^I think it's technically short enough they could do it as a four over two stick plus facade, or even a five over one. But the corners and interior voids make me think they might do this as a proper steel structure all the way up.
Interesting to see Lux Living propose saving both the Optimist and the Engineer's Club buildings, I would not have thought they would be the developer to pioneer this approach in St. Louis. Both proposals seem like good ways to incorporate some interesting mid-century modern buildings (or at least facades) that aren't great from an urbanist perspective into more dense developments that still retain local character and make for a more varied and interesting architecture. Hopefully they can pull them off in a way that pushes other developers to be creative with future projects.
I like that the repeated the brick color and slate above the windows from the existing building. It would be cool if they incorporated some ornamentation to reference the most dramatic element of the existing building, the triangle projecting over the roof. Anyone know if it is copper patina, or some other material?
I like that the repeated the brick color and slate above the windows from the existing building. It would be cool if they incorporated some ornamentation to reference the most dramatic element of the existing building, the triangle projecting over the roof. Anyone know if it is copper patina, or some other material?
It'll be a 5 over 2 stick actually, with 2 levels of structured underground parking. There are ways to do cantilevered patios with wood construction.symphonicpoet wrote: ↑Nov 24, 2021^I think it's technically short enough they could do it as a four over two stick plus facade, or even a five over one. But the corners and interior voids make me think they might do this as a proper steel structure all the way up.
The green you're seeing is a copper patina. Also I doubt this is the full fledged final design, and some things are in the works to try to pay homage to the triangle roof, either in the main entry canopy or making some additions to the large grey vertical element on the southern most façade.rbeedee wrote: ↑Nov 25, 2021I like that the repeated the brick color and slate above the windows from the existing building. It would be cool if they incorporated some ornamentation to reference the most dramatic element of the existing building, the triangle projecting over the roof. Anyone know if it is copper patina, or some other material?
- 6,118
I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, but it makes me a tad less joyous. Ah well, even if the materials are impermanent and crumby at least it'll be a solid addition while it lasts.stlnative wrote: ↑Nov 28, 2021It'll be a 5 over 2 stick actually, with 2 levels of structured underground parking. There are ways to do cantilevered patios with wood construction.symphonicpoet wrote: ↑Nov 24, 2021^I think it's technically short enough they could do it as a four over two stick plus facade, or even a five over one. But the corners and interior voids make me think they might do this as a proper steel structure all the way up.
Virtual meeting tomorrow via Google Meet: Wednesday, December 1st at 6PM Meeting ID: meet.google.com/ftc-brsg-ury. Phone Number: (US)+1 617-675-4444, PIN: 451 006 183 9887#
- 85
Is this a joke? That building will not be missed.billikens_19 wrote: ↑Dec 18, 2021Oh great…
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... toric.html
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
From the article:goat314 wrote: ↑Dec 18, 2021Is this a joke? That building will not be missed.billikens_19 wrote: ↑Dec 18, 2021Oh great…
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... toric.html
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The city’s Cultural Resources Office recommended Friday that the St. Louis Preservation Board deny preliminary approval of the demolition when it meets Monday, saying the “loss of half the building would be a significant loss to the city’s architectural history.”
Although the facade of the building would look the same from Lindell Boulevard, the Cultural Resources Office said that construction of the large apartment complex next to it would “greatly alter the current character of the block and site.”
So, not only should a single-story building on one of the City's grandest boulevards be preserved, but the empty area around it should also be preserved to maintain the "current character"? The CRO's credibility is getting shaky.
I can see both sides of the argument. That building is special, and the new additions will absolutely change it's character. Not saying I'm opposed to the plan, but I do see their point.
- 3,762
^ those bulidings weren't subjectively special enough to the city's wealthiest family that wants to make a bunch of money off a parking garage next to their soccer stadium so CRO didn't care.
- 2,419
It just my opinion, so take it for what it's worth -- not much, but that building is hideous.
I hope this project, or something similar, happens.
I hope this project, or something similar, happens.
Judging from the permit activity, it appears it did. Can anyone confirm?sc4mayor wrote: ↑Nov 23, 2021Looks pretty decent. Guess that 2016 renovation never got off the ground.
NextSTL - Engineers’ Club on Lindell Redevelopment Goes before the Preservation Board
https://nextstl.com/2021/12/engineers-c ... ion-board/
https://nextstl.com/2021/12/engineers-c ... ion-board/
CRO is just following the ordinance. They are supposed to evaluate based on the criteria, and make a recommendation. They did that. The Preservation Board can follow the recommendation, ignore it, or do anything in between as they choose.
Must have just been the interior. The outside didn’t seem to get the updates that were proposed before. I could be wrong though.
- 337
The interior did get renovated it is very geometric to maybe hint at being an “engineer’s club” but pretty par for the course in regards to auditorium/event spaces. I think their website has some pictures or I can dig and find some as I’ve been to at least 5 events there. It looks like this proposal maintains the event space which I think is a good idea. Lux seems to have all sorts of “amenities” so this could be another one if they maintain it as rentable. Would be cool if they honor all the people that have membership to the club.sc4mayor wrote:Must have just been the interior. The outside didn’t seem to get the updates that were proposed before. I could be wrong though.
Is the Engineer's Club still using the building? Always looks empty when I walk by.
- 6,118
I've always wondered how some demoitions in preservation review districts manage to dodge the CRO and get permits without review. 1900 Olive was one such. There was another little brick factory/warehouse/office on Locust I think it was that met a similar un-reviewed fate a couple of years prior. I actually went and took pictures of that one at a special request from someone on this forum. I suppose the trick is we have to catch wind of the intended demos far enough out to raise an effective stink and get them reviewed in advance. I wouldn't hold the Olive block against CRO. I don't think it's their job to seek out seekrit demos, just to review the applications that come across their desk. Instead I'd gripe about why the city gave out the permit in violation of its own ordinances. (Which probably has a lot to do with powerful folk and a general love of sports. And parking. Most folks in this town genuinely seem to prefer parking to old buildings.)bwcrow1s wrote: ↑Dec 18, 2021Where was the CRO for 1900 Olive? Turds.
1900 Olive was reviewed. The CRO director approved the demos without referring to the Preservation Board.
https://nextstl.com/2021/01/1900-olive- ... is-needed/
https://nextstl.com/2021/01/1900-olive- ... is-needed/
Good points. Still bitter, and nothing that can be done. Raise more stink and be labeled as petty and muted by the apathetic public.
- 6,118
Do you know if the criteria for approving demos in preservation districts or referring them to the board are publicly available? I still can't believe that one was approved.quincunx wrote: ↑Dec 19, 20211900 Olive was reviewed. The CRO director approved the demos without referring to the Preservation Board.
https://nextstl.com/2021/01/1900-olive- ... is-needed/
I didn't get the impression that the director approving happened often. I don't know if there's a document cataloguing them. You could try asking CRO. The director also approved demo for the Starbucks on Jefferson. He made a presentation explaining his approvals. It's linked in the article.