http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/s ... enDocument



Just think of the traffic it will bring?



I'm all for keeping a small town a small town, that's up to them - but using traffic as your mantra? What does that mean, you have to wait for the stoplight to change twice to get through instead of once?



I'd be interested to know more about the space requirements for the development, multipliers, trip generators, etc. I figure there's more than enough vacant land within the city to build it properly.

Ironically, that tract of land is not even close to Columbia proper. Rather it sits in flood plain just east of the JB bridge. I don't understand what traffic it would generate within Columbia.



There's already a planned business park development in Dupo just north of this area.

^ Do you know how widespread the opposition to the primary airport was in the Columbia-Waterloo area per se?



I was always led to believe that petty Missouri politicians killed the plan.



I find it funny that local officials are trying so hard to pick and choose the kind of growth they want to attract, because Columbia and Waterloo are already on their way to becoming congested and anonymous exurbs anyway. And, while they're at it, they're talking about how they don't want to be like St. Charles and South County.



Hmmm...



I'd love to see them embrace New Urbanism and adopt a smart growth strategy, but the newer development I see there doesn't stray from the decades-old paradigm of low-rise suburbia. If they want the growth, they should start looking into developments like New Town. Otherwise, they can't have it both ways.

You can't stay a small town, while also growing and prospering at the same time, while sitting outside a major U.S. city. It's just not going to happen. Their little dream will hit come crashing down sooner or later.



What a huge mistake.



Hopefully they look into building this theme park in another Metro East location. Right now, there is a huge plan for a theme park and resort just 40 minutes south of Belleville. That one is moving forward.

Arch City wrote:
Maybe Edwardsville should go after it.

Why Edwardsville?

shadrach wrote:Put it next to the proposed MSL stadium in Collinsville.

Exactly what I was thinking.

I say put it in the city next to my proposed MLS stadium!!!

IKEA / MLS stadium LEGO LAND .. trust me Columbia would rejet them ALL as all will require incentives. It seems some believe 100% of nothing is better that 30% of a billion dollars ...

^ This is really unfortunate (and not to digress too much, but) as the traditional college towns are increasingly losing out to large metro areas. The great universities of the next century will almost exclusively be in our largest MSA's. This is due to fundraising. In general, universities receive less than half their private gifts from alumni. More and more, gifts come from foundations and institutions located in the same city as the university. This is why places like UNC-Charlotte, IUPUI, even UMSL are on the rise. Columbia and Mizzou are losing out in many ways by rejecting growth. But if that's their decision it's OK. I'm only suggesting that there are far reaching consequences.

Grover wrote:^ This is really unfortunate (and not to digress too much, but) as the traditional college towns are increasingly losing out to large metro areas. The great universities of the next century will almost exclusively be in our largest MSA's. This is due to fundraising. In general, universities receive less than half their private gifts from alumni. More and more, gifts come from foundations and institutions located in the same city as the university. This is why places like UNC-Charlotte, IUPUI, even UMSL are on the rise. Columbia and Mizzou are losing out in many ways by rejecting growth. But if that's their decision it's OK. I'm only suggesting that there are far reaching consequences.

I think we are talking about Columbia, IL, but a valid point none the less.

Grover wrote:^ This is really unfortunate (and not to digress too much, but) as the traditional college towns are increasingly losing out to large metro areas. The great universities of the next century will almost exclusively be in our largest MSA's. This is due to fundraising. In general, universities receive less than half their private gifts from alumni. More and more, gifts come from foundations and institutions located in the same city as the university. This is why places like UNC-Charlotte, IUPUI, even UMSL are on the rise. Columbia and Mizzou are losing out in many ways by rejecting growth. But if that's their decision it's OK. I'm only suggesting that there are far reaching consequences.

Grover, it was Columbia, IL, that rejected Legoland, not Columbia, MO. I don't think Legoland has requested to build anywhere in Missouri yet except for Lees Summit, MO.

ricke002 wrote:

Grover wrote:^ This is really unfortunate (and not to digress too much, but) as the traditional college towns are increasingly losing out to large metro areas. The great universities of the next century will almost exclusively be in our largest MSA's. This is due to fundraising. In general, universities receive less than half their private gifts from alumni. More and more, gifts come from foundations and institutions located in the same city as the university. This is why places like UNC-Charlotte, IUPUI, even UMSL are on the rise. Columbia and Mizzou are losing out in many ways by rejecting growth. But if that's their decision it's OK. I'm only suggesting that there are far reaching consequences.

I think we are talking about Columbia, IL, but a valid point none the less.

And Columbia, Mo. isn't necessarily rejecting growth. I don't have the stats in front of me, but I believe it's one of Missouri's fastest-growing cities.

Da#n - I'm off my game . . . uh, shame on Columbia, Illinois

Grover it's an honest mistake .. Columbia is one the most popular city names in the US .. and most times people in St. Louis ass/u/me you're talking about Missouri .. Not Illinois when you mention the name .. I lived in columbia ILLLINOIS for 11 years so i can attest to this fact..

Just wanted to chime in on a little update... As a former resident of Columbia and a current business owner in Columbia I chose to attend a info meeting tonight for a group that is pro Columbia crossings...



First off, Columbia is not saying no to Lego land/gj grewe per se, it is being thwarted by a few aldermen who are going to end up causing a lot of trouble with this development. Here are some key points that I wanted to share...





* The 3 aldermen in question are spreading rumors and lies to the older public of Columbia in attempt to stop support. For example they refer to the area as "Mayberry” and are leading the residents to believe that if we do not allow the TIF that Columbia will stay small and "Mayberry esque".



* The truth is that if the TIF is not allowed, then Columbia will be sued because they will be in breach of contract.... Regardless of the outcome the residents who own the land that GJ grew has options on can de-annex and join neighboring DUPO, which will then combine the development with Discovery Business Park. So in essence, this development is coming either way, it comes down to who gets the revenue for schools, fire, PD etc. (est. 600,000$yr)



* The development has been said to be a Lego land and a clone of Gravois bluffs.... This is not true, just as Columbia voted for the 75% brick on residential they are just as upscale in the requirements for mixed use... The development stated tonight will be a combo between Chesterfield (i64) and Winghaven if Columbia gets it. If we lose out to Dupo all contracts are off and dupo/st. clair co. gets to decide zoning and composition.... Nothing against Dupo but their standards for zoning/curb appeal are not on par with Columbia, so we could end up with some pretty un attractive development down there.





Anyway as any business owner can see, this development would be great for Columbia and I hope we change some minds and get our aldermen’s heads out of their Asses....

The development stated tonight will be a combo between Chesterfield (i64) and Winghaven if Columbia gets it. If we lose out to Dupo all contracts are off and dupo/st. clair co. gets to decide zoning and composition.... Nothing against Dupo but their standards for zoning/curb appeal are not on par with Columbia, so we could end up with some pretty un attractive development down there.

Are you saying that Dupo will approve something worse than Chesterfield and Winghaven!?!?!

If K.C. can get a Schlitterbahn, surely Columbia can get a Legoland.