Third Coast In The News

More offices -- and homes Replacing 42 houses a drastic step, but project near Michigan Ave. works Editorial, The Grand Rapids Press, Grand Rapids, Mich., A.8 Jan 12, 2004

There's no place like home. So, when developers sought to replace 42 homes near downtown Grand Rapids with a trio of boxy office buildings, the city's Planning Commission understandably took a dim view.

Not anymore. A revised plan, approved unanimously by the City Commission last week, has rightly calmed the fears of city leaders and even most residents. The three-block, $27 million development will strike a good balance -- offices, restaurants and condominiums - - and be an attractive replacement for the old neighborhood.

The project will include five new buildings, a neighborhood park and generate $500,000 in new property taxes for the city. Planned brownstone rowhouses will contain some 21 condominium units. The other buildings could include housing.

Expected restaurants will return some retail to a neighborhood that has steadily lost businesses. The final architecture is a vast improvement over the first faceless monoliths the developer had proposed.

The medical offices will complement a Michigan Street corridor that includes Grand Valley State University's Cook-DeVos Center of Health Sciences, Spectrum Health Services and the Van Andel Institute. This so-called "medical mile" is a health care concentration that aids research and has been a boon for the region.

The area slated for development is bounded by Int. 196 and Michigan Street on the north and south, and Paris and Union avenues on the west and east. Currently, a mixture of rental and owner- occupied homes are there, some in poor repair. Last year, Chicago businessman Edward Levitt began approaching people with offers to buy. Working through S.J. Wisinski & Co., a Grand Rapids commercial real estate firm, he secured options on the 42 separate properties.

Last week, the City Commission held a public hearing, then skipped the usual two-week waiting period and approved the development immediately. Homeowners who had agreed to sell to Mr. Levitt said they were eager to move on.

The commission was right to approve this particular plan. The homes were old and most of the owners willing -- some eager -- to go. Concerns expressed early on helped make the final plan better than what Mr. Levitt had originally proposed. In all, it's a good deal for the city. That said, members of the Planning Commission and City Commission should ask pointed questions whenever an entire neighborhood is slated for the wrecking ball.

Such a drastic step should only be taken if preceded by plenty of public debate and a full explanation of why what is proposed is better than the houses that are there now. If solid neighborhoods are routinely traded for office complexes, Grand Rapids will become more and more a daytime destination for suburban commuters, and less and less a place to live and raise a family.

Here, planning commissioners did ask questions and forced positive changes. That process should be followed wherever new development occurs. When bulldozers are aimed at old neighborhoods, the standards should be especially tough.