90
New MemberNew Member
90

PostApr 01, 2008#3301

phoaddict wrote:I think one big challenge is the balance of creating a locale that would appeal to fun seeking cardinal fans after a ball game as well as a place that's good enough to attract people on off seasons and non cardinal game days.


That has always been my initial thought. My fear was that the residential would be amassed by corporates who want a space for pre/post game entertainment and beer storage, rather than residents who would truly use the space and make it their home. If the retail aspect wasn't useful to the daily downtown resident, then we'd be left with Union Station V.2. Ideally the dead space that exists between Soulard and the stadium was more like Soulard, to serve as the glue to bond the two areas and give the stadium a neighborhood feel.

1,000
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,000

PostApr 01, 2008#3302

bonwich wrote:


And this is precisely the point. The whole BPV thing is an artificial construct -- "let's plan a whole district!" -- instead of simply building the damned stadium and letting the surrounding area "naturally evolve." Except that would have blown the whole flim-flam about a "world class development" that the stadium would spur (as long as you subsidize the crap out of it).


I say a shantytown flea market like I went to in the Ukraine would be cool.

2,190
Life MemberLife Member
2,190

PostApr 01, 2008#3303

lukethedrifter wrote:
bonwich wrote:


And this is precisely the point. The whole BPV thing is an artificial construct -- "let's plan a whole district!" -- instead of simply building the damned stadium and letting the surrounding area "naturally evolve." Except that would have blown the whole flim-flam about a "world class development" that the stadium would spur (as long as you subsidize the crap out of it).


I say a shantytown flea market like I went to in the Ukraine would be cool.


My grandfather was from a village near L'viv. Perhaps some of my distant cousins were trying to hustle you. 8)

1,000
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,000

PostApr 01, 2008#3304

bonwich wrote:
lukethedrifter wrote:
bonwich wrote:


And this is precisely the point. The whole BPV thing is an artificial construct -- "let's plan a whole district!" -- instead of simply building the damned stadium and letting the surrounding area "naturally evolve." Except that would have blown the whole flim-flam about a "world class development" that the stadium would spur (as long as you subsidize the crap out of it).


I say a shantytown flea market like I went to in the Ukraine would be cool.


My grandfather was from a village near L'viv. Perhaps some of my distant cousins were trying to hustle you. 8)


Not so much there. But the bazaar in Istanbul was crazy.





Actually a Grand Bazaar would be cool. And guys selling Mississippi River catfish sandwiches right off a boat, too.

308
Full MemberFull Member
308

PostApr 02, 2008#3305

Billkn, i fear too that there will be UnionStation V.2., especially if there isn't anything for day time crowds...



We already have soulard market...that's as big of an outdoors market we can get...plus on the loop as well.



I'm thinking things like 7eleven, wallgreens, bars, movie theater, clubs, small int'l restaurants... I like the video on cordish's site of what they have in mind....if only it would like that !

2,831
Life MemberLife Member
2,831

PostApr 02, 2008#3306

As much as we would all like to build and design BPV... or rebuild Chinatown (Bill) or yadda yadda yadda



well... we aren't. So, really can we save some bandwith.



I am sure there will be plenty enough discussion that is really newsworthy about this project to fill up this thread than speculations and wish-lists.





8)

5,631
Life MemberLife Member
5,631

PostApr 02, 2008#3307

bonwich wrote:
lukethedrifter wrote:
bonwich wrote:


And this is precisely the point. The whole BPV thing is an artificial construct -- "let's plan a whole district!" -- instead of simply building the damned stadium and letting the surrounding area "naturally evolve." Except that would have blown the whole flim-flam about a "world class development" that the stadium would spur (as long as you subsidize the crap out of it).


I say a shantytown flea market like I went to in the Ukraine would be cool.


My grandfather was from a village near L'viv. Perhaps some of my distant cousins were trying to hustle you. 8)
My girlfriend of two and half years in college was from L'viv. I miss her.



As for BPV, I'll be content if they deal with the unsightly mess and build something useful, modular and sustainable.

12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostApr 02, 2008#3308

awrhodes wrote: Was anyone on here even all that excited about the architectural merits of a bland rectangular tower being erected on what is/was supposed to be a residential-entertainment district?


Yes.



Actually, it was going to be a modern, curvilinear, glass tower, featuring much more dramatic architecture than what we're used to seeing around here. It would have occupied only two of the roughly six major building sites in the Village, leaving plenty of room for condo towers with all of the shopping/entertainment areas on the lower levels.



Frankly, it seems to me that Ballpark Village is more suitable for office space, rather than residential. Sure, condos overlooking the field sounds great, but there's really no kind of residential infrastructure in that part of Downtown. Even with the loss of Centenne, I predict that we'll see a big interest in office space in BV. Remember, they've already got a major law firm interested in moving their headquarters there (a fact that seems to have been lost in all of the Centenne hubbub).

1,517
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,517

PostApr 02, 2008#3309

^



I respectfully disagree Framer. The language of single-use developments should be stricken from development vocabulary. If this site is not yet suitable for residential (and thus a mixed use approach), development should not happen yet.



Our downtown is slow and sleepy enough. We don't need to add another 9-5 area to downtown. Plus, with Cupples Station redevelopment/Ballpark Lofts/Pointe 400, this area has a residential component to build off of (meaning, new residents need services; the more dense collection of residents, the more services demanded and the more efficiently they can be offered).



My feeling is that taxpayers are not going to want to subsidize another bland collection of office buildings.

752
Super MemberSuper Member
752

PostApr 02, 2008#3310

Matt Drops The H wrote:My feeling is that taxpayers are not going to want to subsidize another bland collection of office buildings.


Given the choice -- Heck yeah anyone on here would go mixed use... but we might not be able to be so picky (especially becuase there don't seem to be any relatives of Bill Gates or descendants of Bill Walton on here willing to donate to a worthy cause), and any high rise development would be better than what ever the $60 M guaranteed will get ya (You couldn't put in a 4 story garage covering 1/2 the site for $60 M).

12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostApr 02, 2008#3311

I'm not saying it should be ALL office. I agree with you, it should include office, residential, shopping, and entertainment. I just expect the development mix to lean a bit more towards office use. I'm just being realistic here.



Certainly, condos facing the ballpark should do well. But I think many of us on this forum are guilty of a bit of wishful thinking. We want massive numbers of people living downtown. But Downtown also needs good jobs for those people. If there proves to be a strong market demand for office space in BV, then they should build it.

1,517
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,517

PostApr 02, 2008#3312

Well downtown has been a business district primarily ever since the Post-War period. It bled jobs and residents alike dramatically since then. Offices won't save downtown or bolster it. We need to be asking questions like--what's the current vacancy rate for office space in downtown? in Clayton? What's the demand for Class A? Class B? Class C?



If you support a mix, we're in agreement, but I would make sure the space is adaptable to residential, or not build it at all. If there were an example of a recently built corporate tower that's amenable to residential use, I would say go ahead and develop it as offices right now.



As future stewards of whatever will be built on the site, we must be "picky". Not excessively so, but we as a public and our leaders should always be demanding what we/they think will be the best in the longterm.

8,912
Life MemberLife Member
8,912

PostApr 02, 2008#3313

Framer wrote: Even with the loss of Centenne, I predict that we'll see a big interest in office space in BV. Remember, they've already got a major law firm interested in moving their headquarters there (a fact that seems to have been lost in all of the Centenne hubbub).


David Nicklaus disagrees...





Downtown office glut could get even bigger



With Centene's decision last week to pull out of the Ballpark Village development, the counting is certain to run past the two-decade mark. Even as city officials and developers talk bravely about the likelihood that Ballpark Village eventually will contain a major office component, the downtown real-estate market faces three big challenges.



The first is a glut of office space. According to Colliers Turley Martin Tucker, 16.9 percent of Class A space downtown is vacant, versus 9.1 percent for the whole St. Louis area and 6.5 percent in red-hot Clayton. That's more than 1 million square feet of empty space — the equivalent of all of Metropolitan Square — and 1 million square feet of competition for anyone contemplating a new building.



The slowing economy, and a credit crunch that has made lenders stingier about financing real-estate projects of any sort, is the second challenge. When employers aren't hiring, they don't need new space.



The third challenge is a remarkable coincidence: Six downtown law firms, which occupy a total of 875,000 square feet, face decisions about expiring leases within the next two years. The largest firms, such as Armstrong Teasdale and Thompson Coburn, are so big that they have only two practical choices, according to leasing agent Jay Holland: Stay put or sign up for space in a new building.



"I've been doing this for 28 years, and I've never seen anything like this before," said Holland, a senior vice president at Colliers Turley Martin Tucker. "The implications of their decisions are huge. They will affect landlords and other tenants, vacancy rates and rental rates for all of downtown."



The law firms do have a third option: Clayton, where developers are promoting new high-rises and where Holland says the market is ripe for more construction. Clayton has lured big firms from downtown before, including accountants Ernst & Young in 2001 and lawyers Husch & Eppenberger in 2002.



Partly because of such losses, the downtown office market has been weak for more than a decade. The best recent year was 2006, when Holland's firm calculated net absorption at nearly 200,000 square feet. (That's the total of firms leasing new space less those moving out.)



In 2007, however, absorption was a negative 91,000 square feet. This year's numbers look soft, too, with Bank of America having recently vacated 120,000 square feet at 100 North Broadway.



Downtown does have a lot of things going for it, Holland said. A flurry of residential, retail and entertainment development should make the area more attractive to office employers, too.



So far, though, they're not flocking to downtown. Centene, by moving from suburbs to city instead of the other way around, was supposed to reverse a decades-long trend. With Centene out of the picture, things look bleak.



Ballpark Village remains the highest-profile spot for new offices, but it's not the only one. Richard Ward, a consultant with Zimmer Real Estate Services, says he's recently been looking at potential office-building sites downtown. "There are quite a few of them actually, more than I had thought," he said.





SOURCE

1,000
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,000

PostApr 02, 2008#3314

Honestly we should be realistic and just shoot for a beach. It'll be much cheaper and can be done by the All Star Game.

10K
AdministratorAdministrator
10K

PostApr 02, 2008#3315

tbspqr wrote:Given the choice -- Heck yeah anyone on here would go mixed use... but we might not be able to be so picky (especially becuase there don't seem to be any relatives of Bill Gates or descendants of Bill Walton on here...


"The Cardinal owners are HORRIBLE!"




6,775
Life MemberLife Member
6,775

PostApr 02, 2008#3316

Moorlander wrote:
Framer wrote: Even with the loss of Centenne, I predict that we'll see a big interest in office space in BV. Remember, they've already got a major law firm interested in moving their headquarters there (a fact that seems to have been lost in all of the Centenne hubbub).


David Nicklaus disagrees...





Downtown office glut could get even bigger


/Naivitista



More negativity from the Post. They should write about the new restaurant that opened on Washington. I wonder if Nicklaus even knows Washington Ave exists?



/

10K
AdministratorAdministrator
10K

PostApr 02, 2008#3317

I think the headline on that column is different than the one in the print edition I received this morning.

5,631
Life MemberLife Member
5,631

PostApr 02, 2008#3318

Nicklaus writes about facts and is academic. Can't say the same for McClellan. McClellan just thinks he's too witty for his shirt, too witty for his shirt, so witty it hurts. He's not in mensa, you know what I mean? But he'll continue to do his thing on the Post floor. Why? He's too witty for Milan, too witty for Milan, New York and Japan. Poor Billy, poor Billy cat.

2,076
Life MemberLife Member
2,076

PostApr 02, 2008#3319

Nothing wrong with what Nicklaus wrote. As for "the restaurant" that opened on Washington, what does that have to do with office space? Does the closed Dierdorf and Hart's have anything to do with office space? IMO as a downtown worker for 10 years, downtown residential and retail has lost a lot of momentum. There are still gaping holes in services that any other 'town' of 10,000+ would have been provided several times over. To blithely ignore the data and wrap the cloak of "bad journalism" around anything that doesn't paint a rosy picture doesn't seem productive to me.

6,775
Life MemberLife Member
6,775

PostApr 02, 2008#3320

bprop wrote:Nothing wrong with what Nicklaus wrote. As for "the restaurant" that opened on Washington, what does that have to do with office space? Does the closed Dierdorf and Hart's have anything to do with office space? IMO as a downtown worker for 10 years, downtown residential and retail has lost a lot of momentum. There are still gaping holes in services that any other 'town' of 10,000+ would have been provided several times over. To blithely ignore the data and wrap the cloak of "bad journalism" around anything that doesn't paint a rosy picture doesn't seem productive to me.


I agree.



But a lot of people here complain about the Post being negative when they report what is really going on. They only want super, happy, smiley stories in their paper, even if that does not reflect reality.

10K
AdministratorAdministrator
10K

PostApr 02, 2008#3321

The Central Scrutinizer wrote:I agree.



But a lot of people here complain about the Post being negative when they report what is really going on. They only want super, happy, smiley stories in their paper, even if that does not reflect reality.


The truth hurts sometimes.

8,912
Life MemberLife Member
8,912

PostApr 02, 2008#3322

^ agreed

^^True, some do feel that way tcs.



What bugs me though are the one sided stories that sensationalize the bad things in this town. We are trying to create some momentum and change the perceptions of the layman county folk and these stories take away from that. It's not difficult to see how this might frustrate people. All media outlets use this tactic so I don't really blame the PD.

4,489
Super ModeratorSuper Moderator
4,489

PostApr 02, 2008#3323

There's nothing wrong with the truth, but I think it is important to paint the whole picture as to why downtown has 1-million square feet of vacant Class A space and where it is. There are dinky buildings here and there that when added together makes up the 1-million square feet. I think that it is important to explain all of the complexities of why so much space exist.



Where is all of this 1-million square feet of Class A office space downtown? Realistically, it is not located in a single building. It is scattered between numerous buildings in downtown St. Louis. I am willing to bet that many of the Class A office buildings with space may not have enough space for a large single employer that a new building with 500,000 to 1-million square feet obviously would. And, in many instances the Class A space is older or recently has been "updated".



Clayton has been snagging firms from downtown because large new buildings have been built, which could accommodate them. Ernst and Young moved into the Plaza in Clayton because it was large enough and new. Ernst & Young and Husch & Eppenberger LLC then damn near took up the whole building, which I believe is about 307,000 square feet.



For the record, mayors of St. Louis since Bosley have been saying that downtown needs a major new Class A office building - preferably a 1-million sq. foot building to help stop the bleeding of firms to Clayton. In their efforts to stay downtown, some downtown firms have been asking for the same.

10K
AdministratorAdministrator
10K

PostApr 02, 2008#3324

^

Very true. And consider the impact that the mostly vacant but soon-to-be-redeveloped One City Centre has on the overall Class A statistics.



I got the impression that Husch actually tried to remain downtown but couldn't find enough space while E&Y just screwed downtown over.

6,775
Life MemberLife Member
6,775

PostApr 02, 2008#3325

Moorlander wrote:^ agreed

^^True, some do feel that way tcs.



What bugs me though are the one sided stories that sensationalize the bad things in this town. We are trying to create some momentum and change the perceptions of the layman county folk and these stories take away from that. It's not difficult to see how this might frustrate people. All media outlets use this tactic so I don't really blame the PD.


But it's not their job to perpetuate momentum. Their job is to report the news. And a murder downtown will get more press than a restaurant opening. It's been that way for well over 100 years.

Read more posts (1435 remaining)