Little Rocker 
Member since Jul 8, 2011

clinton_hog_hat_jpg-magnum.jpg

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

Stats

Recent Comments

Re: “LR Advertising and Promotion Commission votes to buy building at Markham and Spring

Sound - Ignoring, for a minute, the ridiculousness of your conspiracy theory, did you miss the part of the story where Bank of England was already trying to buy the building? It was the bank's offer to buy it that triggered the LRCVB's first right of refusal to purchase. Cromwell already had a buyer and didn't need LRCVB to step in.

2 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Little Rocker on 08/24/2016 at 11:56 AM

Re: “Consultants to city: Get MOU from AHTD on I-30

Self Appointed Arbiter - there's a difference between "removed" and "relocated." Nelson-Nyygard was stating that removing a main-line interstate and replacing it with a non-interstate (a boulevard) has never been done without relocating that interstate.

Posted by Little Rocker on 05/24/2016 at 2:51 PM

Re: “Putting up a parking lot for a tech park

According to your article from 3 months ago, it's about $11.6 million for all the Stephens buildings and lots, not just the one being torn down. http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archi…

Posted by Little Rocker on 05/05/2016 at 1:29 PM

Re: “Critic asks Highway Department to tell truth: No park in 10-lane freeway plan

The AHTD plan, even without the deck park envisioned by Tom Fennell and presented by Studio Main, still includes replacing tons of concrete with green space (17 acres according to the Downtown Partnership press release). This includes the area to the east and west ofI-30 where the circular exit ramps currently take up about 2 blocks on each side, as well as the 4-block-long viaduct that splits the River Market District between 2nd and 3rd. All of that concrete comes down, and AHTD will contract with the city to maintain it as park land.

As for the insistence that a deck park will never become a reality because there's "no realistic pathway to getting the money out of the city to do such a thing" (Max) or that we'll have to "fund it with bake sales" (Dodds) - what gives you that idea? Over and over, the citizens of Little Rock have demonstrated that we will fund meaningful projects. Most recently, the renovation of the Arts Center at $60 million and Robinson Auditorium at over $70 million come to mind. Before that, the expansion of the Convention Center, construction of the River Market Hall, countless libraries, the MacArthur Park renovation, Riverfront Park, the River Trail system, the Junction Bridge, the Clinton Bridge, the Bidgg Dam Bridge, and on and on. (Sort of makes me wonder where "Nanc" who made the comment above that "we can't have nice things" has been living.) The Convention and Visitors Bureau always seems to have some kind of bond that is reaching maturity and ripe for refinancing for the next project. Or how about at the end of the 10-year penny sales tax - this would be a great project to add to the list of new items when it's up for renewal (which happens to coincide with the expected completion year of the I-30 project.)

Dallas has built one deck park and has another in the works in Oak Cliff near the zoo, which is reportedly going to cost $50 million for a park about 3 times as long as what Studio Main has proposed between 6th and 9th. If the citizens of LR truly want it, and visionary folks like Studio Main market it right, I think we'll see a deck park over I-30 sooner than you think.

5 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by Little Rocker on 04/28/2016 at 2:59 PM

Re: “Critic asks Highway Department to tell truth: No park in 10-lane freeway plan

The AHTD plan, even without the deck park envisioned by Tom Fennell and presented by Studio Main, still includes replacing tons of concrete with green space (17 acres according to the Downtown Partnership press release). This includes the area to the east and west ofI-30 where the circular exit ramps currently take up about 2 blocks on each side, as well as the 4-block-long viaduct that splits the River Market District between 2nd and 3rd. All of that concrete comes down, and AHTD will contract with the city to maintain it as park land.

As for the insistence that a deck park will never become a reality because there's "no realistic pathway to getting the money out of the city to do such a thing" (Max) or that we'll have to "fund it with bake sales" (Dodds) - what gives you that idea? Over and over, the citizens of Little Rock have demonstrated that we will fund meaningful projects. Most recently, the renovation of the Arts Center at $60 million and Robinson Auditorium at over $70 million come to mind. Before that, the expansion of the Convention Center, construction of the River Market Hall, countless libraries, the MacArthur Park renovation, Riverfront Park, and on and on. The Convention and Visitors Bureau always seems to have some kind of bond that is reaching maturity and ripe for refinancing for the next project. Or how about at the end of the 10-year penny sales tax - this would be a great project to add to the list of new items when it's up for renewal (which happens to coincide with the expected completion year of the I-30 project.)

Dallas has built one deck park and has another in the works in Oak Cliff near the zoo, which is reportedly going to cost $50 million for a park about 3 times as long as what Studio Main has proposed between 6th and 9th. If the citizens of LR truly want it, and visionary folks like Studio Main market it right, I think we'll see a deck park over I-30 sooner than you think.

6 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by Little Rocker on 04/28/2016 at 2:57 PM

Re: “Watch 30 Crossing in 3D; read architect's objections

Hey Sound - I took your advice and paused it at :12 - those lanes you're referring to as collector lanes aren't collector lanes, they're actually the existing frontage roads on the city street grid that you can see there today. Here's a link to view them: https://www.google.com/maps/@34.7335953,-9…

Using your same math, we would count the number of lanes in that section today as 11. In reality, though, that part of the interstate has 7 lanes today - 4 south bound and 3 north bound.

12 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Little Rocker on 04/27/2016 at 2:50 PM

Re: “Watch 30 Crossing in 3D; read architect's objections

"There was no indication of who would fund the concepts presented by Studio Main. AHTD has already indicated they would not pay for the 6th-9th Streets deck park and there is little hope they would pay for any of the other amenities shown by Chris East."

So when Tom shows deck parks on his boulevard plan, it's a great idea, but when Studio Main shows it, he has a problem with it? There was no indication by AHTD that they would pay for these amenities, and it was effectively communicated by Mr. East that these are simply the long-term visions of Studio Main.

"The new plans add park space but no land (actually less land) for future business development."

So which portion of new park land would you sacrifice for commercial development? I think it's better to retain it as green space, which will serve as a huge amenity to the existing commercial uses and encourage new development throughout the River Market and an increase of existing property values. We don't need new land for commercial development downtown - there are already too many empty lots and dilapidated buildings yet be developed.

"AHTD is still expanding the freeway to 10 lanes through downtown whatever you call it."

How is this different from Tom's design? From Tom's own description his convertible plan: "Interstate 30 remains as a 6 lane freeway but flanked by boulevard lanes on each side that handle local traffic through downtown." So change "boulevard lanes" to "collector/distributor lanes" and you've got the same thing. Now we're just arguing over whether these lanes are one-way or two. Plus, AHTD has agreed to completely eliminating the most intrusive and divisive portion of the existing freeway - the long 4-block 2nd St. exit ramp that cuts like a knife from the interstate to Cumberland and shoots traffic at high speeds into the Clinton Ave intersection - and replacing it with park land. To me, this is way more important.

"There was no mention of Smart Mobility’s study, a Chester Street bridge, or beefing up local arterials and connections for diffusing traffic.

AHTD has addressed the Chester St Bridge scenario in multiple presentations and stated that the traffic it would divert from the I-30 bridge is minimal and not worth the expense. As for not beefing up local arterials and connections for diffusing traffic - that's exactly what they're doing by removing the 2nd St off ramp and letting traffic diffuse onto the grid, whether 4th, Capitol, 6th, or 9th. And it funnels traffic away from the River Market.

"And there was no “boulevard” option on their options checklist."

Wasn't it Tom, himself, who finally admitted that the boulevard option wouldn't be viable until some point 20 to 30 years into the future when there are fewer cars on the road (since a Boulevard only handles 50,000 cars per day that stretch of I-30 currently has 120,000 per day)? Then he fell back to an interim design that looks remarkably like what AHTD proposed yesterday? See it here: http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archi…

"Nelson Nygaard, is clearly not independent, but in the go-along with the mayor and AHTD mode which is very disappointing."

Smart Mobility is clearly not independent, but in the go-along with Tom Fennell mode, which is very disappointing.

18 likes, 4 dislikes
Posted by Little Rocker on 04/27/2016 at 2:33 PM

All Comments »


 

© 2016 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation