7,809
Life MemberLife Member
7,809

PostMay 15, 2007#51

Framer wrote:^Er, Richmond Heights, but yes, that's a good point.


Totally my bad. I should go to bed.

3,311
Life MemberLife Member
3,311

PostMay 17, 2007#52

what in the hell is everyone talking about in here. NIMBY's? Are people just ASSUMING there are, or have they actually heard from Moorlands residents? There are highrises from Wydown to Clayton Road along this stretch. There should be a 20 story building WITH retail (whole foods?) on this corner. The intersection is not "too busy" for this, and there are TONS of people who can walk to this destination.

FACT:That schnucks was the biggest selling schnucks per square foot in the region.



Lipton = f-ing joke, I hate eminent domain, but I'd love to see it happen to him. It's not like he won't get a premium for this property. hopefully the old miser is getting up there... hehe :twisted:

11K
Life MemberLife Member
11K

PostMay 17, 2007#53

FACT:That schnucks was the biggest selling schnucks per square foot in the region.


Why did it close?

7,809
Life MemberLife Member
7,809

PostMay 17, 2007#54

Grover wrote:
FACT:That schnucks was the biggest selling schnucks per square foot in the region.


Why did it close?


I thought the current Richmond Heights location was/is their busiest per sq ft store?

5,433
Super ModeratorSuper Moderator
5,433

PostMay 17, 2007#55

JCity wrote:Lipton = f-ing joke, I hate eminent domain, but I'd love to see it happen to him. It's not like he won't get a premium for this property. hopefully the old miser is getting up there... hehe :twisted:


The properties are in no way comparable, but suddenly I'm reminded of the Avalon Theatre in south St. Louis. At least there's little danger of the Clayton Schnucks collapsing into itself, although that might prompt someone to do something with it one of these days.

1,610
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,610

PostMay 17, 2007#56

There are also existing high-rises along Lindell, but that didn't stop NIMBY's in the CWE. You would think, like the dense CWE, that many Clayton residents love living in such a dense place, but new proposals seem to bring the NIMBY's out from the shadows.

70
New MemberNew Member
70

PostJun 04, 2007#57

The properties at Clayton and Hanley and at Brentwood and Clayton have long had several developement proposals in front of the Clayton Developement Committee.



They must not meet Clayton standards.

8,912
Life MemberLife Member
8,912

PostJun 04, 2007#58

The Curmudgeon wrote:The properties at Clayton and Hanley and at Brentwood and Clayton have long had several developement proposals in front of the Clayton Developement Committee.



They must not meet Clayton standards.


Good job Clayton! These are high profile properties in an up scale area. They deserve developments of a high standard.



Isn't the property at Brentwood and Clayton Rds actually in RH?

2,430
Life MemberLife Member
2,430

PostJun 04, 2007#59

I assume that Curmudgeon is talking about the I-Hop site and adjacent triangle property, which with the development due south all along Brentwood is the next logical spot for development along that stretch (well other than the acres of surface parking for the Galleria).

8,912
Life MemberLife Member
8,912

PostJun 04, 2007#60

indeed. Thanks, I was unaware of any proposals for the Ihop.

2,430
Life MemberLife Member
2,430

PostJun 04, 2007#61

Neither was I.

2,190
Life MemberLife Member
2,190

PostJun 04, 2007#62

bpe235 wrote:
The Curmudgeon wrote:The properties at Clayton and Hanley and at Brentwood and Clayton have long had several developement proposals in front of the Clayton Developement Committee.



They must not meet Clayton standards.


Good job Clayton! These are high profile properties in an up scale area. They deserve developments of a high standard.



Isn't the property at Brentwood and Clayton Rds actually in RH?


Clayton Road is the boundary. North = Clayton, South = RH. (At least for the next couple of years :wink: )

8,912
Life MemberLife Member
8,912

PostJul 06, 2007#63

per the Summer 2007 St. Louis Leasing guide

-Tom Bajardi of Sansone Group


The city (Clayton) is in preliminary discussions with a developer for a mixed-use project at the former Schnucks location at hanley/clayton.




Could be the start of something... finally!

7,809
Life MemberLife Member
7,809

PostJul 06, 2007#64

bpe235 wrote:per the Summer 2007 St. Louis Leasing guide

-Tom Bajardi of Sansone Group


The city (Clayton) is in preliminary discussions with a developer for a mixed-use project at the former Schnucks location at hanley/clayton.




Could be the start of something... finally!


So did Clayton throw the eminent domain threat around if the owner of the land didn't do anything and kept asking way above market price?

801
Super MemberSuper Member
801

PostJul 06, 2007#65

dweebe wrote:
bpe235 wrote:per the Summer 2007 St. Louis Leasing guide

-Tom Bajardi of Sansone Group


The city (Clayton) is in preliminary discussions with a developer for a mixed-use project at the former Schnucks location at hanley/clayton.




Could be the start of something... finally!


So did Clayton throw the eminent domain threat around if the owner of the land didn't do anything and kept asking way above market price?


The market price is the price that the owner asks.

8,912
Life MemberLife Member
8,912

PostJul 07, 2007#66

the market price is the sales price.

1,610
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,610

PostJul 07, 2007#67

bpe235 wrote:the market price is the sales price.




So....market price has nothing to do with what other, comparable properties are sold for? Much like when trying to sell a car, you would tend to price it where other cars of the same model and year are selling at, right? You COULD try to sell your '95 Civic with 150k miles for $25,000, but most people wouldn't go for that. If someone were to buy it, that doesn't mean there is such demand for '95 Civics that prices would increase for all '95 Civics, thus influencing the overall market. (Also, I got a 'D' in economics, so I could be totally off base...just my logic getting the best of me)

3,311
Life MemberLife Member
3,311

PostJul 10, 2007#68

the MARKET price is the price in which the property is sold. The ASKING price might be far higher. Appraisers can appraise properties at any number, but the market price is the SALES price.

8,912
Life MemberLife Member
8,912

PostDec 19, 2008#69

Lipton’s vacant Clayton corner under contract



The vacant former Schnucks property on the prime corner of Clayton and Hanley roads in Clayton is under contract to an out-of-town developer after sitting dormant for nearly five years.



Owner Lipton Realty Inc. has a deal to sell it to Cullinan Properties Ltd., a real estate development firm based in Peoria, Ill. Cullinan put the 3.3-acre site under contract within the past 30 days.



Cullinan is not new to the St. Louis market. The developer broke ground in November on a $385 million mixed-use project in St. Charles on the site of the former Noah’s Ark restaurant at I-70 and Fifth Cullinan is not disclosing its tenants for the Clayton site. Ryan Woods of the Clayton office of commercial real estate firm Lee & Associates also is a partner on the development group and is handling leasing for the project. Woods said the development could range between $70 million and $100 million. “The size and scope of the project is largely dependent on the users that we’re talking to right now,” Woods said. Woods said the uses that are being considered for the site include a hotel, office and retail. The development group is in the final stages of negotiations with an office tenant and a retail tenant totaling more than 100,000 square feet of space for the site, he said.

http://stlouis.bizjournals.com/stlouis/ ... tory4.html

12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostDec 21, 2008#70

Interesting. I assumed this would be residential. Of course, in today's market, commercial makes sense.

8,912
Life MemberLife Member
8,912

PostDec 30, 2008#71

I drive by this site every day and for some reason I can't put a finger on what I think would be an appropriate development for this site. Thoughts?

7,809
Life MemberLife Member
7,809

PostDec 30, 2008#72

Moorlander wrote:I drive by this site every day and for some reason I can't put a finger on what I think would be an appropriate development for this site. Thoughts?


I have the same confusion. That intersection is too much of a cluster-eff for retail or even mixed-use. Shopping at that old Schnucks was never fun. It was alwasy too much drama to get in and out.



I guess 3 or 4 story residential condo with the entrance/exit off of Westwood.



But based upon the price for the lot I guess we'll see another 20+ story tower. Hopefully it will be nicely done and not something that chokes off the Moorlands.

3,311
Life MemberLife Member
3,311

PostJan 06, 2009#73

have you guys seen the rendering for this? pretty interesting. I'll have to find it.

8,912
Life MemberLife Member
8,912

PostApr 23, 2009#74


11K
Life MemberLife Member
11K

PostApr 24, 2009#75

This is one place where I wouldn't particularly like to see street-level retail. It's certainly a high-traffic intersection and probably attractive for that reason, but none of the other corners have retail and there's only a small amount of niche retail within a close walk.

Read more posts (255 remaining)