Mich, I saw that article too today and had the same questions. It looks like they are doing a road diet from 4 lanes to 3 with bike lanes on either side. I assume they are putting in concrete medians in the non-turning sections of the third lane? Interesting how the article and the letter sent to residents does not mention the diet, only on the construction page. Seems like that was a critical piece.
Major Coolidge Road Improvements Project (Project to begin April 15, 2024) – This project will include a mill and resurfacing of Coolidge Road from Saginaw Highway to Lake Lansing Road and a lane reconfiguration from four lanes to three lanes plus two bike lanes. Lane closures will be in place for the duration of the project, and access to local businesses and residents will be maintained as much as possible. For additional information, view the construction notice (PDF) and the map link.
I am not sure just what issues they brought up, but I would guess that having all the traffic lanes closer to their homes instead of half on the other side of the very large median. Remembering the old Logan Street, it was really an urban thoroughfare with retail nodes at many of the four corners, homes, businesses, a lot of gas stations, churches, schools and of course Oldsmobile. I know something like that would be difficult to recreate; a neighborhood that was built mainly in the late19th and early 20th centuries. And I'm pretty sure imposable with the unimaginative leaders and builders of Lansing. Something like at least with the density and feel of an urban street life could be something people could feel good about and support. I could see reclaiming the row of former street front lots on both sides for development which would put the current street front lots further back from a smaller greener straighter street. If they put in a streetcar/tram line [dreaming] that would really make this area a popular urban neighborhood.
Just saw the LSJ article, wow, this is ridiculous. Is Schor really a spineless mayor? Because everything I see points to that being the case. So we are going to jeopardize state funding and leave a problem section of roadway a problem section to allow for more "listening sessions" that ultimately won't resolve the core issue of people not wanting change because change is bad? This really seemed like a no brainer and the flak would be short lived once the new focus issue popped up.
Long term I'd love to see Saginaw and Grand River/Oakland get reconfigured but if people are freaking out about this small slice of outdated superhighway I can't imagine what would happen if they proposed a conversion or road diet on these thoroughfares, assuming MDOT was in agreement.
I've been critical of Schor for awhile, I wish I could say that I'm happy that others are seeing the same thing I have but I'd rather just have a competent and visionary leader.
This MLK fiasco isn't even close to my least favorite thing he's done. Moving the courts and police out of downtown into a low slung two-floor suburban-style complex complete with a big parking lot in front while costing the tax payers over $100 million in the process takes the cake imo. His actions over the city hall move have been every bit as bad: publicly scoffing at Council's very reasonable request that a new rfp be issued for what was a fundamentally different project from the previous rfp, even alluding to throwing the money away if he doesn't get his way. Add to that not being willing to bond out a dime over the $40 million freebie handed to us by the State to build something that's actually worthwhile (makes you feel all warm and cozy that the police and courts, essentially the negative side of government, get a facility that's 2x-3x the cost of city hall itself, doesn't it?) His inept, weak kneed handling of the homeless population's camps along trails and in city parks is also a significant sore spot for me.
For this City's sake Schor can't fade into political obscurity soon enough imo. The problem is that there's no council member I want to see run and nobody else I'm aware of on the periphery except maybe Bob Tresize. Perhaps a state rep/senator?
There's more development momentum and reasons to be positive about this city and region than at any point in my life. We need public officials who recognize that and capitalize on it.
I'm just shocked that everyone is so against what the nearby residents have to say, as they will be the most impacted by the project. It seems reasonable they should get a say. Nearly every road project that's done that will significantly impact an area gets a mailing/survey early on. Why should this project be any different? It's also interesting to hear everyone refer to the Westside as an area of such uneducated people, when statistically I'm sure that's far from the case.
It's also disappointing to see this site just becoming the opinions of a few instead of an actual discussion regarding local development. I've followed this site for a very long time but lately, not just this topic, it's been frustrating and disappointing. It's just not what it used to be early on.
What's funny, is the few of you are the only people I've met in favor of this reconfigureation...so I'm not sure who is on the outside.
I can see you're all passionate, but so is the otherside. Seems it's been decided there is a right and a wrong (on this an other projects) where if you disagree, you're the bad guy. There used to be discussion instead. Why not find some middle ground on this instead? I'm hoping, and thinking, that is what the city is trying to do. I've personally got more issues with Andy Kilpatrick over Schor.
@Lymon89 I don't disagree that community engagement should have happened earlier on, I'm sure part of the issue is most in the community being blindsided. I follow things closely and this caught me by surprise. That's been a consistent feature with Schor: no transparency on the City Hall move, no transparency on the public safety millage or the subsequent use of the funds or design of the new buildings, little to no engagement on the Michigan Ave plan... I'm sure there's other things.
Regarding this site being the opinion of a few: to be more than a discussion of a few requires others, such as yourself, engaging regularly. I have a clear vision for Lansing's future and strong opinions that I will continue to share and am more than happy to discuss and debate things, but I don't just silently sit by while people post things I disagree with. On the other hand I encourage any and everyone to argue with me when they think I'm wrong. I've been asking the lurkers to post more for years. I think I do fairly well at not being condescending or making personal attacks? What prevents you (or others) from posting?
@MichMatters Couldn't we at least try to have productive discussions when we disagree? Maybe engage on some specific points rather than imply that one person is on the "outside"?
I would agree with all of your statements on transparency and community involvement. I think that is a very true statement and perhaps that's what's lead to so much frustration on all sides of this project. Hopefully that's something we can all agree on.
I do and have posted over the years, when I have something to offer, differing view, or opinion. The problem is, I don't always have the mental bandwidth to disagree and regularly argue a point, and that's on me. Lately they just haven't seemed like battles that are worth taking on when so many have their minds set, and again, that'sprobably on me. I've also been more of a "lurker" because I typically agree with everyone for the most part, or have been curious on thoughts, and haven't really had more to say.
I just wanted to voice that feeling because I'd felt things had been shifting over the last few months and I couldn't believe I was alone with that sentiment. Maybe it was just me.
Also, yes. I think more productive discussions instead of total disagreement or categorizing people. I think that's what I'm trying to get at. The name calling of groups and people that disagree is just getting tiring.
Sorry if I was implying any of this @MichMatters. I agree that you do often provide a lot of info that I don't generally take the time to dig up, and it is appreciated. I'm sorry if I forgot/missed you had also stated that about the transparency. Obviously I value this site, and those of you who regularly post on here, otherwise I wouldn't still be here. My comment was just an observation and not targeted at anyone.
As far as the media comment, that's probably fair...but when does the media actually interview anyone of value? I'm just saying there are a lot of educated people on the Westside that oppose this. Like I said, I haven't heard anyone in favor of this, other than on here. Many people over here were before the current configuration and still would prefer it as something other than a 5 lane road like Cedar street.
Also, the comment about the site was not just regarding this thread. I'd just like to see the more productive discussions that once existed as all.
Comments
https://www.cityofeastlansing.com/238/Construction-Projects
https://www.cityofeastlansing.com/DocumentCenter/View/14617/Construction-Notice-Coolidge-Road-Project-and-Map-PDF
Major Coolidge Road Improvements Project (Project to begin April 15, 2024) – This project will include a mill and resurfacing of Coolidge Road from Saginaw Highway to Lake Lansing Road and a lane reconfiguration from four lanes to three lanes plus two bike lanes. Lane closures will be in place for the duration of the project, and access to local businesses and residents will be maintained as much as possible. For additional information, view the construction notice (PDF) and the map link.
Long term I'd love to see Saginaw and Grand River/Oakland get reconfigured but if people are freaking out about this small slice of outdated superhighway I can't imagine what would happen if they proposed a conversion or road diet on these thoroughfares, assuming MDOT was in agreement.
This MLK fiasco isn't even close to my least favorite thing he's done. Moving the courts and police out of downtown into a low slung two-floor suburban-style complex complete with a big parking lot in front while costing the tax payers over $100 million in the process takes the cake imo. His actions over the city hall move have been every bit as bad: publicly scoffing at Council's very reasonable request that a new rfp be issued for what was a fundamentally different project from the previous rfp, even alluding to throwing the money away if he doesn't get his way. Add to that not being willing to bond out a dime over the $40 million freebie handed to us by the State to build something that's actually worthwhile (makes you feel all warm and cozy that the police and courts, essentially the negative side of government, get a facility that's 2x-3x the cost of city hall itself, doesn't it?) His inept, weak kneed handling of the homeless population's camps along trails and in city parks is also a significant sore spot for me.
For this City's sake Schor can't fade into political obscurity soon enough imo. The problem is that there's no council member I want to see run and nobody else I'm aware of on the periphery except maybe Bob Tresize. Perhaps a state rep/senator?
There's more development momentum and reasons to be positive about this city and region than at any point in my life. We need public officials who recognize that and capitalize on it.
It's also disappointing to see this site just becoming the opinions of a few instead of an actual discussion regarding local development. I've followed this site for a very long time but lately, not just this topic, it's been frustrating and disappointing. It's just not what it used to be early on.
I can see you're all passionate, but so is the otherside. Seems it's been decided there is a right and a wrong (on this an other projects) where if you disagree, you're the bad guy. There used to be discussion instead. Why not find some middle ground on this instead? I'm hoping, and thinking, that is what the city is trying to do. I've personally got more issues with Andy Kilpatrick over Schor.
Regarding this site being the opinion of a few: to be more than a discussion of a few requires others, such as yourself, engaging regularly. I have a clear vision for Lansing's future and strong opinions that I will continue to share and am more than happy to discuss and debate things, but I don't just silently sit by while people post things I disagree with. On the other hand I encourage any and everyone to argue with me when they think I'm wrong. I've been asking the lurkers to post more for years. I think I do fairly well at not being condescending or making personal attacks? What prevents you (or others) from posting?
@MichMatters Couldn't we at least try to have productive discussions when we disagree? Maybe engage on some specific points rather than imply that one person is on the "outside"?
I do and have posted over the years, when I have something to offer, differing view, or opinion. The problem is, I don't always have the mental bandwidth to disagree and regularly argue a point, and that's on me. Lately they just haven't seemed like battles that are worth taking on when so many have their minds set, and again, that'sprobably on me. I've also been more of a "lurker" because I typically agree with everyone for the most part, or have been curious on thoughts, and haven't really had more to say.
I just wanted to voice that feeling because I'd felt things had been shifting over the last few months and I couldn't believe I was alone with that sentiment. Maybe it was just me.
Also, yes. I think more productive discussions instead of total disagreement or categorizing people. I think that's what I'm trying to get at. The name calling of groups and people that disagree is just getting tiring.
As far as the media comment, that's probably fair...but when does the media actually interview anyone of value? I'm just saying there are a lot of educated people on the Westside that oppose this. Like I said, I haven't heard anyone in favor of this, other than on here. Many people over here were before the current configuration and still would prefer it as something other than a 5 lane road like Cedar street.
Also, the comment about the site was not just regarding this thread. I'd just like to see the more productive discussions that once existed as all.