^Should we do that on the back of an immigrant group who we want who practice a religion that has seen some . . . shall we say negative publicity lately? Yes, we need to fix it. But I don't think this quite the right group to start with. It's a case of not picking on those already disadvantaged. Particularly not when we really really really want their help. Further, to make it pedestrian friendly you're going to have to put the street on a serious road diet. This may be in the works . . . eventually . . . but it hasn't happened yet.
There is a plan for a road diet with the Metrolink but I think it should happen sooner than that. I guess I just feel like plan is put in place for a reason and no matter what group you are from, be it religious or some big fast food chain, you should have to abide by those plans that a neighborhood worked hard to put in place.symphonicpoet wrote: ↑Mar 27, 2018^Should we do that on the back of an immigrant group who we want who practice a religion that has seen some . . . shall we say negative publicity lately? Yes, we need to fix it. But I don't think this quite the right group to start with. It's a case of not picking on those already disadvantaged. Particularly not when we really really really want their help. Further, to make it pedestrian friendly you're going to have to put the street on a serious road diet. This may be in the works . . . eventually . . . but it hasn't happened yet.
Having said that, the Mosque was approved anyway despite the neighborhood so nothing anyone can do now. Maybe form-based code for Jefferson needs to be put in place now.
- 9,559
Soooo why do we have a preservation board and other boards where people can get relief from the code?leeharveyawesome wrote: ↑Mar 21, 2018
Back to the historic code. Either everyone follows the code or you get rid of the code.
- 1,642
Great question.dbInSouthCity wrote:Soooo why do we have a preservation board and other boards where people can get relief from the code?leeharveyawesome wrote: ↑Mar 21, 2018
Back to the historic code. Either everyone follows the code or you get rid of the code.
Does anyone know if they are tearing down the two residential/commercial buildings facing Jefferson to make way for the parking lot?
That is not in the current plans but could see it being added.leeharveyawesome wrote: ↑Mar 27, 2018Great question.dbInSouthCity wrote:Soooo why do we have a preservation board and other boards where people can get relief from the code?leeharveyawesome wrote: ↑Mar 21, 2018
Back to the historic code. Either everyone follows the code or you get rid of the code.
Does anyone know if they are tearing down the two residential/commercial buildings facing Jefferson to make way for the parking lot?
^ I really hope not. Both buildings seem to be in pretty good shape. I see The Qooba Foundation owns both of them. Hopefully they will be comes homes for some of the members/leaders?
- 9,559
Its actually pretty easy....due process.leeharveyawesome wrote: ↑Mar 27, 2018Great question.dbInSouthCity wrote:Soooo why do we have a preservation board and other boards where people can get relief from the code?leeharveyawesome wrote: ↑Mar 21, 2018
Back to the historic code. Either everyone follows the code or you get rid of the code.
Hopefully, they really haven't done a great job keeping up their current location. It needs a rehab.
Preliminary agenda for April 23 https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/d ... 3-2018.pdf
Agenda for 4/23 with details
https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/d ... 3-2018.pdf
https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/d ... 3-2018.pdf
Those two infill houses in Soulard look fantastic. I hope they don't have any trouble since the design strays a bit from typical Soulard abodes (i.e. their model example is a home in the College Hill Neighborhood on the Northside).
- 6,120
The original layout makes me wonder if they'd intended to acquire the lots next door and add row houses with a common wall on either side. (What with the wall right up on the property line of each.) 2306 and 08 are both LRA. 2304 seems to be bundled up with 2302 right now, so you'd have to sweet talk someone out of their yard. And 2310 is a developer a few blocks away. I can see the value in putting the current two back to back, but that would make it impossible to put row houses on either side. Not the end of the world, of course. But four row houses could be worth the risk of leaving the exposed walls plain and windowless for a while, rather than artfully fenestrated. It's a risk, but . . . four is better than two. And a big blank wall might encourage further development more quickly. I think I see the logic to the original plan, and I think I like it.
Of course there is a proverb about birds in hands and bushes.
Of course there is a proverb about birds in hands and bushes.
Preliminary agenda for 5/21
https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/d ... 2018-6.pdf
https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/d ... 2018-6.pdf
final agenda for monday
https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/d ... 1-2018.pdf
That temporary classroom is hideous. God I wish the form-based code covered this area
https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/d ... 1-2018.pdf
That temporary classroom is hideous. God I wish the form-based code covered this area
Sheesh. That "temporary" building is about the worst thing imaginable for that corner. Yes, I know, at least 4477 is spared, but jeez...
Dear lord! So by modular, they mean a trailer. That looked like my elementary school in Austin when the city was booming so much they had to use trailers to hold the extra kids.
Didn't expect to see the Muny stage renovation on there. I seriously doubt there will be any discussion on it but it would be interesting if there was. A big of a fan as I am, I actually don't know the history/timeline of the renovations over the years. I like the current proscenium but I like the idea of rebuilding it. However I'm not a fan of the new design at all. I describe it to people as the first idea I'd put down on paper, push it to the side, and then come up with the more groundbreaking design.imran wrote: ↑Jun 16, 2018https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/d ... 5-2018.pdf
prelim agenda for June
preliminary agenda for July
https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/d ... 0-2018.pdf
https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/d ... 0-2018.pdf
- 277
There's WAY more than meets the eye on that house on Indiana. I hope they at least document everything and reuse what they can.
https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/d ... 0-2018.pdf
final agenda for tomorrow
Have to say I am impressed with the details and elevations of the Maryland/Boyle project.
final agenda for tomorrow
Have to say I am impressed with the details and elevations of the Maryland/Boyle project.
Preliminary agenda for august 27
https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/d ... 7-2018.pdf
https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/d ... 7-2018.pdf
- 3,762
^ Doesn't SLU own the Wolfner library? Do they have a plan for it yet? The rear of the building looks to be in better shape than the front... doesn't make much sense to tear it down. Not that SLU's demo's ever make much sense.