From the first time I heard that Menards wanted to move to the Alta-Vista site, I wondered how that could possibly be enough room, especially considering their reason was "to expand." The weather tonight is not ideal for walking the site as Alderman Meyer suggested in the previous thread, though that sounds like a good idea if the property owners consent. Tonight though, I decided to compare the sites from space, using
Google Maps. I was definitely shocked to see how much bigger the new site is than their current location, although I'm not sure how much of this area is actually owned by the nursery, where the moved frontage road will be, building orientation, etc. Here are the raw pictures, with my estimate of the areas involved highlighted in red.
Current Menards area (with clouds, unfortunately)
Proposed new Menards area
Make sure to note from the slider on the left that these are the exact same scale, and I'm not trying to fool with anyone. I don't have a lot of opinion on either side of this issue. Businesses wanting to expand is generally good, but I personally also like Menards' current store and don't know what more they need. I'm just trying to get information out there, especially if other people have the same misconceptions about the 65th Street area that I did.
My biggest concern is what happens with the current store, as I can't image that building being useful for anything besides a Menards. How many other uses need a lumberyard and a glass elevator?
Proposed new Menards area
Make sure to note from the slider on the left that these are the exact same scale, and I'm not trying to fool with anyone. I don't have a lot of opinion on either side of this issue. Businesses wanting to expand is generally good, but I personally also like Menards' current store and don't know what more they need. I'm just trying to get information out there, especially if other people have the same misconceptions about the 65th Street area that I did.
49 comments:
Nice photos. That does a good job of showing just how much larger the parcel really is, and why the'd rather be there. As far as I'm concerned, the neighboord is already smack in the middle of a major commercial district, and they ahd to know this was coming. They should take solice that any greenspacing is being done at all. It sucks, and I wouldn't be thrilled about it either, but I can't imaagine they didn't see this coming sooner or later.
I have to laugh when I see that the neighbors are worried about their property values. Have you been out there? They could improve their values by cleaning the place up!! The area is just a step up from a mobil home park! I saw only one house that looks like they have spent any amount of money on their place.
I think they just see a "cash cow" (Menards)coming into the area and they think Menards should buy them out for top dollar.
Not to change the subject, but, QCI, do you know anything of another movie being filmed in Davenport.
There is a film crew shooting a scene on Western Avenue between 3rd and 4th street. There are two police cars blocking off both ends of the street. There are two Model A's in the middle of the street with film equipment being setup.
11:19 PM, Read the paper!
http://www.qctimes.com/articles/2007/12/08/news/local/doc475a23814d66b907420347.txt
http://www.qctimes.com/articles/2007/
12/08/news/local/
doc475a23814d66b907420347.txt
12:25,
The story is dated Saturday. It wasn't there when I looked earlier dumb-ass.
I have not seen the conditions of the properties out there, but I just could be that the people there had a little slice of peace, of heaven in thier own eyes. Peace and quiet. They sit on valuable land - not necessarily in valuable houses.People get mad about the process too. Yes - they could have anticipated something there, but a huge Walmart like store - come on. No one would want that next to them. It is just like large low income rentals, people can see the writing on the wall. Perception is everything. These people won't get the right value of the homes now- they just won't. it isn't fair.
So you favor a system where real estate values aren't allowed to decrease? Millions of homes around the country are worth less than a year ago, and it wasn't their owners faults either. Owning a home isn't a guarantee of the status quo surrounding it for the rest of your life.
Whenever the city wants to build a park, Keith seems to be against it. Whenever a development comes along that Keith doesn't want, he feels the land should be made into a park. Try supporting Centennial, Sunderbruch, and Prairie Heights parks...
QCI
Get off your rear, put on your coat and walk around the property with the evergreen trees. Pretty please.
Keith
To 12/08/2007 1:13 AM,
My Bad, sorry about that, Jerk Off!
Hey I am 9:31 and I am not Keith you nut. Keith isn't the only bright one in this town.
I have a real problem with something QCI - since Keith lost, you have been such a jerk to him. I simply is rude.
Its more like, since he lost he decided to start insulting everyone, so why hold back against him? What about my points is untrue?
I'm with QCI on this one. That's a classic Keith move. And yes, he does deserve to be spoken to like that, because the man is nuts. Anyone who preaches city fiscal conservatism, and turns around and sues the city, is obviously either stupid, or self-centered. Either way, he deserves to be called out for it.
Read the lawsuit, 9:31 and identify yourself.That is the least you can do.
4:00 Your comments "The area is just a step up from a mobil home park!" are an insult to all the decent people in Davenport.
Just because this is a working class neighborhood, not Davenport Sixth Ward Heights, doesn't mean the neighbors should be ignored by the City
Keith
Keith:
Post the lawsuit for all to read.
Suing the city, for whatever reason, is counter to the fiscal conservatism you have preached in the past. Who's money is the city going to spend to defend the suit besides the taxpayers? Let's face it, you got caught with your pants down and your suing the city is your way of trying to shift the blame.
As far as Menard's new site is concerned, you were the lone vote against. You lost, get over it and move on. You will not change any minds with your current plea to create a park out of what is best suited for commercial development.
Meyer:
What is your problem with the decent, hard working people of the sixth ward?
Oh come on, didn't you know that everyone in the 6th ward is a top hat-wearing, caviar-eating, cigar-smoking robber baron planning on the next way to trick Davenport residents?
When people stereotype the 3rd ward, people (including me) get all upset, but apparently its ok when its other wards.
Word is Sixth Ward will go out with an Administrative bang. Stay tuned.
Keith
Oh no, another pending investigation at city hall that is bound to uncover nefarious dealings. This coming from an inside source certainly lends credibility and foreshadows a complete unraveling of the fabric of the sixth ward.
If we "stay tuned" we will find out what the investigation reveals and our inside source, departing alderman Mayer, will surely be vindicated, just like all of his other "stay tuned" alerts promise.
Thank you alderman Meyer.
This town is a mess, and usually when something is a mess it is because the folks incharge are the problem. Because they have the power. Go to the source to find out what happens in this town. The blue collar folks are not making the decisions that's for certain.
Yeah, Meyer is pretty good with that stay tuned innuendo crap.
I like Keith - he means well. We are the fools. You gotta admit - things aren't exactly on the up and up in Davenport. See who breaks campaign promises next. Keep and eye on Daveport Promise.There are a few alderman who are coming in that during the campaign said they would not vote to use the 1% sales tax a funding source.
Keith means well?
Who do you think the fools are if we believe that? He is self serving, nothing more.
No, I don't believe that. I still believe he's trying to do what he thinks is best for Davenport. I just believe he's about 90% wrong on what it takes to help the city.
I think that the only aldermen that jumped to the negative on the Davenport Promise, were the same ones that have been negative on everything. I don't believe any of the new aldermen said they wouldn't support the Promise. It isn't up to the alderman, it is up to the citizens of Davenport.
No - Frink and Meeker both said that they would support Promise - but NOT with the 1% sales tax. I heard them both and many others did aswell. I guess we shall see. I am guessing the same crowd that elected them will have them vote for it using tax dollars. Typical politcs here in DAV. Say anything to be elected.
Meyer has a conviction of what is good for Davenport based on his view of right and wrong. He disagrees with others views 90% of the time and is unwilling to be moved. It's an I am right, you are wrong and I can prove it, mind set that is his justification and that is self serving.
I believe you are mistaken in the statements of Frink and Meeker. Go back and recheck. I didn't hear them say that at all. I think they wanted to look at the plan closer, before they committee to anything. That is generally the way responsibile aldermen would want to preceed. we have a chance to start fresh with new aldermen, please don't start the negativity before they are already in office. I think it is time for all of us to consider our community values and what we want our city to look like.
Okay - I imaged it the many times I heard them both say they would not use tax dollars to pay for Promise. Sorry - I'm the idiot.
Their exact words - good program, but we shouldn't use tax dollars to fund it.
I think you are mistaken, I would never call you the idiot.
"Suing the city, for whatever reason, is counter to the fiscal conservatism you have preached in the past. Who's money is the city going to spend to defend the suit besides the taxpayers? Let's face it, you got caught with your pants down and your suing the city is your way of trying to shift the blame."
THANK YOU - I'm glad somebody is getting my angle here. Suing a City inherently takes money out of the pockets you've sworn to protect! It was a selfish move, and totally the reverse of everything you (Keith) has preached regarding how we should allocate money responsibly.
Also, suing on election day was stupid move too. Not only was it totally classless, i think it actually LOST Keith votes.
The 'OLD' Menards site is a pain to get in and out of and has a confusing parking lot. If it is zoned correctly a light manufacturing company might be able to use it or turn it into an industrial training center. Even the culinary school could be housed there since it's about the same size as the river center...
No - really a selfish move is the stupid mayor and city admin putting a no contact order on an elected official for something as stupid as the eserv thing. The only way malin will learn is by a Judge's pen. We need to look to Malin as the cause of all these lawsuits, not Meyer or anyone else. Malin is the problem. But, Tara Barney and the crew ar too freaking stupid to know this fact.
Something for Meyer to think about:
Out of office and continue your lawsuit of the city and you may find yourself defending a countersuit. He will be one very lonely man left holding the bag to pay attorney fees.
He will have brought it on himself and he was wrong to violate the confidentiality of the eServ economic development proposal.
1:08, you are ignoring the fact that what Meyer did was wrong and possibly illegal.
You are full of it. What on this earth is illegal about what Meyer did you dope? You are a fool to believe.
What should be illegal are the actions of Russel and Tara Barney. Inside deal on the taxpayer dime. Millions had on the taxpayer dime. Out taxes going up up up while Russel's income goes up up up.
Why would the Russell/eServ deal cause our taxes to go up? The taxes paid on that property will be the same as they currently are.
what i dont understand is why the city of davenport didnt come up with a deal to demolish the old cinemas and the hotel that sit across the intersection, and give that up instead. the size of those two properties combined is easily the size of the nursery; plus it already has a separate frontage road exit made for the traffic.... instead, they want to remove any green space, to leave some empty buildings standing.
There is not way that we as a city can continue on the path that we are headed. We are spread really thin. The first thing that goes is public safety. We are on a path for disaster.
The deal is between Alta Vista and Menards, it isn't the cities deal. The deal is between two private parties. Menards rezoning request is the only thing that brought the city into the deal.
As far as I can see, the city was not asked to help Menards find a new location.
"Menards rezoning request is the only thing that brought the city into the deal."
What Are City Councils for?
Keith
And thanks Scott. I really wish you, we, could get the Community Development staff, which is paid to listen and to think, to do as much.
Keith
Keith:
The council is there to do the business before it.
The council is not there to micro-manage private business. The rezoning request is the legitimate business before them.
Could the old Cinemas have been an option? I don't know. The concept is good, but is the site large enough? Would it satisfy Menards site criteria? Lots of question there that are not the councils prerogative.
Which piece of land is more attractive? One with two buildings that have to be torn down and utilities rerouted or a swath of 'vacant' land? Would there be a request for government assistance in covering the cost of the demolition? If so would the council offer up the 'vacant' land in lieu of giving Menards a TIF to tear down the buildings or just bend over to 'big business' once again?
This sounds like the complete opposite scenario of the eserve debacle and yet KM seems to be against it as well.
So Keith what type of business DO you stand for in Davenport?
"What Are City Councils for?"
Well, sure as hell NOT to tell private companies what to do. And they don't offer up land (old cinemas and the hotel) that DOESN'T BELONG TO THEM !!
You have no idea what the future of that land is and no right to say someone has to sell it to someone else.
Keith, can't wait for you to go (but then coucil meeting will sure be boring in the future).
4:21 - where do you live. GO read the laws of this land. The city council absolutely can tell private property owners what to do.
I would say a better description is that they can tell them what NOT to do.
QCI has it right. City councils are empowered by statutes and ordinances. They can tell Menards that they can not build on the Alta Vista site by denying the rezoning request. The city council can not tell Menards to consider the cinema's property.
It seems the only no vote to the rezoning request is Meyer. The Hammerlink/Ambrose push for a dark store agreement isn't necessarily a bad idea, but once again, they can't tell Menards that if the store is closed that they have to abide by a dark store policy unless it is a condition of the rezoning and Menards agrees. Menards does not have to stay in Davenport, although they have expressed their intentions are to expand their presence with a new store.
A new Menards store means more taxes for Davenport. Looks to me like a good partnership between Menards and the City, without the use of special incentives to Menards.
Dang, people - let business do their business. IF Menard's developes on the Alta Vista site, the activity created there will provide the demand for the former Cinema site.
Please allow the market system to work - it has historically done a much better job than City Council's have - at less cost to the taxpayers.
Post a Comment