Comment 62633

By BigP (anonymous) | Posted April 24, 2011 at 13:40:07

Actually there was other issues then just the number of parking spaces. The design had poor accessibility (the entrance for all the parking, delivery and customer parking would have been off Balsam). The parking lot was cramped with no way to turn around which would have made it ridiculously hard to get in and out of. Take in to consideration that this building was supposed to be geared towards seniors. Now look at that site plan and try to imagine DARTS buses, delivery trucks, emergency vehicles and residents.

I totally agree that in certain situations you can waive parking space restrictions. But those situations are downtown. You cannot apply a downtown solution to Ward 3. There already a big parking problem as is. Most people out here drive to work. There are lots of duplex and triplex houses that have 4-5 car owners and only 1 or 2 parking spots. Adding a building like that which will cause even more spillover is only going to make things worse.

And lets not kid ourselves, the developer did not want to demo that church because of the costs involved, not because of the kindness of their heart. It's been sitting unused for over a decade. Tear it down and create a flow through parking lot so cars enter of main and leave off Balsam. There will be plenty of room for extra spots and you could flatten the footprint of the building by one floor which would be nice since this is an 8 story obelisk in a neighborhood of 2 or 3 story houses.

Nobody says these guys cant build. They should just quit cutting corners and take the rest of the area in to consideration.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds