It is rather ironic how fast these other developments have been approved and are rising into the sky. I guess they learned a lesson on how to get these things done. I wish they would share this lesson with the folks developing the Red Cedar project.
The only projects that seem to move quickly from the planning phase around here seem to be the ones that involve little or no municipal infrastructure work...
The Park District development is now on hold after the city inspectors noticed that the building plans submitted in early December don't match the plans that the City Council approved in August.
The developers removed the tall glass facades at the corners of Building A (Grand River and Abbot building) and replaced them with regular windows. This was one of the requirements from city council to make the building prettier than just a regular box.
As much as I hate EL's administrative micromanaging, I think this move by the developer is major BS!!! Those are two different buildings with the same footprint, and the second is CLEARLY lower quality (read cheaper...) and has poorer aesthetics than the one that was LEGALLY approved. This is bait-and-switch, plain and simple.
If the developer can't deliver the goods they promised, then they underbid, and are incompetent, and don't deserve to do this project. If they are just profiteering by this after-the-fact "value engineering", then tough nuts - I hope the city puts every screw to them.
This is THE marquee plot in the city of EL. This not some generic student condo sprawl in the northern teir... everyone, including national and international figures, who uses the main entrance to the university will see this building. There is no reasonable excuse at this point to change the plan from the merely adequate building that was approved to the generic box the developers are trying slide by with.
I wonder why the developer would try to pull this off? There still seems to be some kind of a jinx on this stop! The no glass design is just so bland and not at all fancy, fancy is what they sold to the council. I would really hate to see this development get messed up by this but I would also be nice to have a worthy building on the spot that we all have to look at forever and the city should not settle for anything less.
I'm not sure about EL's ordinance's, zoning codes or the specifics of the development agreement but I'll get behind the city forcing this issue. The redesign is ugly, significantly impacts the look of the development, and it would have almost certainly affected the city's approval of the project had they shown that rendering to begin with. I encourage EL to pull whatever cards they can to get the developer to comply with the original plans, it's really not asking for much.
You bought a Cadillac! thank you very much "here's your Buick" it looks almost the same doesn't it?! I am really disappointed to hear that the city may not be able to "force" the developer to deliver same buildings they "sold" the city. It seems kind of fishy that they are making these major design changes, and of course they had to be negative changes not let's make it even better changes. They would not have to work through these issues if they did not change the design.
Comments
It is rather ironic how fast these other developments have been approved and are rising into the sky. I guess they learned a lesson on how to get these things done. I wish they would share this lesson with the folks developing the Red Cedar project.
The only projects that seem to move quickly from the planning phase around here seem to be the ones that involve little or no municipal infrastructure work...
Mich - I was also thinking of Red Cedar...
https://eastlansinginfo.org/content/corner-project-now-hold-plans-dont-match-approval
The Park District development is now on hold after the city inspectors noticed that the building plans submitted in early December don't match the plans that the City Council approved in August.
The developers removed the tall glass facades at the corners of Building A (Grand River and Abbot building) and replaced them with regular windows. This was one of the requirements from city council to make the building prettier than just a regular box.
Dicey move. I don't really like that... Still rooting for this full-on though
As much as I hate EL's administrative micromanaging, I think this move by the developer is major BS!!! Those are two different buildings with the same footprint, and the second is CLEARLY lower quality (read cheaper...) and has poorer aesthetics than the one that was LEGALLY approved. This is bait-and-switch, plain and simple.
If the developer can't deliver the goods they promised, then they underbid, and are incompetent, and don't deserve to do this project. If they are just profiteering by this after-the-fact "value engineering", then tough nuts - I hope the city puts every screw to them.
This is THE marquee plot in the city of EL. This not some generic student condo sprawl in the northern teir... everyone, including national and international figures, who uses the main entrance to the university will see this building. There is no reasonable excuse at this point to change the plan from the merely adequate building that was approved to the generic box the developers are trying slide by with.
I wonder why the developer would try to pull this off? There still seems to be some kind of a jinx on this stop! The no glass design is just so bland and not at all fancy, fancy is what they sold to the council. I would really hate to see this development get messed up by this but I would also be nice to have a worthy building on the spot that we all have to look at forever and the city should not settle for anything less.
I'm not sure about EL's ordinance's, zoning codes or the specifics of the development agreement but I'll get behind the city forcing this issue. The redesign is ugly, significantly impacts the look of the development, and it would have almost certainly affected the city's approval of the project had they shown that rendering to begin with. I encourage EL to pull whatever cards they can to get the developer to comply with the original plans, it's really not asking for much.
You bought a Cadillac! thank you very much "here's your Buick" it looks almost the same doesn't it?! I am really disappointed to hear that the city may not be able to "force" the developer to deliver same buildings they "sold" the city. It seems kind of fishy that they are making these major design changes, and of course they had to be negative changes not let's make it even better changes. They would not have to work through these issues if they did not change the design.