I assume the local people in that group are prepared regarding possible criticism. People are going to complain about height, traffic, density, parking, festivals and every other thing. Its all right for people to give input, but some EL residents want things done their way or not at all (CATA BRT, for example) when it doesn't work that way.
This is a good project with many benefits for EL. In addition to the improvement downtown, I think that neighborhoods will improve as less students move to those areas generating less complaints from residents.
The festival questions are valid. Lot 1 gets heavily used by festivals, as well as Abbot and Albert Ave. Presumably those roads wouldn't be able to completely shut down since access to the parking ramp will be blocked (or they could be blocked and people will deal with it, the same way they dealt with Lot 1 being closed during festivals).
However, more festivals should move to Valley Court Park anyways. The park is large enough, and is arguably a better venue since it can allow for a more concentrated location instead of being spread out over multiple city blocks.
Having the festivals in the dirty old parking lot and on the broken streets does not really look so great and often feels too hot and sunny out in the street. I hope this will not be a reason they stop this development. I really like the idea of moving the festivals to the park, and they should move them there even if they do not build this project. I think that if they do build the wide sidewalks there will be room for street fairs.
Exactly. Lot 1 is a good downtown location but not an appealing setting for those festivals. Move those festivals to the park. If you want to keep it downtown, then find space for a few days.
This development is valuable for EL in many ways. It brings energy by changing the landscape, possibly brings a grocery store downtown, includes age-restricted housing and adds downtown parking.
In practical terms, this development should bring more tax revenue for the city as a consequence of more business activity and residents. But it also creates opportunities for future growth by changing perceptions of EL.
So, yes, the city must be diligent but please don't micromanage this project.
Do you think that time will ever come? Are there cities in Michigan where developments are being built without some sort of tax abatement, or other government subsidies? If so than planners, and government here should find out how they are doing it.
I think a lot of it depends on demand, the finances of the municipality, and the red tape that it takes to get the subsidies.
East Lansing is getting to the point where it may not have the finances to support subsidies for both the Center City District as well as the Park District. The City of Lansing's bond rating is low enough that Red Cedar is asking Ingham County for the bond.
Developers in East Lansing have dealt with so much red tape to get subsidies that I'm surprised to see them still trying. I hope that the Core Campus development will not ask for subsidies.
I think the demand is building, but it's not there yet to get rents high enough that extra financing won't be necessary. Developers in Detroit often talked about the magic $2/sqft rent that is required before projects can self-finance. With rents less than $2/sqft, banks see too much risk in lending and want to spread out the risk and pass some of it on to the municipality.
The rents for 565 Building range from $2.008/sqft for 1 bed 1 bath, to $2.605 for 3 bed 2 bath premium units. The rents for Skyvue range from $1.938 for 1 bed 1 bath, $2.152 for 4 bed 4 bath units. If both of these buildings are fully leased and demand still pushes the rates higher, then I think we may start to see more developments get built without government subsidies.
I really do not have a problem with governments helping to get these project built. It often seems like here in Lansing we see these grand plans, and once the local government get a hold of it we end up with something less grand. I also find it kind of ironic that these developers and C.of C. types are the ones who most want government out of their businesses and life's, but seem to be right up front when it comes to a hand out from the government.
Comments
I assume the local people in that group are prepared regarding possible criticism. People are going to complain about height, traffic, density, parking, festivals and every other thing. Its all right for people to give input, but some EL residents want things done their way or not at all (CATA BRT, for example) when it doesn't work that way.
This is a good project with many benefits for EL. In addition to the improvement downtown, I think that neighborhoods will improve as less students move to those areas generating less complaints from residents.
The festival questions are valid. Lot 1 gets heavily used by festivals, as well as Abbot and Albert Ave. Presumably those roads wouldn't be able to completely shut down since access to the parking ramp will be blocked (or they could be blocked and people will deal with it, the same way they dealt with Lot 1 being closed during festivals).
However, more festivals should move to Valley Court Park anyways. The park is large enough, and is arguably a better venue since it can allow for a more concentrated location instead of being spread out over multiple city blocks.
Having the festivals in the dirty old parking lot and on the broken streets does not really look so great and often feels too hot and sunny out in the street. I hope this will not be a reason they stop this development. I really like the idea of moving the festivals to the park, and they should move them there even if they do not build this project. I think that if they do build the wide sidewalks there will be room for street fairs.
Exactly. Lot 1 is a good downtown location but not an appealing setting for those festivals. Move those festivals to the park. If you want to keep it downtown, then find space for a few days.
I hope they do what is required to get this project built.
This development is valuable for EL in many ways. It brings energy by changing the landscape, possibly brings a grocery store downtown, includes age-restricted housing and adds downtown parking.
In practical terms, this development should bring more tax revenue for the city as a consequence of more business activity and residents. But it also creates opportunities for future growth by changing perceptions of EL.
So, yes, the city must be diligent but please don't micromanage this project.
Do you think that time will ever come? Are there cities in Michigan where developments are being built without some sort of tax abatement, or other government subsidies? If so than planners, and government here should find out how they are doing it.
I think a lot of it depends on demand, the finances of the municipality, and the red tape that it takes to get the subsidies.
East Lansing is getting to the point where it may not have the finances to support subsidies for both the Center City District as well as the Park District. The City of Lansing's bond rating is low enough that Red Cedar is asking Ingham County for the bond.
Developers in East Lansing have dealt with so much red tape to get subsidies that I'm surprised to see them still trying. I hope that the Core Campus development will not ask for subsidies.
I think the demand is building, but it's not there yet to get rents high enough that extra financing won't be necessary. Developers in Detroit often talked about the magic $2/sqft rent that is required before projects can self-finance. With rents less than $2/sqft, banks see too much risk in lending and want to spread out the risk and pass some of it on to the municipality.
The rents for 565 Building range from $2.008/sqft for 1 bed 1 bath, to $2.605 for 3 bed 2 bath premium units. The rents for Skyvue range from $1.938 for 1 bed 1 bath, $2.152 for 4 bed 4 bath units. If both of these buildings are fully leased and demand still pushes the rates higher, then I think we may start to see more developments get built without government subsidies.
I really do not have a problem with governments helping to get these project built. It often seems like here in Lansing we see these grand plans, and once the local government get a hold of it we end up with something less grand. I also find it kind of ironic that these developers and C.of C. types are the ones who most want government out of their businesses and life's, but seem to be right up front when it comes to a hand out from the government.
Yes, definitely getting the ducks in a row. Sundance is moving next to BW3 along Albert.