I think it was less about effort and more about (1) the general direction of the market and (2) Green Street's liquidity.Auggie wrote: ↑Jan 28, 2025Yea my point wasn't that it itself in a bubble was a failure, the failure was that it was just an $80M bar for suburbanites and they didn't seriously put effort into the rest of the grand plan.jbacott wrote: ↑Jan 27, 2025The crazy part is that, despite the disfunction from the owners, it kind of did work. It was drawing crowds. No idea how long that would have lasted, but the Armory's failure shouldn't be flagged as a poor concept that predictably failed. It should be flagged as another example of Green Street being a mess.Auggie wrote: ↑Jan 25, 2025The Armory has become the epitome of the suburban style entertainment venue in an urban area.
Looking back with 20/20 vision, it's unbelievable that they actually thought thought was gonna work. Completely cut off from The Foundry and SLU, did not accommodate MetroLink or MetroBus at all, and it's not like it's right off a major road.
- 2,626
Agree with everybody here. We need to stop hailing data centers as sources of investment. Yes, the dollar value is high, but the actual value to the city is diddly squat (arguably negative)
- 1,607
In terms of the data center - the bank does not want this asset, it's maintenance costs, or its tax liability. Most of us grasp the Armory is not worth the renovation cost. It was pointed out that the hot mess that was Greenstreet missed deadlines to get the tax credits that made this project even remotely feasible and yet they plowed on.
The bank wants Greenstreet to make its payments. As long as Phil Hulse projects that he has a plan and payments are coming, this isn't going to be anything else.
The question to Mr. Hulse would be, if not longer encumbered by Greenstreet's soul crushing debt, can the Amory reopen as the Venue it was and meet that obligation? Better for the community certainly.
The bank wants Greenstreet to make its payments. As long as Phil Hulse projects that he has a plan and payments are coming, this isn't going to be anything else.
The question to Mr. Hulse would be, if not longer encumbered by Greenstreet's soul crushing debt, can the Amory reopen as the Venue it was and meet that obligation? Better for the community certainly.
- 13
From a business perspective, I could see why a data center is attractive. The Armory sits next to a power substation. While you would need to feed from two substations, getting access to one would be cheap. The site also has space for generators, chillers and other infrastructure needed in the surrounding parking lot. The interior is mostly a blank slate. They could probably get two levels of DC space by building out a second floor. Finally, it's centrally located and close to Cortex which is an innovation / tech hub.
Agree with everyone here that it doesn't add any vibrancy to the city or activate the area. However, if there isn't another suitable use for it that can be found, I would prefer the building be maintained VS sitting vacant and susceptible to break-ins.
Agree with everyone here that it doesn't add any vibrancy to the city or activate the area. However, if there isn't another suitable use for it that can be found, I would prefer the building be maintained VS sitting vacant and susceptible to break-ins.
$600M zoning only permit submitted by Green Street for Armory Part II.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/bus ... 4e9e5.html
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/bus ... 4e9e5.html
It’ll be a very revealing project for St. Louis if actually a data center. For example, if Bi-State and Great Rivers Greenway remain silent even though the project will massively undercut their overall missions. The City approving this will stamp the area as unlivable for decades, permanently ending any hopes that real transit-oriented development will happen.
I hope Phil realizes just how stupid it would be.
I hope Phil realizes just how stupid it would be.
- 502
Preferably they’d build the residential towers on Grand (like they once intended) and redevelop the Famous Barr warehouse. Get people living down there and then reopen the Armory as the “community living room” space with amenity spaces for residents and things for the public.
There's other places near there that could be used for a data center as well. Places that are not adjacent to a metro station and planned bike trail.
- 925
Can’t approve this. Tax abating that land for what was planned to versus a data center is unacceptable. We got pedestrian bridge funding approved, a multi million dollar greenway, metrolink, bus hub, a major university. Just can’t happen.
- 1,794
Terrible use and the city needs to say no. It’s not the tax payer’s job to bail out GS’s investors and creditors.
- 2,054
Its in partnership with another developer called THO Investments... almost sounds like they still own that property and are trying to salvage some $$PeterXCV wrote: ↑Aug 11, 2025So Green Street didn't go out of business?
- 2,626
Who are the people who have the ability to nix this data center project? This would be worth organizing against
- 2,054
^Is there a way to extort these data centers where its worth it to approve it or is there a method that can require them to not pollute as much? like... force them to build a giant shed with solar panels covering the rail road tracks to fuel their energy needs... I'm just thinking $600M there's gotta be $50-$100M in there to push these folks to comply and get a win-win? or is this definitely a 
⛈?
⛈?Do they need to rezone? It's currently H. You'd think it'd need to be industrial zoned, though our zoning code is old.
- 9,547
I doubt they’re heavily involved in it, you don’t get go from primarily developing apartments and retail to data centers, they’re involved because the money behind wanted that land next to the power sub station
This sounds lovely for ordinary people, which is why it will never happen. The peasants cannot have nice things.Chris Stritzel wrote: ↑Aug 10, 2025Preferably they’d build the residential towers on Grand (like they once intended) and redevelop the Famous Barr warehouse. Get people living down there and then reopen the Armory as the “community living room” space with amenity spaces for residents and things for the public.
I'd rather squatters occupy these buildings from here to eternity than stick another data center in an urban area. Both are blights on the landscape and a net drain on society, but at least a squatter sh*t castle would serve a human need.
Time for me to carry on the battle from the other perspective. Why are urbanist so against data centers in the city? You literally have an old warehouse that was built as a warehouse next to a power substation that is not going away anytime soon. You literally have a slow growth city that is land rich (including way too much public non tax generating property), building rich and infrastructure rich. Time to embrace data centers as one of many solutions needed to filling space, utilizing existing infrastructure and generating tax revenues. Yes, this deal is probably saving someone arse or at least generate a few bucks for the property owner but it becomes leaseable rentable tax generating space.
Yes, the dream of a mini urban oasis goes away but I would like to remind everyone is surrounded by Freeway, railroad tracks and a power substation. Heck, I loved the idea and rendering once upon a time of the full service tower hotel connecting w Grand Viaduct. However, At this point I would love to see Cortex/Foundry/and next to Target (Forget development) all get filled out first and foremost at this point including the fact that the full service hotel tower instead becomes part of the Foundry development along Vande or even fill the empty FPP & Vande corner.
Yes, the dream of a mini urban oasis goes away but I would like to remind everyone is surrounded by Freeway, railroad tracks and a power substation. Heck, I loved the idea and rendering once upon a time of the full service tower hotel connecting w Grand Viaduct. However, At this point I would love to see Cortex/Foundry/and next to Target (Forget development) all get filled out first and foremost at this point including the fact that the full service hotel tower instead becomes part of the Foundry development along Vande or even fill the empty FPP & Vande corner.
Most disappointing to me about a data enter in this location is it squanders the Metrolink station and 70 bus.
Also reminder an operating business was displaced. How many people did it employ? How many will the data center?
Also reminder an operating business was displaced. How many people did it employ? How many will the data center?
For me, it's less about data centers being being in the city and more about this particular location.dredger wrote: ↑Aug 13, 2025Time for me to carry on the battle from the other perspective. Why are urbanist so against data centers in the city? You literally have an old warehouse that was built as a warehouse next to a power substation that is not going away anytime soon. You literally have a slow growth city that is land rich (including way too much public non tax generating property), building rich and infrastructure rich. Time to embrace data centers as one of many solutions needed to filling space, utilizing existing infrastructure and generating tax revenues. Yes, this deal is probably saving someone arse or at least generate a few bucks for the property owner but it becomes leaseable rentable tax generating space.
Yes, the dream of a mini urban oasis goes away but I would like to remind everyone is surrounded by Freeway, railroad tracks and a power substation. Heck, I loved the idea and rendering once upon a time of the full service tower hotel connecting w Grand Viaduct. However, At this point I would love to see Cortex/Foundry/and next to Target (Forget development) all get filled out first and foremost at this point including the fact that the full service hotel tower instead becomes part of the Foundry development along Vande or even fill the empty FPP & Vande corner.
First, it has to be noted that data centers are on the same level of land use as strip malls. They create a minimal amount of jobs, generate no foot traffic, no sales tax revenue once operational, etc. They're also oftentimes ugly and never positively add to the built environment. The only advantage they may have is property tax revenue, depending on how highly they are assed, which I do not know off the top of my head.
Second, I personally am not "opposed" to data centers being in the city. You are correct that there is lots of unused space that they could be built on. Especially in areas like the riverfront, industrial parts of the city, and even very close to where this location is. So actually, I generally would be supportive of a data center development in the city. Unfortunately, all of the ones I have personally heard about are in bad locations for a data center. Such as downtown or in this location.
As for this particular location, why it's bad is because it is directly adjacent to one of the busiest Metro stations, the busiest bus line, and a planned bike/ped bridge across I-64. Additionally, I don't think you can judge Midtown by applying the broader city/MSA population growth. Midtown has grown by nearly 40% since 2000 and will probably grow another 10-15% come 2030. I can't imagine "luxary" apartments with good amenities and a boutique hotel would not do well here, especially with reactivation of the Armory.
Now, I don't know if this is realistic, but I wouldn't be opposed to a data center as part of a development that includes a 25 story apartment building, 5 story hotel, and retail. I have no idea of data centers for some reason are not compatible with a mixed use development- none at all, but if they are, that's how this development should be if it has to include a data center.
There are also better locations like a 3 minute walk from this location for a data center as well, such as the massive unused rail yard.
If it's a $600M data center and nothing else, it just has to be rejected. If we are serious about seeing St. Louis improve, data centers adjacent to Metro stations is not how we make a better city.
My final issue with data centers is less about this development or any specific development, and more about the broader economic changes they are creating. I personally think AI has been and will be used for more bad than good, and I read an article a couple days ago about how data center construction has now surpassed consumer spending in % of GDP. This would suggest that much of our GDP is being propped up by these developments that offer very little to the real economy. So another worry I have is that if this rapid development of data centers we have seen across the country ends up being a bubble, not only will we have a major recession, but we are also going to see data centers lose their value and possibly become vacant. But these issues I have more generally apply, and don't really affect my actual view of this particular development.
^
"I personally think AI has been and will be used for more bad than good, and I read an article a couple days ago about how data center construction has now surpassed consumer spending in % of GDP. This would suggest that much of our GDP is being propped up by these developments that offer very little to the real economy. So another worry I have is that if this rapid development of data centers we have seen across the country ends up being a bubble, not only will we have a major recession, but we are also going to see data centers lose their value and possibly become vacant. But these issues I have more generally apply, and don't really affect my actual view of this particular development."
Completely agree re; AI and data centers, and will take it one step further: No good will come of either of them for ordinary working people. Data Centers are miserable to live near, they suck up vital, non-renewable resources necessary for human life to produce mostly digital trash; and their sole purpose, to provide an investment return on the mountains of capital being shoveled into the furnace, can only be accomplished if they replace, or dramatically reduce wages paid for, 90% of human labor, and quickly. Whether they succeed (we're all pauperized) or fail (the bubble pops), you can bet the consequences will fall on everyone on this message board, no matter how special you/your employers think you are at your job.
We're peasants turning our hand tools into threshing machines and a digital prison for ourselves, owned by the usual suspects who would prefer to see us all bound as slaves or dead, whichever is more cost-effective for them. This is not hyperbole, just a paraphrase of what these guys (they're all guys) are now saying publicly in friendly forums. StL City leadership absolutely needs to reject this development based on the values they professed to voters. It will benefit no one except the investors and whomever they've "influenced" in City Hall.
Thanks. I will now go yell and shake my fist at the clouds.