I guess plan C is appealing the PB decision via the Planning Commission?
- 3,235
You’re so bought. To the extent it’s disgusting.chriss752 wrote:You can think that, and I'm sure there are a few others happy this was shot down but remove Sid and Vic/Lux from the equation for a second.downtown2007 wrote: ↑Jun 28, 2022Glad it was denied. Any opportunity the city has to stick it to Sid and Vic, they should do so.
This same outcome would've occurred if it was any other developer, I guarantee it. Clearly there was concern over lack of communication with Jim Dwyer and you had people concerned over the facadism precedent. This issue, more than Jim Dwyer, would've gotten the same end-result as we got yesterday.
But yes, I guess spinning this to just owning Lux fits the narrative of some who are hellbent to destroy a company whose employees and owners are at least trying to make attempts to be creative and change habits a bit. Congratulations on not seeing the bigger picture here.
- The preservation board stuck it the Optimist International charity by denying a proposal that would've done something with the property and provided the charity with much needed money to vacate the building and continue helping kids.
- The preservation board stuck it to the neighborhood who, when neighbors spoke up, said they wanted the new proposal.
- The preservation board stuck it to the businesses who always want more people living nearby.
- The preservation board stuck it to the apartment-seekers who want to live in the neighborhood but can't because stock is limited and, as such, rent is continuing to increase.
- The preservation board stuck it to HOK by more or less saying, "your design isn't good enough because it uses facadism" and "we expected better from you" without actually saying those things.
- The preservation board stuck it to the city who had a clear and open window to getting a property back on the tax sheets with no tax incentive request added.
If Plan C fails, which we'll know in a relatively short amount of time, then the project is fully dead. Then let's see what happens. Will someone else step up knowing they'll really only be able to build a thin, rectangular high-rise on the eastern portion of the property unless they decide to just renovate the current building for a ton of money? Or will we see another charitable organization pick up the property, continue to defer maintenance, and not contribute anything to the tax sheets?
$10k demo permit application submitted by Optimist Int'l for "WRECK COMMERCIAL BUILDING" $10k is way too low. Anyone know what's going on?
The For Sale sign went from "Back on Market" to "Under Contract" in the last couple days...
^ Would it be fair that the seller might have raised the price and developer/buyer might have low balled the offer only to meet somewhere in the happy middle. Utter speculation on my part but assume that things went on long enough that everyone was back at the table to negotiate a final price.
Either way, good news
Either way, good news
I heard there were three interested parties in the property. Glad to see one has it under contract. It'll be interesting to see what is proposed. Perhaps what we were told was impossible by the last developer is possible.
My hope is that we see the last plan revived. Because while Lux associated, which was the problematic part, it really was an extremely solid vision for the parcel. It was rather upsetting to see the last iteration get shot down. It was just pretty much perfect. Fingers crossed for this outcome: new owners with credibility, most recent past plan.quincunx wrote: ↑Feb 26, 2023I heard there were three interested parties in the property. Glad to see one has it under contract. It'll be interesting to see what is proposed. Perhaps what we were told was impossible by the last developer is possible.
I was one of the three who was interested in the property. Unfortunately, by time I reached out, someone else had it under contract. I was confident in doing a 16-story high-rise on the east and a smaller, 7-story structure on the south with less than 25% of the Optimist pavilion needing to be demolished and the exterior wall along Taylor being retained. I believed the mix would've worked well, but a variance to the parking minimum would've had to be sought.
Looking forward to seeing what the new group will/has come up with.
Looking forward to seeing what the new group will/has come up with.
- 1,607
Hopefully other guy falls through and you get this^ built
- 6,118
^^That sounds like a solid plan. I was sorry to see the last one rejected, but maybe the new owners will have a vision similar to yours. (Or they could take you on as a consultant.) Either way, this is a hopeful bit of news.
Maybe there were four interested parties then.chriss752 wrote: ↑Feb 27, 2023I was one of the three who was interested in the property. Unfortunately, by time I reached out, someone else had it under contract. I was confident in doing a 16-story high-rise on the east and a smaller, 7-story structure on the south with less than 25% of the Optimist pavilion needing to be demolished and the exterior wall along Taylor being retained. I believed the mix would've worked well, but a variance to the parking minimum would've had to be sought.
Looking forward to seeing what the new group will/has come up with.
$0 zoning-only building permit application submitted for 4494 Lindell to turn it into a hotel.
NextSTL - Versa Development plans to convert the Optimist International building into a hotel
https://nextstl.com/2024/05/versa-devel ... o-a-hotel/
https://nextstl.com/2024/05/versa-devel ... o-a-hotel/
Nice.quincunx wrote: ↑May 31, 2024NextSTL - Versa Development plans to convert the Optimist International building into a hotel
https://nextstl.com/2024/05/versa-devel ... o-a-hotel/
But the Central West End NIMBYs will still kill this.
- 502
NIMBYs didn't exist when I was with Lux and we presented the HOK design. People actually liked it. It was the Preservation Board that killed it. I hope they have common sense and approve this project since the enhancements to the pavilion are solid and the new building fits in well. It's the last option you can do with the property besides keeping it.
I think it looks great. The new tower relates nicely to the existing building.
I'm anxious to hear what the CRO/PB thinks about it. They were pretty adamant about preserving the "narrow slot windows" last time, I recall.
"The Pavilion is a distinctive design with expressive, triangular-section concrete columns connected to cantilevered floor slabs; the exterior columns define wall bays on the east and west sides, containing pairs of narrow slot windows that extend from floor to ceiling. The primary Lindell façade has the same window pattern flanking a central section filled by an aluminum storefront assembly."
"The Pavilion is a distinctive design with expressive, triangular-section concrete columns connected to cantilevered floor slabs; the exterior columns define wall bays on the east and west sides, containing pairs of narrow slot windows that extend from floor to ceiling. The primary Lindell façade has the same window pattern flanking a central section filled by an aluminum storefront assembly."
And adding a large awning onto the front with a circle drive? Lux sucks, but I don't think this is any better from a CRO perspective.
And for the record, I wouldn't necessarily be mad about either this or Lux's proposal being built, as the historic pavilion would be largely preserved (and generally revertable if desired), in addition to the many social and economic benefits that come from putting this property into more productive use.
Just wanted to get the rendering out here. I really like this proposal.
![]()
Just noticing this, why does every proposal that comes along involve extra curb cuts??Tim wrote: ↑Jun 01, 2024And adding a large awning onto the front with a circle drive? Lux sucks, but I don't think this is any better from a CRO perspective.
Because we have endemic car dependency.