6,775
Life MemberLife Member
6,775

PostJul 24, 2006#101

Adding The Hard Rock Cafe and cancelling the summer concert series on the lake stage (are the two events related? Possibly) went along way to killing it. I think I have been there about once since that happened, and that was maybe 10 years ago?



For me, it was nothing more than a mall, albeit a cool one. Since I don't go to malls except when I actually have to buy something, and given that the restaurants were/are(?) largely chains, I really had no reason to go there, except the occasional happy hour at Houlihan's, or more often, the Lake Series concerts. Absent those, there's no longer a reason to go.

2,005
Life MemberLife Member
2,005

PostJul 24, 2006#102

IMO a revamped Union Station must be part of any plan for the reconstruction and redevelopment of the 22nd street interchange area. I don't go to Union Station often, but the last couple times have reminded me of the St. Louis Centre back in 2001/02. There are very few national chains remaining in the place(Brookstone,Houlahans) and if more leave it will be a matter of time before foreclosure.



When Ballpark Village opens, it may be too late to save Union Station. Ultimately, Union Station needs to be part of downtown, not an island.

2,430
Life MemberLife Member
2,430

PostJul 24, 2006#103

I think there are a number of factors that cloud the future of Union Station. As Brick mentions, BV and I think more importantly the BD will do great harm to the last reasons to go to Union Station, outside of meeting folks to grab a quick drink before a Blues game. And once Union Station looses its tourist trap appeal, then fixing the situation becomes really hard.



Why? I think the station building is fine as a hotel and that portion will remain somewhat viable, as it is both a unique building and a good place for a hotel since it is such a cool building.



But what do you do with the shed? I mean sure retail centered at serving a downtown residential populaiton is a good idea, but it is so far currently from most of the downtown residential boom and even moreso, I think most would agree downtown would be better trying to develope washington or Olive into the primo retail strips rather than in the station shed. So where does this leave the shed? Really don't know. Untill you can figureout a good non-retail future for the shed then I don't know what becomes of the area. I think office or residential in the surrounding areas is a great idea. And if the greenway plan ever moved along, I could see the creation of some office/ residential around a connection between the greenway and the existing lake under the shed. ( think Canary Wharf)



I mean you can throw out all the normal ideas for the shed space: water park, ice rink, residential oriented retail. But i don't think any are the optimum idea for the space. If you could get away with it, tearing down part of the shed to build towers would be a cool idea, but i can only imagine the uproar that would create. Outside of that, i am running low on ideas for the space.



I guess the best question would be if someone developed condos or apartments in the area under the shed would be people want to live in the space?

1,355
Veteran MemberVeteran Member
1,355

PostJul 24, 2006#104

Business cycles seem to be getting shorter and shorter. The only real problem I see with Union Station is that they haven't altered or grown their business model to keep up with consumer preferences. It still has huge amounts of potential if, for nothing else, as the preeminent transit-oriented development in the midwest. It doesn't appear that they are doing anything at all to catch up/move in that direction. Definately, residential units are critical. As mentioned, they need to add connections to residential to the south and north.



I was through the mall last week and it was packed with tourists. But the place is looking worn, although, clean. Along with underuse of the lake and concert venues, I wonder why they scrapped the Ferris wheel and other fun stuff that used to be heavily programmed throughout the year.

1,400
Veteran MemberVeteran Member
1,400

PostJul 24, 2006#105

It shouldn't be a mall. I'd like to see a real classy theatre company open up here, I'd like to see an urban AMC multiplex with an Imax screen, hype up the comedy club more, throw in a giant Imos Pizza parlor, a carnival game promenade, interesting and creative lighting.... If its gonna be a touristy destination (and I don't see it being anything else) we might as well go all out. I'd be willing to sacrifice stores and parking to make this less of a mall and more. I do think that if we're going to have a "mainstream" movie theatre near the downtown area, this is probably the best place to do it. I realize that there was one. But that was small, inadequate, and the residential base wasn't as strong.

766
Super MemberSuper Member
766

PostJul 24, 2006#106

When I have been in Union Station recently, it mostly seems to serve visiting tourists and business travelers for the hotel. Many businesses book smaller "conventions" there because of the hotel's meeting space and convenience for attendees to shop, eat, etc. However, without better retail this is even of limited value.

2,813
Life MemberLife Member
2,813

PostJul 25, 2006#107

I tend to think that many of you find the whole Union Station "mall" thing a waste... yet places like Water Tower Place (Chicago), Eaton Centre (Toronto) and others work as being "malls" in historic places. Union Station, in addition, is not suffering financially. They do have things catering to tourist mainly, and it seems that this "bothers" some of you. Inside & Outside of Union Station is getting a facelift. MayorSlays blog just posted it awhile back (anyone?), the the station is always clean and not trashy. The shops for the most part are full. 51 Shops (out of 55 spaces) are now open including national/local chains: Brookstone, Discovery Channel Store, Cardinals Clubhouse, The Body Shop, All Tied Up, Bud Shop, Claires Accessories, Dapy, Foot Locker, & Hat World.

Union Station's strong hold is their restaurants and foodcourt - 8 sit down restaurants and 18 Foodcourt options. Including, Hard Rock Cafe, Houlihans, & Landry's Seafood to name a few.

Union Station is now 85 percent occupied and that put's it pretty much on average with any "mall" in the country on occupancy.

Not too mention it is well used during lunch rush hours downtown (with free METRO during lunch hour downtown).

The station has proven itself for over 20 years and for that I think it get's some pretty unfair and bad press.

Overall, I think the station holds it's own and is and always will be a St. Louis tourist attraction... and really that is just fine with me. Tourist love it and Union Station IS serving them. You can play putt putt there, bungee-type jump, ride the paddle boats, enjoy the comedy hall, stay at one of the hotels, rock out at Hard Rock, enjoy free summer concerts, ride Metro to/fro, sip coffeee at Starbucks or eat your hearts delight and just browse for tons of St. Louis souvineer crap.



AS FOR a movie theatre, the new Jefferson Arms movie theatres (5) will be mainstream movies (run by St. Louis Cinemas - same as Gallera and Chase Park Plaza). In addition the Bottle District is to open a new movie theatre complex up as well. The Jefferson Arms info was just on the news 2 nights ago to be under construction in just weeks and open in the spring. I think this will be a better spot for downtown residents (right off Washington Avenue Loft District and blocks out of the CBD) as well.





The station has a new updated website too - very nicely done.



http://stlouisunionstation.com/

154
Junior MemberJunior Member
154

PostJul 25, 2006#108

Thank you, Matt Guy, for telling it like it is about Union Station.



I don't know why there are detractors for this place; it's a stunning building and a wonderful institution! Perhaps something about the business end of historic renovation ruffles (some) people's feathers. It shouldn't.



It needs to be brought up to date a bit, but there's nothing about it's current state to suggest it's in a "death spiral." I think that it's role will change even more when the area around it is developed into a true neighborhood. Then it's shops will begin to cater to the needs of people who live nearby, as well as those who visit.

2,430
Life MemberLife Member
2,430

PostJul 25, 2006#109

I don't think folks on here are dising Union Station, just rightfuly questioning whether the future of Union Station as a tourist oriented mall is strong. I would argue otherwise, mainly feeling that the BV and BD will be serving the same market as Union Station. Perhaps the Station survies and thrives, but my guess is that a big chunk of its business is taken away by the new attractions.



And then you must wonder what its future is. Perhps the Blues will be good and crowds for the home games will help keep the Station going strong, in which case converting some of the parking and land around the station to office or residential is all that's needed. But with all of the new tourist oriented downtown developments on the books, it is time to take a critical eye to Union Station and ensure that it can thrive.

2,821
Life MemberLife Member
2,821

PostJul 25, 2006#110

Union Station is not suffering financially?





From the SLBJ - March 18, 2003



St. Louis Station Associates has transferred ownership of St. Louis Union Station to Regency Savings Bank of Oak Park, Ill., because it was unable to get new financing to replace a loan from Regency.



Steven Miller, managing partner for St. Louis Station Associates, said income generated by Union Station is insufficient to get a new loan to repay the existing loan, which was due Oct. 1, 2001.



"The transfer is a non-contested foreclosure action, which will clear up a number of interwoven title issues," Miller said, in a statement."




Read More:





It was 90% leased at the time and I really doubt revenue has improved much since then, especially considering the NHL strike...

282

PostJul 25, 2006#111

matguy70 wrote:I tend to think that many of you find the whole Union Station "mall" thing a waste... yet places like Water Tower Place (Chicago), Eaton Centre (Toronto) and others work as being "malls" in historic places.


Water Tower Place and Eaton Center are both new(er) malls in areas of heavy foot traffic. Eaton Center also has quite a bit of outwardly facing stores to encourage traffic on the public sidewalk. Same for Water Tower Place. Both are located along their respective cities' primary streets, Michigan Ave for WTP and Yonge for Eaton Center.



Yes, I am dissing the design of Union Station. As a tourist-only destination it is bound to fail. In fact, it has failed already. When the owners can't pay the debt due to insufficient income that makes it no longer commercially viable. The issue then becomes now long will investors be willing to prop it up.



Union Station should have had a residential compontent either within the design or immediately adjacent. That would have balanced the need of local residents with that of tourists.



Union Station sits in isolation. It has zero foot traffic just passing by. You can't just park at the curb and run in for a few minutes to get a couple of items. As stated above, when the BD and BPV open we are going to see the existing tourist base divided among three areas. Union Station willl lose out to the new areas because a) they are new and b) they are outdoor and more street like. The financial situation for Union Station has been bad for years and it is only going to get worse.



So what is the fix? Residential, and soon. We've got to get more and more people around this place. Build on the parking lots to the west right away. Rebuild the highway exchange to free up more land for development to the west and north-west. If Truman's sidewalks had been nicer it would have been good to get Lafayette Square folks to walk down Truman/18th to Union Station for dinner.

2,327
Life MemberLife Member
2,327

PostJul 25, 2006#112

Two things about Union Station that bother me:



1. lack of residential/office. There should be residential towers or something built on the parking area between the powerhouse and the shed.



2. it's not a train station! Amtrak wanted to go back in but Rouse(?) wouldn't let them; said it would disrupt foot traffic. It works in DC. I think it was a bias against 'train travelers.' To me its sad that Union Station, after a hundred years, could still be a viable, living train station.

2,813
Life MemberLife Member
2,813

PostJul 25, 2006#113

Answers to a few comments/questions and let's get some facts straight.



Unfortunately, Union Stations across the country have folded or become becons of tourist attractions. Amtrak is the only game in the country for rail transportation. Besides cities like NYC, L.A., D.C. and NYC that use their Union Stations as viable rail centers (due highly to city commuter rail and Amtrak usage) most stations are nothing more that rotting archieves of America's rail past. Just like the rusted rail cars sitting around the country - so are most stations... and most cities completely lost their stations to the wrecking ball. FORTUNATELY, for St. Louis, our station was spared the wrecking ball in the 70's and 80's and brought back to life with it's grand restoration in the 80's. But what to do with a massive building? Amtrak is federally funded and the decision to keep Amtrak in a gov't funded station was made when Union Station reopened in the 1980's. So reinventing Union Station was the only way the station was to survive. In the 1990's Union Station started to see rail traffic once again with METRO begining to serve the Union Station subway tunnel and a new station, and with Rail Cruise America and Northwest Orient Excursion trains arriving in the train shed. Other cities have not had as much success as St. Louis has had in the past 20 years of operation.



Union Station has seen it's up's and down's in the past 20 years. Today, I only see it headed to a better Union Station. Metro has given Union Station new foot traffic, lunch traffic, and on the tourist rail circuit. Adding Hard Rock Cafe and other tourist options has also increased Union Stations visability again in the past 10 years.





:arrow: As for Union Station financial status. My company is a member of the RCGA and the financial group meets quarterly to discuss the "state of the union". Recently, we were met by a representative of Union Station to discuss the renovations and viable option of adding residential units to the stations exterior buildings. The station is meeting current financial obligations and just recently was able to invest money back into the station.



Jlblues, the article you posted was in early 2003 and since then the station management and ownership has changed. The station is owned by Chicago-based Park National Bank. It is managed by the Jones Lang LaSalle Firm. Even in that article in 2003, the retail was "doing well and over 90% leased" During that time, the St. Louis Station Associates were running Union Station. They did so from 2000 until 2004 and probably were one of the worst management companies (slum lords IMO) in the country. They since then have ceased operations. They were the financial problem, not Union Station's tenants or sales/revenue. There is a big difference!



:!: Here is an article just written 2 months ago about St. Louis Union Station's current restorations and status:



Union Station undergoing an $8 million makeover

St. Louis Business Journal - May 26, 2006 by Rob Luke




One of St. Louis' best-known rehabbed properties is getting another rehab.



The Union Station retail complex is almost midway through an $8.1 million makeover that the building's managers expect to take until early 2007 to complete.



Union Station's General Manager Byron Marshall, of property management firm Jones Lang LaSalle, called the ongoing project "a huge commitment" to the property by its owners, Chicago-based Park National Bank. He stressed that all funding for the work was coming directly from the owner's corporate equity.



Marshall estimated that around $3 million had already been spent on new roofing and interior restoration, plus external stone work and tuck-pointing. Further exterior work will consume most or all of the remaining budget, he said.



Gary Klotz, project manager with Union Station's main exterior-work contractor, Superior Waterproofing and Restoration (SWR), estimates that the project will take between a year and a year and three months. "It's not our biggest job but it's a real nice size," said Klotz, whose company handles 200-300 jobs per year worth about $13 million.



The work is part of a long-term plan by Park National Bank to revitalize the property and attract new tenants.



Park National Bank acquired Union Station after parent company, Oak Park, Ill.-based FBOP Corp., merged Regency Bank, which owned Union Station, into Park National in January this year. Jones Lang LaSalle has managed Union Station since October 2004.



"Union Station's doing well," Marshall said. "Hotel rates are up, occupancy is up and store sales are up."



Marshall said the current rehab work is merely part one of an ongoing revitalization plan aimed at improving the building's returns. He said owners and management were currently "talking with a great many potential retail partners" about the building's future. Marshall did not mention specifics but said the group was looking at more restaurants and retail entertainment venues, and even mixed-use venues. "One thing we concluded was that it's important not to limit ourselves to what we are now," he said.



Union Station was originally constructed in the 1890s, underwent a $150 million restoration in the early 1980s and is home to many examples of late-19th century architecture. On re-opening in 1985, it was then the largest adaptive re-use property in the United States. Union Station holds official status as a National Historic Landmark.



Klotz said working on a building of such historic value will benefit SWR given Union Station's size and prominent location. SWR, which specializes in restoring old structures, has recently completed restoration work on historic buildings at Saint Louis University, Anheuser-Busch and the downtown loft neighborhood.



Some of the work at Union Station already has been completed. The three sections of Union Station -- Head House, Midway and Train Shed -- have each received some new roofing while Head House has had its interior restored. Chiller and cooling towers have also been replaced.



Over the next 12 months or so, the three sections will receive more tuck-pointing, stone and stucco replacement, and re-roofing.



The renovation work won't interrupt any of the scheduled displays and concerts at Union Station over the next few months, officials said.



http://stlouis.bizjournals.com/stlouis/ ... ocus4.html

10K
AdministratorAdministrator
10K

PostJul 25, 2006#114

I hope that the money that the new owners are pumping into the property will result in an improved tenant mix. Right now, the percentage of t-shirt/junk shops is a little too high for my tastes. The recent defection of tenants concerns me as well.



What I'd like to see happen at the Station:



- Some sort of residential component added, whether it be part of the existing structure or new construction elsewhere on the Union Station grounds.



- New restaurants in the Hooters and former Casa Gallardo and Route 66 spaces. National chains seem to work well in Union Station, and I'd probably rather have them located there than elsewhere downtown. Try and get O.T. Hodges back in its old space now that their legal issues seem to have been cleared up.



- Some sort of cultural/entertainment draw - stlmike mentioned an Imax, which might be a good way to pull in tourists and locals.



- Improve connectivity with its surroundings, which could be very tough. However, as Downtown West continues to develop, we'll soon have hundreds of new residents living just a few blocks from the Station - hopefully, they'll take advantage of it.

1,448
Super ModeratorSuper Moderator
1,448

PostJul 25, 2006#115

As far as using Union Station as a train station: remember that Union Station is a "dead end" for rails, so instead of merely stopping on a route, trains must pull in to the station, and then BACK OUT to get going again. It's really an inefficient system, and is probably the only thing poorly done with the original design. That's why we have the Amshack: it's a stop along a route, not a dead end.



EDIT: also, thanks, Mattguy, for the great information!

2,813
Life MemberLife Member
2,813

PostJul 25, 2006#116

That's why we have the Amshack: it's a stop along a route, not a dead end.


Which is now gone... thankfully.



Amtrak is now in their new "temp" station (which is nicer)







and will be moving into the new Gateway Transportation Center Station (under construction) by next year:







info: http://www.slfp.com/CitySide.htm

2,327
Life MemberLife Member
2,327

PostJul 25, 2006#117

Amtrak's operational considerations (ha, don't bother me with logistics!) is not my point...



This is an old lament of mine y'all will have to get used to and that is 'authenticity of structures.' A train station that's a train station, a city hospital that's still a city hospital, things like that.



Realities are different (I've been pickled for that too) but the romantic in me wishes 'The Sporting News' was still printed and headquartered in The Sporting News building instead of lofts. That's all.

1,610
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,610

PostJul 25, 2006#118

Shad, have you ever watched HGTV's "Rezoned?" This TV show tours properties all across the country, showing the expanding trend of adaptive reuse.



Though it may be painful for some to see properties no longer serve those original purpose, I'd much rather see older buildings reused than torn down.

2,327
Life MemberLife Member
2,327

PostJul 25, 2006#119

No I haven't. (don't have cable)



This is getting off topic and repeating a thread (i forget which topic) where we discussed this same thing.



I prefer adaptive, creative reuse and all that to vacant, decrepit and razing.



I think the Westin/Cupples Station is far cooler than when it was a warehouse. Yet I remember as a little kid in the 70s when railcars would be at the sidings and workers were unloading them and the smells and sounds. That was a gritty city vibe.



And waxing romantic, I remember taking a train to Springfield from Union Station. That was 1977. As sad as it was then, it was really cool watching the train back in under that masive shed.



I'm done, thanks for bearing with me.

back to topic....

2,430
Life MemberLife Member
2,430

PostJul 25, 2006#120

Well from the comments above, it is clear one lament folks have over Union Station is the lack of connectivity the Mall has with the streets. Now, granted the area around it isn't exactly hot pedestrian teritory, the norther side of Clark does get some traffic and if the MVC ever gets its new HQ in the area, that will help add more streetlife and density.



So the question is, can we run streets through the Union Station complex. Clark would be more difficult, as it would likely require running under the shed, but, if developed with new residential and street retail along a Clark running through the shed (not to mention new direct street access to the hardrock), this could sharply change the connection between the mall and the surrounding area.



Seems like Spruce could also be run through the parking lot, with the surrounding lots developed into street oriented buildings with addtional retail, all centered along a concourse running north-south through the site connecting the new street oriented blocks into the existing malls north south concourse.

2,327
Life MemberLife Member
2,327

PostJul 25, 2006#121

Extending Spruce is a good idea. Could it extend west past Drury and up to Harry's? MoDot's planning all sorts of crazy things with 22nd Street.



A momunmental undertaking would be creating a 'lid' (Danforth?) over the MetroLink tracks by constructing 6-8 story mixed-use directly on top.



That would urbanize that stretch south of the Post Office.

10K
AdministratorAdministrator
10K

PostJul 25, 2006#122

shadrach wrote:A momunmental undertaking would be creating a 'lid' (Danforth?) over the MetroLink tracks by constructing 6-8 story mixed-use directly on top.



That would urbanize that stretch south of the Post Office.


That would be a really cool idea if it's feasible - it would free up a lot of land. A building, such as the MVC's headquarters, could be designed so as to overlook the pocket park by the Savvis and have some pretty awesome views of downtown.

2,005
Life MemberLife Member
2,005

PostJul 25, 2006#123

MoDOT will be extending Spruce from 16th to 18th in conjunction with the multimodal center. Once the street is built, ownership will be turned over to the City. Construction will probably be starting this fall or next spring.

2,821
Life MemberLife Member
2,821

PostJul 26, 2006#124

St. Louis Business Journal - May 26, 2006, Rob Luke wrote:Park National Bank acquired Union Station after parent company, Oak Park, Ill.-based FBOP Corp., merged Regency Bank, which owned Union Station, into Park National in January this year.


Note the last word in the name "Park National Bank". Its a bank. Banks are not in the business of owning shopping malls/entertainment venues, nor do they want to be. The only reason they own Union Station is because they foreclosed on it, and if anyone out there in the investment community thought Union Station was a good investment, the bank would have sold it already. Trust me, they have no intention of holding on to the property any longer than they have to. Their only goal is to fix it up, and prop it up, just enough so that some sucker will come along and take it off their hands. Which is also why you will not see any major redevelopment plans for Union Station until that buyer appears.



And, I have a bit of respect for JLL, but they are not miracleworkers.


St. Louis Business Journal - May 26, 2006, Rob Luke wrote:Marshall said the current rehab work is merely part one of an ongoing revitalization plan aimed at improving the building's returns. He said owners and management were currently "talking with a great many potential retail partners" about the building's future. Marshall did not mention specifics but said the group was looking at more restaurants and retail entertainment venues, and even mixed-use venues. "One thing we concluded was that it's important not to limit ourselves to what we are now," he said.
Translation - "We have talked to every national retailer, and after they were done laughing, they asked if we had The Cordish Company's phone number."

2,813
Life MemberLife Member
2,813

PostJul 26, 2006#125

Your opinions are noted.



Maybe you should become a member of the RCGA St. Louis Financial Group. The group is made up of business and financial professionals that discuss current and past financial issues on business and residential ventures and properties in the St. Louis region.

Read more posts (819 remaining)