Thanks, Dan. The primary reason for the opposition to the urban park remains the fury of the city’s leaders that the 2018 vote nixed a major development project that was planned for the site. Voters said no. This is the culmination of a plan to reverse the 2018 vote.
But they can't say that. So the LGC and how impossible it would be to manage become the scapegoats. Unfortunately, they have to fan fear of our most troubled citizens to make that argument.
Yes, after the underground parking structure was built to support a building, they thought it was a done deal. It makes them furious that residents wanted a different use.
Thank you Dad for taking the time to write this up. This a classic case of oppositional behavior that trashes the good will and intent of a gathering space on an increasingly dense high-rise atmosphere. The Library Lot Committee was not even included in the discussions of Library-City... and now misseadingly... folks think "we are saving the library" by vote Yes. Please after reading Dan entry, vote No and let's sort this out: Intent and possibilities.
Well we lost that park space, but the First & Huron parking lot would be much better for a green urban lung - more room for a playground and grass to sit on and maybe a bandshell or stage… No problem with tree roots competing with underground parking- though some of that could be accommodated.
The denizens of the new multi story apartment building to come on the corner would enjoy overlooking it…
I don't remember what the city's plan is for that space. It's zoned D1. I feel it would be a poor substitute because it's not in the heart of downtown. I suspect foot traffic would be substantially less than even the increasingly low-foot-traffic heart of downtown (see statements from the owners of Downtown Home and Garden and Kilwins on why they're closing). And with the current regime's development mania and fear of open space, coupled with this lot's proximity to the Delonis homeless shelter, I think it would be an even more quixotic quest than the Library Lot.
The city has tried, also quixotically, to get the federal building to move. I would love that. But I would make that block along Liberty the park. Really perfect spot for it. Better than the Library Lot. But they wouldn't want that either.
I think most people who didn't support a park feel the diag functions as one. I think that position is flawed for many reasons.
I wouldn't be surprised if the next step is to make Liberty and Main a pedestrian mall. That could sort of replace an urban park. Of course, it might also make A2's traffic woes, which are already hurting down town businesses, even worse. I think it would be preferable to have an actual urban park and plaza. But not we won't. We'll see what the library proposes. There's still a little hope for something nice.
Thanks, Dan. The primary reason for the opposition to the urban park remains the fury of the city’s leaders that the 2018 vote nixed a major development project that was planned for the site. Voters said no. This is the culmination of a plan to reverse the 2018 vote.
But they can't say that. So the LGC and how impossible it would be to manage become the scapegoats. Unfortunately, they have to fan fear of our most troubled citizens to make that argument.
Yes, after the underground parking structure was built to support a building, they thought it was a done deal. It makes them furious that residents wanted a different use.
Correct!!
Thanks, Dan, for this. Facts do matter.
Thank you Dad for taking the time to write this up. This a classic case of oppositional behavior that trashes the good will and intent of a gathering space on an increasingly dense high-rise atmosphere. The Library Lot Committee was not even included in the discussions of Library-City... and now misseadingly... folks think "we are saving the library" by vote Yes. Please after reading Dan entry, vote No and let's sort this out: Intent and possibilities.
Sorry... misspelled Dan... my apology
Well we lost that park space, but the First & Huron parking lot would be much better for a green urban lung - more room for a playground and grass to sit on and maybe a bandshell or stage… No problem with tree roots competing with underground parking- though some of that could be accommodated.
The denizens of the new multi story apartment building to come on the corner would enjoy overlooking it…
Can we all start talking about it?
I don't remember what the city's plan is for that space. It's zoned D1. I feel it would be a poor substitute because it's not in the heart of downtown. I suspect foot traffic would be substantially less than even the increasingly low-foot-traffic heart of downtown (see statements from the owners of Downtown Home and Garden and Kilwins on why they're closing). And with the current regime's development mania and fear of open space, coupled with this lot's proximity to the Delonis homeless shelter, I think it would be an even more quixotic quest than the Library Lot.
The city has tried, also quixotically, to get the federal building to move. I would love that. But I would make that block along Liberty the park. Really perfect spot for it. Better than the Library Lot. But they wouldn't want that either.
I think most people who didn't support a park feel the diag functions as one. I think that position is flawed for many reasons.
I wouldn't be surprised if the next step is to make Liberty and Main a pedestrian mall. That could sort of replace an urban park. Of course, it might also make A2's traffic woes, which are already hurting down town businesses, even worse. I think it would be preferable to have an actual urban park and plaza. But not we won't. We'll see what the library proposes. There's still a little hope for something nice.