The new version of the proposed Trail East and West development project in Uptown Normal would be primarily residential housing on the north side of the traffic circle straddling Constitution Trail. And a controversial mural on a building in the project footprint would likely be torn down.
That's according to Mayor Chris Koos.
The project requires a new Tax Increment Financing [TIF] district to offer a developer enough incentive to put up the two multistory, mixed-use buildings. An older TIF would expire too soon to offer payback over time.
Koos said the town did not go ahead this week with the proposal to create a new TIF because legal descriptions of two pieces of land require minor revision.
Koos said the potential developer who is talking with the town about the project is not one that has worked in the Twin Cities before. It's at least the third attempt to build out the north side of the traffic circle, and Koos said the vision for the two buildings remains residential so it would help create an 18 hour-a-day lifestyle use of the district.
"It's our hope to have people living in Uptown which will support business expansion in Uptown, more stores, maybe the grocery that everybody was hoping for," said Koos.
Koos said discussions have been conceptual because the developer is only willing to spend a limited amount of money on the proposal before there is a TIF.
The mural
The mural on a building on the northeast side of the Uptown traffic circle was once a point of contention between the town and 13 of the artists who painted it.
The artists sued the town in federal court to secure its preservation when previous versions of the Trail East project advanced to the council and included demolition. They claimed federal copyright law protects their work from being damaged or destroyed without their consent. The case was dismissed when Normal agreed to do that, though the judge did so without prejudice, meaning it could be refiled.
In a WGLT interview, Koos said conditions have changed.
“It will probably be destroyed in the sense that that building has to come down. The building requires significant work to save that wall and the space, as I see it right now is needed. To build that building, there'd have to be a narrow passageway through there, and you wouldn't see the mural anyway,” said Koos.
He said relocating the mural, as once proposed by the town, is cost prohibitive.
“It’s wildly expensive. I mean, wildly expensive, and where would you put it?” said Koos.
Under a previous version of the project, the developer agreed to incorporate the wall containing the mural into the new structure as an ornamental, non-load-bearing feature. The previous developer pulled out of the project for other reasons.
"The wall was tuckpointed with foam insulation that you buy at a hardware store, which makes it very unstable, and would require taking all that out, probably from the inside of the wall, to try and stabilize the mural," said Koos, adding the town is trying to contact the artists.
“We have been reaching out to the artists that we can identify and contact and let them know that we have intentions to remove the mural,” said Koos.
Since the dispute, the town has revised its policies to prevent such issues by establishing town control over the disposition of public art.
