urbanSTL

SMSPlanstu wrote:Maybe that's because we don't make walls entirely out of brick and plaster on the interior. They did a great job, and today the exterior can better be thought of as decorative and a light layer hiding the wooden or concrete building materials.

Come on, there is a wide variety of methods to add interest and definition to a building façade, regardless of whether the wall structure is brick, block, concrete, or studs; methods which the architect ignored. Sure many of these methods add cost, but many don't. And if they are going to take on all of the added expense of a mostly brick exterior, with towers and arches, they should at least make some attempt to give it some depth.



Recessed windows, reveals, and projecting elements can be used to add light and shadow contrast. Details, reveals, and a variety of material colors and textures can be used to add definition. They did none of this. The windows aren't recessed, the arches and window headers don't appear to project at all, and the only detail that does appear to project is the horizontal band that runs under the 3rd story windows.

SMSPlanstu wrote:Maybe that's because we don't make walls entirely out of brick and plaster on the interior. They did a great job, and today the exterior can better be thought of as decorative and a light layer hiding the wooden or concrete building materials.

Yes, it's a cost-effective contemporary building. Not a great old building. Not a great new building. Decent, yes. Excellent, no.

I have to say I get a little frustrated by the back biting that goes on within these pages. By people (I assume) who have little or no skin in the game. The Union Club is a wonderful project expressing sympathy to its predecessor built using contemporary materials. Folks it just isn't going to happen using slate or even reproduction slate etc. The market is what is.



St Louis is so oft criticized for the locals not taking command and getting things done but waiting for an outsider to realize the vision. Well these are local and neighborhood people putting their cash and more then likely homes on the line to move the ball down court.



These guys have patiently marketed the hospital site and the printing building on Chouteau. IMO each project has been better executed then the previous one and they are still plugging away on the shopping center.



Let's try offering some encouragement and an atta boy. A good place to start would be what will happen to the remainder of the Malcom Bliss site.



3 cheers for Chris, Trace, and Guilded Age. (I forgot to mention the Church, organizing the TIF, and on and on.)



Now for you smaller fish, now an excellent time to picking up some great bargains on fixer uppers. Get out there and make some ludicrous offer and see who will bite. No body ever made money overpaying on the front end of a deal so now's the time to jump in. Walk the talk I say.



Now I feel better.

alphalfa wrote:I have to say I get a little frustrated by the back biting that goes on within these pages. By people (I assume) who have little or no skin in the game. The Union Club is a wonderful project expressing sympathy to its predecessor built using contemporary materials. Folks it just isn't going to happen using slate or even reproduction slate etc. The market is what is.

You gotta understand though - this crowd is a tough one when it comes to design. 99% of the population is going to see the Union Club building and have no problem with it. Sure, there are some aspects of it that could be improved on, but overall, I think it turned out pretty well and will be great for the neighborhood.



It's too bad that the Shoppes at Mary One Station Plaza Depot never materialized across the street - that would have made for a nice entrance to the neighborhood.

For those that want to complain about the issues with the roof on the Union Club, they need only to look next door to the Methodist Church. Its singled roof is much more objectionable in my mind. Perhaps we could set up a TIF for roofing material.

alphalfa wrote:I have to say I get a little frustrated by the back biting that goes on within these pages. By people (I assume) who have little or no skin in the game. The Union Club is a wonderful project expressing sympathy to its predecessor built using contemporary materials. Folks it just isn't going to happen using slate or even reproduction slate etc. The market is what is.



St Louis is so oft criticized for the locals not taking command and getting things done but waiting for an outsider to realize the vision. Well these are local and neighborhood people putting their cash and more then likely homes on the line to move the ball down court.



These guys have patiently marketed the hospital site and the printing building on Chouteau. IMO each project has been better executed then the previous one and they are still plugging away on the shopping center.



Let's try offering some encouragement and an atta boy. A good place to start would be what will happen to the remainder of the Malcom Bliss site.



3 cheers for Chris, Trace, and Guilded Age. (I forgot to mention the Church, organizing the TIF, and on and on.)



Now for you smaller fish, now an excellent time to picking up some great bargains on fixer uppers. Get out there and make some ludicrous offer and see who will bite. No body ever made money overpaying on the front end of a deal so now's the time to jump in. Walk the talk I say.



Now I feel better.

Have you seen the building in person, from Lafayette for example? It's like one of those suburban faux-castle McMansions you see out in St. Albans that look good from a distance, but when you get up close, the stone "walls" look like they were glued to the side of the house.



I appreciate the intent, I really do, but if you are going to try to recreate an historic building you must at least try to be faithful to the architecture and craftsmanship of the era. Otherwise, it's like spending a million dollars renovating a Victorian mansion on Lafayette Park, and then putting in a front door and windows that you bought at the Home Depot clearance sale.



If you have to reduce construction costs to make the numbers work, and you can't go the distance on the historic reconstruction, then don't bother, just do something like this instead:

Arch City wrote:

I am not opposed to your demonstration photo however I doubt it would be allowed under the historic code.

southcitygent wrote:For those that want to complain about the issues with the roof on the Union Club, they need only to look next door to the Methodist Church. Its singled roof is much more objectionable in my mind. Perhaps we could set up a TIF for roofing material.

As someone who goes to that church, we'd love it. The problem is, with ~100 people attending services every Sunday, I don't think the money is there.



Would you rather have the church with a shingled roof, or an empty church?



I think it's a shame that Union Club couldn't make everything historically accurate, but the practical side of me would rather see a nice new building that's a "good effort" and revitalizes a neglected part of the neighborhood.



Given the alternatives on the other corners, plus the proximity of I-44, I'm glad to see that *anything* was done here.

alphalfa wrote:I have to say I get a little frustrated by the back biting that goes on within these pages. By people (I assume) who have little or no skin in the game.

Every citizen has "skin in the game." Some are developers, some are critics, some are architects, some are residents, some are just people walking down the street. They all make the built world a real one, through different contributions and observations. Money is the most obvious "skin" but not the only form, and not one that should silence a real discussion on design. (By the way, smart developers like those discussions more than most think.)

alphalfa wrote:I am not opposed to your demonstration photo however I doubt it would be allowed under the historic code.

Considering that what is being built was "allowed under the historic code", it bears almost no resemblence to the historic building it ostensibly recreates other than a couple of arches and towers, and it doesn't follow any design standards for historic building renovation or reconstruction I've ever seen, then no, I don't see why Park West Lofts wouldn't be "allowed" as well.



Do you really think that if someone wanted to build Park West Lofts along Jefferson Avenue, that the city wouldn't find a way to get it done?

It's awful. I pine for the days when that beautiful Aldi was still open. It's tragic we lost the National store too -- it had really high volume liquor sales.



or



It's completely reasonable for that part of Jefferson. A great fit with the Barr Branch library across the street.



Development may be seen as a series of choices in a world of limited resources. I think the Cultural Resources Office does a fairly thorough job of analyzing to achieve a balance between choices and resources.

Matt wrote:I think the Cultural Resources Office does a fairly thorough job of analyzing to achieve a balance between choices and resources.

Usually, yes. In this instance, no.

Keep more of this coming, it may lack the appeal for some of you, but this is exactly the development STL needs (and yes, better).



Developments like this and the new condos down Grand help begin a momentum and send a signal to developers that there is demand here for this and better.

I just heard that there is a large sign on the side of the building that says "Leasing Spring 2009". I assume this means they are going to rent the units rather than try to sell them in the current tough housing market.

AvantStL wrote:I just heard that there is a large sign on the side of the building that says "Leasing Spring 2009". I assume this means they are going to rent the units rather than try to sell them in the current tough housing market.

Confirmed on the large sign. I'm curious what the deal is, as they're still advertising in the Marquis and elsewhere that units are available for purchase.

I'm sure they'd be happy to sell you one, but in the meantime, leasing the unsold units makes sense.



BTW, I drove by this building last week, and it sure makes an impression on that corner. It's got a nice, massive feel.

How can a developer build a building like this and let it sit empty?



Is it just the economy, or is there another issue?

There are lots of empty condos in the Lafayette Square area. The ones on Park and Vail (plus the townhomes), several in Lafayette Walk on Chouteau and Mississippi, the Eden Lofts, etc.



I think the biggest problem in all of them is that they just want too much money. I can get a condo in the Union Club for $240k. For the same money I can get a rowhome that's bigger and only has neighbors on the sides on Lasalle, Hickory, Dolman, or 18th. Why bother?



For example, I really like the location on Park and Vail, by Schwaig art glass. I'd like to buy one of those condos. 2000 sq ft - the new reduced price is $369,000. That's outrageous.

Lafayette Walk has one vacant unit available for sale by the developer (out of 31 total units that have been built) and one resale unit that is vacant (job relocation).

AvantStL wrote:Lafayette Walk has one vacant unit available for sale by the developer (out of 31 total units that have been built) and one resale unit that is vacant (job relocation).

Good to know. Now if they'll finish the development I'll be pleased. I do so love the big dirt expanse left on Mississippi. (or is something else supposed to go there?)

JMStokes wrote:

AvantStL wrote:Lafayette Walk has one vacant unit available for sale by the developer (out of 31 total units that have been built) and one resale unit that is vacant (job relocation).

Good to know. Now if they'll finish the development I'll be pleased. I do so love the big dirt expanse left on Mississippi. (or is something else supposed to go there?)

Yes, a final 6-unit building is supposed to be built on the vacant lot. I doubt that the developer could get a construction loan right now to build the building even if 100% of the units were under contract. Unfortunately, I think it is going to be a while before the last building is built.

Drove by the building on Saturday night, and judging from the number of lights on, it looks like they're doing a decent job of getting the units leased, which is great to see.

I really love the added density this building brings to the neighborhood. It's too bad the building and parking lot on the other side of Lafayette are so under-utilized.