Quote:
Originally Posted by meh
I don't know... Clayton has over 4x more office space than Covington and a strong occupancy rate. And Clayton is no slouch architecturally—especially the pre-war multi-family:
Clayton's residential population is small (about half of Covington's), but they've been building town homes and multi-family at a reasonable clip. And there are several high-rise proposals waiting around for interest rates to fall. And, again, the densest part of Clayton is walkably contiguous with the City/Central West End (that includes DT Clayton—I walked it frequently when I worked at Wash U).
|
Oh, I'm well aware Clayton has a far larger office market than Covington (I work in downtown Clayton from time to time), though that's to St. Louis' detriment and Cincinnati's benefit. I was just using Covington has an example of
a secondary office market that is appealing without stealing space from the primary core.
And I agree that Clayton isn't Schaumburg in residential architecture. I was just pointing out Covington having a more historic, denser core since it was from the mid-1800's versus Clayton being presumably built in the 1920's and 1930's.
Threaded Mode