Which design do you like the best? (see page 2.)
- 622
What a great picture Traffic, congestion, lighting. I'm usually gone by 6:30 and not back until the evening. very interesting though.
- 182
Looks like they posted the potential designs.
Arcturis
![]()
Lawrence Group
![]()
Trivers
![]()
I really can't imagine how these work. THe designs are pretty drastic to what's there now. I think I like Arcturis' with all the glass, but I'm not totally sold yet. All I know is that I'm pumped for when this is done.
Arcturis
Lawrence Group
Trivers
I really can't imagine how these work. THe designs are pretty drastic to what's there now. I think I like Arcturis' with all the glass, but I'm not totally sold yet. All I know is that I'm pumped for when this is done.
- 729
Hmmm, I think the Trivers design makes the best seemless transition but think it is a bit sterile and not real inviting. I like the uniqueness of the design from The Lawrence Group but think it could use a bigger pedestrian area which brings the winner to Arcturis. But not sold on their design either. Seems like it is missing something at the street level.ArchMadness wrote:Looks like they posted the potential designs.
Considered from the perspective of a pedestrian, I strongly prefer the Lawrence Group's. We really need to see a south elevation to inform our opinions, though.
- 6,775
The Trivers includes the Metrolink entrance, but the other two don't. Are we looking from the same angle?
- 10K
I'm not sure - either Lawrence or Trivers. The Lawrence rendering looks a little "cold," but I like a lot of the aspects of it.
- 1,026
I eally like the Lawrence design (the middle one) .. but what in the hell happened to the first rendering that was put out. I actually liked that one better than all three.
why do they pay people to design "initial renderings" if they're just going to redo the whole thing anyway. Seems pretty wastefull.
why do they pay people to design "initial renderings" if they're just going to redo the whole thing anyway. Seems pretty wastefull.
It looks to me like the Trivers design has nothing on the street level but a giant wall of glass with no retail or anything. Am I missing something in that rendering?
In any case, my vote goes to Arcturis. At street level, there isn't anything like it on Washington Ave. yet. While the Lawrence Group's has the same feel as many of the buildings not too far west of 600 Washington.
In any case, my vote goes to Arcturis. At street level, there isn't anything like it on Washington Ave. yet. While the Lawrence Group's has the same feel as many of the buildings not too far west of 600 Washington.
- 10K
The more I look at these renderings, I think the Arcturis rendering reminds me a little too much of the current SLC with the white siding.
And as Central Scrutinizer mentioned, where is the MetroLink platform in the Arcturis and Lawrence renderings?
And as Central Scrutinizer mentioned, where is the MetroLink platform in the Arcturis and Lawrence renderings?
I say Lawrence. Trivers' design looks forbidding to me, and Acturis, I don't know, I think the cheesy rendering and yellow first floor turn me off. Some tweaking might swing me into their camp, but for now, I say Lawrence!
I like the Lawrence Group's. I like the use of the awnings. I like the contemporary, but conservative look of their design. Acturis' yellow storefront base seems trendy and could be outdated in a matter of years. Their design also reminds me of the earlier Bottle District design. Old news. It's a vibrant design, but the character seems out of place on Washington Avenue.
I kind of like Trivers', but I like LG's the most.
I kind of like Trivers', but I like LG's the most.
It's good marketing. Notice how we all clamor for renderings here, even when it's way too early in a project's life to take them seriously... people like to look at, evaluate, and talk about the pretty pictures. This keeps them thinking and talking about the project, which feeds the funnel that ultimately pays for the whole thing.markofucity wrote:why do they pay people to design "initial renderings" if they're just going to redo the whole thing anyway. Seems pretty wastefull.
What surprises me is how poorly some developers capitalize on the initial flurry of attention, neglecting their web sites, etc.
- 1,054
The Acturis seems like it could go ghetto easily with the yellow <switched> Granted Downtown is not destined for a decline but we do not need to make buildings look like it from the start nor have unfriendly pedestrian lower levels no matter how great the architecture.
I applaud Trivers for the setback and enlarged pedestrian area whether plaza or expanded sidewalk to compliment the metro station. However, the architecture is still not pedestrian oriented and needs to be since it is located adjacent to a Metro station and non-pedestrian designed buildings make walking to and from a station uncomfortable. Plus, it looks Southern Californian.
Lawrence Group is the best. They mix old and new and are not afraid to break post-modernist designs for making buildings appealing to people at eye level. Their portfolio of other STL projects makes them a leader and shows their sensitivity to history and the 21st century.
I applaud Trivers for the setback and enlarged pedestrian area whether plaza or expanded sidewalk to compliment the metro station. However, the architecture is still not pedestrian oriented and needs to be since it is located adjacent to a Metro station and non-pedestrian designed buildings make walking to and from a station uncomfortable. Plus, it looks Southern Californian.
Lawrence Group is the best. They mix old and new and are not afraid to break post-modernist designs for making buildings appealing to people at eye level. Their portfolio of other STL projects makes them a leader and shows their sensitivity to history and the 21st century.
- 6,775
Jambo wrote:DeBaliviere wrote:
And as Central Scrutinizer mentioned, where is the MetroLink platform in the Arcturis and Lawrence renderings?
Maybe the Metro entrance will be moved and relocated into the remodeled building lobby (interior)??
Highly, highly unlikely.
Given the prominance of the corner and its location, I kinda ranked the 3 based on what i felt the ground level retail potential of each was. The more potential for lively and sucessful ground floor retail, the better the proposal. Besides, lets face it, while the upper stores of each differed some, they are similar in that its modern glass floor to ceiling.
Based on this, Arcturis is out, because not only is the design bland, but the ground floor seems boring.
The upside with Lawernce is that it seems to have a solid traditional first floor component, with a more modern upstairs. I really like the mix.
Trivers is definatly more modern and edgy, but those big V shaped thing, while cool looking from afar, I worry about how the ground floor retail will work, particualry, how much window space and window shopping will there be (lets remember that the visual, the window shopping is really what can drive that ground floor retail).
While I like the U shape of Trivers and the idea that the shape could provide more retail frontage and a lively plaza, I am just no convinced that the ground floor will cut it for retail and that the interior retail spaces on the plaza could hurt from a lack of visiblity and the last thing the next reincarnation of SLC needs is empty underused retail space.
My vote goes for Lawernce. LETS BRING IT ON!
Based on this, Arcturis is out, because not only is the design bland, but the ground floor seems boring.
The upside with Lawernce is that it seems to have a solid traditional first floor component, with a more modern upstairs. I really like the mix.
Trivers is definatly more modern and edgy, but those big V shaped thing, while cool looking from afar, I worry about how the ground floor retail will work, particualry, how much window space and window shopping will there be (lets remember that the visual, the window shopping is really what can drive that ground floor retail).
While I like the U shape of Trivers and the idea that the shape could provide more retail frontage and a lively plaza, I am just no convinced that the ground floor will cut it for retail and that the interior retail spaces on the plaza could hurt from a lack of visiblity and the last thing the next reincarnation of SLC needs is empty underused retail space.
My vote goes for Lawernce. LETS BRING IT ON!
The retail , on the Lawarence group project, looks a lot like the Borders bookstore at the base of my old Apartment, in Chicago.
- 5,433
JMedwick wrote:Given the prominance of the corner and its location, I kinda ranked the 3 based on what i felt the ground level retail potential of each was. The more potential for lively and sucessful ground floor retail, the better the proposal. Besides, lets face it, while the upper stores of each differed some, they are similar in that its modern glass floor to ceiling.
I like all three plans, but like you, I'm looking primarily at the potential for the best retail space on the ground level. I have no doubt that the residences will be nice, as well as the amenities, regardless of what plan is chosen. But downtown has its share of dead zones given the number of urban plazas and parking garages, so it's important to get the ground floor space at this prominent corner 'right' IMHO.
The Arturis plan does the least for me- mostly because the ground floor retail space is the least attractive, and it seems uninteresting.
I'm more drawn to the aesthetics and overall design of the Trivers. The U-shaped main entrance and the plaza combine to form the most interesting street elevation IMHO, but I'm afraid the retailers would get lost in the mix, there would likely be less pedestrian density with this setup, and it wouldn't complement efforts to bring ground level retail to the former Dillard's/SB&F building across the street. And, the last thing downtown needs is another plaza, even if this one would be much more functional than its counterparts (The dreadful US Bank Plaza, and even the vast plaza at the 1010 Market building come to mind.)
So, that brings me to my favorite proposal so far, The Lawrence Group. It's my favorite for many of the same reasons that others have mentioned here. It's a striking, contemporary design, and IMHO it has the best looking street level retail frontage of the three designs. I particuarly like the awnings over the doors and display windows- it contrasts nicely and appropriately with the more contemporary upper floors- and it creates strong visual interest at the ground level.
And, as much as I want that &^%$ skybridge to come down, the banner makes its presence a bit more bearable for the time being!
At this point, I've gotta go with Arcturis. It seems bold and dramatic. The Lawrence Group's is OK, but doesn't knock me out. Frankly, I think Triver's design belongs on a suburban office campus. Think Winghaven.
Of course, these are just conceptual renderings, and we're only seeing one small portion of a 2-block site. Stay tuned...
P.S. I love the giant question mark.
Of course, these are just conceptual renderings, and we're only seeing one small portion of a 2-block site. Stay tuned...
P.S. I love the giant question mark.
Designs for St. Louis Centre are unveiled
By Gail Appleson
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
06/09/2006
The first proposed designs to transform the ailing St. Louis Centre into a vibrant retail center and upscale condominium complex were unveiled Friday by Pyramid Cos., the new owner of the mostly vacant shopping mall.
Matt O'Leary, senior vice president of Pyramid, said a team from his company would create a concept using elements from the designs submitted by three St. Louis architectural firms, and then request specific proposals from each. Pyramid hopes to choose an architect in six to seven weeks and start construction by the end of the year, including demolition of the skybridge over Washington Avenue.
In February, Pyramid announced plans for a $260 million renovation of St. Louis Centre, the adjacent former Dillard's department store and One City Centre. The designs unveiled Friday were limited to St. Louis Centre.
The designs, which were submitted by Lawrence Group, Trivers Associates Architects and Arcturis, had different elements but they met certain requirements set by Pyramid. One requires that the first floor be reserved for retail stores and restaurants, which must open onto the street and not into a mall.
"In cities that have good urban retailing, stores face the street," O'Leary said, adding that while the vertical Water Tower Place mall works in Chicago, "We are not Michigan Avenue."
Describing St. Louis Centre as a white elephant, O'Leary said the project would not be able to draw national retailers until it got rid of the mall.
There are no commitments from retailers, but O'Leary said Pyramid is hoping to draw a mix of national and local companies, including apparel shops, a bookstore and a furniture store. ?O'Lear?y said he didn't think ?Gold's Gym would remain on the first floor of the building; however it might relocate to an upper level.
The top three floors are to be used for condos, outdoor green space and recreational facilities that could include a fitness center and movie theater. Some of the designs call for the addition of a fifth floor for penthouse condos. One design breaks the upper floors into four residential buildings.
Pyramid plans to use about 170,000 square feet for residential space containing some 100 to 130 units, O'Leary said.
By Gail Appleson
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
06/09/2006
The first proposed designs to transform the ailing St. Louis Centre into a vibrant retail center and upscale condominium complex were unveiled Friday by Pyramid Cos., the new owner of the mostly vacant shopping mall.
Matt O'Leary, senior vice president of Pyramid, said a team from his company would create a concept using elements from the designs submitted by three St. Louis architectural firms, and then request specific proposals from each. Pyramid hopes to choose an architect in six to seven weeks and start construction by the end of the year, including demolition of the skybridge over Washington Avenue.
In February, Pyramid announced plans for a $260 million renovation of St. Louis Centre, the adjacent former Dillard's department store and One City Centre. The designs unveiled Friday were limited to St. Louis Centre.
The designs, which were submitted by Lawrence Group, Trivers Associates Architects and Arcturis, had different elements but they met certain requirements set by Pyramid. One requires that the first floor be reserved for retail stores and restaurants, which must open onto the street and not into a mall.
"In cities that have good urban retailing, stores face the street," O'Leary said, adding that while the vertical Water Tower Place mall works in Chicago, "We are not Michigan Avenue."
Describing St. Louis Centre as a white elephant, O'Leary said the project would not be able to draw national retailers until it got rid of the mall.
There are no commitments from retailers, but O'Leary said Pyramid is hoping to draw a mix of national and local companies, including apparel shops, a bookstore and a furniture store. ?O'Lear?y said he didn't think ?Gold's Gym would remain on the first floor of the building; however it might relocate to an upper level.
The top three floors are to be used for condos, outdoor green space and recreational facilities that could include a fitness center and movie theater. Some of the designs call for the addition of a fifth floor for penthouse condos. One design breaks the upper floors into four residential buildings.
Pyramid plans to use about 170,000 square feet for residential space containing some 100 to 130 units, O'Leary said.
I'm in love with the Lawrence Groups design. I just love how it stands out. Acturis is okay, but really doesn't inspire me. And Trivers is pretty freaking cool, but something about Lawrence just grabs my attention.
A few timing updates:
- Pyramid will be closing on the property before September
- Financing is arranged but won't be in place until April
- Resident move-in not expected until 2009
- Pyramid will be closing on the property before September
- Financing is arranged but won't be in place until April
- Resident move-in not expected until 2009