It seems there are already many topics to talk about in
regard to the Glendale Condominiums.
At first glance, the site plan for Glendale Circle
Condominiums seems to be quite nice, and is better than I would have hoped for
on this parcel. I am surprised that the
developers didn't opt for more units/more money. I don't know what the planned price point is (probably
more than we would expect, but am guessing somewhere under $300K) but I think
it's terrific that someone is building ranch-style condos with attached garages
in a west side neighborhood. As a long-time
Virginia Park/West Side resident, and life-long Ann Arborite, and nearing
retirement age - - I know that the options to find one-floor, no-steps housing
in this part of town is extremely difficult and very, very limited. There are many folks that would like to buy or
remain in our older, near town neighborhoods - - even though their health, age,
or disabilities may/will require bedroom-bath-laundry on a ground floor.
The prevailing reason for the addition to my own home in
2005 was exactly that. There are a
number of attractive and small condo communities nearby (Allen Creek, Tulip
Tree, Walnut Heights, Parkside Commons, Old Orchard, Liberty Heights,
Ridgewood), but almost all of them are two-story, with very few offering a
first floor bedroom, bath, or laundry - - or no-step living.
As a real estate broker for over 25 years, I've had
countless clients that would have been eager and excited to buy one of these
proposed condos - - mostly for the reasons above. I don't know the owner, the developer, or any
of the principals involved (wouldn't know Mr. Starman if I saw him), so I have
no vested interest in this development - - other than that it's possible I may
bring buyers to the development.
All that being said, a few pieces of random info or comments:
(1) The development as proposed seems to be quite low
density. It's likely that this parcel
would allow for twice the number of units and up to 2-1/2 stories tall. Could possibly be stacked, apartment-style
units - - which would be more likely to attract absentee owners and student
renters. I'm relieved that the proposed
units are one-story, which IMO would have much less neighborhood impact and a
less "towering" appearance.
(2) I did talk briefly with Susan Bowers of Bowers and
Associates (the name and number on the postcard). As I had thought, Susan thinks the target
buyers will be empty nesters and single parent families or single
professionals. Each two-bedroom unit
will have about 1300
square feet, a full unfinished basement, first
floor laundry, attached one-car garage. The
exteriors will be Hardi-Plank siding and some ledgestone (Hardi-Plank is
approved by our historical commission).
(3) The majority of the property is zoned R4B, and has been
for many years (25 or more?). A small
portion of the southern most property, which contains the present two rental
homes (one behind the other), are zoned R1D - - which I assume the developer
will ask to be rezoned to R4B. [See Zoning
Section of this Blog for further details.]
(4 ) The two homes
to be torn down are likely solid and worthy of restoration ( I like them, but
always wondered how one home came to built in the backyard of the other ?).
(5) I think that
Hillside Terrace (the retirement/nursing home) had at one time owned all of
this property for possible future expansion. I think they sold it to Starman in 2003.
(6) It seems that parking is
adequate. I doubt if many folks would
park on the street - don't know why they would since they can park in their
garage or in front of their garage door - which is usually the case with many
other condos like this. The number of
2-car owners might be offset by the number of owners who are
bikers-walkers-infrequent car users (which would likely be the profile of many
interested buyers). So likely on a
day-to-day basis, the proposed parking would be sufficient - - but if anyone is
having a party or large gathering, parking could/would be problem. (Same problem for all of us, I suppose - -
with parking limited to one side of most streets, the guests of anyone having a
party usually take up most available street parking for several blocks.)
(7) I haven't
checked with the county treasurer, but it's possible that the owner MAY be
current on all his property taxes. The
city tax site would NOT show late payments made to the county rather than the
city treasurer. At some point after
taxes are past due, the city turns them over to the county for collection. Some businesses make a practice of doing this,
figuring they are better off paying the penalty and interest. Not a good practice IMO, but it's done
frequently nevertheless.
(8) On the
postcard, I don't see a water catchment basin either, so I'll be interested to
see a larger, more-detailed plan that will hopefully be available at the
meeting. It would be hard to imagine
that some provisions haven't been made for this, since the city is very
stringent in this area. I've seen much
smaller residential or business developments that have been required to have
on-site water run-off basins.
(9) The
condos/townhomes on Montgomery near Bemidji were/are a different situation altogether.
Different zoning - - and all 4 to 6 new
condos (which essentially replaced 4 or 5 older duplexes) comprise a total land
area equal to about 1/4 or 1/5 the size of the Glendale property - - so the
density there is about the same or more than Glendale.
No comments:
Post a Comment