urbanSTL

If someone wants to come and invest the money to build a hotel in St. Louis and the city tells them to GTFO?

Since when is not giving decades upon decades of tax breaks, subsidy, and tax credits tantamount to saying "GTFO"?

I'm of the opinion that basically anyone who wants to build a multistory building on a surface lot downtown should be allowed to.

In my humble opinion this shouldn’t even be a debate this is literally a great infill project if it indeed happens. I’m all for incentives done in a civil manner. I simply don’t believe St Louis can get most projects going without some sort of incentive unless the developer has heavy deep pockets and doesn’t truly need them. I also believe most cities do the very same however I don’t think St Louis is in a position to say no more hand outs


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

^ sure it is in that position. if the demand really is there, the market will meet it... room rates and occupancy will rise and new product will come. I believe the 21c already is proceeding without abatement. I wouldn't rule out subsidy, but a market analysis is warranted for sure and a moratorium on subsidy during that time is appropriate.

newstl2020 wrote: Enough with the consternation. I've spent 15 years on this board with many others yearning for the day we get new construction in the city and it finally begins to materialize and you all can't help but scream the sky is falling.

I, for one, am not consterned.

bprop wrote:

If someone wants to come and invest the money to build a hotel in St. Louis and the city tells them to GTFO?

Since when is not giving decades upon decades of tax breaks, subsidy, and tax credits tantamount to saying "GTFO"?

I didn't say anything regarding tax breaks or subsidy. A statement was made that a "source at the SLDC" says they are considering imposing a moratorium on new hotel construction downtown. That is simply the dumbest GD thing I have ever heard in my entire life.

BellaVilla wrote: Pardon the ignorance but what are the "run-down" hotels in downtown?

1. The Red Lion. Reviews mentioned worn out rooms, high prices and, this should be common knowledge by all locals, the awning at the entrance is horrendous. The least they could do is replace it.
2. City Place (Crowne Plaza). Reviews mentioned outdated rooms, maintenance problems, rude staff, cleanliness issues. Others have said that the elevators are slow and that the lobby is constantly dead. On my end, the exterior of the building needs a cleaning job and a hotel brand flag attached to it. Diamond Resorts will have timeshares here but I hope they invest some money into fixing up the place or else their gamble will fail.

If work isn't done to these hotels to bring them into contention with other, newer hotels Downtown, then I see them closing or drastically downsizing. Why dish out over $175 at either one of these places on a special event night when you can do the same at a better-kept hotel? Customers matter more than profits in the majority of business. If you don't have customers, you don't have a profit. I believe that the owners of these places should spend some money to win over new customers and retain existing ones. It's how they'll have to remain competitive as all these new hotels come online. 

The Mayor wrote: ^ I stayed at the Red Lion when it was known as the City Center Hotel and it was nice enough, though this was 4 or 5 years ago.  Had a great rooftop patio.  Would hate to see that one close.

I good portion of it is condos. Wonder if it would go full residential. 

The Mayor wrote: ^ I stayed at the Red Lion when it was known as the City Center Hotel and it was nice enough, though this was 4 or 5 years ago.  Had a great rooftop patio.  Would hate to see that one close.

My understanding is that service deteriorated substantially in the last few years.

newstl2020 wrote: Everyone needs to seriously pump the breaks on the hotel saturation theme. And a moratorium on new hotel construction in downtown? I'm sorry, that's literally never going to happen and an asinine thought altogether. A source from SLDC saying this is even a modicum of an idea needs to be fired on the spot and then launched into the sun. If someone wants to come and invest the money to build a hotel in St. Louis and the city tells them to GTFO? Goodbye to investment attempts in the city, completely. Someone is proposing a new hotel. Awesome! We are a very large city and a very large region with many companies/events/family members/convention visitors/tourists etc. needing accommodations. 

Enough with the consternation. I've spent 15 years on this board with many others yearning for the day we get new construction in the city and it finally begins to materialize and you all can't help but scream the sky is falling. If the city didn't have a need for hotel rooms, trust me, money would not be considering it. Will this 100% happen? Certainly not. Is it viable if the time has been spent by developers and Marriot to get to this point? Absolutely. 

End of rant.

You've got to take Chris' claims/posts with a big grain of salt and some patience to see what part (if any) of it actually shakes out. 

I appreciate the passion. But the endless attempts to get the scoop lead to an over-abundance of half-truths. 

Separately, I couldn't agree with your take more. Put me down as one of the "many others". 

@wabash my claims of a Moratorium on Hotel Incentives in the city have been backed up by two individual Downtown real estate individuals who lease out office and retail space in multiple buildings. They are from two different firms and each called their buddies in the SLDC to see if true and both came back yes with a little more information. It's all going to surround historic rehabs to hotel usages IF implemented. They (realtors) don't see it happening due to the upcoming Convention Center Expansion, MLS Stadium, the few XFL games and some things here and there. So you can take my claims as a grain of salt regardless if they come true or not. It's an odd time for sure in terms of development.

As for getting the scoops, I have recently found myself in a position where I hold off on some stories. The Moxy and 1200 S. Brentwood were confirmed by the developers with words and other information coming from their mouths. The Moxy developers gave me more information than they wanted me to include in the story and the post made on here because the figures are constantly changing. If it's half true, I'll go back in correct my posts on my blog while ones on here remain to show previous mistakes by myself. I have no shame in it. There are other scoops in the pipeline where I am working closely with developers on stories. Two are in Downtown, one is in the Central West End and another is in the Bevo. Other stories come in the way of public information where it is out there, you just have to find it. 

Plus, I'm not here to replace the Business Journal and STLToday. They have better sources and so I am making use of who I have. Things change over time and as time goes on, things on STLToday and the Business Journal become half-truths but at one point were 100% true.

If you knew some of the things I was told by Aldermen, neighborhood development board heads, developers and architects about what Alex did at NextSTL when pursuing stories, you all would sh*t. The things said weren't pretty but I appreciated what he did to keep us informed. This may anger people, but I'm trying to pick up where he left off. His enthusiasm about the future of the city and region was really on display and I can't blame him for that. All of yours, as well as mine, is also high. I'm here to inform and document changes as they go on. I'm not here to set the story straight when my sources are peanuts compared to others. 

If it's one thing I learned doing this, I love hearing people complain about what I do. Not the developers or architects, but the readers. I understand why, it's because of the rough start and claims I made early on. Completely understandable on everyone's part. If you all wish for me to stop pursuing stories, let me know. I'll gladly stop but until enough people start saying that, I'm going to continue what I'm doing and finding things like the Moxy and 1200 S. Brentwood and future things like AT&T and Chouteau's Landing.

I know this whole post is off topic but I wanted to say it.  

^Don't stop, Chris, but you've got to be careful that you maintain your credibility. Also, as I'm sure you know, be careful not to reveal too much too soon, or your sources will get real quiet real quick. 

Overall, considering how young you are, I think you're doing a great job, and I look forward to watching you grow into it. 

so, it's not a moratorium on hotels, but a moratorium on hotel tax incentives?  that nuance is key and one I stand behind.  

Chris, I for one am glad to see what you write. It's interesting and I trust your process and I believe you're doing your homework and taking care to protect your sources. And I am amazed at the relationships you seem to have developed so quickly. It speaks well of the way you do things. Keep on keeping on. Yes, a moratorium on subsidies seems entirely appropriate and is/was doubtless blowing in on the political wind.

soulardx wrote: so, it's not a moratorium on hotels, but a moratorium on hotel tax incentives?  that nuance is key and one I stand behind.  

Yes. SLDC has no means to stop a project that does not ask for incentives. In general, the City government has no means to stop a project that meets zoning and building code requirements on a given parcel. Only when variances or ordinance changes are needed does that City have any power beyond what is described in code, or if there is a form-based code or Local Historic District ordinance regulating design.

So with the recent rumored sale of the AT&T Building, I have to wonder if this project could be loosely associated with a potential tenant in mind. After all, there isn't quality hotel space near the AT&T building for at least four city blocks. (That "shouldn't" be a problem, however, it could be a contributing factor.)

I'd seriously doubt that the Moxy development is related to some inside scoop on the AT&T tenant. Even some of the people who were very involved in the auction process don't know what's going on with it.

True, that area is underserved so they might just be trying to fill in a gap in downtown. Wishful thinking on my part.

They are renovating the old Omni Hotel right next to the proposed Moxy though.  I forget that project but I'm sure there's a thread here about it specifically or its mentioned in the hotels thread.

mjbais1489 wrote: They are renovating the old Omni Hotel right next to the proposed Moxy though.  I forget that project but I'm sure there's a thread here about it specifically or its mentioned in the hotels thread.

The very first hint of the renovation of the (Omni) Majestic was the genesis of the "Hotels Thread"
It will operate as a Le Meridien which, along with Moxy, is a Marriott brand. I assume the Moxy site is owned by the Majestic Hotel owner as they're currently using that lot as a staging site for construction. 

Majestic/Le Meridien and the Moxy after being developed by the same people, Hawkeye Hotels. Hawkeye told me that their hotels here are to serve the growing Downtown St. Louis area but they also hope that the AT&T building brings them more customers. They knew it was abandoned but weren't made aware of redevelopment plans. 

chriss752 wrote: Majestic/Le Meridien and the Moxy after being developed by the same people, Hawkeye Hotels. Hawkeye told me that their hotels here are to serve the growing Downtown St. Louis area but they also hope that the AT&T building brings them more customers. They knew it was abandoned but weren't made aware of redevelopment plans. 

Seems odd that they would build the Moxy without parking, especially since they will be managing both hotels. 

I wouldn't be heartbroken if they would buy and tear down the Gateway Metro Federal Credit Union and build a decent looking garage with quality ground level retail. It could easily serve both hotels and possibly some public parking.