So many memories of mis-spent teens and early 20s of parking in that area >> Blues games at the old barn >> post gaming at the white house bar >> going inside the Jack in the Box.chris fuller wrote: ↑5:12 PM - Jul 17the old jack in the box across from steak n shake is gone
I am not a fan of drive thru anything myself but I do think the first step is getting things cleaned up. Vacant buildings put back into use or replaced with something productive. Something that contributes to the tax roll. Once it's cleaned up you start giving the confidence that it can be something more. It simply wont happen until a baseline is achieved. Look at the Dominos and Gateway Golf Carts on S. Kingshighway. Not a big fan of either but its went along way in cleaning up that stretch and making it more appealing.bwcrow1s wrote: ↑9:07 PM - Jul 21Yeah, because they'd rather that than a vacant building which has apparently been subject of some squatting. As if accepting the lowest hanging fruit won't just send the squatters elsewhere on Hampton.
It's a cycle that will never cure itself without bold vision. And well, it ain't there with the current alder.
I do not agree, because this lot is going to be a drive thru for another 20+ years. You can't just roll that back. This is the opportunity to stand firm on what the City and its residents have voiced as a collective and demand better if they want to do business there.STLAPTS wrote: ↑1:57 AM - Jul 22I am not a fan of drive thru anything myself but I do think the first step is getting things cleaned up. Vacant buildings put back into use or replaced with something productive. Something that contributes to the tax roll. Once it's cleaned up you start giving the confidence that it can be something more. It simply wont happen until a baseline is achieved. Look at the Dominos and Gateway Golf Carts on S. Kingshighway. Not a big fan of either but its went along way in cleaning up that stretch and making it more appealing.bwcrow1s wrote: ↑9:07 PM - Jul 21Yeah, because they'd rather that than a vacant building which has apparently been subject of some squatting. As if accepting the lowest hanging fruit won't just send the squatters elsewhere on Hampton.
It's a cycle that will never cure itself without bold vision. And well, it ain't there with the current alder.
What is SLUP?bwcrow1s wrote: ↑7:21 PM - Jul 22I do not agree, because this lot is going to be a drive thru for another 20+ years. You can't just roll that back. This is the opportunity to stand firm on what the City and its residents have voiced as a collective and demand better if they want to do business there.STLAPTS wrote: ↑1:57 AM - Jul 22I am not a fan of drive thru anything myself but I do think the first step is getting things cleaned up. Vacant buildings put back into use or replaced with something productive. Something that contributes to the tax roll. Once it's cleaned up you start giving the confidence that it can be something more. It simply wont happen until a baseline is achieved. Look at the Dominos and Gateway Golf Carts on S. Kingshighway. Not a big fan of either but its went along way in cleaning up that stretch and making it more appealing.bwcrow1s wrote: ↑9:07 PM - Jul 21Yeah, because they'd rather that than a vacant building which has apparently been subject of some squatting. As if accepting the lowest hanging fruit won't just send the squatters elsewhere on Hampton.
It's a cycle that will never cure itself without bold vision. And well, it ain't there with the current alder.
Added to that it basically ignores the entire spirit of SLUP, which what was the point of that entire exercise if nothing more to be yet again ignored.
If we were actually enforcing it 7 Brew would be building a mixed use building here rather than another drive through but it skirts by because the "parking" is going to be in back while it ***** Hampton even more with a flood of drive thru customers.
The whole thing is sad and lazy.
Strategic Land Use PlanSTLAPTS wrote: ↑7:27 PM - Jul 22What is SLUP?bwcrow1s wrote: ↑7:21 PM - Jul 22I do not agree, because this lot is going to be a drive thru for another 20+ years. You can't just roll that back. This is the opportunity to stand firm on what the City and its residents have voiced as a collective and demand better if they want to do business there.STLAPTS wrote: ↑1:57 AM - Jul 22I am not a fan of drive thru anything myself but I do think the first step is getting things cleaned up. Vacant buildings put back into use or replaced with something productive. Something that contributes to the tax roll. Once it's cleaned up you start giving the confidence that it can be something more. It simply wont happen until a baseline is achieved. Look at the Dominos and Gateway Golf Carts on S. Kingshighway. Not a big fan of either but its went along way in cleaning up that stretch and making it more appealing.
Added to that it basically ignores the entire spirit of SLUP, which what was the point of that entire exercise if nothing more to be yet again ignored.
If we were actually enforcing it 7 Brew would be building a mixed use building here rather than another drive through but it skirts by because the "parking" is going to be in back while it ***** Hampton even more with a flood of drive thru customers.
The whole thing is sad and lazy.
Agreed. If mixed use was required it would be vacant for another 20 years.StlAlex wrote: ↑7:52 PM - Jul 227-Brew wouldn't be building a mixed use building here if they were required to because they'd back out because that's not what they do.
I think there's far better places to direct distaste with land use than this location.
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
Tough sh*t then, I guess do your business where no one cares about the future of the streetscape.StlAlex wrote: ↑7:52 PM - Jul 227-Brew wouldn't be building a mixed use building here if they were required to because they'd back out because that's not what they do.
I think there's far better places to direct distaste with land use than this location.
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
The city didn't though. The Board of Adjustment approved the variances. It'll be a heat island with a tiny FAR to keep the property assessment as low as possible while maximizing wealth extraction, just like the one at 3224 S. Kingshighway.StlAlex wrote: ↑7:19 PM - Jul 237-Brew is probably objectively an upgrade over Jack In The Box and the city can better dictate how the land is used with it being new build.
Because on its face it's a stupid idea that would basically ensure no chain restaurants ever open in the city, which would mean their business goes out to the county locations. Places like Jimmy John's, Dunkin, Canes, Chick fil A, Smoothie King, Scooters, 7-Brew, Chipotle, Panda Express, etc would not have opened in the city in the last several years had there been a near total ban on drive thrus.PeterXCV wrote:Good response, no engagement with the reasons I put forth about why drive thrus are bad, just calling the idea of not building any more of them in the City stupid.
Saying no would essentially guarantee this site will remain vacant for who knows how much longer. There is no demand for mixed use development on a car sewer like Hampton is in this location, just like how there's also no demand for new mixed use on Kingshighway, which is why there's so many vacant plots of land and under-utilized land along it.quincunx wrote:Saying no doesn't require dying.
I agree living on Hampton would suck, though people live on it and Kingshighway, etc, despite the noise danger, and pollution. We almost had two new apt buildings at Kingshighway and I-64 after all.
Dunkin's opening a location in the strip mall on Forest Park Ave though, without a drive thru. There's also several Jimmy John's locations like in Clayton, Central West End, on nearby Oakland ave without drive thrus. The Chipotle in Clayton and the one on Grand have no drive thru.StlAlex wrote: ↑7:58 PM - Jul 23Because on its face it's a stupid idea that would basically ensure no chain restaurants ever open in the city, which would mean their business goes out to the county locations. Places like Jimmy John's, Dunkin, Canes, Chick fil A, Smoothie King, Scooters, 7-Brew, Chipotle, Panda Express, etc would not have opened in the city in the last several years had there been a near total ban on drive thrus.PeterXCV wrote:Good response, no engagement with the reasons I put forth about why drive thrus are bad, just calling the idea of not building any more of them in the City stupid.
The city would suffer because of such a ban.
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
It's almost like there's very limited locations that can support these establishments without a drive thru. Like the CWE next to a hospital complex, downtown Clayton, a college campus.....PeterXCV wrote:Dunkin's opening a location in the strip mall on Forest Park Ave though, without a drive thru. There's also several Jimmy John's locations like in Clayton, Central West End, on nearby Oakland ave without drive thrus. The Chipotle in Clayton and the one on Grand have no drive thru.StlAlex wrote: ↑7:58 PM - Jul 23Because on its face it's a stupid idea that would basically ensure no chain restaurants ever open in the city, which would mean their business goes out to the county locations. Places like Jimmy John's, Dunkin, Canes, Chick fil A, Smoothie King, Scooters, 7-Brew, Chipotle, Panda Express, etc would not have opened in the city in the last several years had there been a near total ban on drive thrus.PeterXCV wrote:Good response, no engagement with the reasons I put forth about why drive thrus are bad, just calling the idea of not building any more of them in the City stupid.
The city would suffer because of such a ban.
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
Personally I'm not clamoring for more fast food development in the City but it seems like they'll figure it out if they want to be here. Also F*** Chick-Fil-A seriously.
