urbanSTL

^ So what's the plan for the cinder block on the garage portion of the office building? Surely it will be covered with something, right?

bwcrow1s wrote:^ So what's the plan for the cinder block on the garage portion of the office building? Surely it will be covered with something, right?

I was told it will be a baseball themed mural

The mural will be an electronic screen that will be turned off at night. This allows for the theme to be changed more often and practically effortlessly.

I really like the random folding chairs.  This is the type of thing that will make downtown a place to visit.

^ well done.

ricke002 wrote: I really like the random folding chairs.  This is the type of thing that will make downtown a place to visit.

I think you may have hit upon the next great public street art exhibit...and a useful one at that.  
'Come to St. Louis to see our random folding chairs, and maybe sit a spell.  Mmm-hmm.'

One Cardinal Way has about 130 more feet to go before being topped off; the black lines show the outline of the finished tower. This building will look much taller than I thought! I swiped the original photo from Chris' twitter in case anyone was wondering.

Here are the full photos.

yesterday’s game against the astros my friend was amazed how beautiful the building already was he asked what was it going to be and I told him residential. He says downtown need many more like it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thank you! I enjoy amateur photography here and there only with my phone. The friend I gone with told me how much better Kansas City was compared to St Louis I don’t even know how Kansas City got in our conversation. He doesn’t really care for baseball and was telling me he much rather go to a soccer game so I told him that if St Louis gets awarded a soccer team the stadium will be next to union station and he was very surprised anyways what I’m trying to say is that a lot of St Louisans are highly oblivious on what’s happening here most just don’t seem to follow whats going on and don’t know any of the projects even smaller ones. Im hoping developments such as 100 foundry even iron hill BVP are trend setters. I do kind of wish they replace standard green street signs for something unique to downtown St Louis I just feel our downtown is still way to bland


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe someone in the design or construction field can answer this for me. I've always wondered how these "random" pavers are placed. Are they precisely plotted ahead of time by a human, or perhaps a random-number generator? Do they just leave it to the construction crew to lay them down randomly? 

Update on the tower from yesterday 7/26/19. The best view of this building is from the Southeast, IMO. Fills a huge hole in the skyline from the East.

That would work out great even with the St Louis flag colors with the arch symbol either left top or middle


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Or put the money to actual good use.....do you want downtown to be a mini New York or a mini Disneyland? 

Downtown needs to focus on streetscape improvements before any other infrastructural projects IMO.  New streetlights, new crosswalks, road diets, convert back to two way, and get the traffic lights on sensors.  I also think the signs are drab, but the least of the worries for me.

I really hope Mike Shannons gets redeveloped soon.

There is a plan for one street for streetscape work at least. To connect Washington to the stadium better. Not sure where that is at right now. 

framer wrote: Maybe someone in the design or construction field can answer this for me. I've always wondered how these "random" pavers are placed. Are they precisely plotted ahead of time by a human, or perhaps a random-number generator? Do they just leave it to the construction crew to lay them down randomly? 

I have personally seen this "random" pavers done in 4 different ways and have heard of 1 other. 1: the designer specifically places each one of them in AutoCAD and then when construction of it begins is on-site to verify the contractor has a good method of placing them according to the plan. This usually turns into contractors labeling the paver colors by letters typically already assigned to them in the sheets and then the use a numbered grid system for the layout. Example on site a coworker heard "row 5 column 23 is color B". 2: The designer uses a plugin like skatter for sketchup or grasshopper for rhino and these systematically randomize the pavers based upon the number of pavers, types of pavers, size of the area, etc. The construction is similar to method 1 the designer may just be less help on site since they didn't specifically place each one. 3: The designer creates "zones" on the drawing and says within zone 1 it must be x% color A, x% color B, x% color C within zone 2 x% must be color A, etc you get the point. Contractors typically don't like this method because now the designer has the power to say rip it up and try again if it doesn't visually meet these "zone" standards. 4: usually the easiest method for both designer and contractor is the module method. The designer can design any number of modules and randomly place those modules on the site. Contractors then know there is a definitive way of placing them due to the drawings will say module 1 and within module 1 you have to construct it as shown in the detail for it. 5 (the one I have only heard of being used): The most timely (in my opinion) the designer is on-site the entire layout process and hand chooses where each paver goes. I would assume this is the most costly as you may not know how much of each paver type you will use. 

Now I walk on Kiener daily and have yet to confidently come to terms on which method they used there which often means they used method 2 as I described above. I want to belive they used method 4 but I continue to search for the modules and I never seem to find them. 

^Good info. Thanks for responding! 

STLEnginerd wrote:

GoHarvOrGoHome wrote: Mike Shannon's site is eventually going to be something big. In the meantime I wouldn't mind if it got torn down and turned into surface parking on a interim basis. I'm no fan of surface parking, just seems better than a rotting two story building that's just waiting to be torn down anyways.

I think the problem would b if you turn it into parking which is revenue generating then there is less compulsion to actually build on it.  If it got really bad, I suppose you could make it greenspace.

We visited St. Louis a couple of weeks ago and were wondering whether the following idea would be feasible from a financial, legal, and technological perspective:  

How about moving the Peabody HQ building on the Gateway Mall to the Mike Shannon development site?  This would solve a couple of problems....

—Eliminate the obstruction on the Gateway Mall which was the original objective of the Plan
—Develop the Shannon site without having to “build” a new building

Obviously, moving a building the size of the Peabody HQ would be a very complicated engineering task.  However, a number of buildings were moved during the construction of Comerica Park in Detroit in 1998-1999 site preparation phase including a large theater.  In general, the shorter the distance, the “easier” the move.  

Hopefully there are some experienced engineers on this blog that could offer some insight on whether this would be feasible.