urbanSTL

I love this design. It's exactly what would be ideal for this area. Some "historic" style neighborhoods along with some ultra modern would be a good mix. I also like the wood-sided infill- as mentioned above. Obviously wood doesn't follow historic guidelines, unless you go back pre 1860's in St. Louis, but it's much cheaper than brick. I can't stand brick front's and EFIS walls everywhere else..
Let's also make the vast majority of these new houses market rate, NOT "mixed income" or recreate Laclede Town as someone else said. That is NOT the solution to redevelop these neighborhoods. We don't need the entire northside to be run by McCormack Baron. While they do some great projects, I think we need more middle to upper middle income families to move into this area of the city. Downtown doesn't need to be completely encircled by today's projects. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but it's true.

gone corporate wrote:I have one question: How much do you think it would cost to make this a reality?
For discussion's sake, let's take away land acquisition costs.

Open question; if anyone has a qualified guesstimate, fire away. Thanks

Since no one took a shot, here's my guess: a build out of 1 million sq ft with construction costs of $175 per sq ft. So a total of $175 million.

I think im probably low on the total number of sq ft (build out), but I figure I'd balance it out by being high on the construction costs.

Perhaps this new development could have its own school(s) for only the residents of this, what I suggested to be, a "market rate" development. That way, young families will be encouraged to move here and actually put their kids in a city school, even though it would only be for this "district".

stlien wrote:

gone corporate wrote:I have one question: How much do you think it would cost to make this a reality?
For discussion's sake, let's take away land acquisition costs.

Open question; if anyone has a qualified guesstimate, fire away. Thanks

Since no one took a shot, here's my guess: a build out of 1 million sq ft with construction costs of $175 per sq ft. So a total of $175 million.

I think im probably low on the total number of sq ft (build out), but I figure I'd balance it out by being high on the construction costs.

You have to add at least $15 to $25 million to the price tag for demo/cleanup costs alone ($12.3 million for Carondolet Coke site) - those building foundations complete with building rubble are still buried there like a mummy in a tomb (see Pruitt-Igoe building footprints):

http://cityarchpruittigoe.wordpress.com/2011/01/18/160/

And then another $20 - $30 million in infrastructure costs (water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, gas, telephone, fiber optic, electric, streets (curb, gutter, roadway pavement, sidewalks, street trees, signage), etc. For reference Ballpark Village is using $17 million in TIF (presuming every dollar goes to infrastructure improvements - FYI, that's what TIF was designed to be used for).

Reallistically, I think the timeline of development is several decades out on the optimistic side with or without McKee getting a favorable ruling. Being optimistic, I think you got two large swaths of development that will most likely happen first in the next decade.

1) Mixed Use development of the Bottleworks, I think this is where capital will be willing to venture first with a large scale residential development with its access to downtown being near north side and easy access to I-70/new Mississippi River Bridge. Throw in the possibility of a rebuild Edwards Dome, Arch Grounds Improvements and continued commercial success on the east end of Wash Ave.

2) 22nd Street Development. Commercial Development/Tenants will pick this area along with Bottleworks long before Pruitt site with its freeway/traffic counts/downtown employees and transit access. Even then, you have a lot lot of developable space to fill out if the 22nd street interchange is replaced and the old parkway replaced with a street grid. It could easily take over a decade to fill even half the commercial space proposed.

Still on the believe that pursuing urban argiculture/winery is the best short term plan considering the resources available in St Louis from Botanical Garden to Dansforth Center and so on while smaller, organic, block by block development happens around it. Otherwise, you might get a large scale housing project most likely subsidized that sucks up any development nearby

Alex Ihnen wrote:^ Yep, we're talking 150yo wooden sewers. This is why TIF was invented.

Not quite that old, and mostly brick, but you got the right idea.

actually, Alex is right, lots of wooden sewers in the oldest sections of the city pre-date the brick sewers!

I know that's true, but in my experience most of the McKee area is brick. That is just in my experience, so I could be wrong for some areas. Regardless of the construction materials, the sewers are old and things like sewers are exactly what TIF money is meant for.

I would be very interested to see a map of the whole city that details the materials sewers are made out of. How things have changed over time with different development patterns and technologies.