Those worries were pretty much put to rest today when Menards decided to pump a bunch more money into the area. And by a bunch I mean a bunch.
Menards, according to Wedneday's NG, bid $14,700 per acre for 288 acres of prime commercial property -- the Pfeffer property -- adjacent to the new Wal-Mart in east Urbana, along Illinois 130. For those of you mathmatically challenged, including real estate commissions, that comes to $4.5 million. Not exactly chump change. (Unless you're a really rich chump).
So, will Menards build a second home center in the twin cities?
Marv Prochaska, vice president of real estate for Menards, said the company was "possibly" interested in building a second local home improvement supercenter in Urbana.This, to me, is a large investment in the future of Urbana.
...
Prochaska indicated Menards would likely sell much of the land to other interested developers over time and would keep any land that it wanted for a store.
My only wonder is whether those same folks who protested so mightily over the building of the Wal-Mart store will again protest mightily? And on what grounds will they protest mightily?
Yes, I still decry the loss of valuable and irreplaceable farm land. I still wish that abandoned properties within Urbana could be redeveloped instead. I also hope that east Urbana doesn't become another ugly commercial blight like North Prospect on Champaign has become. Nevertheless, the land was for sale at auction and at those prices was NOT going to go to a soybean farmer.
But it's getting harder and harder for Urbana to retain its 'bozo' tag. Some losses don't hurt as much.
And so it goes.
9 comments:
The face of Urbana is definitely changing.
For better or for worse remains to be seen...
So true; still, given the recent history, any positive commercial development in Urbana should be a plus, if only to at least temporarily halt the 'bozo' letters to the NG.
(My vote is 'worse.' development solely on the extreme outskirts draws dollars and development from the center, where it would seem to be needed more.)
Urbana's new development isn't just on the outskirts. It's all over the place. For example:
-new residential/retail development on Philo Rd where the old Kmart is ($20 mil)
-new condos on N. Lincoln
-new hotel on N. Lincoln
-new walmart
-new Aldi's
-new subdivision on east colorado
-stone creek doing new building
-new walgreens at five points
That's just what I can recall from driving around town. In other words, its all over the place.
I had always hoped Home Depot would build on 130, but I'll happily take the Menards. Urbana desparately needs a home center like that and I think it would be a wonderful addition.
As for turning it into N. Prospect, I don't think Urbana will let anything that poorly planned get built.
with the exception of the Walmart and the KMart redevelopment, most of the rest is pretty much on the town's perifery. (And the KMart redevelopment is close).
But I certainly hope you're right that Urbana won't allow a new North Prospect blight to sprout up. I hate having to go up there and avoid it whenever possible.
Don't forget the new condo/apt. building that just went up on Race St. (across from the Courier).
Oops. That last comment was from me. Not sure why it posted anonymously.
Forgot all about that one. So maybe not ALL the growth is on the expanding edges of the town.
Nevermind.
There's also Lincoln Square Village. Not a lot of visible changes yet, but they have filled the old Bergners and now expect to start filling retail store spots this fall.
To be honest, I don't really like the whole lincoln square plan, but it's there and it's moving forward (and it's in downtown).
The KMart redevelopment is definitely not an outskirt area IMO.
Good point. Both projects also represent redevelopment of existing properties, which also is good - and doesn't eat any valuable farmland. It's something I think is a positive trend. I just wish there were more of that kind of redevelopment and a little less sprawl into the rural areas.
But that's just me. If a farmer wants to sell to a developer, who's to say he/she can't? Sure, we can zone and zone and zone. Some control that way is good. But at some point, we also end up zoning out all growth.
We just as a society/county/city/group of human beings have to come to some kind of consensus as to what should be farmland and what should be city. What should be acceptable growth and what isn't. I think that's the point.
Post a Comment