Elm Street Controversy
From N-R Editorial Writer Alan Johnson and my comments.
"The City Council will hold a special meeting Tuesday to revisit the question of a proposed new five-story mixed-use building on South Elm Street.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I think it’ll work just fine in that spot.
The council should say yes to incentives for the project and resolve a dispute with neighbors over parking spaces.
And it should to stop trying to conduct such sensitive business after midnight, when most normal human beings are punchy, weary and anything but clear-headed."
Posted by Allen Johnson on January 23, 2009 7:20 PM | Permalink
---------
Hey Allen, I agree that conducting city business after midnight is a bad idea.
Your suggestions that "The council should say yes to incentives for the project and resolve a dispute with neighbors over parking spaces." is also a bad idea.
Do you have any suggestions that would actually help the small property owners with the parking situation downtown? Just saying "resolve the dispute" is not enough.
Downtown Greensboro is not competing with Charlotte, Raleigh or any other city in NC. We are competing with shopping and business centers that have 24-hour free parking.
My suggestion would be to let the affected merchants and property owners join together to either buy or rent the Downtowner's Parking lot in the 300 block of South Elm from the city and provide parking for our customers. We could withdraw from the current business incentive district which has not been friendly to small (especially daytime) business. This would give us the opportunity to self-rule and self-taxation which we have not had. The details could be worked out without interference from city council members and quasi-judicial non-profit entities who have interests in other areas of the city.
If a new Business District were formed, property taxes, sales tax money and other incentives could be used to help finance a parking garage in the area. But, for now, the lot should remain a public surface parking area.
See ya downtown.
"The City Council will hold a special meeting Tuesday to revisit the question of a proposed new five-story mixed-use building on South Elm Street.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I think it’ll work just fine in that spot.
The council should say yes to incentives for the project and resolve a dispute with neighbors over parking spaces.
And it should to stop trying to conduct such sensitive business after midnight, when most normal human beings are punchy, weary and anything but clear-headed."
Posted by Allen Johnson on January 23, 2009 7:20 PM | Permalink
---------
Hey Allen, I agree that conducting city business after midnight is a bad idea.
Your suggestions that "The council should say yes to incentives for the project and resolve a dispute with neighbors over parking spaces." is also a bad idea.
Do you have any suggestions that would actually help the small property owners with the parking situation downtown? Just saying "resolve the dispute" is not enough.
Downtown Greensboro is not competing with Charlotte, Raleigh or any other city in NC. We are competing with shopping and business centers that have 24-hour free parking.
My suggestion would be to let the affected merchants and property owners join together to either buy or rent the Downtowner's Parking lot in the 300 block of South Elm from the city and provide parking for our customers. We could withdraw from the current business incentive district which has not been friendly to small (especially daytime) business. This would give us the opportunity to self-rule and self-taxation which we have not had. The details could be worked out without interference from city council members and quasi-judicial non-profit entities who have interests in other areas of the city.
If a new Business District were formed, property taxes, sales tax money and other incentives could be used to help finance a parking garage in the area. But, for now, the lot should remain a public surface parking area.
See ya downtown.
posted by Diane Grey Davis | 1:14 PM
|
0 comments
