Showing posts with label downtown development. Show all posts
Showing posts with label downtown development. Show all posts
Another fait accompli ? ? ?
...Nobody, except the people who have already made the decision, know the fate of the Elm Street property south of Lee Street.
...Several out-of-area consultants have been brought in to help improve the area. Apparently none of their cookie-cutter plans suited the decision makers. The meetings that I have attended about the area have been unproductive and the plans presented by consultants haven't even been adapted to the needs of Greensboro. It must be easy to dismiss plans if they don't suit the decision makers agenda.
...Greensboro government and the so-called leaders here have been dismissing plans from local and out-of-town consultants and from citizen groups for as long as I have lived in Greensboro (about 40 years).
...Another hotel is needed in Downtown Greensboro. The pickin's are poor for tourists and convention accommodations in the Central Business District. A hotel at each end of Elm Street is a good idea.
...The right kind of hotel could enhance Downtown Greensboro. It could bring more conventions and tourists into the whole Greensboro area.
...I think that the reason there is resistance is because it could possibly take business away from "hotel row" near the Coliseum and from the Grandover complex out by I-85.
Some questions are • Will the people who run Greensboro let this happen?
• Who will pay for it? • Will the entire area be developed by one hand-picked "in current favor" developer? • Who will build and manage it? • Do the people who run Greensboro want to make Elm Street a nice gateway into Greensboro? •
More info:
News-Record
Piedmont Publius
Joe Guarino
GONE FOREVER ? ? ?
DOWNTOWNERS PARK GONE ! ! ! !
TREES, GRASS, FLOWERS GONE ! ! ! !
A LITTLE MORE SUNSHINE GONE FOREVER ! ! ! !
The people who rule what happens in Downtown Greensboro have removed the little greenway through the parking lot on South Elm and McGee streets downtown because they claim that nobody used it. People used to use it to eat bag lunches and watch passers-by and enjoy the breeze and the flowers. Neighbors often sat on the benches and had friendly conversations and/or heated discussions.
Of course, not as many people used it after the benches were removed to prevent so-called "homeless people and panhandlers" from sitting on them. Are these people any less because they do not own real estate? Why should it matter who sits on the benches? Most of these people were harmless, non-violent folks. I will admit that they were sometimes annoying but so are the many drunk customers of the bars that frequent downtown after dark. So, should we ban everyone from downtown who is annoying ? I know some people who fit into that group. Maybe some folks would want me banned.
Where does it stop?
What are these planners plotting? What are they thinking? Maybe to make downtown less attractive so people will frequent the alternatives to downtown such as the strip malls and mega shopping centers owned and operated by people who have no financial or nostalgic interest in our traditional downtown.
Benches and Stupidity
....
Hey Zach,
Interesting that the same group of numbskulls who want benches along the so-called greenway (actually a cement path) are the same folks who wanted the benches removed from the Downtowners' Park on South Elm Street to avoid panhandlers and homeless folks from hanging out there. And the same group who opposes putting public restrooms in the parking garages because someone might use them for illicit purposes.
Now they want to remove the little greenway through the parking lot on South Elm and McGee streets downtown because nobody uses it. People used to use it to eat bag lunches and watch passers-by and enjoy the breeze and the flowers. Neighbors often sat on the benches and had friendly conversations and/or heated discussions.
There are lots of rules about downtown. One should be that there is no panhandling, (begging) in the Central Business District. There are enough police officers downtown to enforce the rule. Downtown has many rules that are different from other areas of the city. This is one that is needed.
Hey Zach,
Interesting that the same group of numbskulls who want benches along the so-called greenway (actually a cement path) are the same folks who wanted the benches removed from the Downtowners' Park on South Elm Street to avoid panhandlers and homeless folks from hanging out there. And the same group who opposes putting public restrooms in the parking garages because someone might use them for illicit purposes.
Now they want to remove the little greenway through the parking lot on South Elm and McGee streets downtown because nobody uses it. People used to use it to eat bag lunches and watch passers-by and enjoy the breeze and the flowers. Neighbors often sat on the benches and had friendly conversations and/or heated discussions.
There are lots of rules about downtown. One should be that there is no panhandling, (begging) in the Central Business District. There are enough police officers downtown to enforce the rule. Downtown has many rules that are different from other areas of the city. This is one that is needed.
Jeri Rowe Does It Again
Thanks Jeri,
Nice article in News-Record about Old Greensborough. It is a community that is evolving and staying the same - a unique neighborhood. I know you couldn't mention all of the characters on S. Elm; but I am a little disappointed that The Browsery and Jar-Mar Brass were not included.
I enjoyed the photos.
More from Jeri about downtown
Also, Michelle Forrest has some interesting photos of the Old Greensborough area on her Facebook page.
See ya downtown,
diane
Nice article in News-Record about Old Greensborough. It is a community that is evolving and staying the same - a unique neighborhood. I know you couldn't mention all of the characters on S. Elm; but I am a little disappointed that The Browsery and Jar-Mar Brass were not included.
I enjoyed the photos.
More from Jeri about downtown
Also, Michelle Forrest has some interesting photos of the Old Greensborough area on her Facebook page.
See ya downtown,
diane
Downtown Development Scams
In answer to a comment on the post Calling All Property Rights Advocates
I was not referring to the Wachovia Building; however, I believe that the Cement Park that was touted as a gift to the city, but is owned by a private non-profit, was built solely to help sell the Wachovia Building. Check out the biggest promoters of the park. I tried unsuccessfully for years to find out how much money the City of Greensboro contributed to the project, including lighting, curbs, sewers, sidewalks, etc. The park is maintained primarily with tax money.
Now, back to the original comment: One property to which I was referring was a city-owned, block-long area between McGee Street and Smothers Place that was sold to a developer for around $90,000 and I understand is now up for sale for around $400,000 because the project that he promised was never completed.
Another property sold without prior knowledge of the public was part of the parking lot in the 300 block of S. Elm Street and allowing the builder of the proposed development to rent specific parking spots for his tenants and customers. Other business owners cannot rent spaces there even on a "when available" basis, but this one building owner can rent individual spaces exclusively for his tenants.
Several downtown property owners have tried to purchase part or all of that lot. Their efforts were refused and then it was sold to a developer without public knowledge. A new building will be erected next to it on a lot where the old Mantleworks building stood before it was struck by "renovation lightning" and had to be demolished.
I think that if this builder wants parking for his customers, he could have incorporated it into the new building.
And did anyone notice that the new "guildelines" will not go into effect until this out-of-place building is completed?
Favoritism and underhanded deals are the rule rather than the exception in Greensboro.
One downtown success story is the old bank building on the corner of Washington and Elm streets. I think that it was purchased without incentives and has been renovated one floor at a time by the owners. Another is the building on the SW corner of McGee and S. Elm streets. An old building was renovated by one family and is now a bustling spot containing several restaurants and pubs. Another is the small business center in the old Blue Bell Building at the corner of Lee and S. Elm.
I was not referring to the Wachovia Building; however, I believe that the Cement Park that was touted as a gift to the city, but is owned by a private non-profit, was built solely to help sell the Wachovia Building. Check out the biggest promoters of the park. I tried unsuccessfully for years to find out how much money the City of Greensboro contributed to the project, including lighting, curbs, sewers, sidewalks, etc. The park is maintained primarily with tax money.
Now, back to the original comment: One property to which I was referring was a city-owned, block-long area between McGee Street and Smothers Place that was sold to a developer for around $90,000 and I understand is now up for sale for around $400,000 because the project that he promised was never completed.
Another property sold without prior knowledge of the public was part of the parking lot in the 300 block of S. Elm Street and allowing the builder of the proposed development to rent specific parking spots for his tenants and customers. Other business owners cannot rent spaces there even on a "when available" basis, but this one building owner can rent individual spaces exclusively for his tenants.
Several downtown property owners have tried to purchase part or all of that lot. Their efforts were refused and then it was sold to a developer without public knowledge. A new building will be erected next to it on a lot where the old Mantleworks building stood before it was struck by "renovation lightning" and had to be demolished.
I think that if this builder wants parking for his customers, he could have incorporated it into the new building.
And did anyone notice that the new "guildelines" will not go into effect until this out-of-place building is completed?
Favoritism and underhanded deals are the rule rather than the exception in Greensboro.
One downtown success story is the old bank building on the corner of Washington and Elm streets. I think that it was purchased without incentives and has been renovated one floor at a time by the owners. Another is the building on the SW corner of McGee and S. Elm streets. An old building was renovated by one family and is now a bustling spot containing several restaurants and pubs. Another is the small business center in the old Blue Bell Building at the corner of Lee and S. Elm.
Downtown Guidelines
"GUIDELINES" is an understatement and yet another intrusion on the property rights of the citizens of Greensboro.
These guidelines were not written or approved by the people who will be most affected by them - the people who took the risk of opening businesses or relocating businesses in Downtown Greensboro, the people who bought property in the Central Business District without incentives and the people who will suffer when over-regulation and bad judgment by city government ruins downtown, AGAIN.
History shows us that it has happened before.
Also see: Calling All Property Rights Advocates
These guidelines were not written or approved by the people who will be most affected by them - the people who took the risk of opening businesses or relocating businesses in Downtown Greensboro, the people who bought property in the Central Business District without incentives and the people who will suffer when over-regulation and bad judgment by city government ruins downtown, AGAIN.
History shows us that it has happened before.
Also see: Calling All Property Rights Advocates
Calling All Property Rights Advocates
-----
Please let your Greensboro City Council Member know that the you don't approve of the additional overlay restrictions that are being proposed for the Central Business District without the consent of a majority of the property owners and business owners. This is only for Downtown. It is unfair, unless it is applied to all areas of the city. And, not many of us want that.
DGI and others have prepared a 103-page document on design and other building restrictions for the CB. It is another instance of unfair treatment of the businesses operating downtown, especially small independent merchants and property owners.
Recently, the City Council approved selling a public parking lot to a developer who will put up a building that is out of character with the area. Plus, they gave him several perks and incentives that the rest of us didn't get when we moved into downtown and contributed to its revitalization.
This is not the first time that city property has been sold underhandedly to a developer without knowledge of the public and without an open bid process.
We, the people, can change the way business-as-usual is done in Greensboro. It might be too late for this stupid project; but, we should know what is happening in downtown and in other areas of the city that is unfair and sometimes illegal.
When one of our current city council members said that the businesses downtown want free parking and everyone else has to provide parking for their customers, she was wrong. She apparently didn't know that every bit of property in the Central Business District pays an additional 5% tax which is supposed to be used to help the downtown businesses. So, we do pay for parking and other amenities. (UPDATE: I was informed last night by a reliable source that the extra downtown tax is actually 9%)
And, downtown property owners are not the only ones being treated unfairly. It happens too often in all areas of the city.
Downtown needs your help. If you love downtown and you want open, fair government in Greensboro, do something. Find out what your present council person is doing and what his/her opponent in the next election plans to do. Go to forums, meetings, read the blogs and the news papers. And then, vote for a better Greensboro government.
Thank you.
Please let your Greensboro City Council Member know that the you don't approve of the additional overlay restrictions that are being proposed for the Central Business District without the consent of a majority of the property owners and business owners. This is only for Downtown. It is unfair, unless it is applied to all areas of the city. And, not many of us want that.
DGI and others have prepared a 103-page document on design and other building restrictions for the CB. It is another instance of unfair treatment of the businesses operating downtown, especially small independent merchants and property owners.
Recently, the City Council approved selling a public parking lot to a developer who will put up a building that is out of character with the area. Plus, they gave him several perks and incentives that the rest of us didn't get when we moved into downtown and contributed to its revitalization.
This is not the first time that city property has been sold underhandedly to a developer without knowledge of the public and without an open bid process.
We, the people, can change the way business-as-usual is done in Greensboro. It might be too late for this stupid project; but, we should know what is happening in downtown and in other areas of the city that is unfair and sometimes illegal.
When one of our current city council members said that the businesses downtown want free parking and everyone else has to provide parking for their customers, she was wrong. She apparently didn't know that every bit of property in the Central Business District pays an additional 5% tax which is supposed to be used to help the downtown businesses. So, we do pay for parking and other amenities. (UPDATE: I was informed last night by a reliable source that the extra downtown tax is actually 9%)
And, downtown property owners are not the only ones being treated unfairly. It happens too often in all areas of the city.
Downtown needs your help. If you love downtown and you want open, fair government in Greensboro, do something. Find out what your present council person is doing and what his/her opponent in the next election plans to do. Go to forums, meetings, read the blogs and the news papers. And then, vote for a better Greensboro government.
Thank you.
By Those Who Follow the "leader" ????
To Sue,
Did you read my post about the paved greenway? Your response post didn't seem as if you did. My questions have not been addressed.
Actually, I have been to several of the meetings. I did ask many questions which were not honestly or adequately answered. I have talked with city employees and officials about it.
At one of the meetings with one of the planners from another state who boasted of a greenway in his home town, I asked how often he used the greenway? It was within walking distance of his office. His answer was very evasive.
I am not against the so-called greenway. I just don't think tax money should be spent on it at the present time. There are more pressing issues which I mentioned in my post.
Also see:
More comments
Did you read my post about the paved greenway? Your response post didn't seem as if you did. My questions have not been addressed.
Actually, I have been to several of the meetings. I did ask many questions which were not honestly or adequately answered. I have talked with city employees and officials about it.
At one of the meetings with one of the planners from another state who boasted of a greenway in his home town, I asked how often he used the greenway? It was within walking distance of his office. His answer was very evasive.
I am not against the so-called greenway. I just don't think tax money should be spent on it at the present time. There are more pressing issues which I mentioned in my post.
Also see:
More comments
It's Not Just Parking
More thoughts on downtown incentives and parking in Downtowners Park (sometimes called panhandlers park)
Cara Michelle wrote:
I’m not a fan of incentives,. . . . . And I don’t think anyone offered incentives to Simmone (owner of M’Coul’s and Green Burro) or the other business owners in that area. If they add parking, Simmone better get some of it,
..........
It’s not just a few parking spaces. It is the idea that now that downtown is a good place to do business, why should an investor even have to ask for incentives. There were no incentives when most of us invested in property downtown or opened businesses there.
Why should the new guy get special parking privileges that no other business gets. Why should he be allowed to buy city property for a fraction of it's worth? What kind of scam is this? The whole thing stinks.
Why destroy one small park when the city spent so much to help build another park downtown that is privately owned by a non-taxpaying, so-called non-profit group.
I can’t understand how citizens can believe the web of lies that Robbie Perkins spews about no investment in downtown in years. Why is a new building a better investment for downtown than a rehab of an historic building in an historic district?
Simon Richy has improved the corner of Elm and McGee streets much more than this johnny-come-lately can ever do. And he hardly gets a thank you. Many others have invested in the area, also.
Cara Michelle wrote:
I’m not a fan of incentives,. . . . . And I don’t think anyone offered incentives to Simmone (owner of M’Coul’s and Green Burro) or the other business owners in that area. If they add parking, Simmone better get some of it,
..........
It’s not just a few parking spaces. It is the idea that now that downtown is a good place to do business, why should an investor even have to ask for incentives. There were no incentives when most of us invested in property downtown or opened businesses there.
Why should the new guy get special parking privileges that no other business gets. Why should he be allowed to buy city property for a fraction of it's worth? What kind of scam is this? The whole thing stinks.
Why destroy one small park when the city spent so much to help build another park downtown that is privately owned by a non-taxpaying, so-called non-profit group.
I can’t understand how citizens can believe the web of lies that Robbie Perkins spews about no investment in downtown in years. Why is a new building a better investment for downtown than a rehab of an historic building in an historic district?
Simon Richy has improved the corner of Elm and McGee streets much more than this johnny-come-lately can ever do. And he hardly gets a thank you. Many others have invested in the area, also.
Who Objects
Am I the only one who noticed that City Council Members who objected to the Zoning Protest Petition at the Jan. meeting are closely connected to the development, building or real estate industry?
Real Scoop on Parking Downtown
From the N&R Yesterday. "A subcommittee of city officials and merchants has been studying possible solutions since spring. The group plans to discuss its recommendations Tuesday with the full Downtown Development Advisory Committee. Then any proposals go before council for a vote."
Actually, city officials, DGI, merchants, property owners, big business and out-of-town consultants have been discussing parking problems in Downtown Greensboro for many years. The most recent series of discussions started when an out-of-town consultant arranged to talk to some of the people who are directly affected by parking.
I met with him. I was the only person who attended the meeting. The meeting was set up early so that working people could attend. The meeting was so early that I was not allowed into the City Hall because it was not open to the public yet. When I finally got in, the consultant and I talked about parking downtown for quite a while. I won't go into any details here, but several months later, I was surprised at what was presented to the Downtown Advisory Committee. It was not what I expected.
I attended several meetings where new parking regulations were discussed. Most of the suggestions were very helpful to the nighttime businesses that have been encouraged to make Greensboro Downtown the place to be at night.
Did you know that renting a parking space from the City of Greensboro, only guarantees you a place if you can find a vacant one in one particular lot or parking garking garage from 8am to 6pm. All other times all meters, city lots and garages have unlimited free parking for anyone.
So, what's the deal? Charge the people who work and shop downtown during the day, but let everyone park free at night.
WHAT ARE WE THINKING?
Here are some other thoughts about Downtown Parking (with some corrections in my spelling and grammar) that I posted on the Inside Scoop Blog earlier today.
----------
Eric,
The 30 minute passenger parking in loading zones was put into place for very short term parking to run in for a cup of coffee, take out food, make a delivery or to load up a purchase that would be a hassel to carry to the parking garage. At the time they were put in, parking in the garages was much more expensive than parking on the street (even if you got a ticket, the fine was less than parking half a day in any of the decks). It seemed like a fairly good idea at the time.
Delivery trucks are NOT as big a problem as some people think. There is plenty of room to drive on either side of even large trucks making deliveries to most nearby retail stores and restaurants.
I have suggested to the City Council and to the Downtown Advisory Board and to Downtown Greensboro Inc. that a good use of some of the extra tax money downtown property owners pay and/or a portion of sales tax paid on purchases in the Central City would be to have traffic cops in the downtown area during a few heavy traffic times to keep the traffic flowing at a reasonable pace.
REALLY ?? You didn't know that a portion of the county sales tax that is collected Downtown comes back to the quasi-judicial non-profit Downtown Greensboro Inc. A large portion of it used to clean up after the bar traffic and to maintain the Cement Park at Elm and Friendly.
My suggestion to use humans to direct traffic has fallen on deaf ears for many years. This solution was used in the "old days" and is used in congested areas of forward-looking cities and in our large, local shopping centers. I guess the shopping centers are trying to be customer friendly, which increases business.
Most of the people who "make the downtown rules" don't have a personal financial interest in downtown and don't seem to care about how hard the parking regulations are on merchants.
For at least the past 30 years, most of the changes in the Central Business District of Greensboro have done more to hurt the area than to help it.
Some of the things that have been done:
*Trying to turn downtown into an outdoor mall with no parking.
*Closing alleyways so that deliveries and maintenance could not be done from behind the buildings.
*Having no bus stops in the shopping/business district of Elm St.
*When city busses cross Elm Street, at Market, Washington, McGee and Lindsey streets, they don't stop to load or unload passengers.
*Having the HEAT (free student transportation vans) run a short loop by the bars two or three nights a week, but never close to daytime shopping.
*Raising the price of metered parking and installing meters that will not register any parking time on them until at least 25 cents has been put into the slot. So if you park for 5 minutes, you still pay for 30.
*Closing streets, making traffic heavier on those left open.
*Removing turn lanes and narrowing streets by extending sidewalks into traffic lanes.
*Installing medians which make auto, bike and pedestrian travel harder and more dangerous.
*Now, there is talk of moving the Visitors' Center from the Downtown area to inside the Coliseum.
I could go on and on, but it probably will not do any good. We need some good ideas about how to improve the downtown. What I meant to say is that we need some officials who will listen to good ideas and then act on them. There is much talk about helping and saving downtown and making it day and night friendly. What a bunch of rot.
I will attend the meeting Tuesday. The talk will not be driven by customers or small business owners.
There is one suggestion that does seems reasonable.
*Use the loading zones for taxi stands during certain hours at night so the drunks can get home safely.
I hope to see you at the meeting.
Actually, city officials, DGI, merchants, property owners, big business and out-of-town consultants have been discussing parking problems in Downtown Greensboro for many years. The most recent series of discussions started when an out-of-town consultant arranged to talk to some of the people who are directly affected by parking.
I met with him. I was the only person who attended the meeting. The meeting was set up early so that working people could attend. The meeting was so early that I was not allowed into the City Hall because it was not open to the public yet. When I finally got in, the consultant and I talked about parking downtown for quite a while. I won't go into any details here, but several months later, I was surprised at what was presented to the Downtown Advisory Committee. It was not what I expected.
I attended several meetings where new parking regulations were discussed. Most of the suggestions were very helpful to the nighttime businesses that have been encouraged to make Greensboro Downtown the place to be at night.
Did you know that renting a parking space from the City of Greensboro, only guarantees you a place if you can find a vacant one in one particular lot or parking garking garage from 8am to 6pm. All other times all meters, city lots and garages have unlimited free parking for anyone.
So, what's the deal? Charge the people who work and shop downtown during the day, but let everyone park free at night.
WHAT ARE WE THINKING?
Here are some other thoughts about Downtown Parking (with some corrections in my spelling and grammar) that I posted on the Inside Scoop Blog earlier today.
----------
Eric,
The 30 minute passenger parking in loading zones was put into place for very short term parking to run in for a cup of coffee, take out food, make a delivery or to load up a purchase that would be a hassel to carry to the parking garage. At the time they were put in, parking in the garages was much more expensive than parking on the street (even if you got a ticket, the fine was less than parking half a day in any of the decks). It seemed like a fairly good idea at the time.
Delivery trucks are NOT as big a problem as some people think. There is plenty of room to drive on either side of even large trucks making deliveries to most nearby retail stores and restaurants.
I have suggested to the City Council and to the Downtown Advisory Board and to Downtown Greensboro Inc. that a good use of some of the extra tax money downtown property owners pay and/or a portion of sales tax paid on purchases in the Central City would be to have traffic cops in the downtown area during a few heavy traffic times to keep the traffic flowing at a reasonable pace.
REALLY ?? You didn't know that a portion of the county sales tax that is collected Downtown comes back to the quasi-judicial non-profit Downtown Greensboro Inc. A large portion of it used to clean up after the bar traffic and to maintain the Cement Park at Elm and Friendly.
My suggestion to use humans to direct traffic has fallen on deaf ears for many years. This solution was used in the "old days" and is used in congested areas of forward-looking cities and in our large, local shopping centers. I guess the shopping centers are trying to be customer friendly, which increases business.
Most of the people who "make the downtown rules" don't have a personal financial interest in downtown and don't seem to care about how hard the parking regulations are on merchants.
For at least the past 30 years, most of the changes in the Central Business District of Greensboro have done more to hurt the area than to help it.
Some of the things that have been done:
*Trying to turn downtown into an outdoor mall with no parking.
*Closing alleyways so that deliveries and maintenance could not be done from behind the buildings.
*Having no bus stops in the shopping/business district of Elm St.
*When city busses cross Elm Street, at Market, Washington, McGee and Lindsey streets, they don't stop to load or unload passengers.
*Having the HEAT (free student transportation vans) run a short loop by the bars two or three nights a week, but never close to daytime shopping.
*Raising the price of metered parking and installing meters that will not register any parking time on them until at least 25 cents has been put into the slot. So if you park for 5 minutes, you still pay for 30.
*Closing streets, making traffic heavier on those left open.
*Removing turn lanes and narrowing streets by extending sidewalks into traffic lanes.
*Installing medians which make auto, bike and pedestrian travel harder and more dangerous.
*Now, there is talk of moving the Visitors' Center from the Downtown area to inside the Coliseum.
I could go on and on, but it probably will not do any good. We need some good ideas about how to improve the downtown. What I meant to say is that we need some officials who will listen to good ideas and then act on them. There is much talk about helping and saving downtown and making it day and night friendly. What a bunch of rot.
I will attend the meeting Tuesday. The talk will not be driven by customers or small business owners.
There is one suggestion that does seems reasonable.
*Use the loading zones for taxi stands during certain hours at night so the drunks can get home safely.
I hope to see you at the meeting.
City Attorney Stymies Good Action by Council
Last night near the end of the regular Greensboro City Council meeting, just before the Council went into closed session to discuss economic incentives, personnel problems and law suits, there was some discussion about delivery trucks being ticketed for parking in the street while unloading. (see previous post) This practice has been overlooked for many years because there is no other place for unloading large trucks. The City, in it's ??wisdom?? closed off most of the alleyways downtown years ago.
Council members and the Mayor discussed where the trucks should park and if there should be a "designated delivery time." Some members wanted to suspend the practice of giving delivery trucks tickets for parking in the street or in regular spaces until the problem could be worked out.
The City Attorney informed the Council that this could not be done without changing a local ordinance. So, the discussion almost stopped.
I could not see some of the people commenting from the staff area, but I think that Ben Brown, Assistant City Attorney, said it would be worked out. I hope it will be, AND SOON because any dummy knows that retail cannot survive without deliveries.
Council members and the Mayor discussed where the trucks should park and if there should be a "designated delivery time." Some members wanted to suspend the practice of giving delivery trucks tickets for parking in the street or in regular spaces until the problem could be worked out.
The City Attorney informed the Council that this could not be done without changing a local ordinance. So, the discussion almost stopped.
I could not see some of the people commenting from the staff area, but I think that Ben Brown, Assistant City Attorney, said it would be worked out. I hope it will be, AND SOON because any dummy knows that retail cannot survive without deliveries.
Beer Truck Blues
Parking in Downtown Greensboro isn't bad enough. The city is doing some strange stuff. I have heard from reliable sources that parking patrol officers are giving out tickets to delivery trucks that park in the street to unload. WHAT ARE THEY THINKING?
Many of the people who have rented apartments and/or purchased condos in the Central Business District have been duped. They were sold a misleading bill of goods. Of course there are many places to eat and drink in the CB; but there are very few good jobs and very little reasonably priced places to shop for everyday goods. So, if you live downtown you can eat, drink and walk home. But you probably have to drive to work, to shop for clothing, groceries, toys, school supplies, hardware and appliances, medical and dental care, etc. And they need available, reasonably priced, places to park.
We want empty nesters and retirees in Downtown Greensboro. Most of the living space requires walking up stairs, which is not suitable for many older people. We want young people to live in Greensboro. What happens when they want to settle down and have children? How far can a mother walk with her small children and several bags of groceries? Parking is a problem. Children need grass and trees and back yards. There seem to be very few amenities for families with children downtown; but, there are still some family-friendly neighborhoods surrounding it. We should protect the neighorhoods around the CB and not let CB zoning creep into family-living areas. Let's try to keep Greensboro family friendly and keep the downtown auto and pedestrial friendly. And try to be a little more helpful to daytime businesses that support and are supported by downtown residents.
Many of the people who have rented apartments and/or purchased condos in the Central Business District have been duped. They were sold a misleading bill of goods. Of course there are many places to eat and drink in the CB; but there are very few good jobs and very little reasonably priced places to shop for everyday goods. So, if you live downtown you can eat, drink and walk home. But you probably have to drive to work, to shop for clothing, groceries, toys, school supplies, hardware and appliances, medical and dental care, etc. And they need available, reasonably priced, places to park.
We want empty nesters and retirees in Downtown Greensboro. Most of the living space requires walking up stairs, which is not suitable for many older people. We want young people to live in Greensboro. What happens when they want to settle down and have children? How far can a mother walk with her small children and several bags of groceries? Parking is a problem. Children need grass and trees and back yards. There seem to be very few amenities for families with children downtown; but, there are still some family-friendly neighborhoods surrounding it. We should protect the neighorhoods around the CB and not let CB zoning creep into family-living areas. Let's try to keep Greensboro family friendly and keep the downtown auto and pedestrial friendly. And try to be a little more helpful to daytime businesses that support and are supported by downtown residents.
Has Anything Changed?
-----
This is from a post on my blog in August, 2005.
And the beat goes on! ! ! !
-----
This morning I sat through a Greensboro City Council Briefing Session that lasted almost 4 hours. The Council did make a few decisions, but most of the meeting was wasted with presentations that didn't include much information that the council members did not know already.
The council members discussed appointing alternates to the boards and commissions because there are so many absences at the meetings. They decided that the only board that needs alternate members is the Board of Adjustments. Because the findings made by the Board of Adjustments are final unless there is a legal appeal within 30 days of the ruling, the council felt that there should always be enough members present to make a ruling. The alternate members will be asked to attend every meeting, but will only be able to vote when replacing an absent member.
Representatives from Action Greensboro and Downtown Greensboro Inc. gave their usual "We're doing a wonderful job" reports and estimates of how much the Center City Park will cost. DGI will get some money because of the extra tax the City Council passed last year on property owners in the Central Business District. Because the taxing authority (in this case, I guess it is DGI) gets a percentage of the taxes collected in their area from Guilford County Sales Tax revenue. I think that Ray Gibbs said that the extra money, which will be around $100,000, will be used for park maintenance. I think the city council agreed to spend $200,000 toward park maintenance. At last month's briefing, I thought the city agreed to pay up to $450,000 for park maintenance. Of course, nobody knows what the cost of the park will be and Action Greensboro asked for a five year trial period to figure out what will happen.
Adam Fischer from GDOT started to give an impressive presentation about why the city is adding those annoying medians on so many streets. The council members would have no part of that. They interupted so many times during the presentation that I'm not sure the presentation was ever completed. A lively discussion ended with GDOT winning, as usual, and very little accomplished.
After that, it was time for a presentation about proposed changes to the city's noise ordinance. By that time, several of the members had left and those who were still there were looking at their watches. There seemed to be lots of concern about how street noise could hurt the outside eating and drinking businesses on Elm Street. The biggest problem is that nobody knows how loud is too loud, and most don't understand noise/decibels?
The presentation was confusing and it was decided to bring it up later after the council had time to test noise by using a decibel meter. We were told that these meters cost around $3,000 each and that the city will probably purchase 5 as soon as possible and add more until every officer has one.
This is from a post on my blog in August, 2005.
And the beat goes on! ! ! !
-----
This morning I sat through a Greensboro City Council Briefing Session that lasted almost 4 hours. The Council did make a few decisions, but most of the meeting was wasted with presentations that didn't include much information that the council members did not know already.
The council members discussed appointing alternates to the boards and commissions because there are so many absences at the meetings. They decided that the only board that needs alternate members is the Board of Adjustments. Because the findings made by the Board of Adjustments are final unless there is a legal appeal within 30 days of the ruling, the council felt that there should always be enough members present to make a ruling. The alternate members will be asked to attend every meeting, but will only be able to vote when replacing an absent member.
Representatives from Action Greensboro and Downtown Greensboro Inc. gave their usual "We're doing a wonderful job" reports and estimates of how much the Center City Park will cost. DGI will get some money because of the extra tax the City Council passed last year on property owners in the Central Business District. Because the taxing authority (in this case, I guess it is DGI) gets a percentage of the taxes collected in their area from Guilford County Sales Tax revenue. I think that Ray Gibbs said that the extra money, which will be around $100,000, will be used for park maintenance. I think the city council agreed to spend $200,000 toward park maintenance. At last month's briefing, I thought the city agreed to pay up to $450,000 for park maintenance. Of course, nobody knows what the cost of the park will be and Action Greensboro asked for a five year trial period to figure out what will happen.
Adam Fischer from GDOT started to give an impressive presentation about why the city is adding those annoying medians on so many streets. The council members would have no part of that. They interupted so many times during the presentation that I'm not sure the presentation was ever completed. A lively discussion ended with GDOT winning, as usual, and very little accomplished.
After that, it was time for a presentation about proposed changes to the city's noise ordinance. By that time, several of the members had left and those who were still there were looking at their watches. There seemed to be lots of concern about how street noise could hurt the outside eating and drinking businesses on Elm Street. The biggest problem is that nobody knows how loud is too loud, and most don't understand noise/decibels?
The presentation was confusing and it was decided to bring it up later after the council had time to test noise by using a decibel meter. We were told that these meters cost around $3,000 each and that the city will probably purchase 5 as soon as possible and add more until every officer has one.
RENOVATION LIGHTNING in Greensboro
______
A vacant building on Elm Street is ablaze! My, My, what a surprise. The restaurant that has operated from the location has very recently moved out to another location downtown. (See new comment below. I shouldn't have posted this until I had more information.
Renovating an old building is very expensive, even with historic funds, low-interest loans, etc.
My questions is always the same. How did the fire start? Maybe is should be, who is responsible for the fire? And the other questions is, will the arsonist be found?
Most of these renovation lightning fires are declared to be arson by police and fire departments. Some, like one that happened in a vacant building with no electricity was said to be an accidental electrical fire.
One apartment complex had several fires several years ago before enough damage was done.
I could be wrong this time. But I doubt it.
More at 11.
Added later
Oops. I might have been wrong on this one. This one might have really been an accident.
A vacant building on Elm Street is ablaze! My, My, what a surprise. The restaurant that has operated from the location has very recently moved out to another location downtown. (See new comment below. I shouldn't have posted this until I had more information.
Renovating an old building is very expensive, even with historic funds, low-interest loans, etc.
My questions is always the same. How did the fire start? Maybe is should be, who is responsible for the fire? And the other questions is, will the arsonist be found?
Most of these renovation lightning fires are declared to be arson by police and fire departments. Some, like one that happened in a vacant building with no electricity was said to be an accidental electrical fire.
One apartment complex had several fires several years ago before enough damage was done.
I could be wrong this time. But I doubt it.
More at 11.
Added later
Oops. I might have been wrong on this one. This one might have really been an accident.
Solar could help pay maintenance in greensboro
-----
Now might be the time for a REAL CHANGE in the way city-owned property is maintained in Greensboro and Guilford County.
If the city produces some of the energy used by publicly-owned buildings, the money saved could be used to maintain those very buildings.
Diane G. Davis
905 Fairmont Street
Greensboro, NC 27401
(336) 378-4457
September 4, 2006
Letters to the Editor
The News & Record
edpage@news-record.com
Please consider this letter for publication. Thank you.
Now is the time for a REAL CHANGE in the way we pay for maintenance of city-owned property in Greensboro.
.
The city can produce energy by using the roofs of publicly-owned facilities. This energy can be sold or used within the building. The money saved can be used to help defray maintenance costs of those very buildings.
As roofs are replaced or repaired on existing city-owned buildings or installed on new facilities, they can be fitted with energy producing solar units. The project would cost less if done as roof repair or replacement is done. Solar Power helps reduce pollution by reducing the need for more coal-burning or nuclear-powered energy plants. Clean solar power pays for itself.
City Manager Mitch Johnson told me that Solar Power is not economical and not a good option for city buildings in Greensboro. He did say that the Melvin Building has passive solar because there is a sky light into the plaza area.
I urge citizens of Greensboro and Guilford County to write, call, e-mail or speak to elected officials at meetings. Suggest that Solar Energy be explored. It is being used in other cities in the US and around the world. It just makes sense.
Thank you,
Diane Davis
Now might be the time for a REAL CHANGE in the way city-owned property is maintained in Greensboro and Guilford County.
If the city produces some of the energy used by publicly-owned buildings, the money saved could be used to maintain those very buildings.
Diane G. Davis
905 Fairmont Street
Greensboro, NC 27401
(336) 378-4457
September 4, 2006
Letters to the Editor
The News & Record
edpage@news-record.com
Please consider this letter for publication. Thank you.
Now is the time for a REAL CHANGE in the way we pay for maintenance of city-owned property in Greensboro.
.
The city can produce energy by using the roofs of publicly-owned facilities. This energy can be sold or used within the building. The money saved can be used to help defray maintenance costs of those very buildings.
As roofs are replaced or repaired on existing city-owned buildings or installed on new facilities, they can be fitted with energy producing solar units. The project would cost less if done as roof repair or replacement is done. Solar Power helps reduce pollution by reducing the need for more coal-burning or nuclear-powered energy plants. Clean solar power pays for itself.
City Manager Mitch Johnson told me that Solar Power is not economical and not a good option for city buildings in Greensboro. He did say that the Melvin Building has passive solar because there is a sky light into the plaza area.
I urge citizens of Greensboro and Guilford County to write, call, e-mail or speak to elected officials at meetings. Suggest that Solar Energy be explored. It is being used in other cities in the US and around the world. It just makes sense.
Thank you,
Diane Davis
Quality of Life Issues/What are we thinking?
-----
Help save the beautiful Wachovia tower downtown and award the buyer over 2 million (city/county) dollars to build himself a penthouse apartment there.
Buy and demolish the beautiful old Ice House on East Market Street and park buses on the lot.(city)
Do nothing to help save the beautiful old Arbor House.
Revoke the charter of a school (state) operating on Friendly and Church streets thus allowing the owner to sell the property for a huge profit to be converted into offices.
Spend $750,000 for street scape improvements around a privately owned park downtown and commit city money to maintain and promote it.(city)
Allow college students to ride city buses free while charging the working poor for transportation to their jobs on the same buses.(federal, state,city)
Let city-owned property deteriorate from lack of routine maintenance.
Ask citizens to borrow money (approve bonds) to build Fire Stations because there is not enough money left over after too much wasteful spending to provide adequate police and fire protection for the city.
Close and donate streets to the private (non-profit? ? ) developers of a downtown ball park.
Invite College students to Get Downtown and Get Drunk.
Raise the tax rate to cover shipping household trash to a dump in another county.
WOW. I don't understand.
Help save the beautiful Wachovia tower downtown and award the buyer over 2 million (city/county) dollars to build himself a penthouse apartment there.
Buy and demolish the beautiful old Ice House on East Market Street and park buses on the lot.(city)
Do nothing to help save the beautiful old Arbor House.
Revoke the charter of a school (state) operating on Friendly and Church streets thus allowing the owner to sell the property for a huge profit to be converted into offices.
Spend $750,000 for street scape improvements around a privately owned park downtown and commit city money to maintain and promote it.(city)
Allow college students to ride city buses free while charging the working poor for transportation to their jobs on the same buses.(federal, state,city)
Let city-owned property deteriorate from lack of routine maintenance.
Ask citizens to borrow money (approve bonds) to build Fire Stations because there is not enough money left over after too much wasteful spending to provide adequate police and fire protection for the city.
Close and donate streets to the private (non-profit? ? ) developers of a downtown ball park.
Invite College students to Get Downtown and Get Drunk.
Raise the tax rate to cover shipping household trash to a dump in another county.
WOW. I don't understand.
Electronic Billboards Downtown
------
A very short discussion at the Greensboro City Council Briefing Tuesday morning concerned the permitting of "Electronic Projection Graphic Signs" within the Central Business District. This discussion was prompted by the appearance of a large banner on the side of a building at the corner of Washington and Elm streets several month ago. A marketing firm projected graphics onto the banner from a building across the street.
Owners of the building and owners of the marketing company, with the support of Downtown Greensboro Incorporated, tried to convince several city boards that the projected image was not a billboard. When they were unsuccessful at this the projection was stopped, but the screen still remains. NOW marketing, Inc. apparently wrote a new sign regulation proposal which they submitted to the city. It was submitted to the City Council on NOW Marketing letterhead. The request was for conditional use permitted within the Central Business District.
Current billboard regulations in Greensboro allow billboards to be placed no closer than every 500 feet. The proposed ordinance would allow these electronic projection screens to be located as close as 300 feet apart. Billboards are strictly regulated and can only be place in areas zoned for their use. The Central Business District is not zoned for billboards; however, there are still a few which were grandfathered when the prohibition was enacted.
The largest billboard currently allowed anywhere in Greensboro has a total 450 sq. ft. size limit. This new proposed regulation would allow projected electronic images onto an applied surface or banner to be up to 500 sq. ft. and self-contained electronic signs up to 1000 sq. ft.
One of the council members commented that signs like that could be seen in Las Vegas. Another comment was "I guess size does matter."
The proposal suggested that cultural, artistic and other public service information would be displayed on the signs with only limited commercial advertisement allowed. Of course, the name of the service provider and contact information would be part of the projected image.
Greensboro Planning Department basically said in their comments that these electronic signs were indeed billboards according to the definition in the Development Ordinance and this proposal would allow the re-entry of billboards into the downtown area of Greensboro. Greensboro Legal Department said that "any commercial content on a sign makes it a commercial sign." And, generally regulating what goes on a commercial sign is a violation of free speech provisions of the first amendment of the US Constitution.
Now, don't get me wrong. I think that billboards have a place. I enjoy them in the proper place and of a reasonable size; but, what were these people thinking? The City Council almost did the right thing. They tabled the proposal. It will come up again. I personally think that they should have trashed it after they had a good laugh.
Previous post about Billboards. What, Exactly Is A Billboard ?
A very short discussion at the Greensboro City Council Briefing Tuesday morning concerned the permitting of "Electronic Projection Graphic Signs" within the Central Business District. This discussion was prompted by the appearance of a large banner on the side of a building at the corner of Washington and Elm streets several month ago. A marketing firm projected graphics onto the banner from a building across the street.
Owners of the building and owners of the marketing company, with the support of Downtown Greensboro Incorporated, tried to convince several city boards that the projected image was not a billboard. When they were unsuccessful at this the projection was stopped, but the screen still remains. NOW marketing, Inc. apparently wrote a new sign regulation proposal which they submitted to the city. It was submitted to the City Council on NOW Marketing letterhead. The request was for conditional use permitted within the Central Business District.
Current billboard regulations in Greensboro allow billboards to be placed no closer than every 500 feet. The proposed ordinance would allow these electronic projection screens to be located as close as 300 feet apart. Billboards are strictly regulated and can only be place in areas zoned for their use. The Central Business District is not zoned for billboards; however, there are still a few which were grandfathered when the prohibition was enacted.
The largest billboard currently allowed anywhere in Greensboro has a total 450 sq. ft. size limit. This new proposed regulation would allow projected electronic images onto an applied surface or banner to be up to 500 sq. ft. and self-contained electronic signs up to 1000 sq. ft.
One of the council members commented that signs like that could be seen in Las Vegas. Another comment was "I guess size does matter."
The proposal suggested that cultural, artistic and other public service information would be displayed on the signs with only limited commercial advertisement allowed. Of course, the name of the service provider and contact information would be part of the projected image.
Greensboro Planning Department basically said in their comments that these electronic signs were indeed billboards according to the definition in the Development Ordinance and this proposal would allow the re-entry of billboards into the downtown area of Greensboro. Greensboro Legal Department said that "any commercial content on a sign makes it a commercial sign." And, generally regulating what goes on a commercial sign is a violation of free speech provisions of the first amendment of the US Constitution.
Now, don't get me wrong. I think that billboards have a place. I enjoy them in the proper place and of a reasonable size; but, what were these people thinking? The City Council almost did the right thing. They tabled the proposal. It will come up again. I personally think that they should have trashed it after they had a good laugh.
Previous post about Billboards. What, Exactly Is A Billboard ?
What About Cedar Street ? ?
----------
Where have the talks gone? Where have the plans gone? There was much ado with planning sessions and maps and citizen suggestions and city staff presentations. Then. . . . . . .What?
Who knows what a Conservation District really is? I have heard the term tossed around, but never defined. There is a neighborhood near downtown commonly known as The Bellemeade District or the Cedar Street Area. What one calls the area depends on what one wants to happen to the area. The developers call it Bellemeade. The preservationist call it Cedar Street.
Some people seem to define the Cedar Street area as the run-down burned out apartment complex on the corner of Cedar and Friendly. Local developers really want that piece of property. Some people define the area as the location where a downtown development called Bellemeade Village is being built. Greensboro City Council seems to want to really help one area and just talk about helping the other. I'm confused.
The terms seem to talk about different places, but they both refer to the same general area between Friendly Ave. and Battleground Ave. from Eugene Street to the old train tracks that run between Cedar and Wilson streets. The planners say it has the potential to be considered a "conservation district". This is some kind of overlay zoning. I am not sure anyone knows exactly what the term means.
Many residents of old neighborhoods bristle at the thought of being designated an 'historic district". We know the meaning of that term. So, I suspect that the new designation will be similar to the historic district, without the restrictions on tear downs and new buildings. Sounds like a developers dream. But maybe not.
So what does it mean to "retain the character of the neighborhood"?
I found a site that describes the Chapel Hill definition of a conservation area. It seems pretty restrictive to me. Look at Chapel Hill's rules for aConservation District.
What do you think?
http://www.ci.chapel-hill.nc.us/index.asp?NID=144#DesignationCriteria
Where have the talks gone? Where have the plans gone? There was much ado with planning sessions and maps and citizen suggestions and city staff presentations. Then. . . . . . .What?
Who knows what a Conservation District really is? I have heard the term tossed around, but never defined. There is a neighborhood near downtown commonly known as The Bellemeade District or the Cedar Street Area. What one calls the area depends on what one wants to happen to the area. The developers call it Bellemeade. The preservationist call it Cedar Street.
Some people seem to define the Cedar Street area as the run-down burned out apartment complex on the corner of Cedar and Friendly. Local developers really want that piece of property. Some people define the area as the location where a downtown development called Bellemeade Village is being built. Greensboro City Council seems to want to really help one area and just talk about helping the other. I'm confused.
The terms seem to talk about different places, but they both refer to the same general area between Friendly Ave. and Battleground Ave. from Eugene Street to the old train tracks that run between Cedar and Wilson streets. The planners say it has the potential to be considered a "conservation district". This is some kind of overlay zoning. I am not sure anyone knows exactly what the term means.
Many residents of old neighborhoods bristle at the thought of being designated an 'historic district". We know the meaning of that term. So, I suspect that the new designation will be similar to the historic district, without the restrictions on tear downs and new buildings. Sounds like a developers dream. But maybe not.
So what does it mean to "retain the character of the neighborhood"?
I found a site that describes the Chapel Hill definition of a conservation area. It seems pretty restrictive to me. Look at Chapel Hill's rules for aConservation District.
What do you think?
http://www.ci.chapel-hill.nc.us/index.asp?NID=144#DesignationCriteria
The Davie Street Plot Thickens !
------
Beach music events will start on May the 11th and run until June 28th
Davie Street (one block) will be closed for the Beach music events
I think that this, of course, is getting us used to not using Davie Street for automobile traffic. In the grand scheme of planning for Downtown Greensboro, Davie Street will be closed and the "FREE" Center City Park will be connected to the Cultural Center and the other park beside it.
Mayor Holliday has repeatedly told us that Davie Street will not be closed, but it seems that nobody can fight the "Planners", not even City Hall.
What do you think?
Beach music events will start on May the 11th and run until June 28th
Davie Street (one block) will be closed for the Beach music events
I think that this, of course, is getting us used to not using Davie Street for automobile traffic. In the grand scheme of planning for Downtown Greensboro, Davie Street will be closed and the "FREE" Center City Park will be connected to the Cultural Center and the other park beside it.
Mayor Holliday has repeatedly told us that Davie Street will not be closed, but it seems that nobody can fight the "Planners", not even City Hall.
What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
