Jump to content

Massive Riverfront Project

GRDadof3

By GRDadof3
in Grand Rapids

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
PBJ Burg

PBJ

Posted
Posted

Anyone remember the thread several months ago about System of a Down's video that showed a lot of Grand Rapids and someone else saying that all the music companies love GR?

Hmmmmmm............

Anyone see any shows on MTV or VH1 where they follow musicians around.. shows like Cribs and The Fabulous Life of..... and how nice thier hotel rooms are when they show them? :whistling:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tringr Whistle-Stop

tringr

Posted
Posted

When I worked downtown in the 90's, I remember thinking that DT would need at least 5,000 new residents just to make it sustainable for such a thing as a grocer store. I had a coworker who bought a condo in the Plaza Towers and wanted a grocery store there. Just not enough people at the time to make it work. I have since revised my estimate and at least 12,000 to 15,000 people would need to live in the DT area to keep it afloat. Once you have markets like this that people visit on a regular basis; ;then, you have a DT that creates a real urban atmosphere and lifestyle. Hopefully, this project will help DT get over that hump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tringr Whistle-Stop

tringr

Posted
Posted

BTW, I'm not including any living scenario downtown (American Seating Park?) where residents would find it just as easy to get in the car and drive to Meijer. Walking distance and ease is a key to what I said in the previous statement. The 12-15 thousand residents would have to have the realistic opportunity to be able to walk to shops. The distance between River House and the proposed Riverfront Project is starting to push it for West Michiganders. (imagine a blobby out-of-shape smiley here)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jayblogger Whistle-Stop

jayblogger

Posted
Posted

tringr: I couldn't agree with you more.

I've lived in downtown Portland, OR. Within a half mile, I had two full service grocery stores I could walk to. That doesn't even include the drug stores, the dry cleaners, the video rental stores, the CDs shops, the used and new bookstores and more that were all less than a five minute walk away.

It's great that we now have a fantastic bookstore downtown (thank you River Bank!) and a cool CD shop (thank you Vertigo!), but we need more. Hopefully this project will push it over the top so that all of the different kinds of merchants you would expect in a lively downtown are here in DTGR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dbrok Hamlet

dbrok

Posted
Posted

When I worked downtown in the 90's, I remember thinking that DT would need at least 5,000 new residents just to make it sustainable for such a thing as a grocer store. I had a coworker who bought a condo in the Plaza Towers and wanted a grocery store there. Just not enough people at the time to make it work. I have since revised my estimate and at least 12,000 to 15,000 people would need to live in the DT area to keep it afloat. Once you have markets like this that people visit on a regular basis; ;then, you have a DT that creates a real urban atmosphere and lifestyle. Hopefully, this project will help DT get over that hump.

Grand Central Market opened downtown recently and it seems like business has been picking up over the last couple months especially. The increase in downtown residents has helped I'm sure, but they also do a pretty good lunch business at their deli counter. IMO workers feel more comfortable stopping there for soda, snacks and sandwiches than they do at Morton's or Elliot's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
john_denver Hamlet

john_denver

Posted
Posted

Speaking of Morton's Party Store...what is the deal with that?

Who is the owner/operator?

I wish they would clean up the outside and take the steel gates off the windows. They sell potato chips and beef jerkey...not Rolex watches.

I know this is "thread creep" but I doubt Morton's Party Store would be worthy of its own thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
torgo Town

torgo

Posted
Posted

I wish they would clean up the outside and take the steel gates off the windows. They sell potato chips and beef jerkey...not Rolex watches.

Couldn't agree more! :lol:

If that is what this is, I agree with others that it means jobs, jobs, jobs baby! You can keep your super-high-rises. We need job growth.

And if we get big job growth, maybe we'll get the high-rises anyways! We could have the cake AND the frosting! drool.gif

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rizzo City

Rizzo

Posted
Posted

Every time I see this thread and wonder about this development I always think about that line from Sherlock Holmes, you know the one Brett Thomas quotes at the end of this great piece:

http://video.woodtv.com/index.php?video_id=2440

How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
grmetro Unincorporated Area

grmetro

Posted
Posted

This statement released by Grubb & Ellis-Paramount makes me nervous:

"The aim and objective of the Grand Rapids development corporation is to provide citizens of Grand Rapids and its surrounding populations with the infrastructure that will create economic growth in the form of jobs, commerce and industry."

The statement goes on to say that

"... this development will establish
an increased tax base
which will advance the social and economic well being of the city and State of Michigan."

The statement seems to state the obvious for any development, however, the mention of increasing the tax base seems to be an allusion to the potential use of emnient domain against those property owners unwilling to sell (Custer perhaps...only speculating) This would be using the weight of the Supreme Court's decsion in the oftened criticized Kelo v. New London case, which uses increasing the tax base as a public use justification to reach eminent domain requirements.

Perhaps I'm reaching...but it caught my eye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRDadof3 Ecumenopolis

GRDadof3

Posted
  • Author
Posted

This statement released by Grubb & Ellis-Paramount makes me nervous:

"The aim and objective of the Grand Rapids development corporation is to provide citizens of Grand Rapids and its surrounding populations with the infrastructure that will create economic growth in the form of jobs, commerce and industry."

The statement goes on to say that

"... this development will establish
an increased tax base
which will advance the social and economic well being of the city and State of Michigan."

The statement seems to state the obvious for any development, however, the mention of increasing the tax base seems to be an allusion to the potential use of emnient domain against those property owners unwilling to sell (Custer perhaps...only speculating) This would be using the weight of the Supreme Court's decsion in the oftened criticized Kelo v. New London case, which uses increasing the tax base as a public use justification to reach eminent domain requirements.

Perhaps I'm reaching...but it caught my eye.

City owned 19 acres = no tax base (revenue)

As private development = tax base (revenue)

I'll bet that's what they meant (I hope).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
egrguy Burg

egrguy

Posted
Posted

"... this development will establish an increased tax base which will advance the social and economic well being of the city and State of Michigan."

that doesnt lead me to think that msu will be apart of this equation as it still wouldn't add to the city's tax rolls other then its employees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
towermart Unincorporated Area

towermart

Posted
Posted

This statement released by Grubb & Ellis-Paramount makes me nervous:

"The aim and objective of the Grand Rapids development corporation is to provide citizens of Grand Rapids and its surrounding populations with the infrastructure that will create economic growth in the form of jobs, commerce and industry."

The statement goes on to say that

"... this development will establish
an increased tax base
which will advance the social and economic well being of the city and State of Michigan."

The statement seems to state the obvious for any development, however, the mention of increasing the tax base seems to be an allusion to the potential use of emnient domain against those property owners unwilling to sell (Custer perhaps...only speculating) This would be using the weight of the Supreme Court's decsion in the oftened criticized Kelo v. New London case, which uses increasing the tax base as a public use justification to reach eminent domain requirements.

Perhaps I'm reaching...but it caught my eye.

About 6 months ago the state legislature passed law that would prevent a governmental entity from using ED to get property into the hands of a private developer. This is one of the reasons why some really don't like that this is leaked out now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MikeK Crossroads

MikeK

Posted
Posted

I think GRDad is on to something with the Dayton project. It's the most realistic idea I've heard yet, and it fits with a lot of the hints that have been floating around out there. And I agree that the absolute best thing that the project could bring is good-paying, high-tech jobs. If we get more of those, lots of other good things will follow for our community! :D

This does seem like the most likely of the ideas I've heard. But where did the 1-2 billion dollar number come from? The Dayton project "carries a projected price tag of $100 million."

http://dayton.bizjournals.com/dayton/stori....html?from_yf=1

Link to comment
Share on other sites
superNOVA Whistle-Stop

superNOVA

Posted
Posted

This would be using the weight of the Supreme Court's decsion in the oftened criticized Kelo v. New London case, which uses increasing the tax base as a public use justification to reach eminent domain requirements.

Not accepted in MI. The judges deferred to States that already had laws on the books - our laws do not allow this type of private eminent domain. However, I am sure there are ways around it.

About Google... Why would we even want them. They don't even have a reliable profit model yet - another net advertising downturn could sink them faster than anything. Remeber, they are a real company now with the need to report results to real investors - they are no longer a side project.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
joeDowntown Metropolis

joeDowntown

Posted
Posted

I would disagree Supernova. Any company that keeps Microsoft on its heels consistently is a powerhouse. And $13B in revenue gives Google a lot of money to push new technology. We could only be so lucky to have them (though I don't think this is it).

Joe

Not accepted in MI. The judges deferred to States that already had laws on the books - our laws do not allow this type of private eminent domain. However, I am sure there are ways around it.

About Google... Why would we even want them. They don't even have a reliable profit model yet - another net advertising downturn could sink them faster than anything. Remeber, they are a real company now with the need to report results to real investors - they are no longer a side project.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PBJ Burg

PBJ

Posted
Posted

I would disagree Supernova. Any company that keeps Microsoft on its heels consistently is a powerhouse. And $13B in revenue gives Google a lot of money to push new technology. We could only be so lucky to have them (though I don't think this is it).

Joe

I'm with Joe here.. although they may not be comming to grand rapids to think thier only viable revenue stream is click through ads is very short sighted. They are invovled in a LOT of things both tech and non-tech related.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • 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.