numstead

It's a testament to the efficacy of the building codes. That duct on the side of the building is fire-rated by code, and protected the rest of the building for enough time for the fire department to respond. Every commercial kitchen has something like that up to the roof, whether internal to the building or external in the GRBC case, or protective measures around its outlet if it doesn't go up to the roof (I'm thinking of the vents on the side of Terra in Easttown). Kudos to GRFD as well for the quick work of putting it out.

btw, a very different rendering... shows up on the WGVU article... https://www.wgvunews.org/news/2023-11-03/grand-valley-state-university-receiving-30-million-state-supplemental-funding-for-planned-downtown-grand-rapids-tech-hub

So I noticed the other night that they most of GVSU's buildings downtown and by the hospital now have white letters [polite clapping]. The big standout is the Seidman Center which has some very small signage all in blue up at the top. It's completely illegible.

I like the look, but I really wish they'd not use the large blue lettering for signage. I don't know about anyone else, but to me the blue illuminated letters all blend together visually at night. They are so hard to look at and it doesn't matter how big they are. White lettering is so much more legible and still on brand for GVSU.

Very pleased to share that Belknap Place achieved LEED Gold certification... https://www.intarch.com/belknap-place-achieves-leed-gold/

Yeah, a deck would be the best scenario to save park space and perhaps be able to give back the field that is used for overfow. Even a single elevated deck over the existing main parking lot (like the one in gaslight village) would at least double the quantity of parking spaces in that area. I did a rough count and the main lot is around 275 spaces. You could probably get to 600 with a fairly simple deck. Throw some solar panels over top of that bad boy like they did at Bridge Street Market! Even so, you're looking at $20,000 per space (optimistically) for construction... that's a $12M deck. We've been zoo members for the last 4 years and I wouldn't mind shelling out a few bucks to park, especially if I can park in the shade.

It appears that there is a common property owner of 1435 and 1439 Knapp, and that seems to be the most realistic place to put a multi-unit development along there based on the parcel depth. The NE corner of the site is about 240' from the trail with very mature tree coverage betweenThere is a long vacant, and dare I say blighted, house on 1435 and the rest of the site is strewn with debris. The same entity also owns 1335 and 1491 Knapp (red parcels below). The house at 1491 is presently being renovated. There is another property owner along there [rolls eyes at the name of their LLC] with multiple parcels at 1443 and 1449 Knapp, and 2027 Joan (green parcels below). Maybe 1443 gets included somehow in the deal. The first guy they interviewed owns 2036 Joan (blue parcel below), which abuts the park and the possible development site. Of all the houses along that stretch of Knapp and Joan, his, and his business partner neighbor's, are the only ones that can be seen from the trail. I had to chuckle when they mentioned the possible impact on wildlife and did a quick cut to the B-roll of the deer. I live about 1/2 mile south of there and walk the trails frequently. Those deer wander through all the neighborhoods around there, including multiple multi-family residential developments. We've seen them bed down in our front yard at night in the winter and eat our flowers in the spring. They aren't in any more danger by this proposed development. Maybe the birds and other critters that are more dependent on the wetlands habitat that the park provides are more at risk, but if the City puts some stringent stormwater runoff detention/retention requirements on the development I'm sure that would help significantly.

Noticed this afternoon that all the glazing is installed along Monroe and it's obscured (frosted) up to about 10' above street level. Doesn't appear to be any permeability through that side of the building. Safe to assume the front door is at the parking deck. How very suburban...

Is there commercial space? That first floor so far has openings like the ones above for windows and PTAC mechanical units. Seems like ground floor residential.

That's fantastic! My wife is from Strasbourg, France where they have one of the most famous Christmas Markets in Europe, so this will be a bit of a taste of home for her.

Right, but that car wash demo had to go through the extra step of Planning Commission approval before getting a permit. MSU doesn't even need to get a permit.

As I understand it (our firm does a lot of higher-ed work, although I personally don't), the State universities don't have to go through the same channels for building permits as everyone else. The State Constitution gives them that autonomy. They still have to go through the SOM Bureau of Fire Services for building code reviews, which can be more stringent in some respects, so there is still that level of assurance for building safety. In this case of the demolished building, the City's ordinance no longer allows a property owner to demolish a building without a legitimate redevelopment plan in place (a demolition permit has to be obtained). Recent examples of which I'm aware... Spectrum/Corewell had to go through Planning Commission for approvals to tear down the Gill facility in North Monroe, and Profile Films did the same for that eyesore coming down on Ann Street. MSU does not need to apply for a permit, but apparently they did anyway. The City would not award a permit to anyone else with the same lack of a development plan, but they will in this case for the same goodwill that MSU extended.

Thinking about it more, it likely means that they have secured funding from critical sources (private and public) to do the most significant amount of the work, or to at least underwrite the project debt, and that they'll have a more high-profile public fundraising campaign (buy-a-brick style) to pay for the rest.

“We haven’t actually started the fundraising at this point, but we’re confident that the funding is coming together very nicely,” she said. What does that even mean?

hmmm, plans and elevations appear to contradict each other regarding the presence of windows on the short ends

Here's a view of our "Belknap Housing" project from a few days ago. Just a couple couple more weeks of interior work on the upper levels, and some paving and landscaping. I'm pretty happy with the building's presences along the street and the scale with all those existing trees.

Not my(our) project, but perspective as an Architect... A building like that is reviewed under the Michigan Building (Commercial) Code - not the Michigan Residential Code - where there is an exception that allows for windowless spaces provided adequate artificial lighting is provided (MBC Section 1205.1/1205.3). There is a maximum "common path of travel" distance allowed within the unit to a point in the corridor where you have the ability to get to two exits, and they appear to have that covered. The City of GR Ordinance is silent on the interior environment of multi-family residential units. So, its not illegal. There have been some stories in the news media in the last year about proposed university dormitories that included those types of units for density purposes. Lots of critical backlash. Developers must believe there is a market for them. I'm all for good urban density, but I can't ever imagine living in an environment like that and wouldn't be opposed to local or national code amendments that would prohibit residential units without access to natural light.

Yes, Morning Belle is going in by Bobcat Bonnies. Under construction now.

Condado is actually going back next to DWR. Some changes are in the works for the old Omelette Shoppe facade however.

I really wanted to drop the word "arcology" in here and watch everyone freak out, but that would have been a bit of an exaggeration.

mixed-use high rise No, they weren't planning on moving the printing operation there as far as I can remember. I don't believe the images we were cooking up ever made it out publicly. I found a color test print in a folder I have stashed away, but can't find a digital file anywhere. It might be an interesting project for someone in the local AIA chapter to try to convince some of the other architects and developers in town to release images from old projects that are long dead just to show off some of the design talent that exists in this town. I'm sure there are some pretty unique ones out there. Maybe it could trigger some new ideas or foster some new connections.

I've seen a thing that is interesting that is not related to Grand Action, Fulton/Market, Post Office site, or Acrisure. I suspect I know who Cookin-peacocks' lurker source is and could speculate on how that person could've heard about this particular thing. That said, I've seen lots of things burn bright within architectural offices over the last couple decades in this town, only to see them flicker out (I made some renderings in the early 2000s for an 8-story HQ for the GR Press on the 555 Monroe NW property), and since I'm not directly involved in this particular thing I have no idea if it's a matchstick or a duraflame log. I can't tell if I just threw gas or water on the fires of speculation.

Heading home yesterday I followed a section of the tower on the back of a trailer along Ottawa/Monroe until it turned west on Leonard, presumably heading toward 131. There area some sections of a green tower crane sitting along the Ottawa Ave side of the CTI site, which I believe were moved from the old Baker Furniture building lot.

It's three stories. 50 residential units.

Most of the columns are being reinforced by welding thick steel plates or steel tubes to the sides. This is to help carry the added gravity loads that would be introduced with new floors. We also have to add diagonal bracing between columns in a couple different bays to improve the building's lateral stability.