^ I was gonna mention something about the Water Division in my original comment...that's one of the larger sites around there and I imagine Green Street would find a willing partner in the city for a future redevelopment. Hopefully those older plans Billiken shared have changed a bit (less parking and more residential) but I would agree that Green Street should have lots for us to look forward to in the future.
- 3,762
To be fair, I don't think anyone made that argument. The concern—at least mine—is not that the area is forlorn (as beer city aptly described it) but that it is full of functioning industrial uses. It's not a mostly-empty canvass like Steelcote or near North Broadway. So the development is going to be very gradual and tentative, and I just don't see it being a hospitable place to live during that long process.sc4mayor wrote: ↑Dec 03, 2020Am I the only one that thinks the argument that "there just isn't anything along McRee upon which to build, or adjacent neighborhoods to connect..." is maybe a little ridiculous?
It would be ideal if they could start with the recycling plant and extend west across Vandeventer rather than plopping apartments in the middle but I understand they're working with what they've got.
- 99
Agreed. In fact, their idea to close McRee at Vandeventer (and build a gas station) would actively hurt any potential connection to the activity on Tower Grove Ave.sc4mayor wrote: ↑Dec 03, 2020Hopefully those older plans Billiken shared have changed a bit (less parking and more residential) but I would agree that Green Street should have lots for us to look forward to in the future.
Last time I was in the area, I noticed "for sale" signs on the vacant lot along Vandeventer between McRee and Lafayette. Anyone know if those lots are still up for sale?
Just... gonna ... leave this right here. For any other dreamers.
![]()
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Closing McCree at Vandeventer? Surely they couldn't be serious about that?
- 2,051
Looking at those aerial photos its pretty obvious there's a lot of wasted acreage in that entire area... which would hopefully mean that there's some flexibility for prospective investments to payoff for said developers... which lends to the idea that "a bigger vision" could be warranted.
- 991
It was theoretical "what could be" done back in 2012 before a lot of the recent investment occurred. Don't put much stock into it.framer wrote: ↑Dec 03, 2020Closing McCree at Vandeventer? Surely they couldn't be serious about that?
I still think that a MetroLink route this way would be beneficial to the Southside. Throw in North-South and extend the Blue Line to Bayless and you got a pretty good amount of rail connectivity down here.addxb2 wrote: ↑Dec 03, 2020Just... gonna ... leave this right here. For any other dreamers.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
- 6,117
The thing is that it's probably a much more promising location in the near term than Steelcote or North Broadway. And light industrial can move. We have tons of sites that will work equally well for a city utility or a plumbing wholesaler. But the number of sites with large parcels near hot residential neighborhoods is a little more limited. That site, as industrial as it is right now, is almost exactly halfway between Tower Grove and Forest Park as the crow flies. It's just over a mile on foot to either one. It's sandwiched between the Grove, the Hill, and the Garden. You could not find a more promising site in this town if you tried. I don't think this will be a long and slow redevelopment process. I think this one will happen fast. It will connect three of the hottest neighborhoods in the city. If it weren't sandwiched between the railroad tracks and the highway this would have been done years ago. The money should be there to give the industry the incentives required to relocate, so even that shouldn't be a loss.urban_dilettante wrote: ↑Dec 03, 2020The concern—at least mine—is not that the area is forlorn (as beer city aptly described it) but that it is full of functioning industrial uses. It's not a mostly-empty canvass like Steelcote or near North Broadway. So the development is going to be very gradual and tentative, and I just don't see it being a hospitable place to live during that long process.
It would be ideal if they could start with the recycling plant and extend west across Vandeventer rather than plopping apartments in the middle but I understand they're working with what they've got.
I took that partial quote verbatim from another user on the previous page...urban_dilettante wrote: ↑Dec 03, 2020To be fair, I don't think anyone made that argument. The concern—at least mine—is not that the area is forlorn (as beer city aptly described it) but that it is full of functioning industrial uses. It's not a mostly-empty canvass like Steelcote or near North Broadway. So the development is going to be very gradual and tentative, and I just don't see it being a hospitable place to live during that long process.sc4mayor wrote: ↑Dec 03, 2020Am I the only one that thinks the argument that "there just isn't anything along McRee upon which to build, or adjacent neighborhoods to connect..." is maybe a little ridiculous?
It would be ideal if they could start with the recycling plant and extend west across Vandeventer rather than plopping apartments in the middle but I understand they're working with what they've got.
Symphonicpoet, you hit the nail right on the head.
- 6,117
^Given all that, I suppose there's a good argument that this project of all projects shouldn't really need incentives. That said, incentives are how we roll around here. They may be how everyone rolls everywhere now, sadly.
Makes so much sense it hurts. Perhaps with an additional station at Rutger/Vista to better serve the medical center.addxb2 wrote: ↑Dec 03, 2020Just... gonna ... leave this right here. For any other dreamers.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Please don't clutter up another thread with Metrolink. There's already a bunch of threads for that.
You know many Hill residents would be a big "***** no" to that.
Renderings for this project should come early next year. Supposedly this will be one of the first projects designed for Green Street by HDA after their merger/buyout.
^ Honestly HDA gives me a little bit of pause. I don't find any of their previous work to be all that great, especially 212. Hopefully with the merger the design department will improve a bit.
The project I'm hinting at in Downtown is being designed by them. I think it's an improvement over what we have previously seen.sc4mayor wrote: ↑Dec 05, 2020^ Honestly HDA gives me a little bit of pause. I don't find any of their previous work to be all that great, especially 212. Hopefully with the merger the design department will improve a bit.
But in HDA's defense, it's not so much that their work is "cheap", it's just cost effective based on what the developer wants. So while I know they are capable of the highest quality project imaginable, their clients ultimately determine how "cheap" something ends up being. The same applies to other firms like Trivers, Arcturis, and even HOK. If a developer has a set budget, the architects have to work with that and sometimes the result ends up being cheap.
Now, with HDA being part of Green Street now, everything is integrated from architectural to development to builder services. So everything is kept internal which could lead to higher quality projects. We will see though. I do not expect the McRee building to be hugely urban in style (surely there will be a setback). But it won't be like Terra or Chroma either.
I didn't say they were cheap, just that I wasn't super impressed with their previous work. Either way, you make an excellent point. At the end of the day they are designing for their client. And yes I expect things to be better with Green Street and HDA integrated now.But in HDA's defense, it's not so much that their work is "cheap", it's just cost effective based on what the developer wants. So while I know they are capable of the highest quality project imaginable, their clients ultimately determine how "cheap" something ends up being. The same applies to other firms like Trivers, Arcturis, and even HOK. If a developer has a set budget, the architects have to work with that and sometimes the result ends up being cheap.
I don't know how urban this will be, but I don't think it will have a huge setback. If they have further plans for McRee they may try to go somewhat urban.
I'm not saying that you said they're cheap, I'm just making a point since comments like that were made on different threads here in the past.sc4mayor wrote: ↑Dec 05, 2020I didn't say they were cheap, just that I wasn't super impressed with their previous work. Either way, you make an excellent point. At the end of the day they are designing for their client. And yes I expect things to be better with Green Street and HDA integrated now.
I don't know how urban this will be, but I don't think it will have a huge setback. If they have further plans for McRee they may try to go somewhat urban.
I mean, they could go urban here but initially I have the feeling we won't. We will see soon enough though. I'm expecting a building of 4 or 5 floors here.
Yes, that's exactly what they are doing.framer wrote: ↑Dec 03, 2020They're clearly building for the long term. Also, we don't know what other parcels in the area they may already have options on.
At some point, they got the early heads up on a large chunk of really cheap industrial land. It was cheap, precisely because it's cut off from everything desirable and surrounded by a complex of nasty warehouses, scrapyards, two railroads, I-44, and the Kingshighway viaduct.
Then, they quietly get cheap options on all the surrounding properties through some anonymous LLC before anyone is the wiser. They grease up the pols to support rezoning and rebuilding all new infrastructure, where it otherwise wasn't needed. All of this is so the developer can build the next-new-mega-mixed-use-extravaganza! on the sly, with an huge helping of TIF, TDD, CID, BTC, NMTC, IRB alphabet soup. When they release the Phase 2 and 3 plans to extort for incentives, they will exclaim, "Think of all the traffic and pedestrians! Where are people gonna walk? Where they gonna park?"
And meanwhile, they get to build a large, multi-phase, mixed-use project for far less than it would have cost them elsewhere; all of their surrounding properties increase 10x in value; and all of the existing, real neighborhoods in the central part of the city, struggling to build up density, see that many fewer residents, customers, retail tenants, workers, etc...
That looks suspiciously like a big box retail center with a couple of large anchors, fast-casual restaurant outparcels, and a few retail/office strip mall buildings - all floating on a sea of asphalt with a bit of green space thrown in as an afterthought...
^ It actually looks like a nearly 9 year old conceptual plan by UIC for a "what should be" article on NextSTL. Not sure Green Street is going to be using that as their guide...
Also, are you saying the Grove, Botanical Heights, Southwest Garden, Shaw and the Hill aren't "existing, real neighborhoods"? They all seem like pretty dense places that are seeing lots of development to me...and this area is sandwiched right in the center of all of them. No one is arguing the connections aren't great right now, unless you're too lazy to walk or bike 2,000 feet to Tower Grove Avenue, where there will soon be a protected cycle track going from the park to Cortex. Once that's done I feel like that would be a pretty easy connection to points north and south. Further connections can be added and improved as time goes on and more development is announced.
Jeez, a company is moving their HQ from Clayton to the City and building a mixed used apartment/office building to boot and all you can think about is how they're going to "extort" the city for incentives for future phases that haven't even been hinted at? I mean, I'm not surprised by the attitude I guess. The cynicism and negativity from some users here is starting to become more of a feature than a bug...
Also, are you saying the Grove, Botanical Heights, Southwest Garden, Shaw and the Hill aren't "existing, real neighborhoods"? They all seem like pretty dense places that are seeing lots of development to me...and this area is sandwiched right in the center of all of them. No one is arguing the connections aren't great right now, unless you're too lazy to walk or bike 2,000 feet to Tower Grove Avenue, where there will soon be a protected cycle track going from the park to Cortex. Once that's done I feel like that would be a pretty easy connection to points north and south. Further connections can be added and improved as time goes on and more development is announced.
Jeez, a company is moving their HQ from Clayton to the City and building a mixed used apartment/office building to boot and all you can think about is how they're going to "extort" the city for incentives for future phases that haven't even been hinted at? I mean, I'm not surprised by the attitude I guess. The cynicism and negativity from some users here is starting to become more of a feature than a bug...
Apologies for the derailing the thread, but do you have more info/sources on this?sc4mayor wrote: ↑Dec 08, 2020unless you're too lazy to walk or bike 2,000 feet to Tower Grove Avenue, where there will soon be a protected cycle track going from the park to Cortex.