Gray's Landing/Riverpoint West: A step forward

[dsmLA]

I am just not excited about this project. Maybe it is because they are using cookie cutter products and designs in an area that could have a cool unique feel.

This is the suburban office park that got lost and ended up downtown.

[Better Life dude]

My take on the housing is that Gray's Landing could be an area perfect for something everyone has been asking for: reasonably priced housing for families. I suppose you might end up with suburban type townhouse development - but so what. If it brings familes with 2 kids and 2 cars or young professionals to downtown, I'm all for it. Not everyone wants a condo. People want row houses where they are not living above or below others. Side by side homes without sharing a common garage is what a lot of people prefer. Except for the 2nd & Grand Ave Townhomes, I can't think of any other townhouses/rowhouses in the downtown district. And those have a high pricepoint of $350k to $500k. If the Grays landing townhomes have a $150 to $250 pricepoint and feature a little vinyl siding and Rottlund Homes builds them, I'm ok with that. It would add a sorely missed dynamic to the downtown scene. All I can say is gitt'er done!

[Ingersoll1978]

All I can say is gitt'er done!

Better-Please never say that again. LOL

[Philby]

I really wish they would do something similar to the plaza in Kansas City in this area. Have a couple streets of commercial full of shopping/restaurants and then residential in the rest of the area (and yes BLD - rowhouses/townhouses for that demographic would be great in this area)

Unfortunately it doesn't look like this is going to turn out as well as it could...

[dogbo]

I don't think I had an illusions that Riverpoint, now Gray's Landing, would become a shopping destination. If they built a KC Plaza like shopping distinct, you might as well kiss any chance for the East Village developing into a really special place. DSM isn't big enough IMO to be able to pull the main downtown shopping to Gray's Landing and also expect EV and other places downtown to develop a strong retail foothold. Let's not forget there is room for A LOT of commercial space around the Gateway West park. You develop Gray's Landing for that purpose, then you can count on very limited success around Gateway.

My hope is that Gray's establishes a small amount of retail to support the neighborhood and also catch downtown workers coming to and from work. I think that is more realistic and more preferable. Anything more grand risks a lot of empty storefronts in EV and the core. I do think developers are realizing the need to be able to accommodate and attract the before, lunchtime, and after work downtown workers so parking is going to be necessary to make this successful.

This still has the makings of a walkable neighborhood and that is NOT what is being offered in most developments in the 'burbs.

[Bluestem]

It's not just the large parking lots that did this development in for me. It's the whole layout. I guess I still don't see the pedestrian friendliness of it, even the townhomes are lined up in a suburban style. Look at the street system, very spread out. Here's an idea, why not just extend the street grid into this area, why would that be so difficult. Look at how small the blocks are across MLK or SW 9th they are much smaller than the "blocks" in Grays Landing.

[Ingersoll1978]

I agree with Dogbo about the shopping aspect. If anything, I wouldn't mind seeing a couple big box stores locate there (Target, PetsMart, Lowe's). The whole central part of the city has to drive 5-10 miles in any direction to go to one. This would present a prime place to do it. I'd rather see that than 1 story flex space that I will get no use out of. In the end, the use of this land seems to be very under whelming.

[Cyclonefan]

I think it will be at least better than what it is now.
I dont think this area got flooded this week, correct me if Im wrong. It got close though I think.

[Des Moineser]

While the north and east is an extension of Riverpoint West, which isn't that great by the way, I am excited about the townhomes. I sort of wish that the townhomes were on the north part of the project, to finaly fill in that gap south of Mulberry and north of MLK. I'm wondering what the timeframe on this project really is, because 500 units seems like a lot to add to an already somewhat saturated market.

All in all, this project is going to do a lot for the city, and maybe the flex office area can be redeveloped at some point. That trail connection bridge is great too.

[DMRyan]

I sure hope we don't end up with vinyl sided tract townhomes here Better Life Dude! The materials on these buildings should at least be quality. For the residential stuff, there's only one chance to do it right.

Instead of the same townhome repeated over and over, I wouldn't mind seeing a mix of historic brownstone and more modern looking 3-4 story condos sprinkled throughout. This project needs varying architecture and high quality building materials to stand out and become a real gem. Otherwise, it's sticking a suburban looking townhome project in what could be a great urban area. Not that these types of homes won't sell, but it would really not be setting the standard very high.

A good mix of the examples below from Charlotte and Cincinnati would do perfectly. Even mimicking what's been built for rowhomes in the Sommerset development in Ames would be great.

[Better Life dude]

These all look great. I wonder what price point they are selling for? That would be helpful to know what the quality of these units cost. I think for 500 housing units in Grays Landing, there's room for higher and lower cost residential housing - something for every family's budget.

[proffdog]

i can't help saying something ... this project is total crap. they are building exactly what downtown doesn't need: more surface parking lots next to a major road (MLK).

the last thing you want is big box retail with no connection to the community ... as soon as downtown no longer supports their target demographic, they'll pack up and leave a massive, unusable building behind that we have to tear down.

people in the center of the city have to drive a few miles to see stores you can see anywhere else in the country, but people from the suburbs have to drive a few miles to see stores that only Des Moines has.

downtown Des Moines' appeal does not rise with chain stores, it rises with unique restaurants and shops ... nobody from out of town will come to Des Moines and say, "wow, what a great city, they even had a Lowe's downtown!".

building this would be a MASSIVE mistake.

[dogbo]

I've heard several people comment that...wow..Seatle and Minneapolis have a Target store downtown.

[proffdog]

there may be some people from small cities who are impressed by a Target downtown, but i can guarantee that no one would go to Minneapolis or Seattle to see a Target store ... they go for the unique things you can only find in those two cities (markets, art, music scenes, shops). and if Des Moines wants to have any sort of appearl to those outside the city, they need to focus their efforts on unique development.

i live downtown, and the 7 minute drive to Target isn't killing me.

[dogbo]

I guess my point was that both downtown Seatle and Minneapolis have highly regarded downtowns which seems to prove you can have a Target downtown and it is not the end of the world.

I'm generally Mr Local store/anti-chain resturant here, so you're preaching to the choir a bit on the need for local, unique shops, bars, restarants, etc. for downtown Des Moines.

[Cyclonefan]

there may be some people from small cities who are impressed by a Target downtown, but i can guarantee that no one would go to Minneapolis or Seattle to see a Target store ... they go for the unique things you can only find in those two cities (markets, art, music scenes, shops). and if Des Moines wants to have any sort of appearl to those outside the city, they need to focus their efforts on unique development.

i live downtown, and the 7 minute drive to Target isn't killing me.

I agree, Id rather this project not have things like that, but it wouldnt be very convnient to have unique restuarnts and stuff like that, that far out from Downtown. Most people would rather it be on Court or another street, within walking distace of the rest of Downtown.
For a while I thought we where making headway on getting rid of surface parking lots downtown, now they are just going to just put more in. I think they should just redesign this whole project.

[Philby]

I don't think the point is to not have chain stores downtown (i think it would be GREAT if downtown DM had enough residents to support a target/whatever along with all the local shops), I think the point is to not have suburban chain stores downtown (with seas of parking lots).

In order for downtown to grow it needs to draw people in from the suburbs and get them thinking about how much nicer it would be to live close to everything downtown offers. Putting a target/lowe's/best buy downtown is not going to do that...

[mistertwister]

yeah but....are the Seattle and Minneapolis Target stores built exactly like thier suburban cousins? Single big box store with acres of flat parking?

My problem with this developement is the total lack of vision that seems to be guiding it. I feared the worst when it was annonced that Hubbel and Rottlund were working together and it seems my fears were warranted. They are taking the exact same approach to design and planning that they would in the suburbs and bringing it to the urban core.

What this site needs is not rows of identical townhouses and big box retail. It needs dense, inner city neighborhood design of old but with modern style and amenities. Retail space and office space needs to be interspresed with housing and above all, parking needs to be hidden and greenspace plentiful.

I would urge that the Des Moines council reject this plan. I would much rather take the time to have something done right, then wind up with another Wells Fargo arena on our hands....i.e. the right idea but poor execution that in the end does not inspire or fufill the intended need.

[speeder]

What this site needs is not rows of identical townhouses and big box retail. It needs dense, inner city neighborhood design of old but with modern style and amenities. Retail space and office space needs to be interspresed with housing and above all, parking needs to be hidden and greenspace plentiful.

I completely agree, I'd like to see this development counter-point Prairie Trail in Ankeny as the other choice for that 'neo-traditional/new neighborhood' seeking crowd. I guess what I'm trying to say is I want to see something that makes me want to move to Riverpoint in a few years and not Prairie Trail... assuming things develop in Ankeny as planned.

[Cyclonefan]

The good thing is that about nothing they come up with will be even close to being as bad as what it is now. We shouldnt forget about that.

[dmluvr]

I disagree with you cyclone fan!---we should not only forget, but we should also expect a complete new proposal.

This is horrible and unexusable. This whole "it's better than nothing" attitude could be applied to about everything and it is completely worth waiting even 3 years before ground breaking to get the right project in there. This is too damn big of a chunk in (or near) downtown to just accept some better than nothing attitude. I'd gladly take nothing over this current proposal as currently--nothing is actually better.

[DMRyan]

This may finally be moving forward! The council should approving a developer agreement at the next council meeting. The details include a way to fund most of the $50 million in land acqusition, site cleanup and site prep to have shovel ready development sites ready for competing development proposals. Phases I and II both consist of mostly commercial space (500,000+ sq. ft. of office space), with phase III being the residential component.

If you want to read the complicated financing package details, see the link below. If everything goes as planned, dirt should start to be pushed by this fall. There's so many financing components to this project, I can only hope that everything goes as planned. One large contingency could throw the progress on this off track.

http://www.dmgov.org/mayor_council/agen ... 07-315.htm


Also, see this week's council agenda for the development agreement details on the Opus_001, E5W and Ingersoll Streetscape projects.

[Des Moineser]

Hmmm... I thought they had already started clean-up on this thing.
Either way, I'm pretty happy about this project. It will really fill in a sparse area of the downtown. Don't care for that flex-space and the box box involved, and the eccessive parking lots, but you can't bat 1.000.

Any idea of a timeframe for ground-breaking/completion?

[DMRyan]

Things could soon be moving forward to end the 10 year residential tax abatement for the downtown area, instead giving new condo owners 5 year abatement like the rest of the city. The city needs the additional money that would be abated to help pay for the loan needed to kickstart the Riverpoint West project. The changes (if approved) wouldn't take place until January 1st, 2009 and will not affect any developments that have commenced construction before this date.

What do you guys think about getting rid of this economic development tool? It may lead to a flurry of construction for downtown properties before the date, but it has been thrown around that there is currently a 2-3 year supply of condos already on the market downtown. Is 5 year abatement enough when the mounting fiscal needs of a cash-strapped city are considered? There are a lot of other incentives and economic development tools to spur projects, but none impact condo purchasers like tax abatement does.

[Better Life dude]

It's eminent demise may stimulate demand for the condos that offer the 10 year abatement. Help move some of that inventory.

Other cities I've looked at for downtown housing: Cedar Falls, Omaha, Minneapolis - none of them offer a 10 year abatement. I feel lucky having bought recently in downtown Des Moines that our townhouse does feature 10 years of abatement.

[DMRyan]

I think KC offers either 15 or 20 year abatement in their downtown core.

[Philby]

While I myself benefit from tax abatement, and perhaps will on my next purchase (if I stay downtown/sherman hill) - i think it is time to test the market and see if people are actually ready to live downtown regardless of the incentives offered.

Brownscamp and the plaza continue to move units even though that tax abatement is over (or almost over) - so that is a good sign.

We've got a wide variety of options for people (although I think we could use more apartments and smaller but cheaper condos) so now we just need to see if the demand is there.

We certainly don't need any more development that the abatement was meant to spur, its already had that effect - so now we need to sit back and see how it plays out.

Regarding KC - is that just in their CBD? or all over the metro? My brother lives on 39th and Main (right by westport, N of the plaza) and I know that his area has seen a lot of development, but there's also already a lot of people who live there (albeit many in lower income bracket) so it seems weird that they would be trying to get people into the area. I do know the building right next door to his was purchased and is going to be turned into condos - so maybe that is because of abatement. I know his area is quite blighted - but just a couple blocks W is westport so perhaps the development that's happening there is spreading to him. Also about 20 blocks north of him in the "warehouse" district - there's also a lot of condo/retail development occuring (near the new sprint arena), so perhaps thats where the abatement applies.

[dogbo]

I think it may be time to reduce the abatement from 10 to 5 years especially if the additional revenue generated is needed by the city to get River Point finally developed.

[rasmeth]

In the last rendering of Gray's Landing there seems to be too much parking. If the developers could at least eliminate the very northeastern quadrant of parking it would increase the curb appeal of the development. They could even turn that quadrant of parking into a pocket park, if not a pocket park move a couple of the commercial or retail buildings up to front the sidewalks and streets with minimal setbacks.

[DMRyan]

This poor development just can't catch a break. Just when the developer seemed close to breaking ground on the phase I spec office portion, there's serious doom and gloom on the horizon for downtown office space.

Maybe the residential will start first once again if things pick up in the local and national real estate market.