The Lipton family sure is something. I'm surprised the city didn't condemn this building years ago. I guess that's what you'd expect from a former slumlord like Don Lipton...
- 8,912
Front page story on specialty grocers today in the BJ. Nothing mentioned about this location.
- 8,912
The plans are quite similar to what was proposed back in 2009.
- 8,155
NIMBYs in Clayton will be sure to be loud about this one... Thankfully they haven't been too successful in derailing recent development plans in Clayton.
- 8,912
I'm sure there will be concerns about traffic. I'm predicting my neighbors will want the tower to be pushed to the west side of the development to align with the rest of the towers along the stretch and limit shadows on the current buildings.
Given the lawsuits other properties there will definitely be an issue if handouts/subsidies eat into the school $$$.
Given the lawsuits other properties there will definitely be an issue if handouts/subsidies eat into the school $$$.
^ Traffic there isn't bad, and the main problem is poor street configuration at the Biltmore/Lake Forest/Clayton/Hanley 6-way intersection.
St. Louis County also doesn't seem at all interested in making Hanley more bike or pedestrian friendly, despite it being so dense with residential. They are resurfacing it now, probably leaving it with the same design for at least another decade. Their only concern is auto traffic and getting cars into and out of Clayton as fast as possible during the morning and evening rush.
St. Louis County also doesn't seem at all interested in making Hanley more bike or pedestrian friendly, despite it being so dense with residential. They are resurfacing it now, probably leaving it with the same design for at least another decade. Their only concern is auto traffic and getting cars into and out of Clayton as fast as possible during the morning and evening rush.
I wonder what the 44 unit residential "facility" is. Maybe senior living?
Also, I know competition is good for the consumer, but a 43,000 sq.ft. grocery seems potentially redundant with Schnucks, Dierbergs, Whole Foods, and Trader Joe's all within a mile.
247 unit, 12 story (on top of 3-4 stories of parking) apartment tower sounds great.
Also, I know competition is good for the consumer, but a 43,000 sq.ft. grocery seems potentially redundant with Schnucks, Dierbergs, Whole Foods, and Trader Joe's all within a mile.
247 unit, 12 story (on top of 3-4 stories of parking) apartment tower sounds great.
This shows the great need for Clayton road to be walkable all the way to a Mixed Use development at the Richmond Heights station. Its literally a no brainer. I would love to see a Clayton road with mixed use buildings from Hanley rd to the Galleria. I'd imagine they would sell fast.
^ The problem is that St. Louis county owns both Hanley and Clayton Roads, and they are completely tone deaf on walkability and livability. They will not sacrifice motor vehicle throughput for even marginal improvements in pedestrian or cycling facilities.
There were talks and preliminary plans for making Hanley a complete streets project between Clayton Rd. and Forsyth Blvd. as part of the redo, and they were completely abandoned.
There were talks and preliminary plans for making Hanley a complete streets project between Clayton Rd. and Forsyth Blvd. as part of the redo, and they were completely abandoned.
Are those few parking spots right on the friggin' corner really that important? Sheesh.
This development should add to the argument for Linden Ave./Tropicana pedestrian access to the Richmond Heights Metrolink station. But that's an argument I don't see any of the stakeholders (the developer, future residents, nearby residents, nearby businesses, political representatives, or Metro) making.
^ Ideally, I think it would have been better all around if Tri's development/residential tower/mixed use that was proposed near the Forsyth metrolink station was revitalized. I think that was a great fit and great use of that idle property in downtown Clayon. Believe it even had a proposed walkway directly to metrolink. Heck, I would take back from the dead Boulevard II & III with more residential/apartments and or residential facility. That project was also have relatively good transit access.
But if this is to be, I'm still trying to understand the location of the tower. Almost like they could build the grocery store, office space and do a parking structure even if the residential facility and tower fail to get approval or if only the residential facility is to get built. Reminds in a way of Park Pacific's original plan with a new residential tower on top of the parking structure along Tucker. I do think the idea of punting on a hotel was the right choice and not going anywhere.
But if this is to be, I'm still trying to understand the location of the tower. Almost like they could build the grocery store, office space and do a parking structure even if the residential facility and tower fail to get approval or if only the residential facility is to get built. Reminds in a way of Park Pacific's original plan with a new residential tower on top of the parking structure along Tucker. I do think the idea of punting on a hotel was the right choice and not going anywhere.
- 8,912
Take a look at the developer's website. This development seems out of the ordinary for them. They seem to be primarily a developer of suburban strip malls. I think this will be one of their first attempts at an urban mixed use/residential development.
http://www.gbtrealty.com/#home-video
http://www.gbtrealty.com/#home-video
^Indeed, having to walk all the way around is just stupid. Was it fear of park and riders, criminals, cost, or an oversight?
- 8,912
Clayton ARB provides some feedback.
1. Eliminate row of parking and move building out to street.
2. Enhance the architectural merit as this is a prominent property and southern entrance to Clayton.
3. Screen or add architectural dressing to exposed parking structure currently visible from Clayton rd.
4. Unify the design of the residential and commercial buildings through consistent massing, articulation, and materials.
Read here: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/f12zsvnwszpf ... t.doc?dl=0
1. Eliminate row of parking and move building out to street.
2. Enhance the architectural merit as this is a prominent property and southern entrance to Clayton.
3. Screen or add architectural dressing to exposed parking structure currently visible from Clayton rd.
4. Unify the design of the residential and commercial buildings through consistent massing, articulation, and materials.
Read here: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/f12zsvnwszpf ... t.doc?dl=0
The existing tower to the north pushed the developer to push the proposed tower to the east of the lot. The Moorlands neighborhood has tremendous concern about parking. Neighbors want to make sure there is plenty of parking within the development so the new residents and retail patrons don't try to park in the existing neighborhood (which I'll admit parking is difficult at night).
Sounds like parking is under priced in the area.
Shame the blocks don't have alleys so that on site parking would be accessed that way instead of taking a spot of on street parking away with sa curb cut.
Shame the blocks don't have alleys so that on site parking would be accessed that way instead of taking a spot of on street parking away with sa curb cut.
- 8,912
Looks like they were drilling soil samples today. Hopefully that means we'll hear something soon.
Maybe this was mentioned before but why do you think this has taken so long to be developed? It seems like a good lot at a prime location. I figure it would have been developed right away. I am guessing some proposals just haven't been approved because of NIMBYs?