urbanSTL

STLrainbow wrote:Square will be taking space in the Cortex One Building
http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/blog ... tions.html (sub article)

Has anyone been able to access this article?

debaliviere wrote:

STLrainbow wrote:Square will be taking space in the Cortex One Building
http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/blog ... tions.html (sub article)

Has anyone been able to access this article?

Yes

moorlander wrote:

debaliviere wrote:

STLrainbow wrote:Square will be taking space in the Cortex One Building
http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/blog ... tions.html (sub article)

Has anyone been able to access this article?

Yes

So is there anything interesting/noteworthy in it?

debaliviere wrote:

moorlander wrote:

debaliviere wrote:
Has anyone been able to access this article?

Yes

So is there anything interesting/noteworthy in it?

Probably.

Nothing really important in the article.

"After being founded in St. Louis, Square moved to San Francisco. It announced in September 2015 that it would open a new St. Louis office, though the company had been quietly operating out of the CIC@CET building under fictitious name Balbis (another shape that looks like the letter H) for several months.

Cortex CEO Dennis Lower said Square has been looking for expansion space in several places. He said he wasn’t sure whether the agreement between Square and Stereotaxis had been finalized."

^ I believe one of those places Square has been looking at is downtown but I guess we'll have to wait and see.

I feel like a good place for them would be the East Loop somewhere along the streetcar line. Workers would be easy to find and even a small presence of such a forward thinking company would be beneficial to the entire line. Although you certainly wouldn't see me complaining about new office tenants downtown

CORTEX East anyone. I also think Square consolidating as anchor office tenant for Railway Exchange mixed use project would be a nice fit for all involved.

Skratching my head why CORTEX/Wexford haven't announced their next phase with a tenant in Microsoft supposedly being signed up and next door you got Lawrence Group going full on with phase 1 that includes 124,000 square feet of office space & statement that interest was very strong.

Turnover at Wexford: http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/blog ... -role.html

debaliviere wrote:Turnover at Wexford: http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/blog ... -role.html

Sounds like he is making a logical move. You also have to wonder what GTE partners have up their sleeve next & if it is more projects for St. Louis in mind. First thought would be them teaming up on W Pine residential tower that was floated.

As far as CORTEX/Wexford. Would love to hear formal notice and announcement on what's coming next. Keep getting more tidbits & Details and Microsoft name thrown around but no hard break ground date on the following. As it appears the next phase has grown to $300 million.

Most recently, he helped shape Wexford’s vision for a $175 million mixed-use development that will be built just east of @4240. That development is expected to be anchored by Microsoft and will also include a parking garage and office building.

The project is part of Cortex’s “3.0” phase, which is expected to cost around $300 million and include a 120-room hotel and 200-unit residential development.

Does it benefit or hurt the overall object to have both the Cortex and Danforth? How often do they end up competing against each other?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

^ The efforts around Danforth seem to retain a pretty good focus on ag tech and as long as that remains the case I think the two do a decent job of reinforcing each other as they establish the Saint Louis region as an attractive choice.

CarexCurator wrote:I don't see competition between CORTEX and Danforth. Ideally they can grow into separately specialized innovation districts. Where they overlap though, it is probably more overflow than poaching. In this article both districts are facing the same challenge to build enough lab space to keep up with demand, and expansion problems in one district will probably lead people to the other.
http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/ ... 602dd.html

Seems like a good problem to have. A capacity increase in one place helps the other.

What I think is concerning is if the demand is there but no space is becoming available then you start losing out competitively to other developments and more importantly other regions. I believe CORTEX can rebuild Crescent building but at this point it is about infill and Wexford's US Metals site if not mistaken.

I'd like to see more tech growth downtown. Railway Exchange, Jefferson Arms, Washington Avenue, 555 Washington remodel?!

@Nextstl tweeted the next phase is imminent.... pretty much along lines of the mixed-use renderings released earlier. Clustered just east and across the street from the @4240 Building on Duncan.

Let's hope for some good frontage on Forest Park Blvd. I'd hate to see Cortex turn completely inward.

We (the Cortex Board) approved the next phase parking, hotel, apartments, office building at our last meeting. The incentive legislation should be forthcoming shortly, along with other projects--it will be a very busy fall--close to $1Billion in the pipeline. This assumes we continue on a path to rational incentive reform and our attempts don't get turned into a political football as candidates posture for next year's municipal elections. If done the wrong development in the city could shut down for years.

^off topic, what kinda of fees does Park Central charge developers? And for what reasons does it charge them?

[quote^off topic, what kinda of fees does Park Central charge developers? And for what reasons does it charge them?][/quote]


They don't charge fees for themselves. Starting about 15 years ago in the CWE we/they began to require 20% of PV of city provided incentive to be contributed to an infrastructure fund administered by them. This would function as sort of a pay as you go TIF district. The thinking being some of the economic benefit granted by the city should inure to the neighborhood and not just to the developer. This way instead of just plugging the gap between Market Value and Development Costs, we would invest in projects that would increase MV for the whole neighborhood.

As MV increased in FPSE, beginning about 3 or 4 years (starting with Aventura) we expanded the program to FPSE. Aventura's contributions and subsequent ones have helped with the park and Manchester improvements. The Chouteau Grove project will result in a public parking lot with a value of about $1Million.

Concurrently we began testing the market in the CWE with less than ideal projects getting no incentives and therefore no contribution to infrastructure fund. Some projects advanced without incentives the Standard and several more. Several projects never advanced--the only one I think that became public was the mid rise at the Optimist.

Other projects that generally conform to our neighborhood's shared goals--dense, urban, car optional still receive incentives and still contribute to the infrastructure fund.

I'm working on making some changes to this process in anticipation to some announcements over the next few weeks and to prepare for incentive reform that I hope to implement citywide next year after we complete the economic development plan for the city.

^Who is we? I can't help but feel like the body/bodies that need(s) reform being in charge of that reform, and not being transparent about the process is destined to not end as effectively as it should.

Additionally, why are incentives continuing to be introduced at a record clip if everyone knows the system needs reform? Get as much in the system as possible before the spigot shuts off?

Saying that reform is needed, and the level of incentives currently in the pipeline are incongruous to say the least.

Incentive reform absolutely should be a political issue, and the next Mayor/Board of Aldermen should have input. This should be done in a transparent public manner, not behind closed doors.

^^ Andrewarkills has a good question. Kinda confuse on the who is the "We (Cortex Board)" Also, does the mean that we should be seeing a Cortex/Wexford groundbreaking announcement soon? or just one more step in a couple more steps?