Clifton Heights residents were unable to stop Drury despite serious opposition. The only thing that will stop this is if Wash U/BJC are opposed.
Framer wrote:There's a public hearing about the plan at 7 PM, August 18th, Church of the Living God, 1034 S. Kingshighway.
Also, there's an article in the current issue of the West End Word.
From the FPSE site
Hotel Proposal: Representatives from Drury Inns will present a proposal to build a hotel on Kingshighway south of the Interstate 64/Highway 40 interchange at the next Gibson Heights Neighborhood Association meeting. The meeting will be held at 7 p.m. Tuesday, Aug. 19 in the lower level conference room at Calvary Christian Church, 1034 S. Kingshighway (at Gibson). Meeting attendees are asked to use the Gibson entrance.
- 1,768
If Drury is an unstoppable force with no immovable object to hold it back, lets hope it looks more like the Clarkson Drury and less like the hampton/44 Drury.
- 320
Did any members here attend the hotel-presentation meeting at the Church on Gibson? I made an effort to attend, but (as is usual for me) arrived after the meeting had wrapped up.
What points were covered, and is there a link on the net?
What points were covered, and is there a link on the net?
I didn't go, but here is a summary of what was said:
"We are going to buy most of your neighborhood to put up a hotel on one of the most visible locations in the city. We will then demolish just enough of the neighborhood to destroy whatever integrity it had or might have had.
Here is a rendering. This giant wart here on top of the hill is the hotel. We are currently undertaking a design competition to see who can create the most hideous hotel building and parking garage on God's green Earth. The city is behind us 100%, so if you don't like it, F you!"
"We are going to buy most of your neighborhood to put up a hotel on one of the most visible locations in the city. We will then demolish just enough of the neighborhood to destroy whatever integrity it had or might have had.
Here is a rendering. This giant wart here on top of the hill is the hotel. We are currently undertaking a design competition to see who can create the most hideous hotel building and parking garage on God's green Earth. The city is behind us 100%, so if you don't like it, F you!"
- 11K
jlblues wrote:I didn't go, but here is a summary of what was said:
"We are going to buy most of your neighborhood to put up a hotel on one of the most visible locations in the city. We will then demolish just enough of the neighborhood to destroy whatever integrity it had or might have had.
Here is a rendering. This giant wart here on top of the hill is the hotel. We are currently undertaking a design competition to see who can create the most hideous hotel building and parking garage on God's green Earth. The city is behind us 100%, so if you don't like it, F you!"
If you don't know (and you don't appear to), the neighborhood is more than 20 city blocks, stretching east to Vandeventer and south to the railroad line. The current plan would require the purchasing of maybe 4 homes (my estimate) at the end of Gibson. The Drury's and the Alderman made it clear (again, in my opinion - of course there are those will always believe the opposite) that they will not use eminent domain. The alley behind the Lambskin Temple (which would stay) would be the eastern boundary. The church next to the Lambskin would go and the rest would be on land made available by the reconstruction of the Kingshighway/40 interchange.
The first tower would be a Drury Inn/Suites at the north end of the property and a possible second tower would be on the scale of a "Ritz-Carlton" according to Mr. Drury. Each tower would be 16 stories and have approximately 345 rooms. All parking would be underground.
IMO - the normal people showed up tonight. Those who had lived in the neighborhood "for 30 years" and didn't want to see their three-house area affected in any way. Of course the same 6 negative voices are at every meeting and they are loud. There were also a couple people who spoke up about how far the neighborhood had come and that they would be happy to consider such a development with some changes. They got a good response as well. The main conern seemed to be insuring that there be no access from the hotel to Oakland, Arco or Gibson Avenues.
No need to guess at my opinion - I think 700 hotel rooms in the CWE/FPSE would be a great thing and I (unlike many in attendance) understand why this works at 40/Kingshighway and not 4XXX Manchester Avenue. Tim Drury and his father answered questions from everyone (approximately 200? people).
^A company does not build over 100 ass-ugly small-town and suburblah "hotels", often with attached ass-ugly parking garages, and then suddenly put up something that respects urban design and architecture principles, and something worthy of such a high-profile site. It just ain't gonna happen. I'm not going to judge their intentions by their words, I'm going to judge them by a half-century of deeds.
So which paragon of urban design can we expect for the site next to Forest Park and Barnes-Jewish Hospital...?
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
I actually had no idea the Drury chain exhibited such a variety of designs...
So which paragon of urban design can we expect for the site next to Forest Park and Barnes-Jewish Hospital...?
I actually had no idea the Drury chain exhibited such a variety of designs...
- 11K
jlblues wrote:^A company does not build over 100 ass-ugly small-town and suburblah "hotels", often with attached ass-ugly parking garages, and then suddenly put up something that respects urban design and architecture principles, and something worthy of such a high-profile site. It just ain't gonna happen. I'm not going to judge their intentions by their words, I'm going to judge them by a half-century of deeds.
So which ground-breaking, urban design can we expect...?
They built the buildings above because that what was allowed. I (and many others) were at the meeting tonight to say that similar buildings will not be OK. They have done good work on the reuse of buildings downtown and I do believe that they understand what a good building is. If they're going to build in FPSE it can't be what they put up on Hampton - they understand that. Of course it won't be the Chase either . . .
^Well they certainly did a good job of convincing you. Maybe that explains how they could have entered dozens of different communities, with dozens of different design guidelines, even in some high profile locations, and still manage to put up the same cheap crapola. "I...drink...your...milkshake!"
Don't give them a pass just because they've renovated a couple of old buildings. It's hard to screw up what was a beautiful building to begin with, try as they may. That doesn't say a damn thing about them. The above pictures say everything.
Why do you think it would turn out any different than the Hampton/44 shite? All the parties involved are the same...
Maybe that explains how they could have entered dozens of different communities, with dozens of different design guidelines, even in some high profile locations, and still manage to put up the same cheap crapola. "I...drink...your...milkshake!" Don't give them a pass just because they've renovated a couple of old buildings. It's hard to screw up what was a beautiful building to begin with, try as they may. That doesn't say a damn thing about them. The above pictures say everything.
Why do you think it would turn out any different than the Hampton/44 shite? All the parties involved are the same...
- 11K
^ I guess you weren't there? The design presented is already very, very different from anything you so artfully displayed above. For one - all parking will be underground. The towers will be in line with the existing street blocks so that there will not be a wall at the end of Gibson or Arco. I mean, it doesn't take an intelligent person to understand that there are very poorly designed Walgreen's and Trader Joe's and very well designed Walgreen's and Trader Joe's . . . or does it? The very clear message last night was that this can't be like many of their other hotels. I would characterize the "pro" voices as saying, "I can't support what I see right now, but it's great that you would like to invest in a development here - let's keep talking to see if something will work." Very radical, I understand. 
Grover wrote:
No need to guess at my opinion - I think 700 hotel rooms in the CWE/FPSE would be a great thing and I (unlike many in attendance) understand why this works at 40/Kingshighway and not 4XXX Manchester Avenue. Tim Drury and his father answered questions from everyone (approximately 200? people).
No doubt that a 700 room hotel within walking distance of the park, BJC and Manchester would help FPSE. At the very least, it would help strengthen the link between the two neighborhoods, which is the key to the long term success of FPSE.
Was there any discussion of how the buildings would be oriented to Kingshighway? Based on your discussion, it sounds a partially underground and partially above ground garage and then two hotel towers placed on top with access to the garage on Kingshighway. Sounds like no surface parking, which is a good thing.
Was there any discussion of alternative sites, in particular use of the parkland across Kingshighway for the development?
Remember how residents of Southtown were promised an urban shopping corner at the site of the Southtown Famous?
Remember how we were promised an attractive urban gathering space when the Ambassador Building was torn down?
Bait and switch is the oldest tactic in the book, and it happens ALL THE TIME in this city.
Remember how we were promised an attractive urban gathering space when the Ambassador Building was torn down?
Bait and switch is the oldest tactic in the book, and it happens ALL THE TIME in this city.
- 11K
STLgasm wrote:Remember how residents of Southtown were promised an urban shopping corner at the site of the Southtown Famous?
Remember how we were promised an attractive urban gathering space when the Ambassador Building was torn down?
Bait and switch is the oldest tactic in the book, and it happens ALL THE TIME in this city.
So anytime a bad project is proposed we'll recognize it as bad and anytime a good project is proposed we'll just call their bluff and declare it bad!
This is what I threw together from memory (maybe someone else who was there can add their thoughts):
http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8& ... 3&t=h&z=17
Based on what Grover has been nice enough to share with us, this project certainly has potential. Certainly needs work, but things appear to be going in the right direction. I think in this case, no surface parking is the most important part.
Thanks for the photo grover. Based on that, it looks like the Drury project will be using some of the "found" land from the Highway 40 project. Seems like a good project if it is in the area outlines in yellow. I don't understand how that blue access route would work. Given that it would intersect with Arco, Gibson, and Oakland, it would seem simpler to just exit out onto Kingshighway either at the point where Old Kingshighway splits off or Arco.
One side note. What is the status of the project on Chouteau which was the Laclede Gas site? If I remember, the project included some ground-floor retail along Chouteau and Taylor. When developed, Taylor could become the primary neighborhood link (particularly for pedestrians and bikes) to the CWE from FPSE. Given this, it seems like any Drury development should include a well lighted and clear entrance for its patrons on to Chouteau. Turning the developments back completely to the neighborhood would be a lost opportunity.
One side note. What is the status of the project on Chouteau which was the Laclede Gas site? If I remember, the project included some ground-floor retail along Chouteau and Taylor. When developed, Taylor could become the primary neighborhood link (particularly for pedestrians and bikes) to the CWE from FPSE. Given this, it seems like any Drury development should include a well lighted and clear entrance for its patrons on to Chouteau. Turning the developments back completely to the neighborhood would be a lost opportunity.
- 11K
The blue line is the entrance to the hotel. It must be a certain distance from highway 40/64 per MODOT. Regarding a connection on Chouteau - I know that it looks like it would make sense on a map, but Chouteau is a quiet residential street and the absolute last thing that should be allowed is to have a 700 room hotel entrance at the end of Chouteau. It was said that there would be a coffee shop and restaurant in the hotel and any connections, vehicle or pedestrian, would be up to the FPSE neighborhood. It seems likely to me that this means there would be no vehicle access but probably a sidewalk so that residents could access the property - as well as the new footbridge that will going in.
To add to previous comments, the majority of negative comments last night seem to have concerned 1) vehicle access to the neighborhood (no one wanted it), 2) concerns that the project would stall and the neighborhood would be left with a gaping ugly hole and 3) mild disbelief that it makes sense to put a hotel here. A number of people asked if they had done a market study and if they REALLY thought people would stay there.
I haven't heard anything about Chouteau/Taylor for a few weeks, but last I heard the developer had ordered final drawings. I think this is a $100,000+ expense and shows that there is still strong interest in the project.
To add to previous comments, the majority of negative comments last night seem to have concerned 1) vehicle access to the neighborhood (no one wanted it), 2) concerns that the project would stall and the neighborhood would be left with a gaping ugly hole and 3) mild disbelief that it makes sense to put a hotel here. A number of people asked if they had done a market study and if they REALLY thought people would stay there.
I haven't heard anything about Chouteau/Taylor for a few weeks, but last I heard the developer had ordered final drawings. I think this is a $100,000+ expense and shows that there is still strong interest in the project.
^ Thanks for the clarification. That said, there is a difference between a safe and well-lit pedestrian access to the hotels from Chouteau and placing the hotel's main entrance on Chouteau. I know and agree that it would be a bad idea to put the main entrance on Chouteau, but it would seem like a good idea to not turn its back completely on the neighborhood and at least offer a decent secondary entrance for pedestrians out onto the neighborhood and what will be the closest commercial development.
- 11K
^ agreed. Excellent pedestrian access is essential. In fact I think there's already money/plans for lighting and the new pedestrian bridge that will connect the west end of Chouteau to the south end of Euclid.
I almost forgot, but it seems a forgone conclusion that MODOT will sell this no longer needed land to the highest bidder, whether it's the Drury's or not. The question may in fact be what kind of development the neighborhood wants here, not IF we want development. Also, it was stated that the development itself (buildings/entrance/etc.) would not occupy any land that was once Forest Park (unless approved by city-wide referendum). This will obviously be a tight squeeze, but if the historic boundary line is the center or west side of Euclid/Kingshighway then it look like it will fit.
I almost forgot, but it seems a forgone conclusion that MODOT will sell this no longer needed land to the highest bidder, whether it's the Drury's or not. The question may in fact be what kind of development the neighborhood wants here, not IF we want development. Also, it was stated that the development itself (buildings/entrance/etc.) would not occupy any land that was once Forest Park (unless approved by city-wide referendum). This will obviously be a tight squeeze, but if the historic boundary line is the center or west side of Euclid/Kingshighway then it look like it will fit.
From the 1985 National Register Nomination: The Lambskin Temple is significant in the area of architecture. "When constructed in 1927, the building was in the vanguard of the Modernistic architecture, just developed in highrise and commercial buildings in major St. Louis business districts. Designed by St. Louis architect Edward F. Nolte, the Lambskin Temple is a monumental three-story brick building, the massive planes of its facade overlaid with a flat geometric pattern of varied materials. The abstraction of its ornamentation serves to emphasize the synthetic and graphic qualities of its design. The Temple was the first fraternal building in St. Louis, and one of the first in the country, which relinquished historical references in favor of the new modernism. The Temple is also significant as the master work of its designer, Edward F. Nolte, architect of many important residential and commercial structures throughout St. Louis and its environs during the first half of the 20th century."
Allow me a little elaboration on Nolte (of Nolte and Nauman): Very prolific and important St. Louis architect who also designed the Endicott Johnson Shoe distribution plant downtown (listed in the NR in 2007), and many homes in the Parkview, Holly Place, Waterman Place, Delmar Loop, and Compton Heights National Register Districts. The Lambskin Temple is the work of a master St. Louis Architect. All I am saying is GET CREATIVE PEOPLE!!!!!! If Drury takes out the Lambskin and Wash U. Med Center takes out the Ittner designed Central Institute for the Deaf building, and Ittner designed Shriners Hospital directly across the way (as they plan), St. Louis will have lost the last remnants of a very architecturally significant section of the city that was already largely dynamited by highway construction. Drury should incorporate the Lambskin into any design. Don't give them a free pass on this one.
Allow me a little elaboration on Nolte (of Nolte and Nauman): Very prolific and important St. Louis architect who also designed the Endicott Johnson Shoe distribution plant downtown (listed in the NR in 2007), and many homes in the Parkview, Holly Place, Waterman Place, Delmar Loop, and Compton Heights National Register Districts. The Lambskin Temple is the work of a master St. Louis Architect. All I am saying is GET CREATIVE PEOPLE!!!!!! If Drury takes out the Lambskin and Wash U. Med Center takes out the Ittner designed Central Institute for the Deaf building, and Ittner designed Shriners Hospital directly across the way (as they plan), St. Louis will have lost the last remnants of a very architecturally significant section of the city that was already largely dynamited by highway construction. Drury should incorporate the Lambskin into any design. Don't give them a free pass on this one.
- 11K
The Lambskin Temple will stay and not be part of this project. As many of you know the Temple has been renovated into loft apartments. I understand that there are quite a few vacancies, but the apartments are nice.
Let us at least give Drury credit where it's due: They saved several endangered downtown buildings for their downtown hotels. (I'm thinking that in addition to the Drury-branded ones, they're also responsible for the Hilton at 400 Olive.)
They do deserve credit, that is why I was so surprised when I head that the Lambskin was part of this deal. Very glad to hear that it is no longer threatened.
- 479
Here is the rendering presented last night. The Drurys did not present a site plan.
![]()
