Cherry Picking the St. Johns Lombard Plan
Dear Editor,
In the Review article of 10/30/15, about the razing of Ivy Island, Lindsay Jensen, Executive Director of St. Johns Main Street said, “We are in support of it happening. We recognize that significant planning, resources, and neighborhood input went into developing the St. Johns Lombard Plan, which is the basis/reason for Ivy Island being vacated.”
If we're going to use the SJLP than fine, let’s use it. It shouldn't be dragged out when it's convenient to promote a certain agenda. Let's not cherry pick what is in the SJLP that will be used or not used. The Plan promotes much more than razing Ivy Island for a right turn signal into SJ. The SJLP is thoughtful, considered, and wholistic in its approach. Importantly, for the business district, this intersection is seen as a Gateway into St Johns and the SJLP acknowledged that importance.
I encourage the readers to follow the actual statements from the St. Johns Lombard Plan (SJLP). The SJLP is easy to look up. Just Google "St Johns Lombard Plan." Or go to the Library. I've included page numbers for reference.
Concerning Ivy Island, quoting the SJLP, it starts with a simple idea “shift the island north and merge it with the sidewalk…," (by this simple move the former island, becomes a buffer to the traffic of Rt. 30/Richmond) This then "allows for more active pedestrian use" (Ivy Island itself protects the pedestrian and what was the Lombard Slip Lane becomes a protected corridor for walking). Added benefits are "improved sight lines into the commercial core" and "an opportunity to create an enhanced Gateway to the Downtown Business District." This plan has NO impact on James John Elementary School (SJLP, pages 36, 86)
The current developers have taken this elegant and uncomplicated solution and heaped on it apartments, retail stores and underground garages, and then tell us that this is what we asked for. In the SJLP, the Lombard Slip Lane becomes an east-west corridor that protects pedestrians from the traffic of Rt. 30/Richmond. In the Bolouri Plan there is no protected corridor, what was the Lombard Slip Lane will have apartments. These apartments are an obstacle that the pedestrian will need to walk around, using the sidewalk that Bolouri provides, bringing the pedestrian uncomfortably close to the heavy traffic of Rt 30/Richmond. EXACTLY AS WE HAVE NOW. No different. Same exposure, same traffic. Walkability, important in the SJLP, is not improved. Plus this wall of apartments, rather than integrating our community, as the SJLP does, runs the risk of dividing us into a SJ Eastside and Westside. It also becomes less of a Gateway into SJ as it is a wall that completely blocks the view of SJ and foils the easy access into the Business District. Importantly, the Bolouri plan, unlike the SJLP, has an immense negative impact on the parking and traffic patterns at James John Elementary School.
The SJLP is a wholistic agreement between the SJ Community and City Government. Livability and respecting the character and small town feel of St Johns is key. James John Elementary School and the Library were singled out as important civic buildings that new construction should compliment. Buildings were to be one to three stories. Architectural examples throughout the Plan show nothing larger than three stories. Boundary developments between commercial and residential zones needed to reflect the scale and character of the residential zone. Also, developers needed to provide adequate parking. (SJLP, pages 22 and 100)
If we're going to use the St. Johns Lombard Plan, let's use it. If we do that, it means that Farid Bolouri will need to make things “smaller and more in line with the character of St. Johns,” which is more in the design and spirit of what the St. Johns Lombard Plan promotes.
John Teply