urbanSTL

^Also, the markets would be completely different. I'm sure the tower units would be very, very high end. The Ballpark Lofts, while certainly nice, will probably be marketed to a relatively lower-income market.

The vacant lot just east of the Scottrade Center would be ideal, especially with a renovated opera house, and walking distance to Ballpark Village, and the Pond development. A hotel right next to the arena also makes perfect sense.

I had a dream last night that they tore down the Days Inn at 12th & Washington in order to build the MW Tower there.

The West side of Tucker between Olive and Locust would be good. You know, where that stupid suburban bank is right now.

Framer wrote:The West side of Tucker between Olive and Locust would be good. You know, where that stupid suburban bank is right now.

We have a long way to go downtown before we can start ripping up existing buildings, no matter how suburban they look... I agree its out of place, but not nearly as much as all those wasted acres of asphalt and grass... lets build somewhere there isn't already something thats being used....

tbspqr wrote:

Framer wrote:The West side of Tucker between Olive and Locust would be good. You know, where that stupid suburban bank is right now.

We have a long way to go downtown before we can start ripping up existing buildings, no matter how suburban they look... I agree its out of place, but not nearly as much as all those wasted acres of asphalt and grass... lets build somewhere there isn't already something thats being used....

^Wrong. That bank building needs to be replaced badly, it is a horrible waste of space. They can put a bank into the first floor of whatever building goes on that lot. I don't know if MW tower should go on this spot, but something needs to go there badly. Christ Church Cathedral looks orphaned without buildings behind it. And Tucker needs all the help it can get. With the new Park Pacific, Nadira, etc., I am hoping a real building replaces this bank and surrounding surface lots ASAP!

I have to admit - I am not familiar with this exact bank (so maybe it would have been better for me to keep my mouth shut) but in general:

downtown has sooo many empty surface lots and parks that go unused that are in a location that is just as "prime" as this already used bank... I still think it would be better to put this where there isn't a functioning building. I hate to be a pessimist/realist but... even with all the wildest dreams and all the plans thus far presented - there will still be “prime” space available to build on (surface lots parks etc). We can't go around bullying anyone (no matter how small/ugly their building is) when the same opportunity exists for just as good a spot. New York could do this because most of their good spots are taken, but STL has NOT that luxury. STL can’t afford a reputation of “begging for years to get any business to come downtown” – then to drive certain of those ones off.



Sacrifice the 81 story tower at the expense of the little bank – HECK NO!! I just don’t like all the talk about “I don’t like that building so it should be destroyed”

I too would like to see unused/underused (which is what I would call this bank) lots along Washington and Tucker built first. Infill is great, but will lag if prominent corners - symbols of a renewal - aren't well used. The MW Tower wouldn't fit on this lot, but something similar to the Nadira would . . .

tbspqr wrote:

Framer wrote:The West side of Tucker between Olive and Locust would be good. You know, where that stupid suburban bank is right now.

We have a long way to go downtown before we can start ripping up existing buildings, no matter how suburban they look... I agree its out of place, but not nearly as much as all those wasted acres of asphalt and grass... lets build somewhere there isn't already something thats being used....

The asphalt and grass are being used.

The Central Scrutinizer wrote:

tbspqr wrote:

Framer wrote:The West side of Tucker between Olive and Locust would be good. You know, where that stupid suburban bank is right now.

We have a long way to go downtown before we can start ripping up existing buildings, no matter how suburban they look... I agree its out of place, but not nearly as much as all those wasted acres of asphalt and grass... lets build somewhere there isn't already something thats being used....

The asphalt and grass are being used.

Touché

tbspqr, Just to clarify, your point is taken and is valid. No point in knocking down buildings and kicking out successful businesses when there are empty lots available for development. But, this wouldn't be a matter of putting a poor banker out of business. They could easily move into a new building. In fact, they might welcome the increased customer base.



Of course, discussion of the bank lot is off topic, because MW wouldn't fit on this lot anyway. (I don't think it would? but what do I know?).



While I think such a building as substantial as MW should be downtown, I have considered how striking it would be at Lindell & Grand. It would be a beacon for the entire city.

My first post. I've been reading for a while and enjoy the enthusiasm that many of you bring to these topics. Like many of you, I am a proud of my city and want only the best for it. The new construction discussed here - MW tower, TBD, and BPV are all fantastic concepts for St. Louis and seem to go hand in hand with a revitalizing downtown.



However, I seem to be in the dark here. Can someone please tell me, beyond animated discussion on this site, when anyone has committed to actually building an 81 story tower anywhere? The last few post have people movng banks and considering certain strategic building points concerning the skyline, but best I can tell we're all chasng our tails. Has MW committed to anything? Has the city received even a proposal? There seems to be a tangible rumbling or two on TBD and BPV every once in a while, but really nothing of note on this tower.



I guess I want the enthusiasm and excitment here to be justified, and not just excitment over nothing. Before we start moving banks, can someone enlightment as to this being a real project or a pipe dream?

CSMAC, welcome to the the forum.



Actually, there is no serious talk about moving banks for this building. If you read the entire thread, you can see that much of it has been dedicated to such speculation. If this building were to be built, where should it go, how will it look, etc. As far as I am concerned, this thread is little more than entertainment. However, there have been hints, some of them credible that this building may be more than a rumor. But, in the meantime, there is no harm in discussing possibilities and impacts.

Thanks for the welcome Expat.



I agree, there is no harm in discussing rumors, possibilities, and impact. And in previously reading the entire thread, I came to the same conclusion that that's what was going on here. The line seems to blur sometimes though and I was wondering if I was missing something.



I guess I wanted to get excited over facts, not speculation.

Maybe someone that has been paying close attention could give us a summary of where this actually stands? I can see how it would be complicated for someone to read this thread and understand what is going on (or not going on).

All the recent speculations/enthusiasm has come from a post that said Kevin McGowan spoke at a SLU class and told them the project was now 81 stories and that an announcement would be coming in the next 30-60 days. Apparently Kevin had been telling others at St. Louis forums/other events that a 71 story tower was in the works. It is speculation but as some have noted, Kevin doesn't seem like the kind of developer to shoot himself in the foot - that's why many of us are assuming this will be built and are concerned about where it will go.

Ihnen wrote:It is speculation but as some have noted, Kevin doesn't seem like the kind of developer to shoot himself in the foot - that's why many of us are assuming this will be built and are concerned about where it will go.

Agreed. Of course, the original post could have been bogus, but if people from the mayor's office, the P-D, and other developers read this site, it's safe to assume people from MW also read this site. Wouldn't they have negated this thread by now if it wasn't at least feasible?

Just to put everyone at rest, a member of the local media is on the case, trying to reach Mr. McGowan and see what he has to say.



Hope to have a reply from his either today or tomorrow.



Will keep everyone informed.

cwecub34 wrote:Just to put everyone at rest, a member of the local media is on the case, trying to reach Mr. McGowan and see what he has to say.



Hope to have a reply from his either today or tomorrow.



Will keep everyone informed.

he'll probably deny it until he is ready to announce it... at least thats what i'd do..



I mean assuming it's the post, why would he want to give them any details..they'd just misquote him anyway... I hope your local media guru works in that OPO at that bizjournal...

Local media on the case? Must be looking to see if they can rail him for 'taking the public's money' with a TIF. Either that or an 'it'll never happen cause it's in the city' spin. Look at the PD. The last sentence on the 14th Street Mall renovation was, "Absent the tax credits, the project would not be possible, said David Dodson, deputy director for the housing alliance."

SoulardD wrote:Local media on the case? Must be looking to see if they can rail him for 'taking the public's money' with a TIF. Either that or an 'it'll never happen cause it's in the city' spin. Look at the PD. The last sentence on the 14th Street Mall renovation was, "Absent the tax credits, the project would not be possible, said David Dodson, deputy director for the housing alliance."

So you're saying David Dobson is lying?

Nope, but instead of ending the story on a positive note they hit the fact that 'things aren't possible in the city' and that 'another project is taking our tax money'.



-I think that Dobson was saying TIFs are crucial to redevelopment. I think the average suburbanite would read that sentence and look at it as a negative situation.