Jump to content

GVSU Downtown Development


GRDadof3

Recommended Posts


To me, tunnels are just kind of dark and depressing and they require extra lighting and security and a whole host of other problems. It's like saying, we're just going avoid dealing with the fact that this road was designed strictly for cars and put the pedestrians down here. Perhaps we should also put a tunnel at Fulton and Ottawa, so that after an event at Van Andel people can safely get back to the parking garages.

Out on a trail out in a sparsely developed area, a tunnel might be okay. But on a street that is 2 blocks from one of the main intersections in downtown, that does not seem like an acceptable idea. The area needs to be modified to slow down the cars and safely accommodate the pedestrians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, tunnels are just kind of dark and depressing and they require extra lighting and security and a whole host of other problems. It's like saying, we're just going avoid dealing with the fact that this road was designed strictly for cars and put the pedestrians down here. Perhaps we should also put a tunnel at Fulton and Ottawa, so that after an event at Van Andel people can safely get back to the parking garages.

Out on a trail out in a sparsely developed area, a tunnel might be okay. But on a street that is 2 blocks from one of the main intersections in downtown, that does not seem like an acceptable idea. The area needs to be modified to slow down the cars and safely accommodate the pedestrians.

Tunnels and overpasses are pretty expensive. I remember working on one at WMU many many (20) years ago and it was over $1 Million (for one that bikes and peds could use). Definitely narrowing Fulton there, with the emphasis shifted to pedestrians, would do wonders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be difficult to fit a special tunnel into the narrow strip of land with the river, bridge deck, and overpass supports.

There's already a striped and signaled crosswalk at Mt Vernon (by the gas station).

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source...,327.83,,0,4.38

Here's an option: use the existing freeway overpass as protection -- an awning -- for a new crosswalk, have it terminate on the north side here:

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source...,327.83,,0,4.38

Just add overhead lighting, signage, and pavement striping. I'd include a pedestrian island in the middle, too. Don't even have to steal from a traffic lane, as there is already a "beam me up" center lane to nowhere already striped. (Click on the Streetview arrows to head east; it vanishes nearer to the bridge deck.)

Edited by Veloise
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't there a sidewalk along the river right there that ends on the north side of Fulton? How hard would it be to just extend that a bit further south to get under Fulton and come up the other side?

That is where the Riveredges trail ends just north of Fulton. Here are the problems I see with that.

--It would be costly to extend the rock bed supporting the trail under the river and then build more steps up the concrete retaining wall. --It probably wouldn't be usable in the winter.

--It wouldn't be handicap accessible without another large investment to put in ramps, not to mention that a lot of people would be too lazy to walk down the 20-30 steps and back up on the other side.

This might be more feasible as part of a larger project extending the trail south down the river, but there are lots of different owners involved on all the riverfront parcels to the south on the west side of the river.

This document, http://www.ci.grand-rapids.mi.us/download_...rridorpart3.pdf , does a good idea of showing what has been developed through the Green Grand Rapids process, and what some of the options are for engineering it. (You can find the previous two files in this document here: http://www.ci.grand-rapids.mi.us/index.pl?page_id=8572)

I really like the idea of continuing the Riveredges trail by having the crossing right at the River. That said, I think that Veloise's suggestion is the most reasonable at this point in time, until the riverwalk can be extended to the south. The 131 overpass really does create a nice shelter for the elements in the winter, and the sidewalk on the south side that leads straight to the site of the A&P Warehouse is kept pretty clean during the winter (it was part of my old bike commute). It could even be widened pretty easily.

And if an island was placed in the middle of Fulton, it would make the crossing very similar to the one just to the West that goes from the DeVos Center (the main part of the Pew Campus) to the dorms on the south side of Fulton. That one is not perfect, but seems to function okay and be reasonably safe for pedestrians, of which there are quite a few.

Edited by fotoman311
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the infrastructure ideas are interesting but...pedestrians tend to act like beads of mercury spilled out of a broken thermometer: they follow the shortest, most direct route. They aren't going to climb stairs (ramps) to go up and down via an overpass. They aren't going to descend to the river to walk under the bridge. They will go straight across, at wherever they emerge from one side, and aim towards a point that's convenient for their destination on the other.

Keep in mind than any non-grade crossing would have maintenance issues, require extensive lighting, and not feel "safe" at certain times of the day and night. (As a grrrl, I would never go underneath a bridge when there's a grade-level alternative.)

Right now there's probably minimal pedestrian crossing traffic at this mid-block location, and establishing offices in the cell tower building is not likely to affect that. (One tends to park near the building that contains one's office, not across campus.)

I've spent some time on this bridge, talking to fisherpeople, photographing the A/P billboard located in back of the gas station, and connecting to Fulton from the CTB sidewalk area. It hardly qualifies as a Calvin's Crossing situation.

(That freeway underpass wall sure seems to have Tracy Van Duinen's name written all over it)

Edited by Veloise
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is where the Riveredges trail ends just north of Fulton. Here are the problems I see with that.

--It would be costly to extend the rock bed supporting the trail under the river and then build more steps up the concrete retaining wall. --It probably wouldn't be usable in the winter.

--It wouldn't be handicap accessible without another large investment to put in ramps, not to mention that a lot of people would be too lazy to walk down the 20-30 steps and back up on the other side.

This might be more feasible as part of a larger project extending the trail south down the river, but there are lots of different owners involved on all the riverfront parcels to the south on the west side of the river.

This document, http://www.ci.grand-rapids.mi.us/download_...rridorpart3.pdf , does a good idea of showing what has been developed through the Green Grand Rapids process, and what some of the options are for engineering it. (You can find the previous two files in this document here: http://www.ci.grand-rapids.mi.us/index.pl?page_id=8572)

I really like the idea of continuing the Riveredges trail by having the crossing right at the River. That said, I think that Veloise's suggestion is the most reasonable at this point in time, until the riverwalk can be extended to the south. The 131 overpass really does create a nice shelter for the elements in the winter, and the sidewalk on the south side that leads straight to the site of the A&P Warehouse is kept pretty clean during the winter (it was part of my old bike commute). It could even be widened pretty easily.

And if an island was placed in the middle of Fulton, it would make the crossing very similar to the one just to the West that goes from the DeVos Center (the main part of the Pew Campus) to the dorms on the south side of Fulton. That one is not perfect, but seems to function okay and be reasonably safe for pedestrians, of which there are quite a few.

That's what the DDA is recommending too as a good fix (island in the middle). Anyone seriously want to work on this? Meet with GVSU/MDOT/DDA?

I would disagree a bit Veloise. This won't be just offices for the business college, it will contain classrooms. I think there will be an uptick in peds. Maybe not like the Mt Vernon crossing, but more than there is now. And I see people sprinting across Fulton right there every time I'm in that area taking pictures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's what the DDA is recommending too as a good fix (island in the middle). Anyone seriously want to work on this? Meet with GVSU/MDOT/DDA?

I would disagree a bit Veloise. This won't be just offices for the business college, it will contain classrooms. I think there will be an uptick in peds. Maybe not like the Mt Vernon crossing, but more than there is now. And I see people sprinting across Fulton right there every time I'm in that area taking pictures.

A crossing is definetly a must. There is already a significant number of people crossing from the parking to the Eberhard Center and the Engineering building for classes and conferences. In addition with this building replaced, people may want to start walking along the river south of Fulton as a river walk. Bummer, wouldnt be able to play Frogger across Fulton anymore :scared: . Both a crossing and a riverwalk extension would be nice. Its almost a liability for Grand Valley when you have buildings across from each other on a busy street.

If you ever drive south down from Burger King and get stopped for 5 minutes by students crossing you realize how many student pedestrians there are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BK is sitting on a gold mine and they know it. QDI would probabally be willing to negotiate, But they got alot more money than Devries should there be a battle.

I wonder tho, Is it really that expensive for GVSU to build another ramp? They really need that many empty lots downtown? The community college has multiple ramps, two of them Giant. The city builds a new ramp every six months, it would seem the university would be able to weave itself into an urban fabric too. Maybe there is more to GVSU's master plan for downtown than meets the eye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking about that myself but here is what I think GVSU is trying to do. They want to move everything but the core departments out of Allendale and into GR. The thing is that it costs money to do that. That is why they have been moving one department every couple of years. Right now I think they are close but probally have a few more that need to move out. Once they get everything moved out that they want to they will at that time start to convert a parking lot to a ramp one per year until they get all of them done. The thing is that yes ramps offer a ton more parking but they also come a handicap. You have to maintain them yearly and then they need to replaced as salt from Michigan Winters eats away at the concrete and steel. I would say ten more years and gvsu will be sitting pretty close to finishing the transition. I would like them to move the atheletics into GR but I dont think the West Side would like to see a 75k seat stadium footprint. Of course if they got approval from the DEQ and Kent County along with the EPA butterwoth could be inticing as it is all clear and would be the only open land large enough for a sport facilties that GVSU would need to go Div 1 if they decide in 10 to 20 years from now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well they'd probabally Go D1AA (FCS) Before they went into the big bowl conferences. I understand what you're saying about room for a 75k seat venue, But a college stadium that large is only reserved for the big dogs. To be D1 your stadium I believe needs to be 15k minimun, Most MAC Schools are right between that and 30k. (Temple plays at Financial Field which seats 69k, but that's where the Eagles play). I'm pretty sure we could find room enough on the west side for a small D1 venue. You wouldn't need a sea of parking like the silverdome either, just use all the ramps that are all over downtown already, shuttle services could make a fortune on game day. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking about that myself but here is what I think GVSU is trying to do. They want to move everything but the core departments out of Allendale and into GR. The thing is that it costs money to do that. That is why they have been moving one department every couple of years. Right now I think they are close but probally have a few more that need to move out. Once they get everything moved out that they want to they will at that time start to convert a parking lot to a ramp one per year until they get all of them done. The thing is that yes ramps offer a ton more parking but they also come a handicap. You have to maintain them yearly and then they need to replaced as salt from Michigan Winters eats away at the concrete and steel. I would say ten more years and gvsu will be sitting pretty close to finishing the transition. I would like them to move the atheletics into GR but I dont think the West Side would like to see a 75k seat stadium footprint. Of course if they got approval from the DEQ and Kent County along with the EPA butterwoth could be inticing as it is all clear and would be the only open land large enough for a sport facilties that GVSU would need to go Div 1 if they decide in 10 to 20 years from now.

:rolleyes: GVSU is not moving to Grand Rapids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about extending that East about another 50 yards. :)

Interestingly, there are no curb cuts along Fulton between the Kinko's parking lot and the crossing at Mt Vernon (by the gas station).

Ped XINGS want to be sidewalk width. Making them too wide loses the, er, impact. Here's Monroe between the special event parking deck and the performance/expo halls.

monroe1.jpg

Jeff's rendering:

2340825518_3c9d53a67a_o.jpg

And existing conditions:

fulton1.jpg

L@@K, I caught a couple peds:

fulton4.jpg

Edited by Veloise
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Devries fires back. Dilapidated Downtown Building Hoarders unite!

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/ind...vries_says.html

I can see both sides of this argument. I will be interested to watch how it plays out.

It is funny how all of sudden there are "plans" to develop it into a mixed use project...wonder how long those "plans" have been around? Maybe if construction permits and planning approvals for that type of re-development were being sought, I'd be less skeptical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Devries fires back. Dilapidated Downtown Building Hoarders unite!

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/ind...vries_says.html

DeVries disagrees.

"It's really disingenuous to say it's the only spot it will fit, when
if you and I got into a car
we could find plenty of places to do it," he said. "Plus, I'm frustrated with having to defend the concept of if you own something, it's yours."

Veloise doesn't like that.

Link to comment
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.