A Conversation On Murray Hill's Proposed Storage Unit

[Tacachale]

Many in the Murray Hill neighborhood are vehemently opposed to a new development proposal. The Jaxson's Mike Field discusses ideas to create workable solutions.

Read more: https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/a-conversation-on-murray-hills-proposed-storage-unit/

[Adam White]

I have no issue with the development and see it as an improvement over what is there. And I'm being completely honest about that - if I lived in Murray Hill, I'd support this development.

I appreciate the ideas offered up in terms of what could be done to reach a compromise. I think Mike is onto some good ideas there. You may never convince some people who are opposed to the very notion of a mini storage place being there, but if you could make it something 'more' that engages people at street level, it could bring a lot of people on-side.

[Peter Griffin]

I have no issue with the development and see it as an improvement over what is there. And I'm being completely honest about that - if I lived in Murray Hill, I'd support this development.

I live walking distance from Murray Hill, this would be a major improvement over what is there. Activating Plymouth St. is a fools errand since nothing else on that street jive with pedestrian use. This project creates a new storefront on Edgewood where it matters, and brings the property back into a tax-generating state with the storage facility.

Haters gonna hate and NIMBY'ers are never gonna want anything in their backyard. Amen

[thelakelander]

Activating Plymouth St. is a fools errand since nothing else on that street jive with pedestrian use.

I think what Plymouth is today and what it can or can't be in the future is another classic case of a community that needs a vision and some coordination with COJ in respect to modification of zoning policy to support the incremental implementation of that said vision. Currently, like downtown development, much of this stuff is reactionary and hodge podge in terms of implementation that incrementally leads to a unified vision of whatever people want the area to develop into.

As of now, both Plymouth and Edgewood are the only two streets with a CCG-1 zoning designation in Murray Hill. Same goes for the CGC land use designation in the neighborhood as well (excluding Cassat, Lenox and the intersection of Post and McDuff on the edges of the neighborhood). While most focus on Edgewood, from visibility perspective, Plymouth fronts Roosevelt, meaning it has visibility to much higher population (AADT 55,000 vs AADT 3,300 for Edgewood). In short, it is Murray Hill's gateway view from US 17 (where the majority access the neighborhood). Even though it looks a mess today, the street does have a 23,000 square foot retail center facing Roosevelt under the CGC designation that is currently disconnected from the Edgewood strip by the proposed storage facility site. How the building's frontage addresses Plymouth will either make or break the opportunity to really do something special with Plymouth and the high visibility asset it brings to Murray Hill's table.

As a community, Murray Hill needs to ask itself what type of commercial development does it want and what areas/key sites of the neighborhood offer up the best opportunities to align with that specific commercial site selection criteria. Plymouth doesn't have to be shit if you don't want it too. Even with storage as a primary use, there are still good and bad ways to address Plymouth that can result in a long term scene of activity or one with a long term dead zone.

[Steve]

Plymouth to me is ideal for a residential/office/etc use over retail. Clearly retail can thrive on Edgewood, and Plymouth, while sometimes forgotten about, has better visibility to more traffic because of Roosevelt.

Residential might be a challenge due to the train, but not impossible.

Agree wholeheartedly with the writer's point, particularly about requiring the retail building and retail/office/not storage on at least part of the first floor of the storage.

[ProjectMaximus]

This is my favorite article from Field. Great points and I hope enough people in the community can understand that 1) there's really no legal basis for opposing mini-storage and 2) there are ways where the mini-storage plan can be adapted into a homerun for this corridor.

Also, thanks for mentioning the new Larry's restaurant. I've often mentioned to people that I could have sworn it was supposed to be "coin laundry" and it went up in the blink of an eye, then got sold to Larry's instead. Now with the backstory it all makes sense.

[Adam White]

This is my favorite article from Field. Great points and I hope enough people in the community can understand that 1) there's really no legal basis for opposing mini-storage and 2) there are ways where the mini-storage plan can be adapted into a homerun for this corridor.

Also, thanks for mentioning the new Larry's restaurant. I've often mentioned to people that I could have sworn it was supposed to be "coin laundry" and it went up in the blink of an eye, then got sold to Larry's instead. Now with the backstory it all makes sense.

I don't think the 'legal basis' is a compelling argument. There may be no legal basis, but the objection isn't one based in law. It's about what type of neighbourhood the locals want - and in their mind, a mini storage place doesn't fit that view. I don't necessarily blame them - it's their right to try and make their voices heard. They might fail, but they obviously feel it is worth a shot.

I liked the article because it at least showed how there are options and how this can work for everyone (so I totally agree with your second point).

[Bill Hoff]

As I've said before, would be happy to have this project in my neighborhood. Positives outweigh the negatives by quite a bit, in my opinion.

One note - the referenced legal judgement in Springfield wasn't about affordable housing. It was about permanent supportive housing, which is a different animal.

A second note - kinda feel for Mr. Diebenow. Last year, he represented a party trying to build a Dollar General in Springfield on 8th Street. That was met with significant community opposition and our Councilman steered him to other possible locations outside the neighborhood. It appears he's fallen into the same situation with this project, though the Councilwoman in MH doesn't appear inclined to intervene.

[Tacachale]

This is my favorite article from Field. Great points and I hope enough people in the community can understand that 1) there's really no legal basis for opposing mini-storage and 2) there are ways where the mini-storage plan can be adapted into a homerun for this corridor.

Also, thanks for mentioning the new Larry's restaurant. I've often mentioned to people that I could have sworn it was supposed to be "coin laundry" and it went up in the blink of an eye, then got sold to Larry's instead. Now with the backstory it all makes sense.

I don't think the 'legal basis' is a compelling argument. There may be no legal basis, but the objection isn't one based in law. It's about what type of neighbourhood the locals want - and in their mind, a mini storage place doesn't fit that view. I don't necessarily blame them - it's their right to try and make their voices heard. They might fail, but they obviously feel it is worth a shot.

I liked the article because it at least showed how there are options and how this can work for everyone (so I totally agree with your second point).

I understand the complaint, but as the article says, if the argument doesn't have legal standing it's not going to change anything. Even if residents got the city to reject the project, it just sets them up for an appeals battle they couldn't possibly win. The two options for getting things to change are to change the zoning (which won't happen in time to stop this project) or to apply pressure to mitigate the negative effects of this project.

[Adam White]

This is my favorite article from Field. Great points and I hope enough people in the community can understand that 1) there's really no legal basis for opposing mini-storage and 2) there are ways where the mini-storage plan can be adapted into a homerun for this corridor.

Also, thanks for mentioning the new Larry's restaurant. I've often mentioned to people that I could have sworn it was supposed to be "coin laundry" and it went up in the blink of an eye, then got sold to Larry's instead. Now with the backstory it all makes sense.

I don't think the 'legal basis' is a compelling argument. There may be no legal basis, but the objection isn't one based in law. It's about what type of neighbourhood the locals want - and in their mind, a mini storage place doesn't fit that view. I don't necessarily blame them - it's their right to try and make their voices heard. They might fail, but they obviously feel it is worth a shot.

I liked the article because it at least showed how there are options and how this can work for everyone (so I totally agree with your second point).

I understand the complaint, but as the article says, if the argument doesn't have legal standing it's not going to change anything. Even if residents got the city to reject the project, it just sets them up for an appeals battle they couldn't possibly win. The two options for getting things to change are to change the zoning (which won't happen in time to stop this project) or to apply pressure to mitigate the negative effects of this project.

Or make a really, really big deal about it and see what happens. I'm not saying they should, but I understand why they might.

And as I was saying, you can talk about the law all you want, but the objections of the residents aren't based on the fact that they think the project is somehow unlawful.

[JeffreyS]

Larry's put up a giant "FU" sign on the main street of one of my favorite neighborhoods. Larry's can give up any hope of me setting foot in there and also I will not be going to any of it's other locations anymore.  I don't mind the giant apes, the stupid signs all over the windows I can look past but not the FU.  They could have put fired up with the FU stylized a bit or something if they felt they needed some raunchy thing to be relevant. No just a big literal FU to Murray Hill.  My kids and their friends talk about it.  Again this is not because of all the other horrible decorative choices they made it's essentially a sports bar I don't need it to elegant.  Hopefully they will take the sign down because it could be a decent addition to the area.

[Captain Zissou]

I went to El Jefe and Buchner's last night and as I was driving down Edgewood from Roosevelt, I thought that MH would be lucky to have this development if the recommended changes are made.  The area is improving, but it still has a long way to go.  It's not like somebody wants to put this in the San Marco Theatre or Sun Ray space.  Make it so that the Plymouth side has a chance at ground floor retail and make sure that they do the Edgewood tenant and you're good. It will definitely be a step up from what's there.

[pierre]

Larry's put up a giant "FU" sign on the main street of one of my favorite neighborhoods. Larry's can give up any hope of me setting foot in there and also I will not be going to any of it's other locations anymore.  I don't mind the giant apes, the stupid signs all over the windows I can look past but not the FU.  They could have put fired up with the FU stylized a bit or something if they felt they needed some raunchy thing to be relevant. No just a big literal FU to Murray Hill.  My kids and their friends talk about it.  Again this is not because of all the other horrible decorative choices they made it's essentially a sports bar I don't need it to elegant.  Hopefully they will take the sign down because it could be a decent addition to the area.

I was glad to see they finally moved that monstrosity on a trailer (NYC construction worker statue??) out of the closest parking spots to their door.

[Peter Griffin]

Larry's put up a giant "FU" sign on the main street of one of my favorite neighborhoods. Larry's can give up any hope of me setting foot in there and also I will not be going to any of it's other locations anymore.  I don't mind the giant apes, the stupid signs all over the windows I can look past but not the FU.  They could have put fired up with the FU stylized a bit or something if they felt they needed some raunchy thing to be relevant. No just a big literal FU to Murray Hill.  My kids and their friends talk about it.  Again this is not because of all the other horrible decorative choices they made it's essentially a sports bar I don't need it to elegant.  Hopefully they will take the sign down because it could be a decent addition to the area.

That is hands-down the lamest reason I've ever heard to boycott an establishment. The "FU" tee-hee play on words for "Fired-Up" got under your skin THAT BADLY?

[JeffreyS]

Larry's put up a giant "FU" sign on the main street of one of my favorite neighborhoods. Larry's can give up any hope of me setting foot in there and also I will not be going to any of it's other locations anymore.  I don't mind the giant apes, the stupid signs all over the windows I can look past but not the FU.  They could have put fired up with the FU stylized a bit or something if they felt they needed some raunchy thing to be relevant. No just a big literal FU to Murray Hill.  My kids and their friends talk about it.  Again this is not because of all the other horrible decorative choices they made it's essentially a sports bar I don't need it to elegant.  Hopefully they will take the sign down because it could be a decent addition to the area.

That is hands-down the lamest reason I've ever heard to boycott an establishment. The "FU" tee-hee play on words for "Fired-Up" got under your skin THAT BADLY?

To be clear I am not calling for a boycott I don't like something about it so I am not going there.  That said they put a giant FU on the front facing side not fired up with the letters a different color or something.  Expand your universe, have more experiences you can find something even more lame I bet.