^ Well, the Park East is 27 stories, I think, so not so likely to see towers that high, but the look was 100x more modern than the beige and green glass we've seen for some time. If I had to guess, maybe some 20-story towers...but again, there was much speculative development.
I haven't gotten over there during the day to check out the exhibit, but BJC has a 13-minute video on their website of three proposals, the responses to their "request for inspiration" from these companies. Of the three, I thought the middle one, from Skidmore, Owings, & Merrill was the best, though Cannon's weird wormhole-ish skywalk was interesting.
http://media.bjc.org/bjcnet/Request%20f ... videos.wmv
This worked fine for me in safari, but not chrome.
http://media.bjc.org/bjcnet/Request%20f ... videos.wmv
This worked fine for me in safari, but not chrome.
It looks like the firm, near-term requirements were for a signature new childrens/OB/onc building on the southeast corner of Kingshighway and FP avenue, and a gigantic new building on the queeny tower site that likely will extend the height of the main pavilions around to the corner, then increase it along kingshighway.
The Cannon design was annoyingly insular. The other two atleast acknowledged the need for connections to existing assets around the campus. Very disappointing though that none could incorporate the few remaining early 1900s buildings on kingshighway into their designs. This proposed campus could be in Atlanta or Singapore by the looks of it. Why not keep the historical bookmarks to our past?
(Deep breaths)
I do like the modern design and heights. I just wish it did not make Wash U look like an upstart institution. It has a rich past you know.
Anyhow, thankyou for posting the link.
(Deep breaths)
I do like the modern design and heights. I just wish it did not make Wash U look like an upstart institution. It has a rich past you know.
Anyhow, thankyou for posting the link.
I preferred the Cannon design to the others. For one, when it comes to health-care facilities, they cannot be new enough. They age out of date faster than any other kind of facility I feel. Though I like classic designs in most architecture, when it comes to medical facilities my opinions are like my opinion on surgery: If in doubt, cut it out.
Also, Stantec, Foster and Partners, and Sasaki's presentation I felt to be light on the design and a bit to heavy on the production of the clip itself.
Also, Stantec, Foster and Partners, and Sasaki's presentation I felt to be light on the design and a bit to heavy on the production of the clip itself.
Just as long as the campus plan is a legitimate TOD, I'm fine with any architectural style. My biggest worry is that the campus doesn't become a truly walkable, transit oriented environment. I'm not really worried about the aesthetics, because I know anything built in Cortex/BJC/WUMC will have that modern glass look.
- 8,904
BJC unveils 3 designs for $1 billion project
Projects on the north side of BJC’s campus are the first for which contractors are expected to be selected. The campus renewal project is expected to include new oncology and bed towers and expansions to St. Louis Children’s Hospital
http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/blog ... llion.html
Projects on the north side of BJC’s campus are the first for which contractors are expected to be selected. The campus renewal project is expected to include new oncology and bed towers and expansions to St. Louis Children’s Hospital
http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/blog ... llion.html
SOM seems to have the most comprehensive design, appeals more to the context.
Are links to the proposed designs in the article? I must need help finding them.
Wow, those are some of the biggest names in architecture. I'd love to see one of the world's best design something that actually gets built here.
- 11K
^ Yep - several repeats from the Arch grounds competition as well. I'm guessing that the teams would rather win this one than that one...
How can this be TOD when BJC likes to demolish buildings for parking garages near Metro stations?
What about the Shriner and CID buildings?
In Toronto Frank Gehry was tasked to redesign the AGO, however you can hardly tell he did it due to political constraints. How can we be sure BJC as a client will ask for the best design and site planning? They operate within a region that does not support TOD. Do we have a market for TOD?
Every Arch Grounds firm said the highway should be removed. Look at the weight they carried.
This is a great thing. But there's a lot to go.
What about the Shriner and CID buildings?
In Toronto Frank Gehry was tasked to redesign the AGO, however you can hardly tell he did it due to political constraints. How can we be sure BJC as a client will ask for the best design and site planning? They operate within a region that does not support TOD. Do we have a market for TOD?
Every Arch Grounds firm said the highway should be removed. Look at the weight they carried.
This is a great thing. But there's a lot to go.
Not huge news, but BJC is in the process of demolishing the small office building on the northeast corner of Clayton and Newstead. Used to be an architect's office, then I believe acquired by the college of pharmacy, then sold/traded/negotiated to BJC. I don't have any inside info on what will replace it - I assume expansion of the adjacent BJC parking lot in the near term and something CORTEX-y eventually.
http://maps.google.com/?ll=38.633294,-9 ... 20&vpsrc=6
http://maps.google.com/?ll=38.633294,-9 ... 20&vpsrc=6
- 11K
^ IMO - a cool little modern building, but certainly nothing to fight about. Unfortunately it will likely be parking for quite a while...
That is pretty disappointing. I heard (and this is all from second- and third-hand sources, so take it with a grain of salt) that a group looking to move a small social services enterprise closer to a Metro stop was told the building wasn't available for lease. To hear that it's going to be demolished instead of put to a constructive use is disheartening. It's not like the addition of some parking there is going to solve any parking problem, it's just going to make a desolate corner of campus even more desolate and continue to be a barrier to connecting the CWE and FPSE.
Only the SOM plan explictly mentions saving Shriners and the CID, but according to the picture boards and display models all the plans retain both.doug wrote:What about the Shriner and CID buildings?
I think all of the plans represent improvement, but SOM's is my favorite. I think they do the best job of looking at the campus in relation to the Metro and WashU/BJC's neighbors.
- 11K
^ Good observation, thought Shriners and CID have been on the demo list since at least 2007 and so I would still expect that they will be demolished.
Probably so, though with the relatively recent addition to the CID I think they might be more likely to keep it. Is either building listed on the National Historic Register? Recent events suggest that the most likely way to save any building in St. Louis is to have the Preservation Board deny a demo permit...
The last photo update on the new building on Euclid was about 9 months ago. Is construction finishing up? If so, how's it lookin'?
- 11K
Didn't snap a pic, but it's getting close the drop-off area and signage are finished and the lobby looks complete as well. The upper floors appear to still be in the build-out phase.
