Preservation Board Agenda

What's happening in our built environment.
First unread post434 posts
^^What is proposed to replace these? Unfortunately, I doubt I can make it to the meeting because it's Passover.
This is part of BJC's/Wash U Medical Center's planned $1 billion + reconstruction and includes a major expansion to Children's Hospital. The existing buildings are empty, and everyone I've heard from confirms that they're unusable for a modern hospital. I do love the existing scale and facade along Kingshighway.

HOK has been chosen as the lead designer, and I suspect they're planning something great. The images from the 2011 "request for inspiration" (below) are not the actual designs. One architect on the project told me that they hope to open the whole campus up to Kingshighway and that a priority is defining the Kingshighway facade and skyline as seen from Forest Park.

Image

Article: http://nextstl.com/central-corridor/hok ... cal-center
"everyone I've heard from confirms that they're unusable for a modern hospital."

Reminds me of the arguments they put up for demolition of the Pevely building. If nothing else, why can't the facades of the old buildings be incorporated into the new?
After these two buildings are gone, the transformation of these blocks into Clayton wannabes will be compete :(

to Stlgasm,
The preliminary agenda does not have any details. Will look for them in the coming week.
if there were a guarantee that the facade of the new building would be human-scaled and not covered in giant vents and ugly, pre-fab concrete panels (like several of the newer Kingshighway-facing buildings to the south) then I would be... alright, I suppose, with the loss of the current building. i doubt there's any such guarantee, though, as even "good" architecture nowadays seems to trend monolithic. definitely i would prefer that they at least incorporate the current facade into the new building. i'll be writing to the preservation board and to BJC to express this, for whatever it's worth.
These guys did it....

Image

Conveys, at a glance, the history of the modern building.
Bellevue Hospital in New York creatively incorporated historic buildings into its new ambulatory care center (*cough* Pevely *cough*):

http://www.lera.com/projects/lab/bellevue.htm
Reminds me of the arguments they put up for demolition of the Pevely building.


Understandable. I think the difference (as it has been explained to me) is that the Pevely is an open floor plan structure that could easily be retrofitted for outpatient use. The BJC buildings, in contrast, are a rabbit warren on tiny rooms and corridors.

I'm not sure about saving the facades of the older buildings. I saw that a lot in DC, and for every good example, I saw four bad examples. I like the warmth and scale of the older BJC buildings, but other than their porches, they don't strike me as great architecture. I guess I'd rather see their potential replacement first--and see how it fits with the overall campus redesign--and then discern which is better.
This won't be popular here, but I don't get the attraction here. I don't consider Kingshighway to be the front door for the hospital complex, or a place I'm going to take a walk anytime soon. As mentioned, Pevely wasn't (isn't) very suitable for a medical building - my hope there was that it be repurposed for another use. If we're being honest, I bet a very large majority on this board can't place these BJC buildings. They're not prominent like other structures that have been fought over. I would like to see these buildings kept, but I don't think it's realistic. It would have been great to still have the Ettrick building and the new BJC headquarters is no beauty, but I'm glad it's there.
Taking that stance, Alex, I could say that since its unlikely I will be walking by the Pevely building anytime soon and since Biondi will probably get his way, I should resign myself to it's fate and fight more realistic battles.

We may not save these buildings but there is value in a conversation that questions what is being thrown away for what are short term goals in the big picture. Perhaps there is lack of context along Kingshighway because citizens before us did not question the wisdom on parking garages and blank walls.
And have we forgotten that a brick building was torn down just to provide a staging area for construction for the outpatient building? BJC has already received a lot of leeway. I think those who are able to should continue to speak up.

I guess if I was employed by BJC or otherwise dependant on them, I may not be able to speak my mind. Fortunately I don't work for BJC (or SLU)
imran wrote:
Taking that stance, Alex, I could say that since its unlikely I will be walking by the Pevely building anytime soon and since Biondi will probably get his way, I should resign myself to it's fate and fight more realistic battles.


I don't think that's true at all. There are many differences in the locations, but the biggest issue is really that Pevely was in the hands of a private developer with a development plan for housing...and then backslid into SLU's hands. The BJC situation is very different. Whatever is built will be built for 50+ years - those aren't exactly short-term goals. And BJC doesn't have a tendency to tear things down and leave vacant lots for years. FYI I don't work for BJC or SLU either...
"BJC doesn't have a tendency to tear things down and leave vacant lots for years"

I can name two on Forest Park Parkway west of Boyle ( ofcourse depending on one's definition of years ).

Look, I get that you are not feeling these buildings. I really did not love the Del Taco saucer either but supported its preservation. I believe that if you re-invest in older architecture the results are usually spectacular and well-meaning new construction often falls short.

And 50 years in a 250 year old city,..... long term is a relative concept.

Agree to disagree I guess.
I'm with the tear'em down camp on this one. The old Shriners Hospital should be preserved. Everything else can be sacrificed to a $1bil. cutting edge medical campus. BJC doesn't have the best architectural record (hospitals tend not to), but they do build, build, build. I'd rather not put anything in the way of that. Those old buildings are nice, but they're not worth saving. I especially like the idea of having more towers filling out the CWE skyline.
I think a lot depends on the buildng in question.

1. I must admit that I can't wait until Queeny Tower gets its turn with the wrecking ball. That's supposedly Phase Two after the northern buildings get built. I really dislike that the gateway to the Central West End is a poorly built, sidewalk-facing parking garage with those silly little arches looking as if they might crumble beneath the weight of that massive, dehumanizing concrete block. Almost anything would be an improvement.

2. At the same time, I might be willing to lay down in front of a bulldozer or chain myself to a column if someone ever tried to tear down the Central Institute for the Deaf building. That building is amazing.
FYI: CID and the old Shriners have been labeled for demolition since 2007 by a public master plan map by WU/BJC.
I'll have to look for some chains. Where do you buy chains?
Why couldn't something like this be offered as a good compromise?

Image

Says 'big city with character' to me ..
landmarks wrote:
I thought that readers would be interested in the agenda of the Preservation Board at their monthly meetings. As such, I will try to post the full agenda here when it comes out from now on. The meeting today contains two proposed demolitions that are, strangely, being endorsed by the Cultural Resources Office (CRO). The first is along Jefferson between Ann and Russell where historic buildings in the Fox Park Local Historic District are to be destroyed to build a parking lot for a daycare center whose design does not comply with standards for mass or proportion for new construction according to the CRO's analysis. The next is a large early 20th century industrial complex at 169 E. Grand, which is clearly eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and which contains multiple buildings deemed by the CRO itself to be "sound" and of "High Merit." Strangely, despite the fact that the ordinance the CRO is tasked with interpreting states specifically "DEMOLITION OF SOUND HIGH MERIT STRUCTURES SHALL NOT BE APPROVED BY THE OFFICE" the office is endorsing demolition. As always, the meeting is open to the public for comment, 4:00 this afternoon on the 12th floor of 1015 Locust (across from Bridge Taproom). Agenda: http://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/departments/planning/cultural-resources/documents/preservation-board-final-agenda-4-april-2011.cfm

The former Taco Bell become ATM has been demo'd...the Southside Day Nursery construction is soon to come.
Next PB meeting on April 22

Apart from garages,front steps and fence,
there is an appeal to the previous denial (in January) to demolish 2746 Utah Ave.
The buildings on the south side of the 2700 block are all subsiding and leaning to one side or another (http://preservationresearch.com/2012/08 ... ah-street/). Can they be saved? I hate for St. Louis to lose any of its historic housing stock.
Next Meeting Monday May 20

2746 Utah Avenue demolition to be discussed (previously tabled apparently)

Store front alterations in the CWE for LuluLemon,
Patio roofs and issues regarding windows in historic districts.
^
This is a HUGE snag for Maryland Plaza, the CWE and StL. This brand is HOT and those pants.....
lululemon opening up in CWE
http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/blog ... store.html
It's interesting that the store wouldn't go into Frontenac or Clayton.
it's already at Frontenac Plaza. This is a 2nd location
(and my lack of LuluLemon and Frontenac knowledge is showing) :(
More women walking around the CWE in yoga pants is a very good thing.