urbanSTL

Granted I don't know what things look like underground but s subterrainian garage need not be limited to the area of the surface Serra Park. 10th, 11, Chestnut, and the very wide Market Street an all be torn up and built under. Not to mention the courts building has a good sized lawn area.

gone corporate wrote: ↑

Jan 03, 2022

@urban_dilettante Understand me, sir: I'm not seeking the Mark Twain Hotel's destruction. I am seeking 909 Chestnut being put back into productive use as an office building occupied with businesses. To get that building back in productive use, I believe we first need parking proximate to that building because it doesn't have any on site, and solutions to getting this accomplished should be addressed. 

Right off the bat, I say the parking lot behind the Mark Twain can and should be bought by the 909 Chestnut owners, who should look to building a garage on that site to better attract future tenants. Concurrently, they should get access to the building's former garage a couple blocks up (the AT&T garage). If there's space available there, then they should make having access to those spaces part of their marketing. I have no desire to see the Mark Twain Hotel lost, but I do believe having 909 Chestnut fully occupied is worth more than the Mark Twain Hotel, especially in its current use. I honestly think the best solution would have been to have new parking constructed under the City Garden, but I believe that opportunity has passed. Could new underground parking be reasonably built under the Serra Sculpture? Not sure, but that'd be a damn attractive thing to get that building back in productive use. 

i understand why you suggested it. i think it's an absolutely horrible idea. nothing personal.

I know this would be unpopular, however it would likely be cheaper than building an underground garage.

What if, the Gateway Metro Credit Union building was demolished and the lot at the northeast corner or 10th & Pine were used to build a parking garage with street level retail over 10th street allowing it to remain open, that way one massive garage could be built without tearing anything significant down.

Find a way to lease spots in the garage at 11th and Chestnut and in the Culinaria garage.

gone corporate wrote: ↑

Jan 03, 2022

@urban_dilettante Understand me, sir: I'm not seeking the Mark Twain Hotel's destruction. I am seeking 909 Chestnut being put back into productive use as an office building occupied with businesses. To get that building back in productive use, I believe we first need parking proximate to that building because it doesn't have any on site, and solutions to getting this accomplished should be addressed. 

Right off the bat, I say the parking lot behind the Mark Twain can and should be bought by the 909 Chestnut owners, who should look to building a garage on that site to better attract future tenants. Concurrently, they should get access to the building's former garage a couple blocks up (the AT&T garage). If there's space available there, then they should make having access to those spaces part of their marketing. I have no desire to see the Mark Twain Hotel lost, but I do believe having 909 Chestnut fully occupied is worth more than the Mark Twain Hotel, especially in its current use. I honestly think the best solution would have been to have new parking constructed under the City Garden, but I believe that opportunity has passed. Could new underground parking be reasonably built under the Serra Sculpture? Not sure, but that'd be a damn attractive thing to get that building back in productive use. 

The combined area of the Mark Twain building plus the lot behind it looks to be maybe 1/2 the size of the garage at 11th and Pine. And I don't know how this works, but wouldn't the Bell lofts and adjacent buildings have "air rights" so that a parking garage couldn't be smashed up against their balconies? I just think that even if one would execute on the pie-in-the-sky dream of taking a viable building and turning it into a parking garage, it wouldn't be remotely sufficient, nor even have half as much capacity as a big ugly garage just about a block away.

Doubling down on the auto centrism that turned our DT into a boring dump is not the solution.

Might I suggest investing in our bus system and adding more housing units within 5 miles of DT.

JaneJacobsGhost wrote: ↑

Jan 04, 2022

Doubling down on the auto centrism that turned our DT into a boring dump is not the solution.

Might I suggest investing in our bus system and adding more housing units within 5 miles of DT.This is 

Obviously this, but the market has shown that this building just doesn't work without a parking solution. Tearing it down and generally shifting downtown away from office focus is an option too

Ooooh. Cars v. Destroying our capital stock: Two disastrous 20th century strategies enter but only one can succeed! Jk both sound great!

Lets turn the Mark Twain in to market rate apartments and  build  an underground garage  under the Serra Sculpture Park.

I know this has been mentioned previously (including by me), but why not just convert like 25% of this 1.4 million square foot behemoth into on site parking? I know the building might not be perfectly configured for this, but it doesn't look completely infeasible either.

This accomplishes multiple goals. It reduces the leasable square footage (and vacancy) and solves a decent portion of the parking issue for tenants.

^ It seems to be the obvious solution but can only assume that 9091 Chestnut being relatively new & therefore the structural design of core/elevator banks in the middle and open floor plates is about supporting some people and office furniture.   Thus the retrofit to get 10 floors or so to support larger loads of garage parking, live and dead loads as cars will move up down, would make underground parking under the City Garden look cheap.   Someone with a lot better understanding can chime in

So maybe look at in 1/3rds which would be consistent with the elevator banks i believe.  1/3 is repurposed as commercial w current small underground garage reserved for premium sq footage users and those who want to pay less have access to parking nearby.  1/3 becomes hotel rooms and you resolve with valet parking via nearby garage/city garage deal which is no big deal because that is pretty much common in any downtown.   

So that leaves remaining 1/3 residential and the expectations, what people want and market whether it is a high end conversion and or slamming in a bunch of studio's and one bedroom.   Between Railway Ex and Jeff Arms you still got a huge amount of space downtown for One bedrooms and studios downtown.   So I can see high end residential on upper with large footprints with the views going over well/better fit but can't help but thinking that they it won't do well unless parking is somehow tied directly to the building/residents.  To me that solution is parking under City Garden and I think it is still the best way to get building activated & on its way to being filled again.  

There’s someone under contract for this skyscraper once again per STL Business Journal




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wake me up when a sale goes through.

Sent from my SM-F711U using Tapatalk

^To that Statement, here's what they say.

The disclosure comes from a Dec. 15 filing from bondholders who own the building, which indicated the contract is expected to close in the first quarter of 2022.

Like the four other times that the skyscraper has been under contract in the last three years, it’s not clear who the potential buyer is or what plans could be for the building, which at 1.4 million square feet is the largest office building in the St. Louis region and the state. Brokers who have been affiliated with marketing the building in the past did not respond to requests for comment. CWCapital, a Washington, D.C., firm identified in bondholder filings as the special servicer appointed to oversee the property, also did not respond to a request for comment.

JJ Taino wrote:There’s someone under contract for this skyscraper once again per STL Business Journal




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Let’s fooking go!

moorlander wrote:

JJ Taino wrote:There’s someone under contract for this skyscraper once again per STL Business Journal




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Let’s fooking go!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Any chance the new buyer has the same tenant in mind? I know one of the previously rumored tenants is still aggressively adding headcount locally across multiple buildings in St. Louis county.

Really crossing my fingers here.  We need to get some positive momentum and this would definitely qualify.  Mayor Jones better focus on downtown.   I know a company that is moving forward moving out by the end of the year.  

Fifth times a charm?

chris fuller wrote: ↑

Nov 19, 2021

Cities with empty offices see new room to expand housing
After Covid, New York and other cities are weighing whether to convert empty office buildings into affordable housing.
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/11/11/new-york-shrinking-offices-housing-520318

The past multi-billion corporate monopolies, just like we see today. Tall Buildings occupying cities emptied out from a pandemic. Their status symbols are now empty. So, why can we not use their empty millions of square feet! All with 100s of shelter spaces and new homes for those without a roof or a job that could have been once in the unoccupied safe buildings. Laid off, once making 650K a yr, now a virus changed our planet forever.!