Cheaply and poorly constructed
Poorly maintained
Infested with mold
Sounds like this one will be demolished
Poorly maintained
Infested with mold
Sounds like this one will be demolished
Although I like this building. If it is cost prohibitive to rehab, we should definitely see it tore down when a solid replacement comes along. Hopefully any new proposal will be something with some height and skyline altering.
- 1,864
Somewhat surprised we haven't seen anyone buy it for the land... especially if BPV II and 300 S. Broadway are built, I think this spot could be prime for another residential tower.
It's practically woven into Deloitte building. Does that mean Deloitte dies too?
This is a mid century marvel with a lot of history. Generations from now, people will say it was constructed around the same "era" as the Arch. I think it's silly to demo it now. Especially since it's only been vacant some 4 years. There are some buildings that have been vacant more than a decade and they get more attention.
I understand buildings like Jeff Arms have better infrastructure, but I don't want to count the millenium out. Just seems like something we are going to regret.
This is a mid century marvel with a lot of history. Generations from now, people will say it was constructed around the same "era" as the Arch. I think it's silly to demo it now. Especially since it's only been vacant some 4 years. There are some buildings that have been vacant more than a decade and they get more attention.
I understand buildings like Jeff Arms have better infrastructure, but I don't want to count the millenium out. Just seems like something we are going to regret.
- 2,623
I would think that the Deloitte Building could very easily remodel the bottom two floors in a post Millennium demolition scenario
- 307
You guys thinking what I'm thinking???.... World's biggest Amazon Echo!!!!!! Woot Wootjshank83 wrote: “They were amenable to having us include the property in that package (Amazon),”
It was be truly sad to lose a unique and highly visible tower like this. Considering how anemic our skyline is relative to many other cities of our size, we need to keep all the skyscrapers we have.
Round towers seem to be cursed in St. Louis. The old Rodeway Inn on the western edge of downtown and the Regency Nursing Inn (the "Round Building") in the CWE have already disappeared from the skyline, the Lewis & Clark Tower in suburban Moline Acres was recently condemned, and the tallest and certainly most famous of all round buildings in the city faces an uncertain future. Let's hope someone finds a way to rescue (and repaint!) this kitschy hotel so future generations of St. Louisans can dine at the revolving rooftop restaurant on prom night.
Round towers seem to be cursed in St. Louis. The old Rodeway Inn on the western edge of downtown and the Regency Nursing Inn (the "Round Building") in the CWE have already disappeared from the skyline, the Lewis & Clark Tower in suburban Moline Acres was recently condemned, and the tallest and certainly most famous of all round buildings in the city faces an uncertain future. Let's hope someone finds a way to rescue (and repaint!) this kitschy hotel so future generations of St. Louisans can dine at the revolving rooftop restaurant on prom night.
I agree that saving it is preferable, that its STyLe (thanks for that 'gasm) will be more broadly appreciated as time goes on and that round buildings are a dying breed in St. Louis, BUT I'd still be happy to see the oval building at the south end of the site replaced by a new 6+ story apartment building (i.e The Euclid, The Everly, The Orion, etc...) to supplement the other major residential investments that are proposed nearby.
I think that could be done while preserving all of the original building's swinging 60's charm.
I think that could be done while preserving all of the original building's swinging 60's charm.
- 403
Sorry to say this but theres likely not going to be a developer willing to sink in that kind of money if its not economically sufficient to warrant saving such a beautiful building yet badly and cheaply built.
Sadly the city doesn't own the building either but whatever goes in its replacement the city shall definitely have a say.
I would recommend the replacement building be iconic and no shorter than what was previously there.
Also i would like for the city to modernize its height limit in that vicinity instead of 250-300ft the new limit should accommodate new development so i'd go with 450-550ft still not overshadowing the Arch but allowing for more height.
I'm definitely not against saving this building however if saving means possibly a 10 year wait till some developer with very deep pockets who wants to save it and feels it be a great investment i'd say go for it but this could easily be a 200 mil possibly 300 mil redevelopment.
I say this building has a 90% chance of being lost. In some 10 years the skyline is going to look different with or without it.
come to think of it this was in one of my predictions for this year.
Sadly the city doesn't own the building either but whatever goes in its replacement the city shall definitely have a say.
I would recommend the replacement building be iconic and no shorter than what was previously there.
Also i would like for the city to modernize its height limit in that vicinity instead of 250-300ft the new limit should accommodate new development so i'd go with 450-550ft still not overshadowing the Arch but allowing for more height.
I'm definitely not against saving this building however if saving means possibly a 10 year wait till some developer with very deep pockets who wants to save it and feels it be a great investment i'd say go for it but this could easily be a 200 mil possibly 300 mil redevelopment.
I say this building has a 90% chance of being lost. In some 10 years the skyline is going to look different with or without it.
come to think of it this was in one of my predictions for this year.
I'm sure this is on here several times but here's the National Register Nomination if anyone wants to flip through it.
I've said it before but I just love how weird this building is. It's got a tunnel under 4th Street to the parking garage, a rear entrance for buses on Memorial Drive, one of the largest ballrooms in the region, an amazing two story lobby facing the Arch, the city's only revolving restaurant (with a history of it's own worth saving), and a massive atrium in South Tower that used to have some bizarre structure inside it. Not to mention the fact that they built an office building on top of one of the wings.
The only thing I don't like is that it's just not that attractive of a building, in my opinion. But maybe a well done paint scheme could easily change that.
I've said it before but I just love how weird this building is. It's got a tunnel under 4th Street to the parking garage, a rear entrance for buses on Memorial Drive, one of the largest ballrooms in the region, an amazing two story lobby facing the Arch, the city's only revolving restaurant (with a history of it's own worth saving), and a massive atrium in South Tower that used to have some bizarre structure inside it. Not to mention the fact that they built an office building on top of one of the wings.
The only thing I don't like is that it's just not that attractive of a building, in my opinion. But maybe a well done paint scheme could easily change that.
- 307
KMOV: Millennium Hotel owners 'still evaluating' future of vacant St. Louis property
“Having talked to developers and folks that have looked at the site, working with those circular buildings that were pre-cast construction would be very difficult. Not impossible - it can be done, but I think would be very difficult,” said Coatar. “I think at some point you’re going to have to see new construction on that site, simply to compete with all the other new residential and commercial and hotel products coming on the market.”
...He also said it’s not out of the realm of possibilities for the city to eventually explore a “finding of blight” on the buildings, considering water damage in one of the towers. That would allow them to move forward with other incentive packages.
“Having talked to developers and folks that have looked at the site, working with those circular buildings that were pre-cast construction would be very difficult. Not impossible - it can be done, but I think would be very difficult,” said Coatar. “I think at some point you’re going to have to see new construction on that site, simply to compete with all the other new residential and commercial and hotel products coming on the market.”
...He also said it’s not out of the realm of possibilities for the city to eventually explore a “finding of blight” on the buildings, considering water damage in one of the towers. That would allow them to move forward with other incentive packages.
Dude loves to blight.San Luis Native wrote: ↑Mar 05, 2018KMOV: Millennium Hotel owners 'still evaluating' future of vacant St. Louis property
“Having talked to developers and folks that have looked at the site, working with those circular buildings that were pre-cast construction would be very difficult. Not impossible - it can be done, but I think would be very difficult,” said Coatar. “I think at some point you’re going to have to see new construction on that site, simply to compete with all the other new residential and commercial and hotel products coming on the market.”
...He also said it’s not out of the realm of possibilities for the city to eventually explore a “finding of blight” on the buildings, considering water damage in one of the towers. That would allow them to move forward with other incentive packages.
- 1,864
If it leads to new residential construction like BPV Phase 2 and (hopefully) 300 S. Broadway, then go for it. Just require building permits and financing be in place before any demolition permits. And add in a clause that states that if the proposed towers aren't built as originally proposed (or at all) that the tax incentives are null and the developer is responsible for paying taxes at the rate of what the building would have been valued at starting immediately.
It's a shame that in St. Louis, a city littered with so many surface parking lots and vacant parcels, new development so often hinges on replacing existing buildings. There is plenty of room for BOTH. I don't know the politics of all this, but I feel like the alderman should be steering development priorities toward underutilized parcels - parking lots, parking garages, etc. Make some deals, be a hero. In downtown St. Louis, increasing density can easily be achieved without sacrificing a single existing structure. Even in the most sought-after locations, there are parking lots and garages breaking up the cohesion of the streetscape. While no one wants to see the Millennium mothballed for a millennium (haha), I'd rather it be physically there in the skyline than not.
Agreed. Lots of largely lateral density additions. We're adding residential density with 300SB yet making a lateral density addition in terms of street building wall, activity, etc. It's frustrating to look at that building going away while staring at all of these low productivity buildings like Mike Shannon's, the prison garages, etc.
I would hope with the Millennium it could be encourage to at least save the iconic tower and demolish the rest for new construction. Seems like Coatar is trigger happy on moving ahead blighting.
I would hope with the Millennium it could be encourage to at least save the iconic tower and demolish the rest for new construction. Seems like Coatar is trigger happy on moving ahead blighting.
Agreed -- I would definitely be for demolishing the low rise portion of the Millennium. If the tower can find incentives to be saved, build a 1-2 story reception area along 4th street and a newly reconnected Clark, and new construction could go on the northeast corner of that newly restored Clark/4th intersection.
The walkway area is such a waste of real estate, especially now that the hotel is defunct. Tons of green space, lots of curb cuts, etc.
The only confusing to me is how the grid will perform with a street like Clark reopened. Do we have it cross the sunken highway? Or be only accessible from the West side/south-running portion of Memorial? The whole new state of Memorial is a little bit confusing to me since it has to wrap around Ely square, force a turn onto Market, etc.. I at least think the more pedestrian walkways we can get over the highway, the better.
The walkway area is such a waste of real estate, especially now that the hotel is defunct. Tons of green space, lots of curb cuts, etc.
The only confusing to me is how the grid will perform with a street like Clark reopened. Do we have it cross the sunken highway? Or be only accessible from the West side/south-running portion of Memorial? The whole new state of Memorial is a little bit confusing to me since it has to wrap around Ely square, force a turn onto Market, etc.. I at least think the more pedestrian walkways we can get over the highway, the better.
It's not all that sunken at Clark so the best you could do is connect to the southbound side of Memorial. Too bad we didn't take the opportunity to build the boulevard.
- 1,792
Right. Without a boulevard memorial drive is a glorified interstate on ramp. I see no reason to reopen Clark through to an on ramp. Better to drive pedestrian traffic to Walnut where they can access the arch grounds.
I would probably go the other way and build an additional building on the site in place of the fountain. Renovate the other buildings.
- 103
In a perfect world, we could get the millennium hotel converted/renovated to apartments. Then tear down the adjacent building and built a 400ft condo building. The connector piece could be redone to have a pool and outdoor space on top with a gym inside. Boom!