Also, thanks for the pics Greatest Of All Time 314! Really good shots. Always much appreciated by those of us whom are temporarily displaced 
doug wrote:Come on. If we were not still building parking garages then perhaps I could sound crazy. But yeah we haven't really changed how we do planning so I don't understand why I am sounding insane.
Are you implying Golterman is crazy or insane?
I don't think you sound insane at all (on the contrary) but often slightly negative. (Trying to be nice here.)
I mostly agree but again it's always easier after the fact to point out the mistakes.doug wrote:I haven't heard any response either as to why we can use eminent domain for Schnucks in south city, to take working people's homes, but not the bum who once owned the Centre and did nothing to improve it. Rather than taking the blight through court we put our credit on the line (a deal which every member of the Board of Estimate and Apportionment said was a bad deal yet voted anyway to pass minus Green) for a developer who was overextended. Hence the need to turn this around quickly to pay off that debt. Sure the Laurel is being redeveloped but that was a part of the deal before it fell apart. So I don't see anything added except a parking garage wearing a sexy dress where condos -- and a rooftop pool -- could be instead. Rather we could fire the officials who paid for this deal, use their salaries to make the bond payments, and wait until the market recovers and we get those condos. Or Slay could cover the payments for a year or two with his campaign funds? Call it a down payment on his new downtown condo. That aside I keep pointing this out because we seem to forget our mistakes despite the fact they occur so often.
I think this is one of the most exciting and successful projects downtown. The market was and still is not there for condos so it was changed into garage space, which saved us from another new garage and kept Thomson Coburn happy.
The building looks much better than it did, the skybridge is gone and in the process we're getting a completely renovated Laurel, including an Embassy Suites, apartments and a Blues HOF.
The former One City Center Tower went from 20% to 80% leased and we will finally have a movie theater downtown. Hopefully they will be able to secure a large national retailer on the ground floor.
All in all a good deal for downtown, although I admit the owners of 500 North Broadway were dealt a losing hand, lost their biggest tenant Lewis Rice and then lost their building.
If I were neighbor Stifel Nicolaus I'd consider staying put. They're practically on top of a Metro Station in a soon to be hopping part of downtown, much more so than at the relatively isolated Balk Park Village.
^Except I like the BPV concept and expansion of a new Downtown footprint...Again, if the projections pan out, we're gonna need BPV...
...If they do the HOF correctly, that could really be quite an attractive draw to Downtown St. Louis...Tremendous potential there to integrate the rest of the Lou music scene with the interest and visitors generated by such a museum...A great starting point to find the St. Louis that isn't baseball or beer...
...If they do the HOF correctly, that could really be quite an attractive draw to Downtown St. Louis...Tremendous potential there to integrate the rest of the Lou music scene with the interest and visitors generated by such a museum...A great starting point to find the St. Louis that isn't baseball or beer...
- 11K
Now that's good. How hadn't I heard that one before?the count wrote:Balk Park Village.
^Must've had a clear moment, which only happens about every five years.
In another moronic deal coming from City Hall, Thompson Coburn was going to get a garage south of their building where the Ambassador once stood. When St. Louis Centre fell through the City decided this would be a better idea since it could help generate funds to pay off the bond obligations and keep the greedy law firm happy. Or we could have said leave to TC. But that's not the main focus of our current conversation.the count wrote:The market was and still is not there for condos so it was changed into garage space, which saved us from another new garage and kept Thomson Coburn happy
It's not even completed. How can you call it successful?the count wrote:I think this is one of the most exciting and successful projects downtown.
Yeah, that's kind of a big deal given we subsidized one property owner against another. Or, to put it another way, we did exactly the same zero sum shuffle that some criticize the county for doing to the city. The owners of 500 N. Broadway were so unhappy the sued the City.the count wrote:I admit the owners of 500 North Broadway were dealt a losing hand
This is not the way we should go about doing anything. The original plan for St. Louis Centre had 350 parking spaces with condos and a pool. We spent $34.3 million in a TIF for Pyramid's redevelopment of the Centre; $14.5 on One City Centre. With the original plan, at an average of $15,178 per parking space, the parking parking cost was $5,312,300. The new plan will have 750 spaces at a cost of $11,383,500 for parking. This plan only increased the number of parking downtown without the additional residential. It is not mixed use. I had no idea St. Louis urbanists could be so distracted by the plastic and glass enveloping St. Louis Centre? Obviously the design was meant to obfuscate.
If anything this saga makes the case for regulated markets, proactive planning, and government accountability through transparency. We wasted millions on this horrible deal due to developers thinking the sky is the limit with politicians happily receiving campaign contributions thus in turn opening the city's treasury. How many other projects of the last 10 years fit into that category? Graft, pay to play, or ignorance -- St. Louis cannot afford such decision-making in the future. Or rather right now. If we added up the number of tax breaks and failed projects we wouldn't need the user fee for garbage collection.The city also approved$14.5 million in tax increment financing (TIF) for the One City Centre redevelopment project and a $34.3 million TIF for the redevelopment of St. Louis Centre. With the TIF for One City Centre, the city is obligated to pay money from its general fund if Pyramid defaults on property taxes. In that case, the city would be obligated to pay an estimated $1.2 million per year for the life of the TIF, up to 23 years.
St. Louis City's growth has been impressive in some aspects, yet so has the amount of corruption and strength of the Slay machine. I must commend their success. It arises from the fact that especially younger people lack short term memory or objectivity for four reasons. One, they don't want to be excluded from the "St. Louis cheerleader party," which everyone must be a part of in order to be cool and feel included among peers. Two, the one party system means people with independent thought can't get very far in politics. Three, our non-profits that deal with these areas are largely dependent upon government funding and/or corporate donations. Four, no strong credible voices have not come out criticizing the current situation obviously because of the first three issues. Yet this is the most successful project downtown so who cares about all of these trivial things. If only I was more positive and less negative. Or perhaps if people took collective head from ass.
- 1,610
So your fourth reason CLEARLY is valid because the first three are the only three explanations. "Younger people" lacking "short term memory" can't at all, ever be in favor of a building, parking garage, plaza, open space, cornfield, oil refinery unless they fall into one of those three categories. Or unless Doug likes it, then they're idiots not to.doug wrote:It arises from the fact that especially younger people lack short term memory or objectivity for four reasons. One, they don't want to be excluded from the "St. Louis cheerleader party," which everyone must be a part of in order to be cool and feel included among peers. Two, the one party system means people with independent thought can't get very far in politics. Three, our non-profits that deal with these areas are largely dependent upon government funding and/or corporate donations. Four, no strong credible voices have not come out criticizing the current situation obviously because of the first three issues. Yet this is the most successful project downtown so who cares about all of these trivial things. If only I was more positive and less negative. Or perhaps if people took collective head from ass.
Gosh, I just don't seem to be catching on to the big issue here...Context: I did not vote for Pres Obama, but did vote for and am a fan of Mayor Slay...Hey, the world runs on relationships and quid pro quos...I don't see anything nefarious or grotesquely selfish going on in this deal (see how I used big words there to sound smart =p)...Quite the contrary, I see a mayor aggressively continuing to restore a bombed out CBD and a law firm looking for a good deal...
At the end of the day, someone has to captain the ship...We all can't do it at the same time...And that captain is going to hopefully do what he feels is in the best interest of the ship and crew and is going to lean on and use his friends and cohorts to accomplish this...It will always be this way whether there is a Democrat, Republican, Green Party, Libertarian, or Independent as the captain of the ship...
City gov't is beholden to private investors and developers re what is going to go up where...If private enterprises ain't there with the ideas and plans, nothing is going to get built...It seems to me that here, City Hall did the best it could to jump start the rehabilitation of a significant piece of the Downtown scene given the implosion of the residential real estate market and tight credit...
And yes, frankly, form, design and material are CRUCIAL to any architectural development...Most of us will never (or will rarely) have use the buildings we talk about, but we all will have to look at them often, if not daily...
- head buried in South Pacific sand
At the end of the day, someone has to captain the ship...We all can't do it at the same time...And that captain is going to hopefully do what he feels is in the best interest of the ship and crew and is going to lean on and use his friends and cohorts to accomplish this...It will always be this way whether there is a Democrat, Republican, Green Party, Libertarian, or Independent as the captain of the ship...
City gov't is beholden to private investors and developers re what is going to go up where...If private enterprises ain't there with the ideas and plans, nothing is going to get built...It seems to me that here, City Hall did the best it could to jump start the rehabilitation of a significant piece of the Downtown scene given the implosion of the residential real estate market and tight credit...
And yes, frankly, form, design and material are CRUCIAL to any architectural development...Most of us will never (or will rarely) have use the buildings we talk about, but we all will have to look at them often, if not daily...
- head buried in South Pacific sand
Consider the situation at the time. Downtown development was booming and Pyramid was a large part of that. STL Centre had bounced around among multiple shady developers only looking to cash in on flipping the property. Pyramid had successfully developed other large-scale projects in the city and proposed a wonderful mixed-use project for STL Centre.
The city took a gamble knowing that if Pyramid succeeded they would take one of the biggest problem properties and turn it into an asset. At that time, a redeveloped STL Centre would help attract more conventions to the city by addressing one of the biggest problems. That's a net money-maker and that is the primary reason they put money on the line. A condo development at the time made sense. I disagree with A LOT of the financial decisions the city has made, but this is one instance I agree with the investment.
Of course, we all know what happened next but few if any of us could have predicted it. The economy plunged and so did Pyramid. The city was left on the hook to turn STL Centre into an asset. They made the best of the situation, providing parking for a law firm that refused to stay without it, and put a facelift on a visual eyesore. In the end we retained a major employer, added ground-level retail and improved the pedestrian experience, fixed a major eyesore, and spurred further surrounding development.
So, what did we really lose? At this time we would still have an undeveloped STL Centre and aging office building across the street from the Convention center. We likely would not have a redeveloped Dillards building. We likely would not have a continued investment from Macys. We may or may not have TC and another parking garage. So, looking at the big picture, IMO our net loss was 250 condos and a rooftop pool.
The city took a gamble knowing that if Pyramid succeeded they would take one of the biggest problem properties and turn it into an asset. At that time, a redeveloped STL Centre would help attract more conventions to the city by addressing one of the biggest problems. That's a net money-maker and that is the primary reason they put money on the line. A condo development at the time made sense. I disagree with A LOT of the financial decisions the city has made, but this is one instance I agree with the investment.
Of course, we all know what happened next but few if any of us could have predicted it. The economy plunged and so did Pyramid. The city was left on the hook to turn STL Centre into an asset. They made the best of the situation, providing parking for a law firm that refused to stay without it, and put a facelift on a visual eyesore. In the end we retained a major employer, added ground-level retail and improved the pedestrian experience, fixed a major eyesore, and spurred further surrounding development.
So, what did we really lose? At this time we would still have an undeveloped STL Centre and aging office building across the street from the Convention center. We likely would not have a redeveloped Dillards building. We likely would not have a continued investment from Macys. We may or may not have TC and another parking garage. So, looking at the big picture, IMO our net loss was 250 condos and a rooftop pool.
Exactly. They left the condos and the pool out of the project because right now they wouldn't sell and be sitting empty for a long time. It's the reality of today's market. It's not even a real loss. Doug has the luxury of judging everything from an idealistic (and far more superior) perspective. Developers and certainly the city don't have that luxury.metzgda wrote: So, looking at the big picture, IMO our net loss was 250 condos and a rooftop pool.
Condos that would have generated more tax revenue compared to paying off bonds we shouldn't have guaranteed. Residents of those condos which would support local retail, the local economy, and filled our sidewalks instead of suburban commuters who park and leave after business hours.
- 2,386
^UGH doug, what are you not comprehending here?
Those condos do not exist, nor do the tax generating residents. Additionally, there are numerous developments downtown that are actually REALLY built that can be purchased readily. While there has been a large influx of population to downtown, we are still nowhere near 100% occupacy/ownership. Not to mention the fact that we have a BRAND NEW 25 story tower about a block from here. All of these existing condos can generate revenue on HIGHER VALUES when they sell as the market will not have an extra 250 condos to sell when it cant right now.
I appreciate your points, but can you please make some every once in a while that deal with reality for the sake of our collective sanities?
Can you at least give us a quick "This is a good improvement over what was there and will help add momentum to downtown as it makes the streetscape more active, inviting, and enjoyable! Hey, maybe if this is a success the added amenities might help draw more people to downtown, possibly leading to the rehab of a much nicer and treasured historic structure (COUGH ARCADE COUGH CHEMICAL BUILDING COUGH) or possibly even more new condo construction!"
For us, man
Those condos do not exist, nor do the tax generating residents. Additionally, there are numerous developments downtown that are actually REALLY built that can be purchased readily. While there has been a large influx of population to downtown, we are still nowhere near 100% occupacy/ownership. Not to mention the fact that we have a BRAND NEW 25 story tower about a block from here. All of these existing condos can generate revenue on HIGHER VALUES when they sell as the market will not have an extra 250 condos to sell when it cant right now.
I appreciate your points, but can you please make some every once in a while that deal with reality for the sake of our collective sanities?
Can you at least give us a quick "This is a good improvement over what was there and will help add momentum to downtown as it makes the streetscape more active, inviting, and enjoyable! Hey, maybe if this is a success the added amenities might help draw more people to downtown, possibly leading to the rehab of a much nicer and treasured historic structure (COUGH ARCADE COUGH CHEMICAL BUILDING COUGH) or possibly even more new condo construction!"
For us, man
newstl2020 wrote: can you please...deal with reality for the sake of our collective sanities?
"Those condos do not exist, nor do the tax generating residents."
They could once the economy recovers?
They could once the economy recovers?
- 2,386
Oof. Yeah, or they could exist at the arcade or chemical building as stated above. If I am not mistaken, this building has no historic merit, was never intended for residential use, looked disgusting, and generated absolutely no revenue sitting as an empty shell of nothingness.
"Back to life...Back to reality." - some crappy 80's or early 90's song.
"Back to life...Back to reality." - some crappy 80's or early 90's song.
- 1,610
You take that back right now, for all of us Soul 2 Soul fans out there!newstl2020 wrote: "Back to life...Back to reality." - some crappy 80's or early 90's song.
- 2,386
^My apologies . Do you get points for identifying the band? I'm still not sure.
. Do you get points for identifying the band? I'm still not sure.^Yes...lol...And I couldn't agree more with ^^^...Though that song is not crap...
I like the large sign with the white P inside the blue circle that's now part of this development's parking. Wouldn't it be nice if this became the defacto standard for all dowtown lots and garages? Maybe then all the people that complain about lack of parking would quiet down and see all the available options?RobbyD wrote:There is definitely too much parking capacity DT (though I do read on Yelp and other sites that people still complain about parking...We are not utilizing the spaces properly)...But my understanding is that Thompson Coburn (largest firm in town in terms of actual lawyers in the City) would have bolted without an upgrade to their parking situation (which the new garage directly addresses)...The reality is, parking has to be obvious, cheap and convenient or the garage monsters we've built become even more monsterous...and empty...doug wrote:But I am not a fan of keeping parking garages across the street from other garages.
...And, I completely agree that dressing garages up should be a top priority...I'm thinking that for cost of materials and some hardtack and gruel, local artists would be up to the task of creating interest and design on the many blank walls of DT...
Just saw the Count's pic of the newly opened sidewalk along Wash Ave...I agree...The parking sign is highly visible (right on teh street as opposed to set back on the building) and should help folks find where to park...Standardized signage would make sense to me too...One of my favorite parts (and biggest game changer) in the Arch grounds redevelopment plan, as it stands now, is the utilization of existing parking structures in Downtown...Clear, consistent signage would be crucial for this idea to work...dweebe wrote:I like the large sign with the white P inside the blue circle that's now part of this development's parking. Wouldn't it be nice if this became the defacto standard for all dowtown lots and garages? Maybe then all the people that complain about lack of parking would quiet down and see all the available options?
- 11K
I don't know whether that's good or bad.RobbyD wrote:One of my favorite parts (and biggest game changer) in the Arch grounds redevelopment plan, as it stands now, is the utilization of existing parking structures in Downtown.
Anyway, having electronic signing indicated number of spots remaining in each garage would be good as well.
A couple of pics of the ongoing construction of the Laurel building:
![]()
![]()
The Laurel, as a part of the 7th Street Garage/600 Washington project, will be home to a 212-room Embassy Suites Hotel, 205 apartments and 30,000 s.f. of retail space. With a possible Blues Hall of Fame and the confirmed movie theater across the street I'd say you could label this an exciting project.
More new pics of downtown developments HERE
The Laurel, as a part of the 7th Street Garage/600 Washington project, will be home to a 212-room Embassy Suites Hotel, 205 apartments and 30,000 s.f. of retail space. With a possible Blues Hall of Fame and the confirmed movie theater across the street I'd say you could label this an exciting project.
More new pics of downtown developments HERE
My thinking is 1) rather than spending money on additional parking decks, that money can go somewhere else, 2) more business for garage owners might spur investment in improving the garages' athsetics (well...I have seen a pig fly (if only for about 3 secs)), and 3) if a major goal is to connect the Arch and the City, having Arch visitors park in the City rather than on the Arch grounds will help achieve this. Clearly, increased pedestrian activity between teh City and the Arch has the potential to further bolster and possibly expand current entertainment, restaurant and retail offerings. In another five years, Downtown has the potential to offer just about everyone something to do, eat or see and will have a world famous monument to "get them in the door" so to speak. And in teh height of teh summer season, many folks will have some time to kill and be looking for additional diverstions (even if it's just meandering through Citygarden)...Alex Ihnen wrote:I don't know whether that's good or bad.RobbyD wrote:One of my favorite parts (and biggest game changer) in the Arch grounds redevelopment plan, as it stands now, is the utilization of existing parking structures in Downtown.
Anyway, having electronic signing indicated number of spots remaining in each garage would be good as well.
...And garage with sign posting how many spaces left good idea! Tarzan like. I really think it's the little things like that that make good experiences and places great experiences and places.
- 11K
Sorry that it didn't come through in my "good or bad" comment, but yes, I completely agree with you. It's just a bit...disappointing that the most exciting part of a $578M redesign of our National Park may be...parking. 