urbanSTL

I wish we had more details about the proposal, because I cannot imagine the city would allow the majority of Bohemian Hill to be replaced by a Walgreens, especially when so many of those homes have been renovated in recent years.



If I'm not mistaken, the original plan for City Hospital's redevelopment called for a "mixed-use" urban scaled development to be constructed across Lafayette from the hospital in place of those delapidated rowhouses. In my mind I imagined something similar to the development taking place along Park Ave in Lafayette Square. In no way is a free standing chain store like Walgreens acceptable, unless it is built into the lower commercial space at street level like we see in other cities such as Chicago. I think Walgreens can be a good neighborhood amenity if it's done tastefully and respectfully, but the company's track record as a good corporate citizen is less than stellar in most aging central cities.



One of the biggest criticisms I have about St. Louis is that it has so many wonderful neighborhoods, but they are disconnected from one another. There is no cohesion between the vibrant 'hoods. If the city is going to be attractive beyond a spattering of enclaves, we need greater urban continuity along major thoroughfares. Bohemian Hill is the missing link between Lafayette Square and LaSalle Park/Soulard, and its existing infrastructure is ripe for rehab, especially since it has those really cool infill houses perched over the highways. The residents need to demand the best possible development for the remaining vacant lots in Bohemian Hill, not just for the highest tax revenue. A singular Walgreens with parking and all on that site would represent a giant leap toward mediocrity, and would create an appalling eyesore for the entire neighborhood and those which surround it.



Remember, Walgreens wanted to tear down the South Side National Bank building to put one of its drive-thru pharmacies in its place, but the residents wouldn't hear of it. They can be stopped.



Anyone know when the next neighborhood meeting is?

I keep hearing people say 'it depends on what the project looks like'...and I can't agree with that because it's an issue of having nice historic homes in an area that is in need of nice dense infill housing, not for the area to be torn down, regardless of what they build there. There is plenty of land available in that area without the need to build on top of everything else.



There's just way too much land available for me to see a need in tearing down viable housing in order to accommodate a retailer, particularly one like Walgreens, urban design or not. If they want to build a Walgreens, they've got land available there, build around the existing houses and homeowners, instead of on top of them.

I would contact the people on the Stop Eminent Domain flyer, they'll know about meetings. I can understand the benefits of a well thought out unified development plan for the area, but I don't think that that is what we are dealing with. The scale of the proposed development is (I think) an obvious warning sign of surface parking, and the persistent rumors of a 24-hour Walgreens should not be taken lightly. Also, why are the developers refusing to make their plans public. We could be looking at a situation where the buildings are demolished before the plans for the area come to light (bad idea). I also think that, bottom line, a well thought out unified development plan should 1. include the various neighborhood associations/stakeholders in planning (or at least create a forum for comment). 2. Make every effort to preserve existing streetscapes and buildings ESPECIALLY when they are structurally sound, aesthetically pleasing and consonant with the neighborhood, and occupied by people who don't want to leave. It's not like there is a shortage of vacant space in the proposed development area. Also, if the developer was forced to work within the existing space constraints (read, no ED driven demolition of occupied homes), a more "urban" plan would probably be the result. If they are allowed to clear the land wholesale, it becomes much more easy to build stand alone buildings and large parking lots.

are they talking abut tearing down the buildings on the west side of tucker just south of lafayette? Those homes are gorgeous .....

Yup. Apparently it is everthing from the Truman off ramp east to Tucker (including the west side of Tucker)---the south side of LaFayette down to I-55. That is what one of the Bohemian Hill contact people told me this morning. I couldn't believe it either.

They aren't tearing down $hit, because WE WON'T LET THEM!

TGE-ATW wrote:Yup. Apparently it is everthing from the Truman off ramp east to Tucker (including the west side of Tucker)---the south side of LaFayette down to I-55. That is what one of the Bohemian Hill contact people told me this morning. I couldn't believe it either.

2 of those homes (that front Tucker on the west side)have just gotten finished being rehabbed in the last year. One is 2 townhomes and the other is a single family. They look nice, too.



2-3 months ago I spoke with some guys doing tuckpointing on the building farthest North on that row. They said it had been bought and was being rehabbed and that the owner was looking to buy others.



Those being torn down would be a shame. I was hoping they'd leave at least that first row, preferrably that whole block.



How can guilded age think people will want to all of the sudden live in the Georgian and look out their front windows at a huge parking lot? I know I don't want to. Hopefully they'll be smart and put in something that'll benefit the area and link Soulard, Lafayette Square, and Downtown as we've all mentioned.

I don't believe this. I believe this has been exaggerated. I really doubt that the city would tear down those homes along Tucker. .. especially when you consider the sher amount of space that you already have without tearing down those homes. I mean how much space do you really need. ....



and i really doubt the guilded age would support it

Is Gilded Age responsible for the development of Bohemian Hill? They have a pretty good reputation of development in and around the Square area, I don't know why they'd ruin it with a suburban development.



But I don't know why this hasn't been more publicized, it's been so under the radar it worries me a little bit. Are there any plans that have been submitted to the city? Where is Steve Patterson?

^Yeah, that's why this whole thing doesn't make sense. Gilded Age prides itself on tasteful development and historic rehab/reuse (as its name suggests), and I doubt they would back a contradictory plan such as this.

Sorry to sound like a broken record, but the Foodland site on Jefferson is much better suited for a development like this.



I'd like to see Guilded Age get to work on the Foodland site and the Union Club (Jefferson and Lafayette) before taking this project on.



And what is up with Mary One's development at Jefferson and Lafayette?

Did anyone hear Phyllis Young on the Sloan Ranger show last night. 920 am? She was on talking about the situation at 6:00. This sh*t is real. The plans haven't been released (because they know everyone is going to flip out) and both her and the developer seem really evasive about what is going on. But, she confirmed that they are interested in acquiring all the properties that we have been discussing for demolition. And she also has initiated the eminent domain proccess by blighting all of the buildings (although she denies that ED is inevitable. More later.

The northeast corner and eastern edge of this proposed superblock is full of buildings, both new and rehabbed. If the development could already have visibility from the corner of Truman and Lafayette as well as the highways, why would the corner of Tucker be needed as well? If it's a traditional suburban-looking strip center, I suspect the corner of Tucker goes to Walgreen's. And if that's the case, I'm sure there are numerous 7th ward residents (including this voter) willing to tell Walgreen's where to go.

Can you imagine driving into downtown from the 44/55 interchange and seeing a huge Walgreens perched up on the hill in front of City Hospital! Wow, what a grand entrance! Forget those interesting historic buildings, who needs 'em? We want suburban abominations and we want 'em now!



I think it's time to assemble, pronto.

TGE-ATW wrote:Did anyone hear Phyllis Young on the Sloan Ranger show last night. 920 am? She was on talking about the situation at 6:00. This sh*t is real. The plans haven't been released (because they know everyone is going to flip out) and both her and the developer seem really evasive about what is going on. But, she confirmed that they are interested in acquiring all the properties that we have been discussing for demolition. And she also has initiated the eminent domain proccess by blighting all of the buildings (although she denies that ED is inevitable. More later.

Yeah, I think we all knew it was for real when the home owners were presented with ED papers. What we really want to know is what the plans are for the area. (Besides knocking everything down to Tucker, we've established that they plan on doing that.) If anyone knows specifically what they're going to build on the site, what the design will be, etc. please post.

JivecitySTL wrote:I think it's time to assemble, pronto.

Agreed.

We can't assemble fast enough.



This is a huge issue of concern, for anyone interested in Urban living.

Let's meet this weekend, or even sooner! Somewhere in Soulard/Lafayette Square would be most appropriate. Who's in?

Regardless of other issues, this part of Bohemian Hill (west of 12th) has been a nightmare for the past 20 years. Several developers have had the rights but not been able to turn it around or turn it into a viable, cohesive neighborhood. It simply has never been able to take off. The area is surrounded on all sides by busy streets or interstates. The traffic noise at night makes the property as worthless as living next to train tracks.



My guess is that most of the homes facing 12th were owned by the worse type of slum lord. Over the past 12 years, I've witnessed some of the worst blight conditions in the city along this strip.



In addition to oversight on the design of new development, I would be interested to know that any owner-occupants get replacement value for their homes. To buy a comparable home in the Frenchtown area would take nearly $300,000.

Traffic from highways is very overrated. Much like traintracks, you get used to the noise. I've lived right off highways in my life, it's not that bad.

THe west side of Tucker looks pretty good now, I drove it on Saturday. With regard to the plans, that is the big mystery and also what has people so confused. No one has been able to get the plans, although following the organziational meeting last Saturday, concerted efforts began to remedy this. Yes, this area has been legally blighted for years, although the small block between Tucker and 13th where most of the threatened houses are is now composed of new re-habs, new in-fill (nice), and homes with great re-hab potential. Despite the fact that some people wouldn't want to be so close to the highway, other people look at the easy access as a benefit. Also, the height of the location affords a nice view to the southeast, a view up Tucker of the city to the north, and an excellent location perched between two of the premier city historic districts and very close to the stadium etc. This is nothing more than a land grab and the blight argument is being used by Young and Gilded Age to take what they know is an incredibly valuable piece of property.

I tend to dissagree. The noise from the Railroad is at least come-and-go, but the highway is a constant hum that disturbes any peaceful setting outdoors (as a railfan I am perhaps a little partial and more accepting of the railway than most). Add to that the fact that living next to a highway can stunt the lung growth of children (http://tinyurl.com/2bzgz7), and you have yourself a nasty little habitat. I for one would never consider living in earshot of the highway. In my opinion they should all have sound barriers anyhow.

Can anyone give me an exact description of the area this project could encompass? For example (X Street on the west, Y Street on the South, Z Street on the North...)