12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostApr 22, 2017#151

Senior housing at the Deer Creek Shopping Center site. I guess nothing was ever built here; the shopping center has since been successfully revitalized.

Don't let the vintage auto fool you; this was proposed in 2008:


403
Full MemberFull Member
403

PostApr 22, 2017#152

I'm curious can anyone find the rendering of the park pacific condo high-rise that was suppose to be built atop the parking garage?

12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostApr 22, 2017#153

^Not the best, but here's what I've got:




5,261
Life MemberLife Member
5,261

PostApr 22, 2017#154

St.Louis1764 wrote:I'm curious can anyone find the rendering of the park pacific condo high-rise that was suppose to be built atop the parking garage?
To bad it was never built. It would've added a lot to Tucker than just a boring Parking Garage

1,864
Never Logs OffNever Logs Off
1,864

PostApr 22, 2017#155

^Would be a fairly easy conversion or addition to the parking garage they did build. A potential low hanging fruit of sorts if a developer wants to build residential in the future.

12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostApr 22, 2017#156

Hopefully they engineered the structure so the residential can be added in the future.

1,877
Never Logs OffNever Logs Off
1,877

PostApr 24, 2017#157

framer wrote:
Apr 22, 2017
Senior housing at the Deer Creek Shopping Center site. I guess nothing was ever built here; the shopping center has since been successfully revitalized.

Don't let the vintage auto fool you; this was proposed in 2008:

This is going from an old memory, but if I recall they ran into issues because the parking lot of the Deer Creek strip mall is in the flood plain of Deer Creek itself. Their initial plan was to build on what is currently parking lot, but that put the proposed buildings in very real danger of at least semi-regular flooding.

If you notice as a part of the renovation of the strip mall they added bioretention basins (and I *think*, permeable sections of asphalt, but not sure of that) to the parking lot to mitigate some of the rainwater runoff issues.

When the creek floods today, it only covers part of the parking lot, which is a much more manageable issue than would be the first floor of a senior community.

-RBB

12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostApr 26, 2017#158

What a big tease this turned out to be: A massive residential development north of the Landing, as part of the casino deal with the City.


6,117
Life MemberLife Member
6,117

PostApr 26, 2017#159

Literally everything about that casino deal leaves a bad taste in my mouth. :(

1,677
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,677

PostApr 26, 2017#160

Wow. I had never seen that rendering of the casino development. Why did the deal fall through? That's offensive.

80
New MemberNew Member
80

PostApr 26, 2017#161

Yeah, that's another case of the infamous "Phase II" of any major project in town. People should know by now that any project that has an ambitious "Phase II or III" of a project should only ever expect Phase I to get built as shown.

12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostApr 27, 2017#162

Early conceptual renderings of Centene's Clayton HQ:






PostApr 28, 2017#163

McGowan's fantasy tower:


PostApr 29, 2017#164

Here are a couple of past predictions for the St. Louis skyline. First, from 1910, a vision of Olive Street in the year 2010:



And another from just a few years ago, predicting the year 2030 (sorry, I don't know who created this image, but it's appeared on these boards before):


PostMay 03, 2017#165

Libeskind's concept for the Bottle District:



And a slightly more plausible version:


5,261
Life MemberLife Member
5,261

PostMay 03, 2017#166

I would've preferred option number 2 here. The one with the W Hotel


Author and owner of BuildingSTLNews.com

12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostMay 04, 2017#167

Drury Hotel's twin-tower proposal for Kingshighway and I-64. I wouldn't be surprised if this gets resurrected in some form:


PostMay 09, 2017#168

Apartment building at the corner of Kingsland and Vernon, a block or two north of The Loop in U City.


PostMay 11, 2017#169

Chouteau's Lake District. I'm not sure this was ever a serious proposal, and I'm not really sure it's completely dead, either, for that matter. It's always been a bit of an enigma:







Not sure where this image came from, but someone seems to have added McGowan's fantasy skyscraper. Might as well dream big:


1,677
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,677

PostMay 11, 2017#170

Where would all the railroad tracks go? Maybe I'm missing them.

62
New MemberNew Member
62

PostMay 11, 2017#171

I never understood the Chouteau's Lake proposal. Why in the world would we spend hundreds of millions of dollars to build an artificial lake six blocks away from one of the greatest, most historic natural waterways in the country? St. Louis needs to find ways to engage with our existing riverfront rather than creating something new.

1,155
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,155

PostMay 11, 2017#172

stlokc wrote:
May 11, 2017
I never understood the Chouteau's Lake proposal. Why in the world would we spend hundreds of millions of dollars to build an artificial lake six blocks away from one of the greatest, most historic natural waterways in the country? St. Louis needs to find ways to engage with our existing riverfront rather than creating something new.
Except it's not an artificial lake. That area floods once or twice a year because 200 years ago that was a wetland that drained into the Mississippi. It's simply a restoration of what nature intends.
As for what to do with the train tracks, The area where the lake would be only has 3 lines running through it. The Rail yard is all west of 13th street. There would still be 2 or 3 lines running through there, the rail yard would just be reduced, and eventually phased out / relocated.

1,677
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,677

PostMay 11, 2017#173

stlokc wrote:
May 11, 2017
I never understood the Chouteau's Lake proposal. Why in the world would we spend hundreds of millions of dollars to build an artificial lake six blocks away from one of the greatest, most historic natural waterways in the country? St. Louis needs to find ways to engage with our existing riverfront rather than creating something new.
Agreed. Needs some major investment though and moved from something just to engage tourists but residents.

1,877
Never Logs OffNever Logs Off
1,877

PostMay 11, 2017#174

stlokc wrote:
May 11, 2017
I never understood the Chouteau's Lake proposal. Why in the world would we spend hundreds of millions of dollars to build an artificial lake six blocks away from one of the greatest, most historic natural waterways in the country? St. Louis needs to find ways to engage with our existing riverfront rather than creating something new.
What aprice said. I agree with you that the river needs to be much better engaged, but the proposed development needn't have overlapped. You're not going to paddle boat or kayak out on the river; between the barge traffic, entire trees floating along, and the many eddies and undercurrents it's just not safe enough.

And because the river levels vary so much you're not likely to have water-side decks or patios. Even the C+A+R improvements to Lenor K Sullivan keep you several dozen yards away from the river's actual shorelines at normal levels, and it's currently under water. Add a lake with a stable shore and you could have lunch on a pier over the water, etc. That's another reason you don't see residential or offices right up against the water (the stillborn NFL stadium would have been the first, so it is possible).

All of these things would be much more practical to do on a lake. And presumably they won't turn the thing into an open sewer this time.

All that said, while I love the idea I'm not holding my breath that we'll see a recreation of Chouteau's pond any time soon.

-RBB

488
Full MemberFull Member
488

PostMay 11, 2017#175

stlokc wrote:
May 11, 2017
I never understood the Chouteau's Lake proposal. Why in the world would we spend hundreds of millions of dollars to build an artificial lake six blocks away from one of the greatest, most historic natural waterways in the country? St. Louis needs to find ways to engage with our existing riverfront rather than creating something new.
Well you cant really use the Mississippi for anything fun honestly. Too big, too powerful, too fast. Every time I go home to Milwaukee, I am incredibly jealous of the Milwaukee river. Small, slow river they spent a lot of money to clean up that cuts through what would basically be like tucker Ave in STL. Now people take boats on it every night, kayak, canoe, have a riverwalk, tons of restaurants in several neighborhoods looking over the water. Pricey condos looking over the river. I know people who Kayak to work!

You can't have any of that with the Mississippi.

Read more posts (251 remaining)