Jump to content

JoeHarmon

Dirt Lot 0'
  • Content Count

    74
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

17 Good

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. When I walk to Eden park from Pendleton, From 13th and Reading, I cut in at the staples, then walk through the parking lot behind the parking garage and office building, which then drops me off at Elsinore right at the bridge over 71.
  2. If you get off 75 at Newtown pike, that is major road that gets you to circle 4 in less than 5 mins. They have been adding lanes on circle 4 and the grade separated part of it essentially is a highway at this point. While 75 does not go through the middle of downtown, I think the only reason the city hasn't sprawled completely over to it is the urban growth boundaries they have in place to protect their horse farms.
  3. Just speculation here, but I would guess who ever owns the Kenwood town center enjoys being in a township over a city proper. If they wanted to be part of Madeira, or if they wanted Kenwood to be its own city, they could probably make that happen.
  4. At least it looks like the two historic buildings on the Jehovah's Witness block won't be torn down.
  5. Everyone needs to make 9:30 pm their regular shopping time, so they constantly have a full-ish store at 10. That will get them to extend hours.
  6. of the , 71, 471, 50 triangle, seems like you could really just rip out the 71 parts and make it so 71S follows the path of 471 until it gets to 50. Then 71 turns and follows 50. Have a full set of ramps at this new 71, 471, 50 interchange. Then you can eliminate the tunnels under Lytle park, the elevated parts of 71 and recover that triangle of surface lots. I realize a bunch of money was just spent on rehabbing the tunnels, and the elevated parts of 71, so this will never happen. But if you wanted a less complicated/expensive design than what we currently have, it seems possible.
  7. From an environmental perspective, this is way better than what skyhouse proposed. Tall skinny towers mean lots of steel, which mean lots of CO2 emissions. The skyhouse proposal didn't use the site very well. lots of wasted space. If this give us the same number of apartments with better use of space, I am all for it.
  8. I have worked downtown since 2004. I have parked in a variety of lots/garages. Only on rare occasion are any of the garages full. There is ample parking downtown. Anyone who says there isn't really means, "There aren't enough cheap surface parking spaces one block from my building".
  9. I don't like the idea of tearing down an 800 room hotel, to replace it with, another 800 room hotel. Creates so much waste. Why not just renovate it one floor at a time. Then you can keep most of the rooms open as you go.
  10. I would like to point out that after redevelopment of Ziegler park, you can now find children of various income levels playing on the equipment, and in the swimming pool. So it is possible to create a successful mixed income neighborhood, and park. It just isn't easy. As was mentioned above, we clearly need to get the buildings rehabed/repopulated on McMicken/Clifton first. Then pick the one neighborhood park to spend the money on. Whether that is Grant or Findlay. The Rothenberg academy also has their playground on Clifton almost right next door to Grant Playground.
  11. So maybe this is dumb question, but if the convention center needs to expand so badly, why doesn't it expand upward. Add a new floor (third?) on top of the whole thing.
  12. The brick is probably ok. Roof is clearly destroyed. The real question would be what shape are the wood floor joists in. It likely could be saved, but may be cost prohibitive.
  13. When they presented to the Pendleton Council, they said it was going to be changed from 1 story, to it has to be within 10% of the overall average height of the buildings on the block. I pushed on this because that is going to be difficult when it comes to large plots of land that don't have many buildings around them. Really, the new guidelines are almost entirely aimed at infilling a single 25x90 lot, where it has neighbors on either side. Those are the easy, non-contentious proposals. It is the bigger developments where you are combining 4+ lots for one large building that the new guidelines still don't really address. When i asked about this, they mentioned how the guidelines recommend looking at the original Sandborn maps. Which I take to mean that they are going to try prevent any large buildings, and make everything be smaller finely grained development. I didn't get a satisfactory answer from them on this.
×
×
  • Create New...