urbanSTL

^ city site is down right now... a common occurence unfortunately,,,, but I believe seeking 20 year abatement but can't recall if its 100% for ten and 50% for ten.

Update: website is now up... amazing! the abatement sought is 90% for 10 years; 85% for 5 and 80% for 5. One positive is that it will be in the hands of a for-profit so some tax will be paid but I wish they'd pursue a more fine-grained reutilization of the existing building.

Incentives approved. Link for the Stltoday article:

http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/ ... a4d97.html

The article states that the preservation board requested the developers save a corner of the facade. Developers state this is financially unfeasible. Developers are going to bring this back before the board requesting the board drop their recommendation to incorporate a portion of the facade. If the preservation board denies, this is "dead in the water" according to the alderman. However, they are expected to rubber stamp the approval with a development plan in place.

I wish I had a better knowledge of the costs of incorporating a corner of the facade into the building, but something about this just feels like a developer telling the board to pound sand because they can under the guise of it "killing the project."

That said, I have a hard time opposing this provided the permits and financing are iron clad. This and the BPV tower could potentially start some momentum in really building out a residential community between the stadium and Soulard which downtown sorely needs IMO. Theres a TON of work to do, but if we can potentially connect Soulard/Benton Park to downtown it would be one of the most important things to happen to the area in a long time IMO.

^So what this is saying is that the Preservation Board will most likely overturn their recommendations since a full plan with incentives and money is now in place? And if they don’t, this is dead.

This project makes me nervous i really hope that it happens however the preservation board could absolutely have a change of heart and deny the demolition of this building. I also wish there was a way that they could move this building but i think that in itself be more costly? Downtown needs something other than One Cardinal Way as in new construction cause who actually really knows when the other parcels will get developed in BPV.
Is there anyway they can save majority of the brick on this building for a future development.

St.Louis1764 wrote:

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Feb 17, 2018

^So what this is saying is that the Preservation Board will most likely overturn their recommendations since a full plan with incentives and money is now in place? And if they don’t, this is dead.

I think with a project like this there needs to be a solid financial backing so that way we avoid having another green space let alone parking lot. So I'm on board with that.

But isn’t that what has happened with this vote today? Everything is ready to go besides approval and building permits? That’s what I think is happening. Everything must be lined up for them to go back and appeal the Preservation Board’s decision.

From what the Post is saying yes it has a financially sound backing however just because it does doesn't mean the preservation board will give in and support the demo of the building but from what i also read is that the preserve board is going to rubber stamp and give an ok to demo the building. Nothing is ever a done deal

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Feb 17, 2018

^So what this is saying is that the Preservation Board will most likely overturn their recommendations since a full plan with incentives and money is now in place? And if they don’t, this is dead.

From my reading that is correct.

I do not believe the financing is in place yet, however. The alderman stated that he will only support demolition on the condition that permits are pulled and financing is in place. I just hope they take the care to wrap this up completely in contracts to build out the full scope of the project before demolition takes place

I'm not worried about additional BPV parcels. If Cordish & Cardinals see the demand for One Cardinal Way, I would expect things to start rolling fast.

300 Broadway is unique because an outside developer is interested in building off BPV and Downtown momentum. The competition there will give Cordish a kick as to how they develop future phases. Pressure to build/plan faster, attract better tenants..etc.

dylank wrote: ↑

Feb 17, 2018

I'm not worried about additional BPV parcels. If Cordish & Cardinals see the demand for One Cardinal Way, I would expect things to start rolling fast.

300 Broadway is unique because an outside developer is interested in building off BPV and Downtown momentum. The competition there will give Cordish a kick as to how they develop future phases. Pressure to build/plan faster, attract better tenants..etc.

I am willing to bet a "Two Cardinal Way" is being designed. This tower and One Cardinal will have strong demand (as we have seen with One Cardinal Way) which means another building must be around the corner whether at BPV, Cupples or just in this general area. It is just common sense! If I were a developer, I would try to buy lots near this future hub of activity in particular, the Mike Shannon's property. At some point, a link between the gateway mall and Ballpark Village/Downtown South will need a link that isn't guided by a parking garage or bank.

That's a good point. I always forget about Mike Shannon's space.

That would be a perfect little connector from Kiener to Ballpark. Would they have to demolish the restaurant space? Or could they build atop the concrete structure?

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Feb 17, 2018

dylank wrote: ↑

Feb 17, 2018

I'm not worried about additional BPV parcels. If Cordish & Cardinals see the demand for One Cardinal Way, I would expect things to start rolling fast.

300 Broadway is unique because an outside developer is interested in building off BPV and Downtown momentum. The competition there will give Cordish a kick as to how they develop future phases. Pressure to build/plan faster, attract better tenants..etc.

I am willing to bet a "Two Cardinal Way" is being designed. This tower and One Cardinal will have strong demand (as we have seen with One Cardinal Way) which means another building must be around the corner whether at BPV, Cupples or just in this general area. It is just common sense! If I were a developer, I would try to buy lots near this future hub of activity in particular, the Mike Shannon's property. At some point, a link between the gateway mall and Ballpark Village/Downtown South will need a link that isn't guided by a parking garage or bank.

If what happened at KCP&L is any indication I'm guessing you are right. One Light leased so well that Two Light was announced before One Light was even done or soon after. I'm a strong believer that BPV is a bigger pull than KCP&L, so a 2 and 3 Cardinal way is likely already in the works. Real potential for BPV to look like San Deigo's BVP in the next 5-10 years imo.

dylank wrote:Would they have to demolish the restaurant space? Or could they build atop the concrete structure?

I would guess demolish and start over

If I'm reading the Preservation Board drawings correctly, this thing is gonna be over 400' tall.

Edit: Never mind. I just realized that the street level is listed at 100', so I guess that's above sea level or something.

I saw in the wikipedia for tallest buildings in St.Louis and buildings under construction or planned and 300 Broadway is listed at 350 feet tall while One Cardinal Way is listed at 330 feet

I hope the East Elevation can mirror the glass facade of the West.

Especially since the design plays on the river a bit. The subtle waves of glass are like those of the Mississippi. <3

Like I said not long ago, I hope this project is built.

I understand the concerns about the existing building, and yes, I want the city to make sure this is going to actually be built before demolition is approved, but I just think this is a great spot for another tower.

It will practically be built just beyond dead center in Busch Stadium. With two towers going up simultaneously, you've got to think that would change some perceptions about St. Louis nationally. Additionally, should these projects have success, along with Jefferson Arms and Railway Exchange and other projects, you've got to think that jobs and additional residences will soon follow.

My dream is to see this spur development on the lots just south of TUMS, and just to the south of Busch and 64/40 -- near Paddy O's and Kilroy's. How beautiful would it be to have a swath of 4-8 story buildings -- or taller if possible -- in those locations?

I know right. Some decent parking reform and the implementation of a solid form based code could turn that area into one of the hottest neighborhoods in the city. Close to downtown, decent metro access, existing historical buildings, and a whole lot of room for new construction. Maybe Nestle could even get on board by consolidating some of their parking ocean and building something useful on the edges of its property.

EDIT: And my God they need to fix Broadway and 4th Street. The one way streets are just so dangerous and unfriendly, seems like somebody is killed by a car there every year.

Passed 4-1 at Preservation Board tonight, the project moves on.

dbInSouthCity wrote:Passed 4-1 at Preservation Board tonight, the project moves on.

Great! Now get the construction process moving! When is the earliest we could see this start? May?

^^probably better with the competition. No more decade-long delays. Maybe more height variation/design improvements.


Wonder how this would've effected the speed of BPV if it had been proposed in 2012-2014

dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑

Feb 27, 2018

Passed 4-1 at Preservation Board tonight, the project moves on.

Thanks for the update dblnsouthcity. Does the three conditions apply as per your post in the Preservation Board thread? Assume it does on the vote

dredger wrote: ↑

Feb 27, 2018

dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑

Feb 27, 2018

Passed 4-1 at Preservation Board tonight, the project moves on.

Thanks for the update dblnsouthcity. Does the three conditions apply as per your post in the Preservation Board thread? Assume it does on the vote

I dont think the Pres Board can apply #2 and 3 but we will present those 2 at the Board of Adjustment when this projects building permit comes up later in the summer, at that point the board of adjustment can attach those as a condition of the building permit. The developed as agreed on all 3 of those

From Richard Callow’s Twitter. I wonder how we can get a clearer image of the rendering with the existing structure?