Yeah, I don't know what to make of the numbers but it's difficult to argue with statistics. I still believe that an increase in housing going to MSU students, who often aren't going to report that residence on the Census, is part of it. There's also a not insignificant number of houses that have been bought purely to host grow operations. I don't think those factors combined would make up for too much more than a few thousand difference though.
One thing that comes to mind is that besides the general trend of smaller households in the US/western society, the trend of smaller households is even stronger among higher income and more highly educated people. As an area gentrifies many of the households may go from having a parent(s), several kids and possibly some extended family to a single person or couple, not often with children and very rarely more than two, especially in trendier urban areas. I can see that leading to sort of an oxymoron in places that are gentrifying at a moderate pace where population doesn't really grow much, if at all, despite visible new construction and renovations. It's because every dumpy rental remodeled to meet a higher end market or that is bought by single person or young couple represents a net loss in population.
There are a couple of interesting articles in the City Pulse this week, one about the City Hall which basically retells the story of the history of city halls that Lansing has built. They hinted at a new or remodeled building and that some developers are still interested but no details about that. The other was about removing the North Lansing Dam, they are actually considering it and the Army Corps of Engineers has already been studying the idea. It went on to say they will look at taking down the Moorse Park dam next as it poses an even higher potential for disaster if it were to fail than the North Lansing dam. It was pointed out that we would not be left with a little shallow stream as some feared. They said they had removed many dams, and no community had been left with a muddy little stream. They install rocks and ramps to create rapids that are passable by fish boats and kayaks and help keep the river level high. The Grand River downtown has been running low for a couple of years and I have noticed the exposed banks have naturalized with grass and small shrubs. the river also looks more natural and runs clearer as it flows over the rocks by the BWL bridge. I think it is a big river and it will respond nicely to having the dams removed.
I'm all for replacing the dams with rock rapids if they can keep it passable for boaters, it'd sorta suck if the Michigan Princess couldn't operate anymore though. At the North Lansing Dam I would like to see the fish ladder and attached dam structure on the east bank retained, the fish ladder itself could become a pedestrian path leading down to the river or something and it'd be nice to see the little generator building preserved used for something.
I think the fish ladder could be a really great outdoor amphitheater, the bowl shape is already there just ad seats. The generator building could be the stage production/back-stage area. Another idea would be some sort of fountain or water feature with the river water directed to wash around the bowl of the ladder passing over lights or art pieces around the bowl.
The way I read the story seemed to say they could retain enough depth for boating. It is just my opinion, but I have thought it is odd that the Michigan Princess was located on such a short stretch of the river, maybe they could move the boat to Lake Lansing.
A move to Lake Lansing wouldn't be the worst idea for the Michigan Princess although I'd hate to see the city lose the boat. I wouldn't mind either of those uses for the fish ladder, I particularly like the idea of using it as an amphitheater. I just hope they save it and incorporate it into something interesting.
Based on that price, I wouldn't hold your breath on decent houses. While it's a decent price for Lansing on existing homes, I can't believe they're able to build them that cheap. Maybe the land will be dirt cheap, that will help, but construction alone is hard to get a basic home built for that price. I am curious to see what they produce.
Several years back, while I worked with a developer, the construction costs alone for a 1600sf home, as basic as possible, was between 250-300k. That didn't include the land cost.
I'm hoping for the best but I'm not sure what they can really produce at that price. It's definitely an adventurous single family project
I think that's likely what we'll get, but I hope I'm wrong too. We really could use some middle housing. The housing stock in Lansing is pretty dismal, but it's hard to add/improve the stock when the property values are so low/affordable. At least at that price, I would hope whoever buys them will take care of them. It's got to be an improvement over what's currently there.
The construction of the Taco Bell at MLK and Southland seems to be moving along. That parcel is zoned MX-2 Mixed-Use Community Center, and it doesn’t seem to be meeting any of the form based code requirements. Oh well. I guess it will fit with the area’s decrepit fast food/strip mall aesthetic. We wouldn’t want to ruin that kind of cohesiveness.
It kind of seems like this FBC was just developed to maintain the status quo and not actually improve the city’s built environment.
Idk, the setbacks look pretty significant. The conditions state that the front setback should only exceed the build-to line to accommodate a lane for safe travel. It looks big enough for parking, which isn’t allowed in the conditions. Maybe they’ll put a “patio” with like two tables that no one will ever use to meet the guidelines?
Regardless, if that’s allowed to be built in the same form as any old fast food restaurant, defying all of the primary guidelines for that zoning category, along a designated “activity corridor” (defined as an arterial or Major Street that traverses an area that typically is designed to promote a multi-modal balance between vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle travel…lol) then it’s not a very high quality form based code, IMO.
The more I read this thing, the more toothless it sounds.
Small item, but growing eyesore. Laux Construction posted on LinkedIn that they will be doing renovations on the pedestrian bridge connecting the Radisson to the Lansing Center.
Not sure how to share the post, so I thought I'd try the screenshot. Sounds like a total overhaul.
Comments
One thing that comes to mind is that besides the general trend of smaller households in the US/western society, the trend of smaller households is even stronger among higher income and more highly educated people. As an area gentrifies many of the households may go from having a parent(s), several kids and possibly some extended family to a single person or couple, not often with children and very rarely more than two, especially in trendier urban areas. I can see that leading to sort of an oxymoron in places that are gentrifying at a moderate pace where population doesn't really grow much, if at all, despite visible new construction and renovations. It's because every dumpy rental remodeled to meet a higher end market or that is bought by single person or young couple represents a net loss in population.
Link to the story: https://www.lansingcitypulse.com/stories/north-lansing-dam-could-be-removed-on-uncle-sams-dime,20016
The way I read the story seemed to say they could retain enough depth for boating. It is just my opinion, but I have thought it is odd that the Michigan Princess was located on such a short stretch of the river, maybe they could move the boat to Lake Lansing.
Several years back, while I worked with a developer, the construction costs alone for a 1600sf home, as basic as possible, was between 250-300k. That didn't include the land cost.
I'm hoping for the best but I'm not sure what they can really produce at that price. It's definitely an adventurous single family project
It kind of seems like this FBC was just developed to maintain the status quo and not actually improve the city’s built environment.
Regardless, if that’s allowed to be built in the same form as any old fast food restaurant, defying all of the primary guidelines for that zoning category, along a designated “activity corridor” (defined as an arterial or Major Street that traverses an area that typically is designed to promote a multi-modal balance between vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle travel…lol) then it’s not a very high quality form based code, IMO.
The more I read this thing, the more toothless it sounds.
Not sure how to share the post, so I thought I'd try the screenshot. Sounds like a total overhaul.