Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That seems like a harder sell than Main in downtown and the south end of North Main. The former jumped off because of the steady traffic from all of the offices, proximity to the Vista, and USC. The latter is capitalizing off of adjacent middle class neighborhoods, but will not really take off until it better Connects to Main and starts absorbing momentum. It's hard to see what very North Main has to establish a foothold. Columbia College is really small and the area probably suffers from a reputation issue.
That is true but that development could help support the small businesses in the shopping center across the street and down the road where piggly wiggly is located. Maybe even spur new businesses near there. I get what you're saying about the southern part of north main being close to downtown but that corridor as a whole is important to the city. I would say north main, gervais, bull, assembly, and huger are all main arteries into the city and need to be maintained/developed for a positive introduction for columbia.
why are we questioning a possible new development anywhere in our city? we should be encouraging this? for a long times we've wanted development in the northern reaches of our city. we've received two in the last month and we're questioning it. I'm lost as to the cynicism of these remarks. yes Azurest was proposed a long time ago (3-4 years ago) but why are we poo-pooing on this? any insight? any development would benefit this area.
That is true but that development could help support the small businesses in the shopping center across the street and down the road where piggly wiggly is located. Maybe even spur new businesses near there. I get what you're saying about the southern part of north main being close to downtown but that corridor as a whole is important to the city. I would say north main, gervais, bull, assembly, and huger are all main arteries into the city and need to be maintained/developed for a positive introduction for columbia.
There is a restaurant/business proposed on the pad site of the Piggly Wiggly that was approved a few months ago ...so baby steps
why are we questioning a possible new development anywhere in our city? we should be encouraging this? for a long times we've wanted development in the northern reaches of our city. we've received two in the last month and we're questioning it. I'm lost as to the cynicism of these remarks. yes Azurest was proposed a long time ago (3-4 years ago) but why are we poo-pooing on this? any insight? any development would benefit this area.
I think people are cautiously optimistic. Over the years a variety of ideas and master plans have been proposed for North Columbia /Eau Claire ...Some like the development near Hyatt Park have materialized but there is still a long way to go....Even the residents of this area are skeptical when it comes to promises of development from politicos and developers who are connected to them. The mayor was connected to a development off of River Dr where the developer partner was under investigation from the FBI ...He sold his interest before he assumed office but the story made the rounds on the news for some time. I am not sure if the development was completed or if it met the community expectation of homeownership and rental mix. There are at least a half a dozen vacant or underutilized shopping centers in the area and it has always been ripe for redevelopment but falls short in part because of market interest/ competition from other areas and the city"s tepid financial support.
This area is also Columbia's largest neighborhood with a myriad of challenges in pockets throughout and not as widely known or discrete like some of the more popular revitalizing areas like upper and lower Waverly , Pinehurst , or Edgewood......so I think that is why some folks are skeptical but I think are generally supportive
Last edited by Woodlands; 01-02-2021 at 06:36 PM..
why are we questioning a possible new development anywhere in our city? we should be encouraging this? for a long times we've wanted development in the northern reaches of our city. we've received two in the last month and we're questioning it. I'm lost as to the cynicism of these remarks. yes Azurest was proposed a long time ago (3-4 years ago) but why are we poo-pooing on this? any insight? any development would benefit this area.
I think people are cautiously optimistic. Over the years a variety of ideas and master plans have been proposed for North Columbia /Eau Claire ...Some like the development near Hyatt Park have materialized but there is still a long way to go....Even the residents of this area are skeptical when it comes to promises of development from politicos and developers who are connected to them. The mayor was connected to a development off of River Dr where the developer partner was under investigation from the FBI ...He sold his interest before he assumed office but the story made the rounds on the news for some time. I am not sure if the development was completed or I'd it was the impact was minimal. There are atleast a half a dozen vacant or underutilized shopping centers in the area and it has always been ripe for redevelopment but falls short in part because of market interest/ competition from other areas and the city"s tepid financial support
why are we questioning a possible new development anywhere in our city? we should be encouraging this? for a long times we've wanted development in the northern reaches of our city. we've received two in the last month and we're questioning it. I'm lost as to the cynicism of these remarks. yes Azurest was proposed a long time ago (3-4 years ago) but why are we poo-pooing on this? any insight? any development would benefit this area.
People just want to know if it's viable/feasible. Just because something is proposed doesn't mean it's going to be built or that it's necessarily a good development. I'm not saying any of these things are true of this proposal, but I'm just giving reasons why some folks might be asking the questions and expressing the concerns they are.
why are we questioning a possible new development anywhere in our city? we should be encouraging this? for a long times we've wanted development in the northern reaches of our city. we've received two in the last month and we're questioning it. I'm lost as to the cynicism of these remarks. yes Azurest was proposed a long time ago (3-4 years ago) but why are we poo-pooing on this? any insight? any development would benefit this area.
Not all development is equal. Azurest looks nice and could help revitalize the area, but the fundamentals around it do not look good and as has been pointed out, seemed to be politically enabled if not motivated. While the developer is of course welcome to take the risk that the project flops, the city would also be making an investment in the form of infrastructure and time. This investment comes before construction, putting it even more at risk. Given that the city is pressured on resource by many other commitments (N. Main streetscaping, Bull Street garages and infrastructure, water/sewer funding, etc.) and has other opportunities (Finlay, Innovista, Harden), choosing to get behind a development that does not contribute to existing momentum is a riskier choice than reinforcing other projects in the the Vista, Main, N. Main, 5 Points, or other areas.
Not all development is equal. Azurest looks nice and could help revitalize the area, but the fundamentals around it do not look good and as has been pointed out, seemed to be politically enabled if not motivated. While the developer is of course welcome to take the risk that the project flops, the city would also be making an investment in the form of infrastructure and time. This investment comes before construction, putting it even more at risk. Given that the city is pressured on resource by many other commitments (N. Main streetscaping, Bull Street garages and infrastructure, water/sewer funding, etc.) and has other opportunities (Finlay, Innovista, Harden), choosing to get behind a development that does not contribute to existing momentum is a riskier choice than reinforcing other projects in the the Vista, Main, N. Main, 5 Points, or other areas.
What you have noted is the most concerning ..the city is strapped financially and COVID 19 has not helped. If this development is simply seeking access to city utilities at a reduced rate which is available to any development that is not an issue ...but if the city is being asked to help with providing the infrastructure that could prove challenging depending on the level of investment. I suspect some politico that reps that area even the developer could argue that "you did it for bullstreet ...why not here ?!". North Main and Eau Claire is a revitalization area that will certainly need some level of subsidy ...but timing and the underlying feasibility are still important. Someone mentioned that the timing of this development corresponded with the city election several years ago which combined with the fact that it was not even in the city at the time ( just now being annexed) is interesting.
Again .. all for North Main Fairfield and Monticello getting development so I hope this project works ...I just want it to make sense and not be some type of political stunt. I was not a fan of Bullstreet at the time when it was announced but have been pleasantly surprised so I can stand to be corrected
Not all development is equal. Azurest looks nice and could help revitalize the area, but the fundamentals around it do not look good and as has been pointed out, seemed to be politically enabled if not motivated. While the developer is of course welcome to take the risk that the project flops, the city would also be making an investment in the form of infrastructure and time. This investment comes before construction, putting it even more at risk. Given that the city is pressured on resource by many other commitments (N. Main streetscaping, Bull Street garages and infrastructure, water/sewer funding, etc.) and has other opportunities (Finlay, Innovista, Harden), choosing to get behind a development that does not contribute to existing momentum is a riskier choice than reinforcing other projects in the the Vista, Main, N. Main, 5 Points, or other areas.
What you have noted is the most concerning ..the city is strapped financially and COVID 19 has not helped. If this development is simply seeking access to city utilities at a reduced rate which is available to any development that is not an issue ...but if the city is being asked to help with providing the infrastructure that could prove challenging depending on the level of investment. I suspect some politico that reps that area even the developer could argue that "you did it for bullstreet ...why not here ?!". North Main and Eau Claire is a revitalization area that will certainly need some level of subsidy ...but timing and the underlying feasibility are still important. Someone mentioned that the timing of this development corresponded with the city election several years ago which combined with the fact that it was not even in the city at the time ( just now being annexed) is interesting.
Again .. all for North Main Fairfield and Monticello getting development so I hope this project works ...I just want it to make sense and not be some type of political stunt
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
