore, there may be 20 at 50% 20 at 60% and so on... If rent is 800$ then non-subsidized (market rate) rent would be 1600$ for these apartments or approximately 1,960,000$, thats helps a little, the rest must be brownfield lol

[jas49503]

a substantial portion of the 28 million dollars is earmarked for building an estate out in ada also.