They owe the public to rebuild those buildings
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They are a total loss, coming down.delmar2debaliviere2downtown wrote: ↑1:24 PM - Apr 24They owe the public to rebuild those buildings
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- 947
Understood they destroyed them but then they should rebuild them once the safety hazard is cleared
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- 3,796
^^Is there any timeline for the demo of the buildings?
Seems to me, if they wanted to rehab these buildings, they would have been guarded 24-7 with security. Seems like they almost wanted to clear the land even though they put out those grand renderings. At the very least, if they are a total loss, the owner(s)/developers owe our City the courtesy of clearing this eyesore. What a complete embarrassment for that site to welcome visitors to STL/Missouri.
Seems to me, if they wanted to rehab these buildings, they would have been guarded 24-7 with security. Seems like they almost wanted to clear the land even though they put out those grand renderings. At the very least, if they are a total loss, the owner(s)/developers owe our City the courtesy of clearing this eyesore. What a complete embarrassment for that site to welcome visitors to STL/Missouri.
- 3,796
^Seems like a great place for a data center if the Gateway South plan falls through. These under-utilized locations, that are tough to develop make great places for data centers, vs. putting them near populated areas, natural areas/parks & dense urban areas like the Armory.
I disagree. I wish STL would utilize its waterfront more. I understand thats tricky with flood control and what not, but plopping a data center there is short sighted. Soulard is so disconnected from Downtown. I really wish 7th/Broadway/4th street was more built up and populated with restaurants/bars/shopping/residential. It sucks that Kosciusko was so gutted, and will be hard to change that area to be anything but industrial. This development would have been a good help with that.DogtownBnR wrote: ↑6:11 PM - Apr 28^Seems like a great place for a data center if the Gateway South plan falls through. These under-utilized locations, that are tough to develop make great places for data centers, vs. putting them near populated areas, natural areas/parks & dense urban areas like the Armory.
7th needs a redo. It doesn't need 2 lanes and a median. Keep truck traffic within Kosciusko (which will help 7th from being a rutted out piece of sh*t), remove the median and north bound lanes, Rebuild on the parking lots to face a slimmer 7th street so your no longer looking at the backs of buildings.
- 3,796
^ I completely agree! I want the riverfront to be developed. However, if it comes down to nothing ever being put on the south RF or data centers, I go with something over nothing. Choteau's Landing was discussed over 20 years ago. Now Gateway South is either stalled or moving VERY slowly (or maybe not happening, who knows). Then they decided not to secure the existing buildings, sealing their fate. Now we have this MAJOR eyesore greeting travelers into our City. As they cross the Bridge, let's hope the Arch can distract most travelers. It is an absolute embarrassment. The owners should be forced to clean up the site. If they plan to move forward at some point, they would have to demo most of the damaged buildings anyway. Can't imagine any of them are salvageable at this point. . . 
I was just in cape girardeau this weekend and you can literally walk from water street and onto the riverfront cobbles.
Is there no plausible interaction availability points we can capitalize on? It's a main attraction to be that close to the river. Of course there is a flood wall as well but the access points are very easy to navigate to from the CBD. It's just a system of doors that seal in the case of high water (and it was very high this weekend to where most were closed).
Is there no plausible interaction availability points we can capitalize on? It's a main attraction to be that close to the river. Of course there is a flood wall as well but the access points are very easy to navigate to from the CBD. It's just a system of doors that seal in the case of high water (and it was very high this weekend to where most were closed).
Oh totally its an eyesore. I just really want the original intent of the site to happen, and not just throw up more tilt up storage, shipping, insert whatever heavy industrial use that YES will provide tax revenue, but be completely void of any human interaction, use or activity.DogtownBnR wrote: ↑2:53 PM - May 04^ I completely agree! I want the riverfront to be developed. However, if it comes down to nothing ever being put on the south RF or data centers, I go with something over nothing. Choteau's Landing was discussed over 20 years ago. Now Gateway South is either stalled or moving VERY slowly (or maybe not happening, who knows). Then they decided not to secure the existing buildings, sealing their fate. Now we have this MAJOR eyesore greeting travelers into our City. As they cross the Bridge, let's hope the Arch can distract most travelers. It is an absolute embarrassment. The owners should be forced to clean up the site. If they plan to move forward at some point, they would have to demo most of the damaged buildings anyway. Can't imagine any of them are salvageable at this point. . .
- 85
Every other city on the Mississippi River has some sort of activated riverfront. I’ve never understood why people in St. Louis act like it can’t be done here toobwcrow1s wrote:I was just in cape girardeau this weekend and you can literally walk from water street and onto the riverfront cobbles.
Is there no plausible interaction availability points we can capitalize on? It's a main attraction to be that close to the river. Of course there is a flood wall as well but the access points are very easy to navigate to from the CBD. It's just a system of doors that seal in the case of high water (and it was very high this weekend to where most were closed).
The lack of development on the river is unbelievable - The city has almost all of it zoned industrial and seems to be stubbornly locked into thatSTLcommenter wrote: ↑4:03 PM - May 04Every other city on the Mississippi River has some sort of activated riverfront. I’ve never understood why people in St. Louis act like it can’t be done here toobwcrow1s wrote:I was just in cape girardeau this weekend and you can literally walk from water street and onto the riverfront cobbles.
Is there no plausible interaction availability points we can capitalize on? It's a main attraction to be that close to the river. Of course there is a flood wall as well but the access points are very easy to navigate to from the CBD. It's just a system of doors that seal in the case of high water (and it was very high this weekend to where most were closed).
- 1,630
“Because…” broadly waving at everything already on our riverfront,STLcommenter wrote: ↑4:03 PM - May 04Every other city on the Mississippi River has some sort of activated riverfront. I’ve never understood why people in St. Louis act like it can’t be done here toobwcrow1s wrote:I was just in cape girardeau this weekend and you can literally walk from water street and onto the riverfront cobbles.
Is there no plausible interaction availability points we can capitalize on? It's a main attraction to be that close to the river. Of course there is a flood wall as well but the access points are very easy to navigate to from the CBD. It's just a system of doors that seal in the case of high water (and it was very high this weekend to where most were closed).
- 225
looks like they have a loooong way to go
Who is paying for this; the owners I presume?
Who is paying for this; the owners I presume?
- 947
OK, this seems a positive step in the right direction…
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- 3,796
Is this a 'brick recovery' to use that brick for the project or sell it for reuse in Texas?
Seems like a very tedious job? Is brick recovery usually done brick by brick, by hand? Seem dangerous to even be standing on that site with all of the half-collapsed buildings hanging in the balance right above the workers.
It would be nice for the developer/owner to provide an update on the status of the project? Wonder if the Mayor's office requested the owner clean up the site?
Seems like a very tedious job? Is brick recovery usually done brick by brick, by hand? Seem dangerous to even be standing on that site with all of the half-collapsed buildings hanging in the balance right above the workers.
It would be nice for the developer/owner to provide an update on the status of the project? Wonder if the Mayor's office requested the owner clean up the site?
- 967
We received word this morning from the owners of the property surrounding SMV that a major cleanup of the wrecked buildings nearby will be starting in several days. In particular the building immediately to the east of the Church and Hall will be demolished. Please pray that the effort continues with great success and the neighborhood is reborn!
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... louis.html
Gateway South developer says they have secured 4 tenants that will fill 145,000 square feet, construction could start by the end of the yeat. The redevelopment agreement requires 250,000 square feet of space to be developed by 2032.
The tenants include a panelized home manufacturer that will occupy 54,000 square feet and employ 250 people and an electrical contractor's facility that will occupy 50,000 square feet and employ 115 people. Additionally, there will be a 16,000 square foot workforce development hub and a 27,000 square foot community child care center.
None of the tenants were named, however.
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
Gateway South developer says they have secured 4 tenants that will fill 145,000 square feet, construction could start by the end of the yeat. The redevelopment agreement requires 250,000 square feet of space to be developed by 2032.
The tenants include a panelized home manufacturer that will occupy 54,000 square feet and employ 250 people and an electrical contractor's facility that will occupy 50,000 square feet and employ 115 people. Additionally, there will be a 16,000 square foot workforce development hub and a 27,000 square foot community child care center.
None of the tenants were named, however.
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
Panelized, autocorrected to penalizedframer wrote:"Penalized home manufacturer"?
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
- 6,153
^Given what they've done and what's happened, penalized seems quite apt.
I get that this is a relatively sketchy small-time developer so far but I don't really think this is too far of a stretch. Two additional small tenants next to the 2 previously announced ones, and this "first development" is just the rehab of a small building at 2nd and Lombard and the construction of a new warehouse. Unlike Crunden-Martin or the fanciful high rises on the renderings, this is something even they can likely accomplish and accomplish with relative easewhitherSTL wrote: ↑1:08 AM - May 27That’s all BS