urbanSTL

Thanks for the info, Second Empire. Yep, I'm sure that using real limestone would be QUITE expensive. You know, with all the new synthetic materials available today, I wonder why no one has come up with a suitable material that could convincingly mimic limestone, terra cotta, etc. (for instance, I remember a few years ago a lady perfected a weatherproof mixture of concrete and plaster of paris. A builder in Florida is building homes of concrete blocks he disigned, and the homes have an old world European look, but they are very expensive. And in Chicago, one builder is making molds of whole facades and reproducing them in concrete, bringing costs way down while having the look of craftsmanship that is no longer feasible in the traditional method. I've seen conrete roofing that looks just like slate roofing. Maybe there's some kind of polymer that could be added for added durability, reduction of weight and/or acceptance of coloring, as concrete does not weather dyes well--so I've read) Some industrious person could make molds of terra cotta, limestone or do something like the guy in Chicago and mass produce them. Anyone care to comment on this?

markofucity wrote:maybe I fundamentally misunderstand what stucco is but isn't it just a plaster like substance that can be molded into virtually any shape ...

No, stucco is a cementicious exterior plaster most commonly applied to a metal or wood lath or less so directly to masonry. It has all but been replaced by EIFS (Exterior Insulation and Finishing System or more commonly Dryvit) -- its acrylic (and inferior) substitute. It is mostly a material for flat vertical surfaces though it is sometimes used to create a variety of simple details within the surface. You may be thinking of Terra Cotta which can bear a strong resemblance to stone and be cast in any shape to be gazed or not depending on the desired look. Terra Cotta is much more prevalent than even stucco in this area -- we are fortunate. As was mentioned before, stucco in St. Louis is mostly to be found on our wonderful Arts and Crafts buildings and very little else. The facades in Lafayette Square that we are talking about are referred to by Cultural resources as "Concrete" when some little bugger gets all cocky and decides to paint them with "non-approved" colors and they are called before the Preservation Board. I would trust them on this one. They must be concrete.

I was thinking of Terra Cotta ... and thanks for the info.

"Cementicious". That's how my cereal tasted this morning!

Again, who benefits from this loss?

http://www.ksdk.com/news/news_article.a ... ryid=98553



I can't tell now if it was existing residential being rehabbed that burned or this development. Anyone know?

Lafayette and Mississippi is the Gilded Age infill project.

Thanks for the clarification and sorry for the mistake.

St. Louis, setting ablaze the trail to progress.

First three units are nearing completion and will be ready for new owners in February and March, 2007.

I recently noticed that BSI is back on site constructing the last building in the Mississippi Place development (I believe this is the one that was previously burned down). It will be nice to have this development completed.