Of New Urbanism, Arcades, and Jogging - I've recently been doing a bit of what most people call jogging (I call it "running" because it makes me feel much more athletic, but I recognize that as slightly delusional.) I've taken to making one run a week that covers as much as possible of downtown Sarasota, so I can get an up-close look at how different projects are going, what our city facilities look like, and how things overall are coming together. One thing that has been interesting as we've gotten closer to summer is how drawn I am as I go to any shade I can find, and how the few arcades that we do have make such good shade. (I know what you're thinking - "his running is nothing like people walking!" If you're saying that, you have quite obviously never seen me running.)I also had the opportunity when I was in the Florida Panhandle a couple of weeks ago to visit a number of the small New Urbanist communities that are springing up along the coast. Seaside, for example, has all the charm its reputation would suggest, but for my personal taste was just a bit too close - though I'm sure I could live there quite comfortably. On down the coast was another called Rosemary Beach, that was also quite interesting and somewhat "roomier." Both featured arcades to the curb line under living space quite prominently - in fact in some cases small balconies or other features actually extended over the parking space., and were both attractive and functional.
My point isn't to trigger another great debate on arcades. It is simply to state that when the City Commission voted to effectively "ban" arcades, staff was also given direction to evaluate where and when arcades make sense and eventually bring that discussion forward. I think along the way everyone agreed that arcades in and of themselves aren't an evil, it's the correct application of them as a design feature that counts. I hope as the issue comes forward in the future, that's the conversation we have. My recent (welcome) exposure to arcades prompted me to say so!
posted by Michael McNees at 6:01 PM
8 Comments:
Gretchen - I agree, I don't know anyone who opposed arcades on private property. There are also, along with people at the other end of the spectrum who would allow them everywhere, people in the middle who believe that in certain applications, i.e. small or irregular lots or other specific circumstances, allowing them over public right-of-way could yield a better outcome for everyone. My opinion is that the discussion did become very much "yes or no", and very Main Street-focused, without a good examination of any potential middle ground. I believe that's why the commission gave the direction they did.
By the way, I certainly appreciated your comments in the paper and don't remember anything silly. And thanks for the suggestion regarding the NOrth Trail project, it's a good one and I'll put something up on it later today.
Logan, one good thing about the cranes is that everything they're building downtown is on already developed land, so every unit downtown is one less unit being built on natural land somewhere to the east. That is anti-sprawl, and one of the main philosophies of our downtown, "new-urbanist" strategy.
I think it is time for the city to realize there are situations that arcades will definately work and be the best use of our public land and there may be areas it will not be best. It is a very closed mind that thinks 2500 signatures means the issue is dead. First those signatures were not received in good process but solicited with a very distorted view of the arcades. People need to realize that our downtown is a city and it is not like the neighborhoods surrounding it. There will be tall buildings and concrete. There will be people living in many nooks and crannys, overlooking the sidewalks. I fully support arcades but reserve opinion about the locations because there may be locations that it just does not work. I wish people could keep a little bit more of an open mind about these things instead of shutting the gate to the discussion because they fear loosing.
The one place I would like to see an occasional arcade is where there is an open space above it. Not as a way to get more building space several stories up and turn the street into a canyon. The, now closed, Bayou Bleu restaurant would have been a good place for such a balcony over the sidewalk and it probably would have saved that business.
Downtown Resident - I understand your point, and even started this thread with my own thoughts about how the arcade discussion to date had been somewhat narrow, and have posted previously on the subject. But I hope everyone can express an opinion without having to label those with different opinions, otherwise we get bogged down in what becomes finger-pointing and questioning of motives and never get to the real issues.
Regarding again the 2500 signatures...I was solicited to sign the petition and I was told a huge doom and gloom story about arcades. The way the petition was gathered was not by a group really trying to understand the subject around arcades, it was their sole purpose to have them banned. There is nobody that is be able to verbally dispute those facts. This is not an issue of listening to the neighborhoods and citizens this is the issue of SOS wanting their way on one view, which is theirs. I did not see any meaningful dialogue of discussion about the benefits and possible downfalls of arcades, just downfalls seemed to be their view. Democracy involves many different views and to have just one view is very narrow minded.
I do think the conversation needs to be opened back up and the City Commission should not have removed the options to have arcades and arcades with livable space above them.
I also seek shade when I can find it and wish the building at One Central had arcades that covered the pedestrian sidewalk and was not stepped back. All Town Planners know this is not an optimal solution to building a city but the arcades should be over the sidewalk.
Less than two years ago I spent about 7 months painting murals in a private home in Rosemary Beach so I know it very well. That photo is looking north from just off 30a and is basically Main Street if I recall.....Upper Main, if you will...
If you turn around and go South across 30a to where the original Rosemary Beach shopping area was created, you'll find no arcades. I liked the look of both and while I probably wouldn't want to see arcades on both sides of a narrow city street and nothing but, it looks great in some places. And in fact, back when I was painting up there, my wife and daughter would drive up to visit once a month and we would walk around....it's designed as a walking community, by Andres Duany. If it started raining, you know where everyone headed....to the arcade areas.
So I would not be in favor of any outright ban on arcades.
Skip
I support Sarasota allowing arcades to be built. I also support builders being able to build living space above the arcades.
We cannot keep comparing ourselves to other cities or trying to justify when and why or where arcades will work.
We are a great city in the South and we could create an unique area different than others. Arcades gives us this opportunity. I see that they may not work in all areas but we need to let go of Sarasota staying just the way it was because nothing stays the same.
We are building a city and cities require density, shopping, exitement and people space. Cities do not work because there are parks and open space and green lawns with trees. These are not the things that make up a city. Luckly for those that seem to be jerking from the thought of our city becoming a real city, our city is small and surrounded by great neighborhoods that can keep us green.
Thanks for the good conversation on arcades, and for some new voices. To the model comment, on Monday Cooper, Robertson, our Cultural District consultant, used a fairly low-tech model to demonstrate their concept and its relationship to the surrounding buildings, and it was quite helpful. I understand the model is available in our Planning Department for viewing, and I suspect such things will become more and more common in the future.
Post a Comment
<< Home