urbanMSP

Urban design fetishes aside, does the city not see the opportunity in a model with much more local ownership that gives returns back to local businesses and residents? Why master-plan with a heavy brush and rely on 1, 2, 5 (whatever, it's too few) developers to run with it when you can spread out the wealth (along with the risk) and have the place develop much more incrementally.

Is there any way the city will reconsider??

Stuff like the ford plant makes me feel like being an urbanist is hopeless. A golden opportunity is handed to the city on a silver platter and nobody in charge thought "let's just plat this out and let people build a neighborhood."

Exactly! What's the reason this doesn't (won't) happen? My gut tells me cronyism, but the optimist in me wants to believe there's something I'm missing.

Cronyism may play a role, but I think it has more to do with risk - while platting it out might share the risk in a certain sense, there's a fear that the sales will be subpar and whole sections of urban fabric will sit undeveloped. I think that's an unfounded fear, because as you point out, it allows local ownership and breaks it up into pieces that many people can afford. But they know that if they sell the whole thing off to one or two developers with deep pockets, nobody will tell them that they left it to fail - they can hold those specific developers responsible in a direct way. It's also the expectation, and people rarely lose elections for thinking too small. Platting the land into city blocks and selling it off individually is a risky, "big" idea and requires the city to plan things out like sewer, power, etc. Selling it to a developer or two allows them to offload the whole thing.

Talinsday, I think you're right. Still, the dreamer in me wishes the City would withhold a couple of blocks with lot-size limits to allow for a unique, modern infill akin to the great commercial strips of old. Can you imagine a three-block stretch with four to eight small-scale buildings on either side of the street? Creativity could go a long way to bring St Paul to the forefront of regional and even national urban saliency.

Don't even do that.. Just test this out: form-based code showing how buildings should look for various styles. Narrowed streets beyond 2-3 arterials than run through. Remove parking minimums entirely. Remove FARs. Split-rate property tax based heavily on land and not improvements. Plat out whatever grid (or semi-grid akin to a more European style city), and open up properties for sale. Make it clear that as stuff develops from Ford/Cleveland south and west (likely the route it would go) there is ample undeveloped space that can be used for temporary parking. As more and more infills with businesses and residents, local shops will rely less on outsiders with cars and more on locals. It may get to the point that someone sees enough demand for parking as space is being filled that they build a parking ramp. I don't care.

This is ~150 acres of St Paul's 35,968 total land area. Roughly 0.4%. Don't over-think and master plan this - doing so helps ingrain that whatever goes in will have to stay there for 500 years because whoever came up with "the plan" was so smart that no one should challenge it. Let it grow naturally and if things are screwy, it's less than half a percent of St Paul's problem.

Sad to see this being completely demolished... It just seems to go on forever looking from the parkway.

Don't even do that.. Just test this out: form-based code showing how buildings should look for various styles. Narrowed streets beyond 2-3 arterials than run through. Remove parking minimums entirely. Remove FARs. Split-rate property tax based heavily on land and not improvements. Plat out whatever grid (or semi-grid akin to a more European style city), and open up properties for sale. Make it clear that as stuff develops from Ford/Cleveland south and west (likely the route it would go) there is ample undeveloped space that can be used for temporary parking. As more and more infills with businesses and residents, local shops will rely less on outsiders with cars and more on locals. It may get to the point that someone sees enough demand for parking as space is being filled that they build a parking ramp. I don't care.

This is ~150 acres of St Paul's 35,968 total land area. Roughly 0.4%. Don't over-think and master plan this - doing so helps ingrain that whatever goes in will have to stay there for 500 years because whoever came up with "the plan" was so smart that no one should challenge it. Let it grow naturally and if things are screwy, it's less than half a percent of St Paul's problem.

Exactly! Make it pretty much as laissez-faire and unplanned as possible, and it will be the most affordable, most transit and pedestrian friendly area in the twin cities. That is what has happened just about everywhere else in the world.

My hope is for high end housing and some retail, restaurants, and entertainment in a centralized "downtown square" style.

http://finance-commerce.com/2013/10/org ... servation/

I hope they can save the visible part of the showroom building with the tiled roof on the corner.

If not the old section of plant, at least they could try to save the entablature on the north side. I took pics of these earlier this summer; fantastic marriage of industrial and classical themes.

http://flic.kr/p/epoXvB

http://flic.kr/p/euZN3C

http://flic.kr/p/euZMYh

I'm wondering what the plan is for the rail line that winds through Saint Paul from the power plant of Shepard Road and ends at the Ford plant. I don't think it's being used any more now that the plans it closed.

Mulad would probably know best, but the small yard near St. Paul Ave and Edgecumbe has been used for railcar storage. I don't think CP has any customers west of the ADM facility at Randolph & Shepard Rd.

I hope RCRRA or another entity picks up this corridor and preserves it for transit use.

The tracks paralleling Saint Paul Avenue were definitely not cleared of snow in January, February or March. Of course they could be still used occasionally for storage as was noted above.

I hope RCRRA or another entity picks up this corridor and preserves it for transit use.

Well, if HCRRA's experience has taught us anything, it's that they are better off leaving it a post-industrial eyesore until they're actually ready to move on a transit use - because interim uses get in the way of intended long-term uses.

Just because you snagged some industrial railroad right of way doesn't mean you need to use it. With the reopened Riverview studies, I'm sure it may make sense to use West 7th or Shepard for some (or maybe all) of a new line. But might as well have some dedicated ROW in the arsenal.

http://finance-commerce.com/2014/05/no- ... ord-plant/ (locked)

A panel discussing the Twin Cities Assembly Plant’s future agreed that the site should be redesigned as district that caters to pedestrians and cyclists.

Puh-leaze let Joe Souchery write a column in response to that...pretty please with a cherry on top?

I'd love to see this site become a model for how institutional/large-scale uses could integrate with the urban fabric rather than occupying single-use parcels. Imagine the Amazon South Lake Union concept but on a much smaller scale. Imagine a small college or corporate HQ, mixed with street-level storefronts and housing, and well connected to transit. Just a thought.

With Ford plant gone, St. Paul leaders seek model development: http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_ ... seek-model

The various visions for the property face a number of challenges, including the fact that the city does not own and does not plan to purchase the Ford site. That puts Ford more or less in the driver's seat.

Some critics worry that without control over the site, the city will end up with the same kind of car-friendly development common in the suburbs -- large "big-box" retailers surrounded by residential cul-de-sacs. They'd like to see the city buy the Ford site, construct a street grid with sewer and water infrastructure, and then sell it to a developer.

"By building standard-sized city blocks through most of the site, you would have a pretty safe bet for properly scaled urban development to follow," said Matt Brillhart, who writes for urban planning blogs. "Without small city blocks, I think the big worry is that we'll wind up with suburban big-box style development."

Look ma, I'm famous!

I was hoping for a new office max.