4100 Manchester

RockChalkSTL · PostAug 10, 2022#262022-08-10T15:09+00:00

I understand the sentimentality for the building and for the (shuttered) business, but I don't know how to react to this proposal with anything but excitement.

The business is gone. In fact, hadn't it closed briefly before trying to unsuccessfully come back?

This feels like progress to me. Telling this development group, which has a 30-story tower + more proposed in Downtown West, to kick rocks because 4101 Manchester has taken its sweet time, and because Green Street is sitting on its former gas station lot a few blocks north on Sarah, makes very little sense to me.

quincunx · PostAug 10, 2022#272022-08-10T15:19+00:00

From Aug 2020

RFT – Attitudes Nightclub, St. Louis’ Oldest Gay Bar, Closing for Good Due to COVID-19

https://www.riverfronttimes.com/music/a ... 9-33952011

shadrach · PostAug 10, 2022#282022-08-10T15:24+00:00

I don’t get the pushback. Density, street level retail, added residents, 5-stories, crane, vibrancy, perception of ‘things are happening…’

That facade can be saved and replicated, take a picture. Also kill this proposal for that underwhelming building and future developers will think twice.

The thing about empty lots—they aren’t always in a location that makes economical sense. Often times that’s why they’re empty.

PeterXCV · PostAug 10, 2022#292022-08-10T15:37+00:00

^Would be nice for some policymakers to change that economical sense. I'd bet in most areas of the city it's cheaper to purchase and tear down a historic building to build something new than to acquire a parking lot to do so.

imran · PostAug 10, 2022#302022-08-10T16:04+00:00

Mapguy wrote: ↑
Aug 10, 2022
Y’all do know the pink brick was a paint job right? It’s not original glazed brick. I remember very well when they painted it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Woah. The original is even more spectacular

PostAug 10, 2022#312022-08-10T16:17+00:00

shadrach wrote: ↑
Aug 10, 2022
I don’t get the pushback. Density, street level retail, added residents, 5-stories, crane, vibrancy, perception of ‘things are happening…’

That facade can be saved and replicated, take a picture. Also kill this proposal for that underwhelming building and future developers will think twice.

The thing about empty lots—they aren’t always in a location that makes economical sense. Often times that’s why they’re empty.

The pushback isn’t against the density, residents, retail, bragging rights etc etc.
it’s the principle of do we defend this valuable architectural legacy…. Or continue to sell out.

If parking lots were taxed based on average property values in the district, it would suddenly make economical sense to develop them.

shadrach · PostAug 10, 2022#322022-08-10T16:27+00:00

This is where we differ. I just don't see it as that 'valuable,' architecturally or historically to grab the torches and pitchforks (culturally, I think the Palladium in Grand Center a bigger loss).

Regarding lots, I'm referring to the real estate adage of 'location x 3' —this lot is next to Chroma and Narhwahls. It's about proximity. Yeah, I'd rather it be built across the street but who knows the tangled saga with that or it'll ever open up. I'm assuming this is a decision based on location, timing and availability.

dweebe · PostAug 10, 2022#332022-08-10T16:38+00:00

shadrach wrote: ↑
Aug 10, 2022
This is where we differ. I just don't see it as that 'valuable,' architecturally or historically to grab the torches and pitchforks (culturally, I think the Palladium in Grand Center a bigger loss).

Regarding lots, I'm referring to the real estate adage of 'location x 3' —this lot is next to Chroma and Narhwahls. It's about proximity. Yeah, I'd rather it be built across the street but who knows the tangled saga with that or it'll ever open up. I'm assuming this is a decision based on location, timing and availability.

My guess is we'll be posting about that lot across the street in 2032.

imran · PostAug 10, 2022#342022-08-10T17:34+00:00

shadrach wrote: ↑
Aug 10, 2022
This is where we differ. I just don't see it as that 'valuable,' architecturally or historically to grab the torches and pitchforks (culturally, I think the Palladium in Grand Center a bigger loss).

Regarding lots, I'm referring to the real estate adage of 'location x 3' —this lot is next to Chroma and Narhwahls. It's about proximity. Yeah, I'd rather it be built across the street but who knows the tangled saga with that or it'll ever open up. I'm assuming this is a decision based on location, timing and availability.

Yes that is where we differ.

I tend to take the approach of if I’m wrong I would at least not have caused the destruction of a specific, authentic and tangible connection to those who lived before.

Many people look at preservation only as curated- saving select historic landmarks etc. To me though, vernacular buildings like this are the under-rated treasures of Cities.

Modern infill on the other hand will always remain a possibility - whenever that speculative lot owner finally decides to cave.

We really can have it all if we took a long view.

STLEnginerd · PostAug 10, 2022#352022-08-10T18:07+00:00

quincunx wrote: ↑
Aug 10, 2022
They haven't applied for a demolition permit yet.
Seems tough to put into ordinance "if there are vacant lots, parking lots, or buildings less than X years old nearby, demolition permits are forbidden, don't even think of wasting people's time with a proposal."

How about to demo a property of density = n

-all projects must have financing in place and approved plans must be for projects which equal or increase existing density n
-if the the property to be demoed is historically significant or adds significantly to the historic character of the neighborhood increase required density by 2n
-if the proposed project will significantly contribute to the neighborhood aesthetic decrees required density by 1n
-if the property to be demoed is adjacent or near adjacent to vacant properties which are viable alternative sites for the project increase required density by 2n
-if the new project will significantly increase the overall property values within the neighborhood, provide an essential service not currently available, significantly increase foot traffic or is reasonably expected to catalyze future developments, reduce required density by 1n

Of course at 5 stories this project meets those criteria (n +2n - 0n +2n - 0n) = 5n) so I'm good with it.

One asterixis to this equation line of thought is, I am not sure how to assign value the historical significance of LGBT significant sites. In a way i think this place could arguably be just as culturally valuable as the Palladium which to me is a truly frustrating loss. That said if people value that history they need to invest in it and support it. Make these places so ingrained in the culture of the city that its more than a building but instead a destination and a symbol. Every community needs symbols that evoke pride and cultural history. I am not part of the community so I don't know but it seems like the community doesn't see this place like that. If they did this proposal should be DOA.

It is weird to me that demolishing a place like Pappy's or Ted Drewes would evoke many orders of magnitude more grass roots protests than the Palladium but i guarantee they would. That's just how we collectively rank our sacred cows.

imran · PostAug 10, 2022#362022-08-10T18:11+00:00

quincunx wrote: ↑
Aug 10, 2022
They haven't applied for a demolition permit yet.
Seems tough to put into ordinance "if there are vacant lots, parking lots, or buildings less than X years old nearby, demolition permits are forbidden, don't even think of wasting people's time with a proposal."

I’m sure a lawyer-type would be able to manage it

Mapguy · PostAug 10, 2022#372022-08-10T23:02+00:00

quincunx wrote:From Aug 2020

RFT – Attitudes Nightclub, St. Louis’ Oldest Gay Bar, Closing for Good Due to COVID-19

https://www.riverfronttimes.com/music/a ... 9-33952011

It really wasn’t that old of a bar, 1988 I believe and there isn’t anything of architecture value inside, the outside is interesting but it has been painted. It was more of a younger twink bar, was never really one of my hangouts. I always liked Loading Zone, Freddie’s (Just Johns) Complex, and Magnolias better. They all had a more mixed crowd and way better music and shows. Where Rehab is now I believe was Grandmas Rainbow Lounge, I was always to scared to go in there, it was really divey. I wish I would have now.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

symphonicpoet · PostAug 11, 2022#382022-08-11T03:48+00:00

^There wasn't anything of architectural value inside the Paladium anymore either. I think there was a tiny bit of plaster above the stairs when you came in from the south, but that was it. And it's not just about age, but also historical importance. Attitudes served as an important cultural touchstone for a group facing oppression; a place folks could be themselves. It's not quite the same as the Paladium, but it's not completely different either. And unlike the Paladium, this isn't falling down. It's more recent history, but it's not any less real. One of the problems of preservation is that people tend not to think of the recent history as important, but it was all recent once. You have to save it now to savor it later.

gone corporate · PostAug 11, 2022#392022-08-11T17:25+00:00

Three quick thoughts...

1. I like the design of this proposal and think it adds to the urbanist objectives of increased City investment while providing (amongst other things) increased urban density, new streetscape activation, and aesthetically appropriate design attributes. If the developers have the funding and will absolutely build here as they envision their project, then it's worth the loss of a shuttered one-story former bar. (How old is the existing building anyways? Is it really that historic?)
Edit: Thanks @quincunx for the info. Yeah, I'd say 1928 is pretty old. Historic? Yeah. Historically significant? ...Maybe?

2. There may be apprehension of this project succeeding Attitude's as something akin to forsaking STL's LGBTQ community. However, as @Mapguy noted above, it's only one of many such establishments and not really a core element of the community. (As a straight white male who used to live in Soulard, I think the loss of Clementine's would have been more significant, but I really don't know and respectfully defer)

3. We're all justifiably pissed at the lack of progress at 4101 Manchester and, if we could ignore land ownership rights & swap development sites, we'd rather see this development on the NW corner of Sarah & Manchester rather than the SW corner. My personal anger is not at these new developers but on the owners of 4101 Manchester, their absolute failure to do what they said they'd do, and their not selling the property to another developer. They're just not getting out of the way so something else can go there, and it's infuriating.

quincunx · PostAug 11, 2022#402022-08-11T17:30+00:00

gone corporate wrote: ↑
Aug 11, 2022
Three quick thoughts...

(How old is the existing building anyways? Is it really that historic?)

As stated in my article, built in 1928.

Mapguy · PostAug 11, 2022#412022-08-11T19:02+00:00

symphonicpoet wrote:^There wasn't anything of architectural value inside the Paladium anymore either. I think there was a tiny bit of plaster above the stairs when you came in from the south, but that was it. And it's not just about age, but also historical importance. Attitudes served as an important cultural touchstone for a group facing oppression; a place folks could be themselves. It's not quite the same as the Paladium, but it's not completely different either. And unlike the Paladium, this isn't falling down. It's more recent history, but it's not any less real. One of the problems of preservation is that people tend not to think of the recent history as important, but it was all recent once. You have to save it now to savor it later.

As someone from this “oppressed” community I can tell you the closing off Attitudes wasn’t some great loss. JJ’s was a loss. Clementines was a loss, Complex was a loss, Faces was a loss. Most of the “oppressed” community avoided Attitudes because it was a bar that always had fights, they had a cover, drugged up kids, under age kids. Before Covid you could walk by on a Saturday at 10 pm and it was dead.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

symphonicpoet · PostAug 11, 2022#422022-08-11T21:15+00:00

^I'm not under the impression it was important recently or there wasn't a reason it went out of business. Sorry. Didn't mean to imply that. But there's a certain history to it if it really was the first gay bar in town. Maybe the original claim was mistaken, but it was certainly an older one. Don't mind me. I'm not suggesting it's necessarily sacred, but I'm not really in favor of tearing down the building for another four story stick apartment, especially when there's other space nearby and some real history to it. Maybe I'm completely wrong, but it's worth taking into consideration and I'd really like to find a way to discourage the incessant cannibalization of built up blocks in our successful neighborhoods when we can never seem to actually fill all the empty ones. It drives me absolutely batty.

Mapguy · PostAug 12, 2022#432022-08-12T02:59+00:00

symphonicpoet wrote:^I'm not under the impression it was important recently or there wasn't a reason it went out of business. Sorry. Didn't mean to imply that. But there's a certain history to it if it really was the first gay bar in town. Maybe the original claim was mistaken, but it was certainly an older one. Don't mind me. I'm not suggesting it's necessarily sacred, but I'm not really in favor of tearing down the building for another four story stick apartment, especially when there's other space nearby and some real history to it. Maybe I'm completely wrong, but it's worth taking into consideration and I'd really like to find a way to discourage the incessant cannibalization of built up blocks in our successful neighborhoods when we can never seem to actually fill all the empty ones. It drives me absolutely batty.

It wasn’t the first gay bar in town. It opened in 1988. When it closed it just happend to be the “oldest” of the gay bars still around at that time, in 2014 when Clems closed it was the oldest gay bar in the state up until then. Anyways, anyone want to be Schooled on St. Louis LGBTQ history I’d be happy to do that.

I am not a fan of destroying more buildings, I’d rather see lots or parking lots redeveloped. The fact is though this is a single use building that would end up being completely gutted. The new one is multiple use and will add some density.
My worry though is the new residents will move in and complain about the bars nextdoor or the crowds and parking blah blah blah. It’s like people that move next to an airport, then b**** about noise.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

symphonicpoet · PostAug 12, 2022#442022-08-12T03:53+00:00

^Fair enough. Sorry. I'd just accepted someone else's claim about it, and I'm aware it's been around a while, so it didn't seem ludicrous and I didn't dig. I shouldn't have repeated something so casually and I sincerely apologize.

chriss752 · PostAug 17, 2022#452022-08-17T17:08+00:00

This can be merged with the "New Life in the Grove" thread if need be, but I think this project is significant enough to split off from that general thread. I get that the thread has been the place where a lot of discussion on the Grove's future has taken place, but it does become a mashup of several conversations and projects. So that's why I made this thread, to keep discussions on this project separate.

As we know, 4100 Manchester is a proposed project by the AHM Group to replace the Attitude's bar building. The project has already been presented to the Grove CID. No tax abatement is to be sought.

In a conversation with Kyle Howerton, I asked why gray brick will be placed where windows should go. In short, the ceiling heights are higher than average and so are the windows. Adding more glass would require more sheer walls and more sheer walls means more steel and more steel means more cost and more cost means a tax incentive would have to be sought.

Anyways, this is an $8.3 million development. As stated previously, this project includes 24 apartments, 1200sf of retail space, 10 parking spaces, 20 bike spaces, and a mural wall on Sarah and the west facade. The project is currently going through the community and stakeholder feedback stage, so the design could be tweaked. The goal is for this project to be a "win" for everyone.

Here are some renderings that I was sent. We've seen most of these before.

This one I don't recall seeing posted on UrbanSTL or other places, but here's a street-level view.

EssTeeEll · PostAug 17, 2022#462022-08-17T17:36+00:00

Thanks, Chris. These seem higher res than before, and I hadn't see the last one like you said. If they can't fill out the windows, I wonder if they'd consider a different color brick than gray? I kind of think black would be look better. But that's just no big deal, I'll take the W.

STLEnginerd · PostAug 17, 2022#472022-08-17T17:50+00:00

I'd recommend Pink as an homage. Not sure if that would placate anyone though. I see they did it on the ground floor but its the grove you can be a bit flashy.

related side note* i really bugs me that the building called chroma is just varying shades of gray and brown. seriously its The Grove, add some color. If you can't do it there you can't do it anywhere.

Timmy · PostAug 17, 2022#482022-08-17T18:04+00:00

Taco Circus coming back with a grove location?

TheWayoftheArch_V2.0 · PostAug 17, 2022#492022-08-17T18:13+00:00

^I saw the same thing, haha

RockChalkSTL · PostAug 17, 2022#502022-08-17T19:24+00:00

That signage is already there.

https://www.saucemagazine.com/a/59281/t ... r-a-new-co

4100 Manchester

Choose Display Mode