urbanSTL

Alex Ihnen wrote:WU will likely relocate/build a new graduate business school, but I wouldn't count on it being anywhere other than the Danforth campus.

This is clearly the incorrect thread for this, but latest word is Wash U is going to tear down Thomas Eliot Hall (the hideous concrete box building) for the new graduate business school. It would be right next to the Knight Center for Executive Education.

Good news. I still fear that the one at 11th and Spruce is a goner, but at least building 9 is being rehabbed. The Cupples buildings are important and I'm glad so many have been saved.

newstl2020 wrote:So I know I am getting wayyyy off topic (kind of) here but I think couples station would be an amazing place for wash u to relocate their graduate business school to. With their endowment they could deff make a really modern (and likely tall) new downtown business school in the heart of stl that imo would really raise the profile of the school. A large amount of private institutions already have satellite business schools in their metro downtown areas. It would be a perfect fit for cheap and a great location for the future. Alright I'm finished.

The WashU business school currently resides in one of the newer buildings on campus. I think it was built in the late 80s or early 90s, but it still looks really modern on the inside. WashU just went through a big building phase for the engineering and medical schools and as far as I know they are done building for awhile. I know your suggestion was just a random one, but it doesn't look likely.

maskedmesothorium wrote:The WashU business school currently resides in one of the newer buildings on campus. I think it was built in the late 80s or early 90s, but it still looks really modern on the inside. WashU just went through a big building phase for the engineering and medical schools and as far as I know they are done building for awhile. I know your suggestion was just a random one, but it doesn't look likely.

I thought that I made this clear above, but my intention was to state that this would be a cool location for a satellite campus of their business school offering primarily part-time MBA night classes and the like. Having a neon Wash U sign on a building downtown (new or rehabbed) would do a lot for the city's image which Wash U stands to benefit from (in addition to having easier offerings for their students working and living around downtown).

The university that I attended just finished construction of a brand new $200 M B-school on our campus, but has a location downtown as well as two others in the surrounding metro. I really didn't think this was such an isolated occurance. Most major Universities offer courses in their metros respective downtown areas.

Either way, this was merely casual wishful thinking and has nothing to do with the current buildings, so I think we can safely shelve this.

newstl2020 wrote:

maskedmesothorium wrote:The WashU business school currently resides in one of the newer buildings on campus. I think it was built in the late 80s or early 90s, but it still looks really modern on the inside. WashU just went through a big building phase for the engineering and medical schools and as far as I know they are done building for awhile. I know your suggestion was just a random one, but it doesn't look likely.

I thought that I made this clear above, but my intention was to state that this would be a cool location for a satellite campus of their business school offering primarily part-time MBA night classes and the like. Having a neon Wash U sign on a building downtown (new or rehabbed) would do a lot for the city's image which Wash U stands to benefit from (in addition to having easier offerings for their students working and living around downtown).

The university that I attended just finished construction of a brand new $200 M B-school on our campus, but has a location downtown as well as two others in the surrounding metro. I really didn't think this was such an isolated occurance. Most major Universities offer courses in their metros respective downtown areas.

Either way, this was merely casual wishful thinking and has nothing to do with the current buildings, so I think we can safely shelve this.

I've always thought that UMSL could benefit from a downtown or midtown campus, especially for their MBA program. Their north county campus isn't terribly convenient for many part-time students.

Mackey Mitchell Architects said today it will leave its long-time home near Union Station and move late this year to a renovated Cupples Station building a block west of Busch Stadium.

http://www.stltoday.com/business/column ... f6878.html

^Good news! I believe this leaves only one building (albeit a large project) left to go in the entire Couples complex, no?

^Well, good news for Cupples Station, but bad news for Union Station.

framer wrote:^Well, good news for Cupples Station, but bad news for Union Station.

Good for Ikea

newstl2020 wrote:^Good news! I believe this leaves only one building (albeit a large project) left to go in the entire Couples complex, no?

Yeah, but that one building is about to collapse.

RobbyD wrote:Nothing is perfect on this earth...what has been saved and how it has been saved is notable imo

Exactly. Three or four quality rehabs with stable/growing occupancy for one structure that just can't make it -- that's a ratio I can respect. The last isn't entirely a lost cause but time is not on it's side. With the other successes in the Cupples district, the proof is there that this CAN work on a large-scale.

Kevin B wrote:

RobbyD wrote:Nothing is perfect on this earth...what has been saved and how it has been saved is notable imo

Exactly. Three or four quality rehabs with stable/growing occupancy for one structure that just can't make it -- that's a ratio I can respect. The last isn't entirely a lost cause but time is not on it's side. With the other successes in the Cupples district, the proof is there that this CAN work on a large-scale.

well, the ratio's not really three-or-four to one. there were 18 warehouses originally. now we're down to 10 + Cupples 7 which is likely to meet the wrecking ball not because of vague notions like "nothing is perfect" or "it just can't make it", but due to McGowan's very real negligence. The Cupples 7 situation could have been prevented if the city actually held big developers to code.

RobbyD wrote:^It's likely that the McGowans have done more for preserving St Louis than you or I ever will...

so then it's alright for them to purchase important historic buildings and not even take elementary preservative measures like covering holes in the roof, instead allowing said buildings to deteriorate for years? please. they know better. makes me wonder if they ever actually planned to renovate it, or if they just wanted the land - you'd think that would've been the first thing they did.

What in the world would downtown do with 9 more vacant warehouses anyway...we've collectively as a society figured out more efficient and cheaper ways to manage manufacturing warehousing and supply chains away from urban cores...

oh, i don't know, maybe offices/residential/commercial? maybe what's been done with the other Cupples buildings? maybe what lots of other cities who haven't gutted their downtowns have done with vacant warehouses? of course they're not going to be used as warehouses. the thing about old warehouses is, they often have open floor-plans that make them easily adaptable for other uses.

rawest1 wrote: What demand is there for more office/residential/commercial? Take a walk, on this gorgeous day, down Olive between Jefferson and Tucker, and count the FOR SALE/FOR LEASE signs. It would be nice if we could preserve every single building ever that was built in St. Louis between 1764 and 1960, but there isn't demand for all the buildings. So it's inevitable that many of them will rot, and it simply is not cost-effective for anyone to do anything with all of them.

enough with the "every single building" nonsense. there is a difference between a rotting, unowned building and an owned, neglected one. the fact is the McGowans knowingly neglected #7. the building has been standing for nearly 100 years, and if the small holes in the roof had been patched before the entire roof had collapsed, the building wouldn't be ready to fall down. in fact, most of the missing Cupples buildings were not taken down due to rot. they fell to Bush Stadium, the highway ramps, and a genius plan to turn one into a canopied atrium that -- surprise, surprise -- guaranteed its demolition before financing was in place, leaving yet another surface parking lot.

demand downtown has been growing and is still on the rise. a couple of decades, billions of dollars, and numerous rehabs later it is in FAR better shape than it was in the late 80s/early 90s. what's more, the Cupples complex is in a more desirable location than "Olive between Jefferson and Tucker"; it's adjacent to the stadium and the central business district. given all the recent investment in the complex, I don't think it's fantasy to expect that, if it had been maintained, #7 would have been converted into offices and/or residential.

Alex Ihnen wrote:The difference retaining additional Cupples buildings would have made is that a neighborhood could have emerged. A real district could have proved much more enticing to developers, retailers and residents. Historic warehouses generally surrounded by parking lots isn't so appealing.

which, unfortunately, has become the case throughout much of the city. it's a huge detriment to progress. just got back from Boston, where the north end is a shining example of the redevelopment appeal of an in-tact district adjacent to downtown.

^While retaining all of the Cupples Buildings would have obviously been ideal, this area has IMO the best chance of getting the next residential tower that gets built in the city. While the South side of downtown is, in general, not as ideal a location as say Wash Ave or midtown, the one thing this does have going for it in spades is the proximity to the Metro-Link stop and views of Busch III.

I honestly think someone is going to step up with a proposal for an infill building that mirrors the Cupples buildings for the first 4 or 5 floors (ie, brick), using the first floor for retail and the next portions of the brick building for parking for residents. After this portion, you could transition to a glass building with balconies over-looking the stadium from virtually any current lot in this area. I'm not saying that we will get anything huge, but the potential risk reward for something in the 20 story range is huge. Wouldn't cost much at all the build, and could potentially claim huge premiums for the condos.

Additionally, you could simply hop on the subway for one stop to 8th and Pine and literally be a block away from the grocery station (Culinaria). Furthermore, the location could not be more ideal for frequent travelers, as you would save a killing on parking at the airport. Simply hop on the train to Lambert. Huge pluses in almost every category that you can think of.

If we are going to have actual infill of any kind begin downtown, my money is on this location.

Newstl2020, Didn't the developer also purchase the lot you are referring to? Think it is very doable and would have some great views overlooking the ball field and Arch as backdrop. The key would be get to the sq foot price down to a much more sellable. We all know how well the latest new high end condo construction went for two brothers.

Throw in a Stanely Cup and another World Series and you might get a local banker to bite on it. The bankers/financers are certainly not going out on limb for anything else right now.

^I believe McGowan owns the lot fronting Busch Stadium and the metro-link station. He has grand schemes for that property (MW Tower ~90 stories). I am not sure if that is alive in any incarnation right now, but I am almost certain the name would change as I do not think McGowan and Walsh work together anymore.

That is the best lot, and would likely have the best chance of getting good development. I am sure that is why he is holding onto it.

I actually think it would be very cool to see something done on the triangular lot directly West of the Westin. The highway off ramp borders the plot on the West side, and the building would have to be creative, but I think that would add to the appeal of the property. Would still have next to top-notch views of the stadium, and you would still be very proximate to the metro-link station.