4,489
Super ModeratorSuper Moderator
4,489

PostDec 06, 2007#101

jlblues wrote:Anyone have renderings of this project?
(See page 5)

1,878
Never Logs OffNever Logs Off
1,878

PostDec 06, 2007#102

For jlblues, from page 5:


Arch City wrote:






-RBB

2,821
Life MemberLife Member
2,821

PostDec 06, 2007#103

:oops: Whoops, my bad. Thanks. I thought those were old renderings.

5,433
Super ModeratorSuper Moderator
5,433

PostDec 06, 2007#104

Saint Francis Medical Center in Cape Girardeau called. It wants its expansion plans back. :wink:



Seriously, I'm holding out hope that this will look much nicer than the renderings suggest. It wouldn't take much to make it look better.

12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostDec 07, 2007#105

Thanks, RBB, for reminding me how ugly this thing is.

3,311
Life MemberLife Member
3,311

PostDec 10, 2007#106

totally butt. I REALLY hope it turns out better than the rendering.

85
New MemberNew Member
85

PostDec 10, 2007#107

I'm starting to wonder why anyone would fund/subsidize a hotel of this size right now. As a small "boutique" hotel it made sense: there is certainly a small crowd of people each week who comes to St. Louis to see a concert at the Pageant, visit Wash U., or just hang out near the Loop.



But another big hotel with meeting rooms and the whole works? It will only survive by cannibalizing business from existing hotels. What is the point?

11K
Life MemberLife Member
11K

PostDec 10, 2007#108

^ I disagree - even if the design isn't great, the location is unique and it's really not that large. This hotel will be popular. One can always argue that any new business is only canabalizing other businesses - yep, that's the way it always works. There are finite customers and they have to come from somewhere. This doesn't mean nothing new should be built.

4,553
Life MemberLife Member
4,553

PostDec 10, 2007#109

I'm starting to wonder why anyone would fund/subsidize a hotel of this size right now.


Maybe because everything Joe Edwards touches turns to gold.

11K
Life MemberLife Member
11K

PostDec 10, 2007#110

^ Interesting - I was just having this conversation with someone else the other day. It's taken Joe Edwards literally decades to get to where his is now, and produce the success he now enjoys. From a distance it seems inevitable or simple, but it's never a sure thing and it's always a long road. Kudos to Joe, but I'm sure he would disagree with your statement!

476
Full MemberFull Member
476

PostDec 11, 2007#111

He couldnt get Webster Groves to do what he wanted. So everything he does does not turn to gold and not everyone is willing to throw cash at him. Poor Webster though, now they have a giant vacant lot staring right across the street from city hall.

85
New MemberNew Member
85

PostDec 14, 2007#112

Grover wrote:^ I disagree - even if the design isn't great, the location is unique and it's really not that large. This hotel will be popular. One can always argue that any new business is only canabalizing other businesses - yep, that's the way it always works. There are finite customers and they have to come from somewhere. This doesn't mean nothing new should be built.


But it IS an argument against the use of public monies. My recollection is that he's building the hotel with New Markets tax credits from the city.

5,433
Super ModeratorSuper Moderator
5,433

PostDec 14, 2007#113

wheelscomp wrote:Poor Webster though, now they have a giant vacant lot staring right across the street from city hall.


I get the feeling Webster's always gonna have that vacant lot across from City Hall. I'm not quite sure what some of the folks there want.

6
New MemberNew Member
6

PostDec 15, 2007#114

I have seen some sketch up models rendered better by students!! The portion that extends South doesn't look too bad (with the exception of the hideous roof structure), but I really would hope that the horizontal banding is not a feature of the realized building. Or, at the least, if they do intend on banding (whether material change or color), I hope the bands aren't as visually stark as they are now.



It would be nice if they had take a cue from the Hearst Tower in New York. While not of the same scale, there still was the possibility of something new and modern rising from a maintained, historic facade.



It just seems a shame and a missed opportunity that the loop, one of the most progressive areas of the city, will be stuck with a bland, suburban hotel on such a prominent corner.

11K
Life MemberLife Member
11K

PostDec 15, 2007#115

I actually think the "banding" may be the only thing that ties the project together. It's just the brick pattern from the front building and not as dark as in the rendering.








710
Senior MemberSenior Member
710

PostDec 15, 2007#116

i think lighting and glass might alter some perceptions of the final product...for better or worse. i think i might have built something slightly taller up to the curb in between the funeral home and the adjacent building, only beefing up the rear of the funeral home to its own hight or slightly higher...and it being an adjacent restauraunt/club/lounge. of course this isn't super creative, or as risky...i'm just a "repaired" streetwall junky. all in all, i'm just happy to see continued growth of the east loop...

2,821
Life MemberLife Member
2,821

PostDec 16, 2007#117

Soooo...there is going to be a restaurant and bar in this place according to the BJ article. That brings up some interesting possibilites.



Maybe Joe could make a theme out of it? A nice upscale BBQ rib joint in the funeral home? :shock:



Maybe a martini bar in the basement? In that case, I already have a name for it - The Embalming Room. :lol:

1,391
Veteran MemberVeteran Member
1,391

PostDec 19, 2007#118

They have demolished this bad boy. Demolition is cool.

11K
Life MemberLife Member
11K

PostDec 19, 2007#119

^ Archbishop Burke?

320
Full MemberFull Member
320

PostDec 19, 2007#120

Tuesday night 12/18,



Demolition, or an unexpected collapse? There was no protection (plywood) above the archway, and the brick debris are just strewn around. :x



Or is the plan to demolish the funeral home, save the good bits, and reassemble the complete complex with a uniform brick?








2
New MemberNew Member
2

PostDec 25, 2007#121

Does anyone have any news on this project?

The entire single-story portion of the funeral home is now gone and there are major holes in the two-story portion.



Did plans emerge prior to demolition that just weren't published? Or did they encountered unexpected structural problems with the existing funeral home after they began demolition?



Anyone know what's going on?

91
New MemberNew Member
91

PostDec 25, 2007#122

I remember reading an article/post...somewhere back in 9 pages of the thread...said they were preserving only the façade and first 15 feet of the building.

2,821
Life MemberLife Member
2,821

PostDec 25, 2007#123

It kind of looks like a building on the north side after the brick wranglers got to it, but I can't imagine anyone would be that bold.

479
Full MemberFull Member
479

PostDec 26, 2007#124

yidnaMU wrote:I remember reading an article/post...somewhere back in 9 pages of the thread...said they were preserving only the façade and first 15 feet of the building.


Edwards is actually demolishing the Jones Funeral Home building and then rebuilding the front elevation with 15-feet returns on each side.

710
Senior MemberSenior Member
710

PostDec 27, 2007#125

ecoabsence wrote:
yidnaMU wrote:I remember reading an article/post...somewhere back in 9 pages of the thread...said they were preserving only the façade and first 15 feet of the building.


Edwards is actually demolishing the Jones Funeral Home building and then rebuilding the front elevation with 15-feet returns on each side.


thank you, i was wondering...

Read more posts (103 remaining)