Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

111 Excellent

About whitemice

  • Rank
  • Birthday 12/06/1972

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Highland Park, Grand Rapids, MI

Recent Profile Visitors

708 profile views
  1. And there is a full Walgreens at Michigan & Fuller; that is 3.5 pharmacies on the corridor. The RAPD#19 and RAPID#13 run past the Michigan & Fuller Walgreens. It seems to me the pharmacy need is well satisfied; as a pharmacy user in that area I don't see a problem. Ditto. This is a huge addition of variety to the district.
  2. PREACH! Grand Rapids has bus lanes the same way we have form-based non-exclusive zoning: sorta, kind, maybe, not really. Grand Rapid's motto should be changed to: "A great city, despite half-assing every damn thing!"
  3. That is the new direction; that was stated at the last MobileGR meeting. If there is development or other work expected the intersection might as well be asphalt for when it gets torn up. I do not believe anyone expects this to be a "permanent" reconfiguration as it is not really compliant with either the Michigan St. Corridor plan or the Vital Streets overlay. It is an interim/incremental improvement.
  4. 'Traffic' improvements for Michigan St planned in Fall 2020 & Spring 2021. https://on.wmmi.net/2k84YyY
  5. This! If we took safety seriously Level 2 wouldn't even be a thing. This is Distracted Driving Enablement.
  6. This! There is a pedestrian & transit oriented road diet planned for Michigan east of College. We'll have to see how ambitious that is.
  7. This. It is a technology trial; it doesn't add any utility. It also provides people a first-hand experience of how awkward and uncomfortable this technology will be.
  8. Same. I have a WAVE card (the RAPID) and a Ventra card (CTA/PACE/Metra). Both are set to auto-load; and I never think about them. The only time I have used the Ventra app is to purchase Metra (commuter rail) tickets as those are zone based and not tap-on.
  9. Other than along Lafayette, which has some environmental issues, there is room for maybe 2 - 3 more developments before the ASP (Area Specific Plan) is tapped out on locations for significantly increased density. Trying to step over their ASP is going to generate a lot of blow back. It will be interesting to see if, from a developer's perspective, dealing with the site issues along Lafayette will be worth being in Belknap. There is probably lower hanging fruit elsewhere, IMO.
  10. Does anyone have/keep a list of the current housing development projects? I was having a conversation with someone from one of the housing organizations and he stated that, currently, every housing development in the city limits was an affordable housing project [I can think of about five off hand]. We agreed that this fact - if true [ I had no grounds to argue ] - was both great and disturbing. Does it mean that market-rate housing is either choked by regulatory nonsense and/or now fiscally non-viable? That's bad. I have also heard from a person-of-significance from a construction-company-of-significance that they had projects on-hold|shelved due to labor constraints. Another interesting data point (yet I admit to being skeptical that what construction companies say should be taken at face value). Any vacancy rate below ~15-20% indicates a constrained market; they are jumping around, but all jumps are within the red range.
  11. Anecdotally, it seems like it has. As someone who shops for rentals, as I have have a steady flow of friends-n-family moving into the city, the number of incentives has certainly increased; things like first month free, waived security deposit, etc... Those kinds of things seemed way less frequent 2016 - 2018. So, who knows, maybe markets work? [at least for the 80% - 120% AMI]. Finding an apartment in the $750 - $950 range is currently also easier; availability has clearly increased. My unsubstantiated gut feeling is that a glob of people have moved from those units - mostly duplexes or subdivided-previously-oneplexes - into the modern, much nicer, amenity laden commercial developments, freeing them up. Potential downside of the city's recent overly complicated rental application regulations may be that landlord's are now discouraging potential tenants who may be on the edge from filling out the application, to prevent having to provide a reason of denial. In the end it may have some effect of pushing some housing discrimination off-book.
  12. The DASH bus is already right there, across Leonard. Also not far from the RAPID#11 or the interstate. The RAPID#7 is an easy walk. Plus there are already bike lanes. This is an excellent location for lots of housing. Very excited to see 310 housing units ... 250 parking spaces; very much a move in the right direction. Aside: this is on my daily commute, I pass it 2 - 4 times a day. It is a big blank space, I personally look forward to having something potentially useful there.
  13. I work for a company that services electric vehicles; in the material handling industry. That number is sort-of true. It reduces the complexity of the drive train by ~80%. You still have all the rest of the vehicle, unchanged; the rest of the vehicle is a lot of the vehicle. A vehicle, unlike a personally owned vehicle today, that is in actual service to multiple users ~12 hours a day takes way more of beating, right down to the door handles. Some are, some aren't. Honestly this is nothing but speculation at this point. Shared vehicles may take of in urbanized areas. But in exurbs and rural areas - no way - the math can never work. That is still a lot of owned vehicles. The current TNCs (Uber, Lyft, etc...) model of parasitism of the value of people's personal vehicles have given people a very false impression of what the cost of truly shared fleet vehicles will be - and autonomy will not decrease that cost. Shared fleet vehicles will also be much more like buses than the image of the posh recliner floating down a highway which companies like the currently sell. In response to these realities it seems more reasonable to expect that many affluent households will still chose ownership. Remember shared AV vehicles have to be stored, fueled, and services somewhere by someone. They all will need regulatory inspections. And they will need to be cleaned somewhere by someone, just like a transit vehicle today. When people don't own it, they treat it differently. It is not a manner of when, but if, however both the precisely when and the precisely how are very open questions. People who talk as if they know those answers should not be taken seriously. There are infrastructure issues like RSUs (road side units - required for AVs); who will pay for them, how will they be managed. There are all the issues of regulation and permitting. There are serious issues regarding equity and accessibility. And there remains the geometry problem: unless AVs carry significantly more people for vehicle [meaning not door-to-door service] they do not solve any capacity problems. I am confident EVs and AVs change things, but likely far less so than some Futurists are proposing. Physics, Geometry, and Human Behavior cannot be eliminated from the equation by any technology. They muddy the picture. Fortunately we already have the technologies to very effective deal with the demand; there is no need to wait for a silver bullet.
  14. The city's Strategic Plan, meant to bridge Operations and "The Master Plan(s)": http://urbangr.org/GRStrategicPlan20202023 The mobility goals are ambitions.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.