Having said that, I believe that property owners MUST be required to maintain their properties. It is the responsibility of city government to monitor and regulate this. The City currently wants to “acquire” my house and will possibly take it without my consent for “redevelopment”. My house (which was built in 1899) was a gut rehab that we moved into in 2003 and made additional improvements. At this time, the City plans to take my house only to tear it down to replace it with office, retail and CONDOS. The problem with this is that because some property owners have been allowed to keep derelict, vacant and unsafe buildings my house has been included in the plan to develop the area.

As a homeowner, I’m very much concerned with the development around me. I want the Georgian Square development to be well thought out and successful as this is imperative to the investment I’ve made in my home. However, it is not necessary for the houses between 13th Street and Tucker to be demolished to make their Georgian Square development work. Actually, if infill housing was used with putting up office/retail spaces in the empty corner lots and property owners forced to bring their properties to a certain level of upkeep the area could be an added benefit to the Georgian Square. I believe visitors to the downtown area would prefer to see a more urban residential area than a grocery store and Walgreens as the focal points of their entrance from the South.

The traffic on the Truman Parkway is increasing not decreasing.

There are many downtown workers that drive by this site every day. And more will be coming soon with the shut down of Highway 40. Even if another grocery store goes in the Washington Avenue area this store will be much more convenient for downtown workers who live outside of the downtown area(perhaps this is why Supervalue has decided to put its store here).

The Jefferson and Lafayette Foodland site is not going to become another grocery store. As mentioned in the paper Jefferson Avenue is going to be shut down for two years while the Jefferson overpass and the Jefferson bridge over 40 is being rebuilt. What retailer will want to locate on a site that has no traffic? And I think Guilded Age is developing that site also. I doubt they put another grocery store there.

This won’t become another “ghetto” store as long as the rest of the site will also be developed.

If the U was pushed forward, putting parking on the outside of the site it might work then. With Soulard style carriage openings the parking lot could connect to a people only square facing Lafayette Avenue and City Hospital. The store frontage of potential retail space would double. Maybe a outdoor food court of some type?

A public space of some undermined size could have outside dining, outside activities and become a city destination in its own right. Human scale complimenting automobile culture, both succeed.

Autos would back up to the already vast highway wasteland behind the site, a perfect marriage of auto with auto.

And for economics 101 fans, the per square unit of income goes up with smaller businesses and by doubling the retail square facing City Hospital. Marketing is more defined and easier with attractive public spaces.

Walgreen’s could wrap at one end and the grocery at the other, right up to Lafayette Avenue.

Deliveries could be worked out in this scheme.

Then the U might make sense.

Steve Wilke-Shapiro discusses the Schnucks site on Grand and Gravois on his blog http://15thwardstl.org/node/124.He did several postings in addition to this one. He also did drawings of alternates. This is the type of activity that should be encouraged.

1. The main grocery building sits back from the street just like the main city hsopital building does.
2. The Walgreens and the buildings on the east edge of the parking lot flank an open space just like the city hospital ward buildings do.
3. The design looks to me like it incorporates a brink wall with a fence on top of it along lafayette with an opening for cars (it only shows one and maybe there should be 2) and an opening for pedestrians.
4. I assume the trucks get to the back of the grocery by driving down the existing 14th street although the plan doesn’t show that detail.

I like the design which seems to me as if it is in keeping with the historic streetscape across the street. I think we should tell Gilded Age that they need to put in a pedestrian walkway through the middle of the parking lot so that the walkers/bikers can easily get to the front of the store.

Model hisotrical examples are often used when constructing new buildings in a historic area (the Lafayette Square historic code requires it and Gilded AGe is doing the same thing at Mississippi and Lafayette). I thnk they should be commended for their design rather than derided.

Here are a few points
1. It is important for political leadership to supply the public with an outline, a plan, if you will, of how the city should be built. Zoning is not cutting it, and just when is it time to discuss city wide goals? such as an integrated transit system used to support neighborhoods and neighborhood development.
2. Instead results are determine by developers and not public interest
3. Make no mistake about it; if a worldwide architectural and urban planning competition was conducted today; for the area along Lafayette between 12th and Mississippi, it would be proven that a beautiful pedestrian environment could thrive alongside autos.
4. This site is just a small area in a larger area that is part of the whole city. The parts should work together to make a whole. Thus this site should be looked at carefully to reorient urban planning in St Louis. It seems there are no projects in St. Louis that consider their contribution to the urban environment.
5. Instead the Quick Trip on Chippewa and Gravois, Loughborgh Commons and Southtown Centre are the norm. Without a debate about what is needed, where it is needed, it is difficult to tell if these developments are appropriate for their sites. In the case of the proposed development, it looks like a done deal; it may make money, but then why hand over the corner of 12th and Gravois so Gilded Age can build another parking lot? If they and they followers don’t think the design of the city matters, then they should be prevented from subverting the public interest.
6. This city needs new leadership. Urban policies have failed, protecting profits for a few while ignoring the good of the city.
7. Good design ultimately equals profits. The difference is that the profits are for all.

This is about as good of design as you can have for this space. Meanwhile, down the street on the Laffayette and Jefferson intersection, there are two new developments going in that serve foot traffic better. Why? Because that’s a foot traffic area. Those are your South Grand style shops, which I am looking forward to.

Very few people will walk to this area, even if it was structured for it. From Soulard, you have to cross over I-55 and cross the street at Tucker. From Lafayette Square, you have to walk across the exit/entrance ramps for two interstates. That’s without considering having to cross Lafayette, which is very busy along this 3-4 block stretch.

Gilded Age has done a good job with their other developments in the Lafayette Square area. I trust them with this one too.

Consider me among the target clientele for these stores–I live less than 1/4 mile away.