Fire at Historic Crunden-Martin Manufacturing Co. Complex in Chouteau’s Landing

Yesterday morning a fire started in one of the buildings in the historic Crunden Martin Manufacturing Co complex:

Fire officials said the building, in the 700 block of 2nd Street in Chouteau’s Landing, caught fire some time between 11:00 and 11:30 a.m. Authorities said the building is a six story, warehouse, formerly the Crunden Martin Manufacturing Co. (KMOV)

I saw the smoke but haven’t been down to the area following the fire.

The following quotes are from the nomination to the National Register of Historic Places (PDF).

Crunden-Martin steadily developed into one ofthe more important and successful woodenware, willow wear and metal-goods industries ofthe city between 1891 and 1990; second only to the Samuel Cupples Woodenware Company.  By1924,Crunden-Martin was the only woodenware firm represented in the Merchant’s Exchange of St.Louis. During WWII, Crunden-Martin manufactured helmets, stoves, buckets and five-gallon gasoline ‘jerry cans‘ for the U. S. military; the company was one of two St. Louis companies to make helmets and the only one to manufacture ‘jerry cans.”

Between 1904 and 1920 they built seven buildings, each designed by leading architects of the day:

The Crunden-Martin Manufacturing Company is comprised of seven buildings; six are adjoining, the seventh is attached via a four-story bridge.

It was the building attached via the bridge that had the fire. The nomination labeled it #5 since it was the fifth out of seven constructed:

Building #5, a six-story brick rectangular-shaped warehouse, was designed (and completed) in 1912 by Mauran, Russell and Crowell; interior mill construction consists of wooden plank and beam(photo9).Primary elevations face south and east;elevations are identical in design to building #2. Building #5 is connected to the main complex (through building #2 to the east) via the 1912 four-story bridge located above the second story; the bridge continues to the sixth story. The first story ofthe east elevation contains six wide bays with tripled six-over-six double-hung windows; one bay contains an entrance surrounded by multi-lights and a transom above. At basement level the bays contain a pair of single-lights. A seventh bay contains a single, narrow six-over-six double-hung window. A corbelled cornice wraps the building just above the first story and continues to the south elevation. Windows at the second through the sixth stories are double-hung six-over-six with soldier arches and metal sills (twelve windows are at the second through the sixth stories;four additional windows are at the half-story between the second and sixth stories);windows are between brick pilasters capped with stylized, square-paneled capitals. An overhanging terra cotta cornice supported on corbelled brick crowns the building. A half-story projects above the building at the northeast side. The building corners are accented with rounded brick.

The south elevation of building #5 contains five wide bays; two have tripled six-over-six double-hung windows, two have bricked-in portions and one has a pair of six-over-six double-hung with brick in between. At the basement level each bay contains a pair of single-lights. The corbelled cornice, from the east elevation, wraps the building just above the first story. Windows at the second through the sixth stories are double-hung two-over-two and six-over-six with soldier arches and metal sills (nine windows are at the second, eight are at the third through the sixth); windows are between brick pilasters capped with stylized, square-paneled capitals. An overhanging terra cotta cornice supported on corbelled brick crowns the building. Iron fire escapes at the southwest corner are accessible from windows at the second through sixth stories. The building corners are accented with rounded brick. Above the first story the building remains unchanged (photo 9).

The north elevation is a blank wall of brick with no fenestration. A half-story (visible at the east elevation) extends above the building. The west elevation contains two wide garage doors and two rear entrances at the first story. The second story contains three pairs and one single double-hung two-over-two windows with soldier arches and metal sills. The third through the fifth stories contain thirteen similar windows; the sixth contains fourteen.

At this time I’m not sure of the extent of the damage and if the building can be saved. The history of the company and the manufacturing complex is certainly interesting,

– Steve Patterson

Thoughts on Cupples #7

A week ago the St. Louis Preservation Board unanimously upheld the staff denial of a demolition permit for the Cupples 7 building. Had Mary “One” Johnson still been on the board there would have been one vote in favor of demolition.  But enough about her…

Demolition was a moot point, owners Kevin McGowan & Nat Walsh couldn’t afford to demolish the building even if they were given the permit to do so. This was about liability, specifically the transfer of liability. Should the building collapse, damaging adjacent properties, they can say they tried to remove the hazard but were denied the right to do so. A clever move to absolve themselves of responsibility.

Well, at least an attempt to absolve responsibility. However, I’m not quick to forgive and forget. How did we get to this point? In 2000 when Bank of America owned several of the Cupples buildings a tank collapsed causing a hole in the roof of #7. The hole was known five years later when McGowan & Walsh bought three of the warehouses, including #7. They attempted to tarp over the roof, right?

Wrong, they did nothing! Water poured in a small hole in the roof for five years prior to their ownership causing structural damage to get to the point where it is today — which is mostly in the basement. They’ve been irresponsible owners for years and now they are maneuvering to blame the city if this historic structure collapses.

The city certainly has failed, I’ve had to resolve issues like peeling paint or end up in court! Where has the city been? They condemned the structure in 2008 and that then did…nothing. Everyone has been covering their own ass, but nobody has been trying to stabilize the building.

Can we all work together to find a way to support the exterior walls for future use? Not you Kevin and Nat, stay out of the picture — let Montgomery Bank foreclose on the mortgage or the city for back taxes.

– Steve Patterson

Pevely Dairy Fate to be Decided Today, or Not?

The proposed demolition of the historic, and urban, Pevely Dairy complex at Grand and Chouteau is on today’s Preservation Board agenda, but won’t be heard:

St. Louis University’s request for permits to demolish the Pevely Dairy buildings is off Monday’s agenda of the city’s Preservation Board but that does not mean SLU is abandoning its effort to raze the historic complex.

A university spokesman said today that seeking a delay for a hearing on its request for demolition permits gives SLU more time to present its case to the city panel. SLU has said it wants to replace the Pevely complex with a building for its SLUCare physician’s practice. (STLtoday.com)

Part of me doesn’t trust that the issue won’t be decided at today’s meeting. But, it’s quite possible the staff will indicate the issue will be on the December agenda.The main problem I have is SLU’s false claim the historic structure is in the way.

Given the history of Saint Louis University these past two decades the Pevely building and smokestack aren’t in the way of a new building. No, they are where SLU President Fr. Biondi wants  grass and a fountain. Trying very hard not to use a few choice expletives!

Biondi hates urbanity, or maybe he just doesn’t know what makes a good city. The SLU campus is very pristine and in the center, interesting, But the edges are dead zones due to all the fenced lawns created by Biondi. Intended to make the area safer, SLU policies suck life out of the area to the point the sidewalks are nearly vacant, which isn’t safe. People create safety.

The smokestack and building at the corner, with the rooftop sign, are the two elements that should be saved. The warehouse elements in the foreground (above) should be replaced, just not with lifeless iron fencing with lawn.  New medical buildings can be built around & embracing the old. The smokestack could be the centerpiece of a courtyard. The architectural possibilities were explored during a recent design charrette:

After a thorough discussion of the site’s dimensions, SLU’s extensive landholdings in the area, and the university’s probable needs, participants subdivided into four groups. Each focused on a different approach, including converting the corner building into doctors’ offices with a larger modern addition, adapting it into market-rate housing and ancillary facilities for the medical school, finding additional on-site locations for new buildings, and generating an overall site plan to connect this corner to the rest of the university. (SLU Says It Can’t Reuse the Pevely Buildings; Local Designers Beg to Differ)

I look forward to seeing the many varied solutions these teams developed.

We must resist SLU’s efforts to destroy both Grand & Chouteau corridors. Biondi has already done a number of Grand at the main campus and the medical campus but hope remains for Chouteau and eventually Grand can be urbanized again, largely by  building over Biondi’s lawns.

Where SLU has replaced walkable urban buildings with acres of fenced lawn we can build new 1-2 story “liner buildings” to recreate the walls of the urban street. The SW corner shouldn’t be destroyed, liner buildings can fix the anti-urban SE corner but two such corners would be a disaster.

The NE corner is a suburban fast-food chain and the never urban NW corner is being cleared for more dead SLU grass. Yawn.

The Grand viaduct is being replaced and the MetroLink station getting rebuilt. The #70 Grand bus is Metro’s busiest and the #32 MLK bus travels up and down Chouteau & Manchester. If developed right, Grand & Chouteau could be a great pedestrian environment. Chouteau is important for connecting Lafayette Square & Downtown  to The Grove.

My guess is Biondi has surrounded himself with yes men that tell him he’s done a great job with the campuses. Well, on the chance he’ll read this post:

Stop it! You are destroying the city! What you’ve done will take decades to undo and it must be undone to create lively sidewalks. It sickens me my tuition helped fund your destructive ways. Retire!

– Steve Patterson

Worth the Wait

In the more than 21 years I’ve lived in St. Louis I’ve made many trips back to Oklahoma City to visit family & friends. Each of those times I visited a number of places to see the positive changes taking place. I also drove by my favorite building over and over hoping to see change.

When I arrived earlier this month my brother had a news story waiting for me:

A Crown Heights property that languished for years — and was referred to by neighbors as the “Moldy Manor” — stands as a reminder that even in a historic preservation district there can always be a black sheep. But it’s not as if the Art Deco fourplex on the southwest corner of Olie Avenue and N.W. 37th Street was an ugly duckling; it was quite the opposite in its day, although it sat rotting for decades. (full story)

Finally, the long time owner (since 1963!) finally sold to a person who will renovate the building! Many had tried to buy the property over the years but the owner was difficult, asking far to much for the property and not maintaing it.

The 4-car garage matched the 4-family’s design.

Sadly the city had  to condemn and raze the garage structure, likely prompting the owner to finally sell.

I’m looking forward to my next trip to Oklahoma City and seeing the completed renovation. I’ll need to time my trip so that I can go into one of the finished apartments.

The Crown Heights neighborhood is a beautiful historic area of single family homes with only a handful of multi-family properties. However, they recognized this particular 4-family was better a vacant eyesore than a vacant lot. Neighborhoods don’t get stronger by razing buildings.

– Steve Patterson

Readers: Saint Louis University Shouldn’t Be Allowed To Raze The Historic Pevely Dairy Complex

College campuses often reflect their location: rural, suburban or urban. Although Saint Louis University is in an urban location, it is doing a great job of destroying all aspects of urban life.

Last week the majority of readers that voted in the poll do not want this to continue:

Q: Should the St. Louis Preservation Board allow SLU to raze the former Pevely Dairy building at Grand & Chouteau?

1. No 134 [66.34%]
2. Yes 43 [21.29%]
3. Maybe 14 [6.93%]
4. Other: 9 [4.46%]
5. Unsure/No Opinion 2 [0.99%]

The 43 “Yes” answers must be from those who think they have a rational look at life.

The reality is each and every time an urban building is replaced with an anti-urban building set behind a green lawn the environment is denigrated, making revitalization that much harder. Wealthy institutions know this will help them but more land, something they couldn’t do if areas thrived with private investment.

Here are the nine other answers provided by readers:

1. Not the main structure.
2. Hell no! Apparently SLU thinks its interests are parallel to ours. WRONG!
3. only if they replace it with a huge fountain or better yet museum of fountains
4. Yes, SLU doesn’t own enough vacant land for this project.
5. No, there’s a shortage of university housing, build reasonably price apts
6. Need to see post-demo land use plans before final determination
7. SLU has a Center for Sustainability with no real estate–rehab Pevely for that
8. No, they should renovate it and add on another building if needed
9. If it can’t be rehabbed

From the nomination (PDF) to the National Register of Historic Places in 2009:

The Pevely Dairy Company Plant sits on an approximately eight-acre site in the Midtown Neighborhood of St. Louis on the west side of South Grand Boulevard between Chouteau and Hickory Avenues. Constructed between 1915 and 1945, the Pevely Dairy Company Plant was designed as the headquarters for the growing company; it remained in service as a dairy until November 2008. It is comprised of three buildings, a smokestack, and two parking lots. The 1915 four-story, red brick office building is located at 1001 South Grand Boulevard. It features a three-bay façade with large display windows in the first level, and retains the original wood door and pedimented entrance surround. A terra cotta cornice with colored tile designs ornaments the flat roofline. Many of the original wood industrial windows have also been retained on this building, as well as the glazed brick walls and floors and intricate woodwork. The 1916 milk plant sits behind the office building at 3626 Chouteau Avenue. This three-story brick and concrete industrial building had additions in 1943, 1945, 1975 and 1997. Featuring metal hopper windows, three loading docks, two metal coolers and two steam tanks, the milk plant’s architecture is primarily functional rather than artistic. The interior retains its glazed brick walls and floors, as well as large, open storage rooms that include concrete mushroom columns. A 1928 garage is located south of the milk plant at 1101 Motard Avenue. This brick, arch-roofed structure retains original glazed glass metal windows, with sliding metal doors and stepped parapet walls on the east and west elevations. The interior consists of an open parking area with a concrete floor. Originally connected to a boiler and powerhouse, the 1943 smokestack now sits across a parking lot from the office building. The brick structure includes a glazed brick design spelling out the Pevely name. The adjacent parking lot and a lot between the milk plant and garage have historically served as open parking and loading space, and are included in the boundary. Though three of the Pevely structures have burned since the period of significance, the factory as a whole retains the industrial structures primarily associated with the company. These buildings are in good condition and continue to reflect their industrial significance.

The issue is said to be on the November 28th Preservation Board agenda, which isn’t available yet. I’m glad to see Mary “One” Johnson is no longer on the board, she consistently voted in favor of demolitions.

Saint Louis University must show the structure(s) cannot be reused — not necessarily for their intended purpose  but for any reasonable use. We’ll see how they try to spin this at the meeting.

– Steve Patterson