Meijer to replace 28th/Kalamazoo Ave store

[jthrasher]

We can not let our planning decisions become political, and in this case they did.

Meijer's plan got rejected.

Planning commissioners who were instrumental in the rejection were removed.

New planning commissioners were put in place.

Meijer came back and magically got approval.

Is there not something wrong with that? Does the end justify the means?

What happens next time?

Maybe the mayor should just abolish the entire planning commission and let the city commission interpret the zoning ordinance. Or better yet, just get rid of the entire zoning ordinance and let whoever cries the loudest or whoever threatens leaving the city get their way.

In the end, the majority won. That's what matters.

I don't see why the planning commission isn't an elected body as well.

[Veloise]

In the end, the majority won. That's what matters.

I don't see why the planning commission isn't an elected body as well.

Because those with the best campaign skills (most money or fund-raising) would win; not necessarily the ones with the best sense of good community development and land usage.

Yrs truly am now on the Board of Zoning Appeals (as an alternate). If it were an elected position, there's no way I would have bothered.

[aowwt]

The planning Committees do not serve the public they serve at the behest of the city councils. They are the ones that get into the details that the councils do not have the time for. If you do not like the planning commission we as voters remove them via the city council. In the case of Meijer, the City Council felt that the pc was not looking at the proposal properly and had the ones that were fighting tooth and nail agianst it be removed. They were replaced with what the council was hoping would be folks that would look at the whole picture. In this case they did look at the whole picture. As for saying it was a political move, I wholely agree. Thats what happens when you get involved in politics and start representing people. If the people you represent ie the city council in the case of city commissions, then you will not be on that commission anymore. Now no city council would say this which is a shame because it would make them more accountable to the public.

[John E]

The city planning commission has approved the zoning change:

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/ind...commissi_4.html

Meijer can go forward with the new store.

~John

[tamias6]

The city planning commission has approved the zoning change:

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/ind...commissi_4.html

Meijer can go forward with the new store.

~John

Looks like its about time to charge up the batteries of my Digital Cam and DV Cam. The 28th street store is definitely going to be the most interesting Meijer construction/reno projects ever done. This project is years overdue. But at least its coming and it will bring some much needed life to that stretch of 28th street.

[Gorath]

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

State of Michigan rejects brownfield tax credits for 28th street/Kalamazoo Meier store. The reason given is because Meijer is a big box store and that they consider the current building not obsolete.

Meijer can still get brownfield tax credits from the city.

But the really big news is that the state will not allow Meijer to build over the contaminated area at the south east corner of the property. I think that this restriction could potentially kill the project.

[mejane]

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

State of Michigan rejects brownfield tax credits for 28th street/Kalamazoo Meier store. The reason given is because Meijer is a big box store and that they consider the current building not obsolete.

Meijer can still get brownfield tax credits from the city.

But the really big news is that the state will not allow Meijer to build over the contaminated area at the south east corner of the property. I think that this restriction could potentially kill the project.

I wondered when that was going to come up. That's the property where my Aunt and Uncle's former house stands up on the hill, where gas from the Meijer station leaked under the road and under the property. I wrote about it here awhile back - there are multiple drill holes in the basement where the levels have been monitored for several years now. You can still see a truck in the driveway almost weekly, maybe more, with hoses in the ground around the house, monitoring things. It's a mess.

[Veloise]

...But the really big news is that the state will not allow Meijer to build over the contaminated area at the south east corner of the property. I think that this restriction could potentially kill the project.

Golly, I wonder if there's another way to site the new store so that it doesn't affect that area.

What's that open space between the existing walls and 28th Street, as shown in the Press graphic?

[tamias6]

Well if the State killed the project by not allowing Meijer to build on the SE corner site, then that old guy that whined to the previous PC about the new store can die a happy man since he'll have his way after all. Former Studio 28 site anyone?

[organsnyder]

Well if the State killed the project by not allowing Meijer to build on the SE corner site, then that old guy that whined to the previous PC about the new store can die a happy man since he'll have his way after all. Former Studio 28 site anyone?

If this project is indeed dead, Meijer killed it themselves by allowing that gas (negligently or not) to leak in the first place. It shouldn't take the DEQ to make them realize that building on a site contaminated with gasoline is a bad idea.

I still don't understand why Meijer can't build the store in front of the new store, in place of the existing parking lot. They could raze the house, garden center, and back of the current store like they are planning to do anyways, but put parking there instead. Parking is allowed on the contaminated land, and - being the back of the lot - would only be used the few days of the year that the parking lot actually fills up.

Oh, that's right - their cookie-cutter design wouldn't fit there. Their supposed "investment" in the site is limited to developing as cheaply as possible, rather than actual community improvement. Why we should give these sorts of companies subsidies, while hard-working small businesses innovate to improve their communities using private funds, is beyond me. I'm hardly a libertarian (in fact, I despise the majority of the philosophy), but it bothers me when our elected leaders use our money to support companies whose interest in a community is limited to getting as much out of it for as little investment as possible.

While I like a lot of what Mayor Heartwell has done, his endless cheerleading for Meijer throughout this process appalls me. Yes, we may lose jobs and convenient shopping (including for me - I live less than a mile from the store and shop there weekly) if Meijer closes that store - which I find highly unlikely - but we have to look at the legacy we're leaving for future generations. Job loss, while painful, is temporary; poor community planning is much more difficult to fix down the road.

[mejane]

If this project is indeed dead, Meijer killed it themselves by allowing that gas (negligently or not) to leak in the first place. It shouldn't take the DEQ to make them realize that building on a site contaminated with gasoline is a bad idea.

I still don't understand why Meijer can't build the store in front of the new store, in place of the existing parking lot. They could raze the house, garden center, and back of the current store like they are planning to do anyways, but put parking there instead. Parking is allowed on the contaminated land, and - being the back of the lot - would only be used the few days of the year that the parking lot actually fills up.

I don't believe parking IS allowed on contaminated land. I think somewhere in this thread I described how I watched Metro truck out tons of dirt where a gas station used to be in order to add parking across the street from the hospital. This was several years ago and I think it was rumored to cost about a million bucks - all to add about 30 spaces.

[organsnyder]

Meijer cannot build a store over the contaminated site, but they can use it as a parking lot, Coles said.

[Veloise]

...I still don't understand why Meijer can't build the store in front of the new store, in place of the existing parking lot. They could raze the house, garden center, and back of the current store like they are planning to do anyways, but put parking there instead. Parking is allowed on the contaminated land, and - being the back of the lot - would only be used the few days of the year that the parking lot actually fills up. ...

Just in case the powers that be are reading this.

[Delvrin]

My best guess is that because 28th St. is a state highway (M-11), MDOT requires a greater setback, especially on the corner, that would make a new building not fit while the old building still stands. Meijer seems dead set on keeping the old store open during construction. Closing it would force them to lay off or transfer the employees and lose the revenue that will pay for the construction for almost two years. This location must still be profitable or else Meijer wouldn't be reinvesting there. The only way I see this project happening now is to do a staged reconstruction of the store in-place, similar to how they renovated the Norton Shores store.

[organsnyder]

I wondered if the set-back might be a problem, though they could certainly fit a building there - just not any of their current prototypes (hence my rant about their cookie-cutter designs a few posts back). I appreciate their desire to stay open during construction - though it's turning out to be quite a headache for all involved.

Your in-place reconstruction idea seems feasible - the current building was built in stages, so it seems that it would be fairly easy to demolish it in stages as well. Of course, that would add to the cost...

[tamias6]

For those worried about trying to fit a new store in, I think this article could be a sign of things to come for Meijer and Big Boxes in general.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi...0,1591495.story

Meijer is planing to build a store in the Chicago suburb of Niles that is only half the size of a normal Meijer store. The idea is to allow Meijer to finally penetrate into densely populated areas where spaces is scares. May be a copy of that store would be a good replacement for the 28th street store. I can also think of some spaces close to DT where this small Meijer store idea would work as well.

[TheCityGuy]

For those worried about trying to fit a new store in, I think this article could be a sign of things to come for Meijer and Big Boxes in general.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi...0,1591495.story

Meijer is planing to build a store in the Chicago suburb of Niles that is only half the size of a normal Meijer store. The idea is to allow Meijer to finally penetrate into densely populated areas where spaces is scares. May be a copy of that store would be a good replacement for the 28th street store. I can also think of some spaces close to DT where this small Meijer store idea would work as well.

Except that these smaller stores will not have general merchandise, something I don't think Meijer wants to do at 28th/K-zoo.

That being said, I like their new approach.

[Veloise]

My best guess is that because 28th St. is a state highway (M-11), MDOT requires a greater setback, especially on the corner, that would make a new building not fit while the old building still stands. ...

Here's part of your answer:

"Setbacks are a local zoning issue. M-DOT has no requirements for setbacks on any of our state trunk lines." Straight from the GR M-DOT office.

...

ETA: Everyone's been eagerly awaiting this, I'm sure.

The subject property is zoned C (commercial), with apparently no stipulations about traditional neighborhood design. See page 84 of this 369-page document for the regs:

http://grcity.us/download_upload/binary_ob...OPYING_2009.pdf

MON-C, Modern Era Neighborhood - Commercial Zone District (Linear).

The purpose of the MON-C Zone District is to accommodate a very broad range of business, service and commercial uses. Development in this District is generally more destination-oriented; with a greater dependence upon the automobile. Off-street parking, drive-through and automobile uses are more prominent. High-intensity business, service and commercial uses are allowed on larger sites that have primary access to major streets. Medium- and high-density residential development is

encouraged on underutilized commercial sites, and particularly in areas adjacent to a Transit-Oriented Development Zone District. Pedestrian and public transportation accommodations shall remain important considerations in site design.

Skip ahead to page 89:

The intent of these requirements is to promote mixed-use development and rehabilitation that:

1. Encourages the location of new buildings to anchor corners and screen parking at important street intersections;

2. Ensures that new buildings relate well to each other, existing buildings and the abutting street;

3. Maintains or creates a continuous street wall that contributes to the unique character of the Zone District;

4. Organizes out-lot development on larger parcels to improve visual and functional coherence;

5. Encourages parking located to the side and rear of main buildings;

6. Consolidates driveways on primary streets and encourages vehicular access from secondary streets; and

7. Provides adequate sidewalk space for pedestrian access and comfort.

Page 90: table of regulations.

Front set-back: 25'

Required Building Line (RBL), as measured from back of curb: 17'

Established Setback. The RBL shall be consistent with the established dimension of existing main buildings fronting on the same block and in the same Zone District, except where existing buildings are setback more than twenty (20) feet from the public right-of-way. The requirements for RBLs do not apply to the MCN-C, MON-C or SD-NOS Districts.

Summary: the Meijer new front wall could be built within 25' of 28th Street.

[Raildudes dad]

Here's part of your answer:

"Setbacks are a local zoning issue. M-DOT has no requirements for setbacks on any of our state trunk lines." Straight from the GR M-DOT office.

Summary: the Meijer new front wall could be built within 25' of 28th Street.

Some years ago there were corridor planning groups (thru the predecessor of Grand Valley Metro Council) for both 28th Street and the East Beltline. The jurisdictions (Grandville, Wyoming, GR, Kentwood and Cascade for 28th) would review any proposed development for impact on 28th Street. GR and especially Wyoming wanted to preserve sufficient land in any development for a future boulevard. MDOT wanted something like 150 feet of ROW IIRC (not practical on 28th is developed areas).

Not sure what happened to those review groups. They had pretty good success with the EBL since it was mostly undeveloped as opposed to 28th that was mostly developed.

Having some old timer's - I can't remember the name of the review groups. Looked at the GVMC site and it doesn't appear those review groups exist anymore.

[organsnyder]

Apparently they're getting ready to do construction - I hear (second-hand - I haven't been there recently) that they're clearing out their general merchandise in preparation for being a grocery-only store for the duration of construction.

[Allison Slater]

When I was there last, there was a large section (former toys area I think? I'm not too familiar with that store) completely blocked off and empty.

[organsnyder]

I just checked the City Commission agenda. The Brownfield request will be addressed at their July 7 meeting.

I just wrote the following email to Mayor Heartwell and my two City Commissioners (hopefully it's not too long):

Dear Mayor Heartwell and Comms. Lumpkins and White,

I'm writing to express my concern regarding the Brownfield credit that Meijer has requested for the redevelopment of the 28th and Kalamazoo store. I want to start by saying that I am not opposed to the reconstruction - living in the Alger Heights neighborhood, I shop there often - but I am concerned about the way Meijer is attempting to go about this project.

Meijer only qualifies for the Brownfield credit because of a problem it caused - negligently or not - through its own actions. If Meijer had not contaminated the groundwater, it would not be eligible. The activities it seeks to be reimbursed for are, for the most part, not related to the groundwater contamination. Therefore, Meijer would in effect be rewarded for the pollution it caused through its own (in)action.

As a small business owner, I am concerned by the actions of companies such as Meijer to avoid paying for their share of government services. While we don't compete with Meijer, there are many businesses that do that have never gone to the government to try to wiggle their way out of paying the taxes required of them. Why should Meijer get a special deal when hundreds of other businesses, employing thousands of Grand Rapids citizens, do not?

Meijer has made veiled threats that they will pull out of the project if they do not get their way. I find this hard to believe; they are already far along in converting the store to the grocery-only format it will be in for the duration of construction.

Further, I find Meijer's proclamations that the new store will have LEED-level features to be very shallow - an attempt to placate those that are uncomfortable with their actions. As indicated in the packet for the upcoming Commission meeting, Meijer is not actually applying for LEED certification. Therefore, the features they are talking about are not required, and stand a good chance of being the first to go if budgets need to be adjusted.

Perhaps a compromise could be reached - Meijer gets the Brownfield credit, but they must obtain actual LEED certification. This way, at least the city gets another feather in its cap (another LEED-certified building) in exchange for the $1 million loss in tax revenue.

Thank you for your time and for your service shepherding the city through this difficult economic climate.

Sincerely,

Chris Snyder

[Veloise]

^^ Nice work.

I'll send him one addressing set-backs.

[organsnyder]

Mayor Heartwell responded to my email:

Thank you Chris. I think your idea is a good one and have passed it along to our Planning Director and Economic Dev. Director. Mayor

If this happens, it wouldn't be the first time that Meijer has built a LEED-certified store:

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories....9324&EDATE=

[mejane]

I just checked the City Commission agenda. The Brownfield request will be addressed at their July 7 meeting.

I just wrote the following email to Mayor Heartwell and my two City Commissioners (hopefully it's not too long):

Very nicely done!