urbanSTL

Framer wrote:Large-scale commercial buildings will not be built in the Gateway Mall. Why can't you guys just accept that and move on?

Why should I accept bad decision making?

bonwich wrote: a below-ground parking garage on which the City reneged its obligation and ended up owing money to the state

I had always thought that would be a great way to kill multiple birds with one stone. Knowing that it is feasible ...



What I want to see take place:

1. Large sections of the Gateway Mall are dug up, and underground parking goes in along the Downtown East length. We dig, and we dig deep.

2. Then, new construction goes in where currently we have the two disgusting tan garages along Chestnut next to the mall.

3. The sculpture park goes in above, as well as other new projects, making them usable for the Downtown work and residential populations.



The site of the Chestnut garages: THAT is where we could best use new 600’ office towers, new businesses locating with perfect views of the Arch and grounds, new revenue sources for city coffers, and increased population in the north business sector. The Bread Company, and the Hooters next to the Wainwright Building, can relocate, and I don’t think the whole world would end. Plus, with so much work going into recasting those plots of land, I’m sure we can get other opportunities to improve the aesthetics and usability of the Gateway Mall; at this time, the realistic potential for ancillary construction may exist more feasibly.



All of a sudden, we have the Gateway Mall in more productive use while being able to both increase its usage and maintain its integrity, new sites for construction of highly desirable office space, and a changed visage for Downtown. If you were a major architect, such as a Calatrava or Gehry, you’d want the opportunity to build something of prominence in compliment to Saarinen’s Arch; Chestnut is where such things should go. Major banks, for instance, would kill for such a location for a headquarters; meanwhile, they have access to as much parking as can go underground next door. If it was conceivable before the grounds were turned into yards, I’m sure they could be made into garages again without overly undue problems for infrastructure relocation, such as electrical, sewage, and telephony.



When I get my billions, I promise I’ll get right to work on it. Until that time, however, the City should make that land available for development and attract new corporate headquarters to Downtown. Plus, we get rid of those damnably ugly garages and make two of the most potentially attractive blocks available for new construction on the market.



I would call this economic development.

jlblues wrote:... add entrance and exit ramps along Chestnut and Market without eating into the Mall itself. And the office buildings that go in where the Kiener garages are would have direct, enclosed access to all of that parking.

Damn right; we have to make sure traffic stays manageable. Eat in a little if we must, but I'm sure good plans can be drawn for this.

Furthermore, that would be prime parking space, close to both stadiums and the heart of the CBD, and would command some of the highest parking rates downtown, giving you a revenue stream to pay off most of the cost of construction. I would think this is exactly the sort of thing for which MODESA was created as well.

Yes, certainly, and oh yeah they're high demand continuous revenue streams. Turning underutilized property into high-demand multiuse is necessary to maintain advancing competitive advantages as we consolidate delineated public spaces with the interests of long-term growth, revenues, usability, and capitalization of space.



This is a relatively simple idea; noting that the City planned on it once, I now recognize it to be feasible, too.



Any REITs out there: make this happen.

newstl2020 wrote:GoneCorporate - I'm working on my finance degree but am unfortunately not quite there yet so I'll defer this to you. I have heard that immediately after the new ownership aquired the cardinals they sold off the two garages on the East and West of the BPV plot for 50 million a piece. How feasable would you believe it would be for the city to actually aquire those garages in order to demolish them to make way for new development while constructing a massive underground parking structure under the mall as you have stated above? I love the idea and in a perfect world that would happen. Do you think this would be feasable, however? Land that is worth that much seems like it would be a pretty good incentive to me (In a better market, that is).

I don't know who the buyer was, but fair to assume it was part of a REIT. They're making profit off of all the parkers, both daily downtown users and special events (Cards game) users. They wouldn't have been sold if they weren't profitable in their own rights. For the City to purchase them, it would be both costly (would want to sell for a profit) and political suicide, as the politicians couldn't dare seek the buyout of a building while the City still has so many problems endemic to a modern urban environment. Or, for the cost of those buildings, the City could build multiple blocks of subsidized housing, improve the schools, and hire dozens of new cops.



For any developments of these scales, it would necessitate the Private Sector.



And remember, the whole Sculpture Park project is from a private foundation in effect giving the public a $20M park renovation.

Magnatron wrote:[-o< please get an Oldenburg sculpture, that would make the whole thing worth it...

Yes! Absolutely! I may have even suggested the same thing earlier in this thread. Something like "Free Stamp" in Cleveland.

I don't understand why we don't have underground parking like Grant Park. Why did we build so many garages when we have a linear plot of green space where we can have underground parking? This was supposed to happen per Pride of St. Louis' Plan. But I'm guessing it didn't remain cost effective when all three office towers weren't built.



I see people park on Chestnut and walk to the cards game all the time. We need underground parking.

Moorlander wrote:

Framer wrote:Personally, I'm not a fan of Oldenburg, but he seems to be popular with the general public, so I guess it would make sense here.

Any examples of this Old guy's work?

http://www.oldenburgvanbruggen.com/lsp.htm

Moorlander wrote:interesting... So how many pieces of Art can we realistically expect for $20mil? It will cover 2 blocks right?

With an Oldenburg, you only need 1!