Steve Patterson reports at Urban Review St. Louis that there was a meeting on Paul McKee's Northside plans tonight.
link: http://www.urbanreviewstl.com/?p=6058
link: http://www.urbanreviewstl.com/?p=6058
Earlier some people said that they have seen the plans for Blairmont. Anyone ready to leak it yet? Whats the big deal?
I don't know if private is the correct term, but there was a meeting tonight for residents of the 5th and 19th Wards. Paul McKee's plans will be publicly released in a few weeks when a Board Bill is introduced to start the DALATC process.
Media is blocked out - including Steve Patterson!
Post is on it: http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/buildi ... -just-yet/
Post is on it: http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/buildi ... -just-yet/
- 2,386
So what is Blairmont? I remember something about a golf-course? Maybe not? Anything?
Here is your primer- http://www.ecoabsence.org/blairmont. It is distinct, but in a way connected with the golf course plan of a decade ago.
Several contributors to this forum where in attendance, and I would have been myself if I didn't have some wrapping up of my capstone to do.
Several contributors to this forum where in attendance, and I would have been myself if I didn't have some wrapping up of my capstone to do.
- 396
An update:
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/s ... enDocument
Residents get briefing on developer's long-awaited plan
BY Tim Logan
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
05/12/2009
ST. LOUIS — Developer Paul McKee has begun talking about his long-awaited plans for hundreds of properties his companies have bought in north St. Louis in recent years.
But not with the public just yet.
Two north city aldermen held a meeting Monday night for residents of neighborhoods where McKee has been buying up property, to hear details and provide input on his so-called "Blairmont" redevelopment plan. But the meeting was closed to the public, and several reporters were barred from entering.
Some who left the meeting said a broad development proposal was presented. They said the plan was short on details but called for residential and commercial development as part of a 15-year plan.
McKee himself has said little about his plans, generating more suspicion from critics. He was not present Monday night.
According to a timeline shown at the meeting, McKee could put his financial plan to the city later this month.
"I'm very intrigued by the plan. If it could be pulled off, it would add to the dynamic of the area," said Michael Allen, assistant director of the Landmarks Association, who also said many questions remain unanswered.
"It's broad brush strokes and short on details," he said.
Despite the potential promise of the proposal, Allen said he was concerned that for a plan that could affect the entire city, it might be moving too fast.
See the rest at STLtoday.com
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/s ... enDocument
Residents get briefing on developer's long-awaited plan
BY Tim Logan
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
05/12/2009
ST. LOUIS — Developer Paul McKee has begun talking about his long-awaited plans for hundreds of properties his companies have bought in north St. Louis in recent years.
But not with the public just yet.
Two north city aldermen held a meeting Monday night for residents of neighborhoods where McKee has been buying up property, to hear details and provide input on his so-called "Blairmont" redevelopment plan. But the meeting was closed to the public, and several reporters were barred from entering.
Some who left the meeting said a broad development proposal was presented. They said the plan was short on details but called for residential and commercial development as part of a 15-year plan.
McKee himself has said little about his plans, generating more suspicion from critics. He was not present Monday night.
According to a timeline shown at the meeting, McKee could put his financial plan to the city later this month.
"I'm very intrigued by the plan. If it could be pulled off, it would add to the dynamic of the area," said Michael Allen, assistant director of the Landmarks Association, who also said many questions remain unanswered.
"It's broad brush strokes and short on details," he said.
Despite the potential promise of the proposal, Allen said he was concerned that for a plan that could affect the entire city, it might be moving too fast.
See the rest at STLtoday.com
=D> I have to be somewhat excited that something is being discussed with the Blairmont properties. This has the potential to really transform a wide area of the northside. I don't know much about Paul McKee but I like to think that has a master plan for all of these properties; because now I can't see how this venture has benefited him in any way.
For those who haven't seen the map in a while; an amazing amount of properties.
http://www.eco-absence.org/blairmont/map.htm
For those who haven't seen the map in a while; an amazing amount of properties.
http://www.eco-absence.org/blairmont/map.htm
Grover's blog said something about historic preservation and infill. Also something about a light rail component (with bikepaths?). Could Paul McKee's plan involve the North-South Metrolink expansion?
Grover would you like to comment on this?
There has been cases of public-private partnerships to build transit and infrastructure. If he has a legitimate redevelop plan, why not give him the $400 million TIF. I would rather a TIF go to a redevelopment of an existing urban area, than a pseudo-new urbanist development in a flood plain.
Grover would you like to comment on this?
There has been cases of public-private partnerships to build transit and infrastructure. If he has a legitimate redevelop plan, why not give him the $400 million TIF. I would rather a TIF go to a redevelopment of an existing urban area, than a pseudo-new urbanist development in a flood plain.
You don't give a $400 million TIF (the rumored amount) for a development project that has a broad idea, but no specifics. This plan has the potential to work and be fairly urban,but we risk giving away all of our bargaining chips up front. This is a project that has a high bust potential, and at this point, no other financing besides government subsidies.
- 11K
goat314 wrote:Grover's blog said something about historic preservation and infill. Also something about a light rail component (with bikepaths?). Could Paul McKee's plan involve the North-South Metrolink expansion?
Grover would you like to comment on this?
There has been cases of public-private partnerships to build transit and infrastructure. If he has a legitimate redevelop plan, why not give him the $400 million TIF. I would rather a TIF go to a redevelopment of an existing urban area, than a pseudo-new urbanist development in a flood plain.
Here's a bit more: http://stlurbanworkshop.blogspot.com/20 ... an-ii.html
I think there's a serious problem with granting a TIF this large based mostly on a few presentations. As I understand it there are no builders lined up, no financing, etc. There are many, many federal and state subsidies that need to be granted, etc. That said, it appears to be a correct vision for urban renewal. And the revitalization of the north side needs to start with the right vision. IMO - there's enough property not owned by McEagle to allow other smaller rehabbers/developers participate in this renewal. We should demand that individuals and small companies receive the same credits/abatements as McEagle. This would lead to a much better project and one that could develop a bit more organic fashion as needs/markets change.
^ I agree.....seems like the plan for light rail would probably be like modern street car. I wish the city would get on the modern streetcar bandwagon like Portland.
- 479
A large TIF would be bad press for a city government that might have to furlough employees.
A large TIF would be bad press for a city government that might have to furlough employees.
And the visible results of decades of private disinvestment in north St. Louis are good press? Really.
^^^ Not if it creates over 22,000 permanent jobs and almost 50,000 temporary construction jobs. I would like to think of that as a stimulus. We are not talking about a shopping center, we are talking about rebuilding a large fraction of the city.
^Pie in the sky projections. If it does, great, but I want to see the data that is based on, and companies signed to leases first.
- 8,912
Who's on Mckee's team? Consultants, Planners, Architects etc
Pie in the sky projections. If it does, great, but I want to see the data that is based on, and companies signed to leases first.
Just reviewed your circa 2004-2005 posts about the Chouteau Lake District.
Agreed, though.
Civitas has been doing the planning. Besides in house employees, I am not sure otherwise.
- 11K
publiceye wrote:Pie in the sky projections. If it does, great, but I want to see the data that is based on, and companies signed to leases first.
Just reviewed your circa 2004-2005 posts about the Chouteau Lake District.
Agreed, though.
I like the "show me" attitude, but to a degree we have to concede that a project like this can't be plotted out parcel by parcel or be too defined. A number of us have said that the best thing is for there to be a template for success. In a real sense, a project this big cannot be presented as a concluded deal. McKee would need hundreds and hundreds of millions already committed. I'm interested in learning more about whether individuals and smaller rehabbers/developers will have an opportunity to be part of this process. If McKee puts some skin in the game, provides a vision and then seeks a collaborate approach it's great.
one way to ensure success would be to allow this new development to have it's own school for the residents. forget people moving in and depending on the city schools.
I can't wait to see what this looks like. I'd love to see both a replication of historic structures as well as very modern ones mixed in. As much as I kind of hate to admit it, i'd settle for a New Town on steroids in this area, as long as they save as much of the existing housing as possible. oh, and i REALLY hope they try to rebuild former retail corridors. MLK, Grand, Tucker, etc.
I can't wait to see what this looks like. I'd love to see both a replication of historic structures as well as very modern ones mixed in. As much as I kind of hate to admit it, i'd settle for a New Town on steroids in this area, as long as they save as much of the existing housing as possible. oh, and i REALLY hope they try to rebuild former retail corridors. MLK, Grand, Tucker, etc.
JCity wrote:one way to ensure success would be to allow this new development to have it's own school for the residents. forget people moving in and depending on the city schools.
I can't wait to see what this looks like. I'd love to see both a replication of historic structures as well as very modern ones mixed in. As much as I kind of hate to admit it, i'd settle for a New Town on steroids in this area, as long as they save as much of the existing housing as possible. oh, and i REALLY hope they try to rebuild former retail corridors. MLK, Grand, Tucker, etc.
I expect something very similar to New Town (maybe a mix of vinyl and brick houses), but I know it will be a higher standard than most would expect. I mean come on guys.....hes asking for almost half a BILLION dollars in TIFs (which I think he will receive) and that doesn't even include the money from the state tax credit (that he personally put together) and possible federal funds like HUD......Private funds also!
I'm excited about what I've heard about the plan. Especially the light rail expansion. I would like to see a public-private partnership with McKee, so we can finally make the N-S line a reality.