Tapatalk

Drury Inn and Suites Twin Towers - Medical Center

Drury Inn and Suites Twin Towers - Medical Center

40
New MemberNew Member
40

PostJul 16, 2008#1

Tonight at the Gibson Heights neighborhood meeting there was discussion of a possible Drury Inn moving into the neighborhood. Apparently they have been approaching some homeowners in the western edge (near Kingshighway) of the 4500 blocks of Oakland, Arco, Gibson, and Chouteau about purchasing their properties. Unfortunately none of the people who had been approached were at the meeting, but some with second-hand knowledge were there. Someone mentioned the hotel being 16 stories and it was also rumored that Drury had already purchased the Lambskin Temple, but nothing was really known for sure. Alderman Roddy did confirm that Drury had talked to him though, so they are definetely interested in the area.



The residents in attendance were all against the development. Not only would it steal some residents from the neighborhood, but it would completely block our view of Forest Park. Personally I wouldn't shed any tears if some of those dull abandoned buildings along Kingshighway were done away with, but a 16 story hotel with parking would need much more space than that, which means losing some nice homes in the 4500 blocks.



Silver Lining: while I don't want this development to happen, it's nice to see the progress of the neighborhood recognized by major developers.

12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostJul 16, 2008#2

Yeah, that's going to be a tough sell in that neighborhood. Unless they're able to buy every house in the immediate area, I don't see it moving past the talking stage. And forget about emminent domain. No way any politician would touch it these days.



And I'd hate to lose the Lambskin Temple.

346
Full MemberFull Member
346

PostJul 16, 2008#3

I personally wouldn't mind the four family flats that are being renovated by city U for the last 10 yrs. being torn down. Are they really thinking of proposing this to be 16 stories tall?

12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostJul 16, 2008#4

Problem is, as wuphys points out, a project this size would need a LOT more land than just those few apartments on Kingshighway. It would require the destruction of the better part of an entire nieghborhood.



Not worth it, IMO. There's lots of vaccant land in this city; let's fill all that first.

1,517
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,517

PostJul 16, 2008#5

Destroying the 4500 blocks of Chouteau, Arco, etc. would probably be the most destructive and awful thing you could do for the Forest Park Southeast neighborhood.



If this project gets off the ground and homes are taken, someone should let the Gills know to pack up and try a different neighborhood.



We need to be wise about what to do with our progress. A hotel in this spot is not needed. The city should work with the Drury Inn to select a location on the other side of 40, or couple the hotel (INCLUDING attractive, urban design) with the project over on Chouteau/Newstead.



That this idea would even be floated is insulting to a neighborhood that has worked hard for revitalization.



No more absolutely unnecessary demolition, St. Louis!

10K
AdministratorAdministrator
10K

PostJul 16, 2008#6

No thanks, Drury. Bad idea.



The Drury at 44 and Hampton isn't exactly attractive either.

2,430
Life MemberLife Member
2,430

PostJul 16, 2008#7

Rather than just saying that this is a bad idea (which it is), lets talk better alternative sites. Here are a few quick ideas:



1. What about making use of the "added" land that was part of Forest Park at the southwest corner of Highway 40 and Kingshighway. The property would have street frontage on Oakland and Kingshighway, good highway access, and close proximity to both the CWE and Forest Park Southeast. Given that this land is disconnected from Forest Park, it seems like a good compromise.



2. Work with Barnes to build a new Drury into the hospital expansion plans on the tennis courts or consider building on the land south of Clayton Road for the new Drury.

2,005
Life MemberLife Member
2,005

PostJul 16, 2008#8

^Building it on the Barnes parking garage site isn't a bad idea, but I thought that was part of Barnes future expansion.



Why not build it at the future Tower Grove/I-64 interchange?? Looks like a lot of vacant land there, at least on google earth.

2,430
Life MemberLife Member
2,430

PostJul 16, 2008#9

Well, that is why I suggest that it be integrated into the hospital as part of the expansion. The Tower Grove Avenue location wouldn't be bad either though I am not sure that it is either close enough to the CWE/ Barnes complex. Besides, is MODOT still creating a new interchange at Tower Grove Avenue? The rebuild website does not show the design for a new interchange here any longer.

1,099
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,099

PostJul 16, 2008#10

^ Not as part of the New I-64 project. It was part of their ultimate "if we could build anything we wanted" fantasy. And who knows if they'll have any money in the future to actually build what they want to build there.

2,005
Life MemberLife Member
2,005

PostJul 16, 2008#11

It won't get built as part of the I-64 project. Since it's part of the original EIS, there shouldn't be any problems getting it onto the state transportation improvement program. I believe construction is slated for 2013. Wash U medical center is paying half, MoDOT the other half. This will improve access to the Botanical Gardens too. A new outer road will connect to the Boyle interchange on the north side. IIRC, no takings are needed.



Scroll to bottom


Washington University Medical Center was approved for $8,000,000 in Cost Share funds to replace

bridges at Taylor Avenue, Newstead Avenue and Tower Grove, construct an additional eastbound off

ramp from I-64 to Tower Grove and westbound on ramp from Tower Grove, construct additional

auxiliary lanes on I-64 and reconstruct Tower Grove north and south of I-64. This project will improve

traffic access and circulation to the existing and proposed facilities adjacent to the I-61 corridor.


edit: added text for those who don't like to click on links(like me)

1,517
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,517

PostJul 16, 2008#12

I would be against this hotel even with a slightly better site in the same vicinity unless the city worked with the hotel on some sort of design standards. These satellite locations are typically painfully ugly and, of course, car centric. Combined with destruction of a gorgeous and highly urban neighborhood, this project would be catastrophic.



If it should have to be built nearby, I again suggest the Chouteau-Taylor Development.







The hotel could face the interstate and it could benefit from the development's retail/restaurant offerings.

2,426
Life MemberLife Member
2,426

PostJul 16, 2008#13

Every time I drive by those old ramshackle flats, I wonder how long it will be before something is proposed that wipes them out.



I happen to love the dense urban streetwall that those old rickety buildings create. When you exit the highway, you know you're in the city when you see that row of flats. I agree with the others who say that there is so much vacant land to build on. It seems like a big hotel at that location would create insane traffic problems at that already-congested intersection.

2,430
Life MemberLife Member
2,430

PostJul 16, 2008#14

Depends on the size of the site, but it would be relatively easy to locate at least part of the hotel along the a street frontage. On the land southwest of the Kingshighway/40 intersection, the building could easily hug the land along Kingshighway, adding some nice density and height to the location, increasing the urban feel of Kingshighway while pushing any surface parking into the rear of the site off of Oakland.

2,821
Life MemberLife Member
2,821

PostJul 16, 2008#15

^I suspect there would be a ton of opposition to building on that sliver of Forest Park southwest of the interchange, including opposition from SLUH, which would probably kill it. That is a shame because it certainly doesn't add anything to the park and it has no use other than a small amount of office space. It isn't even landscaped very well. Depending on the size of the MODOT easement, it seems like there would be enough room there for a 150 to 200-room hotel, and ingress/egress onto Oakland. I don't know how much space is in that underground building, but I'm sure they could work something out to move or create office space in a mixed-use project.



The problem is that new Drury hotels aren't exactly a paragon of design. If something were to be built there, it would have to be stunning. I would also be firmly against any surface parking.

10K
AdministratorAdministrator
10K

PostJul 16, 2008#16

Hell, put it on that Commerce Bank lot at Vandeventer - the closer it is to Manchester, the better the chances of its visitors actually walking to restaurants in The Grove.

2,821
Life MemberLife Member
2,821

PostJul 16, 2008#17

^Er, yeah. Not much visibility there.

320
Full MemberFull Member
320

PostJul 16, 2008#18

Perhaps as a 21st Century "Flat Iron" building, at the triangle of Vandaventer and Manchester (where the dead gas station stands). It might also incorporate the existing building behind it. It could be both an entrance and an anchor to FPSE; add also a Metrolink station at Sarah (just a short walk north).

10K
AdministratorAdministrator
10K

PostJul 16, 2008#19

Chris_on_Kingsbury wrote:Perhaps as a 21st Century "Flat Iron" building, at the triangle of Vandaventer and Manchester (where the dead gas station stands). It might also incorporate the existing building behind it. It could be both an entrance and an anchor to FPSE; add also a Metrolink station at Sarah (just a short walk north).


I like your thinking...

242
Junior MemberJunior Member
242

PostJul 16, 2008#20

Clear something up for me: The new kingshighway interchange is going to have a much smaller footprint than the current full cloverleaf. Will the freed up land be available for development, or will it be held in reserve for future highway stuff.



I'd have to wait to see an actual site plan for this, but my first impression is that i'm against it.



Much better locations would be the southwest corner with an entrance off of Oakland, though i'm not sure how big that underground city facility is; or possibly the northeast corner, on the south side of Clayton rd, though i believe that is also considered part of the park, and would be off limits.



The logical place for a new hotel in the area that is convenient to the hospital complex was in the highlands development, and guess what, someone already built one.



IMO, the best place for a new hotel in the area that doesn't interfere with neighorhoods or park land would be Kingsighway and West Pine, on the set of surface parking lots.

PostJul 17, 2008#21

The only plan that would make any sense is a long skinny building with the main entrance off of kingshighway opposite Oakland, then stretching North on the land currently occupied by those Citi U buildings, an apt building, the lambskin temple, and an apt building, with just a couple of houses, crossing arco and up to gibson.



Not a terrible plan, but i'd definitely be against it if I lived right next door.

2,821
Life MemberLife Member
2,821

PostJul 17, 2008#22

DrDrew wrote:Clear something up for me: The new kingshighway interchange is going to have a much smaller footprint than the current full cloverleaf. Will the freed up land be available for development, or will it be held in reserve for future highway stuff.
The land for the cloverleaf was originally taken from Forest Park, so when the new interchange is completed, land that is not needed will be returned to the park, and - I guess - that is partially as a replacement for Forest Park land MODOT needs elsewhere.


DrDrew wrote:IMO, the best place for a new hotel in the area that doesn't interfere with neighorhoods or park land would be Kingsighway and West Pine, on the set of surface parking lots.
I agree, but unless they come up with a whole new design for an upscale hotel, I don't think anyone wants to see a Drury hotel there. :lol:

1,610
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,610

PostJul 17, 2008#23

If you can see the tall older building at Manchester/Vandeventer from I-64/40, I'm sure you could see a tall hotel built next to the Commerce Bank even closer to the highway. But while we're dreaming, I'd make that tall existing building into a hotel.

5,705
Life MemberLife Member
5,705

PostJul 17, 2008#24

Between Barnes-Jewish/Wash U expansions, new shriners hospital, and maybe some additional Cortex development in the near future it makes sense to develop more hotel rooms in the area. It would be nice if the players could sit down along with Modot and find a location that gives Drury the visibility and I-64 access they desire. Lik everybody has commented, certainly enough holes to fill without having do teardown.

12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostAug 15, 2008#25

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.

Read more posts (289 remaining)