The Keeler Twitches, Again
The Keeler building has been sitting empty at 56 Division Ave N since 1995 [28 years]. It's looming and dilapidated presence creates a dead feeling intersection on the east edge of downtown proper, amplified by adjacency to two parking lots and the AT&T switch building.
Every few years rumors swirl that something is about to happen with the Keeler building. A significant LIHTC (Affordable housing) development was floated in 2017, and nothing moved forward. This isn't uncommon given the extremely competitive nature of LIHTC funding. Most LIHTC proposals end up as shelf weight, at least in between being resubmitted over and over again. It is the prominence of the Keeler building which makes it a focus of attention.
Address: 56 Division Ave N
Parcel ID: 41-14-30-155-001
Owner: ARATH III INC
Year Constructed: 1914
Total Sq/Ft: 167,706 (existing structure)
Architect: Eugene Osgood
Original Purpose: Furniture showroom, converted to office space in 1941.
And on November 8th, 2023 another planning document was submitted concerning this building:
136 Residential Rental Units + 364 Parking Stalls with 12,125 +/- S/F of ground floor commercial. Gross Square Feet equates to 190,680. There will be the following unit typologies delivered to the Grand Rapids Marketplace:
| TYPE | QTY. | AMI INC. | AVG. RENT | MO. RENT | ANN. REV. | NOTES: |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| STUDIO | 6 | 70% | 3.09% | $1,160 | $6,960 | $83,520 | Rents based on HUD 2023 |
| 1 X 1 | 20 | 30% | 4.41% | $1,155 | $23,100 | $277,200 |MSHDA Payment Std. |
| 2023 | 2 X 2 | 15 | 30% | 3.31% | $1,392 | $20,880 |$250,560| MSHDA Payment Std. 2023 |
| 1 X 1 | 60 | 70% | 30.88% | $1,243 | $74,580 | $894,960 |Rents based on HUD 2023 |
| 2 X 2 | 35 | 70% | 18.01% | $1,492 | $52,220 | $626,640| Rents based on HUD 2023 |
| Total | 136 | - | $1,288 | $177,740 | $2,132,880 | - |
What does this mean? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ It is interesting that the square footage does not match that of the existing structure. However there are some variables in how to calculate gross footage, so this could be nothing more than a clerical anomaly. The 364 parking spaces, is also curious; that can only be achieved via structured parking . . . at a cost of seven million ($7,000,000) dollars or more? Damn, parking is expensive. Also where would that much parking go?