5,631
Life MemberLife Member
5,631

PostApr 18, 2008#126

JMedwick wrote:I had not followed this very closely, however I thought the PubDef video was very interesting. The idea of a "green" parking lot makes the proposal marginally better, however even such a parking lot is a far cry from the presence fostered by a building on the site.
A green parking lot? You've gotta be kidding me. The Archiocese is now pulling tricks from the playbook of Jerry Rice?

12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostApr 24, 2008#127

Excellent letter to the editor in this week's West End Word:



http://www.westendword.com/NC/0/364.html



The letter was written by someone named John Wimmer. Not sure if he's one of us or not, but he would fit right in around here.

6,662
AdministratorAdministrator
6,662

PostApr 24, 2008#128

He goes by the name John W. on blogs. He's registered here, but has not posted. He's been involved in our group to stop the demo.

835
Super MemberSuper Member
835

PostApr 25, 2008#129

Great letter, John. I encourage others to submit letters too!

479
Full MemberFull Member
479

PostApr 25, 2008#130

The National trust for Historic Preservation's <i>Preservation Online</i> covered the issue this week -- read it <a href="http://www.preservationnation.org/magaz ... l">here</a>.



Plus today's <i>Vital Voice</i> carries Lindsey Derrington's article <a href="http://www.thevitalvoice.com/cgi-script ... tm">Recoup DeVille Motor Hotel: No Need to Demolish Historic Building</a>.

12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostMay 22, 2008#131

The Missouri Alliance for Historic Preservation has joined the bandwagon. They have added the San Luis to their "Most Endangered" list for 2008 (along with the Mullanphy Emigrant Home).



http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/s ... enDocument

3,785
Life MemberLife Member
3,785

PostJun 17, 2008#132

Save the San Luis: www.noparkinglotonlindell.com



Flier!



We will be doing flier distribution Saturday after work. PM for more info.

12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostJun 18, 2008#133

B.E.L.T.'s (linked) tour of Lindell's Mid-Century Modern architecture is a must-see for all of you who still don't get the value of saving our Mid Century heritage.



Thanks for your work on this, Doug. Godspeed, young man.

PostNov 16, 2008#134

There was an interesting tidbit in the West End Word this week. It seems that Raymond Burke's promotion to the Vatican has put a hold on any demolition of the San Luis. Apparently, any decisions involving local Catholic interests must await the installation of a new archbishop.

6,662
AdministratorAdministrator
6,662

PostNov 16, 2008#135

Yep, and we are using that to our advantage to be able to make a better case of why a parking lot is completely innapropriate for that space.

424
Full MemberFull Member
424

PostNov 25, 2008#136

Not related to keeping these standing, but has anyone noticed how the apartment building across Lindell almost mirrors the odd design of these? It's the black and tan apartment building.



Also, San Luis is completely empty right? Why are some lights still on in the complex?

2,331
Super ModeratorSuper Moderator
2,331

PostNov 26, 2008#137

Do you mean the Jackson Arms?

12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostNov 26, 2008#138

FloPoErich wrote:has anyone noticed how the apartment building across Lindell almost mirrors the odd design of these?


That's another reason it's so important to save the San Luis - it's part of a unique group of mid-century architecture lining both sides of Lindell.

3,311
Life MemberLife Member
3,311

PostDec 16, 2008#139

what is the status on this? the idea that this could even happen is beyond a joke.. who is the alderman?

2,433
Life MemberLife Member
2,433

PostDec 16, 2008#140

Lyda Krewson is the alderman (woman), but her hands are pretty much tied. Since the Archdiocese owns the building, no one can tell them what to do or not to do with the property.



There is a growing movement pushing for preservation, and I'm sure others on this forum can tell you how to get involved.



As of now, the building's fate is unknown, awaiting a new Archbishop.

3,311
Life MemberLife Member
3,311

PostDec 16, 2008#141

whats really sad is that i know several developers who have offered to purchase this building to redevelop it. The archdiocese can go f itself as far as i'm concerned if it thinks it can tear this down for a SURFACE LOT ON LINDELL...what a joke. come on St. Louis...

3,785
Life MemberLife Member
3,785

PostDec 18, 2008#142







There are many possibilities for this building among which include a hotel or residential. Demolition of this historic building for a parking lot would be an egregious affront to the Central West End National Register Historic District and detriment to the greater Central West End Neighborhood.



This building might be more of an acquired taste, however we shouldn't go around demolishing stable, useful buildings due to architectural bias. If we do this then we're no better than George Hellmuth of HOK who said "The Buder, Title Guaranty, and International Buildings are the three ugliest buildings in town" (Gateway Mall Scrapbook, 65). Real Estate Row was then subsequently demolished and for what!



We shouldn't defer solely to the preferences of personalities or institutions. How much damage have we seen already because we were told a given building was obsolete or that a replacement would maximize economic development? It's a ridiculous notion and we may also look to the Century Building as another fine example of this failed ideology. That decision categorically failed to spur development in the Old Post Office District.



Demolition of the San Luis will erase a fine example of Midcentury Modernism and a connection to our past. A parking lot squanders the economic gains achieved from reuse into a hotel complimented with a cafe/restaurant. If the San Luis were put back into use as hotel it would serve the internationally acclaimed Cathedral Basilica-St. Louis, St. Louis University, and the Central West End as a whole. Located on a Metrobus line, less than a mile from Metrolink light rail, and with easy access to the new Highway 64, the centrally located San Luis would serve local, regional, and international clients.



Thanks to Paul Hohmann for locating the above image.

36
New MemberNew Member
36

PostJan 13, 2009#143

Framer wrote:There was an interesting tidbit in the West End Word this week. It seems that Raymond Burke's promotion to the Vatican has put a hold on any demolition of the San Luis. Apparently, any decisions involving local Catholic interests must await the installation of a new archbishop.


I have a source at HUD who stated that the interim archbishop can approve the demolition. Apparently he has done just that, and HUD is currently drawing up the documents stating that the Arch Diocese can do with it as they wish. This will effectively release any encombrances on the property restricting its use as affordable housing. I think we may be seeing a wrecking ball soon.

6,662
AdministratorAdministrator
6,662

PostJan 13, 2009#144

Thanks for that information.

2,433
Life MemberLife Member
2,433

PostJan 13, 2009#145

What the hell are we going to do??? We have to get together soon and figure out a plan of action.

5,433
Super ModeratorSuper Moderator
5,433

PostJan 13, 2009#146

LoftLaw wrote:
Framer wrote:There was an interesting tidbit in the West End Word this week. It seems that Raymond Burke's promotion to the Vatican has put a hold on any demolition of the San Luis. Apparently, any decisions involving local Catholic interests must await the installation of a new archbishop.


I have a source at HUD who stated that the interim archbishop can approve the demolition. Apparently he has done just that, and HUD is currently drawing up the documents stating that the Arch Diocese can do with it as they wish. This will effectively release any encombrances on the property restricting its use as affordable housing. I think we may be seeing a wrecking ball soon.


That makes me sick, but it's not the least bit surprising. What can we do now? :shock:



I've said it before, but I'll say it again:







It might be time to get the band back together. 8)

6,662
AdministratorAdministrator
6,662

PostJan 13, 2009#147

We banded back together, and are actually in the process of coming up with a plan for the property. We just thought we had more time.

549
Senior MemberSenior Member
549

PostJan 13, 2009#148

MattnSTL wrote:We banded back together, and are actually in the process of coming up with a plan for the property. We just thought we had more time.


I wish you luck. Anything everyone else can do? Protests, etc?

6,662
AdministratorAdministrator
6,662

PostJan 13, 2009#149

UrbanPioneer wrote:
I wish you luck. Anything everyone else can do? Protests, etc?


Probably. We will for sure let everyone here know.

216
Junior MemberJunior Member
216

PostJan 13, 2009#150

This is certainly an unpleasant surprise.

Read more posts (309 remaining)