JMedwick wrote:You know Matt, some street narrowing could provide an expanded sidewalk with non-covered strolling space.
I considered that, but it doesn't seem like it is going to happen. I would like to see 2 way traffic along 7th.
I considered that, but it doesn't seem like it is going to happen. I would like to see 2 way traffic along 7th.
^ Just depends on what the City values more, additional sidewalk space or the potential on-street parking in front of the businesses. Given that we are talking about St. Louis, the on-street parking would probably be more valuable. As for narrowing streets, I would think you could do it along 6th and maybe one side of 7th (with all of those garages along 7th, it is one street downtown that may need travel lanes).
RENDERINGS!!!!!!!!!!!
This look is very new to St. Louis. I would like to see more advertising in downtown. As long as its done in a tasteful way.
![]()
This look is very new to St. Louis. I would like to see more advertising in downtown. As long as its done in a tasteful way.
- 5,433
Finally, we've got a rendering! That took long enough. I was beginning to think the renderings were guarded more carefully than Dick Cheney's whereabouts between 2001 and 2008. 
Overall it looks better than I expected. I could really do without the "Park" sign, since I think the ramps are going to make that one pretty obvious just as they are pretty obvious on at least one-third of the structures in downtown. And I hope the glass is heavily tinted to block the view of the cars inside as much as possible.
What's still missing is anything resembling a timeline, or any firm commitments for what will go in the space. Obviously I didn't expect the latter news for some time now, but in today's article the movie theater "might" be part of the plan. So even that is not a sure thing.
Once again, we are settling for less. I am trying really hard to be positive about this- hopefully the developer will do a far better job of attracting retailers to the ground floor than many developers downtown have done so far. And despite the fact that chain retailers and restaurants as a group have taken a serious beating around here lately, I think this is the perfect spot for a concentration of chains, and their presence should help Macy's as well.
Overall it looks better than I expected. I could really do without the "Park" sign, since I think the ramps are going to make that one pretty obvious just as they are pretty obvious on at least one-third of the structures in downtown. And I hope the glass is heavily tinted to block the view of the cars inside as much as possible.
What's still missing is anything resembling a timeline, or any firm commitments for what will go in the space. Obviously I didn't expect the latter news for some time now, but in today's article the movie theater "might" be part of the plan. So even that is not a sure thing.
Once again, we are settling for less. I am trying really hard to be positive about this- hopefully the developer will do a far better job of attracting retailers to the ground floor than many developers downtown have done so far. And despite the fact that chain retailers and restaurants as a group have taken a serious beating around here lately, I think this is the perfect spot for a concentration of chains, and their presence should help Macy's as well.
- 2,386
Would you rather have that above, or what's currently there?
I for one am ok with it for sure. Especially if they get good tenants!
I for one am ok with it for sure. Especially if they get good tenants!
If you look closely, 7th remains one way, and there are no meters in front of the retail, channeling anyone who wants to stop and park into the garage. Wanna bet that isn't just part of the rendering?
- 5,433
newstl2020 wrote:Would you rather have that above, or what's currently there?
I for one am ok with it for sure. Especially if they get good tenants!
Just because I'm not 100% happy with the rendering doesn't mean it isn't a vast improvement over what is there presently.
Of course, if the developer attracts quality tenants, that will be a significant plus. However, that is based on the assumption that this developer will do a far better job of attracting tenants during a recession than other developers have in recent history. There's a vast space still available at The Syndicate. The retail space at the Marquette Garage is still empty. And now the developer says 600 Washington "might" include a movie theater. Naturally an improved building, even if the upper floors are wasted for parking, will be an improvement over the eyesore we have now. I'm just skeptical about the overall impact compared to the original plan which would have included hundreds of condos instead of more parking.
bonwich wrote:If you look closely, 7th remains one way, and there are no meters in front of the retail, channeling anyone who wants to stop and park into the garage. Wanna bet that isn't just part of the rendering?
No, I don't want to bet, because I think you're right. I would hope that the city would at least install meters in front of the place, even if they neglect to make Seventh Street two-way, which is what they should do in my opinion. I won't count on it, though, as it makes too much sense.
No one has posted the rendering I saw a few weeks back so hopefully that will show up at some point. In the meantime, I'll describe what I saw. The view is from 6th and Washington, and the same green glass shown in the already posted rendering wraps around to 6th Street. There is ground level retail that wraps around the corner of the building from Washington to face the MetroLink entrance. The retail only appeared to extend along the eastern-facing section of the building near the MetroLink station while the northern-facing section by the station served as the building's main entrance. A large sign over the entrance said "600 Washington" though I won't be surprised if that touch is scaled down from its rendered size. Just as the small skybridge over 7th street is not shown in the above rendering, the connection over 6th Street was also missing. I can't say what the side of the building facing Locust will look like as I haven't seen any renderings of that.
- 3,235
I am not impressed by the descriptions nor the renderings. I think 750 parking spaces covering 3 of the 4 floors of the building are a total waste. Even if thet can attract tenents for the retail spaces how to they plan on sustaning them with the parking above? The 750 spaces will create a void in density which limits the grownt in that area. I think we all agree that the MX project was a pipe dream but at least it was a vision for the future. I am really disappointed and think this is just another example for settling for the status quo. I would also be suprised if the movie theater ever becomes a reality.
I'm very dissapointed with the rendering.
What some people see as colored glass, I interpret as painted metal bars (parking garages must be well ventilated, remember). The retail on the first floor is nice, of course, but I'm afraid this is just another huge, boring garage.
I had hopes for this project, but this is much less than I had expected.
What some people see as colored glass, I interpret as painted metal bars (parking garages must be well ventilated, remember). The retail on the first floor is nice, of course, but I'm afraid this is just another huge, boring garage.
I had hopes for this project, but this is much less than I had expected.
- 396
look at this GEM from the comments section:
STL Hoosier- ride metrolink? WALK down Washington Avenue? I value my life and property too much to take such risks. You may feel comfortable in that environment, I asure you that the vast majority of citizens in this area would not feel safe riding the MetroLink or walking unprotected down Washington avenue. Why would anyone risk that when safe alternatives exist elsewhere? I have seen homeless people,ghetto thugs, beggars, I dont need to be reminded of such when I go shopping. Safety and convenience are my primary motivators when shopping, not exposing myself to the urban predators.
STL Hoosier- ride metrolink? WALK down Washington Avenue? I value my life and property too much to take such risks. You may feel comfortable in that environment, I asure you that the vast majority of citizens in this area would not feel safe riding the MetroLink or walking unprotected down Washington avenue. Why would anyone risk that when safe alternatives exist elsewhere? I have seen homeless people,ghetto thugs, beggars, I dont need to be reminded of such when I go shopping. Safety and convenience are my primary motivators when shopping, not exposing myself to the urban predators.
Look at the two dudes in the lower right of the rendering. You can see right through them! Zombies--I'm sure of it!Safety and convenience are my primary motivators when shopping, not exposing myself to the urban predators.
What suburbanite would expose themselves to the urban undead when shopping?
I had a condo reserved at the Laurel and that picture just makes me sad. Let's hope something is done before too long.
- 396
I am ok with the rendering. I read on one of the articles that the movie theater etc would be on floors one and 2 and that the parking will be on the south side of the building. Which leads me to beleive that the green glass will in fact be green glass and enclosed (not glassed in cars).
It could be better (original concord rendering) but I will be so happy when the green and white cladding is gone and some street life/retail.... Also the plus is the skybridge and the laurel.
It could be better (original concord rendering) but I will be so happy when the green and white cladding is gone and some street life/retail.... Also the plus is the skybridge and the laurel.
- 39
MidcoastSTL wrote:look at this GEM from the comments section:
STL Hoosier- ride metrolink? WALK down Washington Avenue? I value my life and property too much to take such risks. You may feel comfortable in that environment, I asure you that the vast majority of citizens in this area would not feel safe riding the MetroLink or walking unprotected down Washington avenue. Why would anyone risk that when safe alternatives exist elsewhere? I have seen homeless people,ghetto thugs, beggars, I dont need to be reminded of such when I go shopping. Safety and convenience are my primary motivators when shopping, not exposing myself to the urban predators.
Haha...what a tool. Maybe in the future we will have protective bubbles that we can all walk around in. This dude needs to get a grip.
- 2,386
A more inspired design would be great, but this is going to be a huge boon for North downtown. IMO the redesign of this area makes this whole area of downtown infinitely more attractive for development. Very excited to see what this does for the area.
Anyone want to throw out odds on a Gucci store? (kidding)
Anyone want to throw out odds on a Gucci store? (kidding)
The top three floors will be parking.
Like the pathetic garage across from City Hall, I really hope this parking garage has an LCD television showcasing all of our politicians -- present and past -- which made this fiasco of a deal possible.
The rendering happens to be quite appalling. Looks to be like a contemporary version of Keiner Garages. When will we have architecture that rivals what we've torn down?
This was here before Vince had it torn down.
![]()
But the priority happens to be getting these TIF repayments off our balance sheet, not design. We're not even including residential.
In the short term St. Louis should cut services or salaries in order to repay the TIF -- then wait until we can actually get a project that promotes a Downtown community. This is basically yet another parking garage for Thompson Coburn with first floor retail in order to placate urbanists.
We should wait a few more years. St. Louis Centre has been a blight on Downtown for a long time so we shouldn't rush into this. But again its about coming through on the parking promises made for Thompson Coburn and political shirking by Slay and the Board of Aldermen regarding TIF repayments.
Like the pathetic garage across from City Hall, I really hope this parking garage has an LCD television showcasing all of our politicians -- present and past -- which made this fiasco of a deal possible.
The rendering happens to be quite appalling. Looks to be like a contemporary version of Keiner Garages. When will we have architecture that rivals what we've torn down?
This was here before Vince had it torn down.
But the priority happens to be getting these TIF repayments off our balance sheet, not design. We're not even including residential.
In the short term St. Louis should cut services or salaries in order to repay the TIF -- then wait until we can actually get a project that promotes a Downtown community. This is basically yet another parking garage for Thompson Coburn with first floor retail in order to placate urbanists.
We should wait a few more years. St. Louis Centre has been a blight on Downtown for a long time so we shouldn't rush into this. But again its about coming through on the parking promises made for Thompson Coburn and political shirking by Slay and the Board of Aldermen regarding TIF repayments.
I haven't kept up with this project since it was announced awhile back. To come and find this was disappointing. All I really see is a parking garage with a few stores at the bottom. Bleh.
- 11K
Nothing that will be built will be as cool as the Equitable buildings so who gives a sh!t?
![]()
I for one am not going to b**** about the rendering at all - at this point I will take this project over what is there now and what could not be there.
I find it contemporary enough and I am just happy it will replace what is there. There is plenty of fill in space for other more progressive developments when the economy recovers.
I find it contemporary enough and I am just happy it will replace what is there. There is plenty of fill in space for other more progressive developments when the economy recovers.
- 11K
^ Actually couldn't agree more. I firmly believe that truly great projects will only come when land values rise, which means that lots need to be filled in and existing structures used first.
Parking garages increase land values more than what could be a condo development or apartments if we actually waited? Businesses will locate when a residential neighborhood exists...or not when we continue the proliferation of garages promoting freeriders who exodus downtown after 5PM. Suppose we have 12,000 residents downtown and that's highly doubtful. We need double that easily. Garages are the wrong direction. Why is thus up for debate?
Anna Louise Huxtable gave this argument promoting the demolition of the DeMenil Building which was next to the Wainwright. In essence she said other historic buildings fell so who cares. Under this argument we lose great buildings and as you say we will have nothing new rivaling the legacy of our previous great architects who made us the 4th City.
Taking any project over what exist happens to be accepting low standards when we could have something much better if we waited until the economy recovers supporting a better development. St. Louis Centre has been downtown 25 years. We could wait a few more for something possessing merit. Or we settle now for another garage -- a use which killed downtown streetlife.
This really happens to be a political decision. It's being done in order to resolve the TIF repayments. Ignoring the actual design, the use of the structure, and what was there before St. Louis Centre, we shouldn't allow our elected officials to make such egregious decisions then escape responsibility. How can we have any credibility when we settle for this outcome, especially given we were promised -- and put City money on the line -- for something much greater!
In 50 years will we seek to preserve any of the buildings constructed Downtown in our City during the past 20 years? Certainly not this parking garage. Maybe if it was a residential development with an actual innovative design.
Grover wrote:Nothing that will be built will be as cool as the Equitable buildings so who gives a sh!t?
Anna Louise Huxtable gave this argument promoting the demolition of the DeMenil Building which was next to the Wainwright. In essence she said other historic buildings fell so who cares. Under this argument we lose great buildings and as you say we will have nothing new rivaling the legacy of our previous great architects who made us the 4th City.
Taking any project over what exist happens to be accepting low standards when we could have something much better if we waited until the economy recovers supporting a better development. St. Louis Centre has been downtown 25 years. We could wait a few more for something possessing merit. Or we settle now for another garage -- a use which killed downtown streetlife.
This really happens to be a political decision. It's being done in order to resolve the TIF repayments. Ignoring the actual design, the use of the structure, and what was there before St. Louis Centre, we shouldn't allow our elected officials to make such egregious decisions then escape responsibility. How can we have any credibility when we settle for this outcome, especially given we were promised -- and put City money on the line -- for something much greater!
In 50 years will we seek to preserve any of the buildings constructed Downtown in our City during the past 20 years? Certainly not this parking garage. Maybe if it was a residential development with an actual innovative design.
- 11K
^ That question was meant as a joke.
Anyway, I don't believe that St. Louis benefits from waiting for a better project. Check out the unbelievably high number surface parking lots at prime sites across our city just waiting for the right project. Let's build, increase the rarity of buildable lots, increase their value and get better projects. I think expectations for the good-bad ratio in terms of architecture and development are ridiculously skewed for many in St. Louis. I'm sitting in Boston as I write this and there's a ton of really crap buildings downtown and through the Back Bay - but there are great buildings to. I'd guess that the ratio isn't any different than in STL.
Anyway, I don't believe that St. Louis benefits from waiting for a better project. Check out the unbelievably high number surface parking lots at prime sites across our city just waiting for the right project. Let's build, increase the rarity of buildable lots, increase their value and get better projects. I think expectations for the good-bad ratio in terms of architecture and development are ridiculously skewed for many in St. Louis. I'm sitting in Boston as I write this and there's a ton of really crap buildings downtown and through the Back Bay - but there are great buildings to. I'd guess that the ratio isn't any different than in STL.
Grover wrote:^ That question was meant as a joke.
Anyway, I don't believe that St. Louis benefits from waiting for a better project. Check out the unbelievably high number surface parking lots at prime sites across our city just waiting for the right project.
Surface lots aren't seen as a blight needing to redevelop. St. Louis Centre is and it does receive priority over many other projects Downtown. So if the economy was better we would see residential here like Pyramid planned. The only reason we aren't waiting for a condo development happens to be the political fallout of the TIF repayments. Everything else Downtown happens to be stalled so wait for the market to support a better project. I'm saying let heads roll and that City Hall should find a better solution -- but of course that won't occur. It could in part if people like those on this forum reject this project and promote a better outcome. City Hall isn't going to move on this if people say "oh it's better than before, we can take another garage, and I forgot that Slay and the Board of Aldermen and Estimate and Apportionment put us in this situation."
I generally agree with Doug (minus the political intrigue). This really does suck. Come on guys, it's a HUGE freaking parking garage right in the heart of Downtown's business district. No amount of colored metal screening is going to change that. We should wait a couple of years if necessary and do it right. If we keep settling for anything, that's all we'll ever get.
- 5,433
Framer wrote:I generally agree with Doug (minus the political intrigue). This really does suck. Come on guys, it's a HUGE freaking parking garage right in the heart of Downtown's business district. No amount of colored metal screening is going to change that. We should wait a couple of years if necessary and do it right. If we keep settling for anything, that's all we'll ever get.
The more I think about this, the more torn I become.
On one hand, I want to see something done with St. Louis Centre ASAP, as I have thought of it as downtown's biggest eyesore for years. I also think Grover has a valid point about our perception of architectural quality vis-a-vis other cities. I haven't been to Boston in ages, but I agree with his assessment. Indianapolis has its share of downtown garages, but they have done a better job of concealing their main purpose for existence. Still, most would agree that its downtown is quite vibrant.
OTOH, I'm inclined to agree with you and Doug (also, sans the political intrigue). Any talk of seeking the best and highest use of downtown real estate is just that- talk- when we resign ourselves to settling for another parking garage.
Forgive me for comparing renderings to renderings, but Pyramid's plans for St. Louis Centre as The Concord were much closer to the best and highest use of this structure than anything that I thought was possible. The glass facade would have given the dated structure a thoroughly modern appearance, the atrium could have made an appealing courtyard for residents, and the critical mass of residents would have provided a captive audience for the businesses below and on the surrounding blocks of what was once dubbed Mercantile Exchange.
I would have liked for the city to court a developer that would be willing to revisit that proposal when economic conditions improve. OTOH, a quick turnaround of St. Louis Centre might make the area more attractive for additional investment in buildings like the former Mercantile Library, and it might help the Railway Exchange Building's owners attract new tenants (not for the parking per se, but tidying up downtown's biggest eyesore can't hurt, either).
So I can really see and appreciate both sides of this issue. We cannot wait forever to do something with St. Louis Centre, and as Grover said, we need to realize that there are many other alternatives to push for the best and highest use of a particular parcel (IMHO, starting with the former Ambassador Theater site across the street). But then I think of all the times we've settled for less as a community, and our leaders' obliviousness to the glut of parking garages downtown and the ways in which they have limited downtown's potential, and it frustrates me.
Still, it looks like this development is finally moving forward, so I suppose I'll take a Show-Me State attitude: wait and see.