Share
2,928
Life MemberLife Member
2,928

PostJun 16, 2008#51

jlblues wrote:Post


To emphasize Moorlander's post and jlblues' inquiries, here's the full story about the project from Thursday's development meeting:


Clayton gets closer look at Brown Shoe development plans

By Margaret Gillerman

ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH

Saturday, Jun. 14 2008



Clayton — Brown Shoe Co., which moved its base to Clayton in 1952, seeks to enter a new phase as centerpiece of a $500 million office, retail and residential development revealed in detail this week to the city's plan commission.



The public and city officials posed serious questions about issues such as traffic congestion and tax abatement, but the overwhelming response of about 100 people at Thursday night's unveiling of the plans was appreciation for keeping the jobs here.



"It's a big project and a big idea," said Bob Clark, chairman and CEO of Clayco Inc., who made most of the presentation. "The main catalyst is to keep Brown Shoe in Clayton."



The company, founded in St. Louis in 1878, had considered leaving the area but announced this spring that it would remain.



Clayco is partnered with U. S. Equities and Hutkin Properties in the project. They would buy property from Brown Shoe, build a new headquarters campus and lease it back. Hutkin would secure high-end retail businesses.



The development "footprint" is to include the existing Brown headquarters, along Maryland Avenue just north of Clayton High School.



The project first needs approval of the plan commission and aldermen.



Clark said the expansion would:



— Nearly double the existing 630 jobs to over 1,300 jobs by 2012.



— Improve infrastructure for the community.



— Establish a "signature entrance" to the west side of Clayton.



— Solve traffic safety issues by providing a road to the community center that does not go through the high school parking lot.



The first phase, which could begin this fall, includes demolition of the 8500 Maryland Building — part of the existing Brown Shoe headquarters — and construction of a new headquarters building plus a 2,100-space public garage. The office building would have two sections, one six stories tall and one 18, joined by an atrium.



If the economy permits, a second phase would include:



— Condominiums or apartments in high-rise towers, one 18 stories and one 16.



— Two office buildings, one 14 stories and one eight.



— A second garage, with 2,170 spaces.



— 70,000 square feet of retail space.



— A 14-story residential tower, which could be a hotel, depending on the market.



Lucy Hoblitzelle, a neighbor, said at Thursday's meeting that while she welcomes the project, "I'm concerned about the building heights."



Another woman said, "You've got condos sitting in Clayton now that are not

selling."



Garbriella Farkas expressed concerns about the environmental impact of construction dust and noise.



Clayco's Larry Chapman said keeping the company was a coup, noting, "States would do almost anything to get Brown Shoe to move there."


Source: http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/s ... enDocument



Regarding the other points previously at question:

- "Conveniently negative" refers to the propensity for many on this Forum to question whether or not anything will ever get done, and pessimistically rather than pragmatically. I look to many announcements based upon their business plans, an assessment of both credibility and risk to goodwill of parties involved, and personal knowledge I may have of such projects, although notedly rare but sometimes existent, in as pragmatically a manner as possible.

And yes, the precedent examples given (TBD, BPV, etc.) do necessitate strong questioning.

- I'm not Ron's doctor, but he's in good shape and planning on being with the company until he retires.

- Timeline is listed in the article.

- Brown Shoe is not planning on becoming a real estate development company, but they do have strategic interests in these projects starting, that is evident. I can't say much more beyond that, but I can say that the answer lies in your question. Ask yourself, to what end would it benefit them if there was new retail and office space next to their HQ?
8,904
Life MemberLife Member
8,904

PostJun 17, 2008#52

3,311
Life MemberLife Member
3,311

PostJun 17, 2008#53

i like it. and NO brick! thank god.
12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostJun 17, 2008#54

Yeah, looks nice (except for the suburban box on the extreme right).
2,821
Life MemberLife Member
2,821

PostJun 17, 2008#55

Gone Corporate wrote:- Timeline is listed in the article.
No, it isn't. The only references to time in the article are the following:
"Clark said the expansion would:



- Nearly double the existing 630 jobs to over 1,300 jobs by 2012."



and, "The first phase, which could begin this fall, includes demolition of the 8500 Maryland Building — part of the existing Brown Shoe headquarters — and construction of a new headquarters building plus a 2,100-space public garage. The office building would have two sections, one six stories tall and one 18, joined by an atrium."



and, "If the economy permits, a second phase would include:"...
The first and second quotes only establish a timeline for Phase I. Those 1,300 Brown employees' needs would have to be accommodated with Phase I construction and the remaining existing office space only, since there is no way any of the Phase II office space would be complete by then, unless they start construction before Phase I is even complete. The last quote only establishes a timeline if you can predict a date whereupon "the economy permits" a Phase II. There is no timeline because Brown has no idea what Phase II will include, and when it will include it.


Gone Corporate wrote:- "Conveniently negative" refers to the propensity for many on this Forum to question whether or not anything will ever get done, and pessimistically rather than pragmatically. I look to many announcements based upon their business plans, an assessment of both credibility and risk to goodwill of parties involved, and personal knowledge I may have of such projects, although notedly rare but sometimes existent, in as pragmatically a manner as possible.


From my perspective, your comments on this project are naive, and I am the pragmatist. :) You seem to be confusing my skepticism with pessimism. There is a difference.



And whether or not Brown's Phase II intentions are good is irrelevant. The original articles about which I was commenting were, at best, Brown Shoe press releases, designed to influence state and local officials and the public, to garner the largest pile of assistance and incentives they possibly can. Brown cannot make any guarantees as to what Phase II will look like, or even say that anything in particular is likely at this point. So, as with each of the other multi-phase, large-scale project renderings we've seen lately, it is disingenuous to imply that it is an accurate representation of what any future phase will look like, or to be quantifying what it will include. Projects are phased for a reason. To Ms. Gillerman's credit, this most recent article at least has a few qualifiers such as "could begin", "if the economy permits", "depending on the market", etc.


Gone Corporate wrote:- I'm not Ron's doctor, but he's in good shape and planning on being with the company until he retires.
I wasn't questioning his health. In 2012, when Phase I is being completed, he will be over 60 and close to retirement. He may very well be retired by the time they are ready to start Phase II. So his level of commitment to Phase II may not be relevant.


Gone Corporate wrote:- Brown Shoe is not planning on becoming a real estate development company, but they do have strategic interests in these projects starting, that is evident. I can't say much more beyond that, but I can say that the answer lies in your question. Ask yourself, to what end would it benefit them if there was new retail and office space next to their HQ?
I never said they wouldn't see some benefit from it, but I can't think of a single aspect of the development of corporate headquarters office space, or development of adjacent real estate, that would be in any way relevant to a shoe manufacturer/retailer's corporate strategy.
8,904
Life MemberLife Member
8,904

PostJun 17, 2008#56

Moorlander wrote:




So I guess that's phase I on the right (west side of the street), with phase II on the other side of the street. I'm confused by the building to the right. In the first picture it's a parking structure, but in this second rendering it appears to be office.
2,928
Life MemberLife Member
2,928

PostJun 17, 2008#57

jlblues wrote:I can't think of a single aspect of the development of corporate headquarters office space, or development of adjacent real estate, that would be in any way relevant to a shoe manufacturer/retailer's corporate strategy.


That is obvious.



jlblues: I have been made aware of their corporate intents with facets of these buildings as a means to continue and expand business. I can't talk about these plans, as they're still very fluid, long-term, somewhat confidential, and generally none of your or this forum's business. With that, trust me, there are reasons for these buildings being built. I believe in this company and want them to succeed, so pardon me if I shut my mouth from here on out.



And don't you call me naive if I say I know what I'm talking about and am sharing some of it here. Sorry you can't see it for what it is.



I ask that we don't crap all over the proposals just because other StL projects have failed and new projects being proposed won't be held liable unto us if not completed to 100% matching with original proposals. We must not expect to see a guarantee if it means the rest of the business could suffer if compelled to develop in excess to changing business needs. I'd rather have 4 buildings instead of 6 if it meant hundreds of jobs are saved in the process.



When one of the largest publicly-traded companies in the Metro Area reaffirms its intentions to remain here (as multiple outside options exist with huge subsidies), then sets plans to move entire divisions here from the CEO's home town, and commits to increasing the size and scope of their local global HQ, we shouldn't be assuming full doubt into their intentions to do what they say. We should have at least a modicum of trust.



Focus: I like the renderings. And that's a damn big shoe in that lake.
10K
AdministratorAdministrator
10K

PostJun 17, 2008#58

My favorite part:


Clark said the expansion would:



— Nearly double the existing 630 jobs to over 1,300 jobs by 2012.
1,054
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,054

PostJun 18, 2008#59

Sounds great! Maybe Brown will become more of a transnational corporation and contribute to St. Louis's role in the global economy (Brown creating products that appeal to the growing consumer markets in China, India, South Korea, etc.).



What is the existing level of Brown creating an agglomeration economy in St. Louis around shoe fashion and other related industries? I think we used to have International too. It's good they are staying put, expanding, and interested in building mixed use development (possibly in hopes of a future expanded Metrolink route towards Westport and establishing TOD to encourage the construction of a station adjacent to their HQ). Regardless, the economic spillover effects of Brown and the other companies building more highrises in Clayton is a sign of continued economic prosperity for the region and will continue to help encourage companies to be more centrally located instead of spread out.



For those of you Clayton workers, is Clayton a CBD where companies locate to minimize costs for face-time communication or is like other edge cities whose traditional purpose is as telecommunications and services as back-office centers for the central offices?
36
New MemberNew Member
36

PostAug 07, 2008#60

Anyone have an update on the Famous Footwear move? How many accepted positions here?



Company officials said offices will start moving in mid July and that operations in Madison will cease by Oct. 31, 2008. Every Madison employee has been offered a job in St. Louis. Those who decide not to make the move will be offered a severance package, WISC-TV reported.
15
New MemberNew Member
15

PostAug 08, 2008#61

When I interviewed with Brown Shoe in June, I got the impression that most people from Madison were not accepting the St. Louis jobs. I think they said about 100 were expected to move. Also, they told me they hired a lot of people here who used to work at Macy's. Not sure if that is accurate or just an excuse for why they didn't hire me!
8,904
Life MemberLife Member
8,904

PostSep 02, 2008#62

There is now a pdf slide show posted here:

http://www.ci.clayton.mo.us/FileSystem/ ... 0Final.pdf





Very interesting.



I like this quote from the presentation "Pedestrian is KING-Automobile is an invited GUEST" Let's see how they do.
2,821
Life MemberLife Member
2,821

PostSep 03, 2008#63

Moorlander wrote:I like this quote from the presentation "Pedestrian is KING-Automobile is an invited GUEST" Let's see how they do.
And they've sent out a whole hell of a lot of invitations with that surface parking lot along Maryland.



That drives me up an f'ing wall. :evil:
12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostSep 03, 2008#64

^Wow, you're not kidding! When I first studied the photos, I thouught that stretch along Maryland was a nice, wide walkway. After your post, I went back and studied it more closely, and darned if you're not right. A surface parking lot along the entire length of Maryland!



Idiots.
2,430
Life MemberLife Member
2,430

PostSep 03, 2008#65

On the whole the project doesn't look bad, but to echo the points of others, if the pedestrian is king the first thing to go in the project is the surface parking lot along Maryland. A better question from the Planning Board should be if the pedestrian is king, why does the development need so many parking spaces and mammoth garages.



Lets hold off just a bit and see what happens with the big metrolink vote, because rushing through the approval process for this project without considering the potential to integrate a metrolink stop is just foolish if the pedestrian is truly king.
2,821
Life MemberLife Member
2,821

PostSep 03, 2008#66

It's interesting to compare this to the Centene project.



Centene's development/design team did almost everything right IMO, building up to the sidewalk, with ground floor retail throughout the garage and office building, the site is built out (assuming future phases get built), i.e. there are no large expanses of green space or surface parking. Obviously, they should strive for higher density, particularly in the future phases, and the design of the office building is too conservative, but the screened garage looks good and overall, it's a pretty good project, for Clayton.



The Brown project does have some good elements, but clearly the pedestrian is not king.



Same developers too, for the most part (US Equities). The difference is in the design team and the owners, I suppose.
4,553
Life MemberLife Member
4,553

PostSep 03, 2008#67

Lets hold off just a bit and see what happens with the big metrolink vote, because rushing through the approval process for this project without considering the potential to integrate a metrolink stop is just foolish if the pedestrian is truly king.


Amen. With this development, a Maryland Metro station could be the most pedestrian friendly of the entire Daniel Boone alignment. And what better way is there to "Establish a signature entrance to the west side of Clayton"?



Under project objectives the first bullet is: Focus on the Environment. It's disheartening to see designers and developers throw around green/sustainability/LEED talk at a presentation, and produce the same old car friendly crap.
8,904
Life MemberLife Member
8,904

PostSep 03, 2008#68

I don't have a lot of complaints with this project. I think it will do wonders for the 'west side.'



I can see those condo towers being very attractive to potential buyers. This area of Clayton happens to be one of the most (if not THE most) walkable address in the region.
2,821
Life MemberLife Member
2,821

PostSep 03, 2008#69

Moorlander wrote:This area of Clayton happens to be one of the most (if not THE most) walkable address in the region.
Then why don't they use this project to accentuate and expand on that characteristic, rather than putting up a suburban corporate campus that makes the area less pedestrian friendly?



The contrast between the attitudes of Centene and Brown couldn't be more stark. The former's project embraces the sidewalk, and makes it's buildings an extension of it. The latter seems to feel the need to add a buffer of surface parking and landscaping between it's buildings and all that nasty urbanity.
8,904
Life MemberLife Member
8,904

PostSep 03, 2008#70

jlblues wrote:
Moorlander wrote:This area of Clayton happens to be one of the most (if not THE most) walkable address in the region.
Then why don't they use this project to accentuate and expand on that characteristic, rather than putting up a suburban corporate campus that makes the area less pedestrian friendly?



The contrast between the attitudes of Centene and Brown couldn't be more stark. The former's project embraces the sidewalk, and makes it's buildings an extension of it. The latter seems to feel the need to add a buffer of surface parking and landscaping between it's buildings and all that nasty urbanity.




That is a great question. My guess, Brown Shoe has the room to spread out where as Centene has a more constrained footprint.
5,704
Life MemberLife Member
5,704

PostSep 04, 2008#71

Moorlander, I think your right on as far as the footprint is dedicating what Brown Shoe is doing versus Centene. Centene has a lot less space to work with then Brown Shoe while trying to accomondate similiar space needs for its operations and expected growth.



I think parking reflects what mode of transportation employees desire, use and want. What I think is a good long term plan is the additional residential for this area. Plus, surface parking lots are easy to build upon when market dictates a vertical/dense environment. Just rip up some asphalt.



Dissappointed that they provide at least an opening between their own office space for future metrolink access but don't highlight the fact (Just a bad slogan). I certainly wish they would have emphasized it more in their renderings. It would be a great boost to have a major employer whose undergoing an expansion to advertise a desire for a light rail station at their doorstep.
8,904
Life MemberLife Member
8,904

PostSep 26, 2008#72

Friday, September 26, 2008

Clayton library could move to Brown Shoe development

St. Louis Business Journal - by Lisa R. Brown



The St. Louis County Library system is eyeing Brown Shoe Co.’s planned headquarters complex as a possible location for a branch...



...The library system would seek to build a branch similar in size to the existing Mid County location, which has more than 16,000 square feet of space.



“We’re taking a look at whether it could be combined with a museum or theater space,” Pace said. “The thing that makes it attractive from our standpoint is collaborating (with other users).”



If a move occurs, the library’s existing site would be sold, Pace said. The two-acre site is located across the street from another major commercial development project in Clayton, R J York Development’s planned $110 million 23-story hotel and luxury condominium tower.



The St. Louis County Library system approved a master facilities plan in March that recommends rehabbing or replacing many of its existing facilities over the next 10 to 20 years....





Continue reading here
1,054
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,054

PostSep 30, 2008#73

Sounds like a money making deal for the library system which in no longer as well ranked compared to the St. Charles County library system.



Library benefits from mix of uses and shared parking



Good fortune to Brown Shoe in developing their proposal as Wall Street is getting hit. Maybe only the most well-off areas or developers have the financing to push ahead in a down market?
8,904
Life MemberLife Member
8,904

PostSep 30, 2008#74

CITY PLAN COMMISSION

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD MEETING



Monday, October 6, 2008 - 5:30 p.m.

City of Clayton – 2nd Floor Council Chambers - 10 N. Bemiston Ave.

Clayton , Missouri 63105

For further information contact Catherine Powers at 290-8459





ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW

CONCEPTUAL REVIEW



A. Special Development District (SDD) Project - Project Beacon

8300, 8400, 8500 Maryland Ave. & 61 Topton Way

Consideration of a request by USEC, LLC for conceptual review of a three phase, multi-year development on Maryland and Gay Avenues featuring three office structures, two parking structures, a retail component and three residential buildings. This project will be considered as a Special Development District (SDD).

PostOct 03, 2008#75

Projects: Brown Shoe Co.



$568 million, Clayton

Developers: Clayco and U.S. Equities Realty

Brown Shoe Status: Making its way through the subsidy approval process. Financing unknown.


http://stlouis.bizjournals.com/stlouis/ ... tory1.html
Read more posts (245 remaining)
Share