New hotel proposed for MidTowne Village

[highwayguy]

Probably because Christian Frank lurks here and is going off of our speculation. I doubt he heard it from the developer.

[DJL3CDP]

Brad Rosely appears to be confirming the hotel brand in this video clip. But then again, we never actually hear him say "Hyatt Place", just that they are excited about "the name", so it could just be sneaky editing on the part of WXMI. Not much else new in the story that hasn't already been posted here.

[highwayguy]

Channel 17 was correct. We got approval to "out" the brand and the site is approved by Hyatt for the Hyatt Place-Grand Rapids.

And we are excited about bringing Hyatt to the City! Still a few other hurdles...

Also, the WXMI story had the color renderings that we got today. I can't post them tonight but we will try tomorrow.

DJL

[GRDadof3]

Channel 17 was correct. We got approval to "out" the brand and the site is approved by Hyatt for the Hyatt Place-Grand Rapids.

And we are excited about bringing Hyatt to the City! Still a few other hurdles...

Also, the WXMI story had the color renderings that we got today. I can't post them tonight but we will try tomorrow.

DJL

[Floyd Z]

The rendering shown on fox17 looks fantastic, I can't wait to see a picture of it. I really hope this project get approval.

[Jocar]

Wow, that hotel does look really good. I hope it gets approved as well.

[GRDadof3]

The Planning Commission approved all of the variances EXCEPT for the 20% greenspace rule per site that is part of the new Form Based Code. The project as designed appears to only have 5% greenspace. I personally think that the village green should go toward meeting that requirement.

Not sure what the next step is for the developers, and the decision was quite confusing.

[Nitro]

The Planning Commission approved all of the variances EXCEPT for the 20% greenspace rule per site that is part of the new Form Based Code. The project as designed appears to only have 5% greenspace. I personally think that the village green should go toward meeting that requirement.

Not sure what the next step is for the developers, and the decision was quite confusing.

[Eridony]

The Planning Commission approved all of the variances EXCEPT for the 20% greenspace rule per site that is part of the new Form Based Code. The project as designed appears to only have 5% greenspace. I personally think that the village green should go toward meeting that requirement.

Not sure what the next step is for the developers, and the decision was quite confusing.

[GRDadof3]

If they give this thing a green roof can that count toward the greenspace?

[GaryP]

I personally think that the village green should go toward meeting that requirement.

[ninehigh]

[DJL3CDP]

[GRDadof3]

I don't think that was the one on the foam core today (?) but it's still a nice looking project. That scale makes it look HUGE, which is fine by me. And I like the fact that all that tan and yellow are going to be brick. Every time I see that new Country Inn and Suites at the East Beltline and I-96 behind Northpointe Bank, I keep thinking that facade is going to look like garbage in a few years (EFIS?). Brick, with a little maintenance, can look great for decades.

I also noticed that in the new code, for PRDs, they do require at least 60% brick on the facade.

[DJL3CDP]

I don't think that was the one on the foam core today (?) but it's still a nice looking project. That scale makes it look HUGE, which is fine by me. And I like the fact that all that tan and yellow are going to be brick. Every time I see that new Country Inn and Suites at the East Beltline and I-96 behind Northpointe Bank, I keep thinking that facade is going to look like garbage in a few years (EFIS?). Brick, with a little maintenance, can look great for decades.

I also noticed that in the new code, for PRDs, they do require at least 60% brick on the facade.

[joeDowntown]

Great project! So when's the groundbreaking ceremony.

Midtowne Village looks great from all angles. This will make it even better!

Joe

[GRDadof3]

GRD

I think you are right about the perspective. Still the same building but I think the angle of this is different. As Brad noted, we had less than 24 hours to get these done so they are not placed right or to the right scale. We posted these only to give the Forum some eye candy.

I agree with you that EFIS on this scale would look cruddy after a few years.

Anyway, the Zoning issue is this...

When first approved, we did not have any other Green space requirement because of the park (Village Green). Additionally, there was very little landscaping and limited active use (actually none required) on the parking deck.

With this request, we asked that the new 20% green space requirement be waived and that for this particular lot we be allowed to go with 5%. The reason for this variance was that if you include the park you get 15% or more and that this design was a significant improvement to what was already approved. (Remember, we were approved for a 60,000 sqft building with no active use and no green space). I am not sure the Commission fully grasped this point when they voted unanimously to support every other aspect of the project. As you know from being there, even the staff was a bit surprised and they were working to fix the error.

The key issue is that the support was overwhelming and we expect that the City Commision will approve the package and may (with Staff recomendations) fix this point of confusion.

Thanks UPer's for your support!!!

DJL

[tnd_landscape_architect]

Exactly GRD...in many ways open space requirements actually encourage sprawl because where else but the suburbs is it more likely to find the room for open space....

I will say that I am a big fan of Hyatt Place hotels because every room has huge digital flatscreen TV's!...I almost didnt want to leave!

[GRCityPlanner]

Let me clarify a bit here... the 20% green space requirement applies in the PRD zone district, not in downtown. The downtown district (TN-CC) has a 5% green space requirement, which should be manageable based on several conversations I, and others in this department, have had with many builders, developers, and architects.

There are also ways to reduce the requirement, by installing grass pavers or pervious pavement, green roofs, or being located in the Traditional Neighborhoods areas (Central GR), retaining stormwater on-site, and LEED-certifying the building.

Incidentally, the Planning Commission looked at the Midtowne site again at the end of the meeting last night and decided to waive the green space requirement after all, to accept the site plan as presented (Brad, Dave, and I had worked to increase the landscaping as much as possible, and with the village green and other green space areas in the whole development, there was a total green space calculation of approximately 18.5%).

I have to believe that whoever helped put together the new Form Based Code did not really expect each and every building in a PRD to have 20% greenspace (?) That just screams insanity in an urban setting. I can envision an entire PRD project, let's say that is 10 acres, to set aside 2 acres for open greenspace, but not every building. In a situation like Mid Towne Village, it seems like that creates an undue burden on the individual building owner and designer. Whereas a greenspace set aside for the entire project (like Mid Towne's village green) not only meets the spirit of keeping some area open and green, but does it much more effectively than a piecemeal greespace plan where every building has a little bit of landscaping here and there IMESHO. Knocking 20% off of a footprint might even make many buildings impossible to build, especially on tight urban sites. Parking garages especially, which I'm sure we'd all love to see either under the building or on the ground floors with nice treatments or active uses rather than a surface lot next door to the building, have certain inherent design restrictions which limit how you can lay them out. Cars and traffic in a parking garage don't have a lot of flexibility (like people do).

For instance, take the new parking/liner development project at 38 Commerce. Require 20% greenspace on that site and that project would be sunk. Same with Two West Fulton. I know those project aren't PRD's, but the difference to me is a mere technicality.

If anyone is interested in reading 333 pages of the new Form Based Code, adopted by the city in Nov. 07, knock yourself out and let us know what it says.

Suzanne Schulz did say that there will be kinks to work out on the new code. I think this is one that qualifies. 20% seems a bit arbitrary and should probably be better defined. The line in the code is just that: PRD - Greenspace - 20% (with no qualifiers) Section 5.7.06

[GRDadof3]

Let me clarify a bit here... the 20% green space requirement applies in the PRD zone district, not in downtown. The downtown district (TN-CC) has a 5% green space requirement, which should be manageable based on several conversations I, and others in this department, have had with many builders, developers, and architects.

There are also ways to reduce the requirement, by installing grass pavers or pervious pavement, green roofs, or being located in the Traditional Neighborhoods areas (Central GR), retaining stormwater on-site, and LEED-certifying the building.

Incidentally, the Planning Commission looked at the Midtowne site again at the end of the meeting last night and decided to waive the green space requirement after all, to accept the site plan as presented (Brad, Dave, and I had worked to increase the landscaping as much as possible, and with the village green and other green space areas in the whole development, there was a total green space calculation of approximately 18.5%).

[Eridony]

More info later but please note that the scale of the rendering is off a bit when compared to the surrounding buildings....it is not quite that tall...we just did not have time to get this 100% before the meeting today.

DJL

[DJL3CDP]

Maybe the scale is off a bit, but that doesn't change the fact that the thing looks great. The color of the building makes it fit in well with your other two buildings. I've watched the Women's Center go up from my apartment across 196, and I can't wait to see this building do the same.

[GR Straight Edge]

Gone are the times when Michigan Street NE near downtown Grand Rapids sported tired-looking buildings.

*article snipped*

http://www.mibiz.com/absolutenm/templates/...7&zoneid=32

[Sailor]

That's great news! Quick interest (relatively speaking, of course) in these Michigan Street developments bodes very well.

As far as whether GR can handle more hotel rooms, there were some interesting stats in post #9 of this thread.

[NorthEnder]

That's great news! Quick interest (relatively speaking, of course) in these Michigan Street developments bodes very well.

As far as whether GR can handle more hotel rooms, there were some interesting stats in post #9 of this thread.