urbanSTL

And you and the Post Dispatch are more reliable?

I'll come to you to get superior knowledge on unbuilt buildings from now on.

Height is always picked at. Seems to make the world go round on a lot of these threads. It's fun to speculate is all.

dylank wrote: ↑

Oct 26, 2017

And you and the Post Dispatch are more reliable?

i think if the PD had made an error with the 39 number they would have corrected it by now, so i'm going with 39.

Then I'm going with 100. It's not that hard to figure out it's the name of the damn thing.

newstl2020 wrote: ↑

Oct 26, 2017

Then I'm going with 100. It's not that hard to figure out it's the name of the damn thing.

i don't get the "then".

dylank wrote: ↑

Oct 26, 2017

And you and the Post Dispatch are more reliable?

I'll come to you to get superior knowledge on unbuilt buildings from now on.

Height is always picked at. Seems to make the world go round on a lot of these threads. It's fun to speculate is all.

Not sure if this was directed at me but I've never claimed to know the planned scope of this project. I'm just saying that I've worked for four different architecture firms and we'll go years without updating images or project scope. That and after periodically checking websites of HOK, Cannon, Foster + Partners, etc., buildings will be completed for years while these website project pages continue to filled with renderings and outdated scope info.

urban_dilettante wrote: ↑

Oct 26, 2017

dylank wrote: ↑

Oct 26, 2017

And you and the Post Dispatch are more reliable?

i think if the PD had made an error with the 39 number they would have corrected it by now, so i'm going with 39.

Again, this was all covered pages ago in this thread, but for what it's worth the 39 stories was the correction.This story put out on the P-D's website initially said the tower was 36 stories and 385 units. A day after it went live the numbers were corrected to 39 stories and 315 units. Note the amendment at the bottom of the article:

Editor's note: This article was updated to correct the height of the apartment tower and the length of the original tax abatement request.

^ Are those tax abatement requests records available to the public?

-RBB

rbb wrote: ↑

Oct 27, 2017

urban_dilettante wrote: ↑

Oct 26, 2017

dylank wrote: ↑

Oct 26, 2017

And you and the Post Dispatch are more reliable?

i think if the PD had made an error with the 39 number they would have corrected it by now, so i'm going with 39.

Again, this was all covered pages ago in this thread, but for what it's worth the 39 stories was the correction...

-RBB

yes, i realize that. i'm just saying that if the correction had been in error they would have re-corrected it back to the previous number already. that is why i believe that the corrected number is, indeed, correct.

Well then, it’s November and we haven’t heard when it should start. I remember seeing this month somewhere but there is no date.

Anyone been by the site lately? Any more test drilling? Unfortunately I haven't visited my friends at Parc Frontenac lately. Getting the Parking Lot updates in the elevator were great insight into progress on this thing

I'm very eager for this to start. Anyone heard anything?

Approved meaning... construction permit from the city?

aprice wrote: ↑

Nov 14, 2017

Approved meaning... construction permit from the city?

I believe their incentives were approved. No sales tax on construction materials. I believe a permit was already issued?

Developer applied to get zoning approval in March, but i dont recall this ever going in front of Board of Adjustment because i think they would need a lot of variances.

I messaged Joe Roddy on Twitter. His response is that he talked to the developer two weeks ago and they said that everything was full steam ahead. BUT: Not all permits have been approved by the city yet. In other words, it will happen, but we have to wait.

Good that this project is going forward. St Louis needs a building like this. There's been this weird thinking lately in "urbanist" circles that innovative groundbreaking architecture is somehow anti-urban. A jump the shark moment for the new urbanist movement.

FoghornLeghorn wrote: ↑

Nov 25, 2017

Good that this project is going forward. St Louis needs a building like this. There's been this weird thinking lately in "urbanist" circles that innovative groundbreaking architecture is somehow anti-urban. A jump the shark moment for the new urbanist movement.

Urbanists have little against "groundbreaking architecture." Jeff Speck, co-author of Suburban Nation and one of the most progressive voices currently within New Urbanism, was a classmate with Jeanne Gang and praises her designs frequently. What New Urbanists do have a problem with is height for the sake of height and when developers simply reject the importance of street level activity. Consider the difference between walking down Washington Ave past shops / restaurants and walking down Pine past the former One AT&T Center.

Well that solves the question, why is this not groundbreaking?

^Fairly typical problems around here on sites both large and small.

Hope there are a few good surprises with this development.

FWIW, the PD's article about 300 South Broadway lists the height for One Hundred at 36 stories.

http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/ ... e7597.html

Once built, this building will be an "architectural tourist attraction" just like the Arch. People will come to Saint Louis just to see it.
Jeanne Gang is arguably the most globally talked about architect in the world today. After the Daniel Libeskind whiff at the Bottle District site we can be proud to call one of today's most groundbreaking architects a Saint Louis contributor.

I think the 100 design had a direct influence on pushing the envelope on the 300 S.Broadway design. Once 100 is built, local architects will feel more like breaking out of the safe mode which has permeated local design for decades.

The influence of one building could really change things moving forward.

I'm a bit disappointed that we haven't seen any additional renderings since the original batch.

I don't like the design as previously shown (magazine rack).

I think some architectural history, or architectural integrity, should be maintained in St. Louis, and in any community. The rendering of the magazine rack is too bold a difference for anything in the area. It's out of place and would be a sore thumb.

^ ugh.