Steady progress on W. LocustAs I was checking out the construction progress of the apartment building near Locust & Washington St., I got to thinking about a lot of the buildings on that stretch of Locust that have gone up in the last 5 or so years:
- The new Northwest Bank on Locust
- Next door to that is a new strip mall (the one with Hungry Hobo & Cartridge World)
- Directly behind these two buildings is apartment building construction (pictured)
- Directly across Locust from that is a rebuilt Taco Bell (much more attractive then the old one, I might add)
- Just West of there, at 5 points, there is a relatively "new" Walgreens and Osco (now CVS) - these probably have been there the longest of any of this "new" stuff
- On Division, just South of 5 points, there is a newer Quad City Bank & Trust building
- A few blocks South of that is the IMAX Theater
- Just a little further West down Locust is a relatively new Hy-Vee
- Finally, there is a Jimmy John's restaurant going up near Marquette and Locust
All of these things, with the exception of the Hy-Vee, are concentrated on or near Locust between Division and Marquette. It's a very middle-class neighborhood, certainly not a wealthy one. I'm not trying to pretend that this area is "booming" or anything. It's just seen nice, steady progress. And with the exception of the Putnam & IMAX, I think it was pretty much done completely without tax dollars (correct me if I'm wrong).
I believe this is the kind of steady progress that the city would like to see in similar areas they are studying along Rockingham, Brady, and even other parts of Locust. The odd thing is, I'm not exactly sure what has made this area successful while others have floundered. I believe the Northwest Davenport Business Association may have targeted this area for redevelopment, but beyond that I really can't explain why this area would have an advantage. Whatever they are doing, perhaps it could serve as a model for the others.
9 comments:
This development is a poorly planned. It sticks out like a sour thumb in that location. It blocks the sunlight of the surrounding porperties and looks funky. YOu are out of touch. The location is not middle class - there is not for profit low income transitional housing across the street and there is a bad rental across the street too.
Another example of developers not listening to the neighbors when they offered advice and critique. Money talks, common sense walks. To hell with the people whio have lived there for years and own property - screw them. The all mighty dollar has spoken.
One "bad rental" doesn't make an entire neighborhood "low income". I don't think the area is as poor as you think, or all those developments wouldn't have happened on their own.
For the specific issue of the apartment building, that lot fronts the bank drive-through. What should have gone there? A single-family home would have been a tough sell. It's an improvement over the overgrown lot that used to be there.
Also, the lot was zoned properly. The only reason it needed city approval was because it exceeds the height limit of 4 stories (I guess the roof counts as the 5th story??). The only negative thing I can say is that it is too close to the house to the East of it. In the other 3 directions they left more space, and it fronts two streets and the aforementioned bank lot.
That whole neighborhood is rough, from the people that live at the 'flat,' to the white house on the S/W corner owned by a slumlord, then the grey duplex is owned by the Sisters of Humility, and they harbor battered women, with their x's on the prowl looking for them. There is the same problems with Sisters of Humility properties and JLCS properties.
When I say "neighborhood", I'm talking about a much larger area than that stretch of Pleasant street. That stretch is the exception, not the rule (pretty much the rest of the surrounding area is single-family homes). If it is a rough area, then if anything, it makes the private investment there more impressive.
I am not aopposed to private investment there, but this buildin is way out of place in that area of town. It is not single family and it is too tall. I wish teh developer the city would have heard the people in that area when they offered those suggestions. It is too late now.
My intention wasn't for this to turn into a discussion about the one development on Pleasant St. The point was, that stretch of Locust has seen quite a bit of private development recently, ridding itself of some pretty bad eyesores. There are other parts of town that I'm sure would like to see similar developments, excluding the debated apartment building (i.e. the new banks, strip mall, etc.).
I used to live around there and it seems every time I'm around there something new pops up. I think some of it has to do with all of the development on W. Kimberly. The whole Davenport/Bettendorf area seems to be growing on the far east (53rd) and west and not doing much in the middle. So the west end of that is moving south a bit. I'm never in Bettendorf but I wonder if there's anything new directly south of 53rd on middle road, etc.
The other thing I've noticed is SAU is growing. Jimmy John's loves colleges and I'm betting SAU has a lot to do with the new Marquette/Locust location. That probably feeds the area a little, or at least helps it to recover from Marycrest's departure a few years ago.
Just my $0.02. It's nice to development in Davenport that isn't just near 53rd or downtown.
This is all urban revitalization tax exempt property.
This area is evolving. The best meat market in town remains at Locust and Marquette street.
My beef about the big development apartments is only that it look odd, the developer needed to do a better job at planning. But, hopefully it will do a lot to prevent that area from turning slum. The properties close by are going in that direction. It is private development and MARKET RATE. Here here. Finally, we have a developer not crying for low income loot at the expense of the neighborhood.
Post a Comment