As a south city (Carondelet Park Area) resident, I'm excited about this development moving forward despite the current market.



http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/busine ... enDocument

They've got to get it right since Slay is moving in...

Hilarious and true. The same could be said for the River Des Peres bike trail extension and the new Rec Center. Got to give Slay some things to do.

I put some recent photos of the construction here:

http://stlcitytalk.blogspot.com/

I'm happy about the development, but I'm not so sure about its execution.



On the plus side, the location is excellent, as is the parochial school option down the street (I send my son to preschool at Immaculate Heart of Mary School, and I'm very happy with his educational experience).



On the downside, what passes for a yard in this development is comical at best. Some friends of ours took a tour of the display homes, and the sales agent told them they could take their children and dogs to Carondelet Park to play instead. That's great and all, but I know I don't want to walk even a couple of blocks every time my son wants to go outside to play. The strips of grass (I hesitate to call these things "yards") are so small I could lie on the ground and cut the grass with scissors. There's not even enough room to throw washers, for crying out loud.



Some of the houses have ridiculous looking pillars in their small front lawns. I don't know if it's some lame attempt to simulate gates or an entryway into the subdivision, but it looks more like Generic Meadows in Ballwin than Waterman Place. I suppose the developer couldn't have sacrificed a few houses to create a little more elbow room for the houses and garages, then they might have to charge over $400K for every house instead of $300K. At that price, I'd look at other alternatives in the city...and the county for that matter.



I hope the development succeeds, but it's not for me.

^You're absolutely right. We were interested in buying there as well due to the great location by the school and the park (and even Schnucks), but the yards are ridiculous (its basically a patio). I imagine most of the houses will end up being bought by empty-nesters and child-less people rather than families with young children, which is really too bad--a bigger yard and it would be a great place to raise a family. If they could have just matched the density of the surrounding neighborhood (at least with regards to the single family homes), it would be a much more attractive development.

ThreeOneFour wrote:
On the downside, what passes for a yard in this development is comical at best. Some friends of ours took a tour of the display homes, and the sales agent told them they could take their children and dogs to Carondelet Park to play instead. That's great and all, but I know I don't want to walk even a couple of blocks every time my son wants to go outside to play. The strips of grass (I hesitate to call these things "yards") are so small I could lie on the ground and cut the grass with scissors. There's not even enough room to throw washers, for crying out loud.

This is exactly the reason I think this is a good development for the neighborhood. It provides options. It may attract a different kind of person/family to the hood. There are hundreds of homes with the lawn that you desire in Boulevard Heights. This one block of the neighborhood will have smaller, more manageable yards, if any. I actually like that. Boulevard Heights now has a little more variety.

What's the weird well manicured square pit in the ground at Robert and Trainor Ct? We drove around this development today and wow, it's really unexciting.

Stopped by this development for the first time yesterday and I was impressed by the homes that they had to show.

My wife and I are downtowners, but due to baby plans etc, are looking to transition to a home. We love the city and plan to stay, so we are focused on a home on the south-side.

Our favorite hood is around Francis Park in St. Louis Hills, and we prefer the cool old brick homes around the area, but I must say that I am intrigued with the idea of new construction. I would like a yard, but nothing too big, so that is not an issue with me.

Anyone have any thoughts about this neighborhood in general? Is it good for family, etc? How is crime, and overall vibe? Are the local private schools good?

Thanks in advance, just doing some research.

I live on the other side of Carondelet Park from this development near Grand/Bates. My impression of the development has been favorable. The surrounding neighborhood is very stable and always quiet when I run through. Obviously, the proximity to the park and Loughborough Commons(Schnucks/Lowes) are huge pluses. The new YMCA in the park and nearby trails are also great for families. In my mind, this part of south city has its own, very laid back vibe. I can tell you from my experience, it seems to be getting younger, with many new families. On the private school front, I can only speak specifically to St Stephen Protomartyr Catholic School on Willmington, north of the park. My children attend there and we have been very happy. Feel free to shoot me any specific questions.

Thanks for the info.

Still looking around. When we get closer, I may shoot some additional questions!

$228k building permit application submitted for new home at 3865 Robert

And a $180k one at 3864 Boulevard Heights Ct by the same developer

^I'm not in love with them, but the fairly urban forms are quite decent. One of my wife's coworkers lives over in that general area and we're close enough we just walked over to return some cookware from an office party. That whole subdivision was something of an eye opener to me. Whether it's to my taste or not, I'm darned glad to see it. It looks healthy and seems popular enough.

Actually, I thought it would have been fully built-out by now. 

Hard to imagine this area used to be an expansive greenhouse and nursery operation that served the St. Louis Public Schools. Some great photos on B.E.L.T. http://www.beltstl.com/wondering-about-boulevard-heights/

I think they look pretty good. I especially like the one on the corner. Better than the ones in La Collina! They also put the utility litter in the back. I don't like the little window on the second floor above the front door that some of them have. I would have liked tree lots. I would have ran Boulevard Heights Ct to Field Ave and made the big median narrower so there would be tree lots. The trees in the front yard seem really close to the houses on Boulevard Heights Ct. Love the land productivity. Compare these

to the no-alley driveway wide lot houses to the south.

The houses look very nice, IMO. The parents of a friend of mine own a home there. Not sure I would want to live in the neighborhood due to either a very small or no backyard, but to each their own. I'm also surprised that it hasn't been completely built out at this point. I wonder what stalled things. And does anyone what Blvd Heights Ct will look like once completed? Will it intersect the alley or dead end with a cul-de-sac?

Sent from my LM-V600 using Tapatalk

Honestly, my statement was mostly my preference for brick. They're perfectly nice frame houses and quite a bit nicer than most of what's on offer elsewhere in the region. I'm just a brick nut.

Three $289k building permit applications submitted for new homes at 7123 TRAINOR PL
7119 TRAINOR PL
7121 TRAINOR PL
I guess a three fee-simple townhomes like next door?

quincunx wrote:$0 zoning-only building permit submitted by Spitzberg Lassen Enterprises for multi-fam 82 units at 4092 Robert Ave

Well, I guess we know of a Catholic parish that isn't making the cut.

Sent from my LM-V600 using Tapatalk

Miss Shell wrote: ↑

Jan 17, 2023

quincunx wrote:$0 zoning-only building permit submitted by Spitzberg Lassen Enterprises for multi-fam 82 units at 4092 Robert Ave

Well, I guess we know of a Catholic parish that isn't making the cut.

Sent from my LM-V600 using Tapatalk

The Catholic parish is across the street and in no way affected by this project.