Yea, I agree with you...Though I wouldn't call the parking solution exciting...Just one of those "nuts and bolts" issues that is vitally important but just not that sexy or fun...
In my heart, I would put in a roller coaster along the riverfront along with a sculpture park throughout Downtown that would make Laumeier look like a Bootheel good-ole-boy's front yard after the neighbor kid got done weedeatin it and put a large bison paddock on the Illinois side with a rancher and covered wagon attraction...I would indeed...BUT...If the plan we have somehow gets completed, I really think we are all going to be very happy with the results...
...I just can't get over the transformation along the section of Downtown already (judging from the pics) and its not even fully open for business yet...
Doug: I respect your points and wish to dive into them directly, as you bring up some very big things here…
Personally, I disagree with your assessment that we as a City could’ve waited out five more years with the Centre like it was, so it could be transformed into residential. Dare I say, we’ve about outdone ourselves on residential. The economy is still in the pits (although improving for some) because of the excessive obsession we as a nation had with real estate. Five years from now, I’m not sure how much the Centre would exist as viable conversion into condominiums, and I would think the opportunity costs until then would be tremendous. Whether the shell of a failed shopping mall or the crater of a baseball stadium, nobody likes inaction.
Additionally, I recognize that Thompson Coburn was adamant on staying in the City “if and only if” their lease was complimented with parking solutions. The parking option also satiates the needs for such between Thompson, Lewis Rice (at 600 Washington from 500 North Broadway), and the upcoming needs of the Embassy Suites / residential units at the former Dillards Building across the street.
Meanwhile, I agree wholeheartedly that our construction history of late has been overtly parking garage-centric, and I would greatly appreciate future parking being complimented only with new building construction. Personally, I’d give about anything to see the Kiener garages along Chestnut torn down and replaced with new high-rise office construction.
And absolutely, the quick conversion of this site very much has to do with covering the debts incurred as part of the original redevelopment plans, which involved Pyramid and our national fascination with real estate speculative construction, based on the old premises that real estate will not depreciate (the standard maintained by the computer systems at Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s ratings services for mortgage-backed securities). But, let’s all be aware that we may be viewing this project’s original funding with 20/20 vision, that we as a nation (or even a globe of investors) didn’t really see the collapse coming.
We’re still sold on it, too; with respect, look to your recommendation that we should’ve held off for 5 more years to convert the site into condominiums (ostensibly for upper-class yuppies who would’ve bought partially for speculation, as per the original planners’ intents). We’d be waiting for a train that may never come back, because the last one crashed.
But Doug has a framework in mind that many of us still have, an understandable one based on years of it being sold to us by big housing corporations, giant banks, advertising, and private equity funds…
We all must face it that the real estate market we knew of three years ago is never coming back, and if it does then it is a part of another speculative bubble in real estate investment. This bubble bursting was over 30 years in the making, and we’ll be feeling the effects of this on the value of the USD for at least another ten years. We all bought into it, which is why many governments (StL City included) shelled out so much TIF and subsidies for decades to build, build, build what many times turned out to be speculative properties founded upon incorrect estimations, based upon the premise that all properties would appreciate at a considerable pace, with no estimations for depreciation. Forget “Drill, Baby; Drill”; we’re in a global economic depression because of “Build, Baby; Build!”
Most obvious proof that condos wouldn’t have worked: No one else was going to buy the Centre after Pyramid’s condo deal blew up. If it was viable, it would’ve been bought by investors and held. No one showed except for Spinnaker & their garage option. Proof is in the explicit lack of demand for anyone else here.
Bright side: We’re getting a movie theater. Whoo-hah.
I'd like to add that the project as a whole, including The Laurel, still brings 205 new apartments - that can be converted to condos once the market recovers - to downtown St. Louis. In this economy that's a win for all.
The three-screen movie theater will be on the second floor of the [Mercantile Exchange] building, with a view down the length of Washington Avenue. Harman Moseley, who operates the St. Louis Cinemas chain that also includes the Chase and Galleria theaters, says the new venue will have leather couches, a full bar, a 21-and-over admisson policy and a menu of prestige films.
Can't wait...
...movies, casino, movies, bowling, National Park, broadway shows, baseball, hockey, football, museum play building place, cigar bar, winery, craft brewery, sculpture garden, steaks, street festivals, parades, concerts, greasy burger joint, great Italian food and an Irish pub that pours my drink before I ask...
I wonder what size the screens will be. Hopefully they are at least the size of the Chase's biggest one. Anyone know the sq footage of the space they are getting?
The P-D Article wrote:a 21-and-over admisson policy
This is so strange. It's understandable what they are trying to do, especially considering the great discussion going on over at the "Loitering in the Loop" thread, but isn't this a bit draconian? There are a lot of families that visit St. Louis to see the Arch, a Cards game, the City Museum, CityGarden, and all the other great activities RobbyD pointed out. Will they not be able to take their kids to a movie?
Also, this excludes at least 1/2 of all college students. Many Wash. U. and SLU kids are awash in disposable income. Why turn 1/2 of them away?
I know there've been complaints about their meager spending habits, but what about some of the huge Christian Youth conferences that regularly convene in town. It seems one of their best options for entertainment would be a DT movie.
18 and up just seems like a better compromise, even though it would still keep families out of the theater.
Or maybe this theater could be the first to implement a no 13 to 18 year old policy?
wabash wrote:
I know there've been complaints about their meager spending habits, but what about some of the huge Christian Youth conferences that regularly convene in town. It seems one of their best options for entertainment would be a DT movie.
18 and up just seems like a better compromise, even though it would still keep families out of the theater.
Or maybe this theater could be the first to implement a no 13 to 18 year old policy?
How about an age restriction beginning at a certain time. Say 6pm. I would imagine a family coming into town for a Cardinals game & it gets rained out. Why not see a movie for a few hours.
no one under 18 after 6 sounds a lot better to me. as wabash pointed out, there are TONS of 18-20 year old college kids who would love to patronize a place like this. I know it'd certainly pull my friends and I (south and west county kids) to downtown, if only to get away from the punk@$$ high schoolers at places like Ronnies. The Moolah and Chase are cool, but this place looks like it's going to be totally ballin'.
I'm not as broken up about the age restriction...Though the all of the points made have merit...
Re families, I'm pretty sure that this will more of an art house movie theater? Meaning 9 and 12 year olds will not be interested...And meaning 18, 19 and 20 year olds will not necessarily be coming in droves either...If the programming allows for the more intelligent blockbuster or Oscar nominee types, then they might be losing some money here...
But a very attractive 'boutique' art house set right on Wash Ave and for adults only does not hurt my feelings in the least! Send the kids to City Museum again...they need the workout...
I hate to be debbie downer, but wasn't there a theater in Union Station a decade or so back? That one failed.... what will make this one different? I know downtown experienced growth but there are still less than 3,000 people living in the neighborhood. Is there enough demand for this sort of thing?
I am a bit worried that there won't be the demand necessary for these theaters - the Chase is a 10 minute drive (or 25 minute metrolink) away. The only reassuring thing is that St Louis cinemas will be operating these, the chase, and the moolah, so they'll have an incentive to divvy up their films in a way that encourages folks to go to each theater.
Downtown supports a killer bowling alley, an active beach volleyball site and quite a few decent, if not great, dining establishments...An upscale, three screen movie theater will fit right into the date/going out/tourist/conventioneer scene...Remember, this is not Ronnie's come to city as was the previous theater at Union Station...HSers who hang at the movies and the 20 year olds who hang with them will still have to go elsewhere...
My take is the offerings and setting will be enough of a draw to have more than a few patrons driving past other theaters to come for an evening at a posh Downtown movie theater...
rawest wrote:there are still less than 3,000 people living in the neighborhood. Is there enough demand for this sort of thing?
That's no longer true. Downtown proper has 3,700 residents. Combined with Downtown West there are 7,600. Even if you take just the neighborhoods right next to downtown: DT West, Lafayette Square, Peabody-Darst-Webbe, LaSalle Park, and Soulard, the relevant population is 17,000. But this theater will have a much bigger audience than just the immediate area because of DT's regional draw, the fact that a Metrolink station sits directly across the street, and Downtown's large hotel/conventioner population. Also, between the River and Euclid there is literally one movie theater, and it only has one screen. This will be the most convenient theater for much of the City east of Grand.
Admittedly, the Union Station theater was also right next to a Metro Station, but otherwise its location was really remote by downtown standards.
I think this will be a great success. I just don't want them to limit their audience with overzealous admission restrictions. I agree that a no one under 18 after 6, or something along those lines, seems like the best, balanced policy for what they're trying to do.
I think the theater will be successful largely due to convention goers and tourists. I've taken in a movie when traveling quite a few times. It's a nice way to spend a night after walking around all day. It's a nice option, but I wouldn't take a cab or drive to another part of a city to do it.
After some consideration, I'm firmly falling into the 'keep-it-mainstream' camp. As some have already mentioned, we have the Chase and the Moolah for our arthouse/limited-run/indie films. The Tivoli does it too. What we don't have in or near downtown is a movie theater that shows feature films. With conventioneers, families and tourists all wandering around the CBD and Washington Avenue district, I don't see the problem with opening it up to all-comers and playing your standard movie fare.
As much as I love the occasional off-the-radar fringe film, I'm much more willing to put my movie-going dollars toward one of the big budget ones that may be shallow, yes, but it makes for great escapism. I'm fully comfortable admitting I like to turn my brain off every once and awhile and let the pretty, pretty lights, frantic sounds, silly explosions and cheesy one-liners wash over me. I want to see a new Pixar film or Green Lantern, and see the random kids and families retelling their favorite parts in the lobby and on the street afterward. Then I'll head over to Flannery's for a Newcastle with friends and do the same.
Loews Theatre at 600 Michigan Ave. in Chicago. Looks somewhat similar to the 600 Washington Ave. development, doesn't it?
If you have to make concessions, then make it 21 and up only AFTER ten-oh-clock. That means the last standard admission movie begins at 8:00, and has them out by ten. Then the "responsible" adults can take over the place, have their drinks and watch their flicks. Worried about the riff-raff -- the "urban youth" plaguing the Loop -- well, that's easy. Don't let anyone in without a ticket. Have the ticket counter at street level and no one can take the escalator/stairs up to the main lobby without purchasing a ticket. At ten dollars a pop, a movie theater is becoming an investment activity and people are much less likely to put up with rude patrons.
So please - in just this one instance - DON'T cater to the new urbanist crowd, the 20-something single with a penchant for Miyazaki cinema and "exclusive" settings.
Kevin B wrote:As some have already mentioned, we have the Chase and the Moolah for our arthouse/limited-run/indie films. The Tivoli does it too. What we don't have in or near downtown is a movie theater that shows feature films. With conventioneers, families and tourists all wandering around the CBD and Washington Avenue district, I don't see the problem with opening it up to all-comers and playing your standard movie fare.
The last two movies I've seen are Green Hornet at the Moolah and Rango at the Chase, hardly indie films. I would say the Hi-Pointe and Tivoli cater more to the arthouse films than Chase and Moolah. Let me just say that the movie experience in STL completely blows away the suburban competition.
Kevin B wrote:As some have already mentioned, we have the Chase and the Moolah for our arthouse/limited-run/indie films. The Tivoli does it too. What we don't have in or near downtown is a movie theater that shows feature films. With conventioneers, families and tourists all wandering around the CBD and Washington Avenue district, I don't see the problem with opening it up to all-comers and playing your standard movie fare.
The last two movies I've seen are Green Hornet at the Moolah and Rango at the Chase, hardly indie films. I would say the Hi-Pointe and Tivoli cater more to the arthouse films than Chase and Moolah. Let me just say that the movie experience in STL completely blows away the suburban competition.
Okay, I misspoke (typed). I'm guilty of a poorly-defined argument I guess what I meant is that we have the "high-class" theaters already in our downtown radius with the presumed extravagance and exclusivity -- places that regular ol' visitors are inclined to avoid. While they do show major motion pictures, the attitude is that they're too "fancy" for many. While I'm not condoning a run-down, smelly megaplex, I think there's a comfortable joining point somewhere between intimidating plush leather viewing couches and recognizable, dense stadium-seating experiences.
I guess what I meant is that we have the "high-class" theaters already in our downtown radius with the presumed extravagance and exclusivity -- places that regular ol' visitors are inclined to avoid. While they do show major motion pictures, the attitude is that they're too "fancy" for many. While I'm not condoning a run-down, smelly megaplex, I think there's a comfortable joining point somewhere between intimidating plush leather viewing couches and recognizable, dense stadium-seating experiences.