Jump to content

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, JFW657 said:

Most things come down to money.

Maybe the cost projections become too high because of COVID related issues.

Or there could be a possible liability factor associated with people playing sports in a high traffic area. 

Maybe there were further studies done which suggest that public interest in the sports courts is not what they originally assumed.

Or.... it's possible that they are telling the truth about local businesses requesting the return of the spaces.

Whatever the reason, I understand why some are disappointed but IMO it was never that great of a proposal to begin with.

I'd have rather seen some kind of dining & retail thing go in there. 

Like a box park.  

I would go with that.  I cringed at the original idea of a splash pad down there, so I agree something needed to be tweaked, but the skate park etc seemed fine.  I just don't like the parking lot and being told  that a parking lot is a park.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


19 hours ago, codypet said:

The amount of damage control Brendan is doing for the City in that article is sickening too.  

"the City of Orlando is not shelving its plans to build a park under the I-4 interstate running the length of Hughey and Garland Avenues between West Washington Street and West Church Street, but they have recently shifted the original plans to include surface parking."

Then proceeds to show a rendering that has over 300 parking spaces over 3 city blocks practically dominating the site.   Brendan, you let them gaslight you into thinking that's including surface parking instead of it being primarily surface parking?

Remember back when Under I was envisioned, it was anticipated that the new garage Jefferson would provide the ability to walk through the park to the venues providing foot traffic to local businesses.  Thanks to these spots, now we don't have to do that anymore.

This is such a piece of crap city...its not even funny anymore...

Just now, orlandouprise said:

This is such a piece of crap city...its not even funny anymore...

i didnt say crap. thx for the edit. :tw_confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, jgardnerucf said:

Why is everyone going crazy over this? Put some damn lights up and put some damn parking spots back and call it day. The drummer man will keep playing and the dollar lady will keep asking.

I mostly agree, but I'd hope they do a little more than just put some lights up. :thumbsup: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, JFW657 said:

I mostly agree, but I'd hope they do a little more than just put some lights up. :thumbsup: 

I wasn’t wild about the proposal, but excited that the city was taking a new approach to address an old problem (how to better connect the downtown code to the Parramore neighborhood). I’m bummed because it seems the city is ditching any kind of approach to improving the area in favor of just going back to how it’s always been.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, FLClarkKent said:

I wasn’t wild about the proposal, but excited that the city was taking a new approach to address an old problem (how to better connect the downtown code to the Parramore neighborhood). I’m bummed because it seems the city is ditching any kind of approach to improving the area in favor of just going back to how it’s always been.

Given we can’t even get around to changing the name of Division Street, I suspect we shouldn’t be surprised, sadly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't care for the old proposal anyway. But it seems this group has overlooked it was a "proposal"... a "concept". Remember how CV changed? How about Sodo? Uptown?

When these conceptual ideas are floated, Bungalower, OW and others promote them, and we all start to form opinions.  Meanwhile, did you notice there has not been a public meeting about this project? Was it ever funded, other than for study (No)? Did the public give input? Six years in and none of that was done. To me, that means it was not gonna happen. Btw, that is now on the schedule- The first phase of the project will open up the space for ride-share parking while the rest of the project is constructed. Public input will be heard during phase 2 as part of the DTO Plan process, Papagni said, which will be in about nine months. https://www.yourcommunitypaper.com/articles/under-i-project-altered-to-be-mostly-parking/

Color me not disappointed, not surprised. I'm happy they will return some parking. I think a ride share area is great idea. I hope they dress up the Church to Central zone.

I don't think they're through with the planning. It can be much better than it was. Nonetheless, it will be incremental improvement. 

 

 

Edited by AmIReal
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AmIReal said:

When these conceptual ideas are floated, Bungalower, OW and others promote them, and we all start to form opinions.  Meanwhile, did you notice there has not been a public meeting about this project? Was it over funded, other than for study (No)? Did the public give input? Six years in and none of that was done. To me, that means it was not gonna happen.

I mean, we paid $3 million dollars for them to design a parking lot under a bridge. How does that make sense? Of course the public has a right to be pissed. While I had some of my concerns about the original concept (a splashpad and anything targeting young kids didn't make sense to me), this leaves basically nothing.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the bright side, a flat parking lot would be easy to develop/replace later on.  I am disappointed, but not surprised at all. 

In reality, playing sports underneath one of the busiest interstates in the country was not really all that appealing to me.  I think that the main connection to Church street and Amway and (hopefully) the S+ED will be the most important thing. 

The rest would be mostly underutilized or homeless/vagrant areas.  (although congregation in that area may be better than other locations downtown like the other "good" parks). 

Edited by dcluley98
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not disagreeing with the possibility of vagrants, but I think some of the noisier asphalt sports would have been served well there.   Mainly a skatepark.  Looking at the skatepark over by Festival park, its clearly overused and crowded and could use an expanded footprint.  The idea of clean sheeting it between Central and Washington made sense to me.  That would have freed up the Festival Park space to expand the Volleyball courts which are also used quite a bit.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, codypet said:

Not disagreeing with the possibility of vagrants, but I think some of the noisier asphalt sports would have been served well there.   Mainly a skatepark.  Looking at the skatepark over by Festival park, its clearly overused and crowded and could use an expanded footprint.  The idea of clean sheeting it between Central and Washington made sense to me.  That would have freed up the Festival Park space to expand the Volleyball courts which are also used quite a bit.

Skatepark would work. Basketball courts are a popular use under highways. 

Look at what Miami did with the underline. It is not directly comparable since it has more direct sunlight but it show their creativity compared to Orlando's. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, MrShow said:

This is some Mickey Mouse crap. Not only are parks desperately needed but the city should be encouraging more micro mobility. The I-4 expansion should be the last major investment in traditional automobile infrastructure. 

I-4 should've been torn down and moved away from downtown. It's a travesty that so much money was poured into a gigantic highway running right into the center of our city, meanwhile other cities are demolishing their interstates that bisect their downtowns.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Uncommon said:

I-4 should've been torn down and moved away from downtown. It's a travesty that so much money was poured into a gigantic highway running right into the center of our city, meanwhile other cities are demolishing their interstates that bisect their downtowns.

It’s even worse when you know it was never supposed to go downtown in the first place.

Former Sentinel publisher Martin Andersen wanted easy access for Sentinel delivery trucks and was also one one of the area’s leading segregationists*, so it’s no accident I-4 runs parallel to Division St. He is long gone as are the Sentinel trucks and such racial nonsense needs to be moving quickly in the rear view mirror.

Instead, with the return to parking, Mr Andersen is just smiling wherever he may be that nothing much has changed.

(*Feel free to ask me why Andersen’s discrimination caused Valencia to be Florida’s last public junior college established and his role in keeping it from merging with OJC when it was finally created). 
 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.