1534 Oak Street - Appropriate for the Neighborhood?

[cline]

It is not in the historic district so does it still have to "contribute" to a district it is not in?  Is 1661 a contributing structure?  

[Steve]

It is not in the historic district so does it still have to "contribute" to a district it is not in?  Is 1661 contributing? 

The term "contributing" referrs to the fact that in order for Riverside and Avondale to be a historic district, they need to have a certain percentage of buildings that "contribute" to the historic nature of the district.  Since the site is outside of the historic district (and the proposed building is not 50 years old), "contributing structure" doesn't apply

[Steve]

Archiphreak -- If you "screw the overlay" then the project definately could not be built. The city's current zoning is designed for suburban areas, with large set backs and large parking requirements.  This project would need to provide 74 parking spaces if the Overlay wasn't there.  Under the Overlay, they will only be required to provide 19 parking spaces (a 75% reduction).  The overlay was designed to not only protect the look and feel of the neighborhood, but to also allow developers to build in-fill projects with the same scale, density, and set backs as the surrounding neighborhood without the need for zoning deviations and PUD's.  It's good thing for developers to have the overlay because it relaxes a lot of the zoning requirements applicable to the rest of the city.

Alas, they don't even want to meet those relaxed requirements. . .   

+1

[thelakelander]

The best architecture is what looks good even when it's boarded up (just a strange rule of thumb I like to use

I love it!

[cline]

It is not in the historic district so does it still have to "contribute" to a district it is not in?  Is 1661 contributing?  

The term "contributing" referrs to the fact that in order for Riverside and Avondale to be a historic district, they need to have a certain percentage of buildings that "contribute" to the historic nature of the district.  Since the site is outside of the historic district (and the proposed building is not 50 years old), "contributing structure" doesn't apply

I understand that in order for RA to be considered a historic district it has to have a certain percentage of contributing structures.  However, as you mentioned, this area is outside the historic district so the "contributing structure" rule shouldn't apply (in my opinion).  However, it is within the Riverside Avondale Zoning Overlay and the language within the urban transition design standards makes reference to "contributing structures", evidently including ones not within the historic district.  What's the deal with that?  

[fieldafm]

Personally, I avoid the Larry's over there because I can't stand parking three blocks away to spend 5 minutes in a building to pick up a 7 dollar sandwich.

LOL, I always have to park and walk a block or two just to get a sandwich to-go on the way home from work.  I more often times than not go home first and then ride my bike up to Larrys... I figure if Im going to walk two blocks, I might as well bike for twenty more, LOL

I agree about many things on here.  Steve, how long does the LUZ meeting last and where is this item on the agenda itinerary?  I would like to attend but couldn't be there by 5PM.

[mbstout]

Ugh, this building is horrible and looks like some sort of medical/dental complex =
I would not want to have dinner on that roof.

[ricosuave]

I definitely agree that the problem is scale.  Two stories instead of three would make a huge difference.  I happen to love triangle shaped buildings - dysfunctional as they are - but would personally go for more of a pint sized flat iron building here rather than modern.  I have not kept up with this thread totally but the developer may be drawing RAP's ire as much as this building because of his past run ins with RAP.

[ricosuave]

Not meaning to fan flames with my last post - I *believe* the actual developer is AccuBuild but it may not be.

[fieldafm]

I have not kept up with this thread totally but the developer may be drawing RAP's ire as much as this building because of his past run ins with RAP.

I believe the person you are refering to(who also had some issues in San Marco) is not a part of this new project... could be wrong though

[ricker]

seems many here have extremely short memories.
remember the buildings upon the site of 1661 prior to the current blob?
No?
well it didn't "fit" with the historic gems surrounding it.
The similar wedge @ dellwood and margaret addresses its corner differently. And?
this proposed design provides a corner retreat from the elements and is not a solid plane of uninteruppted concrete on Oak St.
notice what looks like portholes.
interesting to see how this rides.

[thelakelander]

Has anyone read a copy of the Planning and Development Department’s staff report?  Just wondering what it says.

[Singejoufflue]

With a beer bottle on display in the last model photo, perhaps the designers were just plain drunk?  Having only recently moved back from Chicago where these type of buildings were splashed all over gentrifying neighborhoods, they quickly become eyesores as residents and offices find ways to shield the public from floor to ceiling views.

[Steve]

I agree about many things on here.  Steve, how long does the LUZ meeting last and where is this item on the agenda itinerary?  I would like to attend but couldn't be there by 5PM.

My understanding is that they expect this meeting to be over in about an hour.  My guess is this will be the most debated topic, but I'm not sure.

[JAM]

The term "contributing" does not refer to the fact that a certain percentage of the building in an historic district need to be over 50 old.  It is merely a way of inventorying the building stock when the surveys for the historic district were completed.  To be contributing (and protected) in the historic district, it has to be 50 years old and retain its achitectural integrity (i.e. it hasn't been remodeled and lost its original architectural style).  You have to remember that the Zoning Overlay applies to the entire neighborhood from the Fuller Warren overpass, along the railroad tracks to the North and West and to the Fishweir creek area.  That encompasses all of the historic district proper and the surrounding neightborhoods.  There are contributing structures and non-contributing structures within the historic district.  There are no contributing structures outside of the historic district.  Some buildings were carved out of the historic district proper, such as the property at issue here, because they were associated with Riverside Hospital or St. Vincent's Hospital. The distinction is retained in the overlay because of a recognition that historic retail (such as Five Points and St. Johns shops) don't have the land to provide additional parking although they are already commercial.  No one wants to kill what's already there.  But the intent of the overlay was to make sure that new projects provide at least some parking (hence the 75% reduction from normal parking requirements.