urbanSTL

Gary Kreie wrote:I agree with you. But there is some skepticism because of the fall-off in excitement and decline of other downtown projects that should have succeeded. I'm a little concerned that Cordish didn't recognize the need for significant housing as part of Ballpark Village. Today's paper says the Mayor had to negotiate to guarantee that a significant portion of the development would be residential. Cordish wanted to keep it flexible.

Intense, closed-door talks led to deal

By Jake Wagman

ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH

10/29/2006



Just as Cardinals ace Chris Carpenter was beginning his World Series masterpiece last week, developer David Cordish and his son slipped into the owner's box at Busch Stadium.



The pair, both from Baltimore, purchased matching Cardinals jackets and shared their good news with the team's controlling family, the DeWitts.



Earlier that Tuesday evening, the mayor's office agreed to back more than $100 million in public funds for Ballpark Village, the Cardinals off-the-field endeavor that is even more expensive than the stadium itself.



The development, which has existed for years only on paper, had taken an important step forward.



"This was the joining of two family businesses," David Cordish said Friday at the official announcement of the deal at Cordish's office in a downtown office tower overlooking Busch Stadium.



Just as the Cardinals' thrilling postseason was climaxing, 10 months of sometimes intense, closed-door negotiations on



Ballpark Village came to an end.



On one side of the talks were officials from the Cordish Co., which has built its reputation developing primarily retail, office and entertainment projects in urban areas. The firm has formed a partnership with the Cardinals, giving the team a slice of the profits in exchange for rights to develop the land, six prime blocks next to the new Busch.



Across the table were representatives of Mayor Francis Slay, who wanted to add a lasting landmark to his rebounding downtown but was wary that too generous a tax subsidy might make the project impossible to sell to the public.



Negotiations were tough all around, both sides say. As recently as three weeks ago, the parties nearly left the deal on the table.



"There were days that, in the back of our minds, we thought there was a 50-50 chance" of reaching an agreement, said Jeff Rainford, Slay's chief of staff.



Documents generated by the negotiations, obtained by the Post-Dispatch through a public records request, suggest that the lengthy talks held behind closed doors were cordial, yet filled with moments of frustration for both parties. Among the tension points: the amount of the tax incentives, the commitment to residential units as part of the project and the number of parking spaces.



Though the city wanted to make sure condominiums were part of Ballpark Village, documents suggest that Cordish wanted more flexibility to respond to market conditions.



In one e-mail last month, Deputy Mayor Barbara Geisman recalled having to listen to Blake Cordish, the firm's vice president, "opine yesterday about what a horrible deal the residential was."



Later in the same e-mail, Geisman wondered what the city would have to contribute for the developer to build in real life what's depicted on the elaborate scale model of Ballpark Village.



"We asked Blake point blank the following question: If we deliver $115 million, would he build what was on the ritzy model?" Geisman wrote to an outside lawyer and a broker at Stifel Nicolaus who was working with the city. "His answer was an unequivocal yes (for now, anyway)."



The Cardinals have long maintained that residential units would be part of Ballpark Village, saying the area will become a downtown "neighborhood."



Yet in a "Confidential Memorandum" from the Cardinals front office and Cordish executives to Slay, the team and its developer expressed doubts about the demand for new high-rise condos. "Precisely defining an emerging market will be an ongoing challenge," the memo said.



Citing conversations with a "major new office tenant," Cordish asked for flexibility to use the available space — "and subsequently attached subsidies" — for either residential, office or retail tenants.



The residential component — 250 condos — was kept in the agreement with Slay, who has made bringing more residents downtown a key goal of his administration.

matguy70 wrote:[quote ... downtown is not the same place as it was just 2 years ago. To the south you have a revitalized and new Soulard, Lafayette Square and Compton Heights. To the west you have the new West Downtown Loft district, SLU / Midtown and the Central West End. Not to mention the thousands of new residents downtown and new construction / rehabs coming online in the next 6-12 months. Downtown is greatly accessible too. Metro makes downtown a premier and easy destination without the headache of driving or parking - much less to the younger generation and college students. With Metro opening the Shrewsbury Line alone - we are seeing an entire new flock of transit passengers traveling to / from downtown. Especially connecting Washington University to the city lifestyle and destinations.

dweebe wrote:

migueltejada wrote:I wonder what the numbers are on the overall economic impact of this project. I suspect that unless there's a large residential component to the BPV, the money spent there will be nothing more than a redistribution of wealth. I suspect actually that without a big residential component, the BPV will actually harm bars and restaurants in Soulard, Lacledes Landing, Washington Ave, and South City (maybe even ted drewes), as people opt to spend money closer to the stadium and not make the trek to these other locations (of course, with the likely outrageous rents the retail tenants will have to pay, they'll be pricing themselves out of many potential customers).



Of course, I'm a huge fan of the BPV, though I'd prefer there to not be a green park inside of it, but rather a brick paved or otherwise 'concrete' plaza. I think the park really looks silly inside there.



Winter will of course be the biggest challenge year in and year out to the BPV, as the cards don't play, it's not that close to Kiel/Savis/Scottrade/to be named later or the Dome (compared to the Landing), and general tourism drops like a rock in winter. I think that without a large residential component, this will not be able to sustain itself at an 80-90% retail occupancy rate beyond the first 5 years after opening.

So what would you propose to make things better? Would you prefer to leave it an empty lot?



You say you're a big fan of the BPV but sound like you think it might fail or be in big trouble within 5 years.