Gimme the Fiction That People Are Interested in Luxury Lofts
Crain’s Detroit Business profiles developer Jeffrey Spoon’s attempts to interest Ann Arbor in his luxury condominiums and offices, “a case study in how downtown Ann Arbor can perplex developers.” It turns out that people actually want lower-priced residences near “everyday retail needs, such as grocery stores.” “Ann Arbor’s a special place,” concludes the developer, who’s planning to open a restaurant called “The Mellow Mushroom” in town.
“On the retail side, more national chains are joining the local boutiques and bookstores.
“Pottery Barn is coming in,” said Susan Moore, partner of Kwan & Moore Commercial in Ann Arbor. “Five to 10 years ago we didn’t have tenants like that.””
Sweet.
posted by todd on June 20th, 2005 at 12:34 pm“‘You need density to get prices down,’ Spoon said. ‘The constituents here, their desire may not be density. It may be keeping Ann Arbor the way it is.’
“Spoon pointed to a lack of tax incentives promoting new, dense projects as another sign community support is inconsistent.”
What is wrong with this city?
posted by Dale on June 20th, 2005 at 1:01 pm“Conversely, brokers say, there is a strong demand for affordable and midpriced housing, and for moderately priced commercial space in or near downtown. More than half the units at the Eaton building, a former Eaton Corp. factory now known as the Liberty Lofts, were reserved after its opening weekend.”
Well, except that Liberty Lofts is by no means “affordable” or “midpriced”. What they’re looking at is the difference between “high-end” and “very high end”.
posted by Murph on June 20th, 2005 at 2:06 pm“The city is mulling a rezoning plan to allow taller buildings. Currently, buildings more than four stories tall are only allowed when a site goes through another zoning method such as a planned unit development. ”
Not strictly true - it depends on the zoning and what you put on the site. Apparently, Tower Plaza Condominiums (the 26-story gorilla of downtown) was built within existing FAR (Floor Area Ratio: usable floor space to lot size) by making most of the lot one-story and piling up all of the floor area on one corner.
posted by Murph on June 20th, 2005 at 2:10 pmYou’re right in that it isn’t strictly true, Murph. The Corner Apartments (State & Washington) are built precisely by code because we reward downtown residential by allowing taller buildings. It wasn’t a PUD.
Also, Tower Plaza was built before the current zoning codes, and most likely could not be built now, even with the residential bonuses. (for starters, they’d have to provide a car space for every unit, which they don’t have by a long shot)
posted by KGS on June 20th, 2005 at 3:34 pmWow, requiring apartment buildings to have a car space for every unit sounds like a pretty significant barrier to creating affordable housing in town. Might it be the case that some proportion of those who want to move to an apartment in downtown want to live right in town because they don’t or don’t want to have a car? Maybe the ratio should be something more like 4:5.
Is that also required of office buildings?
posted by Anna on June 20th, 2005 at 4:48 pmLet’s do some topic-hopping: maybe we should amend the Resident Permit Parking program to allow downtown residents to buy permits in adjoining neighborhoods. Lots of people are willing to only use their cars _occasionally_, but a much smaller number are willing to live in A2 with _no_ car.
posted by Murph. on June 20th, 2005 at 4:52 pmAnd don’t forget the prospect of car-sharing.
posted by Dale on June 20th, 2005 at 5:03 pmMy favorite item in this, jumping off of Murph’s point a few posts ago, was Edward Surovell’s comment that you can sell condos in the $200K-$700K range here, “as long as you don’t overprice it”. Christ, people in Santa Monica wouldn’t pay that for a condo. Are Ann Arborites really this unaware of the value of a dollar?
posted by Nick on June 20th, 2005 at 5:17 pmMy favorite item in this, jumping off of Murph’s point a few posts ago, was Edward Surovell’s comment that you can sell condos in the $200K-$700K range here, “as long as you don’t overprice it”. Christ, people in Santa Monica wouldn’t pay that for a condo. Are Ann Arborites really this unaware of the value of a dollar?
posted by Nick on June 20th, 2005 at 5:18 pmSorry about the double-post just now - my internet connection is misbehaving.
posted by Nick on June 20th, 2005 at 5:19 pmI can see why the city requires a parking space for each unit (this is Michigan after all, for better or for worse). People can always rent them out if they don’t have a car. Though it seems like a barrier, it’s realistic for new development.
Granted, there are excellent places to live that don’t include parking (when I lived in Boston it was a constant problem, so I moved the car out of town), NYC, etc…but most car-challenged locales are older, non-conforming structures with decent mass-transit.
posted by OFWinsurgent on June 20th, 2005 at 6:32 pmSurrovel is a tool.
posted by Anonymous on June 20th, 2005 at 10:15 pmI don’t understand who buys these condos. If I had that much money to throw around, I’d get a freakin’ actual house, not a glorified apartment.
posted by Dave on June 21st, 2005 at 8:30 amAnna - yes, the parking space/unit is a pretty big determent to affordable housing downtown. People keep thinking that they can ‘just’ build underground parking, but that is so expensive it pushes even the market-rate housing sky-high. This is one reason the Ashley Mews penthouses haven’t sold well. The Corner Apts. only got built because they made an agreement with the DDA to use Tally Hall parking for their tenants - because that lot was too small to have parking of almost any kind on it.
And no, the parking requirement doesn’t hold for office buildings, at least not within the boundaries of the DDA. That’s one big reason why it is cheaper to build office & retail rather than residential in the downtown area.
posted by KGS on June 21st, 2005 at 9:49 amThat’s really interesting, KGS. Maybe it would be wise to compromise and require both office and residential to have some sort of plan for parking, but not have the ratio be 1:1 for either. After all, as many have lamented, part of the parking issue is created by people commuting to Ann Arbor for work. Then, office parking would be partly empty in the evening and could be either rented to people who commute out of Ann Arbor and live downtown, or could be rented to restaurants, bars, etc. Of course, I assume there’s a reason it’s not required for office buildings — is it that AA wants them on the tax rolls and the parking problem created by commuters is outweighed by the benefits of having the businesses contained in those office buildings on the grand list?
posted by Anna on June 21st, 2005 at 10:54 amIsn’t the Mellow Mushroom a college-town-infesting national chain as well as a drug euphemism?
posted by Leighton on June 21st, 2005 at 11:08 ammaybe only the expensive condos in santa monica are listed on realtor.com, but the lowest is $325k and 30 listings in the price is at $500k. the weather is nicer there, though.
but i agree, for that money i’d rather own a home. you could buy an older home around downtown, fix it up and still have money left over.
posted by jas on June 21st, 2005 at 11:46 amThere are some folks that might rather not have a house because of various maintenance commitments. I don’t mind doing some gardening myself, but mowing the lawn is not my cup of tea, nor is shovelling snow. $500,000 condos aren’t really aimed at those of us who think that $500,000 is a lot to pay for a dwelling. Maybe it’s a retirement home. Maybe it’s a second property for the summer when Florida is too hot. Maybe it’s for a son or daughter going to school here. Maybe it belongs to a doctor or lawyer who likes downtown a lot but doesn’t want to waste billable hours driving in from somewhere else to enjoy it. Maybe it’s an investment (read, speculation) property. I have no idea what everybody in my neighborhood does for a living, but there are a lot of nice cars in all the driveways.
posted by JCP2 on June 21st, 2005 at 10:36 pmForex news - This is the best site that you will ever find with all the best online Forex news, the lates quotes, and the highest currencies
posted by Ayana Schneider on August 1st, 2005 at 9:32 pmUnless the railroad is going to be re-routed, do people know freight trains will occasionally be rumbling by within feet of their new digs? When do the developers tell prospective buyers this? After they set the hook or after they take the bait? And since this building is down the hill from Main Street, the only floor with any kind of view is likely to be the roof or top floor…everything else will look up the hill at buildings. I was laughing when I read the spin on this project put forth from the developers, including talk about how “historic” this building is and how you could just “step out” to your favorite restaurant or entertainment area. And $200,000 for a 850+ square foot glorified apartment? get real. 850 square feet and you’re going to pay what? You need your head examined. This building should have been torn down and left a greenspace.
posted by Kevin on September 26th, 2005 at 1:23 pmRock on, Kev! You’ve got it all figured out man, and only three months late. That’s what that block needs–more green space, and conveniently located right smack-dab across the street from the greenway! Awsome planning, dude, you must have gone to school for that shit.
posted by Parking Structure Dude! on September 26th, 2005 at 3:58 pmYou’d be surprised. They made a couple million off that.
posted by bill on April 3rd, 2008 at 3:47 pm