JNOnSTL wrote:^I'm not sure about that map either. I've seen one of CMT's long-range plans, but those maps aren't in there. Which plan are those being borrowed from? As I noted in my earlier post, I have a hard time believing that only 30-40 people from the City and 0 people in Illinois work in Chesterfield.
With regards to extending Metrolink that way, I have yet to see a plan following the path of 64/40. I don't think that would have been overlooked, but it would make sense to me to have our rail line following one of major corridors. The plans for commuter rail go down to Pacific, but I think only because they plan to use existing rail lines.
It wasn't overlooked. MetroLink via 64/40 or the Rock Island RR was the big question when EWGateway was performing their Major Transportation Investment Analysis study for West County. Ultimately, the Rock Island RR corridor was chosen due to the job center at Westport as opposed to the super low density that lines 64/40. The segment from Westport to Chesterfield was dropped due to low ridership. (Alt 3 = Rock Island/Westport, Alt 4 = 64/40)
Over and over again I hear that a 64/40 BRT or rail line would make sense. It doesn't. With the amount of traffic on that corridor, I can see how it could appear to make sense, but look at both/either population or job density (and mill states above) and there's simply no terminus for a line and no density along the line either. There's a lot of traffic because I-64 funnels a large swath of West County into the inner ring and city. Rail and BRT doesn't operate that way - there's no funnel (feeder roads), only a terminus point.
^ Couldn't agree more. I have owned houses within walking distance of METRA (Chicago area), Metrolink (Shrewsbury) and now BART (Its a long walk but doable in my new home out in the San Fran Area). METRA and BART (Middle of Hwy 24 for serving my new home) as commuter rail make a lot of sense because both serve very dense and big employment centers.
The reality is that St Louis doesn't have the big dense employment center that works for commuter rail. That is exactly what purpose the I64/Hwy 40 route would serve. Maybe down the road, and even then it would make more sense to use existing rail infrastructure between Alton, IL and Pacific, MO that Amtrak currently uses. Just as METRA does for the most part in the Chicago area.
What makes sense is tweak metrolink, increase headway and strengthen feeder (bus or streetcar or both), Already I think it does good job of connecting the major institutions and most of the employment centers that will benefit from transit. You could have argued that Cross county should have gone to Westport instead of Shrewsbury, but what is done is done. Instead Cross County to I-55 and make that the focal point instead of trying to do the South County connector
By the way, I sat next to an RGA employee on a flight the other day. He said he knew nothing of any expansion and definitely didn't believe the numbers in the press as the business has very low personnel needs here - it's not a people-heavy business. As with many announcements, it may be fair to guess that the result may be less than the announcement.
^If the employee you spoke with knew nothing about a major corporate expansion, I wouldn't put too much stock into their knowledge of future goals and employment needs for the company.
Yes, the expansion may end up smaller than planned, but any expansion of business is good expansion (and it is a shame they did not choose to locate in an employee friendly location.)
newstl2020 wrote:^If the employee you spoke with knew nothing about a major corporate expansion, I wouldn't put too much stock into their knowledge of future goals and employment needs for the company.
I agree. Usually employees are the last to know sometimes - unless they are development and civic buffs like us and/or read the business papers on a regular basis.
Let's all make sure to be glad that they're not only staying in STL (Metro Area) but are expanding operations, investing millions into their new facility, and are looking to hire a few hundred additional high-wage employees. They remain one of STL's largest businesses, with strong profitability and strong primary ownership by Berkshire Hathaway.
The main reason companies locate where they do, especially in this disgusting economy, is financial. What would be the comparative cost to building a campus building on virgin land rather than a new high-rise in an urban grid?
Also, what about current employees (besides the fella Alex talked to)... would they prefer Downtown over Chesterfield? How many RGA employees live within 5 miles of their current campus, and how many within 5 miles of Downtown STL? Good companies want their employees happy, and long commutes for the chance to work in a tower don't always do that.
Absolutely: I sure wish they'd move to a new tower in Downtown STL over farmland in Chesterfield.
Here's another variable...
Say RGA has been looking strongly at Downtown STL. Is it fair to assume that Ballpark Village would have been the preferred site for their potential relocation by parties representing Downtown STL? Lord knows it's the biggest eyesore in Downtown, is years behind schedule, and is in desperate need for tenants for any office towers. They also are a few years away from even having the grid ready to house a tower. Hell, they still need to re-up the funding from the State before they can even build up the grid for future development (and the Bud restaurant & Cards HOF). And this is all whether RGA would want to be in BPV anyways.
Could the "blowback" of BPV be that its development may preclude the development of other sites in Downtown for new development? Could we expect to see plans for a new high rise office tower in Downtown on a site other than BPV before BPV is developed? Or would a new building coming up in Downtown NOT on BPV land be a death-knell to BPV as anything other than a family-friendly version of Paddy O's?
I always thought that downtown Stl would be a long shot for RGA anyway. A better and in my eyes, more realistic option, would be the Central & Carondelet parking lot in downtown Clayton. We wouldnt have to hear any city vs county BS and im sure the SLCEC could bridge whatever financial gap RGA would encounter.
gone corporate wrote:strong primary ownership by Berkshire Hathaway.
Not sure where you heard this, but it's not true.
One of RGA's biggest competitors if General Re, which is owned by Berkshire Hathaway. Other than that there is no affiliation between the two companies.
gone corporate wrote:strong primary ownership by Berkshire Hathaway.
Not sure where you heard this, but it's not true.
One of RGA's biggest competitors if General Re, which is owned by Berkshire Hathaway. Other than that there is no affiliation between the two companies.
^Relax. StL County investment is still positive regional investment. I had trouble placing this at first - this will be built out on the cornfield just east of the Dierbergs HQ. Rather insignificant bland design though.
newstl2020 wrote:Not a very smart plan if they want to attract young, talented individuals.
I'll agree with that.
BTW, I couldn't really place where this was, but drove by on the way to pumpkin picking the other day. I can say without a doubt that I would never chose to work in such a location. I don't know when it will actually happen, but there will be a demographic shift when more people in offices like RGA want a more urban work environment...we're getting closer to a generation of CEOs that will want something different and then we'll see companies move back to the city.
newstl2020 wrote:Not a very smart plan if they want to attract young, talented individuals.
I'll agree with that.
BTW, I couldn't really place where this was, but drove by on the way to pumpkin picking the other day. I can say without a doubt that I would never chose to work in such a location. I don't know when it will actually happen, but there will be a demographic shift when more people in offices like RGA want a more urban work environment...we're getting closer to a generation of CEOs that will want something different and then we'll see companies move back to the city.
I can't get too excited about this location or design either. But it comes to a point where money talks and a stable well paying job matters a lot more when their is a spouse and a couple of kids at your kitchen table. Or in RGA case, what they care about is attracting talented individuals. Who says they have to be young
dredger wrote:I can't get too excited about this location or design either. But it comes to a point where money talks and a stable well paying job matters a lot more when their is a spouse and a couple of kids at your kitchen table. Or in RGA case, what they care about is attracting talented individuals. Who says they have to be young
+1
I'm a little put off by the "young, talented individuals" complaining that they cannot find jobs *anywhere* after college graduation, yet complaining that they'll never work in a faceless hell-hole (albeit new and presumably modern, tech-wise) in the suburbs.
^ Seems a bit of a straw-man argument. I'm saying I'd never work out there, but I've also found a job. And in fact, anyone would be an idiot if they passed up a job out there if they had no other options. The point is, many people (and more and more people) would not chose to work in such a location. Individuals certainly complain about finding work at times, but companies complain about not being able to find young talent as well.
dredger wrote:I can't get too excited about this location or design either. But it comes to a point where money talks and a stable well paying job matters a lot more when their is a spouse and a couple of kids at your kitchen table. Or in RGA case, what they care about is attracting talented individuals. Who says they have to be young
+1
I'm a little put off by the "young, talented individuals" complaining that they cannot find jobs *anywhere* after college graduation, yet complaining that they'll never work in a faceless hell-hole (albeit new and presumably modern, tech-wise) in the suburbs.
Obviously, if you didn't have any other options, you would not give two shits about where you worked and would be thankful to have the job. If they are trying to attract employees who have no other options, this location is going to suit them well into the future.
Edit: Having RGA is good for the metro area. It just gets extremely tiring watching companies in every other city move into urban areas and seeing the influx of young people (who, btw, despite the apparent disdain are the drivers of urban growth across the country) while watching StL companies build brand new 20 year old campuses in the county. The ten year lag on the rest of the country seriously needs to evaporate if we are ever going to be a competetive metro, and this needs to start with the corporate leadership. It isn't 1992.
Yep. Companies don't have problems finding people they have problems finding *talented* people. What would be interesting would be a poll of these "talented people" to see how much a connected urban campus mattered vs a disconnected suburban one.
As much as I would love to see RGA build in the city or in Clayton, it already is located in West County, and probably a lot of senior management (decision makers) live in Wildwood, Chesterfield, Clarkson Valley, et al. It's a long drive from Wildwood to downtown or Clayton, but it's a hop to a cornfield nearby. I see why they did it, and I doubt that RGA didn't even consider building in the city or Clayton (it's a big project, they likely ran the numbers). It's just that on the whole, what's less work for them and their employees? I also would point out that it's a reinsurance company (not even retail insurance, these people actually sell insurance policies to other insurance companies), so I'm not wholly surprised they went with a traditional suburban campus with an unobtrusive design rather than with a cutting-edge new building or a renovation of a century-old warehouse.
The bigger question in all this, how do you get a corporate HQ to move into downtown when its executive base is firmly planted in the suburbs or exburbs? Do you even try as you spent precious resources on something that is not a gain for the region at the end of the day? St. Louis region certainly has its share of campus/corporate expansion lately including
Edward Jones,
Express Scripts,
Scottrade
Mastercard
now RGA
I don't think you can find a good answer other then a corporate relocation from the outside or convince smaller startups in the downtown core to begin with. Nor can you argue the city has been left out as of late with some very solid and expanding companies committed downtown.
Ralcorp
Peabody
Stifel Nichol
Wells Fargo Securities firmly planting its flag
Nestle/Purina signing more space downtown
At the same time, you certainly don't need more of what you saw with Centene playing the city to get its desired property in Clayton or law firms following their clients.
