Effort to revitalize downtown Jeffersonville on track; Jeffersonville effort coming on strong.
Jeffersonville merchants met not long ago and stragglers could not find a seat.
Such crowds are an encouraging sign.
Hundreds of us will pay Thursday to taste chili and beer on behalf of further downtown improvement.
Jeffersonville is turning a corner, returning its downtown to a top priority. Shopkeepers, city leaders and booster groups are increasingly in step, pleased with progress but not satisfied with it.
More is scheduled and is believed at last to be possible -- amenities as simple as dinner theater and as grand as a convention center.
"We'll not ever get to the point where downtown's revitalized -- that's it," said Jay Ellis, director of the not-for-profit Jeffersonville Main Street Inc.
Sunday, February 08, 2009
"Compared to New Albany -- as always -- Jeffersonville is luckily situated ... "
Bayernfan caught it first. In today's C-J, columnist Dale Moss profiles downtown Jeffersonville's revitalization efforts. Here's the tease:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
A telling sentiment from that article..
"Better to be proactive, to shape, he reminds. "There are people that ought to be able to make it happen," he (Warren Schimpff) said.
Yes, there are people who can make this happen...even in New Albany, unfortunately very, very few actually hold positions with any sway at all.
Frank Rich quoted de Gaulle in the NYT today:
“The cemeteries of the world are full of indispensable men.”
It's going to be damned interesting to see who's indispensable around here in two or three years.
"Compared to New Albany -- as always -- Jeffersonville is luckily situated with an accessible, scenic riverfront across from the heart of Louisville. Not that it especially mattered, as downtown Jeffersonville declined with all other downtowns."
Jeffersonville's waterfront has seen much more reinvestment than what has been seen in New Albany. I think it's important to keep in mind that Jeffersonville's view of Louisville's skyline did not prevent downtown Jeff's original decline; downtown Jeff's decline had to do with factors that have nothing to do with scenic views.
I bring this up because I don't think anyone in New Albany should ever think that our lack of a skyline view will hinder redevelopment of our downtown. Skylines and redevelopment are unrelated issues.
"Skylines and redevelopment are unrelated issues" perhaps more correctly it should be "viewscapes and redevelopment are related issues." Has anyone driven I-64 from 22nd St in Louisville over the Sherman-Minton? Notice anything unusual? The "viewscape" west and north to Indiana as you approach the Sherman-Minton is basically a 19th century viewscape, save for a few elements. I wonder if any thought has been given to protecting that viewscape? My guess is if I went to city hall, first no one would have ever heard of a viewscape, second they'd cringe, third they'd immediately throw it in their"crank" file.
In Old Louisville, the Olmsted designed Central Park became the site of a police station because it was easier to put a police station in a park than on a lot the city actually would have to purchase.
Similarly, New Albany’s main downtown park was destroyed and became the on ramp to the Sherman Minton Bridge, a bridge which would have functioned equally as well a few blocks further west. In my perfect world, I would ask the city to grant a conservation easement on the Greenway (once work is complete) to ensure that 50 years in the future some short sighted politicians do not find our riverfront to be the best place for very undesirable use. Of course, the devil is in the details.
Other than the Greenway, what other vistas are worthy of preserving?
It's not only the greenway, it's the friggin golf course/green space on the other side. It's Portland and New Albany's 19th century skylines, it's the beautiful old K&I and the modern Sherman-Minton. It's trains and barges. How many places in any urban area can you name where there exists a corridor of some 5 miles that is largely still 19th century? That is a valuable "amenity". I'm sure the city and developers see it as a great place for a casino, or a dump.
ps. Dan, wouldn't that sort of conservation easement be a state issue?
The easement could be held any preservation group. Conservation easements are the primary mechanism by which Historic Landmarks, River Fields, and Sycamore Land Trust protect properties. If the easement holder is a non-governmental entity, then government does not have the legal authority to release the easement. Of course, if what is to be protected currently is owned by a government entity, that government entity must convey the easement to the non-governmental holder.
A lot of what you are describing is owned by railroads, the US government, city government, state government and many private property owners. Getting everyone on board to convey easements would be difficult. Zoning likely would be an easier method to preserve the entire view. However, zoning rules always can be changed; variances always can be granted. Only a conservation easement grants a property right in the holder that is essentially immune from government attack.
Post a Comment