Big project(s) coming for downtown?

[torgo]

So, to summarize the last five pages: Some big development might be happening somewhere downtown, but no one knows where it would go, when it could happen, what it might be, or who is involved.

Sounds great, thanks for all the great info!

Carry on...

[Veloise]

Not to mention the fact that Grand Rapids is trying to reinvent itself as a "Green" city, with a strong local economy. I wonder how the folks running local first would feel about a Hard Rock Cafe coming to town.

At least the Chipotle coming to 28th St. will try to use as much local food as possible.

[Mark Miller]

Though your premise of infill is well taken, your writing-off of additional tall buildings in downtown is "old think" at best.

We need infill of all types of height downtown. Granted, in areas away from the river, limit highrises to one or two per city block (to allow light diffusion). In large open areas like the Dash West/WMCA Lots or the Market/Fulton Lot, take a page from Rockefeller Center in NYC and develop (for GR) streetrail-served vertical urban villages with a small number of highrises, a slightly larger number of midrises and a dominent selection of lowrises. The Dash West/YMCA Lots, in particular, would be DYNAMIC under such a higher use as both a student-oriented urban enclave and as a hip mixed-use west downtown hub of entertainment, hotels, destination retail, etc. (think GR's merging of Boston's Back Bay and Chicago's Fullerton/Broadway/State intersection - all sandwiched conveniently between GVSU-Pew and the Bridge Street Entertainment/Retail District).

From the perspective of those on US-131, that would look stunning AND would be a super draw for driving suburbanites due to its crazy convenient location directly next to a highway exit/entry. It's almost a perfect storm for transit-oriented development - maybe even more so than what will be its very good prototype footprint at Market/Fulton.

[GRDadof3]

I absolutely disagree with you on this one. I'm sorry, but it would be a stretch for a company that depends on disposable income to attract dining customers to locate in GR right now. Most, if not all, Hard Rock Cafes are located in major cities or tourists destinations. Mark my words, Grand Rapids will not get a Hard Rock Cafe. There simply isn't the traffic or demand for it. Especially right now.

[arcturus]

I would be more excited about six 5-story buildings than one 30-story building and I would be willing to bet that the 6 buildings would do far more for our city than the 1 building, particularly in regards to liveability.

[GRDadof3]

Liveability is *enhanced* in the one building scenario. It's more cost efficient and you've now got 5 properties available that can be used as parks, neighborhood community/recreation centers, downtown shopping, cultural, or other multi-use possibilities ... certainly big draws. This would complement the downtown living experience and enhance property values. Even better if the properties are adjacent.

The consistent theme here seems to be how to attract people downtown. So I ask what's the sense of building 6 residential stuctures without amenities? What's the attraction? Also, from a mass transit viewpoint, does it not simplify things? Urban planners are recognizing these benefits too.

[Mark Miller]

Liveability is *enhanced* in the one building scenario. It's more cost efficient and you've now got 5 properties available that can be used as parks, neighborhood community/recreation centers, downtown shopping, cultural, or other multi-use possibilities ... certainly big draws. This would complement the downtown living experience and enhance property values. Even better if the properties are adjacent.

The consistent theme here seems to be how to attract people downtown. So I ask what's the sense of building 6 residential stuctures without amenities? What's the attraction? Also, from a mass transit viewpoint, does it not simplify things? Urban planners are recognizing these benefits too.

[wingbert]

When the Detroit franchise opened, much was made of the wall art schwag donated by local musicians. Motown artists, and the ones who grew up in the 'burbs (Madonna) or made their names nearby (Bob Seger) dug through their attics and came up with items. Are there enough GR-renowned artists to do up one wall in a powder room?

[metrogrkid]

Well let's see, one wall would be for Del Shannon, another for the DeBarge family, the third goes to the Red Hot Chili Peppers, and the fourth is all gospel. Slap some Verve Pipe on the ceiling and you're done.

[Yankee Fan]

You absolutely have to be kidding about being "done" with such a gigantic oversight of a little legend known as AL GREEN. Wow. I guess there would be no hope of knowing about Ottawa Hills grads Jeffrey Daniels (Shalamar member w/ Jodie Watley and Howard Hewett) and Adina Howard, huh?

[arcturus]

I certainly did not state nor infer that we should build six residential structures. The buildings I am referring to are mixed-use. I assume that if we are talking about downtown, then we are always talking about mixed-use buildings. You know, the ones with retail on the first floor. So the six buildings can house downtown shopping...although I would be real careful about any of the other stuff listed. Recreation centers and cultural entities are some of the last things we want at the storefront level. These things are good for the upper floors of mixed-use downtown buildings. I am not sure how neighborhood centers, rec centers or more cultural stuff will be a big draw. We need retail. We have plenty of the other stuff.

And parks, the last thing we need downtown is more open space, whether it is parking lots or green space. Keep the parks in the nieghborhoods.

Fill the open space with buildings, don't make more of it.

As far as the towers simplifying things, that is exactly the problem. We should not try to simplify something as complex as good urbanism. Oversimplification of complex systems is the problem and leads to the kind of crap we do not want in our cities. Urbanism is rich and layered and messy. Towers are not.

If urban planners are recognizing it, they are a bit behind the times. Anyway, we don't need any more urban planners...what we need is urban designers.

[Mark Miller]

Sorry, but in my opinion this is the wrong assessment. Creating centralized residential density with social bonus zoning creates opportunities for downtown revitalization with many, many synergistic benefits. Grand Rapids is certainly no Vancouver but we can morph some of their ideas for something unique to our area. Why must buildings be mixed use if there's retail nearby? Create sufficient residential density and you'll have all the stores and businesses anyone could need.

I mentioned simplification, not oversimplification, but I'm nevertheless interested in the comment about oversimplification of complex systems ... could you elaborate?

Regarding the urban designers, I encourage a read I posted posted earlier, within which is stated ... "The other site of intense scrutiny by urban designers these days is downtown Vancouver".

Maybe we should hire a few of them

http://www.archnewsnow.com/features/Feature177.htm

[yankee_farmer]

Is anyone discussing towers involved with the construction industry? The current costs per square foot of high rise structures is out of this world, and Grand Rapids is a city where a developer has other options than building up. There is quite a bit of land in suitable (even attractive!) locations for development where creative mixed-use projects could maximize re-use of urban brownfield parcels (TAX CREDITS) while minimizing construction costs. Lets be honest, folks, high rise projects in much more lucrative environments are being put on hold, it is unlikely a new one will get proposed for GR.

As I have repeatedly mentioned, my money is on a small to medium-sized mixed use development in not quite what we would think of as "downtown" but more likely in an area to be serviced by planned mass-transport infrastructure. I would expect one of the usual GR names and sources of capital to be involved, along with a local construction/development firm.

[GRDadof3]

Is anyone discussing towers involved with the construction industry? The current costs per square foot of high rise structures is out of this world, and Grand Rapids is a city where a developer has other options than building up. There is quite a bit of land in suitable (even attractive!) locations for development where creative mixed-use projects could maximize re-use of urban brownfield parcels (TAX CREDITS) while minimizing construction costs. Lets be honest, folks, high rise projects in much more lucrative environments are being put on hold, it is unlikely a new one will get proposed for GR.

As I have repeatedly mentioned, my money is on a small to medium-sized mixed use development in not quite what we would think of as "downtown" but more likely in an area to be serviced by planned mass-transport infrastructure. I would expect one of the usual GR names and sources of capital to be involved, along with a local construction/development firm.

[yankee_farmer]

yankee_farmer and I must travel in close circles (and not know it). Personally, I'd like to see a downtown bustling with people and activities rather than another skyscraper that looks cool from Alpine Ave. The latter does not always equal the former.

Have you heard about the "planning" project? Center City area?

[GRDadof3]

No I have not, please elaborate?

[yankee_farmer]

I can't, because I only know bits and pieces and I don't know if it's for public consumption yet. I just like to keep people guessing, apparently.

It may or may not involve a high-profile planner, and it may or may not cover all of center city, and it may or may not be giving particular attention to the areas around the Amway Grand Plaza and the riverfront. I don't know who's paying for it though.

[GRDadof3]

Interesting, I must say I was hoping for a project that would re-juvenate another portion of the city, but I look forward to hearing about this one.

[AlexPKeaton]

I take that to mean Division between Wealthy and Franklin. I don't think there's any big secret that the ICCF has been planning something in that area, but nothing has been officially announced.

[GRDadof3]

I take that to mean Division between Wealthy and Franklin. I don't think there's any big secret that the ICCF has been planning something in that area, but nothing has been officially announced.

[yankee_farmer]

I think it's different than their vision/master plan for that area that pretty much everyone has seen. It sounds like it's quite a bit more refined (and exciting) now.

[GRDadof3]

So we have 2 projects. Both sound exciting. I hope we will be hearing more soon.

I am glad they are in two very different-feeling parts of the city.

[Rizzo]

All the private owners along the riverfront are master planning the east bank into a street level promenade. Buildings will be retrofitted with retail bays opening out to the promenade. Possibly cafes around Forslund and JW. The Interurban Bridge along with the GR&I bridge will be reborn as modern cable stayed. A vision of course.

[Allison Slater]

GR&I? Is that the blue? Blue should be kept as is, it's rather iconic. The rest aren't quite so important.

[GRDadof3]

All the private owners along the riverfront are master planning the east bank into a street level promenade. Buildings will be retrofitted with retail bays opening out to the promenade. Possibly cafes around Forslund and JW. The Interurban Bridge along with the GR&I bridge will be reborn as modern cable stayed. A vision of course.