Everly On The Loop: 14-story Student Apartments

Renovations and new construction in the Central Corridor -- defined by the area south of Delmar Avenue and North of Interstate 44/55.
First unread post264 posts
13 stories, 200 market-rate apartments, 4500 sf of ground retail at 6103-6131 Delmar Boulevard. This is the Loop Center North lot between Gokul and Big Shark (those buildings remain). Clayco plans to have it open fall of 2017.

http://nextstl.com/2015/11/clayco-plans ... east-loop/

The Yellow Cab building that was on the site was razed in 2006. Previous plans for the site failed to get off the ground.

http://sdtimes.org/files/Download/SD_Times2006_04.pdf
When Joe Edwards wants something, it's hard to believe it won't happen somehow.
I'm not convinced that this particular site is ready for that many market-rate units, but we'll see.

BTW, NextSTL has updated their story, with much better renderings. The brick facade looks good; I'm just glad they're not using fiber-cement panels.
Image

I like the amount of units proposed and I think the stretch could use even more, but I do have slight reservations about the design.

It looks like an office building or hotel. Where are the private recessed or extended balconies?

I am believer of having vibrant building designs for vibrant districts. Couldn't they take a few cues from Washington University's project (Loop Lofts) a few blocks west?

And why does it have to be a brown brick facade? Yes, there's a lot of classic/traditional-St. Louis design nearby to blend, but can they jazz up the design...... just a little?

And why do new building proposals in metro St. Louis (in many instances) seem to be always trimmed in brown?

Happy for the proposal, but once again, in my opinion, the design comes up just a little short.

Not terrible, but yawn! Hopefully it's only a scheme.
arch city wrote:
It looks like an office building or hotel. Where are the private recessed or extended balconies?


Someone asked the Clayco guy about balconies. He said the boss didn't like them. They leak and are a maintenance hassle.
^Yeah, but Clayco is a "construction" company supposedly doing cutting-edge building design. Figure it out the remedy, Clayco. :(

Yes, there are people who care not to have them, but I wonder how marketable the apartments will be without some private balconies. The fact that someone ask that question should have had the light bulb lit up. Even the ragtag Alverne building downtown is having extended balconies added to its exterior.

Seriously, I don't want to be "David Downer" because I am really happy to see development in the East Loop - especially of this magnitude.
Does Clayco have a real estate management company? specifically involving residential? The comments about balconies coming from a builder doesn't make sense to. However, from the perspective of an owner/property manager I can understand the maintenance issues as well as insurance/long term liability issues of balconies. A cost that will be included in the rent.
.
I think it will be interesting to know if this project is already financed, or if Clayco is self financing?
I try not to be one to complain about every design not being contemporary enough, but even I find this one kinda "bleh". Don't get me wrong, I'm excited about what it means for the neighborhood and the added density and all of that, I'm just finding it more difficult to fight against the constant complaining about design in this city.
Every building doesn't have to be a modern masterpiece. Go to DC and realize urban form always beats design. Why I hate MCM.
^Interesting perspective. Can you expand on that a bit goat? Is it that MCM often isn't fully urban in that it doesn't always maximize land use by incorporating setbacks, plazas, walkways, etc...?

I'm just curious. Haven't heard that connection/perspective on MCM and urban form before.
^ it's not that I don't like the style. It's just that it seems like MCM was the beginning of the ugly suburban site plans and accommodation to cars over people.
^Good points. Look at the Uhaul building on Kingshighway, the Grand/Forest Park Saucer, the AAA building on Lindel as examples. People seem to like the buildings themselves, but they are set back from the street and are catered toward cars rather than pedestrians.
^ I know what your saying; MCM happened as the auto became a dominant feature in our culture and therefore many MCM buildings/site plans embraced the auto more than predecessors. But MCM itself didn't cause that and we have numerous examples of MCM design in STL that have enriched our built environment, and sadly, many others that already have been demolished.

I think the San Luis Apartments are a great example; yes, it wasn't perfectly oriented to the street but it did a decent job of it as a motel and it was a stunner.
I also think of examples such as 505 Washington... while not as tall as its neighbors, it has a strong site plan and terrific design.

And then there is the the Remington Rand on Lindell... terrific MCM building with appropriate site plan. But here in the 21c. we decided that we needed to demo the adjacent building to accommodate cars more as part of its rehab.
dredger wrote:
Does Clayco have a real estate management company? specifically involving residential?


No, Mr. Case said they'd hire one of the usual suspects to manage the property, "it's just not what we do"
While every building doesn't have to be a modern masterpiece or avant-garde, you certainly can have buildings with great urban-form and modern design.

Again, WU's Loop Lofts aren't considered to be a "masterpiece", yet, the design is urban in form, the project is modern and doesn't distract heavily from the older existing architecture. It's a perfect blend of where new modern urban-form meets the old classic/traditional architecture of The Loop.

In my opinion, without being too extravagant, the Loop Lofts took The Loop out of its "time-warp".

I think St. Louis and DC are two different animals. While DC has a strict height limit, St. Louis does not. DC - for the most part - is literally forced to build in urban-form. Also, because of this limit, DC has a shitload of new modern-designed, urban-desinged buildings that fit within their height limit whereas St. Louis doesn't.

If St. Louis is going to build dinky towers and mid-rises, at least make the designs interesting and urban - particularly east of I-170.

Below are some residential design proposals from a few cities in North America. With the exception of the one in Dallas, notice they are all 13-stories, urban-formed and contains either brown trimming and/or brown accents. None of these are avant-garde or masterpieces, but they are modern. They are not sterile and they have either recessed or extended balconies.

By the way, Denver is a "brown" city like St. Louis. They like to build "brownish" projects too, but Denver also has newer towers with major modern flair dotting the landscape as well.

Image
Quebec, Canada

Image
Dallas, Texas

Image
Denver, Colorado

Image
Denver, Colorado

Image
Denver, Colorado
New renderings

Image

Image
It's really not bad but there's just something I don't like about it. Needs more glass and balconies?
I like this proposal more than any of those Denver projects or the Quebec project. It looks great. Modern glassy retail on the ground floor and nice brick finish and big windows up top.

It's very reminiscent of - albeit many times larger than - the Regional Arts Commission Building across the street which I've always liked and thought to be the best modern/contemporary addition to the East Loop.
"We have the universe to roam in imagination. It is our virtue to be infinitely varied. The worst tyranny is uniformity."

-George William Russell
moorlander wrote:
It's really not bad but there's just something I don't like about it. Needs more glass and balconies?

I agree. Not a total bust.....just plain.....somewhat sterile.

The edgy glass doesn't change it for me. Perhaps if it is built, the finished product will be a surprise.

It has happened before.
Is it just me, or is this a 12-story apartment proposal. I can't figure out where they're hiding that unlucky floor.
wabash wrote:
Is it just me, or is this a 12-story apartment proposal. I can't figure out where they're hiding that unlucky floor.

It doesn't matter. The whole design needs to be revamped. :D

I'm willing to bet someone from St. Louis designed it.
First, I really like the design. I guess I'm a bit of a traditionalist when it comes to form, materials, etc. As with every project built nowadays, it could use more texture (preferably some exquisitely detailed teracotta :D) but I think there's something to be said for not straying too far away from traditional urban form in most places. I mean, late 19th/early 20th century cities were visual feasts not because the buildings were all sorts of ridiculous geometric shapes but because they were elaborately and variably decorated.

arch city wrote:
"We have the universe to roam in imagination. It is our virtue to be infinitely varied. The worst tyranny is uniformity."

-George William Russell


While I certainly appreciate imagination, I'm not so sure that infinite variety makes for a livable, comfortable urban experience. IMO.
wabash wrote:
Is it just me, or is this a 12-story apartment proposal. I can't figure out where they're hiding that unlucky floor.


There's a mezzanine level above the first floor. Notice the brick and glass on the easternmost side.