Can St. Louis Push Its Architectural Boundaries?

mattonarsenal · PostMay 22, 2015#262015-05-22T16:14+00:00

Garcia? Are they they developer, Realtor or both?
I want to ask why the difference.

This stretch of Lafayette has a lot of potential. I like the condos/townhomes at the corner of Lafayette and Compton. They are rehabs with a modern touch (also Garcia I think). But I drive by this everyday and saw it going up, and though "that's it?" And, they took two lots for it?

I would be in the market for this type of product in this location, but the exterior... no way. Curious to see how long this stays on the market.

blzhrpmd2 · PostMay 22, 2015#272015-05-22T16:36+00:00

Agreed, I'm with you. The event sounds awesome and I'd go in a heartbeat. Anything that upregulates awareness and is fun and social can't be dismissed.

However, in regards to individual residences, people that can afford to hire personal architects and designers are eliminating or at least highly controlling the problem of cost which is the main problem with our limitations of unveiling hugely innovative design on a large scale. Think about the Bottle District Towers, Skyhouse, Nadira Place. Port St. Louis. Those were all trending toward more a more creative precedent, however resulted in nothing due to cost and economic hurdles.

Again, I'd love to see more evolved design in homes too and your idea fosters that. It seemed the thread was citing bigger projects as the benchmark, however. If homes are the more practical way to start, then so be it. I would hope responsible developers doing their homework would really explore neighborhoods, and seeing more examples of cutting-edge, creative architecture would at least offer evidence of a positive trend to build upon.

framer · PostMay 22, 2015#282015-05-22T16:41+00:00

arch city wrote: What are the existing architectural groups such as the American Institute of Architects St. Louis doing to encourage/foster contemporary cutting-edge design in St. Louis?

The last time I remember the local AIA making a public stand and demanding better design was the Adam's Mark project. The developer claimed it would be comparable to the Hyatt in Atlanta (70 story glass cylinder), but the AIA called their bluff and basically said it looked like crap. They pointed out that such a prominent site deserved much, much better. A brief stink was raised, and the building was ultimately clad in brick, as if that really improved the design (it didn't).

I guess it's difficult for the local AIA to criticize their own members, but if they don't make a fuss, who will?

I've always wished that the Gateway Foundation could support some sort of program such as the Cummins Foundation in Columbus, Indiana. They pay the architect's fees for major public buildings, to encourage excellent design. As a result, Columbus, a rather small city, has a stunning collection of contemporary architecture.

" By paying the architect fees of these buildings, it has allowed the client to be more progressive in their building choices than they might otherwise have been allowed. The buildings themselves were built with typical school board/local government budgets and were meant to show that good design didn’t have to cost anymore than standard off the shelf designs that people were accustomed to seeing. "

More here: http://52weeks.rickyberkey.org/2011/08/28/week-31/

By the way, I have high hopes for the new Art & Architecture building soon to be unveiled at Wash U. Should be a stunner.

stlgasm · PostMay 22, 2015#292015-05-22T17:00+00:00

What do you mean St. Louis' new construction isn't cutting edge?

As a self-proclaimed preservationist, I am also a strong advocate for contemporary architecture. In terms of historic architecture, St. Louis can compete with almost any city in America, but it falls painfully short of almost every other big city I've spent time in when it comes to new construction. For whatever reason, local developers seem stuck on faux-historic, "traditional" design (i.e. Mills' Whole Foods development with the cheesy clocktower, the proposed commercial building on S. Grand, etc), or worse, just plain schlocky crap (The Aventura is the worst of the worst, but there are many less offensive examples such as The Standard in Midtown, etc). Of course there are some notable exceptions to this boring trend in urban construction in our city, but in general it's very very average. Don't local developers bother to even travel to other cities to see what's being built elsewhere? Even Cleveland and Milwaukee blow us out of the water in terms of contemporary urban infill. We desperately need some sleek, glassy modern architecture to contrast and enhance the heavy brick streetscapes that predominate. The mentality that new construction should "fit in" with existing fabric is ridiculous and actually devalues the real historic buildings, because the new stuff can never match the quality and detail that the original buildings have. We have an amazing architectural legacy from the 19th and early 20th century-- this city was built with the highest standards. But sadly, there are relatively few buildings from the last couple decades that uphold that legacy, and our majestic urban landscape is being gradually diluted by mediocre architecture that does not convey greatness, confidence or dynamism-- qualities that made St. Louis the powerhouse of the interior US a century ago. I know we still have the boldness to build great things-- we did manage to build the greatest symbol of modernism as our front door, after all.

urban_dilettante · PostMay 22, 2015#302015-05-22T17:17+00:00

arch city wrote:Just an FYI.......

The Tower at PNC will be the world's "greenest" skyscraper.

oh, wow. okay well that's pretty cutting-edge. i was only commenting on visual impression.

arch city · PostMay 22, 2015#312015-05-22T19:20+00:00

urban_dilettante wrote:oh, wow. okay well that's pretty cutting-edge. i was only commenting on visual impression.

No biggie/problem at all.

But that's why I included websites so people could read more on the buildings I've posted.

That PNC "green tower" is cutting-edge like The Climatron at MoBot was when it was developed.

MoBot, with its Climatron, built the world's first geodesic dome to be used as a conservatory.

With that said, what recent "firsts" can St. Louis lay claim to when it comes to contemporary (and recent) architectural ingenuity?

St. Louis used to have a lot of architectural "firsts".

Despite new buildings like Roberts Tower and RGA's HQs, has St. Louis gotten lazy and complacent? Has it lost its "mojo"? Are recent contemporary projects a small sign that there's a contemporary design resurgence on the way in St. Louis?

Northside Neighbor · PostMay 22, 2015#322015-05-22T21:20+00:00

Way up on page one of this thread, I asked, "Who's supposed to pay for this?" No response.

I guess the idea of cost constraints/market feasibility really is the bane of design enthusiasts.

stlgasm · PostMay 23, 2015#332015-05-23T13:41+00:00

NorthsideNeighbor- of course cost is a consideration, but in many cases, the insistence on adding a brick facade to look "old" vs. a more contemporary design is actually more expensive. It's not always more expensive to build a building that looks cool and modern.

urban_dilettante · PostMay 23, 2015#342015-05-23T18:06+00:00

Northside Neighbor wrote:Way up on page one of this thread, I asked, "Who's supposed to pay for this?" No response.

I guess the idea of cost constraints/market feasibility really is the bane of design enthusiasts.

Cleveland is in no better shape than St. Louis in terms of market feasibility yet they manage to build quality, contemporary buildings. It's not an issue of market feasibility or cost constraints; it's an extension of St. Louisans' aversion to change.

roger wyoming II · PostMay 23, 2015#352015-05-23T20:18+00:00

^ here's Cleveland's latest residential project in the booming University Circle area (similar to CWE with arts and eds & meds hub)

http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/ ... flats-oval

They'll be near this

and this

Northside Neighbor · PostMay 23, 2015#362015-05-23T22:14+00:00

I get it on the smaller scale infill stuff. Absolutely we can design those in all sorts of ways and never again show a faux brick, wanna-be historic building .

What I'm responding to were all the glam architecture high rise images at the top of this thread. What are we? Dubai? No. We're St. Friggin' Louis!

arch city · PostMay 23, 2015#372015-05-23T22:21+00:00

Austin, a region half the size of St. Louis, is about to build the tallest contemporary residential tower West of the Mississippi River - called The Independent.

It will rise 58-stories.

Website: The Independent Austin (video included)

onecity · PostMay 23, 2015#382015-05-23T22:52+00:00

If stl got its architectural heritage by aiming high, then we actually do want the starchitect glam.

arch city · PostMay 23, 2015#392015-05-23T23:12+00:00

A green project for Kingshighway? Residential/hotel and retail.

A project designed for Mumbai, India.

PostMay 23, 2015#402015-05-23T23:23+00:00

8 Spruce Street, Manhattan, NYC
76-story mixed-use building
Designed by starchitect, Frank Gehry

wabash · PostMay 24, 2015#412015-05-24T02:37+00:00

^56 Leonard in Manhattan is about to be the condo version of 8 Spruce (which is all rentals).

blzhrpmd2 · PostMay 24, 2015#422015-05-24T03:15+00:00

So did Art House, Skyhouse, and the Bottle District fall through because St. Louis doesn't want to change?

STL's aversion to change likely adds an additional challenge, however what does that logistically mean? Who or what body is the actual impediment to the process? Many times the employees at our firms are not necessarily local. Developers are not always local. So who is the "STL" voice shooting down ideas or demanding the lackluster products?

Northside Neighbor · PostMay 24, 2015#432015-05-24T12:30+00:00

The "voice" shooting down these grand architectural visions is the market. STL doesn't have the rents or condo market to support high rise luxury buildings, with the possible exception of the Central West End.

You guys wanting to design all these snazzy buildings should move to San Francisco. Where you can pay $4,000 a month for a 1 bedroom!

urban_dilettante · PostMay 24, 2015#442015-05-24T18:58+00:00

blzhrpmd2 wrote:So did Art House, Skyhouse, and the Bottle District fall through because St. Louis doesn't want to change?

STL's aversion to change likely adds an additional challenge, however what does that logistically mean? Who or what body is the actual impediment to the process? Many times the employees at our firms are not necessarily local. Developers are not always local. So who is the "STL" voice shooting down ideas or demanding the lackluster products?

i think the aversion manifests more in the design of our smaller infill. i'm certainly not claiming that our lack of high rise construction results from a preference for mock historicism. it's the market, no doubt. however, WHEN we build things it seems we default to traditional forms. that may actually be less true for our high rises considering that our two newest, Roberts Tower and Park East, are relatively modern.

blzhrpmd2 · PostMay 25, 2015#452015-05-25T12:36+00:00

I'm not saying I like or dislike the following examples, but just to gauge a threshold acceptable, how do the following properties measure up?

http://stlresociety.com/3259/3201-lafay ... -district/

http://nextstl.com/2013/12/developer-up ... townhomes/

(magnolia heights)

http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhom ... 3711-77983

https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/d ... -place.cfm

http://www.designsbyx3.com/our-work/con ... ill-house/

roger wyoming II · PostMay 25, 2015#462015-05-25T17:05+00:00

^ I think those are all fine (I wouldn't reject any) and I'm a fan of Pagano, but those examples are all small-scale projects; even 4545 Lindell. I think the concern is whether we're coming up short and rather uniform on the bigger new developments like CityWalk, West Pine Lofts, etc.. And what might be in store for any high-rises to come.

blzhrpmd2 · PostMay 25, 2015#472015-05-25T17:34+00:00

But aren't some of the listed "coveted" projects like the Cleveland images smaller scale infill, also?

roger wyoming II · PostMay 25, 2015#482015-05-25T18:00+00:00

Aside from 4545 Lindell, the STL examples are just a few townhomes and a single family. The Cleveland examples I posted are larger in scale... the last one takes about a full block at Euclid & 118th. I'd love to see a full block of Pagano. (Personally I'm not thrilled about the middle Cleveland example but wouldn't mind seeing something like that in a Saint Louis mix.)

PostMay 25, 2015#492015-05-25T20:34+00:00

I know I've missed a few, and I don't think there are any renderings for the project underway from West Pine Lofts, but here are some examples of recent projects:

Chouteau's Grove

Ranier Apts.

4534 Olive

Grove

Standard

4643 Lindell

Citywalk

West Pine Lofts

245 Union

WashU Delmar mixed-use

Sarah & Laclede institutional mixed-use (project status unknown)

Olive Street Apartments (project scrubbed)

Optimists tower (denied abatement; project scrubbed)

Clayton

North Central and Maryland

Vanguard

212 S. Meramec

Montgomery Tower (project being re-assessed)

onecity · PostMay 25, 2015#502015-05-25T21:06+00:00

the Lafayette and gibson buildings don't completely suck. otherwise, a bunch of unnecessary fo historical crap

Can St. Louis Push Its Architectural Boundaries?

Choose Display Mode