The U City Plan Commission is holding a (virtual) meeting Thursday evening for a "Preliminary Sketch Plan Review of a Proposed Mixed-Use Development Commonly Known as “Delmar Apartments”."
Seems like a waste. It actually tears down some existing multi-family buildings. I really wish would would focus on empty lots instead of pre-existing buildings to add density.
I have more affinity for the tree and bus shelter in front of it than that office building. But those apartment buildings are really handsome. Corner windows are always a nice detail.
This Mid-Century office building, along with eight of these rather handsome apartment buildings would be torn down for this project:
and half of those handsome apartments will be replaced by a completely unnecessary parking strip. this thing could easily be built without sacrificing any of them. typical STL stupidity.
Unpopular opinion, but I think it is an ok project. Increased density is a plus and this is more of an auto centric area. The way this project is, it's really no different than that newer apartment complex built a little East, only this new project has a parking garage wrapped in apartments.
The loss of the apartment buildings currently there is a shame to some but it's a style we seem to have plenty of throughout the City and parts of the County. They actually remind me of the ones you see in St. Louis Hills.
Overall, I say approve with the request of having more brick and maybe a more mid-century style if it's possible. Definitely would need more brick. In addition to this, maybe add a retail space or two instead of the drive-thru coffee shop within the main building and dedicate some of then parking spots for the retail space employees and customers.
As a Ucity resident who uses this as my main exit, I’m mostly fine with it. Parking seems excessive but since it mostly looks like it will be in a wrapped garage, I’m indifferent on it.
As to those buildings being torn down. Apartments like that stretch from 170 to the loop on Delmar, I won’t lose sleep over a few of them being removed.
So if there's a bland architectural style with mixed "value engineered" facades we can call "developer contemporary" then I'd say names like Avenir (and Spire and Celaris and even drugs like Celebrex) are marketing contemporary. Sort of generic. Not clearly any particular meaning. No real clue as to what they do or where they came from. Avenir could be a drug. Or a shoe company. Or a bank. I suppose it really might be someone's name, but I just have this feeling it's not. That it's supposed to suggest the veneer of an avenue. I suppose if they actually put "apartments" in the name I'll be forced to at least concede they're admitting the function, but the signage in the rendering just says "Avenir." Which gives me this idea for a fantasy project called The Renderir.
^The Buick reminds me a great deal of my dad's 2016 Verano. Which is also a solid "Marketer Contemporary" name. Nothing wrong with it, really. It's just . . . meh. Which is true of so many projects. Nothing wrong with them. But nothing really inspiring either.
Avenir could be a drug. Or a shoe company. Or a bank.
Or a Buick
(well a Buick concept, anyway. From 2015)
-RBB
Don't really follow cars much anymore but that looks like it was built on the camaro platform.
Yes, this was on the GM Alpha platform - the same that fathered the Camaro but also Pontiac G8 and Chevrolet SS sedans, appropriately near-luxed for Buick.
While the design language previewed production Buicks to come, it's a shame this one never came to be.
I just skimmed through about 4 dozen citizen letters submitted to the University City City Council about this project (available to the public through the official U City website) . Not one of them was in support (although a couple were grudgingly open to the idea with some changes). Is this level of opposition normal to any project, or is this more than usual? How does anything ever get built when neighbors are so strongly opposed?
