Jump to content

345 State St


GRDadof3

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, GR_Urbanist said:

I can even see a Kingma's, Martha's II, or a Ken's Fruit Market sliding in there easily. Put some windows along the street, maybe expand the back of the store, and this place will be printing cash.

I've heard that the owners were asking for an absurd amount a couple of years ago. Hopefully they have came down a bit on that.

 

True about those mentioned above.  Put a little sitting area with coffee (like Whole Foods and many others do).  It could be Martha's south.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

  • Replies 109
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The For sale sign that was on Clarks is gone.

 

I would assume good news, but it could be a case of the owners asking far too much, no one being interested in buying the property right now, or it could have just fallen down and someone walked off with it.

But it isnt there as of today, so hope for the best!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
12 minutes ago, EastownLeo said:

Interesting "Owned by" name  = Downtown Grand Rapids Market, Inc.   Back to a Grocery?  Is this the east side of Downtowns new option?

That is the name of current owner, I don't think the sale has gone officially through yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mpchicago said:

Here is what is planned for Clark's Food Center site on State. Four Story Apartment building with Retail.  Designed by Lott3Metz.  Goes before HPC soon.

-f7ff9afc89a08d65.PNG

I think I'm going to cry.... Our long national nightmare is over!

 

I had expected a renovation for sure. This is a transformation!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the article:

363 State St. SE
Lott3Metz Architecture submitted a request for the commission to determine whether the grocery building near Cherry Street and Madison Avenue SE contributes to the historic character of Heritage Hill, and to hold an advisory discussion on plans to remove the store and redevelop the half-acre site owned by Downtown Grand Rapids Market, Inc.

 

Swear to jebuz the HPC had BETTER not foul this one up. That building is a wreck and needs to go! The district needs more housing AND a grocery. I dont care how old this building is or one iota about some "historical character" baloney argument they may want to use. It is time to let something this worthless go for a much bigger return for everyone!

I'm still livid at what they did to the Project Rehab proposal, and I'm almost to the point where there needs to be an effort where the HPC needs to be disbanded and replaced if they keep screwing up economic development like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Lott3Metz one isn't bad.  It's not exactly thrilling by any measure, but it gets the job done and will probably get approved in a form similar to that eventually.  No way that nasty Clark's building contributes to the character of HH.  It's totally mutilated and out of character for the area.  

The Orion one ... well.  That looks potentially questionable and cheapo, as expected.  It is Orion, after all, with their track record of, um, well, yeah.  The generally ugly stuff they build.  But the SS building is already non-contributing, per the article, so something can be built there.  Just the carriage houses stay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, x99 said:

The Lott3Metz one isn't bad.  It's not exactly thrilling by any measure, but it gets the job done and will probably get approved in a form similar to that eventually.  No way that nasty Clark's building contributes to the character of HH.  It's totally mutilated and out of character for the area.  

The Orion one ... well.  That looks potentially questionable and cheapo, as expected.  It is Orion, after all, with their track record of, um, well, yeah.  The generally ugly stuff they build.  But the SS building is already non-contributing, per the article, so something can be built there.  Just the carriage houses stay.

I've been wondering when someone was going to do something with the old social security building site. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GRDadof3 said:

I've been wondering when someone was going to do something with the old social security building site. 

Jason Wheeler said they have been eyeing the property for 5 years.  

Being a prominent location in a historic district I assume design, and materials will be closely scrutinized by the HPC.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/1/2016 at 9:22 AM, mpchicago said:

Jason Wheeler said they have been eyeing the property for 5 years.  

Being a prominent location in a historic district I assume design, and materials will be closely scrutinized by the HPC.  

So did this go through?  Anyone know?  How about the State Street one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Accidentally edited my last post instead of a new one, so here goes again:  Did the State Street proposal get approved?  How about the one for the old Social Security building?  Both of them looked pretty good with a little massaging.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

From Heritage Hill:

50 College Ave. SE, former medical and Social Security building: No application has been submitted for the development of this site (as of July). Orion Construction invited HHA input on their preliminary plan for four, 4-unit buildings along College Avenue (about the size of a large house) and an L-shaped apartment building (due to the grade of the site, four stories from the west & almost three from the east). The driveway would be moved to the north edge. Several members of the 50 College Report met with Orion on June 27 to provide its perspective. The project is consistent with the recommendations in the 50 College Report and several suggestions were readily received by Orion. Orion requested an advisory opinion by the Historic Preservation Commission to ensure the development was headed in the right direction. If this project moves forward, there will be additional opportunities for association and resident input. 363 State St. SE – Old Clark's Market: HHA Executive Committee and Zoning Committee members met with the architects and the potential developer on June 20 to learn more about the building proposed. The developer wants to tear down the existing building and build 71 (or fewer, depending on mix of sizes) micro-units (four stories on State with ground level retail and three stories along Madison). About 36 parking spaces are proposed. An advisory opinion from the Historic Preservation Committee was requested. Again, if this project moves forward, we expect additional input meetings with the developer.

My take as a 36 year resident of Heritage Hill....

50 College

We do not need row apartments in Heritage Hill!  What I would like to see, is brick Townhouse type condo's, and not Rentwood type buildings for 50 College, with court yards, with long term neighbors, not renters, that don't care about the area. if they had a courtyard, and not 4 story apartments looking down on neighboring houses...Where are the Green areas? I thought HH was suppose to fight for lower density housing!!!! Parking is already a premium in the area! There is very little parking for cars in the area already!.... 

363 State

This is all wrong for the area! We do not need college type apartments in the area! 38 Parking spots for 71 units!!! That is fine for the retail, where are the apartment people going to park? 345 State already grabs most of the off street parking along with the Madison Manor's 13 units, along with the Section 8 87 units at the  Stuyvesant Apartments, planned parenthood workers and guests, the 16 unit apartments at Morris and Cherry, 22 units at the Morris Manor!

Buses cannot keep to their lane, going over the centerline on Cherry, even in Good weather, in winter, cars are parked 4 feet from the curb, because of no odd/even parking. and the snow piles, because some bicycle lobby requested a bike lane, and the centerline was moved even more north! Just count the broken mirrors in front of the Hillmount Condo's, next winter! State and College Streets will be on the list next! They even took out a lane of traffic already on College for more parking!

363 State should be a real grocery store, like Martha's Vineyards, with one story of condo's on top....

If these developers say they paid too much for the properties, for this plan, then it is their problem, not the neighbors, we have enough of our own!

I am going to fight both projects!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We do not need row apartments in Heritage Hill!  What I would like to see, is brick Townhouse type condo's, and not Rentwood type buildings for 50 College, with court yards, with long term neighbors, not renters, that don't care about the area. if they had a courtyard, and not 4 story apartments looking down on neighboring houses...Where are the Green areas? I thought HH was suppose to fight for lower density housing!!!! Parking is already a premium in the area! There is very little parking for cars in the area already!...

So what is the problem with renters again?  You do realize that a great many people in HH are renters. They are young people that are experiencing their first time living on their own, students, and young couples starting out. The reason why the uptown area has so much vibrancy in 2016 is not because of people that have been occupying single-family homes for 30+ years, slowly turning HH into a retirement community of senior citizens and their antique collections, it is because of the influx of new people starting out as renters, with others moving onto home ownership in the area from apartments (such as myself), or other opportunities in other parts of the city.

HH is a near-DT neighborhood, just like the west side, in a city experiencing a massive amount of interest from people all over the nation. Being where it is, in a highly desirable part of town, it is absurdly unreasonable to try to lock out denser development or affordable (note these are not Section-8 or LIHTC apartments) just so that HH can become more of a pseudo-gated community of wealthy owners of Victorian mansions and high-priced condos that will live there until they die. The city is trying to mix in as many people from different income levels as possible so we dont end up with that, and since you cannot demolish (which is good), then you use scarce space as it becomes available, and you utilize it to its maximum, not turn it into even more expensive single-family homes or limit it to the smallest number of expensive condos to keep as many people out. HH, as well as the rest of Uptown, lacks options for all of the demand, and it is extremely important to be more creative to ensure that we dont end up with people giving up and looking at different cities.

We have to remember that Heritage Hill is a historical preservation district, not class preservation zone. Renters today are home buyers tomorrow, but they have to live somewhere. The trend is to live in the city, and ALL of the near DT neighborhoods are going to have to come to the reality that it isnt going to skip them by.

 

And believe me, no one is looking down on your home from that “massive” 4 stories. Why do people that have objections to development always have to engage in comical exaggeration? Besides 50 College is not even located on some street of mostly single family homes! Have you even looked at the street? The whole Eastern end is The Hilmount, WoodTV, 50 College site which is the old SS office, then another apartment building, then ANOTHER apartment building. The other side are at most 4 private(?) homes (old mansions), Voigt House, an apartment building, and on both ends of the block are two former homes that are used to house businesses, so it isnt like the street's integrity is being sullied by this. TBH I hope the other non-historical apartment buildings are eventually torn down and replaced with more modern ones! The street is actually too low-density for its location.

This is all wrong for the area! We do not need college type apartments in the area! 38 Parking spots for 71 units!!! That is fine for the retail, where are the apartment people going to park? 345 State already grabs most of the off street parking along with the Madison Manor's 13 units, along with the Section 8 87 units at the  Stuyvesant Apartments, planned parenthood workers and guests, the 16 unit apartments at Morris and Cherry, 22 units at the Morris Manor!

Simple enough, people will have to park far away and walk, or they plan to live near downtown without a car, which many young people have opted for, and are perfectly fine doing. Not everyone uses a car these days.

Buses cannot keep to their lane, going over the centerline on Cherry, even in Good weather, in winter, cars are parked 4 feet from the curb, because of no odd/even parking. and the snow piles, because some bicycle lobby requested a bike lane, and the centerline was moved even more north! Just count the broken mirrors in front of the Hillmount Condo's, next winter! State and College Streets will be on the list next! They even took out a lane of traffic already on College for more parking!”

Having lived in the area since 2005, we just manage. Stopping needed development like this for some potential winter convenience is not good enough of an excuse. This is more of a matter of working out a system so that this situation can be mitigated before it gets too bad.

363 State should be a real grocery store, like Martha's Vineyards, with one story of condo's on top....

Not good enough. Lets stop the apartments, for one story of condos? This project has to make a ROI in order for it to make sense, and a real grocery will want as many potential customers as possible. The closer the better. One story of high-priced condos (at most 2 units) is not going to cut it, especially when they can get in their luxury cars and drive to Trader Joes.


If these developers say they paid too much for the properties, for this plan, then it is their problem, not the neighbors, we have enough of our own!

I am going to fight both projects!”
 

Why not? In the great Grand Rapids tradition of opposing EVERYTHING no matter where it is built, we can always use another person to tell us why great projects that bring more people, money, and life into this town are really just a catastrophe.

  • Cant build a theater downtown (or almost anything else)….where am I gonna park muh cars!?
  • Cant build any housing in Heartside….You're driving out the homeless!!!
  • Cant build anything on the west side…..You are taking away out pawn shops and adult movie stores!!!
  • Cant build on Michigan Ave….You are ruining the “old neighborhood”!
  • Cant build on Wealthy…..These developments are racists!!!
  • Cant build on Belknap Hill
  • Cant build in Eastown
  • Cant build south of Wealthy!
  • Cant build in an historic district!
  • Cant build almost anywhere else because of "traffic, noise, crime" and all other demons.

So where on Earth are these people expecting any of this stuff to go?! Why should anyone do anything for GR if we keep turning out to be a city full of people that will work their rears off to get them scrapped, or put up so much red tape that they just say the heck with this town, and go take their money somewhere else!?

I'm looking at an empty field, and 2 empty buildings, by my house that was supposed to have a similar development until similar goofy objections got so absurd that the developer abandoned the whole thing, leaving an eyesore with no plans of doing anything for who knows how long. Instead of welcoming new neighbors (both renters and condo owners) we get to “enjoy” two abandoned buildings and a empty lot of browning grass.

Thankfully recent developments have shown that the city is less tolerant of every cranky objection from the public and the HPC has loosened up a bit on the "everything must look old in GR because history" philosophy because right now it is far more important to meet these housing needs right now, and generate economic development.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GR_Urbanist said:

Thankfully recent developments have shown that the city is less tolerant of every cranky objection from the public and the HPC has loosened up a bit on the "everything must look old in GR because history" philosophy because right now it is far more important to meet these housing needs right now, and generate economic development.
 

For awhile there, I was afraid that the character of our historic districts was in serious jeopardy from infill that was completely out of character for the neighborhoods.  Lately it's been a lot better though.  

So far as the density issues, I don't think it's necessarily a problem. Still, the point Morris makes regarding parking is well taken, though, and it's one I (and many others) have made before:  Constructing high density development in areas which are right by residential neighborhoods can be an issue since it is crazy to believe that people in a medium sized Midwestern city will live without cars if they can afford one and find a place to put it.  Allowing low levels of parking in areas which border on residential areas with "free" street parking does not help to promote the claimed "multi-modal transit" which is supposed to support these projects.  If the city is going to get serious about this, it needs to find a way to ensure that if the parking isn't there, those cars just don't happen unless the owners pay to park them.  Else, transit will lose out to the car, even if its parked two blocks away.

Morris:  I'm not sure how the College project is "row" houses.  It's three or four 4 units along College, and a larger building in the back, with significant parking on site.  The finished product Orion produces has never given me a ton of confidence, but I think they mean well.  Hopefully the HPC can give them some guidance and this will end up being a positive learning experience for them that will improve the quality of their other projects across the board.  Like, say, no more giant metal HVAC equipment poking out from the top of a brand new building that cost tens of millions of dollars... :rolleyes: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Row houses mean two different things....I was talking about cookie cutter types, that look the same, like at Rentwood complexes., not town houses.

50 College has single family houses that border it. Would you like a 4/3 story apartment house in your back yard?  They still don't have enough parking on site, the minimum for Grand Rapids is one per unit, which is way not enough. 

Now for parking at 363 State, I walked the site last night, and there were only 3 open street spaces on Madison and State in the area. Who don't have a car? The ones I know are the drunks, college kids, the poor, and the bicyclist and scooter nuts that run all year, even in winter, but I can count them on one hand.....If you have 

a J O B, you have to get to it, to go to the store, to travel, you need a car. There is no L train in GR, just buses that I see people waiting for, and trying to get around GR on a bus, you better have time on your hands! 

Now for home ownership, and owner occupied houses, they are people that saved Heritage Hill from the wrecking ball, not renters, not landlords, surely not the city, but the people that live and own here, and made a life here, not renters, they move in, and then move on! Look at the near north side, west side, the south side....The better areas are owner occupied, not from rental places, they take care of their place, and don't move so often, renters don't care much about shoveling snow off the sidewalk, or mowing their lawns or taking care of the outside of the place, owners mostly do.....It is called stability, and renters do not have it mostly.    That is why I favor condo's, they have a stake in the neighborhood. 

Then, I am called old....Talking about prejudices!  I call that wisdom, and knowledge, which you don't seem to have much of! You know who I am talking about. 

I know I don't want a dorm in the area, or problems with traffic and parking, and don't want new places that look like Rentwood , so that is my opinion, and if you don't like it, move downtown. There are bars there, drunks and bums line the street, and live in that 40 story skyscraper, and no free parking!

I value my neighborhood! Move on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully they can come up with something that respects the neighborhood character (both architecture and residents). I used to work across from Clark's many years ago and can't be happier that something is finally moving in it's place. But I also have to respect the longtime residents that saved a ton of history from becoming a St. Mary's / GRCC parking lot. Fingers crossed that the HPC AND developers will come up with a great plan.

Joe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Morris said:

I value my neighborhood! Move on!

 

It's not your neighborhood. It belongs to lots of people of all walks of life. For all of your "wisdom" of living there since the ancient days of 1982, you seem to forget that HH has always been the place where most young people in town got their first places and has never been some ultra-exclusive gated community of only an elite select few. Many people on UPGR live in the area today as well. And you seem to think you have some dominion on whom can and cannot be there because their living styles upset you, especially your elitist view that someone that rents doesn't care about the neighborhood, and they "move too often" (Like that's your business if they do or not) when you can easily find lots of examples in HH of single-family homes that are not in immaculate shape. Having been to estate sales in the area, that can also apply to the insides as well.

So no, HH home owner does not equal "I care more".

I think you just have some seriously problem sharing a neighborhood with people that cant afford to by an 120 year old mansion or a high-priced condo, and that all of these people walking around "your" neighborhood just sticks in your craw. Goodness knows neither of these projects are going to logically affect you in any way shape or form. There is a fine line between "caring" about HH and just flat-out being an unreasonable obstructionist, and this line is crossed far too many times in this town because 99% of the "objections" are just some crank going on about how the people that MAY live there might have loud parties or make noise or "commit crime" or something about traffic. Because young and renting = dangerous or something. And when none of that occurs, then they pat themselves on the back and make it seem like their carping stopped it.

You'll survive the Apartment Apocalypse. People moving there are not going to ruin your life. Take a deep breath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • 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.