New Story at 4477 Olive

The graceful commercial building at 4477 Olive Street in the Central West End may be getting a reprieve. In April, the Preservation Board voted to defer for two months an application for demolition from the Youth Technology Education Center (YTEC) and the owner, Community Baptist Church. (See "Same Old Story?", April 25.) At that meeting, representatives of the Central West End Association Planning and Development Committee testified against the application and agreed to meet with church pastor Willie Kent to see if a compromise was possible. The board was swayed by the spirit of negotiation, and unanimously voted to provide time for more talk.

As a bit of background, the section of Olive Street where 4477 Olive is located was excluded for the original boundaries of the Central West End Historic District due to ward boundaries. Subsequently, that end of the Central West End has been isolated -- even physically, through barriers at Newstead and other places -- from the neighborhood at large. Recent developments have led to a renewal and expansion of the historic district boundaries (which still cut across ward lines) to include the commercial district. Still, there is friction along ward lines between stakeholders in the different sections of the Central West End.

Most of that friction may come from lack of communication. With Kent, YTEC representatives and Central West End Association leaders at the table, a compromise that would preserve the building (most likely) or at least its front elevation is in the works. Things are going so well that YTEC sent the city's Cultural Resources Office a memo asking that the matter be removed from the Preservation Board's June agenda.

Due to procedural rules, however, the board had to take some action. At Monday's meeting, the board voted unanimously to defer the matter indefinitely. Let's hope the dialog between stakeholders is fruitful and that the lovely building is preserved while YTEC's expansion occurs. When the demolition application surfaced, few would have predicted the matter would have been anything but another senseless case of parties talking past each other. Then again, common ground comes from common values -- and all of these parties believe in the revitalization of Olive Street.

Threatened Central West End Building For Sale on CraigsList

Community Baptist Church has posted a CraigsList ad for the building at 4477 Olive Street, subject of discussion at last month's Preservation Board meeting where the board considered demolition on preliminary review. (Read more here.) The neighboring Youth Technology Education Center (YTEC) is seeking demolition for expansion of its facility, but does not own the building. The board voted to defer the matter for two months to allow the Central West End Association, YTEC and the church to explore alternative plans including preservation of the former laundry building.

The ad states that the asking price is $250,000.

Preservation Board Approves Flounder House Demolition, Denies Demolition in The Ville

Here's a quick report of some actions at yesterday's St. Louis Preservation Board meeting.

2915 Minnesota Avenue: Preliminary approval for demolition granted 4-2. Terry Kennedy, Mary Johnson, David Richardson and Anthony Robinson in favor; Melanie Fathman and Mike Killeen opposed.

4477 Olive Street: Unanimously deferred until the July meeting to provide more time to explore alternatives.

4568 St. Ferdinand Avenue: Demolition permit denied. Killeen, Fathman, Robinson and Richard Callow in favor of motion to deny; Johnson, Kennedy and Richardson opposed.

Fate of Flounder House on Monday's Preservation Board Agenda

On Monday, the Preservation Board will determine the fate of this old city-owned flounder house at 2915 Minnesota Avenue in Tower Grove East. The 710-square-foot home lies outside of the boundaries of the Tower Grove Heights Historic District, making it ineligible for rehab tax credits without landmark designation. Clearly, the building is eligible in its own right -- there are fewer than 30 flounder houses left in the city, and the building type is indigenous. Alderwoman Kacie Starr Triplett (D-6th) is seeking demolition, while the Tower Grove East Neighborhood Association strongly opposes demolition. Triplett's application was deferred by the Board two months ago to provide the Cultural Resources Office (CRO) time to develop a pro forma showing that rehabilitation is feasible.

Working with developer Will Libermann, who recently rehabbed a flounder house at 3330 Missouri Avenue in Benton Park, CRO has arrived at an impressively economical budget; see its report here. Liebermann's plan would restore the derelict home to former beauty while creating badly-needed affordable fully-rehabbed, historically-sensitive housing. (His other flounder sold for $125,000.) With the neighborhood behind preservation, there should be a clear outcome but Triplett remains stridently in favor of demolition.

Should the Preservation Board approve demolition, there would be yet another decision creating a housing gap between upper-income residents who can afford fully-rehabbed historically-sensitive homes and lower-income residents who largely cannot. Here is the rare opportunity to cut against the gap. While the home is smaller than your average multi-family conversion, it is a great size for a single person or a childless couple.

The Preservation Board meets Monday, April 28 at 4:00 p.m. in the 12th floor conference room at 1015 Locust Street downtown. See the full agenda here.

Same Old Story?

Same old story: the owner of the lovely building at 4477 Olive Street pictured here is applying for a demolition permit. The city's Preservation Board will consider the demolition on preliminary review at its regular meeting on Monday; the city's Cultural Resources Office is recommending that the board deny the application.

Next-door neighbor Youth Technology Education Center wants to demolish the building immediately for green space, but anticipates eventual expansion. (Again, same old story.) While Alderman Terry Kennedy (D-18th) supports demolition in deference to the center's laudable accomplishments, the Central West End Association is opposed to the demolition.



The Craftsman style storefront building was built in 1917 and designed by architect Edward H.A. Volkmann, who designed several other buildings in this vicinity. Several unusual elements, like the finials atop the raised parapet sections, the balcony and the former arched center display window have led to all sorts of guesses about the building's origin. One story had the building as a fire station. The truth is a bit more mundane -- the building was built for the St. Louis Cleaning Company and used as by the clothing cleaners at least through the 1930s. Cleaners were an important new business type in the early twentieth century, catering to the city's newly-mobile middle and upper classes. The Central West End has several old cleaners' buildings, with the most resplendent being the Anderson Laundry on Washington Boulevard west of Euclid.

Last year, the commercial district on Olive Street between Pendleton and Walton was added to the city's Central West End Historic District. With historic rehabilitation tax credits now available, the street is being remarkably transformed. Before that, Central West End Builders had already obtained National Register of Historic Places designation for and rehabbed the Lister Building, Taylor-Olive Building and Eugene Field School (directly across the street) around the intersection of Taylor and Olive. (The following photograph shows the Lister and Taylor-Olive buildings' proximity to the building at 4477 Olive.)



Apparently there is a developer interested in rehabbing the building, which until recently was used as storefront church. (Same old story, huh?) In the last two years, developers have rehabbed or are rehabbing almost all of the other buildings on this block, and there is even new construction including the Center. Good things aren't just coming -- they are here, and this finely-detailed building should be a part of them.

The Preservation Board meets Monday at 4:00 p.m. in the 12th floor conference room at 1015 Locust Street downtown. The full meeting agenda is available here.

Haven of Grace Applies for Demolition Permit for House It Promised to Save

Haven of Grace has again applied for a demolition permit for the house at 2619-21 Hadley Street in the Old North St. Louis neighborhood. On April 9, the non-profit provider of housing for pregnant homeless women took out a demolition permit application to machine or hand wreck the venerable house that it has sought to demolish before.

The rear wall of the 1880s-era Italianate house mysteriously collapsed in February, and Haven of Grace has neither stabilized the wall nor covered the opening created by the collapse. The collapsed wall is not load bearing, however, and the roof and other walls of the house are intact.



In February 2007, Haven of Grace proposed demolishing this house and another older house at 2605 Hadley Street. Haven of Grace wanted to build three new apartment buildings on the sites to expand their ability to offer intermediate-term housing. Since the houses were contributing resources to the Murphy-Blair National Historic District, the demolition permit applications went to the city's Cultural Resources Office, which denied the permits. The Preservation Board considered the matter on appeal. The Old North St. Louis neighborhood was forced to contemplate a difficult balance between its heritage and one of its best neighbors. At the meeting hearing the appeal, Haven of Grace Executive Director Diane Berry and her architect Tom Cohen announced a compromise plan in which Haven of Grace would agree to mothball the house at 2619-21 Hadley if the board would grant the demolition application for 2605 Hadley. The board unanimously voted for the compromise proposal, and construction proceeded.

Neighbors noticed something strange this fall. Instead of three new buildings, only two were built. The house at 2619-21 Hadley was not mothballed, but left to sit. The new buildings were as sensitive to the neighborhood's fabric as their renderings suggested, and neighbors were pleased both with the design and the density. Best of all, the buildings carried the street face on that side established by the vacant house at one corner and another occupied building at the other. With just one more new building and a rehabilitation of Haven of Grace's old house, the block would be complete.



Alas, that scenario did not come to pass. Haven of Grace claims that the house is beyond rehabilitation. The third building is not under construction because the old house is viewed as a risk that could collapse onto or against the new building.

Haven of Grace decided to back away from its compromise proposal. This is despite rancorous discussion that led to Berry leaving the board of directors of the Old North St. Louis Restoration Group. This is despite soul-searching among the neighborhood's committed preservationists, who had vowed never again on demolition only to be faced with a terrible choice. Most of these people went against their own principles out of respect for Haven of Grace, and either endorsed or condoned the demolition of the house at 2605 Hadley Street, which had not been as far gone as many buildings that have been saved in Old North.

Meanwhile, the house is in no immediate danger of collapse. Due to the Preservation Board denial of the permit last year, the matter will have to be appealed to the Circuit Court. If last year's contest was exhausting, this one could be worse.

Is there any room for compromise this time? The only compromise would seem to be some situation in which haven of Grace would not be responsible for rehabbing the house but could also be assured that the house would be rehabbed in a timely manner. Unless Haven of Grace would sell the house, though, the matter is up to that organization -- and its wishes are clear.

Demolition Comes Twofold to Page Boulevard

On March 19, the Building Division issued an emergency demolition order for the corner commercial building at 5100-02 Page Boulevard, owned by Rosie Love. Love had applied for a permit late last year, and the city's Preservation Board denied her permit in February. The building is a contributing resource to the Mt. Cabanne-Raymond Place National Historic District, hence review by the Preservation Board. Apparently, the Preservation Board made the matter only a trifle harder for Love, an investor who ownes properties across Missouri. Demolition is well underway.

Eastward, at the southeast corner of Page and Kingshighway, demolition will soon commence on a large three-story building owned by Roberts Brothers Properties. A motorist struck the corner column in the notched-out storeftont entrance, leaving the upper two floors unsupported. Rather than repair the damage, the owners let gravity do the work. Brick began falling last week, and now the Building Division has granted a demolition order. A wrecker's signs adorn the plywood fence around the site, including sections in front of two adjacent buildings that have no structural damage.

More wealth drained from north St. Louis...

Preservation Board Agenda Includes Demolitions of Flounder House, Building on Page

The St. Louis Preservation Board meets on Monday to consider a rather short agenda.

Notable items on the agenda include:

Preliminary review of an application by Alderwoman Kacie Starr Triplett (D-6th) to demolish a one-and-a-half-story flounder house at 2915 Minnesota Avenue. The house, built before 1884, is an example of a true flounder house. Flounder houses have half-gabled roofs with a slope from one side of the front wall to the other. Flounder houses were popular in nineteenth century St. Louis due to the speed of construction, but few survive. Many have been successfully rehabbed in recent years, and the smaller ones seem well-suited as economical alternatives to the glut of expensive, energy-inefficient multi-family conversions. Staff recommends denial of the permit.

Preliminary review for a new building at 1412 Mississippi Avenue in Lafayette Square. This building would occupy one of the last gaps in the street faces surrounding Lafayette Park -- the vacant lot at the southeast corner of Park and Mississippi. The Lawrence Group proposes a three-story building with heavy Romanesque massing topped by a Mansard roof with numerous dormers. The building is reminiscent of the ungainly building that houses the Soda Fountain Square restaurant. Hopefully the board and staff will provide guidance to improve the design.

Appeal of staff denial of a demolition permit for the building at 5100-2 Page Boulevard, subject of an earlier post in this blog. Staff recommends upholding the denial. Alderman Frank Williamson (D-26th) supports demolition.

Preservation Board Spares Building at 5286-98 Page

At the meeting of the Preservation Board on Monday, January 28, the Board upheld staff denial of a demolition permit for the historic commercial building at 5286-98 Page Boulevard. Consideration of the item was somber and quick. Attorney Richard Kenney entered a compilation of all of the Berean Seventh Day Adventist Church's exhibits, while Cultural Resources Office Director Kathleen Shea entered hers. After Kenney declined to testify, Board Chairman Richard Callow asked for a motion.

Board member David Richardson moved to uphold staff denial. Board members John Burse, Melanie Fathman, Mike Killeen and Anthony Robinson joined Richardson in voting for his motion. Board members Mary Johnson and Alderman Terry Kennedy (D-18th) voted against.

The next step may be Circuit Court, where any appeal of the Board decision would land.

Previous coverage:

Fate of Building at Page and Union Deferred Again (January 9, 2008)

Confusion at Page and Union (November 27, 2007)

Fate of Building at Page and Union Deferred Again

At Monday's meeting of the St. Louis Preservation Board, the Board voted 3-2 to defer consideration of an appeal of the staff denial of a demolition permit for the building at 5286-92 Page Boulevard. The applicant is the Berean Seventh Day Adventist Church; background on the permit can be found in a post that I made in November. While the November meeting of the Board that considered the matter was packed with congregation members, this month only attorneys William Kuehling and Robert Kinney from Polsinelli Shalton Flanigan Suelthaus appeared to present the church's case -- and yet another rendering of a supposed new building that will replace the existing building (but for which no funds or construction blueprints exist).

Voting to defer the matter were Anthony Robinson, who wanted to hear from the Academy Neighborhood neighborhood association on the proposed new building, Mary Johnson and Ald. Terry Kennedy. Voting against deferral were Mike Killeen and David Richardson. Consideration of the new building is not germane to the Preservation Board's consideration, which legally applies only to the demolition itself. The building is not located in a local historic district with design guidelines. Instead, it is part of a national historic district where the Board can review demolition permits alone.

Among those who testified in opposition to the demolition was historian Lynn Josse, who wrote the National Register nomination for the Mount Cabanne-Raymond Place Historic District in which this building is a contributing resource and visual anchor. Her words appear here:

By way of background: In 2000, the City of St. Louis funded a National Register nomination in order to protect the Mount Cabanne/Raymond Place Historic District and to encourage the reuse of its valuable historic buildings. The district is listed not only for its architectural merit, which is obvious in this building, but as an example of a compact walkable neighborhood with a distinctly Orthodox Jewish character. The congregation of the B’Nai Amoona synagogue at Academy and Vernon had to live within walking distance of where they worshipped because of Sabbath restrictions, so there was a higher than average concentration of Jewish households and businesses. In most ways though, the neighborhood was like other streetcar neighborhoods of the time. Raymond Place had most of the amenities families needed for daily life within easy walking distance. The building that you’re considering today, by the 1920s was the home of grocery stores, drug stores, a medical office, and a delicatessen - all of which would be vital to the daily life of the neighborhood.

In a district like Mount Cabanne-Raymond Place, it is all too easy to allow the commercial edges to erode and slip away. In this district, we’ve lost at least one of the commercial buildings on Delmar since the listing in 2002. But historically, it is the commercial buildings like this one that made the residential life in the center of the neighborhood possible. Raymond Place boasts a really great collection of architecturally interesting houses, but without the context provided by important commercial buildings like this one, it is just that: a collection of dwellings. Cities are more than that; they are a complex system of people and jobs and transit and housing and recreation and institutions and services and retail. We are doing a good job encouraging reuse of housing, but the neighborhood doesn’t make historic sense and may be less sustainable in the future if you allow the destruction of the small-scale retail spaces that historically have connected people.

Part of what the ordinance directs you to consider is the contribution to the streetscape. This building is the streetscape. For over a hundred years it has defined the corner of Page and Union. Its loss would cause a major gap at the northwest corner of the historic district. Replacing this building with a surface parking lot would be a terrible disservice to the neighborhood. It’s a bad use of land and a terrible waste of an important building that should, according to all of your legal criteria, be preserved.

Preservation Board Meets Monday, Demolition Permits on Page and Olive Return

Since the St. Louis Preservation Board did not have a physical meeting last month, this month it will meet twice. The first meeting is Monday, January 7 at 4:00 p.m.

Two of the agenda items are repeats of demolition permits:

- 5286 Page Boulevard. The Berean Seventh Day Adventists' appeal of staff denial of a demolition permit for this two-story commercial building was continued due to the church's presentation of new evidence in November. The Board continued the hearing of the appeal in order to afford Board members and Cultural Resources Office staff more time to review the evidence. (Read more here.) Staff still recommends upholding the denial. The church has no good case for removing the last historic building at the important intersection of Page and Union -- a building structurally sound and listed as a contributing part of a National Register historic district.

- 2217-19 Olive Street. The owners of this building want to demolish it for a parking lot. The two-story commercial building is a contributing part of the newly-listed National Register district called the Olive and Locust Historic Business District. In September 2007, the Preservation Board unanimously rejected the appeal of a staff denial of a demolition permit. (Read more here.) Now the matter is back as a "New Application" because the applicant is not the owner but the Building Division, which claims that building is in danger of collapse. Swayed by the evidence, the Cultural Resources Office is recommending approval of the demolition permit.

The agenda begins with three preliminary reviews of new construction in the Benton Park and Lafayette Square local historic districts.

The meeting takes place on the 12th floor of the Locust Building, 1015 Locust Street downtown. Testimony may be submitted in writing via email to Adonna Buford at BufordA@stlouicity.com.

Confusion at Page and Union

Monday's meeting of the Preservation Board was one of the most bizarre in recent memory -- and that's syaing something. Visitors to the meeting found a room full of over 60 people when the board convened at 4:00 p.m. Normally, there may be around 15 or 20 people in the audience at the start of a meeting, and many less by the end. Had the board offered a raffle prize?

Alas, the cause for the crowd was political: the majority of people in the audience were members of the Berean Seventh Day Adventist Church on Union Avenue, which was appealing Cultural Resources Office staff denial of a demolition permit for the building at the southeast corner of Page Boulevard and Union Avenue. Their purpose seems benign: they want to replace a fire-damaged, abandoned building that neighbors loathe with a gymnasiusm and educational center. There is an interim step of surface parking, but the new building should be standing within two years.



Yet closer examination of the church's plan and the conduct of the church through the demolition permit process makes their plan seem quite controversial. First, the church applied for a permit in April 2007. After denial, the church attorney sought and obtained two continuances without so much as letting CRO staff know why. Then they finally show up, long after the denial, with a crowd of congregants and an attorney with a thick new brief.

Then there is the fact that the gymnasium and educational center plans dissolve under scrutiny. The church simply does not have solid plans. They have a possible site plan and rendering, prepared by an unregistered intern architect working for St. Louis Design Alliance. They don't really have a time line or cost estimates. The church plans to build the shell of the building and gradually finish the interior. Even the parking concern seems weak given that they have use of Walgreens' parking lot across the street in evenings.

Most important, there is the building that the church wants to demolish. The two-story brick commercial building is the last discernibly urban building at one of the most prominent intersections on the north side. The building comes up to the sidewalk, offering definition to the area. Literally, the building anchors the corner. Page and Union abound with glorious buildings, but their intersection has become ugly with Walgreens and a supermarket presenting parking lots to the corner on the west side. That's a sad fact, but a changeable one. This building offers the first step toward that change.

Architect George H. Kennerly designed the building, which was built in 1905. The elaborate tin cornice and cladding around the projecting bays show Classical Revival and perhaps some Italianate influences. Although marred by peeling paint, the tin is in excellent condition and would restore beautifully. The bay windows create an eloquent rhythm and provide definition to the otherwise boxy form. A small fire has left the building with some damage, including roof collapse, but overall it's sound. This is the type of building that seems infinitely adaptable to community needs. Every neighborhood needs buildings with combinations of walk-in and walk-up spaces.



Furthermore, the building is within the boundaries of the Mount Cabanne/Raymond Place National Historic District. That fact is noteworthy for two reasons: historic rehab tax credits are available there, and that district has lost many buildings like this one at its southern edge along Delmar.

The Preservation Board did not consider the appeal until nearly 7:30 p.m. Attorney Richard Kenney of Polsinelli Shalton Flanigan Suelthaus began the church's presentation, which seemed to add other speakers impromptu. Kenney presented a brief written by William Kuehling of his firm. City Counselor objected to Kenney's evidence, which made many assertions about the inability of the church to reuse the building. Frankly, the church's use of so many people to testify weakened their case through confusion and exhaustion of nonpartisan witnesses and Board members. Recounting and contesting the church members' testimony would be tedious and unhelpful to readers of this blog. Eventually, Chairman Richard Callow announced that the Board would take no vote until CRO staff and Board members could carefully examine the church's evidence. (A special January Preservation Board meting is likely.) However, testimony continued until after 10:00 p.m.

Not one person testified in favor of preservation; myself and others had left for other enagagements. However, the hearing of the matter is still open and citizens should send testimony to the Preservation Board by emailing Board Secretary Adona Buford (BufordA@stlouiscity.com).

Meantime, one hopes that the church is not too intractable to reconsider their options. The church owns vacant lots on Page, owns an incredible building (potentially worth money to a developer) and enjoys support of its neighborhood, nearby businesses and its Alderman, Frank Williamson. The battle mentality is premature; with the church's connections it could find a way to do what it wants without robbing a neighborhood of an important architectural anchor.

(Photographs by the author.)

Preservation Board Spares House on Bartmer

At its monthly meeting on Monday, the St. Louis Preservation Board wisely voted 5-2 against the demolition of a Shingle Style frame house at 5594 Bartmer Avenue in the city's West End neighborhood. The house was built in 1898 and while not the most exquisite example of the Shingle Style in the city (that may be on nearby Cabanne Place) is one of probably less than two dozen remaining homes in the style. The demolition was proposed as a preliminary review, with no actual permit under consideration. Preliminary review is often used by potential applicants and staff of the Cultural Resources Office (CRO) to gauge Board opinion without beginning formal application process.

In this case, Alderman Frank Williamson (D-26th) brought the matter to CRO two months ago, citing citizen complaints about the condition of the home. The house has been vacant since at least 1998 and is owned by the city's Land Reutilization Authority. The house is located outside of any national historic district where tax credits would be able to be used in its rehabilitation. However, the 5400 and 5500 blocks of Bartmer show an unusual collection of large historic homes with consistent deep setbacks and early 20th century period styles. Blocks to the west also show consistency. There is no doubt that some historic district on Bartmer is possible.

Two months ago, CRO staff presented the matter to the Preservation Board, which elected to defer consideration for 60 days while staff prepared a thorough report on the building's condition and reuse potential. Ald. Williamson appeared at the first meeting and said that he wanted to tell the citizens something was going to happen, although demolition was not the only outcome he would accept.

CRO staff prepared a report that covers issues of condition, historic integrity and potential market value. Among other conclusions, the repprt showed that not only is the house "sound" under the definition established by the Preservation Review ordinance, it retains almost all of its original architectural features inside! Staff strongly recommends preservation of the house. Meanwhile, Ald. Williamson decided to support demolition. Two citizens sent letters of opposition, including blogger Douglas Duckworth (read his letter here). On Monday, the Board heard testimony against the demolition from myself and in favor from Myron Jefferson, who is building a new house at 5596 Bartmer to the west. Jefferson stated that he would not have built his house if he had known the house next door was not going to be torn down.

According to CRO Director Kathleen Shea, the LRA has agreed to make the house at 5594 Bartmer a priority for its limited marketing efforts. Apparently LRA will not seek its demolition until it has drawn attention to potential buyers. While the gesture is small, it's the most that LRA can do -- and more than usual. Ald. Williamson might want to coordinate with LRA in finding a creative future for the house.

Board Member Mary Johnson told the Board that the board would impede the "development project" of "developer" Jefferson unfairly if it voted down the demolition. Johnson cited Joe Edwards' Moonshine Hotel project in the Delmar Loop as an example where the Board allowed demolition of a historic building, the Ronald Jones Funeral Chapel, for a development project. Edwards is demolishing the chapel but reconstructing its front and some of its side elevations as part of the hotel project.

Board Member David Richardson retorted that Jefferson was not the owner of the property next door. Jefferson does not seek to purchase the house at 5594 Bartmer and was not the applicant for demolition. In making the motion to accept staff recommendation, Board Member Anthony Robinson explained that builders can't control vacant property when building a new house. Robinson said that when he built his residence, his block had five vacant houses and six vacant lots. All of the houses have been rehabbed and all but one of the lots built upon since Robinson finished his house a few years ago.

Voting in support of the CRO staff recommendation authored by Director Kathleen Shea were Melanie Fathman, John Burse, Robinson, Mike Killeen and Richardson. Voting against were Johnson and Ald. Terry Kennedy (D-18th). Chairman Richard Callow abstained from voting.

Preview of Monday's Preservation Board Agenda

The St. Louis Preservation Board meets Monday at 4:00 p.m. at the offices of the Planning and Urban Design Agency on the twelfth floor of 1015 Locust Street. Meetings typically last three hours.

Here are some highlights from the agenda:

Preliminary Reviews

5594 Bartmer Avenue: The proposed demolition of a beautiful and rare Shingle Style house appeared on the Preservation Board agenda two months ago and was deferred pending study of the reuse potential by the staff of the Cultural Resources Office. Staff has written an excellent report on the building condition and reuse feasibility based on a thorough site visit; read that here. Staff recommends denial of the permit and exploration of a National Historic District for Bartmer Avenue. This house and its neighbors fall outside of any historic districts that would enable the use of historic rehabilitation tax credits.

2300 Newhouse Avenue: The proposed new construction of six frame homes with attached garages in the western edge of Hyde Park manages to add yet another absurd faux historic design to the architecturally mongrelized neighborhood. Here we have brick fronts with shaped parapets imitating 20th century buildings that can be found in Hyde Park, but there is a twist: the parapets are actually gable ends on a front-gabled building! The sides and rear show the pitched roof and reveal the illusion the front barely conceals. Furthermore, the developer includes attached garages and has not submitted a site plan showing setbacks. Staff recommends denial as proposed.

Appeals of Staff Denials

5286 Page Avenue: The appeal of staff denial of a demolition permit for the two-story commercial building at the southeast corner of Page and Union has been on the agenda for months, always being continued at the request of the owners. Another continuance is possible. The building is a contributing resource to the Mount Cabanne/Raymond Place National Historic District and the last remaining commercial building at a prominent intersection degraded by a Walgreens across the street. Staff urges upholding their denial.

4218 Maryland: The unlawful alterations made to this house transformed it in disturbing ways: rebuilt bizarre porch, new cheap door and sidelights that don't even fit the opening, alteration of brick pattern and color on front elevation and removal of two front bay windows and replacement with flat openings. Yikes! Staff recommends upholding their denial.

Appeal of Preservation Board Denial

2013-15 Park Avenue: The builder of infill housing in Lafayette Square wants to amend earlier plans to face the side elevations with brick and instead face them with vinyl siding. Staff recommends upholding their denial of this request, and wisely so. Here we have strong neighborhood support for a strict local historic district ordinance that expressly prohibits sided primary and secondary elevations. One expects Lafayette Square to be the last local district where vinyl siding should be approved; the neighborhood is both bellwether and inspiration for the power of local district ordinances to shape attractive neighborhoods. (The Lafayette Square standards can also be an example of the the blind spots of such ordinances, but not regarding the use of vinyl siding.)

Sculpture Garden Plan Underscores Futility of the Gateway Mall

Last week, the St. Louis Preservation Board unanimously granted preliminary approval to the Gateway Foundation's plan to convert two blocks of the Gateway Mall into a sculpture garden. These are the two very formal blocks between Eighth and Tenth streets that were completed in 1993. The garden, which would include landscaping coordinated by the Missouri Botanical Gardens, is actually a good plan in itself. In fact, there is a level of thoughtfulness to the plan that I confess comes as surprise to me. The principal architects, Nelson Byrd Woltz Landscape Architects, looked outside of the mall for inspiration.

The architects cast aside the impossible dreams of formal symmetry, civic grandiosity and identity-making that have plagued the mall's cast of prior architects. Rather than waste half of each block on passive lawn space, as the current design for those blocks does, the architects instead realize the number of intricate details that a city park can have. There are rows of trees along Market Street (for some reason widely viewed as a grand formal drive), and paved "plaza" areas. There is a fountain. But there also are limestone walls (faced in actual limestone on the plans the Board approved), flower beds, smaller lawns and a cafe building at the corner of Chestnut and 8th. Most important to the design are contrasting axes. A central linear axis on the western block abruptly bends on the eastern block, defying the forced sight lines of the mall. A wide arc forms an axis that spans both blocks on the northern side. A meandering curve runs across the southern end of both blocks, suggesting the lines used to demarcate creeks and rivers on state maps.

In fact, the whole concoction has pronounced map-like influences. While the translation of the logical god's-eye view to actual pedestrian experience may muddle the intent, at least the plans celebrate the often conflicting lines that compose our physical and political geography. One of the architects told the Preservation Board that the linear axis follows the footprint of the actual alley that once existed on the blocks, joined with perpendicular lines drawn from old lot lines. This architect actually stated that his inspiration was an old Sanborn fire insurance map of the blocks.

The parks design succeeds inasmuch as it does not attempt to impose a particular experience on an urban space, but rather presents possibilities for user-directed action. However, there are drawbacks. On the plan, Ninth Street looks too narrow to accommodate its current four lanes. Likewise, Market Street appears to lose its northern lane. These losses eliminate metered parking -- a necessity for a healthy downtown block.

The largest problem is not the fault of the designers but of our continued political cowardice: the city won't will itself to erase the Gateway Mall idea from its mind. We are committing political will and civic endowment to major changes for these two blocks, but once completed they sit amid one of the most unintelligible urban landscapes in the nation. These blocks can counteract all of the problems of the mall, but without visual reinforcement their statement will be lost. They will be surrounded by the mediocrity of anti-urban 1980s buildings, which draw their users inside and away from even the best parks. The blocks will still be segments of a string of parks that are mostly useless and unattractive. With so much open space and inhospitable built surroundings, the sculpture garden will still function more as a self-contained destination than a component of a healthy downtown.

Instead of next turning to renovation plans for the rest of the Gateway Mall, city leaders should instead work to enclose the sculpture garden with good design. The Gateway Foundation is doing a huge service to the city by financing the construction and upkeep. That service should be matched with a program to enhance the context: renovate the block containing "Twain" (or even move "Twain" and build on that block); build on the block of Market between Ninth and Tenth where the second IBM Plaza tower was intended; rework the base of the first IBM Plaza tower; build a new building or even just shops on Chestnut south of the original Southwestern Bell building; redesign the base of the hideous Data Building. In short, we need to fulfill the premise that $20 million invested in the Gateway Mall will make a functional difference for this part of downtown.

Three Buildings in the Ville Coming Down -- For New Houses?

Today theCity of St. Louis Preservation Board voted to approve demolition of three buildings in the Ville at 1820, 1822 and 1826 Annie Malone (see the Cultural Resources Office staff report here). Given the spate of demolition in the Ville since Alderman Sam Moore (D-4th) took office earlier this year, sadly that's not noteworthy. In fact, the Board already considered and denied permits for two of these buildings just three months ago.

What is interesting is that during testimony Alderman Moore made several puzzling statements. Generally, the alderman was hostile to Cultural Resources Director Kate Shea, who supported demolition although with a noticeable lack of conviction. Shea recommended approval of the demolition with the stipulation that the alderman and neighborhood groups work with her office to create a preservation plan. In response, Moore said that he would come back every month until all of the derelict buildings in the Ville were demolished. Moore stated that residents of new homes in nearby Ville Phillips Estates demanded the demolition. He went on to say that the cleared lots where the three buildings stood would become part of the subdivision.

The original developers of Ville Phillips Estates were none other than Taylor Morley Homes and Preservation Board Vice Chair Mary "One" Johnson, who did not recuse herself from the consideration of this item. (Johnson is no longer involved with the project.) In fact, Johnson made the motion to accept staff recommendation and demolish the buildings. Her motion was approved with dissenting votes from John Burse and David Richardson.

Shea had recommended including the three buildings in a national historic district centered on the home of Peter Humphries Clark, an African-American educator who helped found one of the first black public school systems in the United States in Cincinnati and successfully fought for the repeal of Ohio's anti-black laws. Shea and her staff secured listing of the house on the National Register of Historic Places last year. Alderman Moore stated that he did not know who Clark was, but that the new subdivision on the site of the buildings would be named for him.

Citizens Anthony Coffin and Barbara Manzara testified in opposition to the demolition. Manzara recommended abolishing the local historic district ordinance in the Ville if there was no community support for historic preservation in the neighborhood. Notably, aside from the alderman, no residents of the Ville testified or sent letters supporting the demolition.

In July, Steve Patterson wrote about the incomplete state of Ville Phillips Estates. Read more: "Ville Phillips Estates Remains Unfinished Months After New Alderman Takes Office"

Denial of "Original Restaurant" Building Demolition Permit Upheld

Photograph by author.

At last week's meeting of the Preservation Board, the board considered the appeal of a Cultural Resources Office Staff denial of an application for demolition of a two-story commercial building downtown located at 2217-19 Olive Street. The board unanimously upheld the denial.

The owners of the building, Gary and Gail Andrews, have owned the building since 1977 but have failed to maintain the building according to city building codes. A section of the roof of the building collapsed several years ago, causing parapet damage, but the building is stable. The owners seek to to demolish the building, replacing it with a lawn and eventually a surface parking lot to serve a building that they own at 2206 Locust Street. (Read the CRO report here.)

The building is a contributing resource to a pending national historic district, the Olive and Locust Historic Business District. The nomination is awaiting final approval from the National Park Service. According to the nomination, prepared by Melinda Winchester:

The residential character of both Olive and Locust easily gave way to commercial activity, as many people converted homes into first floor shops with apartments above. An example of this is the building at 2217 Olive. Constructed as a home for Margaret Hilton in 1888, the first floor was converted into Walter C. Persons Photo Supplies Company in 1929 by William Duerback.

Examples of such conversion on Olive and Locust east of Jefferson are nearly extinct. The nomination does not identify a single other example of the converted residence within the historic district boundaries.

Once the building is listed on the National Register as part of the district, its rehabilitation will be eligible for state and federal historic rehabilitation tax credits. This building and others on the block have not been eligible for the tax credits before. With the availability of the credit, these buildings should be attractive investments.

I concur with Cultural Resources staff that replacement of a historic downtown building with a grassy lot substitutes a high land use with an inappropriately low land use.

A few more notes on the demolition permits on MLK

I was disappointed that we lost not one, but five buildings on MLK at the Preservation Board on Monday.

4222 Martin Luther King had to go. I watched it burn--it was terrible and thorough, and complete with a huge collapse. That building was not a building anymore afterwards.

4149-53 MLK had to go, too. They were pretty much just front facades. They were in the kind of state that only heavy subsidy or some wealthy angel of rehab could have turned around, and I didn't see either touching down on that block any time soon, sadly.

4220 and 4224 could have been saved. I really, really think so, call me crazy. (I call your attention to the fact that I just said I'm okay with the other three demolitions--I'm not THAT crazy!) After questioning whether to vote on the buildings individually, the board voted on all five buildings at once. The vote to grant the demo permit was unanimous (with Richardson, Callow, Robinson, Killeen, and Kennedy in attendance).

The first time I went along the length of MLK after moving back to St. Louis several years ago, I was struck by what a beautiful street it was, and how surprisingly intact and varied its collection of storefront buildings was. Going down a street like that, you can just tell from the landscape that it was and is an important place. As I've watched disappearances on the street since that day, one little storefront here, another little storefront there, I just keep thinking This street will be gone before I turn thirty. I mentioned this in my testimony to the Board on Monday. Asked how old I was, I answered: "Twenty-three."

"You've got time," came the answer.

"It won't take that long," I replied.

Making the loss of the buildings of the 4400 block especially sad was the testimony of Alderman Moore, who had brought the buildings up for demolition in the first place. He said he saw people run out of 4222 shortly before it started visibly burning. He said that he just knew they had to be brick rustlers. Brick rustlers have been setting fires in his area and letting the flames and the fire department be the demo crew--the wood is eliminated, and you get loose bricks and conditions where people are less likely to be suspicious if you're palletizing. Sure enough, Alderman Moore said, he went to the building at 8am the next day, and at 9am the brick rustlers showed up and started picking out the good bricks, throwing broken brickbats back into the remains of the ruined building. The Alderman called the police, and he said they showed up briefly but then left without doing anything, letting the brick rustlers go. What I want to know is: If the cops won't even help AN ALDERMAN arrest brick rustlers (9am the morning after a fire! When no demo permit could have possibly been issued yet!), how the hell do the rest of us in the community even stand a chance at stopping brick rustling?

UPDATED: Three Demolition Applications and One Appeals on Monday's Preservation Board Agenda

UPDATED Monday, Sepetmber 24

Three applications for demolition are on the final agenda for Monday's meeting of the St. Louis Preservation Board. The permit applications are:

- 2868 Missouri Avenue in Benton Park (national and local historic district), owned by Craig Hamby & Brian Magill. A two-story corner commercial building, located across the street from the restaurant Yemanja Brasil, mostly collapsed last year. An adjacent building is stable, but the owner seeks to demolish it too. Application includes new construction.

- 4153 (owned by James and Betty Mitchell) and 4220-22 Martin Luther King Drive (owned by LRA) and 4224 Martin Luther King Drive (owned by Tommie Hampton) in The Ville. The buildings on Martin Luther King are brick commercial buildings. The building at 4222 Martin Luther King collapsed last month, perhaps causing damage to its neighbors.

There is one appeal of a staff denials:

- 2217-19 Olive Street downtown, owned by Gary and Gail Andrews. This is a two-story, flat-roofed brick commercial structure.

The meeting begins at 4:00 p.m. on Monday, September 24, on the twelfth floor of the office building at 1015 Locust Street.

Talking Past Each Other?

Here is the written part of my testimony to the Preservation Board concerning the "Doctor's Building" at 4635 Martin Luther King Drive in The Ville, a contributing resources to the pending Wagoner Place Historic District. (Read more here.) The board denied a demolition permit for the building on appeal at its meeting on Monday. The pastor of the church that owns the building had earlier involved Elliot Davis' brash "You Paid For It" show to broadcast his claim that by doing its job, the Cultural Resources Office is a waste of tax dollars. Davis' report did not matter that the church's wrecking contractor had started demolition without a permit.

Thankfully, with the offer of Ald. Sam Moore (D-4th) to swap land for the parking the pastor seeks, the demolition denial should cause no ruffled feathers. However, forging such a compromise at the very last minute seems like a difficult way to deal with situations like this. There must be a better way to make sure that city preservation laws are recognized by all citizens. The laws are not designed to be punitive, but to ensure that our shared architectural heritage is handled responsibly by present owners. Ignorance of the laws breeds polarization, not understanding. I can make testimony like this forever, but without the foundation of education on preservation as a cultural good, there will be a gap between me and property owners like the pastor. Rear-guard preservation activism is only designed to spare specific buildings. Hearts and minds should be swayed some other way, and I hope to work with others -- including many aldermen and pastors -- to make that happen.

My words from Monday:

Staff is correct; the so-called Doctors Building does not meet the criteria for demolition established under ordinance.

Under city law, thankfully, demolition is not an entitlement. This Board is enabled to uphold the physical integrity of this city's buildings and historic districts at its discretion. We have a process that mostly works. Key to that process is respect for the actual laws at hand.

The applicant illegally began demolition of this building, causing damage that he has broadcast on television as reason why the building is unsound and fit for demolition. However, the Building Commissioner quickly stopped the work and further damage has been avoided. The Building Commissioner notable did not issue an emergency demolition order, meaning that the building's condition even after demolition began was not so unsound as to require immediate demolition.

The best evidence presented so far by the applicant is damage inflicted through illegal demolition. Surely the Board will take that evidence with one thousand grains of salt.

In the current state, the building retains architectural integrity as well as physically sound condition defined in the Preservation ordinance and interpreted by the Building Division. Once it is listed on the National Register of Historic Places in the Wagoner Place Historic District, rehabilitation tax credits are available to address the building’s actual problems (none of which threaten it structurally).

That makes sense to most readers of this blog. However, the testimony was made in a specific context in which understanding is a scarcity. Somehow, with this issue and the broader Ville issue, we found that understanding at the Preservation Board on Monday. Usually, we aren't that fortunate.