Chris has a story about a planned rehab of two apartment buildings (plus a small addition) into a 24-room boutique hotel:
https://www.cityscene-stl.com/post/bout ... WTHUx1nVMo
![]()
https://www.cityscene-stl.com/post/bout ... WTHUx1nVMo
This is a great location for such a project, but seems a shame to lose the apartment units.
Let's replace the housing units with a new building at San Bonita and Skinker.
BTW, the new single-family on Skinker just to the south is shaping up nicely.
Thanks for sharing. I'm definitely interested to see the neighborhood's reaction to this. The project adds 5 parking spaces to the property where there are currently none, so that might appease the neighbors some. It also seems to me that this is being purposely designed to easily switch back to apartments in the future if the hotel fails.framer wrote: ↑Dec 31, 2022Chris has a story about a planned rehab of two apartment buildings (plus a small addition) into a 24-room boutique hotel:
https://www.cityscene-stl.com/post/bout ... WTHUx1nVMo
The article doesn't say if Barrio and Clementine's would be remaining. If they'd be kicked out, I will be against this project. If not, I'm am all for it, and welcome another dining/bar establishment to the neighborhood in addition to the hotel.
Having previously lived in Demun for nearly 5 years I can say no way this flies.
1) the neighborhood will nimby this so hard.
2) parking is already a challenge. So unless they buy space from Concordia and valet 24/7 I don’t see how that works.
1) the neighborhood will nimby this so hard.
2) parking is already a challenge. So unless they buy space from Concordia and valet 24/7 I don’t see how that works.
There's no way newly constructed apartments would rent for anywhere close to what the tenants in the existing buildings pay. Developers know they can get a premium for new construction and they charge it.quincunx wrote: ↑Dec 31, 2022Let's replace the housing units with a new building at San Bonita and Skinker.
- 2,419
Isn't that San Bonita and Skinker lot doomed because a few houses would lose sunlight?
If so, if that defense worked for them before, why wouldn't it work again?
If so, if that defense worked for them before, why wouldn't it work again?
The rumor was when I lived in the neighborhood that the land on that lot is owned by the tower next door and the houses nearby. And that nothing will ever get built there.RockChalkSTL wrote: ↑Dec 31, 2022Isn't that San Bonita and Skinker lot doomed because a few houses would lose sunlight?
If so, if that defense worked for them before, why wouldn't it work again?
I am technically not in THIS neighborhood, but I am walking distance and I am all for it. Assuming Bario and Clementines stay.
No offense but thats why you’re for it.
I know the neighborhood and the insularity. The parking question alone will kill it. It’s not that I’m against it but know how people think.
I'm not sure I follow? I'm for the development because it keeps the retail? Yes. I am for it because it's in my neighborhood, and I believe it will make it a better neighborhood? Yes.dweebe wrote: ↑Jan 06, 2023No offense but thats why you’re for it.jeff707 wrote: ↑Jan 04, 2023I am technically not in THIS neighborhood, but I am walking distance and I am all for it. Assuming Bario and Clementines stay.
I know the neighborhood and the insularity. The parking question alone will kill it. It’s not that I’m against it but know how people think.
Upon further reading, I think you are suggesting that since I am not next door, I don't have to deal with increased traffic and parking, and since I don't have to deal with it, I am for it, but if the parking affected me, I would be against it, which is a pretty crazy jump. My kids go to Captain elementary, a block away, and I have to deal with parking there frequently. More importantly, I was actually simply chiming in as a single anecdotal data point that not everyone in the neighborhood will nimby the hell out of it. Your comment suggests that since it is not in my backyard, I am therefore for it. However, I am absolutely close enough that if I showed up to a hearing on this project opposing it, I would absolutely - correctly - be accused of being a nimby.jeff707 wrote: ↑Jan 06, 2023I'm not sure I follow? I'm for the development because it keeps the retail? Yes. I am for it because it's in my neighborhood, and I believe it will make it a better neighborhood? Yes.dweebe wrote: ↑Jan 06, 2023No offense but thats why you’re for it.jeff707 wrote: ↑Jan 04, 2023I am technically not in THIS neighborhood, but I am walking distance and I am all for it. Assuming Bario and Clementines stay.
I know the neighborhood and the insularity. The parking question alone will kill it. It’s not that I’m against it but know how people think.
I'm in the neighborhood as well, and previously commented I am for this development if Barrio and Clementine's stay. It's an active and progressive neighborhood, it's not full of nimby's. However if those establishments would be forced to close, I will vocally be against it.
From what I know, Clementine’s lease was negotiated well before the sale of this building. The new owner should have to abide by it.
I believe no retail tenants are supposed to vacate their space unless they let their lease expire. The rendering, for what it’s worth, shows Clementine’s.
Now a lot of the condos along Northwood and Southwood have their alley garage parking so they'll be fine. I just know that all of those apartments on S and N Rosebury don't have any parking. So more transient hotel parking will only make it worse for those tenants and that won't enthuse those landlords. And what will Sashas, Strands, Louie and Kaldis have to say?jeff707 wrote: ↑Jan 06, 2023Upon further reading, I think you are suggesting that since I am not next door, I don't have to deal with increased traffic and parking, and since I don't have to deal with it, I am for it, but if the parking affected me, I would be against it, which is a pretty crazy jump. My kids go to Captain elementary, a block away, and I have to deal with parking there frequently. More importantly, I was actually simply chiming in as a single anecdotal data point that not everyone in the neighborhood will nimby the hell out of it. Your comment suggests that since it is not in my backyard, I am therefore for it. However, I am absolutely close enough that if I showed up to a hearing on this project opposing it, I would absolutely - correctly - be accused of being a nimby.jeff707 wrote: ↑Jan 06, 2023I'm not sure I follow? I'm for the development because it keeps the retail? Yes. I am for it because it's in my neighborhood, and I believe it will make it a better neighborhood? Yes.dweebe wrote: ↑Jan 06, 2023
No offense but thats why you’re for it.
I know the neighborhood and the insularity. The parking question alone will kill it. It’s not that I’m against it but know how people think.
I can't imagine any reason why restaurants and coffee shops would object to having a source of patrons who eat out for most meals (ie. hotel guests) right next door.
I don't think this conversion (14 apartments into 24 hotel rooms) will increase the number of cars parking in the area since hotel guests are more likely to be car-free than residents and while some residents may have a second vehicle, hotel guests will likely have one or none. On balance I'd guess evens out to no net increase.
I don't think this conversion (14 apartments into 24 hotel rooms) will increase the number of cars parking in the area since hotel guests are more likely to be car-free than residents and while some residents may have a second vehicle, hotel guests will likely have one or none. On balance I'd guess evens out to no net increase.
What percentage of hotel guest arrive via taxi/uber/lyft these days?
Last night, I attended the public meeting about this proposal. Pretty good turnout (I'd estimate 50-60 people). From what I could tell, I sensed the crowd was pretty evenly split between for and against the concept. To my surprise, there was hardly any drama or yelling. Parking, traffic flow and deliveries/trash pickup seem to be the major concerns, although some residents did express concerns about the transient nature of a hotel so close to an elementary school. A couple people also worried that replacing the current apartment units with a higher-end hotel rooms would drive up rents and make the neighborhood unaffordable for lower income residents and families. The majority of questions and concerns people had sounded reasonable and sensible, with a few exceptions.
This proposal is still at the beginning stages so it's far from a done deal at this point, but it's clear that the development team is passionate about the neighborhood and aim to preserve and enhance the intimate urban character of DeMun. The presenters made a point to mention that the apartment units are in need of major upgrades (plumbing, HVAC, etc), so rent increases to cover the costs are sure to happen even if the hotel concept does not move forward.
Overall, it sounds like an exciting project, and hopefully construction won't be too disruptive to residents and businesses.
More specifics were discussed in regards to parking, amenities, construction timeline, zoning, etc, but I don't have time to lay it all out now. Another informational Q&A is scheduled for Thurs. Feb. 23rd at 7pm at Concordia Seminary.
This proposal is still at the beginning stages so it's far from a done deal at this point, but it's clear that the development team is passionate about the neighborhood and aim to preserve and enhance the intimate urban character of DeMun. The presenters made a point to mention that the apartment units are in need of major upgrades (plumbing, HVAC, etc), so rent increases to cover the costs are sure to happen even if the hotel concept does not move forward.
Overall, it sounds like an exciting project, and hopefully construction won't be too disruptive to residents and businesses.
More specifics were discussed in regards to parking, amenities, construction timeline, zoning, etc, but I don't have time to lay it all out now. Another informational Q&A is scheduled for Thurs. Feb. 23rd at 7pm at Concordia Seminary.