urbanSTL

teddykratch wrote:Re: the $8M, I guess I have to ask what people think is the risk of losing the HQ if the incentive is not approved? Also, with Laclede's recent purchase of Missouri Gas Energy, will some of those jobs come downtown eventually, that may not have fit in their current space? (I don't know much about this but those are my thoughts off the cuff)

I'm pretty sure though that Laclede wasn't really considering a move out of downtown although at one point they were thinking of moving to their property in the Cortex zone. The last three options were staying put and remodeling, 600 Washington, and GenAm. Nice point about maybe more jobs from the MGE acqusition, although I haven"t heard anything yet.

roger wyoming II wrote:How do people feel about $8 million in tax incentives essentially just to play musical office chairs? I don't believe any more jobs will be created out of this.

Based on news reports, the GenAm building will be able to accommodate up to 700 workers - that's 250 more employees than they have now. Keep in mind that LaClede just completed the purchase of Missouri Gas Energy Company in Kansas City. LaClede has almost 1.2-million customers now.

I anticipate there will be employee growth at LaClede - especially with Sitherwood's growth plans for LaClede.

I still wish they had opted for a new tower, but LaClede is taking a long-time empty building off the market - AND the company could potentially maintain some employees in the current building.

Although the downtown office market is being shaken up a bit, what LaClede is doing for downtown is good.

Give them the money.

^ is Sitherwood the Laclede topper? You know what he really could do to help downtown? Call up DeWitt Jr. and say, "you know what? I'd really like to live in a penthouse overlooking Busch Stadium."

Roger: I'd think it prudent to invest in maintaining what you already have. Here, we have one of the few publicly traded companies in the STL area that has remained in Downtown all these decades. They are going to revitalize a deteriorating asset that has sat vacant, along the Gateway Mall, for many, many years. They also likely will bring new jobs with them. And, the building they're in now is much easier to retrofit and source new clients than a hulk like the GenAm. It's only prudent to put our money where our mouth is.

As far as analogies go: Those of us who have yards at our homes, we make sure to water our yards and prune our trees. We have to put some sweat equity into it to make sure it still grows and helps make a nice home for ourselves. We never just go, "It's nature, it'll take care of itself", not giving any effort back to the yard, and expect to see everything blooming properly and in order, or else our yard will look unruly.

Same thing here. Instead of sweat equity, we need real financial support, in this case tax credits. Great return probable.

We mustn't be scared of investing in our core assets to make ourselves better.

^ I appreciate your comments.

I'm not necessarily against the credits but I would be much more comfortable if there were some jobs commitment to go with it. As far as putting this historic but difficult building back in service, your comment got me to thinking.... could/should a similar but more proactive strategy be used for other "endangered" buildings? For example incentives to have moved someone into Cupples 7? If this type of strategy were decided as worth exploring, what other buildings could be targeted?

^ The unknown is whether or not they are full where they are. And there's this from a Post-Dispatch follow up: "Udelhofen said that the building could accommodate 700 workers but that Laclede, anticipating growth in the next few years, already was scouting adjacent structures for office space. Koman said Laclede might consider keeping some employees at the Laclede Gas building."

TIF for the move approved.
Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/blog ... l?page=all

$8.1MM in TIF for $46.4MM in rehab construction costs.

Timeline is that The Koman Group will assume ownership in January 2014 and for rehab to be complete by March 2015.

The fringe activist network MORE (Missourians Organizing for Reform and Empowerment) claimed yesterday that the majority of Aldermen necessary to pass this TIF, those on the Housing, Urban Development, and Zoning (HUDZ) Committee, would vote against the TIF for the building's redevelopment.
Story: http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/blog ... stall.html

MORE claims victory, claiming they've been clamoring at these Aldermen for weeks to derail this.

This is all very dubious.
How so?
They claim Alderman Antonio French is one of the votes against the TIF. Alderman French, however, told the Biz Journal that he hasn't taken a position on this either way. And from his social media accounts, he's obviously pissed that they're trying to claim his voice when he hasn't given it yet, that they're trying to speak for him.

This could get real ugly...

^Cool. Thanks for the quick update.

So with the move official, it will be interesting to see how this impacts development patterns.

Let's stop being obtuse and get to the point, shall we?

You're both right. Now let's circle back to the main discussion...