1726 Park Ave 3-story Apt Building

Renovations and new construction in the Central Corridor -- defined by the area south of Delmar Avenue and North of Interstate 44/55.
From the Preservation Board agenda

Address: 1708-26 PARK AVENUE
Project Description: Construct three-story apartment building with parking.
Jurisdiction: Lafayette Square Historic District Ward: 7
Owner: Chris Goodson
Applicant: Cohen Architects – Tom Cohen & Tom McGraw
http://cohenarch.com/

There's 282 feet of frontage on Park.
^ also keep an eye out for the corner warehouse building on Dolman that has had a couple proposals in the past but never made it... it just sold last month so hopefully a new plan can be worked out.
Is this going on the parking lot across from Square One or adjacent?
Those addresses listed on the assessor's website indicate the project will be the entire parking lot across the street from Square One. It will interesting to see the plan, as the parking lot is relatively narrow.
Shouldn't this be in the South St. Louis forum?
Oh the age old "Where does the south side start?" debate. Is it the viaduct? Or Chouteau? Perhaps Park Ave? Or 44? Or even Russell? Is The Grove on the south side? Dogtown?

We may never know.
I'll dive in... I think the only people who think Lafayette Square is "South St. Louis" are people who don't spend time south of Chippewa.
I live South of Chippewa. I grew up South of Chippewa. The South Side starts at Chouteau to me. Soulard is south. Lafeyette Square is south. The Grove is south. Dogtown is south. Downtown, Midtown, and the West End are Central. Everything north of that is north. Simple. Done. ;-)
For what it's worth, I've seen a few references to LS as being "Near Southside", for instance, the area is served by the Near Southside Improvement Corporation for TIF issues.
When we talk of "sides", there's a South Side and a North Side, but IMO when we talk of South City, that's a different thing. I don't think I've ever heard anyone who went out to eat in Lafayette Square say they were hanging out in South City. When we're talking about development in the city, Lafayette Square is clearly attached to the central corridor in a way that doesn't exist for say, Holly Hills.

It's semantics and I don't think it matters all that much, but the point is to try and be more informative than not. In that case, saying a new apartment building is proposed in "South St. Louis" is more confusing than saying the central corridor neighborhood of Lafayette Square. But whatever.
The renderings are just okay (see preservation board agenda) Wish there was at least one retail space. Maybe at the corner?
Alex Ihnen wrote:
When we talk of "sides", there's a South Side and a North Side, but IMO when we talk of South City, that's a different thing. I don't think I've ever heard anyone who went out to eat in Lafayette Square say they were hanging out in South City. When we're talking about development in the city, Lafayette Square is clearly attached to the central corridor in a way that doesn't exist for say, Holly Hills.

It's semantics and I don't think it matters all that much, but the point is to try and be more informative than not. In that case, saying a new apartment building is proposed in "South St. Louis" is more confusing than saying the central corridor neighborhood of Lafayette Square. But whatever.


We might have to disagree. "South St. Louis" and "South Side" are pretty much synonymous to me. "South City" feels like a newer term to me, but again, I'd take it as the same. (Unless you say Southtown, which is a specific neighborhood and quite distinct from the above. It certainly isn't Southtown, but then neither is the Hill or Carondelet.) If you talk about the development as "Central Corridor" I'm going to think of a very different sort of thing. You're right, it's semantics, but here's the way I see it . . .

To oversimplify a bit Downtown is business. Midtown is theatre. The West End is rich people and Forest Park. North St. Louis and South St. Louis are the places where the rest of us actually live, and work. Lafeyette Square is certainly close to downtown, but it still feels pretty darn distinct in character to me; quite utterly unlike downtown. And not so different from Soulard, or Compton Heights, or Shaw. The truth is all of us define this stuff both a little nebulously and more by landmark, function, and association than lines on a map. And I bet you more folks walk from Lafeyette Square to Soulard or McKinley Heights (which would BE Lafeyette Square if we hadn't hacked a highway through it) than Downtown or Midtown. And in terms of function LS is certainly more South City than anything else. It's one more bedroom community in a phone book full of them. Which sets it quite apart from the central corridor. The central corridor is the big public functions; the public face. It's our Manhattan, if you will. The south side is our Brooklyn and the north side is our Queens. Lafeyette Square is a nice enough neighborhood, but it ain't Manhattan. It's on the wrong side of the tracks. Literally. And it almost always has been. (Since there've been tracks, anyway.)

Maybe it's semantics, but it matters. The very attempt to define it away feels like a part of gentrification. Cool hip kids from outside (maybe as close by as the county, but outside nonetheless) move in and find something. And in an attempt to increase their own hip they say that "Hey, this isn't REALLY Brooklyn . . . it's more Manhattan on the other side of the river." (And there is a stream, by the way. It's buried, but it's there. Under the rail yards. To this day. That's why the valley is there.) So yes, it's semantics. But there's still better and worse semantics; semantics that do more and less to make things clear. If your semantics are driven by the flat geography of the paper map than it might appear to make sense to call a residential neighborhood immediately south of Mill Creek and adjacent to downtown "central." If you want to make clear to an outside how things work, what they look like, or how they feel, then you're much better off calling it "South City." It bears all those South City traits that folks love and hate. All of them. ("Why lookie kids! See how all those streets leading from Lafeyette Square east [and north] have been cut off! Do you know why that is? Let's talk about neighbors and how people treat them and why. You see, there were once big apartment buildings just over there . . .") If that ain't a little South City right there, I don't know what is.
No retail on Park??
Weak.
Why do these renderings look like they were made on an Apple IIGS?

It's a tough situation, because the demand for retail in Laf. Sq. really seems pretty limited, with a few vacancies already. I can see why a developer would rather have the income from
an apartment than a retail space that could struggle. But it'd still be a shame for that corner of S 18 & Park to not be retail.
^ i wonder why retail struggles in LS... has the neighborhood population just not hit the critical threshold yet? or do Lafayette Square-ians not patronize them?
urban_dilettante wrote:
^ i wonder why retail struggles in LS... has the neighborhood population just not hit the critical threshold yet? or do Lafayette Square-ians not patronize them?


Not sure what you mean in terms of retails. In some respects I think retail is changing pretty significantly when you account how online is growing and one day delivery network that Amazon is building. A lot of retail is delivered to the footstep. I wonder how much Walgreens and CVS and the likes are starting to get concerned.

So I think a lot more of retail growth is along the lines of Coffee shops, eateries, fast casual dining, etc. and how much of that can really be supported in LS? My thought is the developer sees where the money is and its not commercial in a rather localized neighborhood.
^ i realize Amazon etc is taking a chunk out of brick and mortar retail, but other cities somehow manage to support considerably more than St. Louis. there's more to it than on-line shopping.
^I wouldn't say the sleepiness and lack of foot traffic in LS, and corresponding lack of retail activity and investment is typical of St. Louis as a whole. The Grove, Cherokee, CWE, and Loop are all seeing consistent development and/or redevelopments with new retail capacity and businesses.
^ right. so i wonder why LS—which is fairly "booming" in terms of STL neighborhoods—is not generating more retail activity.
Wonder if the rents are unreasonably high.
I feel like a lot of the well known chefs have not set up there because it's not as cool or upcoming. Bailey has a spot there and Planter's House is amazing though. Just a theory.
Taken off the Preservation Board agenda