What’s up with the ‘white stained’ brick on the new building downtown?

by

Several people have commented to me that the white stained brick on the new building downtown going in the old Copper Lounge space doesn’t look that historical. Well join the club. A lot of the new construction downtown isn’t that historical. Just look at the condos across from Sunshine or the apartments and condos across from city hall and on Phillips to the Falls. They lack historical design.

But some are wondering how this brick facade got approved. Oh, the old ‘bait and switch’. I guess when the planning department was shown a sample of the brick that was going on that building, the developer, Legacy, showed them ONE brick that was the darkest from the crop with little white stain on it.

When the planning department was questioned about the relapse in judgement and what they were going to do about it they said moving forward they would require contractors to show a bigger cross section of the brick design.

But how does that solve this current problem?

You can’t make change stick unless you stick it to the original offender. I suggest the city informs Legacy they must paint the brick to come into historical compliance or tear it off. Once again, Legacy is given a free pass. Shocker!

Posted in: Developers, Development, Downtown Sioux Falls, Legacy Developments, Planning Commission, Sioux Falls

5 Thoughts on “What’s up with the ‘white stained’ brick on the new building downtown?”

  1. D@ily Spin on June 7, 2018 at 7:58 pm said:

    Call in the excavator and tear it down.

  2. WRONG on June 8, 2018 at 8:22 am said:

    I can’t believe the media has passed on this issue considering the building is on one of the most visible corners in town. Many people downtown are talking about it. The brick color does NOT match what the renderings show and therefore they should be required to bring it into compliance. If in fact somebody with the City did approve of the brick then that person should be questioned.

  3. T on June 8, 2018 at 8:53 am said:

    Looks a lot different than this:
    https://www.argusleader.com/videos/news/2017/06/14/video-early-plans-surface-redeveloping-copper-lounge-site/102838192/

    And the brick up on the second story is not brick. It’s inch-thick sheets of fake bricks. Looks bad when you look at the main story and compare it to the second story. Doesn’t match. The top story looks cheap.

  4. l3wis on June 8, 2018 at 9:11 am said:

    As I told someone, looks like they got a ‘deal’ on the brick from Gage brothers as a going out of stock product.

  5. anonymous on June 8, 2018 at 11:02 am said:

    Was the previous property at this location part of the City’s Facade Easement Program?

    If so, what are the implications of that?

Post Navigation