Eastwood Downtown Development District

1679111214

Comments

  • I remember reading that the Hilton Homewoood would be going west of the Hyatt and I took that to mean it'll be on the northwest corner of Showtime and Town Center.
  • According to the LSJ article linked a few posts back: "West of the Fairfield, Eyde has begun site preparation on the $15 million Hilton Homewood Suites. The seven-story hotel will include 139 rooms and Eyde said he hopes to have it open by summer 2017."
    That would put the HHS in the northeastern parking lot of the movie theater/ south of The Vista. I remember the theater being really stingy about their parking lot a few years ago, but I bet they've seen a big increase in ticket sales with the Fairfield and Hyatt.
    I think this location is best for the development (west of Fairfield), but I haven't seen any site prep there, so I'm not sure if it's correct.
  • edited August 2016
    Though "West of the Fairfield" could mean across the street or across from the Hyatt; it's a vague description. I mean, you'd guess they'd mean across the street, but given what you said about the theater parking, it could be somewhere else. I guess I'll try and see I can dig up some site plans for the area.
  • And this article from December 2015 says this: "The $15 million Hilton Homewood Suites, which will be west of Hyatt Place..."

    Boutique hotel planned for Eastwood

    So, who knows?
  • jj
    edited August 2016
    Good points. I assume that it means south of the Hyatt/ Vista. And I only assume that because that's where it belongs. Parking will be fine.
  • edited August 2016
    With the two quotes each putting it west of the Fairfield, and one specifically putting it west of Hyatt Place, and knowing the theater doesn't want their parking messed with, it'd be safer to assume its west of Hyatt Place.

    EDIT: Contacted the township. Yes, this will be across the street from (directly west) of Hyatt Place like the LSJ originally said.
  • Given the 2 quotes, the "west of the Fairfield" option makes the most sense. It is also more in line with the (ancient) Eastwood master plan, which placed high density- or at least high traffic- hotels, office, and commercial buildings closer to the existing core. The master plan called for townhouses around the perimeter, I think, and that's a good choice. We are talking about a downtown development authority, and allowing the theater to build a force field around their precious surface lot kills any hope for a centralized downtown or new urbanism. The DDA needs to focus on making the area more accessible and interesting for pedestrians, which means not requiring people to walk or bike through endless surface lots. There is plenty of space for hotel parking in the garage.
  • I do not see anything like a downtown or new urban-ism out there. Right now it's really just an outdoor mall, nearly all the building present their rare to the streets and the hotels. On a sunny hot day no one is strolling around from store to store, it is white hot and there is little shade, and the facades are generally phony looking. It is very auto centered but there are some nice stores which is fine with but you can not call the development a downtown as of yet. It would be great to see that change.
  • edited August 2016
    The LSJ has two detailed pieces on The Heights at Eastwood, today, that takes a very dark view of its development.

    The Heights: A tale of logic vs. hope

    The Heights: As Eastwood grew, Lansing Twp. debt spiraled

    Even after skimming them, I'm not sure I can fully agree with the tone, if even I've complained myself about some of the particular issues raised, since I think it's too early to render a final verdict. What I do agree with is that perhaps a township this small could have bitten off more than it could chew; perhaps they shouldn't have gone in alone. Perhaps if the township had come to Lansing and they'd negotiated an Act 425 annexation this would have made more financial since. But it would have required them to hand over some control and share tax revenues. This is why this act was created, though, because small townships don't have the resources (staff, options, etc...) of municipal expertise larger cities do. It's why DeWitt Township finally allowed Lansing to take over the airport lands. It's why Alaiedon allowed Lansing to help with Jackson National Life. It's why Delta Township - despite having over 30,000 people - allowed Lansing to help with GM and its suppliers. Kind of crazy that a township of only 8,100 people thought they could do this alone.

    The article says that Lansing Township has a two-person planning staff. No, you didn't read that wrong: two employees.

    All that said, it appears four of the top five taxpayers in Lansing Township are now Eastwood entities. It's just going to take longer to pay off the bonds than they thought seems to be the main push of this series of articles. The other big take-away is that the township won't be able to borrow for anything else in the forseeable future. The good news is that as the economy improves and the center does more business than things get paid off more quickly. The tone of the article may been more appropriate a few years ago.
  • edited August 2016
    This is genuinely bad news for Lansing Township and taxpayers across the state. What these articles describe is how Eyde (and indirectly DTN) got sweetheart deals at the cost of Lansing Township taxpayers. Lansing Township won't be able to pay back these loans, they ballooned with the delays and the interest on them will make them unachievable. The costs will eventually be passed on to the State of Michigan and all of its taxpayers.

    Meanwhile, these articles show how these companies bottom lines have profited off of this development:
    - Hyatt Place only pays 8% of gross revenue for sales. They are basically guaranteed to turn a profit while the township loses. Only if the hotel was heavily occupied would the township see profits.
    - DTN's Vista Apartments, with 124 units, are fully leased, yet they still only pay $75,000 per year on rent for the building. Each apartment will likely bring in around $800 a month, on the low end. 124 x 12 months x $800 = $1,190,400. DTN makes $1.1 million per year, and only pays 6.3% of its revenue as rent. That's an unbelievably low fixed cost.
Sign In or Register to comment.