Very sorry to hear that Chris. Didn't realize your health was troubling you again. You're in my thoughts and I hope you can find a way to fight this.chriss752 wrote: ↑Apr 08, 2022I'm getting sicker and weaker, so I got nothing to lose beyond my somewhat bad habits.
- 6,119
More concern should be had with the recent NIMBY comments by a particular user on this thread who would like nothing more than to keep this parking lot. $134 million is no small chunk of change and making fun of the variance requests is ridiculous when most would be dealt with if the building and zoning codes were updated. No curved facade, metal, curtain wall, exposed concrete, terraces, parking garage too short, setbacks too close or too far? These are ridiculous old rules that hinder progress.
Even though what I said about the previous plans hold true, I imagine that a select group of people would be even more pissed by that proposal than this one simply because it’d be “tall” and “different”. Please, the grievances would, and should, have to be spared.
Back when the Park Plaza was built, it was modern and huge for the neighborhood. Yet we see it as an icon today. If the same crowd around today was alive back then, they’d probably push to get it killed anyways because it didn’t meet traditional development patterns in the neighborhood either.
In other words, what I’m saying is that the haters need to get over it. And by the haters, I mean people who chose to buy into a condo co-op immediately adjacent to this site (hopefully) knowing that one day something big would go here. If I were the development team, I’d almost go back and pull out the true grand plans of the past to spite the haters in more ways than one. Some don’t realize how ambitious things once were in the not too distant past, not just for this site but for others in the area. The Central Park South effect would’ve been made.
Even though what I said about the previous plans hold true, I imagine that a select group of people would be even more pissed by that proposal than this one simply because it’d be “tall” and “different”. Please, the grievances would, and should, have to be spared.
Back when the Park Plaza was built, it was modern and huge for the neighborhood. Yet we see it as an icon today. If the same crowd around today was alive back then, they’d probably push to get it killed anyways because it didn’t meet traditional development patterns in the neighborhood either.
In other words, what I’m saying is that the haters need to get over it. And by the haters, I mean people who chose to buy into a condo co-op immediately adjacent to this site (hopefully) knowing that one day something big would go here. If I were the development team, I’d almost go back and pull out the true grand plans of the past to spite the haters in more ways than one. Some don’t realize how ambitious things once were in the not too distant past, not just for this site but for others in the area. The Central Park South effect would’ve been made.
That's my take as well, a nearby condo owner who voiced no objections when their unit was built but every proposal thereafter is unacceptable!!imran wrote: ↑Apr 12, 2022As I read the post, I imagined a vexed resident of the St Regis writing it.
This is not on the April Preservation Board agenda. Likely will be on the May agenda.
30-story Central West End tower is decades in making, but obstacles remain
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... aking.html
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... aking.html
- 10K
For some reason, I pictured Moira Rose giving this quote.At a recent city meeting on the Albion project, Katharyn Davis, a resident of the St. Regis, a historic luxury apartment building just to the east of the Koplars' lot, said the views from her building were what attracted her to buy there.
"The expansive views and the streetscape on Lindell (are) somewhat reminiscent of the Baron Haussmann designs of Paris or the streets of Barcelona in the vistas and the scenery and the liveliness of the neighborhoods," Davis said.
- 1,610
Someone been sneaking into the Herb Ertlinger Fruit Wine stash?debaliviere wrote: ↑Apr 21, 2022For some reason, I pictured Moira Rose giving this quote.At a recent city meeting on the Albion project, Katharyn Davis, a resident of the St. Regis, a historic luxury apartment building just to the east of the Koplars' lot, said the views from her building were what attracted her to buy there.
"The expansive views and the streetscape on Lindell (are) somewhat reminiscent of the Baron Haussmann designs of Paris or the streets of Barcelona in the vistas and the scenery and the liveliness of the neighborhoods," Davis said.
- 337
Sorry Katharyn you own your unit not the views outside of it. The views still exist just go outside and experience them rather than just looking.
- 134
It's like buying next to a highway and complaining about the noise.LArchitecture wrote: ↑Apr 21, 2022Sorry Katharyn you own your unit not the views outside of it. The views still exist just go outside and experience them rather than just looking.
If you're buying for the views next to an empty lot on one of the most premier corners in STL, you're gonna have a bad time.
It is interesting that this lot has never been developed. So St. Regis people on the west side have had this view for the building's entire existence.
I do think her comment is ridiculous, to be clear, also I imagine only like 1/4 of the units have Forest Park views.
I do think her comment is ridiculous, to be clear, also I imagine only like 1/4 of the units have Forest Park views.
I mean she can always sell her condo and use the money to move into Albion if views are what she wantsdebaliviere wrote: ↑Apr 21, 2022For some reason, I pictured Moira Rose giving this quote.At a recent city meeting on the Albion project, Katharyn Davis, a resident of the St. Regis, a historic luxury apartment building just to the east of the Koplars' lot, said the views from her building were what attracted her to buy there.
"The expansive views and the streetscape on Lindell (are) somewhat reminiscent of the Baron Haussmann designs of Paris or the streets of Barcelona in the vistas and the scenery and the liveliness of the neighborhoods," Davis said.
^Its hilarious that she actually thinks that opposing the tower because it will block her view is going to stop this from being built. If that’s really why she’s against it, at least make something up that has an ounce of substance. It’s also funny that she compared her view to Paris and Barcelona- I guarantee those cities don’t have a single surface parking lot even half the size of the current one out her window.
- 6,119
There was a hotel on the site that was turned into a retirement complex. It was demolished in 1973. The article makes reference to it. Was apparently a neat looking building. The hotel occupied both that lot and the one 100 sits on.PeterXCV wrote: ↑Apr 21, 2022It is interesting that this lot has never been developed. So St. Regis people on the west side have had this view for the building's entire existence.
I do think her comment is ridiculous, to be clear, also I imagine only like 1/4 of the units have Forest Park views.
The hotel was where the 100 is now at West Pine and Kingshighway, the lot at Kingshighway & Lindell has always been vacant. You can see in the historic aerial below from 1958 where the hotel stood with a parking lot to the north.
Also isn’t Regis only a handful of stories? No matter what gets built there is going to be at least that tall and block their view. Might as well be this.
- 43
There is a public meeting hosted by the developers on this project today, 6:00PM, at the Schlafly Branch Library. Sorry for the late notice; I just received word recently. As a Preservation Board member, I plan to attend to listen/observe. I also am observing this thread here, of course. Thanks for the robust discussion.
How did the meeting go? Would be curious to know which topics were addressed. Thanks!preservation.research.office wrote: ↑Apr 27, 2022There is a public meeting hosted by the developers on this project today, 6:00PM, at the Schlafly Branch Library. Sorry for the late notice; I just received word recently. As a Preservation Board member, I plan to attend to listen/observe. I also am observing this thread here, of course. Thanks for the robust discussion.
The tower is moved back to fully comply with the Historic District setback, the Albion rep stating they had made a mistake reading the codes.
Alderwoman Pihl announced her support, and that there would be no Tax Abatement.
The St Regis board supported the project, in its revised form, as being very welcome and praised Albion and Koplar.
There were questions but no dissent.
Alderwoman Pihl announced her support, and that there would be no Tax Abatement.
The St Regis board supported the project, in its revised form, as being very welcome and praised Albion and Koplar.
There were questions but no dissent.
Great news!! CWE is killing it!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- 6,119
Looking forward to the new renderings. I hope this goes forward quickly. 
I think it’s a good thing that a compromise was worked out on the layout side of things. I’m surprised the St. Regis would support it at all after some of the comments made by residents. As for no tax abatement on this project, that’ll be a big shock if it holds true unless they intend to seek another type of incentive (sales tax exemption on construction materials, possibly a TIF, idk). If this moves with just a sales tax exemption, then I’d say it’s game over for any tax abatement or TIF on any project in the Central West End and most of the Central Corridor. It’s not a bad thing necessarily, just projects counting on incentives will be cancelled or the pipeline will slow significantly. We’ll see though. This whole project will set a new precedent in more ways than one.
And going back to this being the last true highrise site in the neighborhood, the lot immediately east of One Hundred is split owned by the St. Regis and Koplar Properties, so that could one day hold another as there’s no height limit there. The parking lot at 4915 West Pine also could hold one. I imagine that if the need arises, the form based code will be adjusted to upzone the area and allow taller developments. If not that, variances would be issued with relative ease at that point.
And going back to this being the last true highrise site in the neighborhood, the lot immediately east of One Hundred is split owned by the St. Regis and Koplar Properties, so that could one day hold another as there’s no height limit there. The parking lot at 4915 West Pine also could hold one. I imagine that if the need arises, the form based code will be adjusted to upzone the area and allow taller developments. If not that, variances would be issued with relative ease at that point.