Ballpark Village Towers and Mixed Use Project

newstl2020 · PostOct 30, 2007#26012007-10-30T04:43+00:00

The crescent sure doesn't seem like it's having too many problems filling up its retail portion. In response to above, I highly doubt that all that many people are "spectating" in realty properties in downtown St. Louis...we aren't exactly that type of a market yet. Corporations have probably bought a grand total of zero lofts/condos in downtown, as there aren't really any notable buildings going up, and most have been rehabs. You seriously think that people are buying 2nd/3rd residences in downtown Stl to vacation? Sorry, doubt that is going on either. Use your head! I'm waiting patiently for the inevitable day when these scenarios are possible, but right now, I frankly don't think this is the case. There IS a viable market for urban living, and people are beggining to be able to exercise this residential option in St. Louis, which is a great thing. I don't deny that some of the residences in BPV would be snatched up by corporations, or some other tower of note (If proposed, say an 800 foot residential building with the best views within 300 miles in any direction), but as of right now I don't think downtown sale figures are being diluted at all.

Edit: And for those complaining about jobs shuffling from Clayton to Downtown, please remember that Stl isn't simple moving jobs, as Montgomery Bank is in the process of moving its world headquarters to a nice new 30 story building in Clayton. Relax guys, we are gaining jobs, slowly, which is always the case at first. *Crossing fingers for hitting the tipping point where we go from slow to moderate and then from moderate to EXPLOSION*

matt drops the h · PostOct 30, 2007#26022007-10-30T05:04+00:00

migueltejada wrote:
And of course, we've really missed the big picture, in that there is ZERO linking this theoretical BPV village to other "neighborhoods" in downtown or elsewhere St. Louis. There's nothing of interest along Broadway - zip zero zilch to keep a pedestrian to wander up it towards the landing or wash ave - same goes for 8th & 10th. There's a little along 6th & 7th, but that ends at Olive. There's hardly any street level retail presence to maintain visual interest (and safety!) between these areas. That has to come before the residential, or all you'll get is ANOTHER isolated district.

I, as well as others, have talked of the need to expand "Ballpark Village" to include adjacent blocks. But you're right--the vast majority of downtown is so unformatted for interesting urban uses that it will continue to defy description as a neighborhood for decades, short of aggressive infill construction or another urban renewal program.

jmedwick · PostOct 30, 2007#26032007-10-30T13:08+00:00

I, as well as others, have talked of the need to expand "Ballpark Village" to include adjacent blocks.

Very much common ground here. Regardless of office or residential, unless the BPV grows beyond the six small blocks owned by the Cards, the BPV will likely not be a long term success.

As for questions about downtown residential.

1. My fear regarding cooperate purchasers comes from my understanding that in the past many of the units in the Mansion House Apartments were owned by cooperations for entertaining clients and for housing extended stay staff. The Arch views along with the balconies made such units ideal for such uses and it seems reasonable to see major corporations seeking to do the same with BPV units.

2.

You seriously think that people are buying 2nd/3rd residences in downtown Stl to vacation? Sorry, doubt that is going on either.

Can't say for sure that it is happening in downtown St. Louis yet, but it sure is happening in downtown St. Paul.

The well-to-do increasingly forgo cabins for vacation homes in downtown St. Paul

Hailing from small towns, they find themselves enamored of everything urban.

BY LAURA YUEN

Pioneer Press

Article Last Updated: 10/29/2007 07:55:23 AM CDT

By the time Bill Smitten sold a third St. Paul condo to a Mayo Clinic physician, he knew he was onto something good.

"We were like, 'God, another doctor from Rochester,' " said the listing agent of the restored Lowry Building.

These aren't ordinary buyers. They continue to live in Rochester but occasionally retreat to downtown St. Paul for big-city getaways.

When it seems like most Minnesotans are sprinting toward their lakeside cabins on Friday afternoons, a handful of well-to-do residents outside the Twin Cities are trekking to St. Paul to spend weekends at their "urban cabins."

"We are so not cabin people. We can't even keep up with the yard we own," said Bonnie McGoon, of Rochester. "We wanted a place where we could truly escape."

McGoon and her cardiologist husband bought their Lowry condo last year. Weekend warriors from as far away as California and Texas have purchased 22 of the building's 124 occupied units. Others are scattered across downtown.

There is no way to count the number of downtown residents who consider St. Paul condominiums their second homes, but the trend - albeit small - continues during the current housing slump.

"I wouldn't call it an emerging demographic, but it's an interesting piece of the market puzzle," said Bud Kleppe, a downtown real estate agent.

Hailing from rural areas or sleepy towns, they head to St. Paul craving culture, coffee shops, hockey games, museums and art galleries.

Go ahead and giggle.

St. Paul - an urban destination?

Yes, but they're coming from places like Sioux City, Iowa.

Kris Posey and her husband, Tom, both 54, purchased a Lowry unit two years ago. Smitten with their city lifestyles, they recently decided to move into their unit permanently.

From the Lowry, they walk everywhere: the Mississippi River, the restaurants on West Seventh Street, the shops on Cathedral Hill, the single-ticket line at the Ordway. They refer to Pazzaluna restaurant downstairs as their finished basement.

metzgda · PostOct 30, 2007#26042007-10-30T13:40+00:00

SoulardD wrote:^It's funny how people in St. Louis just can't seem to fathom that people might actually want to have their primary residence be in a large building in the city. It's like these people have never been to cities with large successful residential populations downtown. They think that only corporations, speculators, people who'll use them as second residences, etc. will ever be interested in buying residential downtown. The fact that this living option thrives in cities all over the country seems to be lost on St. Louisans.

This project needs residential. The only thing that will keep an area continuously busy is when many people live there. The BV would never be empty because the people would never GO home, they would BE home. I'll admit that I don't know what the market studies say about the demand for downtown residential, but I can't imagine that with Skyhouse and Roberts' towers going up that it is in terrible shape. Even if it were less than stellar, the one project that could draw St. Louisans downtown would be the chance to live within spitting distance of the stadium. One thing is for sure, if you don't build it, they won't come.

I want to second you SoulardD. Moving to Chicago was the best thing that has ever happened to me and has made my appreciation of urban living rise tenfold. I can't want to move back to STL and inject my newfound urban ideals on those in STL. I've found that many people from STL simply haven't traveled enough or lived in an urban community and therefore assume that no one else would want to. Look at "trendy" US cities - NYC, Chicago, Seattle, New Orleans, Boston, San Diego. All of these cities have thriving urban areas - urban areas draw young adults who are willing to live in these high-rises and urban lofts to be near streetlife and nightlife.

Part of the reason why we are growing slowly and always "average" at everything is because many of these "trendy" living options weren't available. Now look at the loft revival and new construction coming - it's making a difference because new companies are moving downtown and outside investors are willing to take urban-building chances. Young adults and retirees are moving downtown, and suddenly STL is looking a little less "average" and a little more "trendy" to outsiders.

Regardless if some of the units in ballpark village are occupied by corporations and vacationers, a substantial portion of the units will be occupied by people as their primary residence. This will increase street-life and will help support the retail portion of BPV. The most important aspect of BPV is for them to make it integrate into the existing street grid of downtown so it is not an isolated entertainment district. Additionally, if the units in BPV fill up quickly (due to corporations and vacationers buying), it only increases the possibility of more new residential construction in and around the ballpark.

hugh ferriss · PostOct 30, 2007#26052007-10-30T15:10+00:00

newstl2020 wrote:In response to above, I highly doubt that all that many people are "spectating" in realty properties in downtown St. Louis...we aren't exactly that type of a market yet.

They're certainly speculating in the CWE - over a fifth of the units in the Park East Tower went back on the market as soon as the building officially opened, and a significant portion of the remainder are expected to be offered for sale within the first year. It would be surprising if similar activity didn't occur in the various high-rises planned for downtown.

newstl2020 wrote:Corporations have probably bought a grand total of zero lofts/condos in downtown, as there aren't really any notable buildings going up, and most have been rehabs.

The lofts and BPV condos are aimed at two distinct markets. I wouldn't expect corporations to buy into the lofts, but I can easily see them snapping up most of the units in prestige high-rises with desirable views.

newstl2020 wrote:You seriously think that people are buying 2nd/3rd residences in downtown Stl to vacation? Sorry, doubt that is going on either.

They're not necessarily buying them as vacation homes, but they are certainly buying units as second residences. When the Edison condos first opened, it was reported that the majority had been bought by lawyers and businessmen who worked in offices downtown but owned houses in West County or beyond. Having a downtown condo enabled them to stay there overnight during the week and avoid having to make a long commute after working late. While I believe the majority of loft conversions along Washington are the primary residences of the owners, there's definitely a market for secondary residences downtown.

metzga wrote:urban areas draw young adults who are willing to live in these high-rises and urban lofts to be near streetlife and nightlife.

They certainly do if they are affordable, but it sounds like most of the planned high-rises in St. Louis are going to be very expensive. If units cost in excess of $400,000, are there really enough young adults earning over $150,000/year to fill them?

newstl2020 · PostOct 30, 2007#26062007-10-30T15:56+00:00

newstl2020 wrote:

"Corporations have probably bought a grand total of zero lofts/condos in downtown, as there aren't really any notable buildings going up, and most have been rehabs.

The lofts and BPV condos are aimed at two distinct markets. I wouldn't expect corporations to buy into the lofts, but I can easily see them snapping up most of the units in prestige high-rises with desirable views"

I don't deny that some of the residences in BPV would be snatched up by corporations, or some other tower of note (If proposed, say an 800 foot residential building with the best views within 300 miles in any direction)

Acknowledged that.

"newstl2020 wrote:

In response to above, I highly doubt that all that many people are "spectating" in realty properties in downtown St. Louis...we aren't exactly that type of a market yet.

They're certainly speculating in the CWE - over a fifth of the units in the Park East Tower went back on the market as soon as the building officially opened, and a significant portion of the remainder are expected to be offered for sale within the first year. It would be surprising if similar activity didn't occur in the various high-rises planned for downtown."

I'm speaking in current tense, and also about downtown and not the CWE, two different markets.

"newstl2020 wrote:

You seriously think that people are buying 2nd/3rd residences in downtown Stl to vacation? Sorry, doubt that is going on either.

They're not necessarily buying them as vacation homes, but they are certainly buying units as second residences. When the Edison condos first opened, it was reported that the majority had been bought by lawyers and businessmen who worked in offices downtown but owned houses in West County or beyond. Having a downtown condo enabled them to stay there overnight during the week and avoid having to make a long commute after working late. While I believe the majority of loft conversions along Washington are the primary residences of the owners, there's definitely a market for secondary residences downtown. "

So they are there Monday through Thursday but not Friday-Sunday? I personally am not exactly put off by this. While it is preferable to have people there 24/7, this is never completely the case. I'm allright with this, as it is something that happens in any major city, and there is always a disproportionate influx of people downtown over the weekend anyway. I would still argue that downtown residential figures are still not being diluted when this is taken into account, as they are still downtown the majority of the time.

metzgda · PostOct 30, 2007#26072007-10-30T17:20+00:00

Hugh Ferriss wrote:
metzga wrote:urban areas draw young adults who are willing to live in these high-rises and urban lofts to be near streetlife and nightlife.

They certainly do if they are affordable, but it sounds like most of the planned high-rises in St. Louis are going to be very expensive. If units cost in excess of $400,000, are there really enough young adults earning over $150,000/year to fill them?

You'd be surprised. I'd say second behind retirees would be young adults in terms of income for purchasing these units. If you have two young professionals buying a place together (either married, or partners) - it's not that difficult to earn over $150,000/year. I'm amazed by the shear number of people I know in Chicago that own expensive (+ $500k) condos. Now I realize STL is not Chicago in terms of # of people earning that income, but the supply of luxury condos in STL is a fraction of a % compared to the supply of luxury condo units in Chicago.

migueltejada · PostOct 30, 2007#26082007-10-30T21:56+00:00

My point was for corporations to buy these things - not investors. Investment properties usually have these things called tennants in them, cause mortgages are usually pretty freakin expensive.

And to all those people that think living in those high rises are so great - there's a difference between dense urban living and living over a mosh pit. Do people live in Times Square? Not to my knowledge (though I have been known to be wrong).

Even in Melbourne, a much denser and more urban environment than St. Louis will probably ever be again, the majority of the young people live off and behind the activity areas. Sure, there's some shop top housing, but the majority of the residential is BEHIND, not on top or within. That's because people like to go home to get away from the noise and hustle/bustle of the "action". In the downtown, where a large proportion of new housing is being built, and we're talking 20+story residential, its being built away from the bars/clubs areas (though away in this case is like 2 blocks, but its far enough).

Additionally, now that there's more residents moving into the downtown, theres a bigger push to limit the hours of places that sell liquor (aka BARS) because people don't want to live around that type of behavior and the resulting crime that comes with drunk people. Same thing in Downtown Champaign, ILL as well - I knew a guy who moved in to a shop top apt, and 3 months later he was b*tching about the noise and vandalism from the nearby bar. You may argue that he should have known better, but I argue that its just the nature of people.

Anyone else notice how the areas most popular neighborhoods have pocket bars/clubs, and not full blown entertainment districts? Anyone else wonder if there's a reason for that?

moorlander · PostOct 30, 2007#26092007-10-30T23:05+00:00

Alot of people would stop coming DT if they weren't open till 3am...

anniewarbucks · PostNov 06, 2007#26102007-11-06T00:26+00:00

I was in St Louis a number of years ago and attended a Cards game and sat close to where the Left field bleachers are now in Bush III when they were in fact the right field bleachers in Bush II. it shocked me to find out that Bush II was gone. I Just joined this forum a couple of days ago and am a active member of KC Rag. I hate seeing the huge hole where that great stadium once stood I would love to see something put in its place.

Expat · PostNov 06, 2007#26112007-11-06T01:39+00:00

Welcome Annie! Thanks for checking in with STL. Glad to have you.

mattonarsenal · PostNov 08, 2007#26122007-11-08T03:03+00:00

I just got back from a business trip to KC and had the opportunity to take a bunch of pictures of Cordish's Power and Light District in progress. Thought this might give us some idea of what to expect here.

Here is the Flickr slideshow with the rest of the photos.

afftonguy78 · PostNov 08, 2007#26132007-11-08T03:11+00:00

Nice pics. Now that we have our own corporate headquarters that will be located in the BPV I hope that it takes off like a bolt next year. I am of course not really expecting for anything to happen this year. I just really wish this would start. I hope that the Cardinals and Cordish also put cams up to watch the progress.

jlblues · PostNov 08, 2007#26142007-11-08T04:12+00:00

I really like the black-framed glass box (retail space?) and the AMC (Empire) Theatre. The Sprint Center and the H&R Block building look great too, everything else...well, meh.

There are more construction photos and lots of renderings on the Power & Light District website. It doesn't look like they have started construction on any of the residential buildings yet, correct?

Looks like they have quite a few upscale retail tenants on board. Would be nice if Ballpark Village landed one of these.

moorlander · PostNov 09, 2007#26152007-11-09T14:50+00:00

Field of Dreams and Promises

Can Busch Stadium be a catalyst for success of Ballpark Village, surrounding area?; A look at track records in Denver, San Diego, Baltimore

The key, according to people involved in ballpark redevelopments elsewhere, is securing community buy-in and establishing a sense of place. Several interviewed agree the best recipe for success is a mixed-use neighborhood that offers more than a glorified shopping mall and food court. The six square blocks of Ballpark Village must embrace a uniquely St. Louis character all summer long and offer reasons to visit during the offseason too.

they go on in detail to discuss the success of areas in Denver, San Diego, and Baltimore.

threeonefour · PostNov 09, 2007#26162007-11-09T16:30+00:00

I noticed the caption underneath the rendering says the groundbreaking is expected to happen in the next few weeks.

God, what I wouldn't give to see a definite date and some action on this site! I don't think I've ever been this antsy about a new development!

phoaddict · PostNov 09, 2007#26172007-11-09T17:36+00:00

metzgda wrote:
SoulardD wrote:^It's funny how people in St. Louis just can't seem to fathom that people might actually want to have their primary residence be in a large building in the city. It's like these people have never been to cities with large successful residential populations downtown. .

I third you on that. I really feel that a lot of st. louisans simply dont travel to other large successful cities. I'm so glad I moved to Chicago, and it feels great to be with people in a city where we can marvel at all the amazing opportunities to live an urban lifestyle. It's trendy to live an urban lifestyle and so many young people now are seeking cities that offer it.

wheelscomp · PostNov 09, 2007#26182007-11-09T17:41+00:00

ThreeOneFour wrote:I noticed the caption underneath the rendering says the groundbreaking is expected to happen in the next few weeks.

Ironically, the rendering in the picture is an old one too.

newstl2020 · PostNov 09, 2007#26192007-11-09T20:52+00:00

SPEAKING of renderings...it's about damn time we get an updated one, don't you think?

wheelscomp · PostNov 09, 2007#26202007-11-09T22:37+00:00

Not really.

soulardd · PostNov 09, 2007#26212007-11-09T23:22+00:00

^I think they should commence work on the life sized, 3-D 'model/rendering' that is constructed of the exact same materials and houses the exact same residential, commercial, retail, etc. on the exact BV site. Then we'll get a good idea of how this thing will look.

hollyhiller · PostNov 10, 2007#26222007-11-10T04:30+00:00

ThreeOneFour wrote:I noticed the caption underneath the rendering says the groundbreaking is expected to happen in the next few weeks.

God, what I wouldn't give to see a definite date and some action on this site! I don't think I've ever been this antsy about a new development!

Are you saying groundbreaking at BPV is supposed to be in a few weeks?

threeonefour · PostNov 11, 2007#26232007-11-11T22:33+00:00

hollyhiller wrote:
ThreeOneFour wrote:I noticed the caption underneath the rendering says the groundbreaking is expected to happen in the next few weeks.

God, what I wouldn't give to see a definite date and some action on this site! I don't think I've ever been this antsy about a new development!

Are you saying groundbreaking at BPV is supposed to be in a few weeks?

Oh, no, I'm no expert prognosticator, especially when it comes to this particular development. I'm just going by the caption I saw underneath a picture of a rendering that was featured in Friday's edition of the STL Business Journal.

I guess they'll break ground sooner or later, but I get the feeling my son will enroll in college first. (He's 4 now, BTW.)

moorlander · PostNov 11, 2007#26242007-11-11T22:39+00:00

I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't break ground until a year from now.

threeonefour · PostNov 11, 2007#26252007-11-11T22:43+00:00

^ Yeah, I'm just not getting a sense of urgency from the parties involved. Yes, they say they'll have the first phase done by the '09 All-Star Game, but I see a lot more urgency from the media and the general public than I do from the Cardinals or Cordish. I'm sure they have good reasons, but it doesn't mean I have to like it.

Maybe a cautious approach is better, but I know I'm bloody sick of looking at that crater every time I pass Busch Stadium.

Ballpark Village Towers and Mixed Use Project

Choose Display Mode