Downtown Greensboro Developments

[twincity]

what would the incentives go towards? infrastructure?

[cityboi]

I watched the city council meeting tonight concerning the $100k incentives for the proposed mixed use on S. Elm. After the vote failed, the council agreed to readdress the issue at their next council meeting.

It failed because their were a few cranky downtown business owners who said that it wouldn't be fair for this builder to get parking spots when they had tried for years to do the same thing. And I personally agree. However, these business owners also didn't build a $3.6 million project downtown.

I don't know why the two topics (the development and parking) were even lumped together to begin with. This project will only take away 4 parking spots downtown, but even if it hadn't, those 4 spots alone aren't going to solve the parking problems downtown.

Ugh...that council meeting was the most pathetic showing of leadership...or lack thereof, I have seen in a longtime.

I hope they have a solution at the next meeting.

from what I read in the paper this morning tempers flared. LindBrook Development Services president Jim Marshall rushed out of the meeting in anger. This kind of crap makes me mad because because its stupid crap like this that could derail the whole project. If this were in Charlotte, the city council would have easily passed this. Basically what city council did last night was discourage other developers wanting to build downtown. You dont derail a mutli-mllion dollar project because a few business owners come in and say the project could affect their parking. Hell most the businesses on Elm Street dont even have parking and people have to park on the streets. This is just rediculous. If I were Jim Marshall I would cancel the whole damn project. Lets see if city council does this crap again.

So far downtown has lost 2 art gallerys, minj grill, and according to 99 blocks a popular night spot will be closing soon. I wonder if it is ChurchHills. I heard they were not doing good. The Metro is also closing soon. Hopefully downtown want turn into another ghost town before this recession is over. But so far it don't look good.

One thing about downtown Greensboro is when one restaurant closes another opens in its place.

Edited January 22, 2009 by cityboi

[beyonce245]

what would the incentives go towards? infrastructure?

The incentives would go toward the purchase of a small portion of the adjoining parking lot. However, using the term incentive doesn't really present the whole picture. Rather, the $100K the city would be giving would be in the form of a loan, which would be forgiven when the tax value on the property reaches $100k.

[beyonce245]

from what I read in the paper this morning tempers flared. LindBrook Development Services president Jim Marshall rushed out of the meeting in anger. This kind of crap makes me mad because because its stupid crap like this that could derail the whole project. If this were in Charlotte, the city council would have easily passed this. Basically what city council did last night was discourage other developers wanting to build downtown. You dont derail a mutli-mllion dollar project because a few business owners come in and say the project could affect their parking. Hell most the businesses on Elm Street dont even have parking and people have to park on the streets. This is just rediculous. If I were Jim Marshall I would cancel the whole damn project. Lets see if city council does this crap again.

One thing about downtown Greensboro is when one restaurant closes another opens in its place.

I wholeheartedly agree. I sympathize with downtown business owners, but their parking problems aren't going to be solve by derailing this project. i don't see why both can move forward at the same time (this project and solving parking that is). I have already written the developer to tell him to please continue working on this project. I also sent an email to all council members expressing my displeasure and asking them to let this project move forward.

I would encourage everyone to do the same. let them know what you think.

[krazeeboi]

Question: how many parking spaces does city code require? A lot of cities have suburban-oriented parking regulations that actually require too many spaces for downtown businesses. Bicycle racks should also be considered. Perhaps a nearby parking garage is needed to provide parking for the S. Elm area. City council could look into that as well.

[beyonce245]

Question: how many parking spaces does city code require? A lot of cities have suburban-oriented parking regulations that actually require too many spaces for downtown businesses. Bicycle racks should also be considered. Perhaps a nearby parking garage is needed to provide parking for the S. Elm area. City council could look into that as well.

I'm not sure how many parking spaces the city code requires, but the number of available spaces isn't the problem. It's the number of spaces in the particular parking lot adjacent to this proposed development that is the problem. The developer is asking the city to give him a small portion of the parking lot to allow for outdoor dining. The end result would be a loss of 4 parking spaces (some would say 15, because 11 of the spots will be leased by the building).

See a map of downtown here. On this map, the proposed development is in the yellow area on South Elm, in between West Washington and McGee streets, in the block with the two smaller parking symbols which represent the parking lot at issue. But also notice the 4 parking decks, which for most of the cranky business owners who showed up to the city council meeting last night, are 4 block or less walking distance from their businesses.

The problem, although no one at last night's meeting said this out loud is this: the customers who frequent some of these businesses are too lazy to park in a deck and walk the 4 blocks or less to get to where they're going. They want to be able to roll right up to the store or restaurant du jour and walk right in. But with the success of downtown, fewer store front spaces are no longer available.

Until customers stop being so damn lazy, parking will continue to be a bigger issue that it is in reality. Perhaps these store owners should offer to validate for customers that park in decks. Or maybe the city should look into creating park-and-ride lots and start a downtown circular bus service. I don't care what the solution is, just come up with one.

Long story short. Stop dragging your feet over a new building that will end up eliminating at most 15 parking spaces. If the success of your business hinges on those 15 spots, maybe your not selling the right food, or product or service. If what you're offering is good and people want it, they will find a way to get there.

Edited January 23, 2009 by beyonce245

[triadguy37]

Basically this is small town thinking for you at it's best. And your right peopel are too damn lazy to park in a deck and walk. Until people's attitute changes about parking decks it will be hard to compete with the Friendly Center and strip Malls. People around here are spoiled. I do hope they get this worked out though.

[Jones_]

It sounds like the City owns the parking lot in question but I am not totally sure. Debt forgiveness is just crafty language for a grant or a giveaway with collateral in this case....It sounds a little like a TIFF setup...is this the case? Parking garages can be good solutions, but make sure they are well designed to integrate into the city, with at a minimum, ground floor retail space. The problem with Greensboro is there is not really enough daytime office workers to pay off the debt on a big garage. You also would not want to sacrifice any beautiful old buildings for a parking deck in any circumstance...cars be damned I say. Small scale developments (like Elm is and has been through its history) should not require much if any off street parking...I agree with beyonce245 that motivated clientele should walk. This really is quite a recreation of how downtown Raleigh started its turn (still in progress)...it faced all these issues, and created its own solutions, which were by no means perfect, but it provides a nearby palate from which to study nonetheless....

[beyonce245]

It sounds like the City owns the parking lot in question but I am not totally sure. Debt forgiveness is just crafty language for a grant or a giveaway with collateral in this case....It sounds a little like a TIFF setup...is this the case? Parking garages can be good solutions, but make sure they are well designed to integrate into the city, with at a minimum, ground floor retail space. The problem with Greensboro is there is not really enough daytime office workers to pay off the debt on a big garage. You also would not want to sacrifice any beautiful old buildings for a parking deck in any circumstance...cars be damned I say. Small scale developments (like Elm is and has been through its history) should not require much if any off street parking...I agree with beyonce245 that motivated clientele should walk. This really is quite a recreation of how downtown Raleigh started its turn (still in progress)...it faced all these issues, and created its own solutions, which were by no means perfect, but it provides a nearby palate from which to study nonetheless....

Very astute comments, especially on the parking decks having ground floor retail. That too was mentioned at last night's council meeting. But to reiterate my previous comment, parking really isn't a problem, at least in terms of overall availability. The city has numerous parking decks, all of which are free on evenings and weekends. Certainly the city will eventually need more parking decks in future years and they should be preparing accordingly now. That said, there are plenty of parking spaces for what downtown Greensboro currently offers.

Downtown is the most urban area of Greensboro. Consequently, downtown business owners should know that there are both advantages and drawbacks with opening up show there, including parking. If your clientele can't make it the 4 blocks from the parking deck to your store, move! I do sympathize with some downtown business owners who have been there for decades. But their complaints kind of defy logic. Would you rather downtown be the desert it once was? Was that your goal when you set up shop there?

As for more recent businesses, such as Bailey's on S. Elm, whose owner was yapping last night against this project, I know that salon hasn't been there for more than two years. And two years ago, parking was just as bad as it is now. So why are you complaining? Because you knew what you were getting into.

The whole damn thing just pisses me off. It's a failure of local government that this mockery even took place last night. I am especially peeved at Councilwoman Wade, who when talking about why she doesn't use parking decks, eluded to the fact that she's afraid of being assaulted. I'm not saying that's not a valid concern for a woman alone at night, but as a leader and representative of the city, could you please not say that on television.

[cityboi]

It looks like developer Lindbrook is considering scrapping the project all together if he does not get the parking spaces. And you know what, I dont blame him. As much as I want to see this development move forward, I think City Council needs to know what its like to miss a good opportunity like this. You dont halt a multi million dollar project and bend over backwards for Joe Shmoe who is upset about his patrons not having alot of parking. They can park on the street like they have to do for all the other businesses on Elm Street.

"We're extremely concerned with the tenor of the council and the direction they are going," LindBrook President Jim Marshall said Thursday afternoon

"Now, we are having second thoughts about whether we should do this."

Way to go city council!....look what kind of message you sent to other developers out there!....Jesus! Folks its time to vote for new city council members.

"That parking lot is the lifeblood of downtown Greensboro," said Simon Ritchy, a property owner."

So let me get this straight...a parking lot is the life blood of downtown Greensboro?

BTW I sent a hot email to city council.

http://www.news-record.com/content/2009/01...an_for_s_elm_st

Edited January 23, 2009 by cityboi

[gman430]

A truly urban development especially one that's downtown shouldn't need or have any parking spaces at all. I live in Greenville, SC and there was a project proposed for downtown that is similar in size to this one. The Design and Preservation Commission kept denying the project because it would of destroyed two historic buildings, but instead of the developers complaining about it they went back to the drawing boards at least two or three times and finally came up with a plan that not only saved the historic buildings but added to them also. The DPC approved it and it is now getting built. A developer that truly cares about their project wouldn't scrap the plans over a few parking spaces that shouldn't even be needed or there in the first place.

Edited January 23, 2009 by citylife

[cityboi]

A truly urban development especially one that's downtown shouldn't need or have any parking spaces at all. I live in Greenville, SC and there was a project proposed for downtown that is similar in size to this one. The Design and Preservation Commission kept denying the project because it would of destroyed two historic buildings, but instead of the developers complaining about it they went back to the drawing boards at least two or three times and finally came up with a plan that not only saved the historic buildings but added to them also. The DPC approved it and it is now getting built. A developer that truly cares about their project wouldn't scrap the plans over a few parking spaces that shouldn't even be needed or there in the first place.

From what I understand, the majority of the section of parking lot the developer wants to buy would be used for outdoor dining with very little of it used for parking.

"The developers asked the city for an economic development incentive of a $100,000 forgivable loan to buy part of a city parking lot. It is next to the vacant lot they hope to develop.

The developer plans to use the space for outdoor dining"

also the latest news is that Natty Greene's will be expanding outside the city with its Greensboro themed restaurant and pub. A new restaurant will be built in Raleigh in the Glenwood area. Owners also plan to build a Natty Greene's in uptown Charlotte as well

http://www.gogoraleigh.com/2009/01/22/natt...erhouse-square/

http://www.news-record.com/content/2009/01...ding_to_raleigh

Edited January 23, 2009 by cityboi

[beyonce245]

A truly urban development especially one that's downtown shouldn't need or have any parking spaces at all. I live in Greenville, SC and there was a project proposed for downtown that is similar in size to this one. The Design and Preservation Commission kept denying the project because it would of destroyed two historic buildings, but instead of the developers complaining about it they went back to the drawing boards at least two or three times and finally came up with a plan that not only saved the historic buildings but added to them also. The DPC approved it and it is now getting built. A developer that truly cares about their project wouldn't scrap the plans over a few parking spaces that shouldn't even be needed or there in the first place.

Your point is well made. But as this proposed development is at a site already adjacent to a surface parking lot. So the issue is not about building more spaces, but taking some away to allow for this development.

[gman430]

From what I understand, the majority of the section of parking lot the developer wants to buy would be used for outdoor dining with very little of it used for parking.

"The developers asked the city for an economic development incentive of a $100,000 forgivable loan to buy part of a city parking lot. It is next to the vacant lot they hope to develop.

The developer plans to use the space for outdoor dining"

Oh, well in that case I say just give the parking lot to the developers. A mixed use development going up downtown where a parking lot used to be is one of the best things that can happen in terms of urban development. This looks like a nice project and I hope the city, developer, and nearby business owners are able to work out their differences so it can get built.

Edited January 23, 2009 by citylife

[cityboi]

Oh, well in that case I say just give the parking lot to the developers. A mixed use development going up downtown where a parking lot used to be is one of the best things that can happen in terms of urban development. This looks like a nice project and I hope the city, developer, and nearby business owners are able to work out their differences so it can get built.

people need to understand is that if they want downtown to be an urban destination, limited parking is to be expected. In the downtowns of many big cities you may have to walk 4 or 5 blocks to get to your apartment. This is common in urban environments and Greensboro citizens are getting use to it, otherwise downtown would be a ghost town.

Edited January 23, 2009 by cityboi

[beyonce245]

The city council has announced that it will be holding a special meeting concerning the much discussed proposed development on S. Elm St.

Read about it here.

And rightly so. Investment in Greensboro is desperately needed, and couldn't be more urgent during this period of economic turmoil. I can only guess that there was a sizeable public outcry over how some of the city council members fouled this up. I have personally written emails to all council members and received encouraging responses from several of them.

Keep writing council members and let them know how you feel.

Edited January 23, 2009 by beyonce245

[Jones_]

i agree, a recovering downtown should be actively trying to get rid of its parking lots. They conundrum is that in cities without good public transit, or people who are unwilling to use it, you must accommodate cars to some degree. Is Greensboro meeting this fine line? I think so based on numerous visits last year. Public parking seemed to be easy to locate and was near where I was going. I am sorry, both the council and the actual downtown businesses that spoke up, seem to miss the entire concept of a healthy and properly urban downtown...contrary to the Greensboro folks speaking up here. I still sort of consider myself a "Greensboro folk". I live in Raleigh now but spent the first three years of my life on Battleground....

Edited January 24, 2009 by Jones133

[beyonce245]

The N&R's Scoop Blog has a picture sent in by Councilmen Robbie Perkins showing that the developer of the land on S. Elm has already put a for sale sign for the land up on the property. See it here.

However, this was done before Councilmen Zack Matheny called a special council meeting Tuesday night to discuss the proposal further.

So dammit, if you haven't already sent the city council your two cents about this project, please do so now. And be sure to remind them of the property and sales tax benefits for the city, the infill development which represents smart growth, and the fact that if a developer wants to spend $3.6 million in a recession and employ dozens of triad workers, we should stand in their way!

Send City Council Members an email It's really simple. You can write one email and have the option to send it to all council members at the same time.

And if you feel like showing the developer some love and support:

Jim Marshall ([email protected])

Seth Marshall ([email protected])

Amy Hargreaves ([email protected])

Edited January 24, 2009 by beyonce245

[cityboi]

I sent my email to city council. I hope others will do the same. This is just rediculous

[Jones_]

I sent my email to city council. I hope others will do the same. This is just rediculous

I did as well...noting my outsider status up front.

[krazeeboi]

You guys pretty much said it; in a growing downtown, eliminating surface lots is a priority. Unfortunately, the existing business owners don't seem to understand that. Patrons need to get used to the idea of parking a block or two away and walking to their destinations. This isn't suburbia where parking in front of your destination is a given.

[cityboi]

City Council has changed its mind and will support the elm street project. I thank everyone for sending your thoughts to city council.

http://www.news-record.com/content/2009/01...centice_request

Edited January 28, 2009 by cityboi

[crowe1856]

From the N&R:

"City Council members indicated they will support a request for $100,000 forgivable loan to the LindBrook Development services to help purchase a piece of the city's South Elm-McGee parking lot.

...Meanwhile it is still unclear whether the developer will pursue the original 5-story project. A LindBrook representative who attended the council meeting said he could not speak for developer."

So do they get the full loan even if they just build a two story restaurant space?

[beyonce245]

From the N&R:

"City Council members indicated they will support a request for $100,000 forgivable loan to the LindBrook Development services to help purchase a piece of the city's South Elm-McGee parking lot.

...Meanwhile it is still unclear whether the developer will pursue the original 5-story project. A LindBrook representative who attended the council meeting said he could not speak for developer."

So do they get the full loan even if they just build a two story restaurant space?

What the city council passed last night was only a resolution expressing supporting for the project and indicating that they will vote in favor of the incentives at their next city council meeting. Because last night's session was a specially called meeting, the council could not legally approve the incentives last night but will have to wait until the next meeting to do so.

I don't the city would agree to the incentive if the owner no longer builds the originally planned building. But then again, I don't see any reason why the developer wouldn't move forward as planned with the original concept.

[cityboi]

I agree. The latest news article didnt mention anything about the developer downsizing his proposal. So it appears as though council will support the original plan.