urbanSTL

Maybe I missed it, do we have any idea of what is going in to replace this?

Aging St. Louis office center to get a makeover



By Jessica Rapp

Tuesday, July 31, 2007 2:53 PM CDT



The homeless who have spent nights sleeping in the St. Louis Hills Office Center have lost their "hotel."



The condemned parking structure of the three-story office building at 6500 Chippewa St., is being reduced to rubble by Bellon Wrecking and Salvage. A parking lot will take its place and the office wing of the vacant building will be renovated.

Link

So, I guess that means the building is not going to come down after all. Must be one hell of a renovation they are doing because the roof has been ripped off. I'm interested to see how this renovation goes.

An interesting (and encouraging) turn of events.

Parking lot.



Once neighbors get used to not having a building there, I bet they will likely be against a future building there.

MattnSTL wrote:Once neighbors get used to not having a building there, I bet they will likely be against a future building there.

Yep! And the average St. Louis Hills resident doesn't share the disdain for surface lots with the average Urban St. Louis forum user.

Remember, a few years ago there was a proposal for a mid-rise addition to a retirement home just across Chippewa, but it was quickly shouted down. This would have been next-door to an existing mid-rise, mind you.

^And built on an existing parking lot. Yet neighbors on the residential block to the north wanted to preserve their views of the car wash and donut drive-in instead of having new luxury senior housing built in a similarly massed mid-rise.

ThreeOneFour wrote:

MattnSTL wrote:Once neighbors get used to not having a building there, I bet they will likely be against a future building there.

Yep! And the average St. Louis Hills resident doesn't share the disdain for surface lots with the average Urban St. Louis forum user.

Errr… Don’t mean to bust your stereotype of convenience, but the alderman wants and the neighborhood would probably support mixed use with condos on this site at a mass equal to or above the existing building. The building owners (a family) are doing this of their own accord. If you recall the building has (or had) parking underneath the long portion away from the road. This section is what structural engineers call a soft story and is a huge seismic problem to try to retrofit for renovation. The floor to floor heights in this building are also pretty shallow (about 9’) hence making it difficult to reuse with modern duct systems, not to mention the place is filled with hazardous materials, which is why demo is going slow.



I do not know why they don’t just sell it to a developer, but trust me…It is not the neighborhood.



You may now resume knowing everything about everything



















Just kiddn ya

I was a neighborhood officer at the time the senior center sought expansion and know firsthand about adjacent residents' opposition. Granted, at that time, St. Louis Hills Homeowners Association was okay with the plans just outside their neighborhood, while it was my Lindenwood Neighborhood Association giving in to one very vocal residential block. If residents behind the office building are in favor of mid-rise construction, all the power to them. Maybe the old NIMBYs of Southwest City are increasingly being replaced with more open-minded new residents. At the time, my former neighborhood association had its old-timers hanging on to power, though they let this youngest homeowner assume some limited leadership, when the neighborhood was clearly transitioning.

Beer City wrote:Errr… Don’t mean to bust your stereotype of convenience, but the alderman wants and the neighborhood would probably support mixed use with condos on this site at a mass equal to or above the existing building.

That's news to me. In the past STL Hills residents have generally been opposed to anything resembling density beyond what's already in place. Like southslider said, I can see where the guard is changing, but it wasn't that long ago that the proposed addition to the retirement home was met with strong opposition. I'm sure attitudes are changing and will continue to do so as the old guard continues to yield to younger residents of the area.



I can see why the section with parking underneath isn't feasible to preserve. I can think of other older developments in the metro area with similar issues. At least they're preserving as much of the building as possible, and I look forward to seeing the finished result. I'm surprised they didn't sell to a developer, though. As much as I wanted to see the building preserved, it seems like a clean-slate project would've been easier.

You may now resume knowing everything about everything

Who? Me?

ThreeOneFour wrote:

Beer City wrote:Errr… Don’t mean to bust your stereotype of convenience, but the alderman wants and the neighborhood would probably support mixed use with condos on this site at a mass equal to or above the existing building.

That's news to me. In the past STL Hills residents have generally been opposed to anything resembling density beyond what's already in place. Like southslider said, I can see where the guard is changing, but it wasn't that long ago that the proposed addition to the retirement home was met with strong opposition. I'm sure attitudes are changing and will continue to do so as the old guard continues to yield to younger residents of the area.



I can see why the section with parking underneath isn't feasible to preserve. I can think of other older developments in the metro area with similar issues. At least they're preserving as much of the building as possible, and I look forward to seeing the finished result. I'm surprised they didn't sell to a developer, though. As much as I wanted to see the building preserved, it seems like a clean-slate project would've been easier.

You may now resume knowing everything about everything

Who? Me?

Well as Southslider said the St. Louis Hills homeowners association was cool with the expansion, I can’t speak for Lindenwood HOA, but to be honest I can’t see what other instance you could base your analysis on, SLH supported the new larger Target with underground parking the new much larger condos on Robert that replaced the one story duplexes there. To the best of my (pretty good) memory there have been no other large projects of high density that have been proposed for the neighborhood for anyone to oppose.



Sure there are dinosaurs in SLH, however for the most part the community is active, and seeking the best environment possible.



As far as fans of asphalt, well I can’t think of any significant (or insignificant) save the long gone and lamented White Castle at the intersection of Hampton and Chippewa, that have been razed for parking or otherwise (the Walgreen’s at Hampton Village was not in the hood, and there were plenty against it)



I am not trying to pick a fight, your posts are always good, it just seemed like a flippant remark about an area you may not have the pulse of.



cool

^ Thanks. In the interest of full disclosure, I must confess it isn't the only flippant remark I've ever made on this forum.

And just for the record, I'm a St. Louis Hills resident, and I have no problem with increased density. Not highrises overlooking Francis Park or anything, but a reasonable increase. The new condos on Robert (mentioned by Beer City) are a good example. And of course, major arteries like Chippewa can easily support some mid-rise buildings.

STL hills can easily support some midhighrises. I would not interfere with the current residentiial area, but there is good enough density to support some mid-rise condos on the main thoroughfares etc.. loughborough, hampton, donovan, chippewa etc...

shadrach wrote:Imagine a mid-rise where the jewelers is, new 3-story retail where the old Boatsman bank/engineering firm. Some patio dining. It could be the focal point STL Hills/Lindenwood needs

We'll take it!

It's too bad they already screwed up the design of the Starbucks and Lions Choice restaurants. They could have a really nice little district there.



Also, a cool modern streetcar system, dropping folks off by Ted Drewes would be pretty damn cool.

ntbpo wrote:STL hills can easily support some midhighrises. I would not interfere with the current residentiial area, but there is good enough density to support some mid-rise condos on the main thoroughfares etc.. loughborough, hampton, donovan, chippewa etc...

Maybe I could have stated my case better before, but I agree with you. I've just heard Alderwoman Baringer talking about the Starbucks and Lion's Choice as evidence of progress and stability in the neighborhood. There's nothing wrong with that, but I'd like to see a bolder vision for the neighborhood in which midrise development is encouraged along Chippewa Street and other key locations within the neighborhood where the scale would appropriately correspond with neighboring structures. Just think, Starbucks and Lion's Choice would've made great ground floor anchors for a three or four-story building with offices or condos, and at least one of them could have still had a drive-thru.



I'm not trying to be critical, I just think that stretch of Chippewa Street that anchors two solid and desirable neighborhoods has so much potential.

Update and cool pics:



B.E.L.T.