More buildings to be torn down in the LaGrave/Sheldon/Cherry St area

[DSchoon]

FWIW, the sale price of 211 LaGrave (the Perry) was $903,750 back in Nov. 07. I would imagine that's what similar apartment buildings would go for in that area (on Jefferson or in HH). Hardly a blighted worthless piece of property. And since it's only on a 10,000 sf (less than 1/4 acre) site, the value can't all be in the land.

Sounds like a good idea arcturus. Want to give it a shot?

I don't have time to do the research, but if someone gives me all the info, I can write the letter.

But if recent history is any indication, peppering the city and planning commissioners on this won't do anything other than create a nuisance. I wouldn't call it wasted effort, but I couldn't imagine anything shy of five substantial bribes getting this stopped in the approval process. The best that could happen is bring attention to the issue for the future.

From my view of the situation, you have three organizations that rely in part or in full on support of the taxpayer and various donors. Reputation is essential to their survival. If you want to stop this, threaten that. Send letters to their boards, the boards of the organizations that fund them, their neighbors (Saint Mary's), their partners, the Public Pulse and prominent members of the healthcare community. You don't even have to persuade any of them. You only need to get them talking about how Cherry Street et al. has a perception crisis on its hands and you will see a change in plans.

For good measure you could create a Facebook page, a hate site and maybe even a stunt like a parking sit-in.

[d8alterego]

I believe GR Town Planner, in an earlier post, had a pretty good reference as to how to write a letter based upon some sound ideas. If you want to write it, go for it.

I don't have time to do the research, but if someone gives me all the info, I can write the letter.

[Nitro]

For good measure you could create a Facebook page, a hate site and maybe even a stunt like a parking sit-in.

Good 'Ol fashioned civil disobedience.......I love it.

[gvsusean]

GR dad if I may use your pics I will create a facebook page...

[GRDadof3]

GR dad if I may use your pics I will create a facebook page...

Go for it!

[Mark Miller]

Well, it seems that they're going through a lot of growth and buying up (and tearing down) buildings at an accelerated rate. The old German restaurant and the building further south included. Do they have a comprehensive master plan or are they just reacting to what comes up on the open market?

St. Marys does have a masterplan. It was created by Progressive AE. Although this area is NOT in the St. Mary's masterplan and this project is NOT being implemented by St. Marys it is important nonetheless. Masterplans should not be islands, they have edges and the edges need to be integrated into a coherent framework. This area impacts the St. Marys masterplan and campus...or at least should. These conditions should not be taken as islands.

All of that said, the problem is that this master plan is not necessarily conducive to what is being discussed here.

Historically St. Mary's has done the same thing (in regards to buying up and tearing down everything) and this is one of the primary reasons why this area is a desolate sea of parking lots. Even their master plan, while fixing some of the urban ills, has not addressed some of the primary street frontages. Along Wealthy for example, where the traffic circles have been built, there is little gesture to do anything other than maintain surface parking lots as frontages. So it effectively relagates Wealthy as a secondary street. The master plan does however propose a connection to the west, setting up an axis to the Diocese campus. This, at least, is a decent urban gesture.

Once again, as stated so many times here by multiple people....the creation or maintenance of good fabric has to start somewhere. This is as good of a place as any. That apartment alone stands as something that should be kept. Maybe integrated into the clinic. Maybe made into the clinic. The apartment looks big city, hip and urban. Isn't that what we want to be?? I can guarantee that there is at least one talented architecture firm out there that could pull this off. This group just are not working with the right people.

[Veloise]

It would be helpful for someone to draft a letter that everyone could copy & paste plus recipient email addresses and names.

I used to work for a non-profit with a lobbying arm. One of the tenets** of political outreach and public opinion is: the form letters go straight to File 13 (the circular one).

Anyone offering comment to the cited parties would do best putting things into their own words. For reference, here's GRTP's post again.

http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/index.ph...t&p=1055374

*basic truths, not a rental tenant

[e49418]

This should help drive some discussion and hopefully action on the subject!

http://blog.mlive.com/knapescorner/2009/03...rth_saving.html

[GRDadof3]

GR dad if I may use your pics I will create a facebook page...

I have to say, when I took these pictures more than a year and a half ago, I never thought they might be the last ones I'd take of those buildings.

Great blog post by Chris BTW!

Another point that I was thinking about, is are these buildings any less significant than those 2 blocks East? Both are probably of the same vintage as many of the apartment buildings in Heritage Hill less than a mile away. Just because they're not technically registered does not mean they're any less significant, right? Grand Rapids touts its Heritage Hill preservation efforts in all of its visitors guides. We even have large exhibits of the destruction of the county building and city hall at the Public Museum, lest we forget what we've lost. Correct? Or does all that mean something else?

[DSchoon]

I used to work for a non-profit with a lobbying arm. One of the tenets** of political outreach and public opinion is: the form letters go straight to File 13 (the circular one).

Anyone offering comment to the cited parties would do best putting things into their own words. For reference, here's GRTP's post again.

http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/index.ph...t&p=1055374

*basic truths, not a rental tenant

I'd have to agree with that. Here's what I suggest:

1. Let me a write a formal letter that can be sent to the organizations it should go to, then we just tack as many names as possible to it. I'll mail it a week from today, so someone should take on the role of gathering the names. Real names with city of residence.

2. Everyone else send an e-mail complaining about this to [email protected] (GRBJ) titled Letter to the Editor and the same to [email protected]. You'll need to use a real name and provide contact information for verification. The GRBJ in particular will print most any coherent letter it receives, so you can create a stir pretty quickly that way.

3. Create a stir. Get that facebook page going and talk about it everywhere you can. Don't feel satisfied that it's in Knapes corner.

[joeDowntown]

GRdad and I chatted about this privately, but what would be the chance of moving these buildings? I racked my brain on if this would be feasible, but unless you had land nearby I think it would be tough to get someone to give up space on a precious surface lot.

One interesting concept that Chris brought up (in a separate discussion) was, what about the ICCF? They have a large plot of land, several blocks away awaiting development. And with their recent history of restoring the DA Blodgett building, would they be interested in the buildings.

If they plan on tearing down the structures, I'm sure you could convince them to sell the buildings for nominal fee (a dollar).

I wonder if there would be incentives (like facade grants) that could help defray the cost.

And those buildings are mighty heavy being all brick, but I'm sure they could be moved.

Joe

[Raildudes dad]

I have mixed feelings about this one. On one hand I would like to see the buildings remain. On the other hand, the fact is they are in a huge sea of asphalt. It will take effort on someone's part to make the new development blend with the old. I sure don't want these buildings to suffer the fate of the Tom Kroon house over by the Y.

[d8alterego]

Now that I've cooled down a bit from my earlier posting, I just wanted to share some questions and thoughts with everyone:

1. I get the feeling that moving the buildings would be difficult because it would cost $ to move them. It seems like the nonprofits don't have deep pockets for that.

2. How difficult would it be to amend the historic preservation zone to include these buildings?

3. Since these are nonprofits that are developing the property, who btw acquire their funding through public means (as well as the stimulus $), could that fact open a door in arguing for the buildings' preservation?

4. I think it is absolutely great that those on here that want these buildings saved are doing something about it. DO NOT give up hope! The payoff of being able to have these buildings preserved WITH a new medical building surrounding them would be AWESOME! Please do what you can to keep the conversation going on this issue and talk to people that could do something about it.

[Raildudes dad]

The red brick one will be a challenge but both are definitely movable. The smaller one doesn't look like it would be bad to move. There's two movers in West MI that can do the job. I worked with one recently and "dad" is 75 and walks and is more agile than most 2/3rd's his age. Fascinating to work along side him also (might be the engineer in me coming out )

[GRDadof3]

Now that I've cooled down a bit from my earlier posting, I just wanted to share some questions and thoughts with everyone:

1. I get the feeling that moving the buildings would be difficult because it would cost $ to move them. It seems like the nonprofits don't have deep pockets for that.

Yes, but if you can get them to sell for a great price ($1 instead of them paying for demolition), and then find a lot nearby for a decent price, even if it costs $100,000 to move them, you still come out ahead with a great set of structures worth a lot more than that. Finding a lot nearby though that is easy to move to and that won't charge you $500,000 is an issue. Getting the buildings through the new roundabouts, if you had to, might also pose a challenge.

But I'm with Raildude'sDad. I'd hate to see a building like the Perry moved over to the ICCF land and then sit there boarded up for a decade.

[John E]

Wow, the people of Grand Rapids sure care about preserving buildings. In many cases I'm in favor of demolishing an old building for a new one, like the old Junior Achievement building but in this case I think the buildings should stay as that property area is NOT prime for development. There is other property and properties in the area that could provide their needs.

The issue with building around the buildings is that the service they are planning to provide is not suitable to be located next to resident living. Also if they build taller than 2 or 3 stories it would take away the beautiful view of the apartment dwellers.

If they could find a good location to move the buildings, I'm sure the funds could easily be raised for it.

Another option would be to build at the Division and Wealthy property and build a park recreation area in the parking lots of the property of the two buildings in question. That could assist the people in Heartside with improving mental health. The profit gained from renting the apartments could help finance the operations. I would like to see that. But I'm not really in favor of using the Division/Wealthy property as that should be used for other purposes.

An idea could be to use the UICA building along with others in the area if needed.

~John

[fotoman311]

GRdad and I chatted about this privately, but what would be the chance of moving these buildings? I racked my brain on if this would be feasible, but unless you had land nearby I think it would be tough to get someone to give up space on a precious surface lot.

One interesting concept that Chris brought up (in a separate discussion) was, what about the ICCF? They have a large plot of land, several blocks away awaiting development. And with their recent history of restoring the DA Blodgett building, would they be interested in the buildings.

If they plan on tearing down the structures, I'm sure you could convince them to sell the buildings for nominal fee (a dollar).

I wonder if there would be incentives (like facade grants) that could help defray the cost.

And those buildings are mighty heavy being all brick, but I'm sure they could be moved.

Joe

Heck, they should be willing to pay towards moving them a portion of the money they WERE going to pay to have the buildings demolished and carted off to the landfill. Of course, perhaps they were going to try and salvage some materials from them beforehand and get some money that way? I don't know.

Here's a local house moving company in GR: http://www.rollawayhousemovers.com/ I'm guessing these might be the people that Raildudesdad referred to? Started in 1954 and operated by the 2nd and 3rd generation seems like it could fit his description of an active 75 year old.

Somewhere I've seen photos of the house at 441 Crescent being moved from it's original location on Lafayette Ave, but I can't find them again.

EDIT: Here's one photo. But, I know I've seen a better quality one. http://www.heritagehillweb.org/pics/Cresce...ent%20NE-1a.gif

[GRDadof3]

http://fogonazos.blogspot.com/2007/10/how-...k-building.html

Building moving extravaganza.

[gvsusean]

ok, so i tried to make a facebook group but, facebook has changed since about 6 months ago when I was last on... I cannot figure out how to make a group anymore; if anyone know pls message me!

[Veloise]

How about someone doing some googling and find contact info for the cited agencies (and their boards)? Post here in a message.

Chris's piece is excellent; I especially like the "asute crowd at Urban Planet" part.

ETA: Facebook group established. Please join, and invite your friends. (Once we get a critical mass, I will invite a couple of significant friends of mine.)

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=5827...gid=58276682755

And someone post a pic of both buildings, similar to the one Chris shot, that I can use on the FB group. (I'm not crazy about copyright violations.)

[joeDowntown]

Wealthy and Lafayette would also be a nice location (by the school), and you might actually be able to deal with GRPS as opposed to some of the churches/non-profits that have no real interest in selling their lots.

Raildude, since you've worked with them before, any guesstimate of what a cost would be to move them?

Joe

[Raildudes dad]

Wealthy and Lafayette would also be a nice location (by the school), and you might actually be able to deal with GRPS as opposed to some of the churches/non-profits that have no real interest in selling their lots.

Raildude, since you've worked with them before, any guesstimate of what a cost would be to move them?

Joe

It's hard to say, how far, even where can impact the cost. Best way would be to call either Rollaway or Dietz in Muskegon and have them look at it. Both are not too busy right now and both are good. (I worked recently with Dietz BTW). If you just want to get a number for info sake, I'd offer to pay for their time & trouble (then you will get taken serious) .

[Veloise]

Pics from today.

Looking past the Perry towards Sheldon, and another vintage facade.

Just down the street is the Dayton, a similar small residential structure.

This building is on Jefferson at Oakes.

Looking past the Oakes building at the Cherry St Court structures. The Hope Lodge (housing for cancer patients' families) is on the left.

Need just a couple more supporters on the Facebook page, and then I will invite my two significant friends to join. (They might have already seen my status feeds.)

ETA: looks like someone already invited them. 61 members, keep it up.

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?ref=home#...2755&ref=mf

A non-Planeteer asked: "Did these apartments used to be doctor's offices about 20 some years ago?" RSVP.

[DSchoon]

Um. Is moving the buildings really the best alternative?

I thought half the point of this was that there are so many other places that this use could be located. And I'm really not sure about the practicality of moving historical structures to a less desirable urban location. It seems unprecedented.

[fotoman311]

Um. Is moving the buildings really the best alternative?

I thought half the point of this was that there are so many other places that this use could be located. And I'm really not sure about the practicality of moving historical structures to a less desirable urban location. It seems unprecedented.

Is it the best alternative? No, definitely not. Is it better than having them torn down? I would say so.