urbanSTL

^See below:

rbeedee wrote:

chaifetz10 wrote:Anyone have insight as to what the plan is for the old gas station at 1039 Tower Grove?  There was some initial work a few months ago and they've started on the tuck pointing and exterior brick.  Only permits listed on GeoSTL are for mechanical and plumbing, and it shows it's zoned as two family residential.  

The last I heard it was going to be station for The City's Finest, a private security agency consisting mostly of off-duty police officers that is paid to patrol several neighborhood/business districts by private entities. Not sure if the plan has changed since then.

From the FPSE Neighborhood Association 7/2019 minutes: 

The old gas station located at Gibson and Tower Grove Ave will become a location for The City’s Finest to check in and check out.

chriss752 wrote:Here are quite a few project updates in the neighborhood. I took all of these today.

Missouri Foundation for Health: Footings in for the replacement building at Tower Grove and Vista. The former 4-family looks great after being fixed up into office space.

They did an awesome job on that 4 family, that whole project is going to be very cool when done


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Amen

Kounter Kulture will open a new location, or cousin location, at 4476 Chouteau. It will be called "Song Bird"
https://www.stlmag.com/dining/songbird- ... the-grove/

Aargh! Konsciously inkorrect spelling drives me krazy.

^ who cares. their food is amazing and they're awesome people.

framer wrote: ↑

Sep 08, 2020

Aargh! Konsciously inkorrect spelling drives me krazy.

Plus, I believe the only way you get to legitimately claim the K is if your solid Polish.  Yes, stereotype but swear their is an old Chicago polish southside neighborhood where every street name starts with K.  Could be wrong, a few decades removed since living in the Chicago area.

New updates...

https://parkcentraldevelopment.org/wp-c ... 5-2020.pdf

Arco Avenue by Gills has grown in size and new design.






Chouteau + Manchester wedge lot...




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The Gills' original plan was WAY better.

Wait, is that Chouteau and Vandeventer?

Yes.

Darker colored brick for Arbor maybe?

addxb2 wrote: ↑

Sep 11, 2020

New updates...

https://parkcentraldevelopment.org/wp-c ... 5-2020.pdf

Arco Avenue by Gills has grown in size and new design.

Some key updated details from the filing concerning Arbor on Arco: 

• Will now extend from 4211-4239 Arco. They have acquired 4211-4213 Arco for this project.
• Has an increased unit count from 95 units to 152 dwelling units, 134 1-Bedroom units and 18 2-Bedroom units.
• The building will be wood frame construction above a one-story above-grade podium and will have two levels of parking (including underground parking) with access only from the alley in the rear.
• Initial Project Cost : 18,700,000
• New Project Cost: $32,000,000 
• 148 Parking Spots for 152 Units

On StreetView 4211 Arco is crumbling to pieces from neglect and would be demoed for this project if it hasn't been already. 

The Arbor could look nice if they use quality materials and detailing. If not, it will look like a cheap caricature. 

framer wrote: ↑

Sep 11, 2020

The Arbor could look nice if they use quality materials and detailing. If not, it will look like a cheap caricature. 

Even then, those arched windows are awful. Looks like a rooftop accent on a postmodern office building...

 There appears to be hardie board siding in between the sections of brick...

Gill's new plan looks like an assisted living center.   No offense intended as I will get there in life as well but have to say what came to mind.

jesus. it's like they put effort into making it ugly as hell. and it seems to have gotten bigger, which will likely mean more demolition of adjacent structures.

here's the original, infinitely superior design:

Speak up

I have no problem with this at all. If everyone’s complaining about this, then y’all should’ve complained about Lafayette Square North since that will be similar to this.

I like this because of the additional residents it adds to the neighborhood and how it does away with some junk buildings and a vacant lot. 2 homes will be renovated as part of this project.

This is a basic rendering too. So I say build it. It won’t be any worse than a vacant lot.

And to compare it to Aventura is laughable by anyone doing that comparison. There is literally no comparison.

chriss752 wrote:I have no problem with this at all. If everyone’s complaining about this, then y’all should’ve complained about Lafayette Square North since that will be similar to this.

I like this because of the additional residents it adds to the neighborhood and how it does away with some junk buildings and a vacant lot. 2 homes will be renovated as part of this project.

This is a basic rendering too. So I say build it. It won’t be any worse than a vacant lot.

And to compare it to Aventura is laughable by anyone doing that comparison. There is literally no comparison.

I disagree. I prefer it over a vacant lot no doubt. If it is this or nothing, I'll take it. I would still argue that it is demonstrably less fitting to the neighborhood than the first proposal, the one they had as a justification for all of the demolitions that occurred. It's a bit of a bait and switch.

I think it looks most like the Aventura of the nearby residential complexes, to be honest. There's more that looks suburban than urban here, and really not nearly as much brick as the first proposal.

I think it should get built too. I love density. But I also agree with the frustration. There's nothing inspiring about it, especially when we thought we were going to get something else and so much was torn down in its way.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

^^  the renders i saw of the Lafayette Square apartments looked nothing like this. and i'm sorry, but this is a sh*t design, especially compared to the previous one. great on the additional residents but that doesn't make it not ugly as hell. as for the "junk buildings"... well, we've seen that argument before (very recently, in fact).