urbanSTL

urbanitas wrote: ↑

Apr 06, 2021

Well, they could keep it simple and just divide up the property into quadrants by extending/rebuilding Prospect south to Chouteau, and Papin west to Spring. Then sell the four resulting parcels to Green Street, PPG, KDG, and Lux Living. Give them each let's say, a 3-7,500sf office or retail min./max. allowance.

Of course, the result would probably just be four similar, amenity-encrusted Texas doughnuts, and it may not provide the density we'd all like to see, but at least it has a realistic chance of filling up much of that highly-visible, vacant lot sometime soon. And the 1,000 or so apartments, along with the med center, ought to generate sufficient demand so the retail doesn't cannibalize anything else in the area.

I'm just going to post what Urbanitas expressed earlier as what I would like to see happen.      
A simple solid plan not dependent on one developer and if it comes in pieces over time that is fine with me as I would still like to see some more solid infill happen in/between CORTEX Crawler/Cortex K/Foundry & Armory Phase II first and foremost.  

I would be thrilled with a basic street grid/infrastructure buildout and a nice starter building with solid urban form to set the tone for the area.

In slightly related news, those hoping that Captain Ds vacates anytime soon may be disappointed to hear that they have been sprucing the place up lately. New signs, new paint job, etc...

From the two competing proposals of potentially three being considered, many of the comments made here are addressed. The proposals have a "block" form and address Grand adequately. The two I see also keep the central plaza envisioned by Cullinan with two different ways to activate it. As for the exact makeup of the proposals, I'll hold off on that for now since one proposal isn't as specific as the other when it comes down to this, but both aren't so retail heavy like the Cullinan proposal. 

We'll see if either of these are picked or the elusive third submission that myself, and some others, think is a lie is chosen. I know who the two developers are and have been told who the third is, but can't confirm if the third is really who I was told it is because if it is. One developer I know of and the elusive third gives me concerns that they wont be able to pull this off if they win based on track record and pipeline elsewhere. One developer has a plan in place and is in talks with some tenants and operators for the spaces and has a reputation of getting things done. So, take that as you'd like. Just I'm not getting my hopes up for any of the proposals in their current forms.

Then SLU needs to stop looking for silver bullets.

I would also accept a privately funded NBA stadium 

GoHarvOrGoHome wrote: ↑

Sep 01, 2021

I would also accept a privately funded NBA stadium 

Nope, not happening because when I win one of the big lotto's whether it be Powerball or Mega  my plan is to buy Blues, add NBA expansion team to the mix and keep them downtown.  The plan includes buying the Old Muni Courts building so I can knock down the current small Enterprise parking lot on west side of stadium for expanded front office/locker space and adding an underground concourse to the east under street/parking garage as part of my Old Muni Courts development that will infill the parking lot with a tower as per of mixed use/residential/hotel tower (HOOP VILLAGE).   If all goes good, will look at phase II across Clark Ave to the south and phase III when USPS moves out of their mail processing center to the East (HOOP II & III)   Just haven't spent time to figure out if my new owner penthouse unit in the new tower next door will have a view of Arch view or not.  

^You better plan on winning several lottery jackpots if you want an NBA expansion team. 

dredger wrote: ↑

Aug 31, 2021

urbanitas wrote: ↑

Apr 06, 2021

Well, they could keep it simple and just divide up the property into quadrants by extending/rebuilding Prospect south to Chouteau, and Papin west to Spring. Then sell the four resulting parcels to Green Street, PPG, KDG, and Lux Living. Give them each let's say, a 3-7,500sf office or retail min./max. allowance.

Of course, the result would probably just be four similar, amenity-encrusted Texas doughnuts, and it may not provide the density we'd all like to see, but at least it has a realistic chance of filling up much of that highly-visible, vacant lot sometime soon. And the 1,000 or so apartments, along with the med center, ought to generate sufficient demand so the retail doesn't cannibalize anything else in the area.

I'm just going to post what Urbanitas expressed earlier as what I would like to see happen.      
A simple solid plan not dependent on one developer and if it comes in pieces over time that is fine with me as I would still like to see some more solid infill happen in/between CORTEX Crawler/Cortex K/Foundry & Armory Phase II first and foremost.  

I will add to my previous comment, and reiterate the importance of establishing an attractive, active, pedestrian-friendly streetscape along Gratiot Street, from the railyard on the west to Topgolf and/or Steelcote - Phase 5 on the east.

The combination of pedestrian and ADA-compliant connections to Grand, and hopefully, the new Compton viaduct, easy access to Metro and eventually the Brickline Greenway, the aforementioned rooftop views, plus street connection(s) under the Grand viaduct, could make this area one of the most desirable neighborhoods in the city.  There's a huge amount of available land on either side of this half-mile-plus-long stretch of Gratiot, with ready-made pedestrian connections without people having to cross the Grand Avenue Grand Theft Auto Experience.  And all of it potentially anchored by major retail and entertainment tenants, and someday, connections to the Armory to the north, and the SLU med school campus and a thriving neighborhood to the south...

But if they turn Gratiot into a wall of parking garages, that will waste and permanently destroy all of this potential.  Gratiot and everything to the north will be a sketchy area full of vagrants and trash, and none of those parcels along the railyard will ever become anything better than what they are now.

urbanitas wrote: ↑

Sep 03, 2021

^And after looking at the proposed Topgolf facility location, it should be feasible to extend and ramp up Gratiot Street behind (north of) the facility and intersect with Compton Avenue, or perhaps pass under, as part of the new viaduct project, complete with cycle and pedster connections.

I wonder if they've even considered that...

It probably hasn't been considered and I wouldn't be opposed to it, just it seems like the future for Gratiot will be nothing more than a garage accessway. Any activation would be at the Grand level and nothing else. It sucks, but I guess developers don't want to waste money on adding retail and lobby space along a street that, in a way, is off the beaten path. 

In a way, I wonder if we could see the creation of an "Upper Gratiot Street" from where it goes down at Spring to just past Grand. This is a similar thing they've done in Nashville with Nashville Yards (upper 10th Avenue). It allows for pedestrian and vehicular access (for drop offs and pickups) above and garage access below. This is an expensive option, but it might be worth exploring.

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Sep 03, 2021

In a way, I wonder if we could see the creation of an "Upper Gratiot Street" from where it goes down at Spring to just past Grand. This is a similar thing they've done in Nashville with Nashville Yards (upper 10th Avenue). It allows for pedestrian and vehicular access (for drop offs and pickups) above and garage access below. This is an expensive option, but it might be worth exploring.

 But maybe an upper pedestrian path theme along southside of Gratiot embracing Steelcote's upcoming project but on the other side of Grand as well.   Somehow extend it a couple block to the east and west with it dove tailing back to grade by the time you either get to TopGolf and or Spring Ave on other side.   In other words, a trestle like mini trail on the otherside of the tracks.

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Sep 03, 2021

It probably hasn't been considered and I wouldn't be opposed to it, just it seems like the future for Gratiot will be nothing more than a garage accessway. Any activation would be at the Grand level and nothing else. It sucks, but I guess developers don't want to waste money on adding retail and lobby space along a street that, in a way, is off the beaten path. 

It is off the beaten path now, but any developer with any vision at all can see the potential.  PPG obviously did, or they never would have undertaken the Steelcote project.  But even they seem to be backing off, most likely because they saw the Iron Hill plans and realized that neither SLU nor the city had any interest in encouraging or enforcing development of a neighborhood in the area.

This is why the city should have prepared a highly-specific, long-term development plan for this area, and others like it, from the moment they first identified potential non-industrial land uses, or a developer or institution first expressed interest, whichever came first.  

A plan for every parcel which incorporates long-term infrastructure projects, and every stakeholder's goals, which every potential developer of the area can review from day one and which they can rely upon.  The plan can be flexible in some ways, but must be sacrosanct in others.  The city then must adhere to the plan when selecting developers and granting incentives.  Incentives for each phase of each project would then be directly proportional to a score based on how well it meets the overall development plan.  Having a specific, long-term plan in hand makes that process much more feasible and efficient, and will actually encourage smaller developers like PPG.  No pedestrian amenities, no incentives.  Long blank walls with no street activation, no incentives.  Period.

There is simply no way to develop this entire area piecemeal without such a plan and arrive at anything resembling a desirable neighborhood.

^ Can the City have any sort of plan when SLU has the development rights? They do control the development rights on the Iron Hill site, correct?

bwcrow1s wrote: ↑

Sep 05, 2021

^ Can the City have any sort of plan when SLU has the development rights? They do control the development rights on the Iron Hill site, correct?

SLU owns much of the land, can select the developer for those parcels, and certainly has leverage over the parcels they don't own, but the city still reviews plans and permit applications, and holds eminent domain rights and the tax incentive purse strings.

In any case, the city land use plan for the area was ostensibly coordinated with SLU.  The problem is that it is so vague and unenforceable that it is meaningless, and doesn't include any language about form, aesthetics, or infrastructure whatsoever.

urbanitas wrote: ↑

Sep 05, 2021

bwcrow1s wrote: ↑

Sep 05, 2021

^ Can the City have any sort of plan when SLU has the development rights? They do control the development rights on the Iron Hill site, correct?

SLU owns much of the land, can select the developer for those parcels, and certainly has leverage over the parcels they don't own, but the city still reviews plans and permit applications, and holds eminent domain rights and the tax incentive purse strings.

In any case, the city land use plan for the area was ostensibly coordinated with SLU.  The problem is that it is so vague and unenforceable that it is meaningless, and doesn't include any language about form, aesthetics, or infrastructure whatsoever.

Got it.  Thanks.

In recent months, I learned that SLU wants something here that's less residential heavy. The preferred proposal is an apparent balanced mix of office, residential, hotel, and entertainment/restaurants. Less residential surprised me but makes sense once you realize just how many apartments are planned nearby (Steelcote: 351+, Armory: 520, Foundry: 270 (for now), Aptitude on FPP: 192. TOTAL: 1333). It seems like a live-work-play development is preferred for Iron Hill, just no one has successfully checked the boxes for that yet. The development also has to be connected with the area instead of walled off. The hope is for this to bridge Steelcote Square and TopGolf with the Armory and Foundry. That's also something that hasn't been checked off yet.

I imagine there's still a ways to go before we see something at this site, but I'm keeping what I know in mind since it makes sense now. And who knows, maybe what'll happen is that the other planned apartments fill up nicely and SLU prefers a more residential heavy development. 

Would like to see the Brickline viaduct crossing 64 extended over the tracks to connect with Spring at Gratiot. Such a vital connection for whatever gets built here.

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Jun 20, 2022

a live-work-play development

The SLU "responsible urban development (to appease the critics)" buzzwords have been achieved.

Thoughts? Just eye candy?

I say invest this in Downtown.  Midtown already has its stewards that are doing some solid work that I believe will be continued.  Biggest pain point is SLU.