^I don't have speakers at work. So I will be checking back for a report. But, thanks for the tip. I will check out KMOX at home.
Any update on the contents of the interview? I heard Hartman laying into ownership on Donnybrook yesterday. Brennan didn't have much to say other then it's an eyesore at the moment.
Ok here is a sketch rundown of what was coverd and what was said.
Charlie started off asking/ complaining about the trash and weeds that have accumulated on the site. DeWitt says the trash was/ will be cleaned up this morning.
Charlie asks about the new parking lot. DeWitt says the Cards got a 9-month permit to improve the site as a parking lot. It is temporary and opportunity for the team to earn some revenue from the site before the season ends. Charlie makes fun of DeWitt a bit, pointing out his thesis was on Louis Sullivan and commenting that a parking lot is not good urban form.
Charlie asks about the remaining trailers on the site. DeWitt says the stadium is done, but the Cards office building on the northwest corner is not done, and that the remaining trailers on the vacant lot remain until that construction is done, which should be about a month.
Charlie asks DeWitt if the Cards are using the hole as a threat against the city, trying to get more leverage for development. DeWitt says no. He explains the usual figures (on table is 600 million project, 350,000 retail 300,000 office 1,000 residences, parking below grade) and notes that a good project takes time. He wants to blow away the required financial commitments-"shooting for the moon"
The Cards are seeking help in TIF and for infrastructure (roads, sidewalks, utilities). If the Cards don’t get help there is a plan b, but he does not elaborate on this plan, other than to say that the Cards haven’t thought much or talked much about it.
(my own comment here: this reminds me of the first go around with the stadium, same comments same language)
DeWitt explains that they need the help. The reason why new offices aren’t proposed is that rents don't support new office (or retail or residential) construction. What the Cards want to build requires a subsidy.
Charlie takes one phone call. The caller complains about the hole, calling it embarrassing and comparing it to a slum. DeWitt says, “no one is more impatient about the project” than he is. He won’t compromise to get something to happen, wants it done and done right.
Charlie started off asking/ complaining about the trash and weeds that have accumulated on the site. DeWitt says the trash was/ will be cleaned up this morning.
Charlie asks about the new parking lot. DeWitt says the Cards got a 9-month permit to improve the site as a parking lot. It is temporary and opportunity for the team to earn some revenue from the site before the season ends. Charlie makes fun of DeWitt a bit, pointing out his thesis was on Louis Sullivan and commenting that a parking lot is not good urban form.
Charlie asks about the remaining trailers on the site. DeWitt says the stadium is done, but the Cards office building on the northwest corner is not done, and that the remaining trailers on the vacant lot remain until that construction is done, which should be about a month.
Charlie asks DeWitt if the Cards are using the hole as a threat against the city, trying to get more leverage for development. DeWitt says no. He explains the usual figures (on table is 600 million project, 350,000 retail 300,000 office 1,000 residences, parking below grade) and notes that a good project takes time. He wants to blow away the required financial commitments-"shooting for the moon"
The Cards are seeking help in TIF and for infrastructure (roads, sidewalks, utilities). If the Cards don’t get help there is a plan b, but he does not elaborate on this plan, other than to say that the Cards haven’t thought much or talked much about it.
(my own comment here: this reminds me of the first go around with the stadium, same comments same language)
DeWitt explains that they need the help. The reason why new offices aren’t proposed is that rents don't support new office (or retail or residential) construction. What the Cards want to build requires a subsidy.
Charlie takes one phone call. The caller complains about the hole, calling it embarrassing and comparing it to a slum. DeWitt says, “no one is more impatient about the project” than he is. He won’t compromise to get something to happen, wants it done and done right.
Hasn't the MLB said they won't give St. Louis another All-Star game until the Ballpark Village is up and running?
- 10K
Thanks for the report, J. Sounds good, hope it's not just lip service. I don't know that I fully trust the Cards' owners.
You are all welcome.
As for what DeWitt said, there was not a lot of new info in the interview. Only the info about the parking lot and the serious/ personal sounding comments about his involvment in the project. From those, I will say he did make it sound like the urban development of the BV might be the most enjoyable part of what he does, which could bode well from the project if he is really into it.
But ultimatly, the reason you are seeing him on KMOX and KMOV is probably to counteract the mounting complaints about the hole in the ground. Folks want to see something started, esp. since the tax breaks the Cards recived were designed to make the BV happen. This is just damage control for now.
But one again, these types of comments, talking about the greatness of the development and the uncertian future for the project if what the cards want isn't done, is a song and dance we all heard approximatly 3 or 4 years ago when the state legislature was debating funding the stadium.
The one change is DeWitt now commenting about the under ground parking in almost every interview. Maybe the city is getting some important design consesions in return for TIF funding.
There is also this discussion at Bernie's Pressbox where one poster claims knowledge of the BV project and that the lack of progress is because tenents won't commit due to the high rents the Cards are asking.
As for what DeWitt said, there was not a lot of new info in the interview. Only the info about the parking lot and the serious/ personal sounding comments about his involvment in the project. From those, I will say he did make it sound like the urban development of the BV might be the most enjoyable part of what he does, which could bode well from the project if he is really into it.
But ultimatly, the reason you are seeing him on KMOX and KMOV is probably to counteract the mounting complaints about the hole in the ground. Folks want to see something started, esp. since the tax breaks the Cards recived were designed to make the BV happen. This is just damage control for now.
But one again, these types of comments, talking about the greatness of the development and the uncertian future for the project if what the cards want isn't done, is a song and dance we all heard approximatly 3 or 4 years ago when the state legislature was debating funding the stadium.
The one change is DeWitt now commenting about the under ground parking in almost every interview. Maybe the city is getting some important design consesions in return for TIF funding.
There is also this discussion at Bernie's Pressbox where one poster claims knowledge of the BV project and that the lack of progress is because tenents won't commit due to the high rents the Cards are asking.
- 5,433
DeBaliviere wrote:Thanks for the report, J. Sounds good, hope it's not just lip service. I don't know that I fully trust the Cards' owners.
I know I don't trust them now. And I'm one of those that wanted a new stadium from day one- not because I'm a fan of subsidies by any means- but because I was never as "in love" with Busch Stadium II as most Cardinals fans were.
Anyone remember this statement in a P-D editorial from a couple of months ago?
' So what will happen if the city rejects the TIF? The project could be drastically scaled back, says Bill DeWitt III, the Cards' vice president for business development. Instead of high-rises, Ballpark Village could be simply "bars and restaurants with parking behind it." '
On KTVI's Wednesday evening 6PM news, Ballpark Village was the lead story, with Charles Jaco reporting. Jaco explained that the city has agreed to provide incentives for the development, and that with a new state law passed, that there would be some incentives from Missouri as well. No problems there.
As I understood it, the sticking point is the Cardinals' insistence on guaranteed tax revenue. IOW, if there's a shortfall, it would be up to the city- yes, its taxpayers- to cover. That's happened twice before in the city- with St. Louis Centre and St. Louis Marketplace- and I think in this case the city's reticence is understandable. That said, I think this project is different on many levels, and I hope a deal can be put together soon. Too much time has been wasted by both sides already IMHO.
It is alarming that they don't seem to have the confidence, and are clamoring for the guarantee, but if you dig deeper you will probably see it's just a case of getting all they can. These guys are rich for a reason; love them or hate them, no self serving millionaire would proceed without getting the most they can to guarantee their returns. Sure there are exceptions, but they are not the norm. It's strictly business, and you can rest assured they want BPV a success, and that it will happen for the mere sake of it being beneficial to their bottom lines. They know that raising the value of their asset is directly related to that piece of ground right next to them, and the value will be increased by developing BPV in a prudent manner. They will of course do all they can though to suck every last dollar they can from you and me along the way. It's just smart business from their standpoint, and as more people complain, moan and groan they are just one step closer to getting what they want. Big business always wins in the end.
- 2,005
Another thing the Cards and City may be waiting on is a grant from MoDESA. That is the recently passed Missouri Downtown Economic Stimulus Act.
http://www.missouridevelopment.org/uplo ... 12706).pdf (sorry about the link, the whole thing needs to be copied and pasted)
The money can be used on various streetscape enhancements which includes sidewalks. There are regulations for the act, but since this isn't directly related to the ballpark and will create over 100 jobs it should be elgible.The City is already pursuing this money for other projects(Tucker/Park Pacific was mentioned in another thread). Perhaps it would be mutually beneficial to both parties if state assistance is granted.
That said, I still hate that giant hole. Parking started on that lot August 31, they were charging $15.
http://www.missouridevelopment.org/uplo ... 12706).pdf (sorry about the link, the whole thing needs to be copied and pasted)
The money can be used on various streetscape enhancements which includes sidewalks. There are regulations for the act, but since this isn't directly related to the ballpark and will create over 100 jobs it should be elgible.The City is already pursuing this money for other projects(Tucker/Park Pacific was mentioned in another thread). Perhaps it would be mutually beneficial to both parties if state assistance is granted.
That said, I still hate that giant hole. Parking started on that lot August 31, they were charging $15.
Aparently the Cards have added MayorSlay.com to the list of local outlets trying to calm the wave of comments and complains over the lack of development at the Ballpark Village.
MayorSlay
MayorSlay
When the Cardinals return home, take a good look at the site of Ballpark Village.
The Cardinals are obligated by an agreement to spend at least $60 million on the site, which would build some nice condos, a couple of bars, and a modest office building.
If that’s all we expected or wanted, Ballpark Village would be finished by now.
We’re working with them to do much more — and much better. And we’re taking the time necessary to figure out how to do that.
Letter to the editor in PD today relates to some article about "so where are the tourists?" Anyone recall the contents of the article from 8/20 PD?
- 8,912
- 1,026
guys - i wouldn't be so harsh. public money is very common for projects like this. and overall, i think st. louis would be getting a very good deal. We held firm on the stadium and got it with virtually no public financing - thats very, very rare. now we have a chance to build a huge boast to downtown for what - 100 million? how much additional tax revenue would this generate? How much additional development would this generate? when will we have such a chance again?
I think teh days are almost over for completely private projects of this magnitude (at least in non-booming markets) .... how much money do we offer ford when they propose a new plant? How much money would we offer any large employer to relocate?
think about it. St. Louis would be getting teh new stadium and six blocks of major downtown development for about 150 million dollars (including tax credits alloted for the stadium and tax breaks alloted for ticket sales). Thats a hell of a good deal. Actually - thats a hell of a good INVESTMENT.
I think teh days are almost over for completely private projects of this magnitude (at least in non-booming markets) .... how much money do we offer ford when they propose a new plant? How much money would we offer any large employer to relocate?
think about it. St. Louis would be getting teh new stadium and six blocks of major downtown development for about 150 million dollars (including tax credits alloted for the stadium and tax breaks alloted for ticket sales). Thats a hell of a good deal. Actually - thats a hell of a good INVESTMENT.
markofucity wrote:guys - i wouldn't be so harsh. public money is very common for projects like this. and overall, i think st. louis would be getting a very good deal. We held firm on the stadium and got it with virtually no public financing - thats very, very rare. now we have a chance to build a huge boast to downtown for what - 100 million? how much additional tax revenue would this generate? How much additional development would this generate? when will we have such a chance again?
I think teh days are almost over for completely private projects of this magnitude (at least in non-booming markets) .... how much money do we offer ford when they propose a new plant? How much money would we offer any large employer to relocate?
think about it. St. Louis would be getting teh new stadium and six blocks of major downtown development for about 150 million dollars (including tax credits alloted for the stadium and tax breaks alloted for ticket sales). Thats a hell of a good deal. Actually - thats a hell of a good INVESTMENT.
True.
How much public money went into Busch III? $30 million? $45 million?
We could be like Arizona which put $400 million into the Big Red's new dome. We could be like Hennepin county which is paying for all of the Twins new ballpark. Or how about the $400 million to pay for Indianapolis' new dome?
What about the public money spent on the nice pretty Washington Ave street, sidewalk and lights?
It's an INVESTMENT that will pay off in the long run.
and typical Post Disgrace rheteric!
Let's get the pot stir going. I love how they say in the aricle:
Note to PD: Downtown has already been transformed.
alaso in the article:
Note to PD: STL already has Hard Rock Cafe. Duh!
Let's get the pot stir going. I love how they say in the aricle:
Team officials have promised that the site one day will be Ballpark Village, a bustling collection of shops, restaurants and condominiums that will transform downtown St. Louis.
Note to PD: Downtown has already been transformed.
alaso in the article:
There also are plans for an entertainment-themed restaurant - think Hard Rock Cafe or ESPN Zone - and a bookstore, such as Barnes and Noble.
Note to PD: STL already has Hard Rock Cafe. Duh!
^ For once I think we may be a bit harsh on the PD. Never thought I'd be saying that...
To transform is to change the form or shape of. Will it or will it not transform downtown further? I think it's practical to say yes.
The PD just used Hard Rock Cafe as an example of an entertainment-themed restaurant. They never stated there wasn't a HRC in STL... Besides, didn't Hooters just move from Union Station to Kiener Plaza?
To transform is to change the form or shape of. Will it or will it not transform downtown further? I think it's practical to say yes.
The PD just used Hard Rock Cafe as an example of an entertainment-themed restaurant. They never stated there wasn't a HRC in STL... Besides, didn't Hooters just move from Union Station to Kiener Plaza?
- 6,775
matguy70 wrote:and typical Post Disgrace rheteric!
Let's get the pot stir going. I love how they say in the aricle:
Team officials have promised that the site one day will be Ballpark Village, a bustling collection of shops, restaurants and condominiums that will transform downtown St. Louis.
Note to PD: Downtown has already been transformed.
That's it! I'm cancelling my subscription. How DARE they accurately quote what someone said.
matguy70 wrote:
alaso in the article:
There also are plans for an entertainment-themed restaurant - think Hard Rock Cafe or ESPN Zone - and a bookstore, such as Barnes and Noble.
Note to PD: STL already has Hard Rock Cafe. Duh!
So? We also have a Syberg's. Does that mean we can't have another?
We're not getting 2 Hard Rock Cafes within 10 city blocks. That would be unheard of and unecessary. But the point is that they said "Think Hard Rock Cafe"... meaning, "think of restaurants along those lines", Hard Rock being possibly the most famous example of a major theme restaurant. I would also not be surprised if Hard Rock wanted to move, though.
Really no need to be harsh on the Post. I thought the article was pretty decent. They gave an overview of the situation and why the Cardinals think they are worthy of the money. Remember while downtown has changed a lot, there still has not been any new construction, so from that vantage, it is more than apropriate to note that the BV would transform a downtown that has not seen large non-governmental new construction in a decade or more.
Be happy, the post is making sure folks know what amazing changes could await downtown if this project get rolling.
Be happy, the post is making sure folks know what amazing changes could await downtown if this project get rolling.
The PD article mentioned that they've got a scale model of the planned Village at the project's office downtown, but they wouldn't allow it to be photographed! Has anyone on this forum had a chance to see it?
- 5,433
jfknet wrote:It is alarming that they don't seem to have the confidence, and are clamoring for the guarantee, but if you dig deeper you will probably see it's just a case of getting all they can. These guys are rich for a reason; love them or hate them, no self serving millionaire would proceed without getting the most they can to guarantee their returns. Sure there are exceptions, but they are not the norm. It's strictly business, and you can rest assured they want BPV a success, and that it will happen for the mere sake of it being beneficial to their bottom lines. They know that raising the value of their asset is directly related to that piece of ground right next to them, and the value will be increased by developing BPV in a prudent manner. They will of course do all they can though to suck every last dollar they can from you and me along the way. It's just smart business from their standpoint, and as more people complain, moan and groan they are just one step closer to getting what they want. Big business always wins in the end.
jfknet, you summed it up well. It's frustrating to see no progress on the giant hole north of the stadium, and it's aggravating to see the posturing on both sides, but in the end it's just business.
I think we're just down to the haggling phase now, just as we were with the ballpark before. At least both parties are still shooting for the $650 million project, and no one's suggested scaling it down (yet).
- 209
Unfortunately, I see this situation dragging out for a long period of time, as both sides will probably play hard ball with each other. It will probably end when the city decides to fine the Cardinals $60 Million, or whatever the agreement was, for not building anything, and then waiving the fee when the Cardinals do in fact start the project without the TIF money.