Yeah, that's super ugly.
Definitely not as impressed as I was from the renderings. I agree, I think it's the small windows and the tiny slivers that were cut out for the balconies. It looks like the balconies are going to be squished. It's not horrible looking, just looks that with some minor changes it would have looked sleeker.
- 1,864
A glass facade instead would have made this an amazing project.
I still like the building overall. I think the building looks better in person than it does in the photos, but I agree that bigger windows would make it more attractive. I think the perforated brick on the west end is also a nice touch.
At the FPSE development meeting where this building was proposed, UIC said they intended the front facade to have some sort of metal coating (some sort of zinc-containing material, I think) that would get a patina over time. I am assuming they stuck with that plan because I haven't heard otherwise, if so it will be interesting to see how the material ages.
I also have not seen any work happen on the LRA lot across the street where they wanted to build a parking lot. Hopefully that has fallen through.
At the FPSE development meeting where this building was proposed, UIC said they intended the front facade to have some sort of metal coating (some sort of zinc-containing material, I think) that would get a patina over time. I am assuming they stuck with that plan because I haven't heard otherwise, if so it will be interesting to see how the material ages.
I also have not seen any work happen on the LRA lot across the street where they wanted to build a parking lot. Hopefully that has fallen through.
This is what a zinc patina looks like. It will be interesting to see if the outside ends up favoring this, because currently it looks like sh*t.
![]()
Sauce-on-the-side's new home is not looking good today.
![]()
Hopefully this is all part of the plan.
Hopefully this is all part of the plan.
- 8,155
^ I think it looks beautiful.... kinda looks like the Olive development. A May opening for SoS may be too ambitious but I think all's well.
- 8,155
^ I don't think so. Just brick work needing to be re-done, i imagine.
separately, In the Biz Journal sub-article on the Green Street project, it said that financing hopes to get squared away in the next few weeks and construction in summer.... so perhaps behind by a year, which wouldn't be too bad.
Also, the Park Central guy said that the grocers they were talking too said the area isn't quite there yet w/o enough density and demographics but that he was confident a grocer along Vandeventer would come eventually.
separately, In the Biz Journal sub-article on the Green Street project, it said that financing hopes to get squared away in the next few weeks and construction in summer.... so perhaps behind by a year, which wouldn't be too bad.
Also, the Park Central guy said that the grocers they were talking too said the area isn't quite there yet w/o enough density and demographics but that he was confident a grocer along Vandeventer would come eventually.
That's wild. It looks like either a complete collapse or that they took it apart brick by brick only to put it back together. I hope you're right and that this is all according to plan.
- 2,056
They are just re-doing the brick front. I saw them pulling them off the other day when I drove by for coffee... if you look closely, you can see all of the bricks meticulously stacked on the scaffolding.
- 8,155
I was kind of fearing the building might see some damage with yesterday's storm (footage of the Grove sign blowing mightily was on ABC nightly news) but all looks good.... but now workers are starting to tackle the west facade, chucking bad brick and saving the good.... this building is becoming a nudist! Sauce on Side ain't opening in May, I can tell you that!
Grove winds:
Grove winds:
Anyone know how the new lighting fixtures handled the storm?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I drove by the lights yesterday, and they all looked intact. Wasn't there at night, so didn't see them lit up.
In other news (and not sure if this has been discussed recently) the lovely row of Chicago-esqe row houses on Talmage are finally beginning rehab by Grove Properties. Also the new house on Chouteau is finished and being marketed by Circa Properties for close to 400k 
I'm assuming the old two family on the corner of Chouteau and Talmage is up next for rehab.
I'm assuming the old two family on the corner of Chouteau and Talmage is up next for rehab.
Hard to emphasize just how radically the Grove has changed in the past few years.rheights wrote:In other news (and not sure if this has been discussed recently) the lovely row of Chicago-esqe row houses on Talmage are finally beginning rehab by Grove Properties. Also the new house on Chouteau is finished and being marketed by Circa Properties for close to 400k
I'm assuming the old two family on the corner of Chouteau and Talmage is up next for rehab.
- 8,155
The UIC new infill at 4321 Manchester received its occupancy permit last week; hopefully a good retail tenant(s) will be announced soon. And down the street at the Gill's project at the corner of Tower Grove, it looks like they are making some progress on the exterior wall after chucking all the bad brick. Hopefully we'll hear more on the big Chouteau's Grove project before too long.
Yes it is. Though the real mark will be when the neighborhood gets rid of the Schoemehl Balls.Ebsy wrote:Hard to emphasize just how radically the Grove has changed in the past few years.rheights wrote:In other news (and not sure if this has been discussed recently) the lovely row of Chicago-esqe row houses on Talmage are finally beginning rehab by Grove Properties. Also the new house on Chouteau is finished and being marketed by Circa Properties for close to 400k
I'm assuming the old two family on the corner of Chouteau and Talmage is up next for rehab.
Pricey, $1400 for a 1BD. Each has a balconey. The ones facing Manchester were cool. Some bedrooms had closets without a door.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
- 3,762
^ hard to tell from the images, but looks like a disappointment inside and out. how were the details? as cheap as they appear?
Seemed par for the course for rentals.
You could tell it is a wood building.
They have in unit washer and dryer.
Another thing that bothers me about new buildings is that the bathrooms don't have windows. Every old building I've lived in here had a window in the bathroom. I appreciate the natural light.
You could tell it is a wood building.
They have in unit washer and dryer.
Another thing that bothers me about new buildings is that the bathrooms don't have windows. Every old building I've lived in here had a window in the bathroom. I appreciate the natural light.
There's no way I'd throw away $1,400 per month in rent in St. Louis for a 1BR apartment. Might as well be making a mortgage payment with that much money. You could by a $250K house for that much, and still have room to spare (of course that surplus would get eaten up some by insurance and property tax, but you'd of course be building equity as well, and have 3 times the space of a 1 BR apartment).
They're probably aiming that $1400 rent at medical residents or doctors at BJC who have the money but aren't looking to be tied to a property purchase.jsbru wrote:There's no way I'd throw away $1,400 per month in rent in St. Louis for a 1BR apartment. Might as well be making a mortgage payment with that much money. You could by a $250K house for that much, and still have room to spare (of course that surplus would get eaten up some by insurance and property tax, but you'd of course be building equity as well, and have 3 times the space of a 1 BR apartment).
^ Right. Not everyone wants to be stuck in STL for 5+ years just to break even...