Not sure St. Louis needs more prospective developers buying up property and sitting on them indefinitely.TransportMe wrote: ↑Mar 27, 2018If developers are wise they would start acquiring land before light rail is implemented and then profit off of the land value gain.
- 307
According to a resident posting on Nextdoor, LSRC (the local resident association) did have input in the project in meetings that took place over several months, so I am hopeful that clears the main hurdle
From a tweet I read, the primary HOK architect, Bill O'Dell owns a lot of that land so it might be more him just using his own firm. Lotta questions on this thing so far.
I said it once, I'll say it again, Christine Ingrassia allowing the demo of those corner buildings for the QT seems really short-sighted when plans like this come around.
I said it once, I'll say it again, Christine Ingrassia allowing the demo of those corner buildings for the QT seems really short-sighted when plans like this come around.
I guess so. But how can you predict this kind of development? Even the Pulte home development was a huge step forward for the area. And if that had happened, this proposal would've been a figment of our imaginations.
It's silly to blame a single person for "allowing" a QT to come in. This forum offers a single-story of automobiles. Just because we may be better off without them, doesn't mean the community feels the same way. I'm not in favor of a gas station consuming an urban corner, but it's done. Look at what's going on around it. At least it's not a fenced surface parking lot for the sheet metal union.
It's silly to blame a single person for "allowing" a QT to come in. This forum offers a single-story of automobiles. Just because we may be better off without them, doesn't mean the community feels the same way. I'm not in favor of a gas station consuming an urban corner, but it's done. Look at what's going on around it. At least it's not a fenced surface parking lot for the sheet metal union.
You're right. There is a lot worse. I just feel it's time to turn a corner on that stuff. Pun intended. Seems like every time we put a hole in the urban fabric we point to other past mistakes to justify it.dylank wrote: ↑Mar 27, 2018I guess so. But how can you predict this kind of development? Even the Pulte home development was a huge step forward for the area. And if that had happened, this proposal would've been a figment of our imaginations.
It's silly to blame a single person for "allowing" a QT to come in. This forum offers a single-story of automobiles. Just because we may be better off without them, doesn't mean the community feels the same way. I'm not in favor of a gas station consuming an urban corner, but it's done. Look at what's going on around it. At least it's not a fenced surface parking lot for the sheet metal union.
Having said that, I lived on Hickory and tried to buy the place I was renting because I figured a development would eventually happen there. I think it's easy to see that land could be perfect to expand Lafayette's footprint. I am really pulling for Jefferson to come back from auto hell.
- 10
Why not have prospective developers? We are seeing a developer / real estate sales company begin to focus on Gravois Park neighborhood. UIC is beginning to buy in Hyde Park too. What if other urban minded developers buy alongside rehabbers up and down the route? This is where communities must lay the groundwork with neighborhood and city comprehensive plans in order to guide growth according to community character and vision. Lafayette Square has completed such a plan (needs updating), Gravois -Jefferson is doing one now. As a result Lafayette Square with this development will see a developer design a development in accordance with their neighborhood plan...albeit a few blocks over from originally preferred for mixed use. It's giving certainty to the market of where and how supply can meet market demand.
Who/what company?TransportMe wrote: ↑Mar 27, 2018We are seeing a developer / real estate sales company begin to focus on Gravois Park neighborhood.
Here's a bunch more info from the Lafayette Square Neighborhood Association (I hope it's OK to share this here):
http://lafayettesquare.org/wp-content/u ... opment.pdf
http://lafayettesquare.org/wp-content/u ... opment.pdf
- 6,120
I like a lot of it but . . . (very small but) . . . Why is it necessary to close every stinking street in town? Apart from that, carry on. Always glad to see the Obata legacy expanding. Always happy to see new development where there is empty land.
- 2,386
^I agree, I hate street closures as well. In this case my read was that the street that is closed abuts some of the more high volume traffic portions of the project (hotel area) and I think this may have been done in conjunction with the neighborhood association to alleviate some concerns. No inside knowledge of this, just makes sense to me given the context.
In the grand scheme of this project if this^ is in fact the case, I believe it is a reasonable compromise given the scope and trans-formative nature of the proposal.
In the grand scheme of this project if this^ is in fact the case, I believe it is a reasonable compromise given the scope and trans-formative nature of the proposal.
No, I completely agree.
It's frustrating to see "urban" developments turn into office/residential parks that disrupt the grid. Missouri is pretty narrow north of Park already, it's not like it's a drag strip. Why are we so afraid of possible traffic? Isn't it reasonable to assume that cars will just avoid taking it and hopping over to another major thoroughfare like Jefferson, Chouteau, Truman, or Lafayette? Not that it's any better for pedestrian safety next to a park, but I imagine most drivers already use these routes as opposed to neighborhood through streets like Missouri.
I just feel like it will feel completely disconnected from the neighborhood. Isolated. From the looks of those plans, the only way to access any of these things will be from Jefferson or Chouteau. Why?
It's frustrating to see "urban" developments turn into office/residential parks that disrupt the grid. Missouri is pretty narrow north of Park already, it's not like it's a drag strip. Why are we so afraid of possible traffic? Isn't it reasonable to assume that cars will just avoid taking it and hopping over to another major thoroughfare like Jefferson, Chouteau, Truman, or Lafayette? Not that it's any better for pedestrian safety next to a park, but I imagine most drivers already use these routes as opposed to neighborhood through streets like Missouri.
I just feel like it will feel completely disconnected from the neighborhood. Isolated. From the looks of those plans, the only way to access any of these things will be from Jefferson or Chouteau. Why?
- 2,430
unless I've missed it I still don't see anything about raw numbers on square footage, number of units, etc. seems weird.framer wrote: ↑Mar 28, 2018Here's a bunch more info from the Lafayette Square Neighborhood Association (I hope it's OK to share this here):
http://lafayettesquare.org/wp-content/u ... opment.pdf
Honestly, I love Lafayette Square but that is kinda how the neighborhood wants it. Isolated. Not a big fan of the street closures and fences.bwcrow1s wrote: ↑Mar 29, 2018No, I completely agree.
It's frustrating to see "urban" developments turn into office/residential parks that disrupt the grid. Missouri is pretty narrow north of Park already, it's not like it's a drag strip. Why are we so afraid of possible traffic? Isn't it reasonable to assume that cars will just avoid taking it and hopping over to another major thoroughfare like Jefferson, Chouteau, Truman, or Lafayette? Not that it's any better for pedestrian safety next to a park, but I imagine most drivers already use these routes as opposed to neighborhood through streets like Missouri.
I just feel like it will feel completely disconnected from the neighborhood. Isolated. From the looks of those plans, the only way to access any of these things will be from Jefferson or Chouteau. Why?
Thank you, I was thinking the same thing. Not that it's a bad thing, but this seems like an awful lot of community engagement for a proposal missing a lot of concrete details - is this a pie-in-the-sky wishful proposal like HOK's renderings of Chouteau's Lake all those years ago or something closer to happening? Any details whether financing has been secured? Are they working to secure tenants for that hotel, all those retail spots, housing management, etc? Will they start in phases or all at once? And so on.STLrainbow wrote: ↑Mar 29, 2018unless I've missed it I still don't see anything about raw numbers on square footage, number of units, etc. seems weird.framer wrote: ↑Mar 28, 2018Here's a bunch more info from the Lafayette Square Neighborhood Association (I hope it's OK to share this here):
http://lafayettesquare.org/wp-content/u ... opment.pdf
I'd love to see this happen - begrudgingly even with the street closures if the neighbors insist - but I'm a bit skeptical. This seems like a less-than-fully-realized development plan at this point based on what's been released publicly. Maybe they've said more in the community engagement meetings?
-RBB
One of the neighbors wrote a very rational, logical defense of the closed street thing over on NextSTL Let's face it, it's probably the only way this gets built.
Yes, it is tempered. Not sure if it's really logical. Like someone else pointed out on there, looks like it was recently open in the 70's and possibly 80's. You're not going to see buses and tractor trailers magically deciding to go down narrow streets.
There's no reason why these potential new residents should have limited access to the heart of the neighborhood as its cultural hub. There are obvious solutions someone else pointed out, such as opening Missouri AND MacKay and making each one way streets to limit the amount of traffic.
Again, most people visiting for food, drink, or leisure from outside the neighborhood wouldn't use those streets to get around the Square. Most people would likely use Park, Lafayette, Truman, Jefferson, etc. Maybe Chouteau, but why force yourself down a narrow residential street when you could be at the park or a restaurant in 30 seconds?
It just feels very exclusionary. As welcoming to the development as the neighbors may seem, it still has a sentiment of isolationism and holier-than-though. It doesn't make any sense to me to further damage the grid. The park and business district (as well as the urban architecture) are the cultural centers of the neighborhood, and one of the reasons people would want to live there.
The plan, as it is, feels like a rendition of The Boulevard, not an inviting, urban, walkable, welcoming neighborhood.
Also note adding a right turn lane to Jefferson at Chouteau, making the crossing of Jefferson 6 lanes wide.
- 6,120
^Jefferson is absurd and Chouteau isn't much better. Both need a serious diet. Hopefully Metrolink will help with that. (That's the only reason they're that wide: they had streetcars. And parking. continuously. No reason not to put both back.)
Yes, the street closures are probably the only way this happens. But . . . should that really be so? I'll accept the cost, I suppose. Grudgingly. I have no choice anyway, since it's not my nabe. Nor was it ever. But I can at least wish we were more forward thinking about this. Yes, this could be fantastic. And my one hope is that a lot of these silly barricades can eventually be removed. When people are more forward thinking and the demand for the land is higher.
But anyway, even if this feels like the Boulevard, there's a difference. It's within walking distance of Union Station; of downtown. Of stuff. Of Lafayette Park even. Even if the streets are closed to automobiles. The Boulevard is within walking distance of the Galleria. But who would walk there? I mean, comeon, with all that "free" parking?
Yes, the street closures are probably the only way this happens. But . . . should that really be so? I'll accept the cost, I suppose. Grudgingly. I have no choice anyway, since it's not my nabe. Nor was it ever. But I can at least wish we were more forward thinking about this. Yes, this could be fantastic. And my one hope is that a lot of these silly barricades can eventually be removed. When people are more forward thinking and the demand for the land is higher.
But anyway, even if this feels like the Boulevard, there's a difference. It's within walking distance of Union Station; of downtown. Of stuff. Of Lafayette Park even. Even if the streets are closed to automobiles. The Boulevard is within walking distance of the Galleria. But who would walk there? I mean, comeon, with all that "free" parking?
This sounds like it will be coming together quickly if Odell has financing in place.
But Odell, a longtime HOK principal who still works at the architecture firm, provided few details on the number of apartments and other specifications in the plans, saying more information would be released in the coming months.
However, he did say that he has financing lined up and could be ready to start construction on at least part of the project this summer, pending city approvals.
framer wrote: ↑Apr 07, 2018New article from the Post:
http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/ ... ed172.html
But Odell, a longtime HOK principal who still works at the architecture firm, provided few details on the number of apartments and other specifications in the plans, saying more information would be released in the coming months.
However, he did say that he has financing lined up and could be ready to start construction on at least part of the project this summer, pending city approvals.
- 6,120
She's learned? We all learn. I'd embrace the change and run with it, personally. She generally sounds like an involved and responsive ward representative. And the plan is mostly pretty solid and has good backing and so seems likely to have wings.
A bit more info:
$146 million project, privately financed. They intend to create a CID. They are asking for a 20 year abatement at 95%.
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... seeks.html
$146 million project, privately financed. They intend to create a CID. They are asking for a 20 year abatement at 95%.
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... seeks.html
Can we add the abatement tracker to the projects list? Would be interesting to compare.MRNHS wrote: ↑Apr 24, 2018A bit more info:
$146 million project, privately financed. They intend to create a CID. They are asking for a 20 year abatement at 95%.
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... seeks.html
^ Might add another one to the list. Looks like a request in for The Hill/old magic chef site I believe as well as. The plus side is $195 million in housing development between the two on sites that have sit empty for years is a big number
You assume some push back at least on Mackay Quarter if privately financed and most of the property in possession of the developer.
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... -asks.html
You assume some push back at least on Mackay Quarter if privately financed and most of the property in possession of the developer.
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... -asks.html