I’ve said it before. It’s the downside to an organization like Cortex. The area was over controlled. The private market would’ve been much faster but Cortex bought up all the land to execute its vision. That really hurts when a global pandemic nukes the underlying intent of your vision.
Yeah that's my biggest beef with the TIF the city renewed for them, that they haven't actually been very good at development. Pretty good at tearing down what remained of the manufacturing in the area for parking lots though
I don’t see you replying with any sort of objective statistical analysis. I am pretty throughly on the YIMBY side. I agree we need more housing but STL has some pretty unique demand side issues with housing. These are housing issues that don’t get solved just by throwing more abatement at the problem.gone corporate wrote:
Amazing... @Chris Stritzel posted a question on the numbers for an economic development project. The responses don't address the subject matter, not in the least. Instead, the responses are critiques of the very concept of Capitalism and personal insults regarding Christianity, plus insulting the reconstruction of the World Trade Center site for good measure... Are we sure these trolls aren't Russian bots?
Back on point: I cannot comment smartly to those economic incentives numbers. I can say that Clayton Ave across from the site has had barriers up for a few days, and a whole lot of dirt was being dug up by two earth movers this morning. Glad to see this progressing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What kind of tax abatement did NYC offer JPMorgan for staying? I think the architecture of that building is incredible, even though I’m personally not a fan of the modern version of JPMorgan as a company.STLAPTS wrote:I do. For example, JP Morgan’s 3.4B headquarters is the initial phase of a much larger real development by JP Morgan in Midtown Manhattan. They are developing a multi-block campus in Midtown Manhattan beyond its new 270 Park Ave headquarters. Another example is Citadel, who left Chicago for Miami, is now building a 4.5 billion dollar office in Midtown. Ken Griffin is not doing that because he feels like he has some obligation to society. He is doing it because it is a must location in finance to attract top talent just like JP and AMEX did or are doing.StlAlex wrote: ↑7:08 AM - Mar 12You don't actually believe that what JPM and AmEx are doing is the move that will generate the most revenue/benefit vs cost, don't pretend that you do.STLAPTS wrote: The rich business owners of the gilded age as well as a majority of their modern day peers gave away their wealth and "build extravagant things" after they retired from business or passed away. As far as JP Morgan and AMEX, it made business sense to build their office towers in Manhattan. It was't charity. It was good business. To compare Keeley to any of the aforementioned is laughable.
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Could Cortex add a retail and a residential component? I think Cortex could use some rezoning.PeterXCV wrote:Agreed, especially when Cortex is nestled between the two hottest residential submarkets in the city. If Cortex had built half as many apartments as have been built in the Grove in the last 10 years it'd feel way more vibrant.STLrainbow wrote: ↑12:31 PM - Mar 12Also, it's pretty wild it's taken 13 years I believe for the first residential to break ground in the Cortex TIF District, which was intended to have residential since its inception. Anyone old enough to remember the Silo Lofts RFP?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Parcels can be rezoned as needed like for the Iris apartments, it's now H. Area Commercial. Ikea is on K. Unrestricted.
Part of the problem is Cortex in severed from the Grove and the CWE by a highway and FPA. The destruction of the apartment buildings on FPA made the separation even more stark. Gotta have parking. The parking, especially surface lots fenced with barbed wire on top, widening Newstead, 5-lane stroads with no street parking etc don't create an urban neighborhood.
Part of the problem is Cortex in severed from the Grove and the CWE by a highway and FPA. The destruction of the apartment buildings on FPA made the separation even more stark. Gotta have parking. The parking, especially surface lots fenced with barbed wire on top, widening Newstead, 5-lane stroads with no street parking etc don't create an urban neighborhood.
No incentives as far as I understandFraydog wrote: ↑4:45 PM - Mar 12What kind of tax abatement did NYC offer JPMorgan for staying? I think the architecture of that building is incredible, even though I’m personally not a fan of the modern version of JPMorgan as a company.STLAPTS wrote:I do. For example, JP Morgan’s 3.4B headquarters is the initial phase of a much larger real development by JP Morgan in Midtown Manhattan. They are developing a multi-block campus in Midtown Manhattan beyond its new 270 Park Ave headquarters. Another example is Citadel, who left Chicago for Miami, is now building a 4.5 billion dollar office in Midtown. Ken Griffin is not doing that because he feels like he has some obligation to society. He is doing it because it is a must location in finance to attract top talent just like JP and AMEX did or are doing.StlAlex wrote: ↑7:08 AM - Mar 12You don't actually believe that what JPM and AmEx are doing is the move that will generate the most revenue/benefit vs cost, don't pretend that you do.
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The had benefits from tax abatement for like 30 years up to 2020. They wanted more tax abatement but De Blasio rejected them repeatedly, which led to a new deal that would see them stay in Manhatten with new zoning allowing for larger building in exchange for a $40M contribution to a infrastructure improvement fund and reconstruction/expansion of the Subway station below the building at the cost of the bank. This entire project absolutely does not happen if JPM was only concerned about money, and you live in la-la land if you think otherwise (not you specifically just generally).Fraydog wrote:What kind of tax abatement did NYC offer JPMorgan for staying? I think the architecture of that building is incredible, even though I’m personally not a fan of the modern version of JPMorgan as a company.STLAPTS wrote:I do. For example, JP Morgan’s 3.4B headquarters is the initial phase of a much larger real development by JP Morgan in Midtown Manhattan. They are developing a multi-block campus in Midtown Manhattan beyond its new 270 Park Ave headquarters. Another example is Citadel, who left Chicago for Miami, is now building a 4.5 billion dollar office in Midtown. Ken Griffin is not doing that because he feels like he has some obligation to society. He is doing it because it is a must location in finance to attract top talent just like JP and AMEX did or are doing.StlAlex wrote: ↑7:08 AM - Mar 12You don't actually believe that what JPM and AmEx are doing is the move that will generate the most revenue/benefit vs cost, don't pretend that you do.
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
The point is that they are taking part in these statement buildings for the sake of being HQd in a statement building that will be known internationally. AmEx is currently in a rather generic looking complex and JPM's old HQ is VERY generic, neither was noteable compared to other well known NYC towers. My point is that if they were solely focused on money, neither would be taking part in spending extra money on a tower more extravagant than would otherwise be needed. Additionally, JPM paid to rebuild a subway station, which is literally private business paying for the upkeep of the civic infrastructure for the sake of doing so. They didn't need to agree to do so, yet they did.STLAPTS wrote:I do. For example, JP Morgan’s 3.4B headquarters is the initial phase of a much larger real development by JP Morgan in Midtown Manhattan. They are developing a multi-block campus in Midtown Manhattan beyond its new 270 Park Ave headquarters. Another example is Citadel, who left Chicago for Miami, is now building a 4.5 billion dollar office in Midtown. Ken Griffin is not doing that because he feels like he has some obligation to society. He is doing it because it is a must location in finance to attract top talent just like JP and AMEX did or are doing.StlAlex wrote: ↑7:08 AM - Mar 12You don't actually believe that what JPM and AmEx are doing is the move that will generate the most revenue/benefit vs cost, don't pretend that you do.STLAPTS wrote: The rich business owners of the gilded age as well as a majority of their modern day peers gave away their wealth and "build extravagant things" after they retired from business or passed away. As far as JP Morgan and AMEX, it made business sense to build their office towers in Manhattan. It was't charity. It was good business. To compare Keeley to any of the aforementioned is laughable.
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
This kind of stuff doesn't happen in St. Louis because people have the mindset that donating a measly $250k to the affordable housing fund is paramount to burning money, as if there's no benefit to having housing that's affordable in the city.
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
Fully amenitized class A product is required to attract and retain top financial in Manhattan. JP Morgan, Citadel, and AMEX don't just do things out of the goodness of their heart. They do things because it better positions them financially.StlAlex wrote: ↑6:21 AM - Mar 13The had benefits from tax abatement for like 30 years up to 2020. They wanted more tax abatement but De Blasio rejected them repeatedly, which led to a new deal that would see them stay in Manhatten with new zoning allowing for larger building in exchange for a $40M contribution to a infrastructure improvement fund and reconstruction/expansion of the Subway station below the building at the cost of the bank. This entire project absolutely does not happen if JPM was only concerned about money, and you live in la-la land if you think otherwise (not you specifically just generally).Fraydog wrote:What kind of tax abatement did NYC offer JPMorgan for staying? I think the architecture of that building is incredible, even though I’m personally not a fan of the modern version of JPMorgan as a company.STLAPTS wrote:
I do. For example, JP Morgan’s 3.4B headquarters is the initial phase of a much larger real development by JP Morgan in Midtown Manhattan. They are developing a multi-block campus in Midtown Manhattan beyond its new 270 Park Ave headquarters. Another example is Citadel, who left Chicago for Miami, is now building a 4.5 billion dollar office in Midtown. Ken Griffin is not doing that because he feels like he has some obligation to society. He is doing it because it is a must location in finance to attract top talent just like JP and AMEX did or are doing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
Infrastructure improvements are a cost of doing business in Manhattan. Especially if you are rezoning to a denser use.StlAlex wrote: ↑6:31 AM - Mar 13The point is that they are taking part in these statement buildings for the sake of being HQd in a statement building that will be known internationally. AmEx is currently in a rather generic looking complex and JPM's old HQ is VERY generic, neither was noteable compared to other well known NYC towers. My point is that if they were solely focused on money, neither would be taking part in spending extra money on a tower more extravagant than would otherwise be needed. Additionally, JPM paid to rebuild a subway station, which is literally private business paying for the upkeep of the civic infrastructure for the sake of doing so. They didn't need to agree to do so, yet they did.STLAPTS wrote:I do. For example, JP Morgan’s 3.4B headquarters is the initial phase of a much larger real development by JP Morgan in Midtown Manhattan. They are developing a multi-block campus in Midtown Manhattan beyond its new 270 Park Ave headquarters. Another example is Citadel, who left Chicago for Miami, is now building a 4.5 billion dollar office in Midtown. Ken Griffin is not doing that because he feels like he has some obligation to society. He is doing it because it is a must location in finance to attract top talent just like JP and AMEX did or are doing.StlAlex wrote: ↑7:08 AM - Mar 12You don't actually believe that what JPM and AmEx are doing is the move that will generate the most revenue/benefit vs cost, don't pretend that you do.
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
This kind of stuff doesn't happen in St. Louis because people have the mindset that donating a measly $250k to the affordable housing fund is paramount to burning money, as if there's no benefit to having housing that's affordable in the city.
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk