Quote:
Originally Posted by muertecaza
|
Ok I just watched this entire bit on Skye. It wasn’t simply due to parking ratio. It was in regards to the level of density the project was providing with lack of accessibility for resident service accessibility i.e. uber, lyft, doordash, moving trucks etc.. the project well surpasses the 175 parking space minimum with 275 total on paper but they will lose some due to the rearrangement of the garbage pickup area/aps yard. All 275 spaces are locked behind a gate and they intend to only provide 1 public space which is on street parking. Additionally in the alleyway which is already congested with big trucks, they intend to have only 1 moving truck loading space for the entire building. These issues will force service traffic onto Myrtle and cause traffic congestion once the building begins to be occupied. They also brought up concern with the adjacent Wells Fargo building project to the west with similar density having a very similar impact and also overworking the alleyway.
Overall, I agree with the remarks and concern for resident services. However, I think this is a very easy fix by simply allowing the first floor or two of the podium to be public parking/resident services. Provide like 5 rideshare/food drop off spots, maybe 10 or so consumer spots and try and rework for loading unloading for moving trucks to occur on the first floor of the podium rather than only in the alleyway.
There was also a push from one of the chairmen to have the site go through the archaeological testing/digging before starting construction that the developers said no to which didn’t help their case lol. I saw both sides where the site had already been built on so the developer did not feel it was necessary however the board’s reasoning was the stipulation never existed at the time of the current structure’s building and they were built at grade whereas this project might uncover some stuff.
They were all mostly in favor of it, but the concerns were too risky given the location thus it failed 4-3. If they take this into account and fix the concerns I could easily see this passing at city council. I still think it’ll pass regardless but don’t be surprised if Marbella or such comes swinging due to traffic concerns lol.
TLDR: big developer plans appropriately big building for downtown with inadequate access for residential services while disregarding cultural presence on site leaves bad taste in DRC mouths.
Also very very very big emphasis from the developer this is NOT intended to be student housing and they seem determined to make it so… however we know how all the other towers claiming the same have gone…
Threaded Mode