data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9bc61/9bc61f0d0f24d1d17ed84f8c93285e10afcd89d5" alt=""
The previous Friday, July 17, the Friends of the San Luis filed a petition for injunctive relief in circuit court. We contended that our right to appeal issuance of the demolition permit, which could only be exercised after the permit was issued, was moot if the wrecking ball was swinging. Judge Rober J. Dierker, Jr. denied our initial motion for a temporary restraining order and then, on Monday July 27, dismissed our petition. The legal wrangling had no impact on demolition activity, of course, but the loss is now a fact of life.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8077e/8077ec9927adad7ea28393118ec264bb8976f844" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/81623/816235624b1587d032f3f36018aec58b6e73aace" alt=""
Prior to the 1961 building code, large buildings were restrained by requirements that the majority of wall surface area meet a defined thickness. Materials like concrete panels and glass had to be employed within larger wall systems, and could not be used to clad an entire building. Before 1961, construction of a glass high-rise in St. Louis was not permitted by code. The removal of the old restrictions allowed St. Louis to embrace the building technologies that allowed for fully modern architectural expression.
Mayor Raymond Tucker was an enthusiast for the DeVille project. In a St. Louis Post-Dispatch article from 1961 ("$4,500,000 Hotel to Be Built at Corner of Lindell, Taylor," September 30, 1961), the mayor raved: "Certainly, this will be an impressive monument to the perseverance of those far-sighted citizens who worked on our code for more than five years."
Greater modern expressions would rise in St. Louis, of course, but the DeVille was the first to fully embrace the code. For 46 years, the DeVille remained an impressive monument to the potential of modern design.
6 comments:
Thank you for your efforts with regard to the San Luis. It's sad that narrow-mindedness and judicial activism (of a retrograde sort) has resulted in this loss.
Our community will hopefully have learned some important lessons that will come in handy on the next significant battle over the historic preservation of mid-century modern works.
I hope so, but unless this is appealed they have the cards in their hands.
Save up your money and buy stuff like this yourselves instead of impinging on property owners rights.
Good riddance!
Ah, the old property owners' rights shtick.
What if I bought the house next to your and parked a monster truck in the front yard, had parties in the bed of the truck until 4 a.m. and painted my house lime green?
Hmmm. Don't like that? Huh? What about "property owners' rights"?
Sheesh! The Archdiocese had the demo equipment on the San Luis quicker than a priest alone with an altar boy. Why the rush to create a surface parking lot?
Maybe they'll put up a CVS on the site; we don't have enough corporate chains in the city yet.
Post a Comment