Interesting, the renderings have already changed. Seems retail in the middle is now two floors and the residential buildings northeast corners are connected over the street. Good sign that the project has already grown.
Some clearer renderings and a new perspective. There are others showing previous designs leading up to the final plan but I’m not allowed to share those.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Any thoughts on whose Chouteau hotel breaks ground first? Starting on the east end with Lafayette Square/HOK newly rendered hotel, Iron Hill rendered hotel above, and just to make it a three way race, the possibility of a revitalized Drury FPSE hotel proposal in conjunction with Wash U development group on the west end (not technically on Chouteau but not too far off beaten path). To me Iron Hill might very well break ground because of the ease of building on a ready made site with incentives already in place but also the big risk of a chain cookie cutter build out that will be underwhelming compared to the renderings above.
Little cynical and skeptical in my comments but feel that some these multi use developments all have to include one of each - at least one hotel, one office building, one apartment building, etc.. At the same time, think Drury made a big mistake but not pursuing its original twin tower Kingshighway hotel as I thought that was going to fit well and a little more classy, urban feel than your Drury typical cookie cutter freeway reward points hotel. The demand for new hotels room in central corridor is going to get sucked up in short order with the old Health building converted into boutique hotel, Midas Hospitality current construction along FPP, CWE York Ave AC Hotel moving forward and if one of these Chouteau proposals break ground.
Little cynical and skeptical in my comments but feel that some these multi use developments all have to include one of each - at least one hotel, one office building, one apartment building, etc.. At the same time, think Drury made a big mistake but not pursuing its original twin tower Kingshighway hotel as I thought that was going to fit well and a little more classy, urban feel than your Drury typical cookie cutter freeway reward points hotel. The demand for new hotels room in central corridor is going to get sucked up in short order with the old Health building converted into boutique hotel, Midas Hospitality current construction along FPP, CWE York Ave AC Hotel moving forward and if one of these Chouteau proposals break ground.
- 595
This is a very significant development that is definitely going to change that entire area in a positive direction
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Do know that a 4th hotel proposal is coming soon as part of a yet to be announced development.dredger wrote: Any thoughts on whose Chouteau hotel breaks ground first? Starting on the east end with Lafayette Square/HOK newly rendered hotel, Iron Hill rendered hotel above, and just to make it a three way race, the possibility of a revitalized Drury FPSE hotel proposal in conjunction with Wash U development group on the west end (not technically on Chouteau but not too far off beaten path). To me Iron Hill might very well break ground because of the ease of building on a ready made site with incentives already in place but also the big risk of a chain cookie cutter build out that will be underwhelming compared to the renderings above.
For the 3 projects you mentioned, I can see Jefferson and Chouteau (Lafayette Square) starting first. The Lafayette North developers claim that the hotel is potential but they rendered it in and have talked about one previously so they really want to do it. We are about a year out from the start on this project and negotiations haven't even begun with hotel companies for Iron Hill. As a matter of fact, the hotel here will be a dual brand and the design is similar to that of Lafayette North's. Because of this, the design is preliminary and will surely change when a brand is selected. The Drury Hotel seems like pie in the sky at this point but Joe Roddy and I have been in contact so I'll have to ask him.
A view of the Pevely complex could have lent some street cred to Iron Hill. 
- 3
Wow, absolutely love these pics. I can tell you right now that people at the SLU med campus have been DYING for something like this to boost the neighborhood around the hospital, which has essentially been an economic desert for years. I live in the CWE and I've always wished SLU had what WashU has surrounding its med campus...chriss752 wrote: Some clearer renderings and a new perspective. There are others showing previous designs leading up to the final plan but I’m not allowed to share those.
![]()
![]()
In terms of who will end up living in this space, you can bet that many of the SLU residents will be moving into these apartments out of sheer convenience and location. This is a huge win for the central corridor.
I think that calling this a TOD is a bit of a stretch.
What's the stretch? Is it not basically next to the Grand MetroLink station?urbanitas wrote:I think that calling this a TOD is a bit of a stretch.
Proximity to mass transit is not the only criterion for a TOD.Ebsy wrote:What's the stretch? Is it not basically next to the Grand MetroLink station?urbanitas wrote:I think that calling this a TOD is a bit of a stretch.
Of course it is still early, but all of the renderings and site plans that have been posted here scream "fortress mentality", which is not surprising given the developer and the primary stakeholder. This appears to be a self-contained, drive in, park, work / dine / party, drive out type of development - think Westport Plaza. I bet they will even provide shuttle buses from the new hospital campus a block away.
^^ I think the argument for why this in not a TOD is that the development itself is still designed to funnel cars in and out of the large parking garage facing the future Chouteau Greenway for which the apartments are built on top of. The fortress mentality. Yes, you can walk over to the Grand Center station via the existing sidewalk but no real focus on Grand Ave itself or embracing the direct route to and from metrolink & the respective bus stops. In other words, I think you can make the case that the development is as auto centric as any other development you get, so happens to be close to metrolink and primary foot traffic is coming to and from the new hospital .
Where as Armory Development literally next to metrolink station and between Foundry & Armory their is a vision incorporate a pedestrian/bike path from the new Boyle metrolink station to the Grand Ave metrolink station via the old trestle of Foundry site and a proposed pedestrian bridge spanning I44. Yes, both will have fair share of parking but also seem better situated and willing to embrace or more inviting to pedestrian, non auto traffic.
On the other side of the coin, the development goes a long way than most developments in or around region metrolink stations and it makes a lot of sense to embrace the significant foot traffic between the new hospital and SLU medical school. So relatively speaking, TOD at end of day is a fair use when you speak in terms of St. Louis IMO. Heck, I still can't believe that the best use of a corner intersection that is next to University Tower, across from the Boulevards and literally a block away from Richmond metrolink station is a pathetic bank branch with drive thru teller/ATM or even the fact that Home Depot or Dierbergs are not torn down for better land use on either side of the Brentwood metrolink station
The city might not have many Targets and i have been critical of Iron Hill as underwhelming as a plug & play proposal but have to give credit to what is being developed and proposed such as Iron Hill are still far cry better than the big box store Target with a sea of surface parking development once upon a time proposed for the Foundry site and could easily have been proposed here. Just wish the extra step to be taken and reconsider how they approach Grand Ave & future Chouteau Greenway.
Where as Armory Development literally next to metrolink station and between Foundry & Armory their is a vision incorporate a pedestrian/bike path from the new Boyle metrolink station to the Grand Ave metrolink station via the old trestle of Foundry site and a proposed pedestrian bridge spanning I44. Yes, both will have fair share of parking but also seem better situated and willing to embrace or more inviting to pedestrian, non auto traffic.
On the other side of the coin, the development goes a long way than most developments in or around region metrolink stations and it makes a lot of sense to embrace the significant foot traffic between the new hospital and SLU medical school. So relatively speaking, TOD at end of day is a fair use when you speak in terms of St. Louis IMO. Heck, I still can't believe that the best use of a corner intersection that is next to University Tower, across from the Boulevards and literally a block away from Richmond metrolink station is a pathetic bank branch with drive thru teller/ATM or even the fact that Home Depot or Dierbergs are not torn down for better land use on either side of the Brentwood metrolink station
The city might not have many Targets and i have been critical of Iron Hill as underwhelming as a plug & play proposal but have to give credit to what is being developed and proposed such as Iron Hill are still far cry better than the big box store Target with a sea of surface parking development once upon a time proposed for the Foundry site and could easily have been proposed here. Just wish the extra step to be taken and reconsider how they approach Grand Ave & future Chouteau Greenway.
Yes, because SLU demolished them all.“This development will be able to serve the student population, young professionals and those working in Cortex, the Central West End and downtown,” said Rob Lochner, Vice President of Development Cullinan Properties. “We love the location, and are excited to make a new place in St. Louis that everyone can be excited about.”
“We are not confined by existing structures. It’s pretty much a blank canvas where we can offer newer, more modern amenities and services,” he said.
Another site with TOD potential that confounds me is the vacant former cab company building next to the Delmar Metrolink station. How the hell has this not been redeveloped yet?dredger wrote: ^^ I think the argument for why this in not a TOD is that the development itself is still designed to funnel cars in and out of the large parking garage facing the future Chouteau Greenway for which the apartments are built on top of. The fortress mentality. Yes, you can walk over to the Grand Center station via the existing sidewalk but no real focus on Grand Ave itself or embracing the direct route to and from metrolink & the respective bus stops. In other words, I think you can make the case that the development is as auto centric as any other development you get, so happens to be close to metrolink and primary foot traffic is coming to and from the new hospital .
Where as Armory Development literally next to metrolink station and between Foundry & Armory their is a vision incorporate a pedestrian/bike path from the new Boyle metrolink station to the Grand Ave metrolink station via the old trestle of Foundry site and a proposed pedestrian bridge spanning I44. Yes, both will have fair share of parking but also seem better situated and willing to embrace or more inviting to pedestrian, non auto traffic.
On the other side of the coin, the development goes a long way than most developments in or around region metrolink stations and it makes a lot of sense to embrace the significant foot traffic between the new hospital and SLU medical school. So relatively speaking, TOD at end of day is a fair use when you speak in terms of St. Louis IMO. Heck, I still can't believe that the best use of a corner intersection that is next to University Tower, across from the Boulevards and literally a block away from Richmond metrolink station is a pathetic bank branch with drive thru teller/ATM or even the fact that Home Depot or Dierbergs are not torn down for better land use on either side of the Brentwood metrolink station
The city might not have many Targets and i have been critical of Iron Hill as underwhelming as a plug & play proposal but have to give credit to what is being developed and proposed such as Iron Hill are still far cry better than the big box store Target with a sea of surface parking development once upon a time proposed for the Foundry site and could easily have been proposed here. Just wish the extra step to be taken and reconsider how they approach Grand Ave & future Chouteau Greenway.
- 2,430
I think this is a case of TAD - Transit-Adjacent Development. But it doesn't appear to embrace or be oriented to transit.
^ Pretty much.
It's just a petty way to appease urbanists and appeal to the public transit crowd. Create a mirage of urban development and connection to our public transit system.
It's pretty much Streets of St. Charles style development. No shock that SLU chose their proposal. It's a very safe plan.
What gets me the most are the middle buildings. So underwhelming. Get some more on top of those. I still feel like this looks like a Richard Scarry mini-town development, and not a fan.
All in all, though, yes, better than a truely suburban type development, but it still feels like such an island rather than something that was developed organically. There's no semblance of traditional city development that is connected to the grid. Oh well.
It's just a petty way to appease urbanists and appeal to the public transit crowd. Create a mirage of urban development and connection to our public transit system.
It's pretty much Streets of St. Charles style development. No shock that SLU chose their proposal. It's a very safe plan.
What gets me the most are the middle buildings. So underwhelming. Get some more on top of those. I still feel like this looks like a Richard Scarry mini-town development, and not a fan.
All in all, though, yes, better than a truely suburban type development, but it still feels like such an island rather than something that was developed organically. There's no semblance of traditional city development that is connected to the grid. Oh well.
Well, but there IS no grid there. The site is already cut off from everything to the north and west, and there's a massive super-block medical complex to the south. Really not much of a way for them to change any of that. Yes, rebuilding the Spring Ave. bridge would be a big help, and let's hope that happens. But in the meantime, they're building a huge, dense, mixed-use project at one of our key intersections. Sounds good to me.
100%framer wrote: Well, but there IS no grid there. The site is already cut off from everything to the north and west, and there's a massive super-block medical complex to the south. Really not much of a way for them to change any of that. Yes, rebuilding the Spring Ave. bridge would be a big help, and let's hope that happens. But in the meantime, they're building a huge, dense, mixed-use project at one of our key intersections. Sounds good to me.
You make a reasonable point as the blocks definitely widen farther up Grand and there is no through street between Spring and Grand. I'm probably just being dramatic.
Sure there is.framer wrote: Well, but there IS no grid there. The site is already cut off from everything to the north and west, and there's a massive super-block medical complex to the south. Really not much of a way for them to change any of that. Yes, rebuilding the Spring Ave. bridge would be a big help, and let's hope that happens. But in the meantime, they're building a huge, dense, mixed-use project at one of our key intersections. Sounds good to me.
Gratiot runs under Grand and goes right past the Steelcote development, as does Papin.
Papin was closed for the new viaduct construction. It could easily be rebuilt and re-extended to run across Grand and all the way through this development to Spring.
Spring runs through the SLU medical campus, and along the western edge of this development.
Given all of the development in this area, its entirely possible that the Spring viaduct will be rebuilt at some point. Spring would then connect this development with SLU medical center, med campus, SLU main campus, and the Foundry.
There also may be an entrance or garage access drive from Chouteau south into the med center campus, between Grand and Spring. Just make it a street and extend it across Chouteau north to Gratiot.
Put stoplights / crosswalks at Spring / Chouteau, Papin / Grand, and Biondi Drive / Chouteau
There's your grid. No silly diagonal driveways necessary.
If they build this project the way it is rendered, any future attempt to restore the grid and make this area pedestrian-friendly will be pointless. Doesn't sound so good to me.
- 6,118
^Framer said it was closed to the north and west, and so it has been for more than a hundred fifty years; since the construction of the Pacific Railroad (later Missouri Pacific) in 1852. You'll find that those rail yards around the development really do go back that far. All the connections you mention are to the south and east save for Spring, which will only connect north if a bridge is reinstalled. Which Framer already mentioned. And which, by the way, is planned and shown in some of the earlier renderings. All the streets you mention are either already there or prominently featured in the plan. Gratiot is precisely the north edge of the built environment in the renderings and the central east/west thoroughfare appears to connect to Papin. They are by all appearances building exactly what you ask for, save that they're making it a touch curvy. Okay, maybe that's silly. But that's a point of style. I'd prefer square. But I also quite like brutalism. (Among a great many other styles.) The function will remain the same. Only the surface ornament is different. They'll still all end at the north and west edges of the development. (Save possibly Spring, should the city chose to rebuild it.) They'll all connect south and east: to Grand, to Steelcote, to the hospital. And north to the Armory and Foundry if someone does the heavy lift of building an expensive bridge over the rails and through the highway. They're doing more or less what you want already, actually. Just . . . with different artistic elements.
^ I don't know what renderings you are looking at, because I don't see any of that. I am referencing the most recent renderings which chriss posted above, on this page.
They show some crosswalk markings on the street, and some suicidal virtual pedestrians, but no actual street intersections on any of the renderings, just entrance / exit driveways like you would see at any strip mall development. No hint of Papin reconstruction / extension anywhere. No hint of a future Spring extension. Both Spring and Gratiot appear to be reduced to driveways from the south and east, respectively, which dead end at the sea of parking to the north of the project. There is about a 20' grade difference between the surface of Gratiot and Grand, so the view from Gratiot is either going to be the backside of a massive garage, a massive retaining wall, or a sea of parking with a massive retaining wall somewhere to the south, none of which are going to be very appealing to future pedestrians.
Off topic, but why does each and every building have to have a parking lot or diagonal parking spaces in front of it when there is a massive parking lot / garage half a block away to the north?
They show some crosswalk markings on the street, and some suicidal virtual pedestrians, but no actual street intersections on any of the renderings, just entrance / exit driveways like you would see at any strip mall development. No hint of Papin reconstruction / extension anywhere. No hint of a future Spring extension. Both Spring and Gratiot appear to be reduced to driveways from the south and east, respectively, which dead end at the sea of parking to the north of the project. There is about a 20' grade difference between the surface of Gratiot and Grand, so the view from Gratiot is either going to be the backside of a massive garage, a massive retaining wall, or a sea of parking with a massive retaining wall somewhere to the south, none of which are going to be very appealing to future pedestrians.
Off topic, but why does each and every building have to have a parking lot or diagonal parking spaces in front of it when there is a massive parking lot / garage half a block away to the north?
- 111
To some extent, it is because of ADA.urbanitas wrote: Off topic, but why does each and every building have to have a parking lot or diagonal parking spaces in front of it when there is a massive parking lot / garage half a block away to the north?
^^ My guess the reason there is no "hint" of a Papin reconstruction or a new Spring viaduct is because that is completely out of the scope for this developer. Any new streets or viaducts outside of this project would be carried out by the City, not this developer (or any developer for that matter). These renderings show what they want to build on this site, not the surrounding blocks they don't own.
For what it's worth the street that runs from Spring to Grand though this development looks like it would line right up with Papin should the city pursue a reconstruction of Papin...but until then, that is NOT a responsibility of this developer to do that. Public infrastructure is generally built by the city, a developer showing all these improvements to the surrounding area in their renderings would simply be false advertising. I can't remember the name of the street but the city recently just closed a small bridge on the South Side because it was unsafe, permanently closed because they can't afford to fix it. They don't have the cash to rebuild the Spring Viaduct, or a full sized grid. As far as pedestrians on Gratiot (which will stay in its current form, it simply curves into Spring) won't really matter unless Rush Truck Center, First Student Charter, Ace Rental and Sales and all those other industrial businesses go out of business or they move. North of those companies is 5 railroad tracks. Nobody is going to be out for a leisurely stroll along Gratiot, until something happens with all those other businesses.
Until then, this is a project that goes an extremely long way to finally adding some real density and life to this section of the city. When the city's financial situation improves and it becomes more feasible to rebuild grids and viaducts, then those things can be done. Absolutely nothing proposed here makes those other things you mention impossible.
![]()
For what it's worth the street that runs from Spring to Grand though this development looks like it would line right up with Papin should the city pursue a reconstruction of Papin...but until then, that is NOT a responsibility of this developer to do that. Public infrastructure is generally built by the city, a developer showing all these improvements to the surrounding area in their renderings would simply be false advertising. I can't remember the name of the street but the city recently just closed a small bridge on the South Side because it was unsafe, permanently closed because they can't afford to fix it. They don't have the cash to rebuild the Spring Viaduct, or a full sized grid. As far as pedestrians on Gratiot (which will stay in its current form, it simply curves into Spring) won't really matter unless Rush Truck Center, First Student Charter, Ace Rental and Sales and all those other industrial businesses go out of business or they move. North of those companies is 5 railroad tracks. Nobody is going to be out for a leisurely stroll along Gratiot, until something happens with all those other businesses.
Until then, this is a project that goes an extremely long way to finally adding some real density and life to this section of the city. When the city's financial situation improves and it becomes more feasible to rebuild grids and viaducts, then those things can be done. Absolutely nothing proposed here makes those other things you mention impossible.
