Discuss items in the urban core outside of Downtown as described above. Everything in the core including the east side (18th & Vine area), Northeast, Plaza, Westport, Brookside, Valentine, Waldo, 39th street, & the entire midtown area.
earthling wrote:Midtown overall could use a 'stop turning Midtown into suburbia' campaign, with a high level master plan the City can agree to enforce, and more detail per district.
...and less fussing about bricks.
Good god yes. There was a perfectly reasonable plan put forth recently for townhouse at 34th and Baltimore that was just torn into by some on our neighborhood assn. The reason why? They were too modern. For god sake, they were attractive, hid their parking, and didn't turn their back on the street.
The modern units at N end of Westport (on Penn/40th) is in similar light. Mixing up is going to happen and maybe should more often than not. Pulling off complementary contrast is the hard part for architects, some may not even bother to try to look at context of entire area. Some locals don't care and just want anything built.
Good god yes. There was a perfectly reasonable plan put forth recently for townhouse at 34th and Baltimore that was just torn into by some on our neighborhood assn. The reason why? They were too modern. For god sake, they were attractive, hid their parking, and didn't turn their back on the street.
W End up Summit has a mix too for such an historic area. Realize it's subjective but there are some really bad examples, like the bland ranch homes thrown between grand homes in Roanoke area and Jansen Place.
earthling wrote:W End up Summit has a mix too for such an historic area. Realize it's subjective but there are some really bad examples, like the bland ranch homes thrown between grand homes in Roanoke area and Jansen Place.
Those ranch homes on Jansen are a tragedy. I'm surprised some haven't been knocked down yet. I haven't been to Westside in awhile, but I feel like some of the more modern homes fit well into that neighborhood.
There are always going to be residents that object to something. As long as the proposed buildings adhere to zoning and code, I don't think residents should be able to completely block a project simply based on appearance alone.
Obviously, there are instances where retaining historic buildings merits special consideration. Dedicated historic districts are a bit tricky. You obviously don't want someone to park an cheap-looking trailer next to an expensive classic house. That is why there are zoning rules. However, you also don't want a bunch of cranks discouraging builders from filling vacant lots. It's in the everyone's interest that vacant lots be developed and contribute more funding for the City. That is where City administration has to make the decision.
I don't think mixing new styles--on vacant lots--in historic districts is a bad thing. There are many neighborhoods where the structures were all constructed at the same time and there is a lot of variety in the styles. You have a Dutch Colonial sitting next to a Arts & Crafts bungalow, or an English Tudor next to a French Chateau. How is that different than building a modern townhouse next to a traditional Victorian townhouse?
I have more objection over really cheaply-built houses that were built by Habitat for Humanity in the past. Some they built already look worse than the 100-year-old houses on the same block that are maintained decently. Habitat has made some effort to at least improve the appearance of their houses. I still question how durable they will be. I think it's encouraging that Habitat is moving to rehabbing run-down and abandoned houses as well as building new ones.
It may have been brought up recently, but looking at the thread title, is now a good time to ask what the impact of the P&L on Westport has been? It seems like a distant memory now, but I recall many businesses claiming that the P&L was the end of the world for Westport, including a few closures citing P&L as the reason. I see more people in Westport during the day and on weeknights than I ever recall prior to the P&L. Based on what I can tell, the P&L has either had no effect or a positive overall effect on Westport. Thoughts?
Yeah, have pointed out before that thread title should be changed to just Westport. Westport doesn't have a fate impact from P&L afterall. Or start a new general Westport thread and keep this one just for posts in context to P&L.
Was in Westport Saturday night and surprised to see $5 parking fees implemented everywhere, which I'm fine with. On a local newscast Sunday morning, though, there were several people interviewed who were incensed and promised to never go to Westport again. LOL
This was everywhere from what I could tell - Sun Fresh, parking garage, surface lot east of Char Bar, etc. I'm sure it'll get neighbors pissed off since people will park on the streets to save $5, but when construction starts on the BOA apartments and the hotel on the XO property, it's time to start thinking of a comprehensive parking strategy.
I really wish the Plaza would have always had some kind of pay parking policy or at least do some kind of validation on spending 10 dollars. The Plaza has really screwed people up on its concept of parking when it comes to Urban Density, some people in this city are just totally clueless when it comes to parking in an urban area and I think the Plaza is to blame.
The Plaza is a single owner that's entire concept was built on car convenience. Plus they built, and own, their own parking. Westport is a 170 year old neighborhood that developed organically before cars were even a concept. Apples and oranges.
Plaza will never charge for parking as long as they are even marginally struggling.
Will be interesting to see what happens when Westport develops itself out of public parking. And public garage parking will probably shrink as residential projects take much of it up. The development now Pickleman's stretch was a lost opportunity to develop that as a garage with biz on top surrounded with retail. Uber biz should increase, streetcar is years away and a bit of distance. This may help transition Westport into more residential neighborhood and less party district - or many start parked downtown or Plaza and Uber it to WP. Maybe the bus lines through WP could increase headways Fri/Sat nights, Westport biz perhaps could provide bus pass for workers (though buses currently end about midnight)
Would be nice to see the Freebirds stripmall torn down with a major residential mid-rise development, streetfront retail and garage large enough for residential and public parking. But the days of free parking near WP appear to be over, at least weekends.
St Lukes may not play along unless there's a decent incentive, having to deal with towing cars left overnight, trash and probably barf if not worse. Can lot owners get a piece of towing charge? St Lukes could make a pretty penny on charging for lots as well as for cars left overnight that they'd likely want towed after certain time.
I mentioned this as one of my 5 big things post, but the city should agree to build a parking garage on St. Luke's land for use by both hospital employees/patients and Westport patrons. The hospital would get increased parking at no cost to them and Westport would get the parking they need.
