Jump to content
GRLaker

Suburban Projects

Recommended Posts

47 minutes ago, droonus2000 said:

That’s my guess as well. To enter a market with such entrenched players like Meijer and SpartanNash must be terrifying. But I don’t have any industry experience either. I’ve long said that’s probably the reason why there are less than a dozen Walmart stores to serve the all of West Michigan. 

We will see if other grocery chains enter the market, I’d like a Mariano’s. It has to bring something unique to overcome Meijer and SN. 

While I’m sure that’s what holds companies from coming in (look at Kroger, which used to have locations in GR and is pretty dominant on the east side of the state), I don’t think Amazon is afraid of anyone. :)

Joe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/9/2020 at 8:51 PM, joeDowntown said:

While I’m sure that’s what holds companies from coming in (look at Kroger, which used to have locations in GR and is pretty dominant on the east side of the state), I don’t think Amazon is afraid of anyone. :)

Joe

I'd add that they probably see the success in Aldi, Trader Joe's, etc. as well.

I'd add a few things;

  • Wal-Mart does play conservative here. Their locations are usually all off major thoroughfares and there is zero-to-little signage and advertising.
  • I think Whole Foods will be successful as Meijer seems to have overly segmented their concepts in the GR area. This might not be as excessive in smaller areas, but shopping there has become a very frustrating experience. Some store layouts, like the remodel on Kzoo & 28th, are so different that locating products takes 2-3 times longer than usual. Additionally, their stores seem to hyper targeted against demos. Knapp and Cascade carry a significant amount of premium products vs a store like Alpine. It's night and day difference to the point where I can't find 30-40% of the items I need in some of the more rural layouts.
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, thebeerqueer said:

Wow! They mean business. 

I'm rarely in that area so I don't know if it's new or been there for a while. 

This item is in the building permits report for the city of GR, dated today. 

 

2891 radcliff.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cookin_peacocks said:

The PizzaHut attached to City Barbeque is gone. Like... The building. 

 

What's going on there? Did I miss something?

That's crazy! Those buildings aren't very old. It'll be interesting to see how Whole Foods changes the strip center. It's always been the little strip center that couldn't. Seems like once they'd fill one store, another would close. It's good for that part of 28th. It's looking a little worn.

Joe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, joeDowntown said:

That's crazy! Those buildings aren't very old. It'll be interesting to see how Whole Foods changes the strip center. It's always been the little strip center that couldn't. Seems like once they'd fill one store, another would close. It's good for that part of 28th. It's looking a little worn.

Joe

City bbq isn't closed so I'm guessing that part of building will stay. But the fact they tore down the PizzaHut is crazy

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Cookin_peacocks said:

The PizzaHut attached to City Barbeque is gone. Like... The building. 

What's going on there? Did I miss something?

 

7 hours ago, joeDowntown said:

That's crazy! Those buildings aren't very old. It'll be interesting to see how Whole Foods changes the strip center.  . . . 

Joe

Could it be because of this in the Whole Foods lease?

389408924_WholeFoodsCovenant.png.e4447bdc581f7cc8d36d9d30d677be47.png

Edited by walker
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, joeDowntown said:

That's crazy! Those buildings aren't very old. It'll be interesting to see how Whole Foods changes the strip center. It's always been the little strip center that couldn't. Seems like once they'd fill one store, another would close. It's good for that part of 28th. It's looking a little worn.

Joe

I bet we'll see the Container Store finally go in across the street by REI now. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, walker said:

 

Could it be because of this in the Whole Foods lease?

 

Wow, that is quite restrictive! No coffee shops, pizza places, organic restaurants. I could see them landing Whole Foods and letting Pizza Hut out of their lease (seems like an inconvenient place for Pizza Hut). Surprised they ripped the building down though. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, joeDowntown said:

Surprised they ripped the building down though. :)

I wonder if the structure was torn down to improve the visibility from 28th Street.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cascade - The former Cascade Commons is being converted into a new Operations Center for Northpointe Bank. The design architect, Ghafari Associates, shared these progress photos a week ago -

2021_01_07_Cascade_North%20Pointe%20Bank

2021_01_07_Cascade_North%20Pointe%20Bank

2021_01_07_Cascade_North%20Pointe%20Bank
Source: Instagram | @ghafari_associates

Cascade -

The former Cascade Commons is being converted into a new Operations Center for Northpointe Bank. The design architect, Ghafari Associates, shared these progress photos a week ago -

2021_01_07_Cascade_North%20Pointe%20Bank

2021_01_07_Cascade_North%20Pointe%20Bank

2021_01_07_Cascade_North%20Pointe%20Bank
Source: Instagram | @ghafari_associates

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Walker Master Plan has been updated and posted. https://ciwalkermi.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/66963

My daughter worked on this while she worked for McKenna in 2020BC (before covid).  :-)  Proud of that kid.

Maybe someone with experience can answer this, but why is this plan so hard to read?  I call myself an armchair urban planner and this was hard to consume.  Maybe my brain is too used to powerpoints but I feel like i would need to print this out to read it.  

Edited by grandrollerz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw this last night - The approved proposal will now consist of (60) 1-BR units, (92) 2-BR's, and (88) 3-BR's. It looks even less inspiring than the Studio 28 redevelopment.

Quote

 

Studio 28 redeveloper gets green light for GR housing project
Christa Ferguson | Wood TV 8
January 16, 2021

GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. (WOOD) — The developer who transformed the former site of Wyoming’s iconic Studio 28 into community housing will soon do the same in Grand Rapids. The Grand Rapids Planning Commission approved the final site plan for HOM Flats at Maynard Thursday. The 240-unit development will sit on 12.4 acres located off Maynard Avenue and Lake Michigan Drive NW and provide mid-market housing for Grand Rapids’ workforce, according to developer Vishal Arora. The planning commission previously rejected the site plan because it didn’t meet all the city guidelines and listed more housing units than what was previously approved. The earlier plan by Magnus Capital Partners called for five buildings that were four stories each. The newly approved project is for seven buildings, only one of which is four stories...

 

2021_01_17_Grand%20Rapids_HOM%20Flats%20

2021_01_17_Grand%20Rapids_HOM%20Flats%20

2021_01_17_Grand%20Rapids_HOM%20Flats%20
Source: Wood TV 8 | Courtesy Magnus Capital Partners

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw that in the city packet. One thing that annoys me about this plan (and a lot of other mutual-unit residential (the development on Knapp street is another): why do they put the retention ponds at the front of the property? They’re ugly, fenced in wastelands. I’m surprised they allow them along the street. Maybe someone knows why they do this?

Joe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, joeDowntown said:

I saw that in the city packet. One thing that annoys me about this plan (and a lot of other mutual-unit residential (the development on Knapp street is another): why do they put the retention ponds at the front of the property? They’re ugly, fenced in wastelands. I’m surprised they allow them along the street. Maybe someone knows why they do this?

Joe

neighborhood behind this property has had drainage issues and it sounds like they wanted to move water towards the south purposely.  (I have not seen the grading plan)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a lot of pushback from the neighbors on this one.  I'm glad the planning commision approved it.  We need more housing yesterday.  This kind of reminds me of the Griggs project near Breton/Burton.  Neighbors feel entitled to a parcel of undeveloped land that they don't own.  If I lived next to an undeveloped large parcel in the city, I would assume it would eventually get developed.  No, your property values are not going to tank by "hundreds of thousands of dollars".  Some of the neighbors on the Grggs project were concerned about an increase in crime..... from a $300-500k condos for those 55+.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/17/2021 at 1:57 PM, joeDowntown said:

I saw that in the city packet. One thing that annoys me about this plan (and a lot of other mutual-unit residential (the development on Knapp street is another): why do they put the retention ponds at the front of the property? They’re ugly, fenced in wastelands. I’m surprised they allow them along the street. Maybe someone knows why they do this?

Joe

A lot of municipality planners come from the "old school" where out in the suburbs, you want to create a "park-like" escape from the big city. That's where the term "industrial parks" and "office parks" came from. So they insist on the drainage easements (quasi greenspace) being at the road if possible. 

I heard that earlier iterations of this project were a lot better, and then it was beaten up by the neighbors into this really bad Kentwood-esque apartment plan. 

It looks like a really bad motel off the Ohio Turnpike. The residents won't even get balconies or patios. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GRDadof3 said:

A lot of municipality planners come from the "old school" where out in the suburbs, you want to create a "park-like" escape from the big city. That's where the term "industrial parks" and "office parks" came from. So they insist on the drainage easements (quasi greenspace) being at the road if possible. 

I heard that earlier iterations of this project were a lot better, and then it was beaten up by the neighbors into this really bad Kentwood-esque apartment plan. 

It looks like a really bad motel off the Ohio Turnpike. The residents won't even get balconies or patios. 

That stinks that they beat the project up. I still think it's a great location, and probably will be a very popular development (especially the proximity to downtown and GVSU). 

The thing that bothers me most about retention ponds at the front is that it adds quasi greenspace, but then they put a big ugly fence around it, which sticks out like a sore thumb. It'd be nice if the retention ponds were built in a way that they don't need fencing (natural wetlands?) OR put them in the back where they're not such an eyesore.

Joe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, joeDowntown said:

That stinks that they beat the project up. I still think it's a great location, and probably will be a very popular development (especially the proximity to downtown and GVSU). 

The thing that bothers me most about retention ponds at the front is that it adds quasi greenspace, but then they put a big ugly fence around it, which sticks out like a sore thumb. It'd be nice if the retention ponds were built in a way that they don't need fencing (natural wetlands?) OR put them in the back where they're not such an eyesore.

Joe

For years we've been hearing about wetlands loss.  Seems like this would be encouraged as a tool to add/improve wetlands capacity, JoeDowntown.  I wonder why it's not.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, cstonesparty said:

For years we've been hearing about wetlands loss.  Seems like this would be encouraged as a tool to add/improve wetlands capacity, JoeDowntown.  I wonder why it's not.    

A lot of them become wetlands over time, especially the ones that retain water most of the year except in the very dry months. Not all of them have fences, just the ones where the landowner has a fear of liability. :rolleyes: 

I believe that any new development has to have a drainage retention or detention area now. Nothing is allowed to leave the site and go into the rivers and streams (and eventually the lakes), particularly polluted water from parking lots with oil and salt on them. Some of them are buried, but if you drive by any new development, commercial or residential, you'll find a detention or retention area. 

If your development is proposed to remove a wetland, you have to replace it within the same watershed area. That's my "knows enough to be dangerous" recollection of how the DEQ handles wetlands. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/19/2021 at 5:00 PM, Onekama said:

image.thumb.png.7aecc70f414c379c27e405a6ffe34e69.png

No retention pond at the front on the next project that this same group just proposed in Holland :)

https://www.woodtv.com/news/ottawa-county/studio-28-redeveloper-reveals-22m-housing-project-near-holland/

 

I'll bet that back right area is existing wetlands. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've noticed quite a bit of activity along Patterson near the airport. The yellow lots had their tree's cleared out within the last 2 weeks or so.

Anyone have any information?

 

2021-02-02_13-27-03.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • 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.