Brentwood officials to consider 80-unit apartment complex

Brentwood city officials on Monday will consider two measures, that if approved, would green light an 80-unit apartment complex on the northwest corner of Manchester and Hanley roads.

The board of aldermen will consider rezoning the corner from Planned Development District to Urban Development District — needed to allow for the greater density of residents, and also a conditional use permit for the development, which includes the site plan. Public hearings will be held for each.

Gary Hassenflu, president of Garrison Development Company, who wants to build the complex, first presented the plan to planning and zoning in December. At the time, Hassenflu said it’s a $20 million project. Rent would be from $1,100 to $1,800 a month — based on the investment and comparable rents in the area.

Screen Shot 2016-07-14 at 8.25.31 AM

Screen Shot 2016-07-14 at 8.25.57 AM

17 thoughts on “Brentwood officials to consider 80-unit apartment complex

  1. Just a reminder–the Public Hearing for the Metro on Manchester project is scheduled for tonight’s Brentwood Board meeting, 7 pm, city hall. If you love the project or hate it, please come out and say so. Also, you can contact your alderman with your thoughts. Tonight is the first reading on the proposal.

    The traffic study is finished–Brentwood’s traffic engineer recommends approval. Of course the study is conducted with scientific looking tables–no one actually sits out in a lawn chair with a clicker in his hand. Although the intersection has an overall “level of service” rated “fully saturated” the extra cars from the project are deemed to add only 2 seconds of delay. But, was traffic from the proposed Sunnen Station project (232 units) just south of the intersection factored in?

  2. I’m not against redeveloping our free-range groundhog enclosure but I think that an 80 unit complex may be too much in that area. Based on comments from the developer, they anticipate a 90% occupancy rate. So 72 units will be filled on average. While public transportation is available just across Manchester, the reality is that STL is a “car town”. That means 72 new cars in and out of that area. In addition, many families own a second car. Add that in even at only 50%, and we now have over 100 cars added to the mix.

    Looking at the earlier stories from December on this, I see that a traffic study was underway at that time. I’d like to see the results of that before any decision is made by the Board.

  3. We don’t need more traffic in the intersection with the industrial area that already brings way to many cars. I live off Porter and I can hardly get into my street or out. I am very concerned about are street being used more because the cars will not be able to get out next to intersection. We already have pleanty of apartments in Brentwood. There is not enough room in that little area down there…

  4. I would love to see Brentwood focus on a more walkable commercial/residential zone along Manchester (something that Maplewood has already). This project is a step in the right direction.

    • You are 100% correct. You can’t build a walkable community without residents living among the businesses. Without urban housing, there’s no new business catering to pedestrians.

  5. I love seeing that this blighted property is finally being developed. This will be a valuable asset to the community. I hope they improve the pedestrian experience at that nearby dangerous intersection.

  6. I hope all who are responding here will contact their Alderman/Alderwoman with these comments.

    Better yet, come to the next Board of Alderman meeting.

  7. I agree with the “green” responses. And THAT is why this area is re-zoned “urban”. Why NOT trees, grass and flowers? Because a previously bankrupt failure builder is going to do what he wants, and not really care about the unintended consequences for Brentwood.

    I would love to hear an evaluation of this decision from P&Z committees in Webster and Kirkwood. Both have a balance of residence and commerce and “green areas”. You are genuinely threatening the culture of Brentwood by “….yes…urbanizing our City.” Why not leave the zoning in place, and build 1/4 that number of apartments, increase the rental fee to compensate for fewer tenants—and still leave “green” available? Some choice: green or sardine? I hope the sardine stinks and the ‘green’ smells healthy and lovely.

  8. Why is it that every inch of open green space has to be torn up and something built on time?! We don’t need MORE traffic on this congested corner!

    • I wouldn’t exactly call this lot green space, it’s got a six foot fence around the whole thing and most of it is old parking lot concrete.

      At most this apartment building is going to produce 30 trips during the peak hour of traffic, that’s one car every two minutes.

      Even if you built one fast food restaurant and left the rest as “green space”, you’d get over 100 trips during the peak hour of traffic. I bet you wouldn’t complain about that plan, but it would be triple the effect on traffic as this apartment building.

  9. Do we have to develope every parcel of land that opens up. Couldn’t we just create some nice green space. Trees, flowers, park benches.

  10. That property has been vacant for as long as I can remember, it sounds and looks like a good investment, the intersection is scheduled for improvements with development it will improve the area..

  11. How dense do we want to get in Brentwood? There are numerous apartments here already.
    Do we really need more traffic?
    Hanley/Laclede Station Rd. are already a nightmare.

    Also Maplewood is building apartments katy korner to this proposed building. It will be right behind Sunnen.