I remember eating at Noodles and Company in Chesterfield in 2011 and he was there. I saw someone arguing with him at another table, and I think one person may have given him the finger.debaliviere wrote:I've grown tired of Strauss' contempt for this city and its residents.
- 1,054
I think St. Louis is being robbed. Check out this Humphreys-designed tower, One Light, for downtown Kansas City.
I'm happy for Kansas City's downtown, but in my opinion, there's no way a new residential tower and hotel can't rise at the at the Ballpark Village site now. I think the Cardinals and Cordish are screwing St. Louis. It matters not that other large-scale residential projects are planned for downtown in existing historic structures and in the Roberts tower, BPV is prime real estate in a prime location. BPV has been poorly executed in my opinion.
Sep 11, 2013, 2:54pm CDT UPDATED: Sep 11, 2013, 3:16pm CDT
Cordish: First P&L District apartment high-rise only the beginning
One Light
-25-story residential high rise
-311 units; 942 units per acre
-590 – 1,379 square foot of retail space
-2,500 square foot of retail space
![]()
![]()
More renderings
I'm happy for Kansas City's downtown, but in my opinion, there's no way a new residential tower and hotel can't rise at the at the Ballpark Village site now. I think the Cardinals and Cordish are screwing St. Louis. It matters not that other large-scale residential projects are planned for downtown in existing historic structures and in the Roberts tower, BPV is prime real estate in a prime location. BPV has been poorly executed in my opinion.
Sep 11, 2013, 2:54pm CDT UPDATED: Sep 11, 2013, 3:16pm CDT
Cordish: First P&L District apartment high-rise only the beginning
One Light
-25-story residential high rise
-311 units; 942 units per acre
-590 – 1,379 square foot of retail space
-2,500 square foot of retail space
More renderings
We're not being robbed because there's nothing preventing that development from happening in BPV.
We simply with something scaled down so that we could get started at all. There's still every reason to believe developments like that could be the next phase, and relatively soon.
We simply with something scaled down so that we could get started at all. There's still every reason to believe developments like that could be the next phase, and relatively soon.
P&L has sat without any such high rises for like 6, 7 years now.arch city wrote:I think St. Louis is being robbed. Check out this Humphreys-designed tower, One Light, for downtown Kansas City.
I'm happy for Kansas City's downtown, but in my opinion, there's no way a new residential tower and hotel can't rise at the at the Ballpark Village site now. I think the Cardinals and Cordish are screwing St. Louis. It matters not that other large-scale residential projects are planned for downtown in existing historic structures and in the Roberts tower, BPV is prime real estate in a prime location. BPV has been poorly executed in my opinion.
Sep 11, 2013, 2:54pm CDT UPDATED: Sep 11, 2013, 3:16pm CDT
Cordish: First P&L District apartment high-rise only the beginning
One Light
-25-story residential high rise
-311 units; 942 units per acre
-590 – 1,379 square foot of retail space
-2,500 square foot of retail space
More renderings
There's no reason to believe such development won't eventually come to BPV, assuming there exists a market for it.
- 8,155
KC is also getting a new downtown hotel with no tax incentives being asked for.framer wrote:I hate being jealous of Kansas City.
Well, as far as residential.....yes. However, I believe the Block Tower was a part of P&L plans. Six or seven years was too damn long. Regardless.....a residential tower should have gone up at P&L from the jump and BEFORE the recession.rawest1 wrote:P&L has sat without any such high rises for like 6, 7 years now.
There's no reason to believe such development won't eventually come to BPV, assuming there exists a market for it.
Still, for me personally, for there not to be a residential high-rise and/or hotel under construction at BPV at this time is inept planning and execution. Especially......after the problems experienced in Kansas City. The should have learned lessons from KC. In my opinion, there is demand for both a hotel and residential - especially with a couple of downtown hotels being offline at this time.
I think KC was in a better position to force the issue with Cordish because P&L was causing the city to lose money. In St. Louis, not so much.
If St. Louis had dangled more incentives and financial backing for Cordish/Cardinals........I doubt St. Louis would be in this ridiculous holding pattern.
Yep. I believe that proposed 10-story hotel is for the downtown Crossroads Arts district.roger wyoming II wrote:KC is also getting a new downtown hotel with no tax incentives being asked for.
St. Louis has more downtown hotel rooms than Kansas City.
- 8,155
^ Yup. Apparently KC is running strong for the GOP convention in '16, but the smaller number of hotel rooms is a concern.
How great would it be to have a 2016 I-70 Convetion Series in August followed by an I-70 World Series in October?
How great would it be to have a 2016 I-70 Convetion Series in August followed by an I-70 World Series in October?
^ Yup. Apparently KC is running strong for the GOP convention in '16, but the smaller number of hotel rooms is a concern.
How great would it be to have a 2016 I-70 Convetion Series in August followed by an I-70 World Series in October?
How great would it be to have a 2016 I-70 Convetion Series in August followed by an I-70 World Series in October?
My opinion...........is that St. Louis is getting robbed. Robbed of a more vibrant and visual-stimulating downtown because of the long drawn out redevelopment of this former hole in the ground - which is now a carpark.jstriebel wrote:We're not being robbed because there's nothing preventing that development from happening in BPV.
We simply with something scaled down so that we could get started at all. There's still every reason to believe developments like that could be the next phase, and relatively soon.
I trust that other phases will be built EVENTUALLY, but in my opinion, a dense urban development should be under construction in addition to what's going up.
At least something is being built, but this mirrors the Delmar Loop Trolley Company ie. bungling, lazy leadership and parties that are too slow on the delivery of their promises.
Granted there was a recession, this is taking way too long.
I wouldn't let it get you too out of joint, KC has overall fewer "urban" housing options and less downtown housing so part of it is meeting an underserved market there.arch city wrote:My opinion...........is that St. Louis is getting robbed. Robbed of a more vibrant and visual-stimulating downtown because of the long drawn out redevelopment of this former hole in the ground - which is now a carpark.jstriebel wrote:We're not being robbed because there's nothing preventing that development from happening in BPV.
We simply with something scaled down so that we could get started at all. There's still every reason to believe developments like that could be the next phase, and relatively soon.
I trust that other phases will be built EVENTUALLY, but in my opinion, a dense urban development should be under construction in addition to what's going up.
At least something is being built, but this mirrors the Delmar Loop Trolley Company ie. bungling, lazy leadership and parties that are too slow on the delivery of their promises.
Granted there was a recession, this is taking way too long.
Also KC is writing a 12 to 14 mill check a year to Cordish, on top of what ever profit they make from P&L and the other tax abatement and TIF the received on the front end - with that kind of positive cash flow Cordish kinda needs to make good on promises there, they could self finance it with kind of income.
- 2,929
Arch City: I share in your frustrations and personally am full of disgust at the glacial pace of BPV.
Same time, I must disagree with your thoughts that STL City should have provided more financing to Cordish, et.al., such as the manner that KC provided the developers.
The KC financing model included their full-faith-and-credit backing the revenue bonds released in support of the P&L District’s construction. These bonds pay the bondholders' coupons from the revenues generated from the development project itself. When the Great Recession kicked in, the City of KC was obligated to make up the difference between actual revenues of P&L and the shortfalls recognized by subpar business returns resultant from the Great Recession. Therefore, the taxpayers of KC’s constituency had to fork over the money to the investors.
In STL, the City passed on Cordish’s requests to create BPV revenue bonds backed by the full-faith-and-credit of the City of STL. Doing this put more obligation on the developers (Cordish, Cardinals) to invest their own capital into the project. Of course, doing this led to development of BPV progressing on a slower pace (we never could have expected it being barely a crawl). However, noting the near-total collapse of the financial system; the sea change in the debt markets and those for real estate investments; the macro downturns in business, personal spending, and real estate valuation; and the coffers of the City of STL remaining near stasis over these years, we must recognize that the City of STL really dodged a bullet it would have had to swallow if the City had backed Cordish BPV revenue bonds with its full-faith-and-credit.
Yes, KC is advancing at a more rapid pace in P&L’s development. But, the City of KC has literally had to pay for Cordish’s shortcomings. STL is on much firmer financial standings, comparatively, for choosing not to invest in Cordish BPV revenue bonds and instead focused City funding on BPV towards infrastructural development for later building construction. This was the most fiscally responsible thing the City could have done here.
Addendum: When considering new real estate construction in the City, we must remember that there could be a massive inflow of new residents into the City by way of the new residential projects opening soon, including: the ex-Roberts Tower, the Arcade-Wright, and the Chemical Buildings. There also are strong suggestions that there will be a new residential tower in Laclede’s Landing just north of the Eads Bridge’s Missouri terminus.
Perhaps new residential construction is being held back prudently at BPV as the developers, and their investors, consider these projects’ development and their impacts on the Downtown real estate market. I have no doubt that there will eventually be high-rise residential construction at BPV (most likely just east of what’s going up now at the corner of Clark & Broadway); my thoughts are simply that the investors & developers may just be considering when this project would lead to optimal returns on the cash they’d put into having it built.
Such consideration, however, does not take away that Cordish & their development teams have taken incredibly too long in getting done the bare minimum of their project, and the City of STL should really implement fines upon them for being this late. They took the risks of being developers, and they must be held accountable to their failed planning & assumptions which has affected our quality of life as citizens of a City with a giant hole where we were promised tall buildings full of jobs, residents, hotel guests, restaurants, and underground parking.
Same time, I must disagree with your thoughts that STL City should have provided more financing to Cordish, et.al., such as the manner that KC provided the developers.
The KC financing model included their full-faith-and-credit backing the revenue bonds released in support of the P&L District’s construction. These bonds pay the bondholders' coupons from the revenues generated from the development project itself. When the Great Recession kicked in, the City of KC was obligated to make up the difference between actual revenues of P&L and the shortfalls recognized by subpar business returns resultant from the Great Recession. Therefore, the taxpayers of KC’s constituency had to fork over the money to the investors.
In STL, the City passed on Cordish’s requests to create BPV revenue bonds backed by the full-faith-and-credit of the City of STL. Doing this put more obligation on the developers (Cordish, Cardinals) to invest their own capital into the project. Of course, doing this led to development of BPV progressing on a slower pace (we never could have expected it being barely a crawl). However, noting the near-total collapse of the financial system; the sea change in the debt markets and those for real estate investments; the macro downturns in business, personal spending, and real estate valuation; and the coffers of the City of STL remaining near stasis over these years, we must recognize that the City of STL really dodged a bullet it would have had to swallow if the City had backed Cordish BPV revenue bonds with its full-faith-and-credit.
Yes, KC is advancing at a more rapid pace in P&L’s development. But, the City of KC has literally had to pay for Cordish’s shortcomings. STL is on much firmer financial standings, comparatively, for choosing not to invest in Cordish BPV revenue bonds and instead focused City funding on BPV towards infrastructural development for later building construction. This was the most fiscally responsible thing the City could have done here.
Addendum: When considering new real estate construction in the City, we must remember that there could be a massive inflow of new residents into the City by way of the new residential projects opening soon, including: the ex-Roberts Tower, the Arcade-Wright, and the Chemical Buildings. There also are strong suggestions that there will be a new residential tower in Laclede’s Landing just north of the Eads Bridge’s Missouri terminus.
Perhaps new residential construction is being held back prudently at BPV as the developers, and their investors, consider these projects’ development and their impacts on the Downtown real estate market. I have no doubt that there will eventually be high-rise residential construction at BPV (most likely just east of what’s going up now at the corner of Clark & Broadway); my thoughts are simply that the investors & developers may just be considering when this project would lead to optimal returns on the cash they’d put into having it built.
Such consideration, however, does not take away that Cordish & their development teams have taken incredibly too long in getting done the bare minimum of their project, and the City of STL should really implement fines upon them for being this late. They took the risks of being developers, and they must be held accountable to their failed planning & assumptions which has affected our quality of life as citizens of a City with a giant hole where we were promised tall buildings full of jobs, residents, hotel guests, restaurants, and underground parking.
- 8,155
^ Too bad OPO had to change to rental as it would be nice to get a guage on the market downtown for new hi-rise condos. I do think there is a considerable market that finds that type of living more attractive than a converted loft. Anyhoo, I like the KC plan to start with this and commit to the next once signings hit a threshhold. I hope they announce the same here. I think the conditions here justify the risk of moving ahead with a first residential tower to be followed by more if the market is indeed there.
gone corporate wrote:Arch City: I share in your frustrations and personally am full of disgust at the glacial pace of BPV.
Same time, I must disagree with your thoughts that STL City should have provided more financing to Cordish, et.al., such as the manner that KC provided the developers.
Perhaps the context of that particular comment/sentence/statement wasn't clear.If St. Louis had dangled more incentives and financial backing for Cordish/Cardinals........I doubt St. Louis would be in this ridiculous holding pattern.
My point was that, in my opinion, Cordish is going slow with this project deliberately. Had Cordish received the financial backing they desired the project would be farther along. That was my point.
I don't think the city should have given away the bank at all - especially in light (no pun intended) of what happened in Kansas City.
I'm sorry, but the name of the game is usually first come, first served. This is how it is done in other regions.gone corporate wrote:Addendum: When considering new real estate construction in the City, we must remember that there could be a massive inflow of new residents into the City by way of the new residential projects opening soon, including: the ex-Roberts Tower, the Arcade-Wright, and the Chemical Buildings. There also are strong suggestions that there will be a new residential tower in Laclede’s Landing just north of the Eads Bridge’s Missouri terminus.
Perhaps new residential construction is being held back prudently at BPV as the developers, and their investors, consider these projects’ development and their impacts on the Downtown real estate market. I have no doubt that there will eventually be high-rise residential construction at BPV (most likely just east of what’s going up now at the corner of Clark & Broadway); my thoughts are simply that the investors & developers may just be considering when this project would lead to optimal returns on the cash they’d put into having it built.
Such consideration, however, does not take away that Cordish & their development teams have taken incredibly too long in getting done the bare minimum of their project, and the City of STL should really implement fines upon them for being this late. They took the risks of being developers, and they must be held accountable to their failed planning & assumptions which has affected our quality of life as citizens of a City with a giant hole where we were promised tall buildings full of jobs, residents, hotel guests, restaurants, and underground parking.
Why wouldn't I - as a developer - consider building a residential project or tower just because others are considering doing the same - especially when demand is there? Neither developer has officially cracked the ground open, but I am dilly-dallying around because some other development firm is "considering" a similar development. I am losing money by not acting faster than the other guy.
Except Chicago, Midwestern prudence is getting the Midwest's ass-kicked by other regions. I've watched how the game is played in other high-growth regions like Atlanta, Houston, Dallas and now Nashville to a certain extent. The developers don't wait - they speculate. Competition is fierce.
We keep hearing about movement on the Chemical, Roberts Tower and Arcade, but what does that have to do with BPV? Nothing. If nothing else, the BPV players should be attempting to snag those potential residents from those other potential developments that have not officially broken ground - some of which haven't even made it off paper.
I am not saying build to the extent where there's a potential housing glut, but in St. Louis' case nothing has materialized yet. Absolutely nothing. Why not turn up the competition? Be the first instead of the laggard.
Last, St. Louis is not going to fine Cordish. Phase I is already under construction - and damn near complete. With Phase I, I believe they have met their obligations to the city. I could be wrong, and I want to be wrong, but I don't think there will be an urgency to get the next phases done - unless there is community pressure.
- 10K
I see only the Roberts Tower as true competition for a residential tower at BPV. Even then, the opportunity to own/rent a unit that looks directly into Busch Stadium will significantly broaden a BPV tower's pool of perspective residents to include out-of-towners and others who may have never considered living downtown otherwise.
- 2,929
We may lament BPV not starting off with a residential office tower, which I would be very happy to hear announced. Same time, I have not heard of any other new residential construction starting in Downtown that could almost compete with what BPV could build. Best place to consider is that giant parking lot block between Fourth Street, Spruce Street, Broadway, and Poplar Street / 64-40. Or next to the Westin Hotel at the Cupples Station where the MX Tower was planned to be built. Or even on the grave of Cupples 7, where no construction whatsoever is planned, save demo of an existing building and laying down sod for another park.
If a developer can be convinced to build in any of these spots, then please, please do so, as I also think the market would respond with tenants for these prospective projects. It's too bad we're not developers with this site.
If a developer can be convinced to build in any of these spots, then please, please do so, as I also think the market would respond with tenants for these prospective projects. It's too bad we're not developers with this site.
Side news: looks like the Atlanta Braves are leaving the 16 year old Turner Field for the suburbs.
http://atlanta.braves.mlb.com/news/arti ... l&c_id=atl
This part makes me chuckle.
http://atlanta.braves.mlb.com/news/arti ... l&c_id=atl
This part makes me chuckle.
Sounds like they're implying some sort of Ballpark Village development. But if you know the Atlanta area, where they're moving to is already a traffic hellhole in a suburban wasteland of shopping malls and office parks.The Atlanta Braves organization has secured a large tract of property at the northwest intersection of I-75 and I-285 and is working with Cobb County leaders to build a new world-class Major League Baseball stadium and integrated mixed-use development. The Braves will not extend their lease at Turner Field upon its expiration at the end of 2016.
"We believe the new stadium location is easy to access while also giving our fans a first-rate game day experience in and around the ballpark and making it a 365-day-a-year destination," said Atlanta Braves President John Schuerholz.
That's pretty pathetic on Atlanta's part. Is there at least a train line that runs by there?
I've been traveling a lot in the last few years within the continental US, and have been to pretty much every major city. Atlanta is by far one of the worst as far as aesthetics and transportation. I would never want to live there, and it seems like they are just making things worse.
I've been traveling a lot in the last few years within the continental US, and have been to pretty much every major city. Atlanta is by far one of the worst as far as aesthetics and transportation. I would never want to live there, and it seems like they are just making things worse.
The MARTA doesn't go anywhere near the planned ballpark. For comparison, their plan is comparable to putting Busch Stadium where the old Chrysler plant is in Fenton.
Which brings up an interesting, if completely off topic question. I wonder if the Cardinals track how fans arrive at their games. In 2008 in one of the ads supporting Prop A, Mike Shannon said that Metrolink brings 20% of the fans to Cardinals games. That figure was restated in a 2013 article about the dedication of new public art at the Stadium Station. If they keep track of that data, it certainly would be an interesting trend to follow.
I'd say it's more like sticking Busch at the northwest corner of Manchester and 270. IIRC the area where they propose to put it has numerous shopping malls, big box retail strip centers, car dealerships and office parks around it.wabash wrote:The MARTA doesn't go anywhere near the planned ballpark. For comparison, their plan is comparable to putting Busch Stadium where the old Chrysler plant is in Fenton.
Essentially, they're putting it north of the City of Atlanta, in the area's most populous suburb, so I'd actually say the plan is more comparable to putting Busch Stadium in the O'Fallon/St. Charles area. The lack-of-mass-transit and big-box-strip-mall-office-park analogies do still apply.dweebe wrote:I'd say it's more like sticking Busch at the northwest corner of Manchester and 270. IIRC the area where they propose to put it has numerous shopping malls, big box retail strip centers, car dealerships and office parks around it.wabash wrote:The MARTA doesn't go anywhere near the planned ballpark. For comparison, their plan is comparable to putting Busch Stadium where the old Chrysler plant is in Fenton.
Fair analogy. Cobb County is very "red" like St. Charles.rawest1 wrote:Essentially, they're putting it north of the City of Atlanta, in the area's most populous suburb, so I'd actually say the plan is more comparable to putting Busch Stadium in the O'Fallon/St. Charles area. The lack-of-mass-transit and big-box-strip-mall-office-park analogies do still apply.dweebe wrote:I'd say it's more like sticking Busch at the northwest corner of Manchester and 270. IIRC the area where they propose to put it has numerous shopping malls, big box retail strip centers, car dealerships and office parks around it.wabash wrote:The MARTA doesn't go anywhere near the planned ballpark. For comparison, their plan is comparable to putting Busch Stadium where the old Chrysler plant is in Fenton.