Will Fifth Third Bank At Loughborough Commons Connect To Sidewalk?

Has it really been nearly two full years since I’ve written about Loughborough Commons? It was December 2008 when I wrote about the new Burger King’s lack of pedestrian access despite the nearby sidewalk.

“Burger King has very generous provisions for the motorist but zip for the pedestrian. What pedestrians you might ask. Well, people do walk to Loughborough Commons. People also arrive by bus and bike. Yes, most use a car but we shouldn’t overlook those not driving private autos. Everyone spending money at Loughborough Commons is paying an extra tax to the Community Improvement district. Shouldn’t pedestrians expect some accommodation in return?”

Of course, nothing was done to correct the lack of pedestrian access.  Now construction has started on the Fifth Third Bank for the parcel between the main entrance and the Burger King.  Here is what the site looked like in late 2008:

The bank building faces Loughborough but will be reached internally. The drive through lanes, not the front door is what is visible from the main drive.

My assumption is the existing sidewalk will not be continued across the edge of the parcel and not up to the front door, a clear violation of the ADA.

I was only at Loughborough Commons for a few minutes but I spotted pedestrians leaving as I was leaving. Walkability is not that difficult but it is obviously out of the mindset of civil engineers and the developers who hire them.

- Steve Patterson

Loughborough Commons Community Improvement District Meeting Today, 3pm.

The Board of Directors of the Loughborough Commons Community Improvement District are meeting later today at the downtown law firm of Greensfelder, Hemker and Gale, P.C.  This ‘CID’ was set up to use some of the tax revenues collected at Loughorough Commons to fund improvements.  It is a quasi governmental entity and therefore subject to open meetings laws.

At right is the public notice found today at City Hall, click to view PDF copy.

Excise Division to Hold Hearing on Qdoba’s ‘Summer Garden’ & ‘Full Drink’ Request

The Qdoba chain’s latest store in the St. Louis region is open at Loughborough Commons. This afternoon the Excise Division will hold a hearing to determine if they should get a “full drink” liquor license and an outdoor “summer garden” permit. While the poor planning at Loughborough Commons disgusts me and I’m not fond of formula chain places I can’t imagine anyone telling them no at this point.

The place is done, including the patio. The outdoor area will soon be ideal for watching those folks driving around the new strip center to order their latte at the Starbuck’s drive-thru window.

What would happen if immediate neighbors all showed up at 2pm protesting the idea of people buying a bud light to go with their burrito? And further yet, drinking said bud on the patio.

So who is the excise division? Well, they are part of the Department of Public Safety — you know that department now headed by Charles Bryson. The DPS website doesn’t tell us much:

Excise Division

6 Employees
Robert W. Kraiberg, Commissioner
314-622-4191
The Excise Division is charged by City Charter with the regulation and control of liquor within the City of St. Louis. The Division is responsible for determining licensing in accordance with the City Liquor code, authorizing issuance of all liquor and non-intoxicating beer licenses, enforcement of City Liquor Laws and Ordinances and initiation of civil action to suspend, cancel or revoke licenses when violations to statutes occur.

That cannot be the extent of information about liquor licenses? So I went back to the main city site and used the search field. This is what I got:

The default is to search stlouis.missouri.org — the “CIN Main Site” or I could search stlcin.missouri.org which is a bit more descriptive. The third option is to the search the internet which we all can easily do from our browsers anyway. I picked the default and basically found press release information — even though press releases are found in the second search option according to the search page. So, I selected the second option and there I found a FAQ page on Liquor licenses. Why this is not linked directly from the Excise Division/Department of Public Safety site I don’t know.

So we see a full drink license “cannot be issued if the surrounding neighborhood disapproves.” Gee, define surrounding. It seems they have a “formal procedure” that can only be obtained via a phone call from 8-5 Monday through Friday. I’d say secret procedure is more like it.  You know I think this whole web thing might actually take off so it would be OK to invest in getting more and more information available to the public via the internet.

People want solutions so here we go.  Explain the types of licenses in greater detail, linking to the appropriate ordinance(s).  Make the necessary forms available online as editable-PDF documents.  Explain the formal procedure so that everyone applying for a license, as well as neighbors, know the same rules.  List who makes the decision and what their criteria is.   Are these people appointed, elected or staff?

Back to Qdoba for some final thoughts.  A chain place can afford to build out a full establishment on the assumption that nobody will object to their having a liquor license and a patio permit.  I know I certainly don’t object — a few beers will likely make Loughborough Commons more tolerable.  But the local person seeking to open an establishment can’t afford such a proposition.  Can they get necessary approvals before spending their life savings on a building or lease space?  Without the finished space the neighbors might have concerns about what is planned.  Without the liquor and/or patio license up front a lender might see the proposition as too risky.
I may need to visit City Hall Room 416 today at 2pm to find out more.

Six Years and Counting

Like the “where were you when Kennedy was shot” question from an earlier generation, we all know what we were doing as we watched on live television the unfolding of events on 9/11/2001. There I was in the living room of a client I had just met, watching that second plane hit the other tower of the World Trade Center. Any doubt about the first plane being lost in the fog was gone. I think what I remember most was the courage of those in the fourth plane, knowingly facing their own deaths, thinking of others on the ground — preventing the deaths of so many more.

In the weeks prior a friend and I had booked an exciting 17-day trip to the east coast — Washington DC, Pennsylvania and New York. Our flight to DC was October 19th. I had been to DC before but this time was obviously different — the Pentagon had a huge hole in the side. Still, people were out and about in the various neighborhoods. The Washington Monument, as you might suspect, was closed to visitors. We had planned a road trip from DC to New York via Frank Lloyd Wright’s Falling Water in rural Pennsylvania and thus had booked a rental car. Getting off the city bus at National Airport was weird — the place was a ghost town as flights were still not being permitted in or out. My first time in New York was surreal. Hotels and restaurants were eager to kick start the local economy so tourists were welcomed. As you approached “ground zero” as it was becoming known, the smell hit you. Neighbors in nearby Battery Park were hosing out the filters on their ventilation systems. The skyline I had seen my entire life in pictures was different, the Statue of Liberty was closed. We walked through the upper east side on the day a person died of anthrax poisoning on the upper east side. Stores had signs indicating they sold the anti-anthrax drug.

I visited New York again in the Fall of 2005. By then the debate about the future of the 16+ acre WTC site was in full swing. It should become a memorial park, it should be rebuilt as it was, and we shouldn’t build targets anymore were among the numerous viewpoints. Others advocated for much needed housing rather than simply replacing vast quantities of office space. Still others sought to return to the long abandoned street grid.

When Minoru Yamasaki was selected to design the World Trade Center his Pruitt-Igoe public housing, designed a decade earlier, was already troubled. When the ribbon was cut for the WTC in 1973 St. Louis had already begun to implode Yamasaki’s insensitive work here. In the 50s and 60s there was little opposition to such large scale projects save for Jane Jacobs. Today the debate over the 16+ acre site in lower Manhattan continues. Such a massive site in NYC is a rarity.

Back in St. Louis 16 acres is nothing to us. The Schnuck’s City Plaza development at Natural Bridge & Union is 20 acres, the Southtown Plaza strip center (former Famous-Barr site) is 11 acres. The old arena site, now called The Highlands, is 26 acres. The remaining Pruitt-Igoe site is roughly 33 acres. At 30 acres, Loughborough Commons, the Schnuck’s/Lowe’s albatross, is nearly twice as big as the WTC site. Yes — Loughborough Commons is 87% larger than the World Trade Center site! Wow, they are debating how many blocks and streets as well as how much office, retail and housing they can squeeze onto their 16 acres while here just getting the ability for an ADA-compliant sidewalk clearly takes more than action by the Board of Aldermen.

Thousands lost their lives six years ago and many more were strongly impacted by the loss of family, friends, co-workers, neighbors and simply a smile from a passing stranger no longer with us on the subway. Decisions made about the future of the WTC site, as well as development sites here in St. Louis and throughout the world, will too have an impact on people’s lives, although in a different way. We must ask ourselves why we are not creating places beyond just the short-term — a place to buy a cordless drill or get a latte at a drive-thru window. Architecture cannot made us better persons but our environment can and does impact how we all engage each other in our daily lives. We must do better. If not, we are simply funding a self-inflicted form of long-term terrorism.

The Magic Continues at Loughborough Commons

It has been a while since I’ve written about Loughborough Commons, the big box retail center receiving something like $14 million in various tax incentives. They been busy building some more retail square footage and preparing for some new tenants to open soon. This is simply a teaser post to show you a couple of the things I’ve been watching for a while.

Above, a staircase leads you down to the parking lot for the multi-unit strip center from the public sidewalk along Loughborough. So we have an SSC — sunken strip center. Or is the center depressed rather than sunken? Or simply depressing? When this stair was announced in the Holly Hills neighborhood newsletter a while back, prior to construction, they made mention of a bike rack at the bottom of the stairs. And here it is — a bike rack at the bottom of stairs.

A bike rack at the bottom of stairs! Get it? Pretty convenient location if you are capable of biking down a set of stairs. So when you bike into the parking area from the complete opposite side you might decide to ride over here to lock up your bike — if you know it is there. And yes, the bike rack is the same width as the concrete pad so that on the off chance the front side is full and you need to use the back side you must push your bike through the grass and shrubs, assuming the sprinkler system is not on. I’m not sure how they expect you to bike back up the stairs.

Those that bike for transportation might have actually appreciated not having to lift their bike over the curb. Say you’ve got one of those handy kid holders on the back of your bike — suddenly the bike is a lot heavier and the kid is precious cargo. Those biking through the park with a kid trailer are simply out of luck as no place is big enough to park your bike & kid trailer. Well, unless you can pick up both over the curb and through the shrubs you can leave the trailer on the grass portion at the back.

I’m also really fond of the ADA ramp at the bottom of the stairs. That will actually come in quite handy for everyone taking their wheelchair up & down the stair. The red truncated domes serving as a “detectable warning” for those with visual impairments are meant to be felt under foot to alert someone when entering a road — not a parking area. That is communicating to someone the are entering a street situation. Clearly they should have consulted with someone with some actual knowledge about the ADA.
Speaking of ADA ramps.

Down the hillside closer to the Schnuck’s and Lowe’s some new stores are being built. In the foreground is a new sidewalk and ramps that to the right connect to the sidewalk along the edge of the main driveway (I say sidewalk but it is too steep to be considered a sidewalk per ADA). The original drawings for the center didn’t include this is the way to get to the Schnuck’s — they had pedestrians crossing the main drive earlier and then the side drive to where you see the back of the stop sign above. I think this could have been a better solution. OK, so you make your way down the hillside from the pubic street, you cross a drive that is just to the right, you make the 90 degree turn, you note the half buried fire hydrant, and you spot the ramp across the drive — they don’t line up.

This is entirely new construction and the ramps on each side of the main driveway do not align. This is all by the same people being built at the same time — am I being unreasonable expecting that they’d align ramps so the person in the mobility scooter, the child on their bike or the parent pushing a baby stroller can safely cross the main entrance to a busy shopping center? This is not complicated stuff here. Yeah yeah, they are not done yet. I don’t want to hear it —- they’ve poured the concrete so they are done with this portion.

I am waiting for a bit more to get done and I will bring you a more in depth review of the new areas and some changes in the old. It is clear to me they were making an effort to improve upon what they had previously done but from the looks of things they simply didn’t have the right people on the job.

Newly Constructed Starbucks and Others Lack Mandated ADA Access Route

I want to see St. Louis reach its potential and be a much more pedestrian friendly place to live. I see many people out walking and jogging but we could have so much more sidewalk activity. I’m seeing more and more couples with babies out in strollers trying to navigate our sometimes unfriendly environments. I’ve written many times about the lack of an ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) access route at Loughborough Commons to which people say someone is not going to walk to Lowe’s to buy drywall. Well, no sh*t. But people do still walk or use mobility devices to buy smaller items. I’m not suggesting we ban cars, simply make places accessible via various means. The ADA is federal civil rights legislation and, if actually followed, would make places more accessible to everyone including those elusive families we seek to attract to the city.

The newest Starbucks in the City of Saint Louis is located where Chippewa St (aka Watson, formerly Route 66) and Lansdowne Ave intersect — just east of both the well known Ted Drewes Frozen Custard Stand and a MetroLink light rail station. It recently opened but unfortunately it is about as auto focused as you can get.

The drive through lane, above, is front and center as seen from the public sidewalk. In the above image the front door is basically behind the right most umbrella. I’m not sure how they expect people from the very nice adjacent neighoborhood to walk there from the sidewalk — through the drive lane and over the shrubs? Someone in a wheelchair is out of luck.

Above, the situation is the same from the other side. You can stand on the sidewalk and read the menu of the drive-thru but you cannot access the door!

View from public sidewalk.

Basically anyone using a wheelchair to access the site must use the auto drive to get to the accessible area just beyond the maroon SUV and then backtrack to the door.

Not only is this dangerous, it is not ADA compliant. Regardless of ADA, this type of poor planning simply assumes everyone will arrive by car. I was unable to spot a bike rack anywhere on the site or in the public right of way. The public sidewalk completely lacks street trees. Sure, the building is nice and new but poorly planned. By contrast, the dated Arby’s location in the next block to the West has an access route to their entrance from the sidewalk. Although it does not meet current ADA standards, it complies with the intent which is more than I can say for Starbucks.

The City of Saint Louis is not alone in permitting poorly planned projects to be built. The adjacent suburb, quite dense and pedestrian friendly, is allowing new construction to erode what there good urban roots. One such project, is another new Starbucks which opened within the last month or so.

Located on the SE corner of Delmar and North & South this new Starbucks drive-thru is more geared toward motorists than the many pedestrians in the area. Despite a high level of pedestrians in the area, this new Starbucks shrugs off any notion of complying with the federal ADA requirement for an accessible entrance from the public street.

Above, a new Bentley, valued at roughly $170K, waits at a red light while a young couple with dog and twins in stroller cross the street.

The couple from above enter the site of the Starbucks via the outgoing auto lane and head toward the back of the building to access the ADA ramp to get their kids out of the parking lot. As others leave, a minivan attempts to back out of a space.The Royal Banks branch diagonally across from the Starbucks, built recently, also suffers from the same issue. From the sidewalk we can see the entrance and an accessible parking space but if you are on the sidewalk (and not driving a black Porsche) you are not welcomed.

Some might say this is better than the gas station that used to be on the site to which I would agree. But, when building brand new from scratch shouldn’t these businesses do a better job attempting to connect people to their front door? The best way is to build up to the street but short of that they need to provide an access route.

Those trying to enter the bank on foot (or mobility device) end up facing the outgoing auto traffic. Those able to can jump onto the sidewalk adjacent to the building but others are forced to risk it in the auto lane until they reach the ramp from the drive to entry.

Given this bank’s sidewalks and ramps I don’t think they’d get an access route right anyway. The red ‘truncated domes’ are used to help those who are visually impaired to know when they are crossing a drive/street. Their direction is meant to guide them, by feel under foot, to the other side. However, here we can see that these will send them out into the street.

The two remaining corners each have older buildings that are urban in form — butting up to the sidewalk. This makes it much easier for pedestrians to access local businesses and spend money. Of course, they must first get past the Post-Dispatch newspaper box blocking the top of the wheelchair ramp.

Back to the city we see the new big box store, The Restaurant Depot, on Manchester Road across from St. Louis Marketplace.

This store is not open to the general public, you must be a restaurant owner to get in. Still, this facility should have an ADA route from the public sidewalk as an employee might use a wheelchair or simply decide to take transit and walk from the nearest bus stop to their job.

Above is yet another new Starbucks being constructed between Broadway and 7th at Russel, just east of Soulard.  An adjacent building will have a new Bread Co (Panera for you non St. Louis readers).  I’m guessing they will lack an ADA compliant access route to both of these locations.

We cannot continue this cycle of building places hostile to pedestrians and then say there are not pedestrians as a justification to build ever more hostile environments.  People arriving at these sites on foot, bike, wheelchair, scooter or car can all be accomodated if we as a city/region make it a priority.  Our leadership in the city and in adjacent municipalities have failed to look out for the interests for whom they are supposed to serve.

Gotta Hurry to Get that Loaf of Bread

Earlier today, around 11am, I was heading eastbound on Loughborough, a 2-lane street with on-street parking on both sides.  I was roughly near the middle of Carondalet Park and all of a sudden a Chevy Caprice passes me.  It took me a second to realize I had just been passed.  I looked down at my speedometer on my scooter — I was doing roughly 32mph.  I look up at a speed limit sign and it is posted at 30mph.  Then I flip the guy the bird.

I ended up being right behind him at the traffic signal entrance to Loughborough Commons.  I tooted my horn and yelled “hurry up” as he had a back window down a bit.  Once he parked I asked why he passed me, stating that that was dangerous and what was his hurry.  His only response, “Are you a cop?”

Folks, before you get in such a hurry to pass those of us on two wheels take a look at the speed limit and check to see what speed we are traveling.  If we are going slow on a 4-lane road then simply use the other lane (although don’t cut back in front of us and then turn right).   If we are on a 2-lane road and traveling at the posted speed limit just wonder if you really need to get to your destination a second or two before we do.  The bread will still be on the shelves when you get there.

Schnuck Family to Sell Majority Stake in Shopping Centers to Austrailian Trust

From the Sydney Morning Herald via Urban St. Louis forum:

MACQUARIE CountryWide Trust has expanded further into North America, buying a controlling interest in 33 retail centres from the Schnuck family worth $US260 million in a joint venture with the Regency Centers Corporation.

Under the deal the Schnuck family will retain 20 per cent of the portfolio, with Macquarie CountryWide owning 65 per cent and Regency the remaining 15 per cent.

Above: Grand opening of Schnuck’s store at Loughborough Commons in South St. Louis, August 2006.

Austrailia’s Hearald-Sun writes:

Of the 33 shopping centres in the deal, 26 are in the greater St Louis area.

The centres will be managed by Regency and the Schnuck family’s DESCO Group.

I’m not exactly sure what this will mean for us locally. Maybe this will be a good thing to have some outside perspective? Given the “value” of these shopping centers, and the $14 million in tax subsidy for Loughborough Commons alone, I fail to see why better pedestrian access could not have been included in the project’s designs.

Related Links:

• Schnuck’s Grocery Stores
• DESCO Group
• Macquairie CountryWide Trust
• Regency Centers Corporation

UPDATE 7/9/07 @ 12:45pm:

The St. Louis Business Journal has a slightly different percentages and some more detail (full story):

Macquarie CountryWide Trust (MCW) is buying a 60 percent stake in the portfolio. MCW is managed by a division of Macquarie Bank Group, based in Sydney, Australia. Macquarie Bank Group’s real estate division manages a portfolio of assets totaling more than $23 billion globally. In a joint venture with MCW, Jacksonville, Fla.-based Regency Centers Corp. is buying a 13 percent stake in the portfolio.

I’m willing to bet that the Schnuck’s grocery store chain will announce within the next 12 months they are being sold.

Access Changes at Loughborough Commons

This is a quick update post from my favorite auto-centric sprawl shopping center in the city, Loughborough Commons. As regular readers know, I’ve been making a big deal about the poor pedestrian access to the center. This update shows you some good and some not so good things at this time.

Above was the view looking north from the front of the Schnuck’s store on November 28, 2006. I thought they were going to provide some sort of access at that time but they did not. Note the customer walking against traffic in the main auto drive.

So I was very glad to see that in the last few days a temporary pedestrian walkway has been created between the main auto entrance and where another building is being construted (I believe for an office supply chain store). Though likely not ADA compliant this is a very nice but long overdue gesture on the part of developer DESCO.

In the back ground near the white van they’ve also started to excavate for more of the sidewalk on the east side of the main auto drive. Eventually these walkways should connect although the stop sign at this internal intersection has been removed for months now. We’ll see how the crossing gets marked and signed. Again, I am very glad to see they are taking steps to provide this access.

Shifting now out to the public street, the sidewalk situation along Loughborough has had ups and downs turing this project.

Above is a view from August 30th, 2006 looking westbound from the bus stop. You can see the sidewalk, the old auto entrance, now blocked, and the new auto entrance. In the background is the big pile-o-dirt where the recessed new strip center is being constructed today. Not exactly great but at least passable for most.

Sadly, for roughly nine months the public sidewalk along Loughborough (just east of the new auto entry) has been left in this condition (above). Missing curb, stagnant water, broken concrete, piece of plywood, etc. The benches for those using the bus were removed last year as well.

Close up view of the conditions, above. Note the changing water marks on the warning barriers. The lights have long stopped flashing.

Pedestrians heading to & from Loughborough Commons have managed to avoid the above mess by taking a short cut which you can see clearly in the grass. This, of course, does not help those using mobility aids such as wheelchairs and mobility scooters.

I recently pointed out these conditions to officials via email. Today crews are working to finish the curb and sidewalk in this area. But just as I think I am making progress something else happens. Ald. Matt Villa, of late, has been receptive to discussions about access and has been very responsive to my requests to push for completion of some of these area. DESCO may have had these things on their schedule for now anyway so it is hard to say if my complaining was effective, I like to think it helped grease the wheel.

The above is along Loughborough east of the main entrance, let’s now switch to west of the main entrance.

Above was the scene on August 30th, 2006. The old store had just closed and the new store opened but pedestrians coming from the west were forced into the street. Yes, I know a construction zone not finished – just hold on before you scroll down and yell at me in the comments!

A month later, on September 30, 2006 a new sidewalk was poured and the big pile of dirt was removed (to where the old store was located, now razed).
Skipping ahead to April 24, 2007 and switching directions in the same area:

Above we can see the sidewalk from September 2006 is still in place and being used — we have a mom and her child heading to the store and another customer just leaving.

However, by June 3, 2007 much of the sidewalk from September 2006 and the remaining old sidewalk had been removed, including the corner ramp at Grand. Here you can see a customer who had just left the Schnuck’s walking in the street. I’m actually glad to see the old sidewalk and corner ramp go away as they were in poor condition and should have been replaced back in September 2006. I don’t know the plan here but hopefully the sidewalk will be back in place soon so that more customers are not forced into an un-friendly street.

Earlier this year the auto drive was also restriped to change some lanes, I’ll spare you the pictures (for now).

Alternative Site Plan for Loughborough Commons

Today I was test driving some fun features with Google Maps (custom maps, drawing tools). Using the old image of the area which is now Loughborough Commons I drew one concept I had for streets and land use in the area. As you will see, my idea is quite different than what is being constructed.

The first thing to notice is that I have retained nearly every home that was located at the corner of the site along Grand & Loughborough. I’ve then cut public streets through the site to create numerous other smaller parcels. The main artery would be extending Loughborough Drive through the site to create a 5-block long commercial district (shown in blue). Buildings facing this street would be “mixed use” with retail/resturant on the ground floor and office or residential above (shown in purple). Residential housing of various forms would face Grand, shown in red. The two big orange boxes would be a Schnuck’s & Lowe’s with the gray box in the middle representing surface parking. Side streets from the adjacent neighborhood would be brought through the site — connecting the commercial district to the existing housing stock.
Mixed-Use (purple):

Lining both sides of a new Loughborough Drive, as well as facing Loughborough, these mixed use buildings would be a minimum of 2 stories high but up to 5 stories. The street-level would be designed for retail/restaurant tenants such as St. Louis Bread Co, Great Clips, Qdoba, Starbucks, and Office Max. Upper floors could contain office space or residential units. Retail parking would be on-street diagonal parking along Loughborough Drive. Shoppers would be encouraged to park once and check out multiple stores via foot.

The main street of Loughborough Drive would be just that — a main street. Think a cross between an old shopping district (Delmar in The Loop), a pedestrian friendly “lifestyle center” (the Boulevard on Brentwood) and a New Urbanist town center (New Town at St. Charles). This was one of the few sites large enough in the city to have developed such a mixed-use model connecting to an existing and stable neighborhood.
Big Box (orange):

This concepts accepts the necessity of big box retailing for the masses. It also accepts most big box shoppers will arive by car, so surface parking is provided between the two stores. The big box stores would not face the main shopping street (Loughborough Drive) but would instead face each other. Both would have excellent visibility from I-55. Blow & Roswell would be used to access the surface parking for the big box stores.

Two options existed for the Schnuck’s here. One is for Schnuck’s to have built on the south location I show above while the existing store remained open. Once the new store was open the old one could have been razed for the new Lowe’s. An alternative would have been to add on to the existing Schnuck’s and basically create a new entrance facing Blow St. The bulk of the existing structure could have been reused, reducing the amount of debris heading to a land fill.

Those shopping on the main street would have easy access to the big box stores, and vice versa, without having to move their cars.
Residential (red):

Housing would be located on this section of Grand, facing existing single-family detached homes. This housing would have a rear alley (shown in yellow) with rear loaded garages. Ideally the residential mix would have varied from condo buildings with shared underground parking to townhouses with individual garages. Garages at the alley might also have had granny flats for small & affordable housing. Low to moderate income and senior housing could easily be mixed in with market rate housing both in the residential section facing Grand as well as above the retail in the mixed-use areas.

For the most part I have “bent” the side streets like Robert & French as they cross Loughborough Drive. This allows the new mixed-use buildings to become more in the line of sight as well as to block views of the highway. However, making these streets perpendicular to Loughborough Drive helps create square corners which are cheaper in new construction than odd angles.

This is only one version of an alternative street grid for the site. Perhap when it has failed in 20 years we can take another stab at the site and get it right.