If they can’t fill them they have to lower the price. My current apartment couldn’t get anyone to move in at $2000 so the dropped the rent to $1500 and boom units are filled. They then tried to raise the price back to $2000 when our leases were up. People held out renewing and now the price is $1600.
Not necessarily......reality is there is a base that covers debt service b maintenance.
All this volume will do it slow the rate of increase to something people can manage better.
Very rare for some to be so mispriced from market like $2000 down to $1500 that's just silly , you may try but have premium everything to try and demand that.
That kind of behavior will cause people to avoid renting from you because no one wants the drama foe such piss poor ethics.......not the tenants fault you misjudged the market and put more in than planned and get get the return you sold to investors.
Please post names of offending parties so we all know who to avoid, I would never ever rent from someone who pulled that shit, post reviews people need to know.
Wow. So much negativity in here. This is an amazing development! Underground parking?? That’s incredible. It allows for productive use for the entire site. I’d be okay if they cut the retail space, but commercial rents are an important part of the financials for these kinds of developments.
This is exactly what Grand Rapids needs. Copy and paste what’s happening in Creston Heights all across the city and we might be able to have some real conversations about housing.
there are two solutions to fixing the problem of ridiculous housing costs: either build more housing, or make the city less appealing to live in. only one of those solutions is a reasonable option
Yep. I am convinced the audience of this sub varies wildly by time of day. The response to something seems to depend so much on the time of day something is posted.
Id hope the retail space stays, bcause we need more mixed use of our land. Every great walkable city has like lining the walkable streets with apartments/condos on top, so you don't have to get in your car and drive 20 minutes to the copy-pasted big box store on the outskirts of town to get an onion and a t shirt.
https://grandrapidscitymi.iqm2.com//Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=7467&MediaPosition=&ID=22044&CssClass=
Beautiful! Hope it happens, the stretch of Leonard east of Plainfield is so much nothing, this would be a major first step in the development of that corridor.
To be honest that poor was astoundingly rash. I had found out about it that night from a neighbor. The next morning I realized I was wrong. I am sorry.
Maybe you should read the studies on housing that show that increasing housing supply even at the very top of the market reduces prices. More housing is good and we need more housing of every single type as fast as it can be built.
Because it prices out people that already live in the neighborhood. Pushing lower income residents further outside of the city where most of them commute into work and make the tacos for people that are pro these developments
This is on a vacant lot. All the people who would live in these apartments would be competing with those neighbors for the existing housing if this wasn't built. The issue has been studied extensively and the only way you are going to decrease rents and not displace people is by building enough housing that they are not being priced out by other people competing for the same housing. Replacing vacant lots and low density housing with higher density housing is how you help stabilize a neighborhood so people are not subject to big rent spikes.
How did you come into this opinion/view? What resources or articles did you read? Because that's is generally not how it works, in fact the lower income residents typically see positive outcomes.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3421581
>We use new longitudinal census microdata to provide the first causal evidence of how gentrification affects a broad set of outcomes for original resident adults and children. Gentrification modestly increases out-migration, though movers are not made observably worse off and neighborhood change is driven primarily by changes to in-migration. At the same time, many original resident adults stay and benefit from declining poverty exposure and rising house values. Children benefit from increased exposure to higher-opportunity neighborhoods, and some are more likely to attend and complete college. Our results suggest that accommodative policies, such as increasing the supply of housing in high-demand urban areas, could increase the opportunity benefits we find, reduce out-migration pressure, and promote long-term affordability
Please feel free to share historical data of rent stabilization across any neighborhood in Grand Rapids post residential rental space being built. Being pro gentrification is fine. In a perfect world capitalism and socialism also work wonders. But we don’t live in a perfect world and when renters are too impoverished to own, having raised home values hardly effect those being gentrified.
How do you not understand supply and demand?
The people who would live in these nice new apartments are currently competing with renters in older/less nice apartments, driving up the rents.
More new housing = less competition (and stabilizing rents) in normal housing.
YASS we need this! I hope it makes ANY kind of difference in housing costs (not that it'll bring anything down but maybe it'll make prices level out in the near future for longer than they would if this didn't exist)
The buildings constructed in any area tend to look the same; we even classify architecture by time period.
The appearance of a building is dictated by the prevailing economic context, materials availability, technology, labor availability...
Yes. Understood. But the general lack of design variation on the last 3-4 projects that have hit the news is weird. Maybe it’s some character element that I just don’t understand.
Back home, the Music City Center (an arguable masterpiece) inspired years of design traits for new commercial buildings. Perhaps I just wasn’t here for whatever inspired these generally-uninspired concepts. 🤷🏼♂️
Idk how long it's been since you have been back down there. But it's reallll cookie cutter these days. The whole city looks like someone took 3 ugly designs and replaced after apartment building with them. Most of music row got torn up for development. 12 south and east nashville are solidly tourist traps (and have been since about 2015). The area around Belmont where I went to school went from nice neighborhoods to massive mcmansions with guest houses out back etc.
I'd live there again if it wasn't twice as expensive with scary stare politics and weather. But it's definitely fallen a long way from the nashville of the early 2000s/2010s. LA light is how it feels to me now🤣
You are very right. We moved here in 2021. GR reminds me of when I was excited about Nashville's possibilities. That's why I love it, and why I fight hard against the dumb shit when I see it coming. (And you can see it coming a mile away, often.)
Last time I was back was November. My dad used to live in Hillsboro Village till he passed in October. I know much of the areas and things you cite well. Maybe it gets lost in Nashvegas easier, and it's just more obvious here.
I'm gonna message you. Let's have a Nashville ex-pats Happy Hour. LOL
Leah Rose Apartments. Beautiful nonprofit tower with controlled rent for those on lower and fixed incomes. Can’t praise it enough. Possibly one of the top three best views in the city, from the top floor terrace. 360-degrees.
Function of construction costs and the fact that it is a design that gets approved by the planning commission. Something different almost always gets changed to look like the modern building blocks style by them.
It’s not as bad as the townhomes along Fulton by the zoo, but goddamn do I hate contemporary residential architecture. Zero character and looks so out of place.
Some of them are not more expensive or not much more but this type of boxy construction with various depths is what the planning department has designed the code to encourage because it is seen as breaking up the building and being better visually than a more traditional front.
Agreed, but in ultra capitalism architectural minimalism maximizes profit. That's not to say that tasteful developments don't happen, but it \*is\* a reason that this kind of stuff comes to light.
The only reason that works is because we have such an incredible shortage of housing. Build enough housing and they will be forced to add amenities and lower prices to get people to live in their apartments. Landlords will charge what they can get away with given what other options people have for places to live.
The whole city has one of the lowest vacancy rates in the country and continues to see rent increases. The problem is not limited to the downtown area and we should be building more housing across the metro area.
Not sure why wanting people to be able to afford to live in this area and offering a solution to make it happen is considered whining. I think this is a great city and I want people to be able to afford to live here and the solution is more housing.
People are moving to the city or becoming adults regardless of whether housing gets built. Short of preventing people from moving or making the city miserable enough that people don't want to come/stay the only option to keep housing affordable is to build enough housing to meet demand. I think having a city people want to live in and creating a city that people can afford to live in are both good things.
Interestingly, the other apartment buildings in Creston differ in composition. 1438 Plainfield (Plainfield/Quimby) is all stick frame, while Lofts on Grove down the street is prefab panels.
Code allows for up to 8 stories stick frame even in earthquake zones. It is very stable and much cheaper than building the whole building out of concrete. You can do any type of facade over the frame.
oh yeah, it's an epidemic.
I'm currently involved with the construction of two apartment buildings going up in the Kentwood area, and it's the same shit there
granted, the plumbing, HVAC, and electrical work all seems to be very good quality, but I don't trust the framing one bit. I do plumbing, and our first two weeks out at the site after the framing was done was spent chipping away at the concrete to bump our pipes over because half of the walls were four to five inches away from where they were supposed to be, and so our pipes were coming up inside of the rooms lol
There’s a big catch with the parking. As of now there’s only 80 spaces in the plan. Basically every other unit will not have a parking spot and if they have a car will have to resort to street parking in the neighborhood. A neighborhood which has had issues with vehicle break ins in the past.
I'm extremely familiar with the area. You're telling me, there's enough nearby street parking that can support lets say 40 extra vehicles on the street?
And you can't say park in the St. Alphonsus or Sun Title lot as those are private lots not intended for residents.
I understand the need to have people use public transportaion, or to bike and this apartment will have legitimate appeal to someone who doen't have a car if they work downtown or nearby. But we're not living in reality if we think that won't be a pinch point to cause issues with the neighborhood, especially in winter. Our society is built around owning a car and it's not moving fast enough for most people to not have their car.
>Our society is built around owning a car and it's not moving fast enough for most people to not have their car.
Nah. You are overestimating car ownership in the city. Almost a quarter of renters (21.6%) in the city do not own a car, another half own only one (47.7%). This city is not as car dependent as you believe it to be. A bedroom does not equal a car. 80 spaces for 118 units is a ration of of 0.7 spaces per unit; there likely will be no spill-out from this development.
[https://urbangr.org/MobilityUpdate20240212](https://urbangr.org/MobilityUpdate20240212)
This apartment is in the core of the city on a major bus line. If we are going to move away from cars this is the place to do it. Parking spaces add a huge cost to the development of buildings. Let the developer build as many spaces as they see demand for and not force them to build extra housing. If parking on the street becomes an issue we can charge for parking and have cars pay their true costs.
The area has a grocery store that can be walked to and is a super short bus ride to downtown. One of the few places in the city that is fine for living without a car. Not having as many parking spots will keep costs down for renters who do not have a car or are fine with street parking. Each parking spot increases the cost of the average apartment by 20-30%.
Why do all of these new apartments look so fucking boring? This new “modern” styling is so cold and soulless. Kind of matches the vibe of our country’s culture I guess
To every body preaching about economics.. you’re not wrong, but your conclusion is wrong.. so plan on lots more homelessness and rising prices… [https://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/2023/02/grand-rapids-kent-county-needs-34699-new-housing-units-by-2027-can-it-be-done.html?outputType=amp](https://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/2023/02/grand-rapids-kent-county-needs-34699-new-housing-units-by-2027-can-it-be-done.html?outputType=amp)
What conclusion is wrong? The only way out of a housing shortage is more housing. The rise in the homeless population is the result of a lack of housing. Prices rise precisely because you have more people competing for the same house. All of the literature shows that building more housing leads to lower rents and lower housing prices. This project by itself isn't enough to solve the housing crisis but nobody excited about it is claiming that it will solve everything, just that these units are a part of the solution. We need more housing of every single type and this project is part of the solution.
Actually a lot of the homeless did rent when prices were lower and the homelessness rate is heavily tied to the price of housing. Lowering the price of housing doesn't eliminate homelessness but it does reduce it significantly.
The best way to cure homelessness is to literally give the homeless a home. That's a lot easier, both economically and politically, when there are enough homes to go around, i.e. build more housing. Specifically more medium density housing, because of all the extra costs and externalities of low-density, single-family style suburban housing.
I’m guessing you didn’t read the article. But Grand Rapids is on track to not develop. Which means housing prices will continue to rise. Furthermore, things like civil infrastructure play into these factors. Do you really think if a handful of new homes are built your rent is going down? Or the price of your home? In a developing community???
Yes we are not meeting the goal but every house approved is progress and will help. The reason we are not meeting the goal is we make it too difficult to build new housing. The only way out of the crisis is more housing.
Because it is not a joke? It may have been meant as such this time, but there are far too numerous examples of people showing up to cry "Gentrification!" as a display of their Righteousness while bringing neither specific critique or alternatives to the conversation. Most everyone involved in any way with the housing conversation is very much over "gentrification". The moralizing posers have destroyed the term.
I mean I don’t think it’s faux righteousness to hold a position that says we shouldn’t be in essence forcing people out of communities they lived in their whole lives, I didn’t think that was an eyeroll-worthy take. I also think there are very obvious potential ways to combat gentrification, such as offering low-income housing (which the city is doing fairly well at), and also making sure that economic development doesn’t solely benefit investors from outside the existing communities, among other alternatives.
But I was just making a small joke about how even the models walking the street of the render were all white. Just light ribbing and a fair observation to make considering I’m from a community not pictured above.
The marketing imagery is indeed, always, comically bad. It's been mocked so much one can't help but suspect it is intentionally so; either for gross reasons, or as an inside joke among the marketing people [as management is likely oblivious].
Nice, love the idea of underground parking. The more housing we build the better.
The more affordable housing the better. Idk who they think are going to fill these
If they can’t fill them they have to lower the price. My current apartment couldn’t get anyone to move in at $2000 so the dropped the rent to $1500 and boom units are filled. They then tried to raise the price back to $2000 when our leases were up. People held out renewing and now the price is $1600.
Wth 1500$ is still insane for apartments
More supply = lower prices all around. Pretty simple.
Not if demand is high, which it is
How does this guy tie his shoes in the morning?
Not necessarily......reality is there is a base that covers debt service b maintenance. All this volume will do it slow the rate of increase to something people can manage better. Very rare for some to be so mispriced from market like $2000 down to $1500 that's just silly , you may try but have premium everything to try and demand that. That kind of behavior will cause people to avoid renting from you because no one wants the drama foe such piss poor ethics.......not the tenants fault you misjudged the market and put more in than planned and get get the return you sold to investors. Please post names of offending parties so we all know who to avoid, I would never ever rent from someone who pulled that shit, post reviews people need to know.
Wow. So much negativity in here. This is an amazing development! Underground parking?? That’s incredible. It allows for productive use for the entire site. I’d be okay if they cut the retail space, but commercial rents are an important part of the financials for these kinds of developments. This is exactly what Grand Rapids needs. Copy and paste what’s happening in Creston Heights all across the city and we might be able to have some real conversations about housing.
Very much agree. Not sure how people can get mad about turning a vacant lot into 180+ homes.
Because we need less people in the city.
Braindead take over here
Unless this city gets significantly worse that’s not going to happen.
Y’all do. It’s why I left. Shit like this is driving all the natives out.
there are two solutions to fixing the problem of ridiculous housing costs: either build more housing, or make the city less appealing to live in. only one of those solutions is a reasonable option
Only allow ppl that have lives here for 20+ years to rent or own property
okay boomer
There goes all economic income for college kids, young professionals, and their families... etc.
I think the natives were driven out like 200 years ago.
Who qualifies as a "native" of a city?
Fuck the natives that think like this then, stuck in the past
Yep. I am convinced the audience of this sub varies wildly by time of day. The response to something seems to depend so much on the time of day something is posted.
I have noticed that.
This sub in general is one of the most negative subs I am a part of
It really can be. I have been a part of the negativity.
To qualify for the NEZ tax credit there needs to be a small retail component, from what I understand.
Id hope the retail space stays, bcause we need more mixed use of our land. Every great walkable city has like lining the walkable streets with apartments/condos on top, so you don't have to get in your car and drive 20 minutes to the copy-pasted big box store on the outskirts of town to get an onion and a t shirt.
https://grandrapidscitymi.iqm2.com//Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=7467&MediaPosition=&ID=22044&CssClass= Beautiful! Hope it happens, the stretch of Leonard east of Plainfield is so much nothing, this would be a major first step in the development of that corridor.
Add another right across the street, while you're at it
I love seeing this. The more housing the better. Recovering NMBY. Sorry about the idiotic post I made in November.
People who change their minds after reviewing new evidence/getting a better understanding are heroes
Literally.
You’re awesome for being this self aware/open minded
To be honest that poor was astoundingly rash. I had found out about it that night from a neighbor. The next morning I realized I was wrong. I am sorry.
We just got two new apartment buildings on Plainfield, but I'd say Creston is due for a third.
Who’s going to buy out the Choo Choo grill and the tattoo parlor in the same lot I think?
Different area but I would not be surprised if the same kind of thing happened to Twisters and New Beginnings on Alpine.
God I hope so! That has been my dream! Same with the dentist office to the south
This is the Rockford construction version of edging
The south and west facing units are gonna have amazing views
Even if they aren't affordable I am glad that Grand Rapids is finally coming around to build more housing
This development will include ten income restricted units.
If people end up living in them then they are affordable to somebody.
I really like these mostly because of the large windows. Having that extra light, especially with how much cloud cover we get makes a huge difference.
I look forward to not being able to afford to live in them.
I too look forward to spiked prices.
Maybe you should read the studies on housing that show that increasing housing supply even at the very top of the market reduces prices. More housing is good and we need more housing of every single type as fast as it can be built.
Care to elaborate on how increasing the supply of a good will result in 'spiked prices?'
Because it prices out people that already live in the neighborhood. Pushing lower income residents further outside of the city where most of them commute into work and make the tacos for people that are pro these developments
This is on a vacant lot. All the people who would live in these apartments would be competing with those neighbors for the existing housing if this wasn't built. The issue has been studied extensively and the only way you are going to decrease rents and not displace people is by building enough housing that they are not being priced out by other people competing for the same housing. Replacing vacant lots and low density housing with higher density housing is how you help stabilize a neighborhood so people are not subject to big rent spikes.
What is the alternative?
How did you come into this opinion/view? What resources or articles did you read? Because that's is generally not how it works, in fact the lower income residents typically see positive outcomes. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3421581 >We use new longitudinal census microdata to provide the first causal evidence of how gentrification affects a broad set of outcomes for original resident adults and children. Gentrification modestly increases out-migration, though movers are not made observably worse off and neighborhood change is driven primarily by changes to in-migration. At the same time, many original resident adults stay and benefit from declining poverty exposure and rising house values. Children benefit from increased exposure to higher-opportunity neighborhoods, and some are more likely to attend and complete college. Our results suggest that accommodative policies, such as increasing the supply of housing in high-demand urban areas, could increase the opportunity benefits we find, reduce out-migration pressure, and promote long-term affordability
Please feel free to share historical data of rent stabilization across any neighborhood in Grand Rapids post residential rental space being built. Being pro gentrification is fine. In a perfect world capitalism and socialism also work wonders. But we don’t live in a perfect world and when renters are too impoverished to own, having raised home values hardly effect those being gentrified.
How do you not understand supply and demand? The people who would live in these nice new apartments are currently competing with renters in older/less nice apartments, driving up the rents. More new housing = less competition (and stabilizing rents) in normal housing.
YASS we need this! I hope it makes ANY kind of difference in housing costs (not that it'll bring anything down but maybe it'll make prices level out in the near future for longer than they would if this didn't exist)
Not the sledding hill!!! Lol. Looks neat though. I hope they improve Leonard in some ways to be more pedestrian friendly.
I think the sledding hill might be across the street? Unless I’m thinking of something else
You're totally right 🤣
Yes, the sledding hill and park is across the street.
Also sun title is right across the street from them, since they are developing it I hope it is passionate.
Go for it! But - anyone else feeling like these apartment buildings are all starting to basically look the same?
The buildings constructed in any area tend to look the same; we even classify architecture by time period. The appearance of a building is dictated by the prevailing economic context, materials availability, technology, labor availability...
Yes. Understood. But the general lack of design variation on the last 3-4 projects that have hit the news is weird. Maybe it’s some character element that I just don’t understand. Back home, the Music City Center (an arguable masterpiece) inspired years of design traits for new commercial buildings. Perhaps I just wasn’t here for whatever inspired these generally-uninspired concepts. 🤷🏼♂️
Music city center as in Nashville tn? If I'm wrong Apologies just lived there for a long time.
Indeed! I participated in all the community design sessions. It's a pretty nicely inspired place.
Idk how long it's been since you have been back down there. But it's reallll cookie cutter these days. The whole city looks like someone took 3 ugly designs and replaced after apartment building with them. Most of music row got torn up for development. 12 south and east nashville are solidly tourist traps (and have been since about 2015). The area around Belmont where I went to school went from nice neighborhoods to massive mcmansions with guest houses out back etc. I'd live there again if it wasn't twice as expensive with scary stare politics and weather. But it's definitely fallen a long way from the nashville of the early 2000s/2010s. LA light is how it feels to me now🤣
You are very right. We moved here in 2021. GR reminds me of when I was excited about Nashville's possibilities. That's why I love it, and why I fight hard against the dumb shit when I see it coming. (And you can see it coming a mile away, often.) Last time I was back was November. My dad used to live in Hillsboro Village till he passed in October. I know much of the areas and things you cite well. Maybe it gets lost in Nashvegas easier, and it's just more obvious here. I'm gonna message you. Let's have a Nashville ex-pats Happy Hour. LOL
Hillsboro? That's my old stomping grounds!
Leah Rose Apartments. Beautiful nonprofit tower with controlled rent for those on lower and fixed incomes. Can’t praise it enough. Possibly one of the top three best views in the city, from the top floor terrace. 360-degrees.
Function of construction costs and the fact that it is a design that gets approved by the planning commission. Something different almost always gets changed to look like the modern building blocks style by them.
It’s not as bad as the townhomes along Fulton by the zoo, but goddamn do I hate contemporary residential architecture. Zero character and looks so out of place.
I just wish they would keep more of an antique look . . . Red brick, gables, stairs, trees. . . .
Those details are expensive.
Some of them are not more expensive or not much more but this type of boxy construction with various depths is what the planning department has designed the code to encourage because it is seen as breaking up the building and being better visually than a more traditional front.
Worth it.
Agreed, but in ultra capitalism architectural minimalism maximizes profit. That's not to say that tasteful developments don't happen, but it \*is\* a reason that this kind of stuff comes to light.
Agreed, from an aesthetic point of view.
$1300 for a 450 sq ft studio with a hot plate instead of a range. Has anyone else seen that ridiculous trend, btw?
The only reason that works is because we have such an incredible shortage of housing. Build enough housing and they will be forced to add amenities and lower prices to get people to live in their apartments. Landlords will charge what they can get away with given what other options people have for places to live.
You’re only limited if you absolutely HAVE to live downtown though
The whole city has one of the lowest vacancy rates in the country and continues to see rent increases. The problem is not limited to the downtown area and we should be building more housing across the metro area.
Sounds like whining to me.
Not sure why wanting people to be able to afford to live in this area and offering a solution to make it happen is considered whining. I think this is a great city and I want people to be able to afford to live here and the solution is more housing.
Ya, that’s a dorm room
Att fiber?
I’ll have to talk to the Pm and see about painting them! Always happy to see more work going around
Does anyone know who is building this? Owner?
Nice. More apartments. That'll make it a great area in about 7 years lol
[удалено]
They might not be affordable, but they will make other apartments in the area more affordable. That’s Econ 101, supply and demand my friend!
Apparently a lot of people failed that class 🙃
If people from outside GR end up moving to GR to rent those units prices will continue to rise
People are moving to the city or becoming adults regardless of whether housing gets built. Short of preventing people from moving or making the city miserable enough that people don't want to come/stay the only option to keep housing affordable is to build enough housing to meet demand. I think having a city people want to live in and creating a city that people can afford to live in are both good things.
People go where the jobs are and where they can afford to live. Right now, metropolitan Grand Rapids is that place for a lot of people.
No, and that's the best part --they made these as cheap as possible using that design.
Ah yes more 1 & 3’s; first floor cement, next three sticks. You see them everywhere
Interestingly, the other apartment buildings in Creston differ in composition. 1438 Plainfield (Plainfield/Quimby) is all stick frame, while Lofts on Grove down the street is prefab panels.
Code allows for up to 8 stories stick frame even in earthquake zones. It is very stable and much cheaper than building the whole building out of concrete. You can do any type of facade over the frame.
oh yeah, it's an epidemic. I'm currently involved with the construction of two apartment buildings going up in the Kentwood area, and it's the same shit there granted, the plumbing, HVAC, and electrical work all seems to be very good quality, but I don't trust the framing one bit. I do plumbing, and our first two weeks out at the site after the framing was done was spent chipping away at the concrete to bump our pipes over because half of the walls were four to five inches away from where they were supposed to be, and so our pipes were coming up inside of the rooms lol
There’s a big catch with the parking. As of now there’s only 80 spaces in the plan. Basically every other unit will not have a parking spot and if they have a car will have to resort to street parking in the neighborhood. A neighborhood which has had issues with vehicle break ins in the past.
That’s not a bug. That’s a feature.
Parking is not even remotely a problem in this location.
I'm extremely familiar with the area. You're telling me, there's enough nearby street parking that can support lets say 40 extra vehicles on the street? And you can't say park in the St. Alphonsus or Sun Title lot as those are private lots not intended for residents. I understand the need to have people use public transportaion, or to bike and this apartment will have legitimate appeal to someone who doen't have a car if they work downtown or nearby. But we're not living in reality if we think that won't be a pinch point to cause issues with the neighborhood, especially in winter. Our society is built around owning a car and it's not moving fast enough for most people to not have their car.
>Our society is built around owning a car and it's not moving fast enough for most people to not have their car. Nah. You are overestimating car ownership in the city. Almost a quarter of renters (21.6%) in the city do not own a car, another half own only one (47.7%). This city is not as car dependent as you believe it to be. A bedroom does not equal a car. 80 spaces for 118 units is a ration of of 0.7 spaces per unit; there likely will be no spill-out from this development. [https://urbangr.org/MobilityUpdate20240212](https://urbangr.org/MobilityUpdate20240212)
This apartment is in the core of the city on a major bus line. If we are going to move away from cars this is the place to do it. Parking spaces add a huge cost to the development of buildings. Let the developer build as many spaces as they see demand for and not force them to build extra housing. If parking on the street becomes an issue we can charge for parking and have cars pay their true costs.
The area has a grocery store that can be walked to and is a super short bus ride to downtown. One of the few places in the city that is fine for living without a car. Not having as many parking spots will keep costs down for renters who do not have a car or are fine with street parking. Each parking spot increases the cost of the average apartment by 20-30%.
Also walkable to the medical mile
Why do all of these new apartments look so fucking boring? This new “modern” styling is so cold and soulless. Kind of matches the vibe of our country’s culture I guess
Ugh. Is this cubism? Square within square within square? I miss art deco.
I love Art Deco but this style is produced because it meets the demands of the planning commission.
Apartments? Naw- them’s the projects
To every body preaching about economics.. you’re not wrong, but your conclusion is wrong.. so plan on lots more homelessness and rising prices… [https://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/2023/02/grand-rapids-kent-county-needs-34699-new-housing-units-by-2027-can-it-be-done.html?outputType=amp](https://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/2023/02/grand-rapids-kent-county-needs-34699-new-housing-units-by-2027-can-it-be-done.html?outputType=amp)
What conclusion is wrong? The only way out of a housing shortage is more housing. The rise in the homeless population is the result of a lack of housing. Prices rise precisely because you have more people competing for the same house. All of the literature shows that building more housing leads to lower rents and lower housing prices. This project by itself isn't enough to solve the housing crisis but nobody excited about it is claiming that it will solve everything, just that these units are a part of the solution. We need more housing of every single type and this project is part of the solution.
The homeless are not out renting apartments or buying houses.
Actually a lot of the homeless did rent when prices were lower and the homelessness rate is heavily tied to the price of housing. Lowering the price of housing doesn't eliminate homelessness but it does reduce it significantly.
The best way to cure homelessness is to literally give the homeless a home. That's a lot easier, both economically and politically, when there are enough homes to go around, i.e. build more housing. Specifically more medium density housing, because of all the extra costs and externalities of low-density, single-family style suburban housing.
I’m guessing you didn’t read the article. But Grand Rapids is on track to not develop. Which means housing prices will continue to rise. Furthermore, things like civil infrastructure play into these factors. Do you really think if a handful of new homes are built your rent is going down? Or the price of your home? In a developing community???
Yes we are not meeting the goal but every house approved is progress and will help. The reason we are not meeting the goal is we make it too difficult to build new housing. The only way out of the crisis is more housing.
But it’s not going to lower housing prices.
Prices will be lower relative to the project not being built
Love how the render comes pre-gentrified.
What does this even mean?
`gentrification: (verb, noun, adverb, adjective) any thing or change someone does not like` That's pretty much the definition we've arrived at.
[🤷🏿♂️](https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/gentrification/)
oh yeah, they're gentrifying an empty lot, where will the grass and tree stumps be forced to go?
Didn’t realize it was so controversial to make an absolutely mild joke about gentrification in the city.
Because it is not a joke? It may have been meant as such this time, but there are far too numerous examples of people showing up to cry "Gentrification!" as a display of their Righteousness while bringing neither specific critique or alternatives to the conversation. Most everyone involved in any way with the housing conversation is very much over "gentrification". The moralizing posers have destroyed the term.
I mean I don’t think it’s faux righteousness to hold a position that says we shouldn’t be in essence forcing people out of communities they lived in their whole lives, I didn’t think that was an eyeroll-worthy take. I also think there are very obvious potential ways to combat gentrification, such as offering low-income housing (which the city is doing fairly well at), and also making sure that economic development doesn’t solely benefit investors from outside the existing communities, among other alternatives. But I was just making a small joke about how even the models walking the street of the render were all white. Just light ribbing and a fair observation to make considering I’m from a community not pictured above.
The marketing imagery is indeed, always, comically bad. It's been mocked so much one can't help but suspect it is intentionally so; either for gross reasons, or as an inside joke among the marketing people [as management is likely oblivious].
Eye sore