‘Ghost’ buildings belie tale of downtown’s progress

moorlander · PostJan 21, 2011#12011-01-21T14:48+00:00

‘Ghost’ buildings belie tale of downtown’s progress

Twelve significant buildings — more than 2 million square feet — sit empty in downtown St. Louis, awaiting redevelopment or demolition, despite 10 years and more than $4.5 billion spent on the city’s revitalization.

The half-million-square-foot Arcade Wright Building. The similarly sized Jefferson Arms. The 177,000-square-foot Chemical Building. Those and nine more significant properties loom over downtown, partially boarded up and home to pigeons.

Projects stalled when the recession hit, leaving some of downtown’s largest historic properties shuttered, their planned redevelopments casualties of the economic downturn.

Still, progress has been made, said Rodney Crim, executive director of the St. Louis Development Corp. “Ten years ago, over 145 buildings were identified downtown that were either under-utilized or vacant and needed to be redeveloped,” Crim said.

“In the past 10 years, over 120 buildings — many of them very significant properties — were rehabbed and are now part of the new fabric of downtown.”

Now, with a $385 million construction boom that began last year under way, the “pump is primed” to redevelop downtown’s remaining ghost buildings, according to Steve Symsack, a 30-year industry veteran and vice president at Coldwell Banker Commercial.

“Within the next five years, where economic opportunity exists, the remaining buildings will be redeveloped or torn down,” he said. “Were it not for the national downturn, St. Louis would have progressed in dynamic fashion.” Symsack noted major investor capital flow to significant projects — the Park Pacific, Laurel and Mercantile Exchange — in spite of the stagnant economy.

read more here
http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/prin ... le-of.html

downtown2007 · PostJan 21, 2011#22011-01-21T23:45+00:00

“Within the next five years, where economic opportunity exists, the remaining buildings will be redeveloped or torn down,” he said.

Lets get one thing straight. Nobody is tearing down any buildings. Name the 12 buildings....

Chemical
Arcade
Lasalle
Gen Am
2 Cupples buildings
Jefferson Arms
Aliverne

What else....

goat314 · PostJan 21, 2011#32011-01-21T23:52+00:00

So lets get this straight. The solution for the remaining 12 buildings is that if they don't get redeveloped soon they will be torn down? Does the city even want an urban policy? Who is still making decisions like its the 1970s?

zun1026 · PostJan 22, 2011#42011-01-22T00:03+00:00

goat314 wrote:So lets get this straight. The solution for the remaining 12 buildings is that if they don't get redeveloped soon they will be torn down? Does the city even want an urban policy? Who is still making decisions like its the 1970s?

Well as long as its Class A office developed in part with TIF funds, then possibly.

With that said the city has done some good. The city is in better shape than it had been.

In all fairness though, not every historic building will be saved ( as much as I would like to see that happen). Some building floor plates and structural issues are far too costly to rehab.

stlcardsblues1989 · PostJan 22, 2011#52011-01-22T01:08+00:00

I hope none come down. Some I value more than others, though. The Alverne is probably my least favorite because it's been changed so much

I'll be honest, looking at Charlotte on Street View, I'm not a fan. The Downtown is pretty, but, as one Charlottean said, they don't have blight. They tear it down. Honestly, the whole city outside of Downtown looks like one big new suburb. Maybe it's the historic preservationist in me, but I can't see anything unique about Charlotte's neighborhoods. I saw a few brick buildings and about half the ones I saw were borded up or otherwise obviously unoccupied. It's a pretty seat Downtown. Other than that it looks pretty bland.

I know that's off-topic, though.

PostJan 22, 2011#62011-01-22T03:23+00:00

I do wonder about this one
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source= ... ,,0,-19.35

the central scrutinizer · PostJan 22, 2011#72011-01-22T04:45+00:00

The Couples building with the collapsed roof is a goner.

c2city · PostJan 22, 2011#82011-01-22T10:54+00:00

I agree, if the collapsing couples building gets saved it will suprise me.

moorlander · PostJan 22, 2011#92011-01-22T12:27+00:00

The Final Dozen
Twelve downtown buildings remain vacant, encompassing more than
2 million square feet of unused space:

Mercantile Exchange, 510 Locust St.
270,000-square-foot building

505 Washington Ave.
78,000 total square feet

Cupples Station 7, 11th and Spruce streets
200,000-square-foot building

Cupples Station 9, 900 Spruce
170,000-square-foot building

Arcade Wright Building, 800 Olive St.
500,000-square-foot building

Chemical Building (also known as the Alexa), 721 Olive St.
17-story, 177,000-square-foot building
GenAmerica building, 700 Market
128,250-square-foot building

LaSalle Building, 509 Olive
13-story, 33,150-square-foot office building

Jefferson Arms, 401-415 N. Tucker
500,000-square-foot building

WS Hotel, 400 Washington Ave.
120,000-square-foot hotel

917 Locust St., Locust and 10th
120,000-square-foot planned hotel

921 Locust St., Locust and 10th
120,000-square-foot planned hotel

Read more: ‘Ghost’ buildings belie tale of downtown’s progress | St. Louis Business Journal

RobbyD · PostJan 22, 2011#102011-01-22T14:22+00:00

I wonder if there is some sort of office in City Hall or the RCGA that actively seeks potential relocatable business. I think there are enough arrows in teh quiver of St. Louis City to pick off business, large and small, from surrounding metros and bring them into the fray here. Especially in the slowly emerging downtown tech scene.

I mean, we can look at empty buildings creating ZERO tax revenue and depressing the current business climate with their forboding, hulking shadows of blight or we can attract new business to fill/rehab these buildings by returning a percentage of newly created tax revenue to the very businesses generating the income. Looking at that list, I vote for giving tax money back to those who are willing and able to bring these gems back to life.

And I would as strong as is legally possible vigorously, consciously and forcefully foster a corporate community proud and willingly responsible for its affordable, beautiful and growing city. I'm thinking Mr. Danforth with a long wet noodle and many "choice" words shared in private to ensure these powerful men and women fully understand how important they are to the people and institutions of St. Louis.

zun1026 · PostJan 22, 2011#112011-01-22T17:47+00:00

RobbyD wrote:I wonder if there is some sort of office in City Hall or the RCGA that actively seeks potential relocatable business. I think there are enough arrows in teh quiver of St. Louis City to pick off business, large and small, from surrounding metros and bring them into the fray here. Especially in the slowly emerging downtown tech scene.

I mean, we can look at empty buildings creating ZERO tax revenue and depressing the current business climate with their forboding, hulking shadows of blight or we can attract new business to fill/rehab these buildings by returning a percentage of newly created tax revenue to the very businesses generating the income. Looking at that list, I vote for giving tax money back to those who are willing and able to bring these gems back to life.

And I would as strong as is legally possible vigorously, consciously and forcefully foster a corporate community proud and willingly responsible for its affordable, beautiful and growing city. I'm thinking Mr. Danforth with a long wet noodle and many "choice" words shared in private to ensure these powerful men and women fully understand how important they are to the people and institutions of St. Louis.

I would figure its a combination of the RCGA and the St. Louis Development Corporation (SLDC).

downtown2007 · PostJan 22, 2011#122011-01-22T17:49+00:00

They would be more effective creating incubators for new business and industries rather than luring other existing companies.

zun1026 · PostJan 22, 2011#132011-01-22T19:50+00:00

downtown2007 wrote:They would be more effective creating incubators for new business and industries rather than luring other existing companies.

This is what I am a major proponent of doing. The City/Metro area does have The Center for Emerging Technologies and St. Louis Enterprise Centers, which help with the incubation process.

RobbyD · PostJan 23, 2011#142011-01-23T08:07+00:00

^I agree that this is probably the most important job creator. But I would imagine it takes a while for serious revenue producing businesses to come out of these efforts. Business incubators very good long range strategy that we must do. But we have vacant buildings and developable land today. I think efforts to fill these spaces with existing moneymakers is worth the effort. I don't think it has to be an either/or proposition.

PostJan 23, 2011#152011-01-23T08:14+00:00

zun1026 wrote:
RobbyD wrote:I wonder if there is some sort of office in City Hall or the RCGA that actively seeks potential relocatable business. I think there are enough arrows in teh quiver of St. Louis City to pick off business, large and small, from surrounding metros and bring them into the fray here. Especially in the slowly emerging downtown tech scene.

I mean, we can look at empty buildings creating ZERO tax revenue and depressing the current business climate with their forboding, hulking shadows of blight or we can attract new business to fill/rehab these buildings by returning a percentage of newly created tax revenue to the very businesses generating the income. Looking at that list, I vote for giving tax money back to those who are willing and able to bring these gems back to life.

And I would as strong as is legally possible vigorously, consciously and forcefully foster a corporate community proud and willingly responsible for its affordable, beautiful and growing city. I'm thinking Mr. Danforth with a long wet noodle and many "choice" words shared in private to ensure these powerful men and women fully understand how important they are to the people and institutions of St. Louis.
I would figure its a combination of the RCGA and the St. Louis Development Corporation (SLDC).

Kewl kewl...Most of my comments come from the relatively uniformed (yet I like to think educated and intelligent) peanut gallery... =p

the count · PostJan 23, 2011#162011-01-23T16:57+00:00

Another largely vacant building downtown we should probably add to the mix is the Butler Brothers Building on 18th and Olive. It's huge: it takes up a whole city block and I believe it's almost 1 million square feet, comparable to One Metropolitan Square.

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&q=st. ... ,,0,-10.52

zun1026 · PostJan 23, 2011#172011-01-23T19:34+00:00

RobbyD wrote:^I agree that this is probably the most important job creator. But I would imagine it takes a while for serious revenue producing businesses to come out of these efforts. Business incubators very good long range strategy that we must do. But we have vacant buildings and developable land today. I think efforts to fill these spaces with existing moneymakers is worth the effort. I don't think it has to be an either/or proposition.

This is pretty in line with my way of thinking. But there are some success stories. Really it about your business plan, the market and probably most important your networking.

RobbyD wrote: Kewl kewl...Most of my comments come from the relatively uniformed (yet I like to think educated and intelligent) peanut gallery... =p

Thats the great thing about this site...we all learn something. Also, even if you are uninformed your posts don't read it.

DaronDierkes · PostJan 23, 2011#182011-01-23T20:09+00:00

RobbyD wrote:I wonder if there is some sort of office in City Hall or the RCGA that actively seeks potential relocatable business. I think there are enough arrows in teh quiver of St. Louis City to pick off business, large and small, from surrounding metros and bring them into the fray here. Especially in the slowly emerging downtown tech scene.

I mean, we can look at empty buildings creating ZERO tax revenue and depressing the current business climate with their forboding, hulking shadows of blight or we can attract new business to fill/rehab these buildings by returning a percentage of newly created tax revenue to the very businesses generating the income. Looking at that list, I vote for giving tax money back to those who are willing and able to bring these gems back to life.

Do you know about that nomadic art gallery in Boston that only filled vacant storefronts until tenants were found, then it moved on. We could do that.

Look at the police department trying to find a home. Why not have a few permanent buildings and spread the rest of the offices around vacant buildings until tenants appear? They do basic repairs to keep the buildings livable, and then they move on when the properties find buyers. They don't improve the buildings so much as they keep them from falling apart. How many LRA homes around the city would make excellent police sub-stations? How much overhead could our boys in blue save by constantly renting dead buildings? How much crime could be prevented by having vacants occupied by cops? How much of their budget could they subsidize by flipping buildings?

The same could be said of lots of other public offices, depending on the particular requirements needed by each. Even some non-profits could do some good like that.

bonwich · PostJan 24, 2011#192011-01-24T01:59+00:00

the count wrote:Another largely vacant building downtown we should probably add to the mix is the Butler Brothers Building on 18th and Olive. It's huge: it takes up a whole city block and I believe it's almost 1 million square feet, comparable to One Metropolitan Square.

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&q=st. ... ,,0,-10.52

Isn't this aka the Plaza Square building? There was a lot of chatter out here a few years ago about a buyer -- we checked it out several times but never found any realization of the rumors.

stlgasm · PostJan 24, 2011#202011-01-24T03:27+00:00

The Plaza Square Building/Butler Bros. building is a blast from the past! There are still a few businesses there-- notably Shamrock-Raisdletter Printing Company (I got my wedding invitations printed there), and a true relic of the old downtown garment district-- Ely Yawitz Velcro Company.

The building is in desperate need of a rehab-- it feels shady and strange, but at the same time, it's totally awesome if you're into 1960s-1970s era signage, lighting and paint jobs. This building was also home to Miss Elaine lingerie company, but that moved out at least a decade ago.

the count · PostJan 24, 2011#212011-01-24T04:54+00:00

^^ Plaza Square! Couldn't for the life of me come up with the name. I remember reading somewhere that it was sold a couple of years ago but can't find any details.

Every time I walk by it I am in awe of how massive it is. Hope it will be redeveloped.

DaronDierkes · PostJan 24, 2011#222011-01-24T05:24+00:00

Do you mean that Plaza Square is something other than Plaza Square Apartments (now CityView)?

stlgasm · PostJan 24, 2011#232011-01-24T14:33+00:00

The building in question is at 1717 Olive Street. The name on the front entrance says Plaza Square Building, although it looks like it was originally known as the Butler Bros. Building.

innov8ion · PostJan 24, 2011#242011-01-24T15:01+00:00

DaronDierkes wrote:Do you mean that Plaza Square is something other than Plaza Square Apartments (now CityView)?

Yes, they are totally distinct. The confusion may decrease with the new CityView moniker.

the central scrutinizer · PostJan 24, 2011#252011-01-24T15:37+00:00

innov8ion wrote:
DaronDierkes wrote:Do you mean that Plaza Square is something other than Plaza Square Apartments (now CityView)?
Yes, they are totally distinct. The confusion may decrease with the new CityView moniker.

Plaza Square is being renamed City View Square?