urbanSTL

quincunx wrote:Maria Altman ‏@radioaltman
SLU says will divest some land that it cleared of homes but has determined it doesn't need.

Also this...

SLU's Heimburger says 395 acre redevelopment project, no eminent domain, 10-12 bldgs will be demolished.

That includes one hospital building to the west of Desloge and I believe the Pevely and Missouri Belting buildings.

Curious on the other buildings that will be demolished

From the PD:

She (President of SSM) said the system planned to keep the tower, used mainly as office space, for at least a year after the new hospital is constructed while SSM makes sure they “right-sized” the facility. “We think we need that building for a period of time.”

Jesus: "Think we need." "at least a year" and worst of all "'right-sized the facility". This is so scary. Where's "We're committed to maintaining this iconic SLU Hospital, South St. Louis, and really St. Louis City landmark. We see it as a not only a point of pride and defining landmark of our hospital, but for the city as a whole."

Hey SLU/SSM Hospital, you're juuuuuuuuust coming around to getting your head screwed on straight and following the incredible example Wash. U. Medicine and BJC has set for you, after cashing out to company that didn't put a dollar into your med school campus for 17 years. Now look at what WashU/BJC is doing with the old Shriners and Central Institute for the deaf buildings and follow suit. Just stop thinking for yourself because you're not good at it, and follow their lead. Thanks.

And with their new development power they can tear it down whenever they like.

There are public renderings online at x-rhodes.com under public plans -> public projects -> SSM Saint Louis -> Plans -> architectural -> A430. They show the Desloge standing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Only buildings specifically identified in the ordinance may be torn down without the usual city review process. Since Deloge is not identified, should at any future time there would be an effort to demolish it, it would have to go through the usual city review process.

Regardless of the current plans to keep Desloge and the need for demo to go through the normal process, the comments from Candice Jennings are very unnerving. I just feel like the City will eventually cave in, when SSM has the wrecking ball ready to roll. This would be an enormous loss for the City and our history. There has to be a way to rehab and make this building viable in the long term. Again, the comments made by the system president make me VERY nervous, regarding the future of the iconic tower.

Candace Jennings, the president of SSM’s St. Louis hospital operations, stopped short of a long-term commitment.

ward17 wrote:Only buildings specifically identified in the ordinance may be torn down without the usual city review process. Since Deloge is not identified, should at any future time there would be an effort to demolish it, it would have to go through the usual city review process.

thanks for posting.... did you express your strong desire to see the Desloge saved to SSM before sponsoring the blighting bill?

ward17 wrote:Only buildings specifically identified in the ordinance may be torn down without the usual city review process. Since Deloge is not identified, should at any future time there would be an effort to demolish it, it would have to go through the usual city review process.

Good to hear.

Of course--but we needed to get this plan moving. It has been bouncing around in various iterations for well over 10 years. By securing SSM commitment to to the 550+ investment, the city gains SSM's only teaching hospital in their 5 states. In other words--their whole hospital system will feed patients to this location. Now that SLU knows they have a solid partner, it will unleash years worth of investment/construction they were holding off on because of the uncertainty of the situation.

Additionally, it will unlock several key development sites to private developers that I/we hope will attract mixed use development. The decision to advance this has certainly increased the likelihood of both the Foundry and Armory of becoming real deals and it has solidified SLU's role as an important Cortex partner.

SSM is already increasing their involvement in the community and are now an institutional partner at PCD and becoming engaged in both the Gate District and Tiffany.

No commitment on Desloge by either the city or SSM as SSM wanted to wait for the dust to settle from the planning of the new hospital. In the year prior to SLU's purchase, I worked with the previous owner to have it listed on the National Register and there was a plan to put in 250 apartments, but then there was the fire that damaged part of the building and the developer couldn't put together the deal and he bailed by selling to SLU. After SLU bought it, keeping Pevely was never negotiable.

^ thanks; just a couple comments.... while it is exciting to see all the opportunity here from SLU/Cortex/Midtown area the loss of something like the Desloge would be a massive blow to the City. That it's even thought of as a possibility is almost unthinkable. I'd rather have clear design and preservation standards in place before such sweeping powers are given to an institution like SLU, which we all know has had a checkered past on such matters.

Also, when does the massive subsidies end for Central Corridor development? I certainly agree with the initial subsidies for the original footprint of Cortex and it seems to be accomplishing what it was intended to do... but now that just about everything else that is following behind also is getting TIFed and/or abated that raises huge alarm bells. People living and working and shopping all in subsidized projects takes a toll on our fiscal capacity and our future. Having something like KC's 75% cap on abatement, etc. on Central Corridor projects with exceptions for extraordinary value/benefits would be a huge step forward and give my (and all the other city's) children a little bit more hopeful future.

Deloge is a city icon. I can't fathom losing that masterpiece.

^ Certainly the degree of subsidies generally available in a particular area will impact the number and size/scope of development projects, but even if we completely cut off Central Corridor subsidies tomorrow we'd continue to see increasing demand and corresponding increases in occupancy and rents for existing properties; building owners would be enhancing their increasingly attractive properties and we'd have more risk-takers moving forward with new projects, whether relying on state and federal tax credits or Brandonview types, who forego incentives completely. Other developers would target subsiized areas as an alternative.

But I'm not really promoting a clean break from Central Corridor subsidies; as I mentioned something like KC's new ordinace that caps abatement at 75%, with exceptions for high value projects, is in order. I think the result will be a continuing steady stream of projects as well as a better tax base that will result in a stronger city, which in turn will further increase demand quickening the time for when we can dry the well.

Oh good, I've always thought what this area needs is more grass fields fronting Grand.

-RBB

Looks like they've removed plans for the front parking garage. While I didn't love the garage, it made a good wall.

If I'm reading those renderings right the grass field is the Peavley site. Driving down Grand the other day I realized that one place where the setback of the main tower away from the street will actually look great is from Grand across Mill Creek Valley. The setback will preserve the view of the current tower, and the two of them, along with the new research building, will create a nice visual grouping from the north.

^ it's not the Pevely site. it's farther south. they're creating a new street (La Salle Street I think?) about a block or two south of Pevely--the garage will abut that street.

urban_dilettante wrote: ↑

Feb 23, 2017

^ it's not the Pevely site. it's farther south. they're creating a new street (La Salle Street I think?) about a block or two south of Pevely--the garage will abut that street.

I see. I misread the plan. You are quite correct. Sad to see them deleting the street facing retail and moving the garage away from Grand. I still think the rest of it is . . . okay at least. But yeah, that's annoying. Old SLU and new SLU don't feel all that different right now.

Did anyone notice that Brooks Goedeker is leaving Park Central Development to lead SLU's planning for this area?

http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/ ... 9d93d.html