Honestly... I wouldn’t be surprised if Emporis’ people look here for information as much as anywhere else... we seemed pretty "sure" that it was going to happen, so they updated in -- maybe they were optimistic us - if they listed it is might happen? But yeah - until it is announced publicly -- it is just a rumor and nothing more. We should have learned this a long time ago. (And even if it is announced doesn’t mean it is going to happen)
- 5,433
It looks like Kevin McGowan is looking to Springfield, Mo. for his next large development...
Recently, McGowan Walsh was selected by the City of Springfield to purchase and redevelop the former Heer's department store on the city's square, which has been vacant for twelve years. McGowan is expected to sign an agreement in the next two weeks. After conducting a study, McGowan will decide whether to develop Heer's as condominiums or a boutique hotel, and the main floor retail space will be anchored by Mike Shannon's.
Meanwhile, we still don't know what the exact mix of condos and offices will be at Ballpark Village, and now that McGowan has taken on projects in Kansas City and Springfield, I'm not holding my breath for the MW Tower announcement anytime soon.
Recently, McGowan Walsh was selected by the City of Springfield to purchase and redevelop the former Heer's department store on the city's square, which has been vacant for twelve years. McGowan is expected to sign an agreement in the next two weeks. After conducting a study, McGowan will decide whether to develop Heer's as condominiums or a boutique hotel, and the main floor retail space will be anchored by Mike Shannon's.
Meanwhile, we still don't know what the exact mix of condos and offices will be at Ballpark Village, and now that McGowan has taken on projects in Kansas City and Springfield, I'm not holding my breath for the MW Tower announcement anytime soon.
I have never taken this tower seriously. And won't until there is a concrete announcement of location, tenants, etc.
My question: When does it become dishonest to show this tower on their homepage?
Isn't that like prominently featuring a Mercedez Benz in an online personal ad? And when asked about it - and only when asked, reply that you hope to own a Mercedes one day, but actually drive the 2001 Taurus shown in a faded image in the background. Isn't that a rather dishonest way to impress possible suitors?
Am I too harsh? What do you think?
My question: When does it become dishonest to show this tower on their homepage?
Isn't that like prominently featuring a Mercedez Benz in an online personal ad? And when asked about it - and only when asked, reply that you hope to own a Mercedes one day, but actually drive the 2001 Taurus shown in a faded image in the background. Isn't that a rather dishonest way to impress possible suitors?
Am I too harsh? What do you think?
- 6,775
Expat wrote:When does it become dishonest to show this tower on their homepage?
Never
Expat wrote:Am I too harsh?
Yes
- 1,768
Both the rendering and website are marketing tools, made to generate interest in current or future projects. Its not dishonest in the slightest. It takes a long time to get significantly lesser projects going. The problem here is that people have been dishonest with themselves concerning the stage at which this "concept" is at. There was never even a site for it. the closest it got was "maybe south of the stadium." The "Kevin said an announcement drum" gets beat almost everyday. Well, one didn't come. So there was no reason to cling to this from the beginning. This is like Truman Capote-Faction.Expat wrote:I have never taken this tower seriously. And won't until there is a concrete announcement of location, tenants, etc.
My question: When does it become dishonest to show this tower on their homepage?
Isn't that like prominently featuring a Mercedez Benz in an online personal ad? And when asked about it - and only when asked, reply that you hope to own a Mercedes one day, but actually drive the 2001 Taurus shown in a faded image in the background. Isn't that a rather dishonest way to impress possible suitors?
Am I too harsh? What do you think?
When going in for an interview would you wear your gym clothes? Their current projects are by no means a Taurus, and as above, with no announcement this never went from vision to proposed project. You have to talk about something like this before comes to fruition. Are you persecuting M/W for thinking big, which we constantly lament a lack of in these parts?
Expat wrote:
Isn't that like prominently featuring a Mercedez Benz in an online personal ad? And when asked about it - and only when asked, reply that you hope to own a Mercedes one day, but actually drive the 2001 Taurus shown in a faded image in the background. Isn't that a rather dishonest way to impress possible suitors?
Bad experience?
First, I want to thank Central Scrutinizer for his reply, concise and to the point .
TheWayoftheArch - Thanks for you thoughts. I don't know how these things work and glad for the insight. I see what you mean in terms of marketing themselves and not wearing gym clothes to an interview. I would expect the resume and portfolio to be accurate - where is the line? Just to clarify, I don't think their current work represents a Taurus, I just used that as an easy way to make a point. And to clarify further, I think the Taurus is a good solid car - nothing wrong with it.
I was just trying to decide when a business is marketing and when a business is trying to imply they are something they are not. It seems that a line could be crossed at some point. I suppose marketing is a large part of the development business. I am all for thinking big. Nothing makes me happier than a St. Louis company thinking big and growing.
. TheWayoftheArch - Thanks for you thoughts. I don't know how these things work and glad for the insight. I see what you mean in terms of marketing themselves and not wearing gym clothes to an interview. I would expect the resume and portfolio to be accurate - where is the line? Just to clarify, I don't think their current work represents a Taurus, I just used that as an easy way to make a point. And to clarify further, I think the Taurus is a good solid car - nothing wrong with it.
I was just trying to decide when a business is marketing and when a business is trying to imply they are something they are not. It seems that a line could be crossed at some point. I suppose marketing is a large part of the development business. I am all for thinking big. Nothing makes me happier than a St. Louis company thinking big and growing.
- 1,768
I see your point, sort of, though I think that you must consider it as part of their "vision" or "mission" to produce quality projects and livable cities. They do not list it under their current projects, and therefore I find no misrepresentation. I think they have it there so people contact them and say "whats up with that sleek tower?" And they them all about their commitment and desire to turn St. Louis into a great livable place, and that they're laying the foundation for great things in the future "and by the way have you seen our plethora of devlopments currently in the pipeline?" (or better "you wouldn't happen to be the CEO of a fortune 500 company looking for new digs to buttress that fantastic hairdo and ego, would you?")
I find this no different than joe blow on the street wearing a shirt that says "SEX" in large print across the front, and then below it in small print says "now that I have your attention..."
Its an attention getter, no different than a balloon attached to a leasing office sign.
Until they make an announcement.
I find this no different than joe blow on the street wearing a shirt that says "SEX" in large print across the front, and then below it in small print says "now that I have your attention..."
Its an attention getter, no different than a balloon attached to a leasing office sign.
Until they make an announcement.
'Arch makes some valid points. Never-the-less, I feel the image is bogus. Expat's personal-ad comparison is right on the money.
Well, first off, it costs money to get quality illustration such as the one presented on the web site, being as this rendering almost certainly must be done by an architectural firm...way too well executed and detailed, indicting it would have to be based on actual plans, IMO. Wouldn't it be rather foolish that a developer would squander that kind of money in such a grand plan soley in an attempt to make themselves look impressive?
MW is trying to make their mark. I believe it will become a reality if enough interest from commited tenants and even public support were in order. I really believe those are THE keys, here. Not taking this project seriously would (and possibly may have already) greatly impare the project.
Because a location has not been given really means nothing. (How many people have their dream home in mind before they have the land?)
In a nutshell, I think to assume this project is a fluke is not realistic reasoning, all things considered. Just my take.
MW is trying to make their mark. I believe it will become a reality if enough interest from commited tenants and even public support were in order. I really believe those are THE keys, here. Not taking this project seriously would (and possibly may have already) greatly impare the project.
Because a location has not been given really means nothing. (How many people have their dream home in mind before they have the land?)
In a nutshell, I think to assume this project is a fluke is not realistic reasoning, all things considered. Just my take.
- 11K
Does anyone "in the business" know at what rate proposed buildings actually get built? I think we show way too much disappointment and pessimism when a project isn't built. I'd be shocked if 1/2 of envisioned projects are ever completed. But so what? It's great to see people ideas of what may be. I love that MW seems to have a vision for an 80+ story tower.
- 69
TheWayoftheArch: Agreed.
How many company websites have "stock photos" of people rather than actual pictures of their own employees? It is just artwork on a website to generate interest.
I would expect someone who "hopes to own a mercedes" to possibly have a picture of them with one. It says something about their personality that they drive a taurus and want to drive an MB...just as MW makes a statement by having something over the top on their website. That is how they see themselves, or would like to be seen in the future.
After an 41+ page thread on MB, I'd say it is working!
How many company websites have "stock photos" of people rather than actual pictures of their own employees? It is just artwork on a website to generate interest.
I would expect someone who "hopes to own a mercedes" to possibly have a picture of them with one. It says something about their personality that they drive a taurus and want to drive an MB...just as MW makes a statement by having something over the top on their website. That is how they see themselves, or would like to be seen in the future.
After an 41+ page thread on MB, I'd say it is working!
Build the damn tower. I am tired of rumors. I want a huge damn tower to cast a shadow on the Arch and every damn jaded City resident. If they don't like it then they can leave. An 80 story tower would attract much business and residents. Plenty to make up for their mediocrity and lack of vision!
![]()
Evil density, shadows, and congestion! People walking around!
Evil density, shadows, and congestion! People walking around!
- 8,904
hypothetically speaking. If the blue tower on the MW homepage is the tower that is announced. What would be your critique? If this is the 71-81 story tower that will soon become an icon in our skyline, would you be happy with the design? If not what would you change?
I personally like the design. I think the balconies on the upper floor would be outta this world and the wedge on the side is a nice design touch. (IE roberts tower). Something bothers me though about the overall shape of the building. It seems like one end is way to wide, but it's probably only one city block so I think it will be fine. I also am skeptical about the color. Does anyone know of any buildings in other cities with similarly colored glass? Thanks, discuss....
http://www.mcgowanwalsh.com/
I personally like the design. I think the balconies on the upper floor would be outta this world and the wedge on the side is a nice design touch. (IE roberts tower). Something bothers me though about the overall shape of the building. It seems like one end is way to wide, but it's probably only one city block so I think it will be fine. I also am skeptical about the color. Does anyone know of any buildings in other cities with similarly colored glass? Thanks, discuss....
http://www.mcgowanwalsh.com/
- 11K
^ I like it, but the 'wedge' will have certainly been played out in St. Louis - the new casino, the Robert's building . . . what's up the wedge anyway? Can't we get something original - the Hancock building in Chicago shows of the structural supports, the Sears Tower is uniquely bundled and many other new buildings across the world are taking on new shapes. I'd be happy with new office space in a signature building, but would like something a little different.
I want them to build something along the lines of London's "Gherkin" aka 30 St. Mary Axe. Dig it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/30_St_Mary_Axe
Make sure to scroll down for pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/30_St_Mary_Axe
Make sure to scroll down for pictures
Hey, we've already got the Eagleton Erection. If we're worried about sausagefests, we shouldn't turn our skyline into one as well.
Butt the Penis of the Plains and the Mighty Gherkin together would be UNSTOPPABLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
- 8,904
bpe235 wrote:hypothetically speaking. If the blue tower on the MW homepage is the tower that is announced. What would be your critique? If this is the 71-81 story tower that will soon become an icon in our skyline, would you be happy with the design? If not what would you change?
I personally like the design. I think the balconies on the upper floor would be outta this world and the wedge on the side is a nice design touch. (IE roberts tower). Something bothers me though about the overall shape of the building. It seems like one end is way to wide, but it's probably only one city block so I think it will be fine. I also am skeptical about the color. Does anyone know of any buildings in other cities with similarly colored glass? Thanks, discuss....
http://www.mcgowanwalsh.com/
Bump... Now that all that Blah Blah Blah has been deleted, anyone else like to share their opinion?
The building is fine, it would just depend on where it were placed. It sort of looks like a much taller version of the Four Seasons casino tower.
I personally would not be impressed if this was the tallest thing in our city. It just looks kind of boring. I keep wanting a super tower on the lot west of the new stadium that has a cut allowing the metro line to run through it. Or perhaps a building that allows some other city infrastructure, perhaps the highway offramps, to run through it, and to mold it. I keep looking at the southern edge of downtown and thinking it has been dilapitated by highway infrastructure, but feel like it could be repaired simply by building around what exists. Now that would be both original (I think) and awesome.
