During the second open house, the attending public was asked
to place preferencing dots on those images which were preferred (green)
and not preferred (red). These preferencing boards will help further
guide the direction of one preferred alternative of districts to North
Avenue.
(a) Alternative one
appeared to have greater preference
of student housing, retail and entertainment district, as well as
the senior housing and grocer. Districts not preferred in this alternative
were the greater regional retail, big box and light industrial concepts.
(b) Alternative two
obtained greater preference for the
more residential neighborhood and apartments rather than the larger
big box and higher density apartments.
(c) Alternative three
again reiterates the desire from the
public to have more neighborhood scale apartments rather than the
larger scale apartment buildings. Again the desire for a retail and
civic component that speaks to a neighborhood scale instead of a large
retail component that is more regional in nature was evident.
Based on this information obtained, a preferred district alternative plan was created to further guide the appropriate revitalization on the North Avenue Corridor. This preferred alternative is presented in the summary and recommendations portion of this report (Chapter 32.24 GJMC).
|
(Res. 174-07 (Exh. A), 12-3-07)
Public comment received during the open house was consistent
with that heard at the first open house. Additional comments received
included: the need and desire for more high quality restaurants, the
need for quality senior housing in proximity to grocery amenities,
improved streetscape and pedestrian realm. Additionally the proposed
student housing and entertainment district was well received along
with greater mixed use development that would promote a neighborhood
and community district where amenities and services are in proximity
to housing.
Public comments regarding the realization of improvements and
redevelopment to North Avenue spoke of the need for the City to actively
be involved in land assembly and incentives to propel any development.
Incentives such as corridor-wide enterprise zone, tax rebates and
mixed use zoning, were voiced. The investigation of current disincentives
that prohibit residential on commercial properties was also noted.
(Res. 174-07 (Exh. A), 12-3-07)