Our City Online

Messageboard - General Columbus Discussion

NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard. As of 05/22/16 they have been closed to new comments and replies, but will remain accessible for archived searches and reference. For more information CLICK HERE

The Lane - Mixed-Use Development - News & Updates

Home Forums General Columbus Discussion The Lane – Mixed-Use Development – News & Updates

Viewing 15 posts - 91 through 105 (of 214 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #445894

    shmoopatties
    Participant

    Here’s the thing that doesn’t seem to be clicking with some commenting here. When the people living there bought their houses, they bought them with the knowledge that the street was restricted to ‘Parking By Permit Only’. Ironically, this was done years ago to protect from overflow parking for the ‘Shops On Lane Avenue’ (or at the time ‘Lane Ave. Mall’) which has tons of parking; the odds of anyone parking across the street (or behind the mall…those residential streets were restricted too) was virtually nil. But that was a time long ago when RESIDENTS were given top priority and BUSINESS had to operate in a manner that placed them second in importance. The signs stating that permits were required to park there were removed for ‘repair’ even though the zoning still was on the books, but as I said, there was no one parking there. Then they rezoned, built that strip-mall with the bar and nail salon and very little parking and the issue came to the fore. But the parking restriction was still on the books, the signs just weren’t there to let drivers know that fact. After the passing of time though, the current attitude is that BUSINESS is the priority and the RESIDENTS are outta luck. So residents get the restrictions when they hardly need them but as soon as they need enforcement, the city changes the restrictions. I can totally understand why the residents are steamed.

    #445895

    Ameya
    Member

    I really wish I could get excited about this since it’s right down the street from me… but nope. Not with those renderings. =

    #445896
    Walker Evans
    Walker Evans
    Keymaster

    shmoopatties said:
    I can totally understand why the residents are steamed.

    Do any residents in the area not have off-street parking?

    Generally, these types of off-street parking restriction concerns are reserved for neighborhoods without off-street parking options.

    If everyone who live in the area has a garage and a driveway… then who cares about who’s using the off-street parking?

    #445897
    Jason Powell
    Jason Powell
    Participant

    The residents have every right to be a little upset when it comes to the parking and traffic situation. But, unfortunately or fortunately, depending on how one looks at it, this type of development has to happen in our land locked suburbs. Because they are land locked, there are very few places to build anything. Increased revenue for the city coffers needs to come from somewhere and commercial can pay a good chunk of that. I’m sure residents don’t want their taxes raised. So, residents are going to have to give and take. It is impossible to please everyone and development cannot be halted in order to please only a very small portion of the overall populace. Additionally, city officials are realizing that they are losing a chunck of their market to nearby hotspots on campus and downtown so they are doing what they feel is necessary to recapture some of that, which will benefit the city of UA in the end. It sucks for some people to have to put up with the consequences that come with progress but that is just the way things go.

    I thought they proposed a parking garage of around 400 spaces. Shouldn’t that, plus the mall lot, be able to handle most if not all of the parking needs while still keeping the side streets permit only?

    #445898

    Mr Man
    Member

    julfling said:

    As for the dick that mentioned all the Saab’s and Audi’s belonging to the owners of those houses tearing through the streets, unlikely. UA is primarily middle class, with a few pockets of high wealth, yes. But that area is not one of them.

    How is that dickish? This area is south of the “Golden Ghetto” (always hated that term, especially out of the mouths of South Arlington kids), and south Arlington is chock full of Saabs and Audis. Although, I must say, during my time in UA the biggest hazard on the road was the moms out driving very aggressively in very large (Suburban-class) SUVs. Not sure if that is still an issue, this was more than a couple years ago.

    #445899

    The main reason UA has to stimulate business is because Kasich killed the estate tax, which eliminated something like $2 million from the city’s annual budget. I don’t know what the forecasted tax revenue from a hotel/entertainment district will be like, but it’s needed.

    The neighborhood directly north of Lane Ave. in this area is as Columbus as any other part of town – it’s full of 3-bedroom post-war houses with regular driveways and regular people living in them.

    Then, at night, all the porch lights go out, and the rooves open up to become helipads, and we fly around in our Saab helicopters, shooting hundred-dollar bills at each other while we cackle maniacally and spray champagne out the window on the people sitting outside at Carsonie’s and the Wine Bistro.

    #445900

    News
    Participant

    Input on master plan still being heard
    Wednesday, August 31, 2011
    By LIN RICE
    ThisWeek Community Newspapers

    Upper Arlington residents still have several opportunities to weigh in on the city’s plans for the decade to come.

    Over the past year, city officials have been hosting “community conversations” with residents on specific aspects of Upper Arlington’s 10-year master plan, a document that elected leaders and city staff use to create an overall vision of progress for the coming decade.

    READ MORE: http://www.thisweeknews.com/live/content/upperarlington/stories/2011/08/31/input-on-master-plan-still-being-heard.html?sid=104

    #445901
    Walker Evans
    Walker Evans
    Keymaster

    Update via email:

    Dear Neighbors:

    For those of you who were able to join us on Tuesday night for our presentation at the BZAP work session, thanks for your continuing interest in our project. It was our first opportunity to present our plans to the board, so we were eager to hear their thoughts and feedback.

    In addition to many of the same plans and drawings we shared with you a week ago, we presented some updated renderings that reflected many of the ideas you expressed to us in our initial public meeting. Among those updates:

    · We showed ideas for hotel and mixed-use building exteriors that reflect more of the “UA feel” many neighbors asked for. We’ve attached a copy of those sketches and invite your feedback on these draft concepts.

    · We reviewed the proposed 12’-14’ tall trees and 8’ tall fencing buffer. The board asked for additional input from the neighbors regarding the fence height because 6’ is the maximum height allowed for fencing in the City of Upper Arlington. We’ve volunteered to provide a taller fence to create a more substantial buffer, but this will obviously require a variance. Most neighbors at the meeting supported the taller fence. Please let us know what you think as well.

    · We reviewed traffic suggestions (in conjunction with the city engineering department) for Wellesley and Lane to further insulate the neighborhood from Lane Avenue.

    · We proposed eliminating the pedestrian connection between the project and Mt. Holyoke to further separate neighbors from the project and prevent any parking on Mt. Holyoke, as many neighbors requested.

    · We mentioned that we are working on cut-off lighting options that will minimize light trespass from all project parking areas as well as coordinating existing tree and fence locations with new landscape buffer plantings.

    While we’re trying hard to address as many issues and concerns as we can, some of the ones you’ve raised can only be addressed by the city. We’ve already passed a number of them along, including the concern about delivery trucks from a neighboring property that are parking on Wellesley, and the suggestion that Wellesley be turned into a one-way street near Lane Avenue. We also mentioned residents’ requests for sidewalks on Wellesley.

    We look forward to continuing to work with BZAP, the city and all of you as the review process continues. We’re absolutely certain that together we can develop a project that enhances the neighborhood and brings new jobs, tax revenue, and business to our community. Thanks again for your interest and involvement.

    Sincerely,
    The Lane Avenue Redevelopment Team

    #445902

    zp945
    Participant

    I think that it would be worthwhile for the city of Upper Arlington and all inner ring, older suburbs to talk with business owners as they plan these developments. Speaking as someone who would actually like to invest money in the area, I can see a number of issues that scare me off. UA has very little commercial space to rent. You basically have the Shops on Lane and Kingsdale. The demographics are strong but they continually skew older and with less children (retail and restaurants are usually looking for either young people with discretionary income or families). UA is losing population to places like Dublin. Westerville, New Albany, etc. It’s cheaper and easier to build in a cornfield than it is to buy up existing properties, raze them and build new. This makes the rent higher, while the demographics get softer. I like UA, and Grandview and Bexley and Clintonville and Westgate and etc, but they have to realize that they are competing with something they can’t be. They don’t have the endless apace surrounding them that the outer ring suburbs do. That can be an advantage if you play to your strengths. Density is key. Personally, I don’t want to live anywhere that I can’t walk to most of the things I want to do. All of the inner ring suburbs offer that. While few of the outer ring suburbs do. Stop trying to be Dublin and just make a place people want to live and spend time.

    #445903

    I don’t think UA is trying to be Dublin, I think they’re trying to maintain their budget so they can continue to operate police/fire/school/community services. When the estate tax was killed by Kasich it was estimated that UA will lose $2mil yearly.

    It’s the same reason they didn’t let Tree of Life put a church-school in Arlington Center off Henderson – it’s zoned for commercial use and having a tax-exempt organization there would cost UA half a million in tax income every year.

    #445904

    groundrules
    Participant

    Walker said:

    were all the architects in the world killed off in some plague that I didn’t hear about?

    #445905

    News
    Participant

    Hotel would change face of Lane Ave.
    Wednesday, September 7, 2011
    By LIN RICE
    ThisWeek Community Newspapers

    Lane Avenue in Upper Arlington will begin to take on a new look in the next year if plans for a hotel and mixed-use development are approved.

    A Columbus real-estate partnership unveiled plans Aug. 30 for a Cambria Suites hotel and accompanying mixed-use development in the heart of the city’s new community entertainment district.

    READ MORE: http://www.thisweeknews.com/live/content/upperarlington/stories/2011/09/07/hotel-would-change-face-of-lane-ave-.html?sid=104

    #445906

    Pablo
    Participant

    · We proposed eliminating the pedestrian connection between the project and Mt. Holyoke to further separate neighbors from the project and prevent any parking on Mt. Holyoke, as many neighbors requested.

    I can understand the fear of strangers parking on your street but to cut off access to the Lane Ave. retail for yourself seems odd. Are you going to drive around the block to grab a bite to eat? I’ll bet there will be a path worn through the landscape by Mt. Holyoke residents once the project is complete.

    #445907

    GCrites80s
    Participant

    I’ve only seen the rendering that was quoted on this page. Obviously, there’s a parking lot in front of the building. But, isn’t that Lave Avenue Shopping Center’s (guess that’s the old name) parking lot, not a new one?

    #445908

    futureman
    Participant

    The parking for the apartments/hotel are behind the buildings using surface lots

Viewing 15 posts - 91 through 105 (of 214 total)

The forum ‘General Columbus Discussion’ is closed to new topics and replies.

Subscribe below: