^I agree, not sure what the naysaying is about. I do hope the design is on par with his proposal for the tower though.
- 835
^The "naysaying" is not in regards to the development itself, but rather the boring, "traditional" design. But like I said, this is no surprise. When Mills announced their "30 story apartment/condo tower" I knew it was a pipe dream. Mills does boring work. I'm glad to see something happening at that corner, but there is a real opportunity to really do something amazing here. We will not see anything amazing. We will see yet another regular building that will just exist.
Sorry I sound cynical, but one thing this city needs is the balls to pull of something modern, bold and DIFFERENT. There is plenty of "traditional" development here. And at least if you're going to hype up a "30 story condo/apartment tower" and 2 years later decide that you're going to put a 6-story lowrise instead, you should at least make it a landmark. More of the same in a neighborhood poised to assert its status as one of the city's most dynamic is not exciting in my view. That's my gripe. We should all want the very best in new development, especially in an important intersection like Euclid & W. Pine. This isn't it. In fact, I'm not even sure there is a net gain with this project. They could rehab the Doctors Building and make the same or a better contribution to the neighborhood. I actually like the retrofabulous Doctors Building.
Not a hater, just hoping for better.
Sorry I sound cynical, but one thing this city needs is the balls to pull of something modern, bold and DIFFERENT. There is plenty of "traditional" development here. And at least if you're going to hype up a "30 story condo/apartment tower" and 2 years later decide that you're going to put a 6-story lowrise instead, you should at least make it a landmark. More of the same in a neighborhood poised to assert its status as one of the city's most dynamic is not exciting in my view. That's my gripe. We should all want the very best in new development, especially in an important intersection like Euclid & W. Pine. This isn't it. In fact, I'm not even sure there is a net gain with this project. They could rehab the Doctors Building and make the same or a better contribution to the neighborhood. I actually like the retrofabulous Doctors Building.
Not a hater, just hoping for better.
If there is any disappointment, it should be over the lack of height and reduced number of units. Given the proposal of 180 units in 6 stories and the bulkiness of the proposal Mills originally put out for the 30 story tower, the tower proposal had the potential to add more than 180 units to the area.
That said, a six story building with that type of density is a great addition to any neighborhood, far better in some ways than modern towers like the Park East. Such a development is in perfect keeping with the comparisons of building the CWE into an area like the Back Bay of Boston. If the CWE is to continue to blossom and add the amenities necessary to spur the development of additional modern towers on prime locations like the vacant lots along Kingshighway, dense low rise and mid rise proposals like the Mills is a key part of that equation.
That said, a six story building with that type of density is a great addition to any neighborhood, far better in some ways than modern towers like the Park East. Such a development is in perfect keeping with the comparisons of building the CWE into an area like the Back Bay of Boston. If the CWE is to continue to blossom and add the amenities necessary to spur the development of additional modern towers on prime locations like the vacant lots along Kingshighway, dense low rise and mid rise proposals like the Mills is a key part of that equation.
- 835
I actually don't have a problem with a 6-story development. What I don't like is the whole "traditional" design thing. I know we have yet to see a rendering, but "traditional" new construction is rarely inspiring.
If that is the rendering, I'll give the design a thumbs down, the massing and siting a thumbs up.
I can deal with it, but I really want something bold and modern in this location.
I can deal with it, but I really want something bold and modern in this location.
If that is the new rendering, I don't think it is bad at all. It's huge.
I would of course like to see a tower and sure it has "St. Louis" all over it, but this design is respectable, in my opinion. There will be other opportunities for new towers in the CWE.
Great find, Grover.
I would of course like to see a tower and sure it has "St. Louis" all over it, but this design is respectable, in my opinion. There will be other opportunities for new towers in the CWE.
Great find, Grover.
MattnSTL wrote:If that is the rendering, I'll give the design a thumbs down, the massing and siting a thumbs up.
I can deal with it, but I really want something bold and modern in this location.
It depends on the materials. If they can pull this off so that it looks like it could have been built in the 1920s instead of like the Boulevard then I like this design. Basically, it comes down to materials. If they go high quality it should look pretty nice and I don't think that they would use the cheap stuff in the CWE.
Not great but not awful. Cut out the clock tower and it is fine. I like the density.
That clocktower is a hideous cliche and the staggered roofs are overly fussy; but the first few floors aren't bad, especially the street level.
Grover wrote:
Love it!! Lots of street level retail, not recessed from the street. Much better than I expected.
As Bastiat says, it all depends on the materials. If they use good, solid stuff (real brick, real stone), then this could be quite impressive.
I like the clock tower, but I'm not crazy about the way the top floor is pulled back. Picture the top floor flush with the rest of the building, and then a real heavy, impressive cornice topping it all off. You know, like they would have done it back in the day. That would be very cool, IMO.
Overall, I give it a thumbs up.
I like the clock tower, but I'm not crazy about the way the top floor is pulled back. Picture the top floor flush with the rest of the building, and then a real heavy, impressive cornice topping it all off. You know, like they would have done it back in the day. That would be very cool, IMO.
Overall, I give it a thumbs up.
Honestly, I like it. Sans the clock tower, that would be a great replacement for the hideous Doctor's Building. As a few people before have said, the key will be keeping in from looking cheap and pre-fab.
I LOVE IT!!! The building kind of reminds me of the style of architecture I would expect to see in Ybor City. Also I love the terrace roofs and it appears that a few of units you'll be able to enter via street level. Additionally the building will add alot of density to the neighborhood.
Framer wrote:As Bastiat says, it all depends on the materials. If they use good, solid stuff (real brick, real stone), then this could be quite impressive.
I like the clock tower, but I'm not crazy about the way the top floor is pulled back. Picture the top floor flush with the rest of the building, and then a real heavy, impressive cornice topping it all off. You know, like they would have done it back in the day. That would be very cool, IMO.
Overall, I give it a thumbs up.
EXACTLY! Architects just basically need to go back and just look at the old stuff for hours and try to mimic it. They try to go traditional and contemporary at the same time and it rarely looks good. If you are going to do the historic look, make it just like they did back then.
I like the idea of the clock tower or any sort of turret going in on the corner, but not necessarily that one. I don't mind it too much, though.
Even though this is a safe design, I'm fine with it. I would love it if there were more developments like this throughout the city. After all, it is modest, it's not trying to be "the thing that saves the neighborhood." It is just a reasonable amount of residential space (not an overblown risk), retail up to the street, plugging up some holes in the building density, and ultimately making the neighborhood more pedestrian friendly.
As Bastiat says, it all depends on the materials. If they use good, solid stuff (real brick, real stone), then this could be quite impressive.
totally agree.
I think this could actually be pretty cool and the clock tower could be interesting. I can understand how one might think it's "cliche" at first, but it reminds me of some of the old buildings downtown that were torn down decades ago.
I agree about the large cornice with the impressive cornice, that would be cool, but maybe they can make more money off the rooftop decks..? or maybe they should add the cornice and have the rooftop decks set back from above.
Overall, I like it. and sorry mattdrops, this is more unique to me than just a bland "modern" building. I like both styles equally, I just better not see that "Boulevard" fake stucco crap on it!!
Not to be a buzz kill, but I think this is hideous. Oh surprise... another faux historic but boring new building. 
As the cigarette chicken says, "Cheap cheap!"
It looks like something that would be built in Creve Coeur.
They need to start from scratch. There is absolutely nothing imaginative or interesting whatsoever.
As the cigarette chicken says, "Cheap cheap!"
It looks like something that would be built in Creve Coeur.
They need to start from scratch. There is absolutely nothing imaginative or interesting whatsoever.
STLgasm wrote:Not to be a buzz kill, but I think this is hideous. Oh surprise... another faux historic but boring new building.
As the cigarette chicken says, "Cheap cheap!"
It looks like something that would be built in Creve Coeur.
They need to start from scratch. There is absolutely nothing imaginative or interesting whatsoever.
I'm surprised with the negativity towards this. I personally think it is much better than the original 30-story proposal. Secondly, I see many similar developments here in Chicago in places like Lincoln Park and Lakeview. They always are well received. I love the setbacks at the top and the mix of brick and stone. I think if they use the right materials, this is quite impressive.
- 10K
I think it's kind of blah. Looks like the same stuff you see in just about every other city. I like it better than what's currently there, but it really isn't all that interesting. The clock is cheesy. I would have rather seen something along the lines of 4545 Lindell or the Park East.
Mark me down for "blah" too. Maybe wait a couple years and try again for something that isnt same old same old. However, I do agree... it would be perfect for Kirkwood.
I agree with the Brothers Style.
It's boring, blah, unimaginative, dull, plain. The original rendering sucked too, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Why is it hard to try something bold, just once?
It's boring, blah, unimaginative, dull, plain. The original rendering sucked too, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Why is it hard to try something bold, just once?
- 835
DeBaliviere wrote:I think it's kind of blah. Looks like the same stuff you see in just about every other city. I like it better than what's currently there, but it really isn't all that interesting. The clock is cheesy. I would have rather seen something along the lines of 4545 Lindell or the Park East.
^Bingo. What is so impressive about this building? It demonstrates zero imagination.