I have driven down Washington Avenue before lofts were going up in this area, and always had my eye on that long line of tudor-style buildings. Maybe now these have a chance to come alive as retail/dining.



The photo below is of the north side of Washington Avenue between 19th and 20th Streets. I haven't been there in a while, but there was a new Nepalese restaurant called Everest Cafe that had recently opened on the south side of this block at 1916 Washington Avenue.

There was an article on that tudor-style building in the print edition of the Post a few weeks back - Rothschild is moving forward with his plans to renovate it. I'll see if I still have the article so I can provide the time frame for construction.



That area definitely needs more retail. People from all over the area are now comfortable coming down to the Tap Room, so there's no reason why ambitious retailers couldn't capitalize on its huge customer base.



I can't wait until the day when new buildings are constructed at Washington and Jefferson. That mostly vacant corner should serve as the western entrance to downtown/the loft district.

DeBaliviere wrote:There was an article on that tudor-style building in the print edition of the Post a few weeks back - Rothschild is moving forward with his plans to renovate it. I'll see if I still have the article so I can provide the time frame for construction.

Yes, I knew he had something planned via the "City of St. Louis Development Activity" website. It has been up there a while, so I wasn't sure if it was still on the boards or not. Here is that link:



http://stlcin.missouri.org/devprojects/ ... jectID=395

Those buildings need Jesus.

That is the Wrought Iron Range Company building, built 1925. It is on the National Register.

Susan wrote:That is the Wrought Iron Range Company building, built 1925. It is on the National Register.

Is that attrocious fake tudor facade original?

I love the Tudor facade. That would make a great row of shops & restaurants. From the air, it looks silly. But from the street, it would be great for pubs, cafes, little book stores, etc. There needs to be an area of smaller storefronts.

The "Tudor" facade is really just a pastiche, right? That's what the aerial shot seems to indicate.

The Tudor facade is original. As well as the terra cotta roof, which is so great and remarkably intact. Some windows have been boarded, but those boards can easily be removed. The building has a lot of integrity.



According to the nomination it was built with first floor storefronts, and the second floor was the showroom for the Wrought Iron Range stove company. But they only used that location as their showroom for a few years.

Maybe the reason the facade sticks out is that it is so incongruous with the neighborhood surrounding it.



This building would look sweet with some streetscape improvements and quality infill on surrounding blocks to provide additional density and context. The renovations already underway in nearby buildings are terrific.

The building interesting due to the fact it is long and wide. It will be very good for street retail but I always thought it is one of the most ugliest buildings in the entire city. It just doesnt fit in with the surroundings and wish they could remove the tudor facade so it was an all brick building.

Sorry, I just see a wrecking ball.

^

I agree, those are some ugly buildings. But if they tear them down, what will they replace them with?

Come on, that's a classic style. (I believe its called Tudor?) Rare in St Louis. There's a neighborhood in London where these kinds of buildings are all over. I agree with Xing, cafes!

Xing wrote:I see outdoor cafes.

I'd love to see more outside dining considering I'll be moving in a few blocks east, but what bothers me about that with the building so close to the street is the lack of sidewalk space. Six to eight feet to the curb isn't much to support foot traffic with chairs and tables. The density is interesting, sure, but awfully tight. The north side of the Delmar loop west of Skinker the best example coming to mind.



At the same time, looking at the aerial photo I see four traffic lanes with street parking on both sides. Should Washington there get treatment like further east, and the sidewalks widened, you'd definitely support the area for shopping traffic and dining.

the style is called Tudor Revival. Primarily used for residential structures which is NOT uncommon is St. Louis. If the application here is original or at least historic, completed when the style was popular up until around 1940, its use as a commercial building is quite rare in that regard. The elements are there with the half-timbering and stucco wall dormers, tiled roof, even the brick pilasters with cast concrete detailing fit the style to a certain extent. The second floor widows are certainly old and blend well with the facade. Whatever the case the detail is indicative of revival style architecture in from the 30's and 40's.



This is a great building IF it has the history to back it up. It would be an ideal candidate for Federal Preservation Tax Credits. This building has potential and I hope it is utilized.



Now that I have said all that watch the info come in that it was rehabbed in 1972. Someone do a record search and give me a date of construction and subsequent alteration?

Susan is correct. The 8 buildings in the complex are part of the Lucas Avenue Industrial National Register District. They were included, not for architectural significance, but for their history.

It if were me, I would leave them vacant for a while. I don't think they are attractive at all, it just looks artificial. It's not the tudor facade that bothers me, it's the fact that it looks like fake tudor. I would bet there is a brick facade underneath the tudor, if that's the case, I'd like to see that building first before taking a wrecking ball to it. But I'd also like to build up the community, then make a push for a mixed use facility, brand spanking new on this location.



But that's me.

The building was actually listed in 2004 as a single site nomination. My boss and a former coworker at Landmards Assoc. wrote the nomination. It is indeed eligible for tax credits- but of course only if they retain the original tudor revival facade.



topeka_bobby raised good points. I think the reason it looks odd to everyone is that we are not used to seeing Tudor Revival applied to commercial buildings. The style was primarily used for residential architecture. I can only think of one other commercial building in downtown St. Louis that is Tudor Revival and that is the little building at the corner of 10th and Locust. And of course that facade isn't original. For that building I could see some arguments for removing the facade. But not on the Wrought Iron Range building- you would be completely obliterating the original design, and you would lose any chance of getting historic tax credits.

trent wrote: I don't think they are attractive at all, it just looks artificial. It's not the tudor facade that bothers me, it's the fact that it looks like fake tudor.

Agree. I've spend a lot of time in Germany, where you would never see a building that large with a tudor facade. It looks good on single family homes and smaller structures, but not in this application.