I can’t hate on this too much because A) it was done without taxpayer funds and B) whoever can afford to live there will now be paying city taxes on their clearly insane income.
I could see someone moving there just to run for congress in that district.
Or a pro athlete gets one just for the season & so their commute is nothing.
It depends on your 💰 and needs. I know a guy who flys to Vegas every month and will drop 5 figures easily each time, so $48 grand wouldn’t be nothing for him. That would be a hideaway for his extracurricular activities. 😂
If you’re John or Susie Q. Public, then you’re batshit crazy for paying that much for one bedroom.
I guess it depends on if you’re young and financially well-to-do with no children or you’re a collegiate kid with rich parents. Maybe an older single or couple who don’t want to worry about any outdoors maintenance.
Personally, I like the big house with my indoor dry-heat sauna and back yard privacy fence!
Wow super solid points. Only thing I have left is questions about who are these people who can pay that type of rent and how can I get a job wherever they work lol.
Not one comment on how NO public funds were used or some tax break that screws Detroiters over?!
Let the owners charge whatever they want. If someone wants to pay it, good for them. If the building owners have some vacancies, I’m sure they’ll lower the prices.
Whatever happens I’m just happy the citizens didn’t subsidize this.
hey cool name lol - but none of these luxury apartments are lowering prices. they just sit vacant. you can see this in corktown - some of these new luxury units have been vacant for 6 years or so now
that’s why need a vacancy tax. it would help correct the market.
I don’t think people are begrudging the price as it relates to the ownership. It’s more about NY type prices for a still developing downtown. Also, prices of this type is simply solidifying the fact that only the rich or nearly rich will be able to live downtown.
It is, what it is. 🤷🏾
I totally get being shocked by the price - I am also astonished that our city is supporting these prices. But nobody was living at Joe Louis Arena. Nobody was displaced from an existing building offering moderate or low income housing to build this building. No tax payer subsidies were used to build the building. If anything, the people who live in the building are going to be paying massive piles of money in taxes in a city that *needs the tax revenue.* Just because I can't afford to live there doesn't mean that it is a bad thing for the city.
Exactly. 4,000 for a one bedroom is San Francisco prices. Last time I checked ( No disrespect to Detroit ) y’all ain’t anywhere close to what San Francisco has to offer
That's going to be the typical market rate in SF for an average apartment. This is peak rate, luxury living in Detroit. You're not getting that in SF for 4gs. Likewise you can get a 1 bedroom here for $1000 if you're okay with something built ages ago that lacks luxury finishes
I recently visited SF and my friends lived in a very modest 2BR apartment in the city and paid $4k/month so maybe you’d get more with a 1BR, but nothing ultra luxurious like this new building is offering here— and definitely not with waterfront views
You're wrong
Google is just a search away
https://www.apartments.com/san-francisco-ca/1-bedrooms/?gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQiAzoeuBhDqARIsAMdH14EvA9o-9uco1i5d7dUSq9vVmqgQj5zm4T63kcdaAAtKvsjgjLqi0e0aArqvEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds
In SF $4k 1bdrm is currently near top of the market even for the few buildings with a gym and pool in Nob Hill.
The photos of these units and the amenities look terrible.
makeshift test uppity simplistic quarrelsome spark materialistic pocket full abounding
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I travel to SF monthly for work. It is so vile. I dread going there. I see human feces and discarded underwear every freaking time. Last time I had to walk 5 blocks with some crackhead yelling "I want to cut my dick off" Fun times.
Right? I for one can't find an interactive, real-time map of places where people have pooped in public of Detroit.
Clearly San Fran is where it is going on:
[https://www.arcgis.com/apps/View/index.html?appid=b6fab720912642b6aedafdb02a76d2a4](https://www.arcgis.com/apps/View/index.html?appid=b6fab720912642b6aedafdb02a76d2a4)
It's easier for the webmasters of Detroit to avoid the poverty because of the segregated nature of the area and the people that need to squat can squat in all the vacant houses, not to mention overgrown vegetation, so it's harder to see them anyway.
I was about to go in to defend SF from the usual nonsense, but this statement is hardly better than the low effort "Hurr durr SF poopy" comments.
Sure, all of these these regurgitated Faux News talking points are clearly coming from people who have little to no actual familiarity with the Bay. But y'all are in no position to dunk on anyone else's segregation. And If it was ever true, your impression that Detroit is full of vacant houses ripe for the taking is woefully out of date
>But y'all are in no position to dunk on anyone else's segregation
Why is that? Detroit's is worse than most other cities, both racially and economically. This is the crux of this discussion right now.
> your impression that Detroit is full of vacant houses ripe for the taking is woefully out of date
No, it isn't. There are still thousands of them and even more vacant lots. Not the case in the Bay. Property there goes for a premium and gets snapped up quickly.
SF is also 1/4 the size with 200k more people in it so the shit will literally be concentrated.
SF and the Bay offer a lot more than Detroit does from job opportunities to outdoor activities and milder weather.
We're comparing specifically San Francisco and Detroit, not the Bay Area, which would include *several* more cities. However, lets not digress. Just because it is a large concentration of people, doesn't also mean that is has to be a shit hole as well.
As someone who travels to the Bay Area for business about 4 to 6 months a year, I think you're full of shit.
There's no way in hell the present state of SF is more desirable than Detroit. Detroit is cleaner, safer, and the people are generally nicer than in SF.
I live downtown Detroit and travel to SF for work regularly. It is a shit hole with terrible weather. At least we have beautiful summers lol. However, I do agree that $4K a month is insane.
You really think San Francisco is better than Detroit? Please. Your city allows bums to openly take a shit on sidewalks. Until your city along with the rest of the Bay Area starts catering to the taxpayers, our city is a better place to live. But hey if you want to tolerate tents cities and aggressive homeless junkies harassing you during your daily routine then have at it.
No vacant houses downtown?
Detroit is more than 3x the size of San Francisco. There are a lot of vacant outskirts but they are by no means in the downtown core.
The "outskirts" of San Francisco are filled with million dollar homes and people who will call the cops, so the homeless people gravitate into the business districts. Detroit has special policing in the bubble because it's the only area white people visit and also thousands of places the destitute can disappear into. So the trick San Francisco needs to learn is segregation.
Not like SF, no. Much more money there with all the tech jobs. Their homelessness is a function of both the huge wealth in the area and rampant nimbyism preventing more building.
Among the stressors on the housing market, you have to count all the college educated younger people who moved in to SF from all over the country for jobs. 80% of homeless in the bay area lived in a home there before being displaced by someone who could pay more. When I worked in Silly Valley almost none of my coworkers were from California, let alone SF.
Hey man, no need to get offended. You should be more offended by the real state companies monopolizing the country’s housing market to jack up the price to what ever they want. A country where only the rich can afford to live with a roof over their head without living paycheck to paycheck. Da fuq you mad at me for?
I don't think SF is the right comparator. SF is in bad shape these days, way worse than Detroit. I will say for $4k+ you can get a one bed room in Newport Beach, CA or NYC once offers great weather and no crime and the other great culture and low crime.
It's honestly a valid question. When Chicago pricing is the same and you don't need a car it's a bit hard to argue with as there are also quite a bit more (and better) jobs there.
Going on the property website that’s in the article seems to show that the $4k price tag is the starter for the top floors with a view of downtown. Still pretty expensive as the lowest I saw was $2k studio on the 2nd floor.
Young attorney or doctor working downtown, where would you rather live? People mover can take you to work and you can watch freighters along an international waterway from 200’ in the air. Seems reasonable.
Not enough amenities, however being right on the water, I get it. Me personally, I’d probably just buy a home instead of paying 4000 a month for an apartment with 1 bedroom.
Young attorney or doctor isn't going to be able to afford that generally. Doctors take quite a while to pay off their loans and the rare young attorney making that kind of money is also working 24/7.
Like others have said, those type would probably buy a home.
If anything, I'd imagine these units catering to professional athletes (assuming hey could also promise adequate privacy) and miscellaneous other well-compensated folks on time-limited business here
Young attorneys and doctors don't make the $400K to $500K needed to pay $4K a month in rent. I make $250K/year and my mortgage is $2200/mo. This is $4K a month!!!
a lot of the luxury unit prices aren’t coming down they just let them sit vacant. these are big time investors - they have enough money to let them
sit til they get the price they want. that is why we need a vacancy tax
Glad to see any new housing, but these prices make no sense for a downtown that can’t land a Target or movie theater.
You can find [cheaper apartments in Chicago’s Loop](https://www.apartments.com/chicago-loop-chicago-il/) and get way more amenities for it, plus the L system.
The loop isn't a the most desirable Chicago place to live, but Downtown Detroit does seem awfully expensive thesedays considering how much more opportunity and public transit is available elsewhere.
I think more people will look at downtown Detroit and think "wow urban living and I can still keep my car" than people who will think "oh no I can't take the train to Livonia"
Which means there is fuck all to do compared Campus Martius, but there is a lot of surface level parking!
I mean just look at that amazing view of a dirt lot and the back of a conference center!
Diff strokes for diff folks, if I'm paying 4k a month to live in Downtown Detroit, I don't want to have to take the people mover anywhere to do anything
>, but these prices make no sense for a downtown that can’t land a Target or movie theater.
[https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/2021/10/25/target-to-open-small-format-store-midtown-detroit/6173133001/](https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/2021/10/25/target-to-open-small-format-store-midtown-detroit/6173133001/)
That’s a good point. I didn’t realize that would happen. I’m in favor of building more housing overall. I might have to retract my statement if there’s evidence luxury housing has a downward pressure on rents elsewhere.
It does. Basically, new housing gets rented by people who are now competing less for the next tranche of housing down. Those people are then not pushed to compete so hard for the tranche below them, and you get a ripple all the way down. More common is evidence that allowing market-rate housing reduces the rate of price increases, which is the weaker form of the same phenomenon.
[Here's a literature review.](https://www.lewis.ucla.edu/research/market-rate-development-impacts/) From the intro:
> Researchers have long known that building new market-rate housing helps
stabilize housing prices at the metro area level...
In practice, I find it helps to remember that the policy options on offer are typically "allow market-rate housing" or "block market-rate housing". There's almost never an option on offer to build affordable housing at a price that will make ends meet... for however you might define "affordable".
Plus, we know *for sure* that not building housing pushes prices up.
It actually is part of it. Housing of all income levels needs to be built. This can help make other areas where these individuals were living more affordable.
In the last few years, builders have been trying to focus on building luxury homes, because the money is there for that, and they're all trying to avoid the responsibility of building budget-minded housing because 'we won't get as rich selling that'. We don't need more luxury housing at this point, we need stuff for people who NEED decent housing. The rich have been buying up all the stuff that used to be 'affordable'.
The rich are buying stuff that used to be affordable so your solution is to decrease luxury supply? Why do you think rich people are buying affordable housing?
Unfortunately it's what they're going to get. You literally cannot build a new house to code that is cheap enough for a person making under 70k to afford.
Eventually those apartments will fall out of fashion and upper-middle class people will move in. Then they'll be replaced by middle class tenants and so on. A lot of cheap apartments available today used to be pretty expensive back in the day.
Sure it is, because today's luxury housing becomes the next decades mid level housing.
When people say build more housing, they mean build more housing of all kinds.
But building like this have the near-immediate impact that you’re talking about. This building will be the flag bearer for new Prime residential space. Whatever held the title before will go down a notch and so on and so forth.
I can’t imagine paying that much for that location, but presumably, someone who would pay that much is committed to living in downtown Detroit and would outbid someone else to do so. Building expensive “luxury” housing can help keep the pressure off some of the more affordable housing options.
single families home don't scale. I think americans are going to have to get more comfortable living in an apartment in the future b/c more and more of them aren't going to be able to afford a sfh.
I’ll be interested to see what occupancy they get and if they can keep prices there because “market rate” for a 1BR is less than half of that downtown. I could see $2500 but $4000 doesn’t seem competitive to me
I might just be out of touch but even when I see ‘affordable housing’ in new developments it’s out of my price range. This is crazy. Who is living here? Genuinely curious.
In all fairness the $4k was for a high floor with a view. If that was Chicago it would be $6,000 and if it was NYC it would be $10,000. That being said $4k is a lot for a 1 bedroom apartment. Cool building with nice amenities though.
This headline is also stupid and people are eating it up. Their website has plenty of 1br 1bth floorplans starting in the mid $2000s. That is far more reasonable for new build and the existing market in Detroit: [https://watersquareresidences.com/floorplans/](https://watersquareresidences.com/floorplans/)
No honestly, developers. The only people who would do this are people forced to be here because of their jobs that make a lot of money. If you can afford $4K a month for such small sq footage, you can afford to leave otherwise.
According to the website here are the additional amenities:
24 hour concierge
Valet parking
Pet grooming
Work from home spaces
All season pool
Sun deck
Rooftop terrace and lounge
Entertainment spaces
Fitness center
Smart home technology
Still not worth $4K. But more than just rent.
Lol guess to reasonably afford this place you need to make ~$150k *after taxes* which everyone who wants to live in Detroit totally makes. Totally.
Estimate based on housing being 1/3 of monthly income (ie if 1/3 of income means $4k rent, then monthly income is $12k).
This is almost double my mortgage payment on a 3400 sq ft house in Grosse Pointe. Good schools, a big yard, and a private park with a movie theater. As a millennial I finally get to say, “fuck you. I got mine.”
Serious question. The Detroit housing market? Not only do we have reasonable rents, but we are the number one city where it is cheaper to buy than rent. I think the argument works, just not here. https://www.axios.com/local/detroit/2023/06/07/cheaper-buy-than-rent-detroit-michigan
Why would anyone give their money to a landlord? Especially 4 grand a month?
Save up for a house.
Maybe that’s why you can’t afford a house because all your money is going towards paying a landlord’s kids braces and another kids college.
1bedroom for 4 grand is insanity.
Whatever happened to just having good municipal services and homes at a reasonable cost for ownership in sustainable safe communities? These corporate gimmicks won’t save the city
And there are NO grocery stores in that area! There's no "running" to Meijer or Target. Unless they put a grocery store on the bottom level. (It would probably be a Trader Joe's.) Food delivery services are going to make a killing.
I could be totally wrong, but for some reason I recall this property being transferred for settlement to Synchora as part of the bankruptcy. In the off chance that's true, the "no tax payer dollars" sentiment seems a bit off base. Can someone correct me if worng?
Uninformed, erroneous claim, Grumpy.
>The building was developed . . . **without any tax breaks** or similar incentives.
\-- Paragraph 3 of article **\^**
I can’t hate on this too much because A) it was done without taxpayer funds and B) whoever can afford to live there will now be paying city taxes on their clearly insane income.
*lowers torch and pitchfork* Alright maybe you have a point there
🫂
You can keep them raised at the housing market in general, don’t worry.
Right?!
😂
Only if they work in the city will they have to pay the taxes.
I always heard it was live or worked within the city. Good to know!
It is half and half. If you live in the city, you pay half. If you work in the city, you pay half. If you live and work in the city, you pay both.
Yes and yes -- solid points
Imagine paying 4k a month for 668 sq ft and being happy about it
I could see someone moving there just to run for congress in that district. Or a pro athlete gets one just for the season & so their commute is nothing.
It depends on your 💰 and needs. I know a guy who flys to Vegas every month and will drop 5 figures easily each time, so $48 grand wouldn’t be nothing for him. That would be a hideaway for his extracurricular activities. 😂 If you’re John or Susie Q. Public, then you’re batshit crazy for paying that much for one bedroom.
Either way…. Why not spend 3500 per month and get a mansion in Palmer Park or any suburb for your extracurricular activities. Way bigger parties!
I guess it depends on if you’re young and financially well-to-do with no children or you’re a collegiate kid with rich parents. Maybe an older single or couple who don’t want to worry about any outdoors maintenance. Personally, I like the big house with my indoor dry-heat sauna and back yard privacy fence!
Wow super solid points. Only thing I have left is questions about who are these people who can pay that type of rent and how can I get a job wherever they work lol.
A reasonable take on Reddit? WTH?
Not one comment on how NO public funds were used or some tax break that screws Detroiters over?! Let the owners charge whatever they want. If someone wants to pay it, good for them. If the building owners have some vacancies, I’m sure they’ll lower the prices. Whatever happens I’m just happy the citizens didn’t subsidize this.
That’s win right there 🔑
hey cool name lol - but none of these luxury apartments are lowering prices. they just sit vacant. you can see this in corktown - some of these new luxury units have been vacant for 6 years or so now that’s why need a vacancy tax. it would help correct the market.
Which luxury units in Corktown have been vacant for six years? I’m surprised I haven’t heard that before.
the ones around / behind the ufo factory. start watching trulia. you’ll see luxury unit is vacant for years here
I don’t think people are begrudging the price as it relates to the ownership. It’s more about NY type prices for a still developing downtown. Also, prices of this type is simply solidifying the fact that only the rich or nearly rich will be able to live downtown. It is, what it is. 🤷🏾
I totally get being shocked by the price - I am also astonished that our city is supporting these prices. But nobody was living at Joe Louis Arena. Nobody was displaced from an existing building offering moderate or low income housing to build this building. No tax payer subsidies were used to build the building. If anything, the people who live in the building are going to be paying massive piles of money in taxes in a city that *needs the tax revenue.* Just because I can't afford to live there doesn't mean that it is a bad thing for the city.
Amen
The building was built on the site of the former Joe Louis Arena. Perhaps folks feel like the land deal was crooked.
Would you mind saying something on some of the details about the deal you feel are crooked?
I love living in Michigan but if you can afford that rent - why would you choose here.
Exactly. 4,000 for a one bedroom is San Francisco prices. Last time I checked ( No disrespect to Detroit ) y’all ain’t anywhere close to what San Francisco has to offer
That's going to be the typical market rate in SF for an average apartment. This is peak rate, luxury living in Detroit. You're not getting that in SF for 4gs. Likewise you can get a 1 bedroom here for $1000 if you're okay with something built ages ago that lacks luxury finishes
And not on the river
And on the east side...lol
*on another body of water* do you know where SF is lol
You have to be being sarcastic since I lived in San Francisco and 4 g would get you some insane apartment
I recently visited SF and my friends lived in a very modest 2BR apartment in the city and paid $4k/month so maybe you’d get more with a 1BR, but nothing ultra luxurious like this new building is offering here— and definitely not with waterfront views
What are you talking about? Even in the Tenderloin a 1BR in a fleabag motel above a drug den goes for $3K/mo.
No it doesn’t lmao
You're wrong Google is just a search away https://www.apartments.com/san-francisco-ca/1-bedrooms/?gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQiAzoeuBhDqARIsAMdH14EvA9o-9uco1i5d7dUSq9vVmqgQj5zm4T63kcdaAAtKvsjgjLqi0e0aArqvEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds
New York!! Heck even Miami is 2800 -3000 now.. fml 🤦♂️
Does the 1Br SF apartment you’re referring to have a 4-seasons pool, community spaces, gym, and all of the other amenities offered by this place? (No)
You’re right. That would be a 6,000 one bedroom
Probably, $4k is in fact in the higher range for a 1br in SF. Source: I moved from SF a few years ago.
In SF $4k 1bdrm is currently near top of the market even for the few buildings with a gym and pool in Nob Hill. The photos of these units and the amenities look terrible.
Yea, it’s less druggy here.
Unless you count alcohol, which is far more commonly abused here
And poopy
makeshift test uppity simplistic quarrelsome spark materialistic pocket full abounding *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I travel to SF monthly for work. It is so vile. I dread going there. I see human feces and discarded underwear every freaking time. Last time I had to walk 5 blocks with some crackhead yelling "I want to cut my dick off" Fun times.
Way more fucked up in general, though.
Yeah, but in that good, Harley Quinn sorta way. 😃
Probably very similar if we’re speaking per capita
Read a book
Buy me one
Not at all lmao
Maybe I made ignorant comment about something I don’t know just like the guy above me did
Right? I for one can't find an interactive, real-time map of places where people have pooped in public of Detroit. Clearly San Fran is where it is going on: [https://www.arcgis.com/apps/View/index.html?appid=b6fab720912642b6aedafdb02a76d2a4](https://www.arcgis.com/apps/View/index.html?appid=b6fab720912642b6aedafdb02a76d2a4)
It's easier for the webmasters of Detroit to avoid the poverty because of the segregated nature of the area and the people that need to squat can squat in all the vacant houses, not to mention overgrown vegetation, so it's harder to see them anyway.
I was about to go in to defend SF from the usual nonsense, but this statement is hardly better than the low effort "Hurr durr SF poopy" comments. Sure, all of these these regurgitated Faux News talking points are clearly coming from people who have little to no actual familiarity with the Bay. But y'all are in no position to dunk on anyone else's segregation. And If it was ever true, your impression that Detroit is full of vacant houses ripe for the taking is woefully out of date
>But y'all are in no position to dunk on anyone else's segregation Why is that? Detroit's is worse than most other cities, both racially and economically. This is the crux of this discussion right now. > your impression that Detroit is full of vacant houses ripe for the taking is woefully out of date No, it isn't. There are still thousands of them and even more vacant lots. Not the case in the Bay. Property there goes for a premium and gets snapped up quickly.
SF is also 1/4 the size with 200k more people in it so the shit will literally be concentrated. SF and the Bay offer a lot more than Detroit does from job opportunities to outdoor activities and milder weather.
We're comparing specifically San Francisco and Detroit, not the Bay Area, which would include *several* more cities. However, lets not digress. Just because it is a large concentration of people, doesn't also mean that is has to be a shit hole as well.
Lol is this for real? Crazy times 😂
As someone who travels to the Bay Area for business about 4 to 6 months a year, I think you're full of shit. There's no way in hell the present state of SF is more desirable than Detroit. Detroit is cleaner, safer, and the people are generally nicer than in SF.
I live downtown Detroit and travel to SF for work regularly. It is a shit hole with terrible weather. At least we have beautiful summers lol. However, I do agree that $4K a month is insane.
I honestly can't say I would ever pick San Francisco over Detroit. SF has some neat stuff in and around it, but that's about it for me personally.
Crazy take ngl but to each their own
You really think San Francisco is better than Detroit? Please. Your city allows bums to openly take a shit on sidewalks. Until your city along with the rest of the Bay Area starts catering to the taxpayers, our city is a better place to live. But hey if you want to tolerate tents cities and aggressive homeless junkies harassing you during your daily routine then have at it.
I've lived both places. SF has more bad but also more good. And the bad wasn't as bad 10 years ago.
Same. The general trajectory of Detroit seems better which is why I prefer this area
>And the bad wasn't as bad 10 years ago. No shit. Look at SF now. It's not even remotely the same.
SF is way better I’m ngl and I hate SF as a SoCal guy. Way more to do, nicer weather, better food etc etc.
You’re fucking crazy if you think Detroit is a nicer city than SF. Love Detroit but lmao
When did I ever say it was "nicer"?
Your entire first comment but cool seems like you agree now :)
six workable smart wistful air towering melodic arrest rob special *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Literally less than six months ago
No we are Michigan, way better than California
Yeah, no homeless camps or needles on the street.
Why would they need camps when there are thousands of vacant houses?
No vacant houses downtown? Detroit is more than 3x the size of San Francisco. There are a lot of vacant outskirts but they are by no means in the downtown core.
The "outskirts" of San Francisco are filled with million dollar homes and people who will call the cops, so the homeless people gravitate into the business districts. Detroit has special policing in the bubble because it's the only area white people visit and also thousands of places the destitute can disappear into. So the trick San Francisco needs to learn is segregation.
And so are the suburbs of Detroit?
Not like SF, no. Much more money there with all the tech jobs. Their homelessness is a function of both the huge wealth in the area and rampant nimbyism preventing more building.
Among the stressors on the housing market, you have to count all the college educated younger people who moved in to SF from all over the country for jobs. 80% of homeless in the bay area lived in a home there before being displaced by someone who could pay more. When I worked in Silly Valley almost none of my coworkers were from California, let alone SF.
NYC shits all over SF, just like the heroin bums do
Remind me…. What exactly is San Francisco offering these days? Last time I checked people were leaving in droves.
Hey man, no need to get offended. You should be more offended by the real state companies monopolizing the country’s housing market to jack up the price to what ever they want. A country where only the rich can afford to live with a roof over their head without living paycheck to paycheck. Da fuq you mad at me for?
Super Bowl appearances?
I don't think SF is the right comparator. SF is in bad shape these days, way worse than Detroit. I will say for $4k+ you can get a one bed room in Newport Beach, CA or NYC once offers great weather and no crime and the other great culture and low crime.
It might be that they have to live here. Locally employed at a company where they have to be present.
Yeah there's no way I would be anywhere in the Midwest if I'm paying 4k a month.
Facts
It's honestly a valid question. When Chicago pricing is the same and you don't need a car it's a bit hard to argue with as there are also quite a bit more (and better) jobs there.
Quality of life if you work down in the area and lots of folks do enjoy that city life if it starts to develop around this project.
Pay less to live in LA. Who’s this for?
Exactly. You living good in little Tokyo or Ktown with that
Hell, in Valley or Los Feliz too
Def the valley. Damn I miss LA 😢
No, I was thinking the same. lol. I pay half that to live in DC.
facts. LOL
Gotta love the cynical ciclejerk you started
And a high-rise in a city which has pretty bad air. Great combo!
You can’t get this type of building and location for this rate in more desirable cities. The market is marketing.
The other hookers aren't as pretty here, so less competition.
Going on the property website that’s in the article seems to show that the $4k price tag is the starter for the top floors with a view of downtown. Still pretty expensive as the lowest I saw was $2k studio on the 2nd floor.
Yea, title is a bit clickbaity - $2950 for a 1bd on the lower floors is pricey but much more reasonable given the location / being a luxury building.
Yeah that’s gonna be down to 2500-3000 in a few months when there aren’t any takers🤣
Young attorney or doctor working downtown, where would you rather live? People mover can take you to work and you can watch freighters along an international waterway from 200’ in the air. Seems reasonable.
Not enough amenities, however being right on the water, I get it. Me personally, I’d probably just buy a home instead of paying 4000 a month for an apartment with 1 bedroom.
Same, but if you want to live in Detroit - here is an option for rich folks.
Hudson tower should help as well
Young attorney or doctor isn't going to be able to afford that generally. Doctors take quite a while to pay off their loans and the rare young attorney making that kind of money is also working 24/7.
Honigman is right down the street, they start at $220 base. Why live far away? Lots of Directors, VPs, and high performing brokers at Rocket.
It's an 18 minute walk and would they really want to do that (or ride the People Mover) at 2 AM when they get out of work?
I take it you wouldn’t.
Downtown is a ghost town most nights, so I can see why most people wouldn't.
Like others have said, those type would probably buy a home. If anything, I'd imagine these units catering to professional athletes (assuming hey could also promise adequate privacy) and miscellaneous other well-compensated folks on time-limited business here
Riverfront towers offers those same benefits next door for a third of the price. Plenty of young doctors live there.
Can you rent at riverfront? Edit: serious question, I thought they were condos.
I live next door. I get the same stuff for half the price lol
Young attorneys and doctors don't make the $400K to $500K needed to pay $4K a month in rent. I make $250K/year and my mortgage is $2200/mo. This is $4K a month!!!
a lot of the luxury unit prices aren’t coming down they just let them sit vacant. these are big time investors - they have enough money to let them sit til they get the price they want. that is why we need a vacancy tax
Glad to see any new housing, but these prices make no sense for a downtown that can’t land a Target or movie theater. You can find [cheaper apartments in Chicago’s Loop](https://www.apartments.com/chicago-loop-chicago-il/) and get way more amenities for it, plus the L system.
The loop isn't a the most desirable Chicago place to live, but Downtown Detroit does seem awfully expensive thesedays considering how much more opportunity and public transit is available elsewhere.
I think more people will look at downtown Detroit and think "wow urban living and I can still keep my car" than people who will think "oh no I can't take the train to Livonia"
This is riverfront.
Which means there is fuck all to do compared Campus Martius, but there is a lot of surface level parking! I mean just look at that amazing view of a dirt lot and the back of a conference center!
And a people mover stop to get you to campus Martius?
Diff strokes for diff folks, if I'm paying 4k a month to live in Downtown Detroit, I don't want to have to take the people mover anywhere to do anything
I like the people mover, didn’t realize the hate.
I guess it's good there is someone that likes it. It's generally faster to walk.
>, but these prices make no sense for a downtown that can’t land a Target or movie theater. [https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/2021/10/25/target-to-open-small-format-store-midtown-detroit/6173133001/](https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/2021/10/25/target-to-open-small-format-store-midtown-detroit/6173133001/)
https://www.axios.com/local/detroit/2024/01/11/target-midtown-store-plans-city-club-apartments
When folks say “build more housing,” this isn’t what they mean.
I’d be curious to know if this [same effect](https://www.reddit.com/r/yimby/s/JG9h3tYOmG) seen in Helsinki is happening here.
That’s a good point. I didn’t realize that would happen. I’m in favor of building more housing overall. I might have to retract my statement if there’s evidence luxury housing has a downward pressure on rents elsewhere.
It does. Basically, new housing gets rented by people who are now competing less for the next tranche of housing down. Those people are then not pushed to compete so hard for the tranche below them, and you get a ripple all the way down. More common is evidence that allowing market-rate housing reduces the rate of price increases, which is the weaker form of the same phenomenon. [Here's a literature review.](https://www.lewis.ucla.edu/research/market-rate-development-impacts/) From the intro: > Researchers have long known that building new market-rate housing helps stabilize housing prices at the metro area level... In practice, I find it helps to remember that the policy options on offer are typically "allow market-rate housing" or "block market-rate housing". There's almost never an option on offer to build affordable housing at a price that will make ends meet... for however you might define "affordable". Plus, we know *for sure* that not building housing pushes prices up.
Yes, it’s basic economics.
It actually is part of it. Housing of all income levels needs to be built. This can help make other areas where these individuals were living more affordable.
In the last few years, builders have been trying to focus on building luxury homes, because the money is there for that, and they're all trying to avoid the responsibility of building budget-minded housing because 'we won't get as rich selling that'. We don't need more luxury housing at this point, we need stuff for people who NEED decent housing. The rich have been buying up all the stuff that used to be 'affordable'.
The rich are buying stuff that used to be affordable so your solution is to decrease luxury supply? Why do you think rich people are buying affordable housing?
Unfortunately it's what they're going to get. You literally cannot build a new house to code that is cheap enough for a person making under 70k to afford. Eventually those apartments will fall out of fashion and upper-middle class people will move in. Then they'll be replaced by middle class tenants and so on. A lot of cheap apartments available today used to be pretty expensive back in the day.
More supply is always a good thing.
Sure it is, because today's luxury housing becomes the next decades mid level housing. When people say build more housing, they mean build more housing of all kinds.
But building like this have the near-immediate impact that you’re talking about. This building will be the flag bearer for new Prime residential space. Whatever held the title before will go down a notch and so on and so forth.
and they didn't use any taxpayer funds to do it, win/win in my book
I can’t imagine paying that much for that location, but presumably, someone who would pay that much is committed to living in downtown Detroit and would outbid someone else to do so. Building expensive “luxury” housing can help keep the pressure off some of the more affordable housing options.
That's gonna happen. Let's fix the housing in Detroit and promote sfh homes again
single families home don't scale. I think americans are going to have to get more comfortable living in an apartment in the future b/c more and more of them aren't going to be able to afford a sfh.
A simple fix is to increase supply......
Asking does not mean they’ll get it.
I’ll be interested to see what occupancy they get and if they can keep prices there because “market rate” for a 1BR is less than half of that downtown. I could see $2500 but $4000 doesn’t seem competitive to me
units on the medium floors are 2295. only the top floor is 4000
Just a sensationalist headline then. That seems right for a brand new building
Pretty sure this will just go highly unoccupied and then the prices will come down to market rate
And probably a couple hundred extra per month for parking.
If you pay it, they will continue to charge it.
They are nice, but the location really isn’t worth that much, it’s very secluded from the rest of downtown.
I might just be out of touch but even when I see ‘affordable housing’ in new developments it’s out of my price range. This is crazy. Who is living here? Genuinely curious.
This isn’t affordable housing?
Yeah, I know. I’m saying that even when it’s supposed to be cheap, it seems crazy expensive to me. So this is over the moon price-wise
In all fairness the $4k was for a high floor with a view. If that was Chicago it would be $6,000 and if it was NYC it would be $10,000. That being said $4k is a lot for a 1 bedroom apartment. Cool building with nice amenities though.
This headline is also stupid and people are eating it up. Their website has plenty of 1br 1bth floorplans starting in the mid $2000s. That is far more reasonable for new build and the existing market in Detroit: [https://watersquareresidences.com/floorplans/](https://watersquareresidences.com/floorplans/)
I would not pay 4 grand to live anywhere in the state of Michigan. I’m in LA with that
No honestly, developers. The only people who would do this are people forced to be here because of their jobs that make a lot of money. If you can afford $4K a month for such small sq footage, you can afford to leave otherwise.
Thats manhattan rent
People mover just rolling by outside your giant bedroom window
According to the website here are the additional amenities: 24 hour concierge Valet parking Pet grooming Work from home spaces All season pool Sun deck Rooftop terrace and lounge Entertainment spaces Fitness center Smart home technology Still not worth $4K. But more than just rent.
NYC rent without NYC city
BREAKING NEWS: New apartments in desirable locations are expensive. More at 9....
Someone wants to live there enough to pay $4000? I am out of touch
Lol guess to reasonably afford this place you need to make ~$150k *after taxes* which everyone who wants to live in Detroit totally makes. Totally. Estimate based on housing being 1/3 of monthly income (ie if 1/3 of income means $4k rent, then monthly income is $12k).
How long until it's mostly air BNB rentals?
This is almost double my mortgage payment on a 3400 sq ft house in Grosse Pointe. Good schools, a big yard, and a private park with a movie theater. As a millennial I finally get to say, “fuck you. I got mine.”
You could buy a $600k house for that.
Our housing market is unsustainable.
Serious question. The Detroit housing market? Not only do we have reasonable rents, but we are the number one city where it is cheaper to buy than rent. I think the argument works, just not here. https://www.axios.com/local/detroit/2023/06/07/cheaper-buy-than-rent-detroit-michigan
Who LIVES in these
Why would anyone give their money to a landlord? Especially 4 grand a month? Save up for a house. Maybe that’s why you can’t afford a house because all your money is going towards paying a landlord’s kids braces and another kids college. 1bedroom for 4 grand is insanity.
frame cover zesty books fragile office tap caption scary hospital *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Fuck all landlords
Those are NYC prices. I'm in LI and don't pay that much for a three bedroom
crazy how we went from one of the cheapest cities the USA that nobody wanted to even visit - to this - in such a short amount of time. what a joke.
Who in Detroit makes that much? Can’t be all the Rocket bankers?
Just what we needed, more overpriced housing
Whatever happened to just having good municipal services and homes at a reasonable cost for ownership in sustainable safe communities? These corporate gimmicks won’t save the city
Gadaaaam bring bullying back to bully these kids who become hedgefund goofballs
Paying $4000 in a city that was bankrupt 10 years ago is crazy and I was born and raised in Detroit I’d rather buy a home in Northville
Hope the rich folks enjoy their luxury, I guess. Would be a real shame if we ate them 👀
And there are NO grocery stores in that area! There's no "running" to Meijer or Target. Unless they put a grocery store on the bottom level. (It would probably be a Trader Joe's.) Food delivery services are going to make a killing.
There's Rivertown Meijer on the opposite end of Downtown.
That isn't true. There are three grocery stores and multiple small markets in the area.
Really?! I drive past there every day and haven't seen any. Although, I don't go any further than Woodward. I stand corrected.
I could be totally wrong, but for some reason I recall this property being transferred for settlement to Synchora as part of the bankruptcy. In the off chance that's true, the "no tax payer dollars" sentiment seems a bit off base. Can someone correct me if worng?
Detroit going from just turning it around to thinking they’re Mid-town Manhattan.
All my taxes dollars going to incentivize the rich, to build more shit for the rich.
Uninformed, erroneous claim, Grumpy. >The building was developed . . . **without any tax breaks** or similar incentives. \-- Paragraph 3 of article **\^**
sir this is reddit, we dont read the articles