Ballpark Lofts I, II, and III - Cupples Sta. Bldgs. 7, 8, 9

stlbaseball · PostSep 18, 2008#1762008-09-18T17:25+00:00

goat314 wrote:Exactly, I've been saying this......They could build a few hi rise condos at ballpark village and sell them out before they even started construction. Either Cordish is short sighted, has no confidence in downtown's renaissance, or are very idiotic. I think its a combination of all three, because the real estate at ballpark village is unlike any other in the region. We could have some serious skyline changing going on in this area.

I couldn't agree any more. Ballpark #8 sold 62 of 68 condos in less than 2.5 hours. When #9 went for sale, many of these people cancelled their contracts in #8 just to be one block closer to the park with still very limited views of the park.

BPV could offer even better views obviously so I would expect the demand in BPV to be even higher and sell out immediately. Of course though, the other factor to be considered is the potentially inflated prices to live in BPV.

dredger · PostSep 18, 2008#1772008-09-18T22:01+00:00

I really have a tough time connecting sales at Ballpark Lofts as reasonable indicator of what would sales at BPV be. Ballpark lofts developer have the advantage of easy to convert buildings/infrastructure in place at a fraction of the cost. Thus the price and financing structure is much more favorable for a far greater number of possible buyers that Ballpark Lofts was able to pull in.

In the meantime, if I was Cordish I would also hold out on the idea that the premium location would be much more supportive of high end new high rise condo construction. In that regards, the market has gone flat and the credit crunch is on. The Skyhouse went dead, Park Pacific scaled back, and even the Tri in Clayton changed and still hasn't broken ground (That is with the prospect of two corporate hq's expanded and building in Central Clayton).

BPV's market will get there, it just won't happen now. I think it is much more important that they get some of those office leases signed now. Then you will see that start of a vibrant mixed area of old and new, office, retail and residential.

moorlander · PostOct 03, 2008#1782008-10-03T17:23+00:00

Project: Ballpark Lofts

$40 million, Downtown

Developer: Blue Urban

Status: Construction has started on the Cupples Station building at Ninth and Spruce streets, with a bridge loan from Enterprise Bank. Ad firms Osborn & Barr and Adamson have signed leases to start late spring 2009. Construction loan with The Private Bank is set to close in November.

What They’re Saying:

Developer Kevin McGowan supplied $9 million in equity to get financing for the deal: “Historic rehab development downtown and in the rest of the country has been shut down. These kinds of developments are not likely to be done for the immediate future — at least the next 18 months.”

http://stlouis.bizjournals.com/stlouis/ ... =printable

downtown2007 · PostJan 22, 2009#1792009-01-22T18:42+00:00

According to a reliable source the 2nd building they were going to complete has fallen through due to a lack of financing.

threeonefour · PostJan 22, 2009#1802009-01-22T18:50+00:00

Downtown2007 wrote:According to a reliable source the 2nd building they were going to complete has fallen through due to a lack of financing.

Those of you that follow development news elsewhere in Missouri know that Kevin McGowan has also made plans to renovate the former Heer's department store in downtown Springfield. The building has been empty since the store went out of business in 1995 and several previous plans have fallen through. Some there are getting impatient with McGowan, which I hate to see because it has been reported that he literally searched the world to obtain financing and came up empty. So it wouldn't be a surprise if the same thing happened here, even with the strong sales for the previous phase.

McGowan thinks that now he can secure a HUD loan to proceed with the Heer's redevelopment in Springfield by converting the bulk of the building into market-rate apartments instead of condominiums, so I wonder if that would be an option for the next phase of this project.

stlcardsblues1989 · PostJan 23, 2009#1812009-01-23T07:04+00:00

McGowan seems to know what he's doing, from what I've seen anyway.

Springfield seems to be growing, so once the credit markets are stable again, maybe his Springfield project will succeed.

moorlander · PostApr 17, 2009#1822009-04-17T12:40+00:00

McGowan loses tenant at stalled Cupples project

Kevin McGowan’s stalled development of a vacant Cupples Station building has cost him a tenant.

Adamson has canceled plans to move its 53 employees there from Clayton, and the advertising firm is scouting for space elsewhere downtown.

In an announcement with advertising firm Osborn & Barr a year ago, Adamson signed a lease to occupy 13,000 square feet starting Jan. 1, 2009. But McGowan, principal of Blue Urban, has failed to secure financing for redevelopment of the building at 914 Spruce St., dubbed Cupples 9.

Adamson had extended its contract to May 31, but McGowan told the firm that the space will not be ready by that time, either. “It still remains our priority (to develop the building),” he said.

McGowan said the recent credit crunch has hampered his ability to lock in financing for Cupples 9, an estimated $43 million project with apartments, office space and ground-floor retail space. He’s in talks with outside investors, including family members, to become equity investors in the project, but a closing date for financing is still weeks away, McGowan said.

http://stlouis.bizjournals.com/stlouis/ ... tory7.html

framer · PostApr 18, 2009#1832009-04-18T04:15+00:00

Moorlander wrote: He’s in talks with outside investors, including family members, to become equity investors in the project,

Good thing he's got lots of brothers.

Seriously, this is really frustrating. Lots of companies are showing the desire to come Downtown, but the lack of available space is keeping them away.

moorlander · PostApr 18, 2009#1842009-04-18T12:59+00:00

^ very true, but at least it also says:

Adamson has canceled plans to move its 53 employees there from Clayton, and the advertising firm is scouting for space elsewhere downtown.

stlcardsblues1989 · PostApr 18, 2009#1852009-04-18T21:34+00:00

Sucks for him, but at least they are still looking to move Downtown. I wonder how much space they would need.

newstl2020 · PostApr 19, 2009#1862009-04-19T01:00+00:00

I'd guess the same 13,000 ft they signed in the above lease.

steve · PostApr 19, 2009#1872009-04-19T18:28+00:00

This is the building closest to the stadium, right? I thought they had started work on that one. . . .

stlcardsblues1989 · PostApr 29, 2009#1882009-04-29T03:06+00:00

This roof looks horrendous.

I don't think they have much time to stall.

http://tinyurl.com/d6lxvk

According to my Google Earth imagery, this Live Maps image matches most closely with July 2007, but the June 2006 date on Google Earth shows it as the same as the Google Maps satellite image.

http://tinyurl.com/czytm9

Are they currently fixing this roof? According to the 2002 Google Earth image, it looks like the rectangular hole on the lower right corner of the roof was cut on purpose. I'm guessing it was cut on purpose because it is so perfectly rectangular. Seems like when roofs form holes on accident they don't form in perfect rectangles. The 2002 image shows only that large rectangular hole, so the further damage must be since 2002. The further damage seems to have occurred mostly since June 2006.

The Live Maps image appears most recent to me. Is this building in danger?

Thanks.

stlbaseball · PostApr 29, 2009#1892009-04-29T18:28+00:00

The building with the roof damage is actually Cupples #7. The building in question for financing is Cupples #9 which is the closest buidling to Busch Stadium. Building 9 does not have any roof damage.

stlcardsblues1989 · PostApr 29, 2009#1902009-04-29T20:04+00:00

I read earlier in this thread that they will try to save Ballpark Lofts #7. I hope they can save it. Buildings with worse damage than this have been fixed, right? I realize credit is hard to come by right now, but it sounds like McGowan will do whatever he can to fix it.

I'm a bit worried, though.

jakektu · PostMay 04, 2009#1912009-05-04T12:43+00:00

Moorlander wrote:McGowan loses tenant at stalled Cupples project

Adamson has canceled plans to move its 53 employees there from Clayton, and the advertising firm is scouting for space elsewhere downtown.

In an announcement with advertising firm Osborn & Barr a year ago, Adamson signed a lease to occupy 13,000 square feet starting Jan. 1, 2009. But McGowan, principal of Blue Urban, has failed to secure financing for redevelopment of the building at 914 Spruce St., dubbed Cupples 9.

http://stlouis.bizjournals.com/stlouis/ ... tory7.html

It appears that Osborn & Barr chose to move into the already completed Cupples building to the West. They have a large new banner sign on the building.

the central scrutinizer · PostMay 04, 2009#1922009-05-04T21:17+00:00

JakeKTU wrote:
Moorlander wrote:McGowan loses tenant at stalled Cupples project

Adamson has canceled plans to move its 53 employees there from Clayton, and the advertising firm is scouting for space elsewhere downtown.

In an announcement with advertising firm Osborn & Barr a year ago, Adamson signed a lease to occupy 13,000 square feet starting Jan. 1, 2009. But McGowan, principal of Blue Urban, has failed to secure financing for redevelopment of the building at 914 Spruce St., dubbed Cupples 9.

http://stlouis.bizjournals.com/stlouis/ ... tory7.html

It appears that Osborn & Barr chose to move into the already completed Cupples building to the West. They have a large new banner sign on the building.

Six of one, half dozen of the other?

tge-atw · PostAug 13, 2009#1932009-08-13T15:40+00:00

If it is indeed Cupples 7 that has roof damage, I think it is time to re-frame the discussion. Cupples 7 (the building at 11th and Clark, designed in 1907 by Eames and Young and listed in the National Register of Historic Places) has graduated from having roof damage to having no roof to speak of. The disgraceful treatment of this building should not be tolerated. Shame on the owners of Ballpark Lofts 111 LLC, they have let this building go so far that it is now in serious danger of becoming unstable (if it is not there already) thus hastening its replacement with yet another surface parking lot for years to come. ***** ridiculous.

stlcardsblues1989 · PostAug 13, 2009#1942009-08-13T20:37+00:00

Is it 11th and Clark or 11th and Spruce?

This is from April 2008:

Another building, located at 11th and Spruce, remains undeveloped.

http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stor ... tory1.html

Undeveloped or neglected?

tge-atw · PostAug 13, 2009#1952009-08-13T20:53+00:00

Spruce, my fault.

stlcardsblues1989 · PostAug 13, 2009#1962009-08-13T21:07+00:00

I doubt it gets read, but I used the "Contact us" button at Blueurban.com and sent this in:

I appreciate very much what your firm has done to develop the Cupples Station Lofts. St. Louisans really appreciate all of your work.

That said, I am concerned about Cupples Station Number 7 (I think it is) at 11th and Spruce. An article in the St. Louis Business Journal said that that building remains undeveloped. But I'm confused about your plans? Do you plan to develop it later or are you going to demolish it?

The reason I ask, is that bing.com's Bird's eye view http://tinyurl.com/pnj5wl shows much damage to the roof of Cupples Station number 7. I have also been told the roof damage has increased since that picture was taken.

I realize times are hard economically, but is anything going to be done about this roof? How can you develop it later when you do nothing to repair it?

I can see that you are a preservationist. I also understand that you are a businessman. I know you have your bottom line to look after. But PLEASE don't let this building fall to the wrecking ball. I'm not saying you should redevelop it right now. Money is tight in this country. But please at least try to stabilize, if it can be stabilized.

Thank you.

I don't know if it will do any good, but I emailed Mayor Slay as well:

Cupples Station number 7, which is located at 11th and Spruce, can be seen in this image:

http://tinyurl.com/pnj5wl

As you can see, the roof damage is extensive. I read here: http://www.urbanstl.com/viewtopic.php?p=161006#161006 that the roof damage is getting worse.

Please, no one wants to see this building fall due to instability. I realize that the owners of this building are renovating other Cupples Stations. Everyone greatly appreciates that, but I hope that they know the danger that this building appears to be in. I know the economy is poor, but I wish they would repair the roof and at least try to stabilize the building. We don't need another empty concrete lot Downtown, do we?

I was just wondering if Mr. Slay knew about this building and the state is in, and if he knows what is going to be done about it. None of us want to see this building demolished.

Thank you. God Bless.

tge-atw · PostAug 14, 2009#1972009-08-14T16:05+00:00

Nice, maybe they will hear you.

dredger · PostAug 14, 2009#1982009-08-14T21:46+00:00

It won't matter if McGowan hears you or not if he doesn't have any cash to make repairs. I can't speak to his financials or his credit worthiness. But, the hard reality of business is no one gives away cash nor does businesses last very long if they don't have a return on expenditures.

Engineering News Record reported that non-residential construction was off 41% this quarter from last year and everybody is looking for things to drop further. What would help is a quicker process out of HUD. I understand that a number of stalled downtown projects are seeking HUD commercial loans.

framer · PostAug 15, 2009#1992009-08-15T02:41+00:00

Maybe it's "demolition by neglect" to clear the way for the future McGowan Tower.

No, not likely. Just a random thought.

stlcardsblues1989 · PostSep 04, 2009#2002009-09-04T04:20+00:00

Got an email back from mayorslay.com a couple weeks ago. I'm guessing the sarcasm means they've been asked before.

Thanks for your note. The City is aware of the issue. The developer is struggling. If you have a stray $3-$4 million, he would certainly be interested.

Ballpark Lofts I, II, and III - Cupples Sta. Bldgs. 7, 8, 9

Choose Display Mode