Archive for Friday, October 20, 2006
Planners envision mini-downtowns far from city core
October 20, 2006
Advertisement
The year is 2030, and Lawrence residents are taking leisurely strolls from their homes to a pedestrian-friendly street lined by multistory buildings filled with shops, condos and offices.
Must be downtown Lawrence, right?
Not necessarily. In a plan floated by Lawrence-Douglas County planners, those 2030 friends very well could be in a new development far south of the Wakarusa River near an extended Louisiana Street and Wells Overlook Road.
“You could live there, you could walk to the retail there, your kid could walk to school there. You wouldn’t have to get in the car to do everything in your life,” said Dan Warner, a long-range planner for the Lawrence-Douglas County Planning Department. “It would be similar to what we have in the core part of the city today.”
In other words, a mini-downtown.
Seeking comment
Planners have developed a land-use map that shows two “new urbanism” areas developing between now and 2030, with the other one far west of the South Lawrence Trafficway near an extended Bob Billings Parkway and Trailriders Road.
But planners first want to find out what the public thinks. The Lawrence-Douglas County Planning Commission on Wednesday will be taking public comment on whether it should start using the proposed land use map incorporating the new urbanism-type developments, or stick with a more traditional map that envisions the city developing in a more typical suburban style.
Planning commissioners are reviewing the two map options as part of a process called Transportation 2030, a plan designed to spell out what the community’s road system will look like in 2030.
The biggest difference between the two maps is the creation of the live-work-and-play zones in what will then be south Lawrence and west Lawrence. The zones would emphasize mixed uses, meaning apartments or condos might be above small retail stores or offices.
The zones also would place a premium on walkability: Both call for a school to be within walking distance of homes, and both would feature lots of sidewalks.
The housing in the area also would be more dense, which is the case in older neighborhoods such as East Lawrence and Old West Lawrence. Some housing also would be zoned in a way to allow people to live and work out of their homes.
“It would be a smaller scale of what is happening downtown, and in the neighborhoods that surround downtown,” said City Commissioner Boog Highberger, who has been a supporter of the new urbanism concept. “As the city grows and develops, downtown shouldn’t be the only commercial area that has that feel and functions in that way.
“But the key issue here is the size. We’re not planning anything that would rival downtown.”
The size of the retail areas for both proposed zones would be along the lines of a neighborhood commercial center. An example of a neighborhood commercial center, Warner said, is the Hy-Vee development at Clinton Parkway and Kasold Drive, though the new urbanism center would be designed much differently.
The two maps also give residents a look at how planners see other parts of the community developing during the next 20 years.
South of the Wakarusa River
The southern area predominately would be low-density, single-family homes. But the area may have a unique feel because it also would have large amounts of green space. The area includes several small creeks, and planners are insisting no development occur in their floodplains.
“The real trick with this whole area south of the river will be to make sure that it is integrated into the rest of Lawrence rather than having it feel like a separate city,” said Highberger, who also is on the Transportation 2030 committee that is developing the maps.
The area will have one major commercial center, which is proposed at U.S. Highway 59 and Wells Overlook Road. Planners have designated the area as a community commercial center, which would allow for 400,000 square feet of commercial development. That would make it one of the larger commercial areas in the city. It would be roughly the same size as the area expected to develop around Sixth Street and the South Lawrence Trafficway.
The plans also call for one other neighborhood commercial center in the area. On one map it would be near the area where an extended Haskell Avenue would intersect with Wells Overlook Road. On the other map, it would be the new urbanism center at Louisiana Street extended and Wells Overlook Road.
West of the trafficway
Low-density, single family development is the major use predicted for the western area. But it also would have significant amounts of office or apartment development along the portion of U.S. Highway 40 that is west of the trafficway.
The plan also calls for the intersection of the trafficway and the Kansas Turnpike to house an “auto-oriented commercial center.” That would allow it to have uses such as a truck stop, hotels or car dealerships.
The western area also would include four new neighborhood commercial centers. One would be at U.S. Highway 40 and Stull Road.
The other three would be along East 800 Road, also known as Trailriders Road. One would be where the road intersects with the Farmers Turnpike northwest of Lawrence. Another would be where the road intersects with North 1750 Road, which is just south of the turnpike. The final neighborhood center would be where Trailriders intersects with North 1500 Road, which is Bob Billings Parkway extended.
Eastern Lawrence
Most of the area east of the East Hills Business Park is planned to be green space, because much of it is in the floodplain.
The major exception is that a community commercial center of up to 400,000 square feet is planned for wherever the eastern leg of the trafficway connects with Kansas Highway 10. Currently the plan calls for that to be at Noria Road and K-10.
A much smaller piece of commercial development is slated at County Road 1057 and K-10.
One major question also exists in this area. The area surrounding the Douglas County Jail is shown on both maps as being predominately a business park, but that may not end up being the case. City and county commissioners have been debating uses for the area, generally called the southeast area, for more than a year.
City commissioners have said the property’s location along K-10 makes it well suited for a business park, but county commissioners say it could be a prime area for affordable housing.
Planners said they need more direction from elected leaders on how the area should be listed on the maps.
Bill Ahrens, a transportation planner with the Planning Department, said it would be important to get the issued settled because the type of use will determine the type of roads needed to serve the area.
North Lawrence
The major northern addition would be large amounts of industrial and research park land around the Lawrence Municipal Airport.
Once planning commissioners adopt a land use map, planning staff members will begin running computer models to help determine the location and size of roads that would be needed by 2030. City and county commissioners ultimately will be asked to adopt that transportation plan.
20 October 2006 at 8:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Reality_Check (Anonymous) says…
Lawrence has been one of the few cities that “gets it,” in that “it” is the idea of strong downtowns instead of strip malls. We know what works in towns nationwide, and that's downtowns. So we should be developing more of them.
I'm ready for all the complainers about New Urbanism, but you know what? You're not a professional…you didn't attend 6 years of college to become an urban planner. As always, I am in favor of leaving the science and professionalism to those who have studied it, read the industry magazines, attend industry conferences, etc. That matters a lot more to me than a bunch of Kansas yokels who like to type their comments on LJWOrld.com
When in doubt, let the pros do their jobs.
20 October 2006 at 8:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
chzypoof1 (Anonymous) says…
Man, I can't wait until they build a bunch of Low Income housing around the prison. The real estate value on those will skyrocket!
Imagine that, they are going to build the low income as far from the “West Side” as they can.
20 October 2006 at 8:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
roger_o_thornhill (Anonymous) says…
Well it isn't like you can build a million dollar home with a sightline to a jail. Who'd buy it? Unfortunately, the county jail was part of the 'Horizon 1960' plan where nobody could see what would happen with 1000 developers and a halfway decent school district. Funny thing is, even houses built next to the co. jail will probably go for over $100,000.
20 October 2006 at 8:40 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Moderateguy (Anonymous) says…
Apparently, the SLT won't be complete by 2030 either. New Urbanism is great as long as it doesn't end up looking like Disneyland. Go for it!
20 October 2006 at 8:40 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
chzypoof1 (Anonymous) says…
I know, it's sad the real estate market in our town. The truth is, the city is just trying to keep the trailer courts to a minimum…while preserving the “ever powerful” downtown.
20 October 2006 at 8:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
tony88 (Anonymous) says…
New urbanism is inherently flawed. It neglects the fundamental process by which great downtowns were created, local adaptation over time made by the people who inhabit the area and spend their time there. New Urbanism simply supplies a few token manifestations of nostalgic patterns developed by a few architects or planners (who do not or will likely not inhabit the place) in an office, rather than grasping the generative processes that have historically GROWN great downtowns. “Rome wasn't built in a day”. Furthermore, American New Urbanism is largely dominated by national chain stores which is diametrically opposed to the nature of development of historical downtowns.
20 October 2006 at 9:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
claypa (Anonymous) says…
I would much prefer the great visionaries of Lawrence stay well North of the Wakarusa. Do not destroy the land and forever mark it with concrete and asphalt.
Your vision is like the cold hand of death hovering over the land. Re-develop/revitalize your community as they have done in North Kansas City, just north of thier downtown area.
Stay focused on solving your local issues. Upgrade services, attract meaningful jobs, provide affordable housing and support the the great people who have decided to make Lawrence thier home.
Please discontinue the practice of vomiting on unspoiled land and nature for the sake of growth.
20 October 2006 at 9:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
JOEHAWK (Anonymous) says…
I love planners, did they ask the people what they want? People have moved out of downtowns for years because they want a yard and space. Our downtown works so well right now. Just because they think it is efficient and neat doesn't mean that is what the people want.
You only have to go away from downtown if you want to buy special things like FOOD and groceries! Even if they put a small store in, it won't work because their prices would have to be too high to survive. Look at the stores leaving downtown now for that reason.
It's the best place to find guns in cars!
It has easy parking, very convenient.
We only have to boost everyone elses taxes and property values to the highest in the state so we can keep Downtown alive and well.
We build one cool building with a couple of half million dollar condos on top and it's a trend. Bah!
We should build 10 more downtowns, they are huge success, look at all the people moving there instead of west of Wakarusa!
Just because you CAN doesn't mean you SHOULD!
20 October 2006 at 9:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Esq2eB (Anonymous) says…
Lawrence. One step closer to being West Olathe.
20 October 2006 at 9:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
krissypoetry (Anonymous) says…
planners and developers are a dirty word in my home –-and this is why
We don't need the sprawl any more than we already have it in Lawrence–though the dirty people claim they don't want to rival downtown, the more planning and development move away from the center of town the more people will be drawn away and smaller shops will have a harder time staying in business.
Also the new home designs are awful,
“The housing in the area also would be more dense”
the new housing developments in north-west lawrence are WAY TOO dense–what happened to having a yard?!
20 October 2006 at 9:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
cowboy (Anonymous) says…
Claypa , you have it right.
Keep your yuppie devo north of the wakarusa. We already are getting your poo plant dumped on us.
these are the same people who cherish the swamp but don't have a problem at all putting high density housing in the country. Quite a disconnect. Southern Douglas County is getting along quite well without the intervention of the city commission.
20 October 2006 at 10:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
jafs (Anonymous) says…
Unfortunately, it seems to me more and more than one can't simply rely on “experts” in any field these days, Reality Check. It's almost impossible to find competent auto mechanics, home remodelers, doctors, etc. I would think the same applies to urban planning. Also, there are different approaches, not a right and wrong way. I agree with tony - cities developed a certain way because of the needs/lifestyles of the residents over time. That is inherently different from “creating” an urban community. Claypa, amen! What Lawrence needs are quality city services (with a $10 million/month city budget, that should be achievable), affordable housing, and good full-time jobs with benefits. It is obvious to me that the development over the last 5-10 years has not met these needs, and in fact may have decreased the quality of life in Lawrence by increasing the cost of housing, among other things.
20 October 2006 at 10:27 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Emily Hadley (Emily Hadley) says…
This is a tough issue.
Mini downtown = strip mall, in my experiences.
Our downtown is fairly small, smaller than several “shopping centers” I have seen. These would have to be quite small to keep from rivalling downtown in size, which seems like it would limit the services available and thus the walkability.
I have definitely seen bigger cities who can pull off density at a larger scale and have many vibrant centers… Hopefully the multi-use buildings won't be *too* big, as the two areas above are wetlands and rapidly eroding river valleys.
Can we cut off the current sprawl and build it better so that the *whole* city has some life to it in 20 years, instead of patches of life, like the KC metro area?
The Lawrence builders offering their wares and services in this year's Showcase of Homes definitely don't have any high hopes for the future of Lawrence's urban planning. Lots of identical, cheap, prefabricated one-story houses spaced out on small, cheap lots so that all you see from the street is driveways, garages, and a cul-de-sac at the end.
Can we curb the *current* building trend enough for the two neighborhood types to interact in the future? I don't know anyone who wants to weave miles around circular streets, past 40 houses identical to theirs with no sidewalks, in order to get to a tree-covered boulevard with shopping.
20 October 2006 at 10:46 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ControlFreak (Anonymous) says…
Reality_Check: “Lawrence has been one of the few cities that “gets it,” in that “it” is the idea of strong downtowns instead of strip malls.”
________________________
Um, Downtown IS a strip mall, it's just vintage. Have you been to The Legends mall? It looks a lot like downtown, it just doesn't have the apartments on top of the buildings and it looks new and in good repair (and their are no homeless people).
20 October 2006 at 10:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ControlFreak (Anonymous) says…
I meant “there” not “their.”
Sorry about that.
20 October 2006 at 11:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
roger_o_thornhill (Anonymous) says…
Build apartments above all businesses. Just think of the pedestrian traffic @ 33rd & Iowa if there were an additional 600 apt. units above Home Depot, WalMart, Target, and BB&B. Just gotta buy bigger firetrucks then.
Or subterranian shopping. Like Rockafeller center. Build WalMarts and grocerias under neighborhoods so that people just have to go down into a hole to get good deals on things they need. Where's the Clay Chastains of Lawrence? I think development on a subway should be started right away. It'll be a lot easier to build it in before the development happens above.
As for mini downtowns? As long as it isn't TownCenter or Legends style construction… It could at least be clever—like German and/or Japanese architecture so as to celebrate sister cities. Or even a CountryClubPlaza knock off. My main point is who cares! I'm not going to benefit from any of this so I don't care. Isn't that how I'm supposed to think?
20 October 2006 at 11:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
consumer1 (Anonymous) says…
just start looking at political signs> which real estate office is supporting which candidates????
This is wrong. Real estate brokers are dumping money on “their Boys and Girls” in office to legislate in their favor. DON”t vote for the people who they promote> reduce the cost of living in lawrence>
20 October 2006 at 11:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
chrisgladfelter (Anonymous) says…
I wish the Powers That Be would turn their attention toward improving North Lawrence first before they start planning future developments. Forget about creating new industrial and research facilities for the moment; North Lawrence needs a grocery store and major repairs to its drainage system.
20 October 2006 at 12:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
BJ (Anonymous) says…
OK, so we have made a mess out of our downtown by over-regulating, charging outrageous property taxes that turn into outrageous rents that turn into outrageous prices that turn away business.
And what do the wise men and women in planning and city commissions do? They think by themselves: “Hmm, we messed this downtown thing up beyond belief, so we better go somewhere else where we can start fresh”, but in the meantime screw that part of the county up as well because they do not have the knowledge nor the skills to undertake a project of this size.
Dear people of Lawrence and Douglas County, if you like where you live: please don't let them do this to us again!
Don't be fooled by this article that states that this is “a plan floated by Lawrence-Douglas County planners”. The City Commission and the Lawrence-Douglas County Planning Commission are in all likelyhood the architects of this plan and will support this plan and push it all the way through before most people in Lawrence even know what happened.
Stay tuned; I think that this might get very “interesting”.
20 October 2006 at 12:24 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
roger_o_thornhill (Anonymous) says…
NorthLawrence ain't never done nuthin' for noone nohow. I thought the levee'd b'nuff. Plus them c-stores got all the grocerin' you need. Milk, terlet paper, cheap cigars, what more do you need?
20 October 2006 at 12:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Sigmund (Anonymous) says…
“Mini-downtowns” can work if they develop organically from actual use and acceptance by residents and are cost effective for business's of existing or recently rehabbed structures. This is different from being “planned” newly built by developers and planners who hope the area will be used.
I would think the new project in east Lawrence could become one of those area's. It is convenient to current downtown, more of a “satellite downtown”, makes some use of older existing structures, and close to existing high traffic area's. Krause's Fine Dining is one such place in North Lawrence where a change in zoning might help to build traffic for North Lawrence and could encourage other business's to locate in that area.
20 October 2006 at 12:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
princess (Anonymous) says…
Regardless of what we might think or what we might want, Lawrence is growing at a fairly rapid rate. I may not agree entirely with this plan (the low income housing around the jail seems insensitive and illogical to me. It is a better area for office complexes IMHO.), but it is the most comprehensive one that we have been offered thus far.
Rather then complaining and dreaming of containing growth that cannot be contained, why not look at what works here and what doesn't? Also what else needs to be added or explored more thoroughly?:
Limits on buildings heights?
Requirements for levels of low income housing in new developments?
Size restrictions on the larger home development areas in order to push diversity?
Limits or bans on box stores?
Bike lanes on new roads to be built?
Preservation planning for the green area left south of the Wakarusa River?
Just a few things I was wondering about when reading this.
20 October 2006 at 1:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
geppetto (Anonymous) says…
I am glad that it is not being planned in East Lawrence. Nothing gets done with the East Lawrence politics.
20 October 2006 at 1:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Tychoman (Anonymous) says…
Better a little downtown atmosphere than strip malls.
20 October 2006 at 1:36 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
white_mountain (Anonymous) says…
I would love to see a riverwalk like San Antonio has.. complete with a wonderful outdoor shopping thoroughfare, anchored by Mass Street on the southern end.
This would give us the best of the old and the new, without as much urban sprawl.
Sadly, there are no plans to capitalize on this aspect of “River City”.
20 October 2006 at 1:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
white_mountain (Anonymous) says…
River view condos close to Mass street, with biking and nature trails, and walking access to shopping and businesses, would be very appealing, and a nice way to preserve Lawrence's unique appeal.
20 October 2006 at 2:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
JOEHAWK (Anonymous) says…
while we think downtown is really cool, it is not practical. By my best observation, about 80% of Lawrence does most of their “shopping” on south Iowa street or 95th street in OP. Why buy music downtown, when best buy is cheaper, why buy clothing downtown when there are 10 places on Iowa that are cheaper with similiar selections. Kohls is packed, target is packed, walmart is packed. Downtown can't handle the capacity and is a ghost town most of the time, except at night and at lunch time.
While everyone bitches about box stores, that is where vitually everyone goes to shop. They are kicking the little guys butt because the little guy can't compete on their level. that is america people. People are going to KC to shop because Lawrence limits selection. So we don't get sales tax, and the city/county raises our property taxes.
So little Lawrence is going to change the entire world?
Instead I think we will be left with higher property taxes We will also continue to have land values that are extremely inflated in comparison with other cities. Something is wrong here and building more little downtowns is not the answer. I think downtown areas have a unique place but they are not the mainstream that this article and many people want you to believe. We need true commerce in this town.
We need someone to come up with a GOOD answer not a cool one.
20 October 2006 at 2:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
roger_o_thornhill (Anonymous) says…
See. That white_mountain person has the right idea.
20 October 2006 at 2:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ControlFreak (Anonymous) says…
Downtown is a strip mall. Granted it is a very old strip mall but is still a strip mall.
Specialty shops do not take away a strip mall status. Besides we have The Buckle, Starbucks, Ambercrobie & Fitch, Chico's, American Eagle Outfitters, & Claire's. All of these are in strip malls everywhere.
Besides, people in Lawrence can't handle two Wal-Marts, how can they handle more than one downtown.
20 October 2006 at 2:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ControlFreak (Anonymous) says…
Don't forget Maurices. No strip mall is complete without one of those.
20 October 2006 at 2:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ControlFreak (Anonymous) says…
Also there is a Chipotle's. Now Downtown is REALLY specially and UNIQUE.
20 October 2006 at 2:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
not_dolph (Anonymous) says…
Posted by geppetto (anonymous) on October 20, 2006 at 1:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I am glad that it is not being planned in East Lawrence. Nothing gets done with the East Lawrence politics.
––––—
LOL, thanks for making my day geppetto.
20 October 2006 at 3:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
tony88 (Anonymous) says…
joehawk, you are making some outlandish assumptions which lead me to believe you are completely isolated from downtown.
“By my best observation, about 80% of Lawrence does most of their “shopping” on south Iowa street or 95th street in OP.” So this is where you shop, so, by your observation that's where you see others shop.
“Why buy music downtown, when best buy is cheaper”
Flat out WRONG. Love Garden is often “cheaper” than best buy, with a selection of music that CANNOT be found at best buy. Best Buy offers no used cd's; i find those are much “cheaper” (by that i think you mean less expensive) and the music is just the same.
“While everyone bitches about box stores, that is where vitually everyone goes to shop.” Translation: I go to shop there, which leads me to believe everyone goes to shop there.
“We need someone to come up with a GOOD answer not a cool one.” Translation: who cares about quality when Wal-Mart offers quantity!
20 October 2006 at 3:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ControlFreak (Anonymous) says…
Hastings offers used cd's too, with a good selection.
20 October 2006 at 3:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ControlFreak (Anonymous) says…
Half Price Books has used cds too.
20 October 2006 at 3:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
tony88 (Anonymous) says…
Yes they do, but best buy? c'mon, their prices are really not that good. Hastings selection is nice, but Love Garden carries selections that can't even be found there.
20 October 2006 at 3:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
tony88 (Anonymous) says…
Half Price Books has a good book selection, but their cd selection is terrible from my experience.
20 October 2006 at 3:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
tony88 (Anonymous) says…
And where is the vinyl?
20 October 2006 at 3:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
tony88 (Anonymous) says…
I find the strip mall comments to be a bit off-base. Can you really find the density and diversity of quality dining establishments that you find on Mass. in a strip mall? The few stores downtown that are chains seem a little out of place to me. I feel a little cognitive dissonance walking out of a chain store directly onto a sidewalk; usually i have to walk across a 1/4 mile of asphalt directly to my car. Are you really serious in claiming that walking down Mass. street is akin to walking along the lifeless facade in front of bb & b, michaels, etc.?
20 October 2006 at 3:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ControlFreak (Anonymous) says…
vinyl? I don't own a record player, so I really have no use for vinyl. Besides I prefer the quality of sound in cds.
I agree about Best Buy, but Love Garden never has what I'm looking for. I still look there, but I would regardless of where they were located.
And Tony, have you been to The Legends? It is a strip mall and there are several high quality eating establishments there. There is also a Claire's, and The Buckle…
20 October 2006 at 3:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ControlFreak (Anonymous) says…
As I said before, Downtown is a strip mall with specialty shops (alongside the several chain stores).
However, a strip mall is a place with stores attached to each other in an outdoor environment (meaning you have to walk outside to go to the next store) along a defined street or walkway.
Sounds like Downtown to me.
20 October 2006 at 3:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ControlFreak (Anonymous) says…
Irish,
We can put some graffiti and homeless people in the new strip malls, uh, I mean downtowns, too. Then it will feel just like the original.
20 October 2006 at 3:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
tony88 (Anonymous) says…
The strip mall is a completely different building type than downtown. Firstly, the strip mall is just that a “strip” laid out in one fell swoop. Downtown has GROWN to become what it is over more than 100 years. It is made up of many small buildings, not one building subdivided into smaller shops.
Secondly, a strip mall is a single-loaded corridor, i.e., only one side of the pedestrian way has buildings, the other side is a parking lot. Downtown is a double-loaded corridor, meaning both sides of the pedestrian way are built.
The modern developments you refer to, such as The Legends do have some elements similar to downtown (seperate buildings, mixed use, etc.) but they are much less diverse. Downtown includes all types of business offices, banks, residences, a wide variety of shops, bars, concert venues, civic buildings, museums, libraries, etc., etc.
20 October 2006 at 3:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ControlFreak (Anonymous) says…
Yeah, Chipotle was another example of a chain store Downtown, to show that Downtown is just a strip mall with specialty shops, bars, restaurants and chain stores.
20 October 2006 at 3:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ControlFreak (Anonymous) says…
Tony,
That is not always the case with strip malls. The Legends (as I keep using as an example because it is a strip mall much like Downtown) has shops on both sides.
I really think it is a semantic argument you are making. “Grown” rather than “built”. They look the same.
If you look at my previous comments, you will see that I said originally (and many times actually), that Downtown is a vintage strip mall with specialty shop and apartments above the shops. Those are really the only differences.
All of which can be replicated with clever planning a aging techniques during construction.
20 October 2006 at 3:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ControlFreak (Anonymous) says…
Also, the library isn't really in downtown proper. If you include the library, then you will also have to include New Hampshire St which WAS constructed in a strip and is one-sided.
20 October 2006 at 3:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
tony88 (Anonymous) says…
It is not a semantic argument. “look” the same and “are” the same is not true. And they don't even “look” the same. I have read your posts; you repeated the same thing over and over. Are you aware that there is an exact replica of the Parthenon in Memphis, Tenn.? Do you think visit that “Parthenon” is the equivalent of visiting THE Parthenon? That is what your position here would lead me to believe.
Planning can only do so much. A planner cannot possible perceive all the nearly infinite variables that will determine how a neighborhood works or does not work.
20 October 2006 at 3:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
tony88 (Anonymous) says…
Firstly, the Library is on vermont st. Secondly, neither vermont nor new hampshire were constructed as strips, and neither is completely one sided. In fact, it seems that the portions of N.H. and Verm. that do work are double-sided. Your pointing out of Vermont street has lead me to add another building type that you will never find at the Legends (unless you include the race track in this category in contemporary society) the church.
20 October 2006 at 3:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ControlFreak (Anonymous) says…
While I would enjoy visiting the actually Parthenon, I would enjoy visiting a replica too. It's a great substitute otherwise it wouldn't be a replica.
The difference is in your (mine, whatever) perception. If you enjoy the specialty shops and the “special atmosphere” you've been talking about, great.
I just don't think it is that special.
20 October 2006 at 3:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ControlFreak (Anonymous) says…
It's not completely absurd to consider someone wanting to put a church near a strip mall.
I realize the Library is on Vermont, I'm not an idiot. I was adding New Hampshire into the mix because it is one block away from Mass (as is Vermont where the library is) because you said mentioned the library as being unique to Downtown.
Parts of New Hampshire were built in a stip. Look at where the parking garage is and the attached buildings. Those are new construction made to look like part of Downtown.
20 October 2006 at 4:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
tony88 (Anonymous) says…
Yes they are, but they are PART of downtown, they are not the entirety of downtown, which is what i am talking about.
(Off topic, kinda): And that building did a pretty okay job of completing that intersection, but i am not too fond of the restraunt in there.
The Hobbs Taylor building is questionable. I like the idea, but doing that giant building at one time seemed a bit overkill. It seems like the first floor is a little inaccesible to the public also.
20 October 2006 at 4:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ControlFreak (Anonymous) says…
Here are a couple of definitions of a strip mall for you. You might find it to sound strikingly like Downtown.
From Merriam-Websters Dictionary
http://www.meriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/di…
“Main Entry: strip mall
Function: noun
: a long usually one-story building or group of buildings housing several adjacent retail stores or service establishments.”
Or, how about this one:
http://dictionary.laborlawtalk.com/strip…
“Noun 1. strip mall - a mercantile establishment consisting of a row of various stores and business and restaurants along a road or busy street; usually opening on a parking lot.”
20 October 2006 at 4:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
tony88 (Anonymous) says…
Those sound nothing like downtown to me. “a long usually one-story building or group of buildings”? No. “usually opening on a parking lot.”? No.
20 October 2006 at 4:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ControlFreak (Anonymous) says…
So you only looked at the parts of the definitions that struck you as different?
How about the words “usually” attached to those, meaning not always.
“A row of various stores and business and restaurants on a road or busy street.”
I don't know what reality you are in, but that sounds a lot like Downtown to me.
Well, this has all been facinating, but I have to go now.
20 October 2006 at 4:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
tony88 (Anonymous) says…
The majority of buildings downtown are two-story. The downtown “strip-mall” as you call it, is built into the network of urban traffic and circulation. Something foreign to the strip mall.
I'm done for the day though. I think whoever may read this forum gets my point to a certain degree. If not, i suggest reading a small essay by architect, scientist, urban planner, Christopher Alexander called “The City is Not a Tree”. I'm sure you can find the full-text online easily. Thanks for the discussion, controlfreak. Until next we meet on the ljw forums…
20 October 2006 at 4:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
tony88 (Anonymous) says…
So i was supposed to ignore the parts of the definition that were different? That's what makes strip malls different, the parts that are different.
20 October 2006 at 5:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
kujeeper (Anonymous) says…
Low income housing near the jail seems logical, then all the illegit kids can walk over to see their parents in the slammer…
20 October 2006 at 5:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
white_mountain (Anonymous) says…
Image from the future:
Lawrence 2030. Looking towards Mass St. from the riverwalk.
http://www.wirednewyork.com/parks/hudson…
(the condos you see in that picture have a fabulous view of the Kansas river).
I like this vision because it preserves Lawrence's excellent bike trails and outdoor fitness activities.
20 October 2006 at 6:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
SpeedRacer (Anonymous) says…
I have no use for downtown Lawrence…it is geared toward the University and Birkenstock crowd and not the average Lawrencian. I spend no money there. The “mini-downtowns” are not that uncommon in urban areas of which Lawrence is destined to become as it blends more into the KC metro. I am patiently waiting for the new shopping center at the bypass and 6th street as I expect it will more adequately serve the need of the West side.
20 October 2006 at 6:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…
“it is geared toward the University and Birkenstock crowd and not the average Lawrencian.”
What exactly is the “average Lawrencian?”
20 October 2006 at 7:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
buffalobill (Anonymous) says…
I would definitely move if they put that stuff around Clinton Lake. Can we please think of improving wildlife areas before we add strip malls to the already stressed and threatened lake. More traffic in these areas would only further endanger species around the lake that have to cross roads. I think all this planning on developing around the lake stinks. Some yuppies just want to be closer to were they can put their polluting boats in. Believe it or not there is an ecosystem around the lake that needs attention. Putting more developement takes the pleasure away from going to the lake to see scenery and wildlife. This is more bad news for those of us who like things somewhat the way they were here.
20 October 2006 at 7:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
BlueRoom (Anonymous) says…
the mini downtowns will be suburbs of Lawrence - maybe we should be thinking of what to name them?
just like the suburbs of the big cities. soon lawrence will be a suburb (with suburbs) of kc and topeka.
20 October 2006 at 10:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
logicsound04 (Anonymous) says…
Can anyone explain the difference between a strip mall and a “planned” downtown (other than the fact that downtown stores will have streets and stoplights between the stores?)
If you want to know what I'm talking about, compare the Country Club Plaza in KC to Zona Rosa out in the Northlands. Zona Rosa was intended to be a “new Plaza”, but it has all the character of a strip mall.
The same thing will happen with any “downtown” Lawrence that is constructed out of thin air rather than growing and evolving with the residents of the area.
Tony88 hit it right on the head.
–––––––––—
In response to Reality-Check's first post, no one is criticizing the ability of urban planners' ability to do their job. The problem is that urban planners don't create Downtown Lawrence's, they create areas like the monstrosity out at 31st & Iowa.
Was urban planning even a career when Downtown Lawrence first came to be? I doubt it.
Unfortunately, it's not really possible to “plan” areas like downtown Lawrence, and in the age where distance between two places is not really an impediment, downtowns simply don't occur naturally. There is no need for all the merchants to locate so densely in order to allow residents to conduct all commerce in one convenient area—people can drive.
22 October 2006 at 4:59 a.m.