urbanSTL

Fortunately, it appears most in STL are anti-data center and all are against a data center at this location. I do not see a path forward here for Green Street. Interestingly, if they had proposed this somewhere it belongs (industrial, low production non-residential land) the data center moratorium probably would've been tabled in favor of stronger permit and location requirements. Since this very ugly building is being proposed in such a visible and central location, STL social media is already brewing. Green Street and partners likely just guaranteed data center moratorium. 

https://www.firstalert4.com/2025/09/19/ ... -troubles/

Midwest Regional Bank is suing the wife of the Green Street developer for millions of dollars.

The bank claimed Jane Morrell, the wife of Kevin Morrell, who runs Green Street Real Estate Ventures, is liable for that debt because she guaranteed multiple loans for several properties run by her husband’s company. Kevin Morrell filed for bankruptcy earlier this year.

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/met ... 0e00c.html

Plan is to turn the Armory and the parking lot both into a data center, developer says it will raise $20 million per year in new tax revenue and create 45 permanent jobs paying $130,000 per year.

It will be the first project to go through the new regulations under Mayor Spencer's executive order on data center development in the city.

Those 45 lucky duckies will be able to access the Foundry so easily!

quincunx wrote: ↑

Sep 20, 2025

Those 45 lucky duckies will be able to access the Foundry so easily!

They better not because this should be rejected by the city 100% of the time.

I've already sent a few emails and got "received" responses (fwiw), we need a massive public campaign against this...

data center? will it look like this? 

Where are the solar panels?

What’s really sad is at this point I would take these on the north riverfront (which I wished would be lofts but it just looks bleak to happen). We continue to lose those buildings (the demo permit for the warehouse on Gano is the latest tragedy) and they are ready made for this type of use and cheap properties. Save those historic industrial brick buildings and do your data centers there. This proposal is so frustrating because it was tax abated for a whole other purpose, is a transit oriented site in the core of the city and the building was recently overhauled and rehabbed. It just makes no sense to scrap all that progress. The locust data center made no sense to me either in the middle of a burgeoning residential/commercial district. It’s just the latest example of absolutely illogical development patterns

^ I would disagree because St. Louis has so much space to already, has way to much public non taxable property and your idea of illogical development patters got me confused.   

Yes, grand visions for the Armory that I would admit looked great but the reality is the closest it came was an adult theme arcarde with the hope that it was going to make money on liquor sales long enough to pay for itself & make the owners a buck or the two..  This is site literally surrounded by a freeway on the north, an industrial warehouse and the freight house yards to the west, and active heavily used freight railroad to the south and a viaduct followed by metrolink and light industrial to the east.   It is defined by and has been industrial for a long time.  No one can convince that a major freewy,mile long freight trains and major electrical substation is going away..  
.
Yes, logical development patterns literally exist in every direction from Armory with a better chance of succeeding because they will ultimately have better connectivity to its surroundings within an urban environmetn.   With more frequent Grand Ave bus service (or maybe this literally the ave that should have a streetcar if you were to actually add one), continue Brickline and Greenway buildouts and embracing good pedestrian/multimodal infrastructure will give the great transit access desired.  So logical development patterns exist and none of them by any stretch of the imagination are complete.  I bet you literally got millions of square you can put back in use or build out.  So what are those logical development patterns that already exist.

- Foundry, you still got an unbuilt/proposed timber frame office next to the new residential tower, surface lot across the residential tower, and plenty to do on east side towards Grand.  Not the least is the parking garage along FPP is fair game shortly if not mistaken (protected for five years to guarantee view for the historical tax credits if not mistaken), 
- Cortex,  you got got plenty of space there.   Finaly Cortex M might break ground and crossing fingers on Sand Crawler  but you still got corner of Vandy & FPP.   
- SLU & Grand Center,  Grand itself is great but how munch infill on the backside of Grand to go.   
- Future SLU - Harris Stowe Market ST corridor.   Market east of Grand has huge possibilities if you truly get rid of the FPP & I64 interchange and open up more developable property and grid along Market back towards Harris-Stowe campus.   

Then we go on other side of Grand,

- Steelcote,  Great start but plenty of space to be had and more to come.  
- Iron Hill.   Is this already forgotten?   Never got off the ground and now you have a huge developable parcel on the other side of Grand from steelcote still left to buld on.
-SLU property back on the block.  If not mistaken, SLU has actually willing to sell land back for private development that might go a long way re establishing a single home residential neighborhood. Yes a hike to metrolink but just one more area in need of development.   But none the less, still a pretty significant parcel to rebuild on.  

 So my argument once again.   City needs to find ways to get property back into private taxable use and  data centers is one of many paths that to get there now.    A thought to grasp, yes it is a data center but it might extend the life of the Armory for several decades, then data centers become obsolete and by that time the immediate area might  be actually built out.   

dredger wrote: ↑

Sep 22, 2025

^ I would disagree because St. Louis has so much space to already, has way to much public non taxable property and your idea of illogical development patters got me confused.   

Yes, grand visions for the Armory that I would admit looked great but the reality is the closest it came was an adult theme arcarde with the hope that it was going to make money on liquor sales long enough to pay for itself & make the owners a buck or the two..  This is site literally surrounded by a freeway on the north, an industrial warehouse and the freight house yards to the west, and active heavily used freight railroad to the south and a viaduct followed by metrolink and light industrial to the east.   It is defined by and has been industrial for a long time.  No one can convince that a major freewy,mile long freight trains and major electrical substation is going away..  
.
Yes, logical development patterns literally exist in every direction from Armory with a better chance of succeeding because they will ultimately have better connectivity to its surroundings within an urban environmetn.   With more frequent Grand Ave bus service (or maybe this literally the ave that should have a streetcar if you were to actually add one), continue Brickline and Greenway buildouts and embracing good pedestrian/multimodal infrastructure will give the great transit access desired.  So logical development patterns exist and none of them by any stretch of the imagination are complete.  I bet you literally got millions of square you can put back in use or build out.  So what are those logical development patterns that already exist.

- Foundry, you still got an unbuilt/proposed timber frame office next to the new residential tower, surface lot across the residential tower, and plenty to do on east side towards Grand.  Not the least is the parking garage along FPP is fair game shortly if not mistaken (protected for five years to guarantee view for the historical tax credits if not mistaken), 
- Cortex,  you got got plenty of space there.   Finaly Cortex M might break ground and crossing fingers on Sand Crawler  but you still got corner of Vandy & FPP.   
- SLU & Grand Center,  Grand itself is great but how munch infill on the backside of Grand to go.   
- Future SLU - Harris Stowe Market ST corridor.   Market east of Grand has huge possibilities if you truly get rid of the FPP & I64 interchange and open up more developable property and grid along Market back towards Harris-Stowe campus.   

Then we go on other side of Grand,

- Steelcote,  Great start but plenty of space to be had and more to come.  
- Iron Hill.   Is this already forgotten?   Never got off the ground and now you have a huge developable parcel on the other side of Grand from steelcote still left to buld on.
-SLU property back on the block.  If not mistaken, SLU has actually willing to sell land back for private development that might go a long way re establishing a single home residential neighborhood. Yes a hike to metrolink but just one more area in need of development.   But none the less, still a pretty significant parcel to rebuild on.  

 So my argument once again.   City needs to find ways to get property back into private taxable use and  data centers is one of many paths that to get there now.    A thought to grasp, yes it is a data center but it might extend the life of the Armory for several decades, then data centers become obsolete and by that time the immediate area might  be actually built out.   

I just do not grasp why you feel that it's okay to build an ugly albatross of a building based on extremely speculative investment in a location that is a 2 minute walk from one of the most heavily used metro stations, a 3 minute walk from the busiest and most frequent bus line, a 5 minute walk from the Foundry (once the ped bridge is built), a 10 minute walk from SLU, a 10 minute walk from Target, a 15 minute walk from SLU Hospital.....there is no justification for a data center to be allowed here.

Maybe some are, but most people on here are not arguing that there should be no data centers built. We are saying they should be built in locations not right next to metro stations....or in business districts.

As for the Armory itself, it was extremely popular and I'm sure lucrative- if you weren't carrying tens of millions in debt. The entire parking lot would be packed on weekends, 25% to 35% full on weekday nights, concerts, people going after Blues or Cardinals games, etc. It made money. The only reason they want this data center plan is to get out of their debt.

It is this straightforward:

1. Data centers should be built on vacant space on the riverfront, secluded industrial areas, or as part of a mixed use development.

2. They should not be built adjacent to significant public transport, multiple large hospitals, a large university, a small university, and a mixed-use entertainment district.

I'm still not clear on whether the old Armory itself would become a data center, or would it just be the new building? 

Both

The parking lot data center has a hearing on Thursday at 8:30 for approval

The Armory itself, the developer has an option to buy it and convert into a data center until June 2027, it will pay green street $5,000 a month until that strike date

I have an article on data centers in the construction forum newsletter out this Wednesday

Auggie wrote: ↑

Sep 22, 2025

dredger wrote: ↑

Sep 22, 2025

^ I would disagree because St. Louis has so much space to already, has way to much public non taxable property and your idea of illogical development patters got me confused.   

Yes, grand visions for the Armory that I would admit looked great but the reality is the closest it came was an adult theme arcarde with the hope that it was going to make money on liquor sales long enough to pay for itself & make the owners a buck or the two..  This is site literally surrounded by a freeway on the north, an industrial warehouse and the freight house yards to the west, and active heavily used freight railroad to the south and a viaduct followed by metrolink and light industrial to the east.   It is defined by and has been industrial for a long time.  No one can convince that a major freewy,mile long freight trains and major electrical substation is going away..  
.
  

2. They should not be built adjacent to significant public transport, multiple large hospitals, a large university, a small university, and a mixed-use entertainment district.

I honestly trying to understand your basis on point number 2 

Is it environmental concern which i find it ironic when both a major freeways (I64 & i44) and a major freightline/railroad corridor are both spewing toxic emissions and carrying hazardous materials ever day and are literally closer to the hospitals and college campuses you are referring too then the data center will be..   

As far as public transport.   Who says that brickline, greenway trails or the I64 pedestrian bridge can't be connected to Grand Metrolink station?  I would argue building transit connections through industrial areas whether it is a handful jobs or many jobs is just as important as being next to another apartment block.  If anything, I think the biggest benefit to public transport in this area is finding better/more frequent north to south transit service along the Grand Service as well as  improving the east west pedestrian mutlitmodal on Market/FPP or Chottuea Ave.  

dredger wrote: ↑

Sep 22, 2025

Auggie wrote: ↑

Sep 22, 2025

dredger wrote: ↑

Sep 22, 2025

^ I would disagree because St. Louis has so much space to already, has way to much public non taxable property and your idea of illogical development patters got me confused.   

Yes, grand visions for the Armory that I would admit looked great but the reality is the closest it came was an adult theme arcarde with the hope that it was going to make money on liquor sales long enough to pay for itself & make the owners a buck or the two..  This is site literally surrounded by a freeway on the north, an industrial warehouse and the freight house yards to the west, and active heavily used freight railroad to the south and a viaduct followed by metrolink and light industrial to the east.   It is defined by and has been industrial for a long time.  No one can convince that a major freewy,mile long freight trains and major electrical substation is going away..  
.
  

2. They should not be built adjacent to significant public transport, multiple large hospitals, a large university, a small university, and a mixed-use entertainment district.

I honestly trying to understand your basis on point number 2 

Is it environmental concern which i find it ironic when both a major freeways (I64 & i44) and a major freightline/railroad corridor are both spewing toxic emissions and carrying hazardous materials ever day and are literally closer to the hospitals and college campuses you are referring too then the data center will be..   

As far as public transport.   Who says that brickline, greenway trails or the I64 pedestrian bridge can't be connected to Grand Metrolink station?  I would argue building transit connections through industrial areas whether it is a handful jobs or many jobs is just as important as being next to another apartment block.  If anything, I think the biggest benefit to public transport in this area is finding better/more frequent north to south transit service along the Grand Service as well as  improving the east west pedestrian mutlitmodal on Market/FPP or Chottuea Ave.  

Major transit transfer centers should be surrounded by housing and jobs. Not "industrial" and a data center.

What I'm saying is when we have an opportunity such as a large open lot directly adjacent to the busiest and most frequent bus line, a metro station, and a future pedestrians bridge that will connect a university and mixed use district, it would be malpractice to allow that open lot to be utilized in a way that totally fails to utilize any of that rare infrastructure and is functionally useless to the city's real economy.

I get why everyone is mad that the data center is being built in this location, but I think the problem is that the city is so reactive when it comes to development. With that said, there is still a lot of underutilized and vacant land around all of the Metrolink stations in the city. In my opinion the city should at least make some requirements for the data center if it is going to be there. Maybe require that the data center is aestethically pleasing, require that Green Street puts some money into landscaping around the general area, maybe even make them install some sort of mural or art installation on the data center. That's really my biggest problem with the city, it rarely requires good devleopment standards city wide, it's always taking bad deals. 

At the ZOUP Kickoff meeting a few weeks ago guest speaker Mitch Silver, an urban planner and former NYC Parks Commissioner, shared that in his experience 'there are two types of cities: plan making cities, and deal making cities.' He asked the crowd which kind of city we felt St. Louis currently is and the response was a resounding "Deal making city!"

With that sentiment in mind, I stepped back from this situation and asked myself "If the city and its citizens were to make a plan of what should be on this site and what it's impacts should be, would a multistory data center and electrical substations, no matter how "beautified", be an acceptable plan?" I think most people who understand the importance of the momentum the surrounding developments, institutions, and multi-modal connections carry would agree with me and say no, absolutely not.

The goals of the community combined with previous planning efforts and MODOTs plans for the reconfiguration of the nearby interchange should all be taken into account to plan for and accept only development that actualizes these goals. The areas in blue deserve dense, multi-use developments that makes the best possible use of the land for nearby populations, businesses, and connections. 

Outside of what the developer said, I assume there is a group or panel within the city that reviews what the current tax income is for these parcels, and compares that to what the tax income would be for this proposed development?  I don't love the idea of a data center here, but I think emotion-based decisions on their own can be risky.  Better would be to balance use with what benefit the city would get from a go-forward income.  How does it compare with what historically has been provided, compared to when the Armory was operating, and compared to another industrial site within the city that as good highway and rail access?

The biggest inhibitor for data centers now is access to power.  Having a substation sitting next to the site would have it's advantages.

City should require as a part of their requirements that SLDC be allowed to run a development RFP with the developer to confirm there are no other proposals.

There is a plan for this area. It called for-

Action Area 3 -- City Blocks 2185.11, 2196, and 2197, containing approximately 18.3
acres (excluding rights-of-way). A primary focus of the development activities in this area
will be the reuse of the St. Louis National Guard Armory Building and any support facilities
such as parking that would be needed to make reuse viable. In addition, the proximity to the
Grand MetroLink station, the rebuilt Grand Boulevard Bridge, and the proposed Great
Rivers Greenway trail system provides the opportunity to redevelop this area for more mixed
use TOD type of development. Any development along Grand Boulevard should help create
an enhanced physical and activity bridge between I-64 and Chouteau Avenue.

metzgdaSTL wrote: ↑

Sep 22, 2025

Outside of what the developer said, I assume there is a group or panel within the city that reviews what the current tax income is for these parcels, and compares that to what the tax income would be for this proposed development?  I don't love the idea of a data center here, but I think emotion-based decisions on their own can be risky.  Better would be to balance use with what benefit the city would get from a go-forward income.  How does it compare with what historically has been provided, compared to when the Armory was operating, and compared to another industrial site within the city that as good highway and rail access?

The biggest inhibitor for data centers now is access to power.  Having a substation sitting next to the site would have it's advantages.

I think this data center proposal is effectively an emotion based plan that does not consider what would best benefit the city.

dredger wrote: ↑

Sep 22, 2025

So my argument once again.   City needs to find ways to get property back into private taxable use and  data centers is one of many paths that to get there now.    A thought to grasp, yes it is a data center but it might extend the life of the Armory for several decades, then data centers become obsolete and by that time the immediate area might  be actually built out.   

This is a terrible argument for such an unproven, and potentially calamitous, type of development.

Not to mention your argument has been so bad for the city in years past. If we were having this discussion 30 years ago, you would be telling us we have to build St. Louis Marketplace so we can get land “back into private taxable use. No thanks.