More like a few months. I feel vindicated. This isn't NIMBYism. Sure, there are areas of StL that should take what's offered, but the CWE isn't one of them.BellaVilla wrote: ↑Aug 24, 2021What of the potential lost revenue for city schools if this moves forward as opposed to the better proposal that could very well come along in the next few years?
- 443
Ah, I missed that. Thanks.MattnSTL wrote: ↑Nov 01, 2021^The info today says no incentives being sought.
Love the Taylor sidewalk activation.
That blasted garage ramp on Lindell tho. This is why I rant against curb cuts. So difficult to undo the damage once you allow them at a site.
That blasted garage ramp on Lindell tho. This is why I rant against curb cuts. So difficult to undo the damage once you allow them at a site.
- 226
This is sure to please! I prefer the other design, but I’ll take this any day! I wonder if they are still planning on adding small offices to Taylor? I really liked that component of the first design.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
We'll see. If it ends up getting approved it was a case of successfully advocating for a more deferential, preservationist design. If it ends up getting a lot of pushback and doesn't get the approvals it needs to move forward we'll know that it was NIMBYism veiled as preservationist concern all along.BellaVilla wrote: ↑Nov 02, 2021More like a few months. I feel vindicated. This isn't NIMBYism. Sure, there are areas of StL that should take what's offered, but the CWE isn't one of them.BellaVilla wrote: ↑Aug 24, 2021What of the potential lost revenue for city schools if this moves forward as opposed to the better proposal that could very well come along in the next few years?
- 6,119
^I can't see why anyone would really object to this. It's basically exactly what everyone asked for. With the exception of the curb cut, which is unfortunate, but is already extant, I can't see where anyone could raise any major objections. It's entirely in keeping with neighboring structures. It preserves the character of a lovely mid-century structure very well indeed. It respects the site. It fits the neighborhood. It should bring new vibrancy and be very popular. This is a dang fine example of adaptive reuse. Absolutely lovely.
^ Couldn’t have said it better myself. If this can’t get approved like this, then nothing will ever happen here.
The CWE NIMBYs will still kill it and be all pleased with themselves.
- 289
To keep it honest though, do any of you recall a NIMBY comment per se regarding the previous proposal?
I attended a neighborhood meeting as well as the PB zoom. All I remember are mid century preservation concerns…
Maybe a comment about alley traffic but it seemed like neighbors were welcoming the added density.
I attended a neighborhood meeting as well as the PB zoom. All I remember are mid century preservation concerns…
Maybe a comment about alley traffic but it seemed like neighbors were welcoming the added density.
I was at the meetings too and that was what I saw too. No one was against the previous proposal except those who wanted to preserve the Optimist building. Concerns over size, added traffic and other stuff were practically nonexistent.imran wrote: ↑Nov 02, 2021To keep it honest though, do any of you recall a NIMBY comment per se regarding the previous proposal?
I attended a neighborhood meeting as well as the PB zoom. All I remember are mid century preservation concerns…
Maybe a comment about alley traffic but it seemed like neighbors were welcoming the added density.
It'll be interesting to see how it goes this time around. Again, the first meeting is tomorrow evening (Wednesday) at 6PM at the Optimist Building.
Comments from Jim Dwyer and Andrew Weil
NextSTL - New Optimist Proposal Emerges
https://nextstl.com/2021/11/new-optimis ... l-emerges/
NextSTL - New Optimist Proposal Emerges
https://nextstl.com/2021/11/new-optimis ... l-emerges/
The meeting tonight was a dud. No one really showed up. Eli Hoisington and Margaret McDonald from HOK, Sid and Vic, John Warren (broker), Julie Frady (Lux), an Optimist Employee, myself, and two neighbors were the only ones here. No major concerns were raised by the two neighbors.
Although maybe boring is no one showing up a good thing? Means probably no one is against it.chriss752 wrote: ↑Nov 04, 2021The meeting tonight was a dud. No one really showed up. Eli Hoisington and Margaret McDonald from HOK, Sid and Vic, John Warren (broker), Julie Frady (Lux), an Optimist Employee, myself, and two neighbors were the only ones here. No major concerns were raised by the two neighbors.
Not sure how those things usually go but I figure bigger crowds usually are not happy crowds.
- 6,119
^Would love to hear what the HOK reps had to say. I do sincerely hope this one goes forward smoothly and quickly. It's so much better than the previous plan. This has got to be the most interesting adaptive reuse in town in quite a while.
Well, I think the reason no one showed up is because of the Ward Redistricting meeting tonight. For many, that's a very important thing so I completely understand why people would go to that. They want their voice to be heard.jshank83 wrote: ↑Nov 04, 2021Although maybe boring is no one showing up a good thing? Means probably no one is against it.chriss752 wrote: ↑Nov 04, 2021The meeting tonight was a dud. No one really showed up. Eli Hoisington and Margaret McDonald from HOK, Sid and Vic, John Warren (broker), Julie Frady (Lux), an Optimist Employee, myself, and two neighbors were the only ones here. No major concerns were raised by the two neighbors.
Not sure how those things usually go but I figure bigger crowds usually are not happy crowds.
But I do agree wit the bit that no one is against it. Some are since it's Lux Living, but overall, the reception (on here, Twitter and Facebook) has been much more positive than on Reddit and Instagram. People seem to like this plan more than the previous one with the exception of a few who lament the fact that the corner pavilion structure is being saved since it seems suburban. The one response I have to that claim is this: with some landscaping on Lindell and Taylor + the walk-up units on Taylor, the suburban nature of the current building will basically go away and it'll become a key piece in the urban fabric of the neighborhood.
Eli Hoisington said the following (and this is a summary of course)...symphonicpoet wrote: ↑Nov 04, 2021^Would love to hear what the HOK reps had to say. I do sincerely hope this one goes forward smoothly and quickly. It's so much better than the previous plan. This has got to be the most interesting adaptive reuse in town in quite a while.
- Design is still in progress with future revisions to keep the general form of what's seen here but with some tweaks. Such as some warmer elements will be added, more glass will be added, and landscaping will all be addressed.
- The intention of the design was to create a new building that is complementary of the pavilion structure in terms of general colors (white concrete, tan stone, and black window frames).
- The new building is designed to contribute to the streetscape on Lindell by honoring some other mid-century buildings nearby. Most notably, the front of the new addition is similar to the Jackson Arms next door.
- Future renderings will include how lighting will look, a better idea of how the windows will look (since they'll be operable).
- The change in the fenestration on the pavilion building is to allow more natural light into the building. So while the window layout remains mostly the same, the window size has been doubled in width to allow more natural light to enter the space. It's a subtle change but it makes a huge difference in how the interiors will feel in the pavilion section.
- The parking garage entrance on Lindell is moved about 4-5ft east as a result of this plan but remains basically the same width as the current garage entrance. There will be a loading dock space on Taylor that's large enough to back a box truck into for easier move-ins, trash pickup and so on.
- Form based code requirements met on all sides but there is some doubt about the alley side. He'll double and triple check the rules but there is precedent for building up to the alley line on that particular alley.
And since materials have been in question, the new building will be clad in the same tan stone as the pavilion, a white brick, metal, and glass. Stucco hasn't been talked about (from what I've heard).
Hmm. So you’re saying they are proposing another curb cut on Taylor for a loading dock access?
Yes but it's to be debated right now whether that's the final location or not. For now it's the location since it backs up nicely to the elevator core.imran wrote: ↑Nov 04, 2021Hmm. So you’re saying they are proposing another curb cut on Taylor for a loading dock access?
Second meeting to be held at 6PM this Wednesday. If you live nearby, or are generally curious, you're invited to attend.
Some new renderings and diagrams. It's really starting to look good. HOK is going "all out" on this.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
- 1,607
Looking really good. Gets my vote at this point.
I like it generally. I just don't understand sprinkling in the random blocks of siding facing the courtyard. It seems that it wouldn't be enough to materially decrease costs, and making all of it brick would be clean and simple and distract/detract from the "historic" portion less.