Widgets Magazine
Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 4567891011 LastLast
Results 201 to 225 of 267
  1. #201

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    Thanks for the update info!!

  2. #202

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates


  3. #203

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    Ha, Edmond NIMBYs and the Neighborhood Assoc folks sure are funny. And they are also doing damage to Edmond's growth and economic development. The same people who said the Spring Creek expansion was just too many apartments and dense and should be somewhere along I35 now say no to the same thing that IS along I35. You can only shake your head at their thinking.

  4. #204

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    Yeah this is ridiculous. Not surprised by the typical Edmond style of thinking. Edmond has some of the worst small town mentality I’ve seen.

  5. #205

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    Eh, based on the article it seems like they merely want more details before recommending approval. Doesn't seem unreasonable.

  6. #206

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    BTW - It's been part of the Edmond master plan for a decent amount of high density residential in that area for years now, so I expect something will happen. It's just a matter of getting the details right. 16 units per acre on top of retail is fairly low density, all things considered.

    I imagine further north on Coffee Creek and Sooner we'll see denser development.

  7. #207

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    Quote Originally Posted by Plutonic Panda View Post
    Yeah this is ridiculous. Not surprised by the typical Edmond style of thinking. Edmond has some of the worst small town mentality I’ve seen.
    Hey, some people see it differently and want something different from their residential landscape. Edmond can grow the way it and its citizens want to. If people want something different they won't live there and vice versa. Why are you so upset about it? Edmond is what it is--a very nice small town suburb. Los Angeles has some of the worst big town mentality I've seen.

  8. #208

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    Quote Originally Posted by Celebrator View Post
    Hey, some people see it differently and want something different from their residential landscape. Edmond can grow the way it and its citizens want to. If people want something different they won't live there and vice versa. Why are you so upset about it? Edmond is what it is--a very nice small town suburb. Los Angeles has some of the worst big town mentality I've seen.
    Because they are killing economic development and projects that further grow Edmond's high quality of life. For every deal they kill, they continue to have dollars leave the city and go elsewhere. Also, Edmond's days of being a small town are over, the population is 100,000 now. And this project, or the failed spring creek project werent going to harm edmond, but only enhance it and bring more revenues.

  9. #209

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    Did you actually watch the meeting or are you just making assumptions? Because you're way off on this one. They want the tax revenue and the base. They just want some assurances that the commericial Dev which this area was planned for and is meant to support and be supported by the convention center, is included with any residential put in, and not blocked/breaking the connection between the convention center and the retail. It's a reasonable concern.

    Or they should go Willy silly and approve ambiguous plans I guess? With no specifications? Any where else on this board they'd get attacked for that. But here goes the whole "nimby" attack without the information to back it up.

  10. #210

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    Quote Originally Posted by jerrywall View Post
    Did you actually watch the meeting or are you just making assumptions? Because you're way off on this one. They want the tax revenue and the base. They just want some assurances that the commericial Dev which this area was planned for and is meant to support and be supported by the convention center, is included with any residential put in, and not blocked/breaking the connection between the convention center and the retail. It's a reasonable concern.

    Or they should go Willy silly and approve ambiguous plans I guess? With no specifications? Any where else on this board they'd get attacked for that. But here goes the whole "nimby" attack without the information to back it up.
    I actually did watch most of it. And it seemed like there was enough information. I wouldnt be surprised to see the council approve it anyways.

    Edmond residents can demand this or that but it doesnt matter if thats not what the market wants. They can say no to commercial in one spot but they'll kill that deal because thats where commercial users want to be. Or say that one area is a good place for commercial but retailers look at the demographics and say no because thats not where the people are.

    In sort of a related topic, Edmond seems so hell bent on making 35 and Covell some big commercial area. Even giving out millions in TIFs and the like, but then they vote against this. Secondly, there isnt a whole lot of density and housetops at 35 and covell to begin with and its going to be a long process on bringing substantial retail there, imo.

  11. #211

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    All the information was verbal. They wanted what the guy talked about in the actual PUD document. The city planner recommended it for approval, and the commission made it clear they'd look better at it with more details in writing. And what Edmond residents? One resident who made one brief statement and pointed out two things?

  12. #212

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    There's a good party about halfway through (I realize it's an hour long) where they talk about the sign variance, and said they were unsure at first, but now that they know the logic, and it's in the document, it makes sense and seems reasonable. On the variance for the residential, the verbage is a bunch of "potentially" and "could" without assurances or outlines that it will absolutely be integrated with first floor retail. They want that in the document specifically in regards to one strip that connects the two various areas (the convention center area and the entertainment/retail area) rather than give a blanket open rezoning which could result in a gated apartment complex blocking off any walk-ability between those areas. So basically, they're asking for good urban design standards to be included in the request.

    Remember, as mentioned above, the Edmond Master Plan already has a lot of dense multi family zoning right next to this commercial space as well, so that's in the plan. This developer is looking for a series of variances, so asking for more assurances and details is totally reasonable.

    I remember back when Edmond used to take developers at their word... like when McDonald's wanted to use neon for their 33rd and broadway location and wanted a variance. The promised it would be well maintained, and any non functioning neon would be repaired in a timely manner. That promise was kept for about 9 months before that store fell into disrepair and became a blight. It was only recently, almost 20 years after the store was built, that it was redone and the store looks good again. Verbal assurances are worth the paper they're printed on.

    And just to be clear, I share the frustration on the Spring Creek development. I was very vocally supportive of that. But I think the downtown and the Covell/I-35 areas are two areas the city needs to keep a little bit of a tighter reign on. The I-35 and Covell will eventually be city center for commercial, entertainment, and convention space, as well as lots of city services. It will also be the most accessible and visible development from I-35. It shouldn't be done haphazardly. I'd compare this to the core to shore type stuff in OKC, and downtown to the various downtown neighborhoods in OKC.

  13. #213

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    Quote Originally Posted by jerrywall View Post
    Eh, based on the article it seems like they merely want more details before recommending approval. Doesn't seem unreasonable.
    No but this is a basic ground work of the plan. It’s clear people just don’t like the apartments. They will still have to submit more detailed plans. We should see a clear site plan hopefully with renderings for Showbiz soon.

  14. #214

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    Quote Originally Posted by Celebrator View Post
    Hey, some people see it differently and want something different from their residential landscape. Edmond can grow the way it and its citizens want to. If people want something different they won't live there and vice versa. Why are you so upset about it? Edmond is what it is--a very nice small town suburb. Los Angeles has some of the worst big town mentality I've seen.
    well, it can be argued LA has small town mentality at times. LA has some of the worst NIMBYs you can imagine. Here in Hollywood we have two 40 story towers that have been trying to get started for 10+ years. A city target is taking even longer than that and has been halfway constructed for some time now.

    You make a fair point but I personally want to see this development go through as it looks good and I don’t get why this way denied. I haven’t watched the video but from the article it just smells as typical whining about apartments.

  15. #215

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    Instead of appartments, I would not mind seeing some midrise condos, with maybe some nice walking/bike trails that would someday connect with the Lake Arcadia trails to the south. The development could take place on other land in the area. I agree that this area with be a dynamic area of development. Lets get it right.

  16. #216

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    Quote Originally Posted by oklip955 View Post
    Instead of appartments, I would not mind seeing some midrise condos, with maybe some nice walking/bike trails that would someday connect with the Lake Arcadia trails to the south. The development could take place on other land in the area. I agree that this area with be a dynamic area of development. Lets get it right.
    But thats the problem, I dont think there is demand for midrise condos, certainly not enough to go build a bunch of them. There is a market for apartments, which is why so many developers have tried to build some. But are told no and thats not what the town wants, even though there are plenty of people who would rent them. And you are also less likely to see any decent retail if you dont have anything in the way of a captive audience or a density of housing.

  17. #217

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    This!!

    Quote Originally Posted by oklip955 View Post
    Instead of appartments, I would not mind seeing some midrise condos, with maybe some nice walking/bike trails that would someday connect with the Lake Arcadia trails to the south. The development could take place on other land in the area. I agree that this area with be a dynamic area of development. Lets get it right.

  18. #218

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    Quote Originally Posted by Celebrator View Post
    Hey, some people see it differently and want something different from their residential landscape. Edmond can grow the way it and its citizens want to. If people want something different they won't live there and vice versa. Why are you so upset about it? Edmond is what it is--a very nice small town suburb. Los Angeles has some of the worst big town mentality I've seen.
    The problem is the mentality of small town doesn't work for Edmond anymore. It's not a small town. As a person who has seen it grown from 60,000 to over 90,000 in the past 15 years, the small town mentality is holding it back from basic infrastructure needs. Lack of center lanes, poor traffic light control, and lack of conveniently located basic businesses services (Grocery stores, restaurants, banks, gas stations) throughout the city. Luckily, they seem to making changes to Covell to reflect more of a city of 100,000 than other main corridors in the city designed for 25,000.

    Many who live on the west side of Edmond are giving plenty of tax revenue to Oklahoma City for entertainment, shopping and dining when they find it easier to go to the Quail Springs Corridor than 2nd/Bryant or Broadway/33rd. The train tracks that divide the city with only two underpasses for bypass, doesn't help matters either.

  19. #219

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    Quote Originally Posted by Plutonic Panda View Post
    No but this is a basic ground work of the plan. It’s clear people just don’t like the apartments. They will still have to submit more detailed plans. We should see a clear site plan hopefully with renderings for Showbiz soon.
    Except that's not what the planning commission said. I guess you can choose to assume they're lying, when they specifically mentioned one strip of apartments that would separate the CC/Hotel from the Theatre/Retail area, and that they wanted the concept of first floor retail to be part of the proposal.

  20. #220

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    Quote Originally Posted by jerrywall View Post
    Except that's not what the planning commission said. I guess you can choose to assume they're lying, when they specifically mentioned one strip of apartments that would separate the CC/Hotel from the Theatre/Retail area, and that they wanted the concept of first floor retail to be part of the proposal.
    I didn’t watch that video, Jerry. But you can’t sit there and say Edmond doesn’t have a bias against apartments. What strip of apartments are seperating it from those areas because I’m seeing a promenade that connects all the way through.

  21. #221

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    The council approved the plan which was denied from the planning commission based off of some signs they thought were too tall and the developer agreed to shorten them.

    On Monday the Edmond City Council approved rezoning an area from general commercial planned unit development to a PUD for Legacy at Covell. The vote was 5-0 for the item located north of the Hilton Garden Inn and Conference Center off Sooner Road, north of Covell Road.

    Covell Development 35 LLC is the applicant for the 130-acre tract west of Interstate 35.

    The entire property contains the Hilton Garden Inn and Conference Center to the south. It will also be the site of the proposed ShowBiz Cinemas.

    The PUD adds residential uses along 47 acres of the acres mostly to the north and west with ground-floor retail and residential above, said Randy Entz, city planner. Residential would be limited to 600 total units not to exceed 16 units per acre.

    “The PUD does create a master sign plan,” Entz said. “It includes two development signs to the east, two to the south and then a smaller one to the west.”

    One sign will be 60 feet tall with 400 square feet of display area in the I-35 Corridor. Another sign farther west will stand 40 feet in height, Entz continued. Ground signs standing 10 feet in height with 120 feet of display area will be permitted for future individual parcels.

    - read more here: http://www.edmondsun.com/news/city-c...ef2407d1b.html

  22. #222

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    Quote Originally Posted by Plutonic Panda View Post
    I didnít watch that video, Jerry. But you canít sit there and say Edmond doesnít have a bias against apartments. What strip of apartments are seperating it from those areas because Iím seeing a promenade that connects all the way through.
    The trouble is those were merely proposed plans and they didn't have the guarantee in writing that the promenade would remain. That guarantee is what they were asking for. They started they liked the plans, but the builder repeatedly used the word potential when talking about the designs.

  23. #223

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    Quote Originally Posted by jerrywall View Post
    The trouble is those were merely proposed plans and they didn't have the guarantee in writing that the promenade would remain. That guarantee is what they were asking for. They started they liked the plans, but the builder repeatedly used the word potential when talking about the designs.
    I see. That makes a lot of sense then. I was wrong I though they just didn't like this plan because of the apartments here.

  24. #224

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    The plan oil ng commission is typically pretty good about holding developers feet to the fire, and I'm not sure they have any anti apartment bias. Now that group Better Neighborhood or whatever it's called definitely is anti apartment.

  25. #225

    Default Re: Covell and I-35 Development Updates

    Crest is indeed putting on hold the store for a few years. Really stinks after they cleared the corner

    http://m.newsok.com/article/5591663/...on-and-mustang

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. What happened to Covell Corner?
    By boscorama in forum Edmond
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 10-30-2013, 06:54 PM
  2. Replies: 22
    Last Post: 10-15-2013, 05:19 PM
  3. SW/C I-35 and Covell
    By Soonerinfiniti in forum Edmond
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-15-2013, 12:45 PM
  4. I-35 and Covell
    By mtpinto in forum Edmond
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 05-19-2011, 02:47 PM
  5. Covell and Kelly
    By blabare in forum Suburban & Other OK Communities
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-15-2006, 10:40 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO