thanks!
can't wait to see the cranes during televised games!!
can't wait to see the cranes during televised games!!
- 6,120
Said this over in the BPV thread, but . . . Nicely done sir!
Do these new buildings plan on having baseball proof windows? Or maybe some sticky windows that’ll catch the balls?
Yeah, I've actually wondered if they were within reach. What's the distance from home plate?
- 1,864
The only way a ball could get to either the new BPV tower or 300 Broadway is if it was 1) a new world record for a HR or 2) got a VERY lucky bounce off of the pavement. The current BPV structure has never been hit, not has a ball ever come even remotely close to making it across Clark.
It's 700 feet from home plate to the current building. However, a home run would need to be hit far enough to go much further than that since it would need to clear the Budweiser scoreboard. I would think it would need to be a 900+ foot home run to have a chance at the ground level.
Dinger swings!MRNHS wrote: ↑Mar 23, 2018It's 700 feet from home plate to the current building. However, a home run would need to be hit far enough to go much further than that since it would need to clear the Budweiser scoreboard. I would think it would need to be a 900+ foot home run to have a chance at the ground level.
-RBB
Looks like this permit (zoning only) was approved April 5th so I presume they are securing financing currently prior to applying for the full permit?dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑Mar 21, 2018Let me add some meat to this,
When someone applies for zoning only permit it means they just want to get the project approved and not slow down the process with everything else like financing, they're not getting an actual building permit. What this allows is for the project to go through City reviews and for the developer to come back and apply for an actual building permit later if the project moves on.
- 403
Sometimes i like sifting through other cities on news for development & saw that in Portland Oregon a developer is proposing a 33 story tower with a possible height of 410 ft on a prominent downtown food cart pod, anyways yesterday i sat on the Kiener Lawn staring at the old county courthouse then gone up the Arch.. Both One Cardinal Way & 300 Broadway are going to be really welcomed additions to the city skyline... I do kind of wish 300 Broadway be a bit taller however 2 300+ footers is a start.
Stl Community College Moving Out?
I'm assuming this could mean demolition will start soon.
![]()
I'm assuming this could mean demolition will start soon.
I just still sit here in disbelief that there was no way a compromise could be made between the parking garage, the city, and HDA. It's a literal car prison eyesore sitting there and they still think this is the best choice to be made. Did anyone actually try anything else? Or just act like they did because it's the easier way out? Because between two new residential developments by Busch III, someone else would have definitely stepped up and redone this building for residential as well. Instead, we still have these horrible looking garages.
I welcome this development, but it's so frustrating that the city is making a half lateral move after approving abatement and everything. It's the last negative thing I'll say on this.
I welcome this development, but it's so frustrating that the city is making a half lateral move after approving abatement and everything. It's the last negative thing I'll say on this.
- 3,762
^ agreed. as much as i like the new construction, this completely unnecessary loss still makes me sick to my stomach.
- 1,792
Especially with the surface lot immediately south, and the millinium hotel complex vacant, and the cupples x lot and mike Shannon’s, and and and...
What kind of compromise?bwcrow1s wrote: ↑May 11, 2018I just still sit here in disbelief that there was no way a compromise could be made between the parking garage, the city, and HDA. It's a literal car prison eyesore sitting there and they still think this is the best choice to be made. Did anyone actually try anything else? Or just act like they did because it's the easier way out? Because between two new residential developments by Busch III, someone else would have definitely stepped up and redone this building for residential as well. Instead, we still have these horrible looking garages.
I welcome this development, but it's so frustrating that the city is making a half lateral move after approving abatement and everything. It's the last negative thing I'll say on this.
I think it was mentioned here before, but the surface parking lot to the south would've cost the developers twice (at least) what they're paying the Community college for their building.STLEnginerd wrote: ↑May 11, 2018Especially with the surface lot immediately south, and the millinium hotel complex vacant, and the cupples x lot and mike Shannon’s, and and and...
To stlien, we are talking about the subsidy alderman of STL. I'm sure a deal could be struck that could have ridded the area of a hideous low rise or parking garage.
Sure we are in free fall with abatements and subsidies, but we can at least go down with more active building density than which we had.
Sure we are in free fall with abatements and subsidies, but we can at least go down with more active building density than which we had.
This Seems like a fallacy of some sort. Just because you’re sure a ‘deal could have been struck& doesn’t mean a ‘deal could have been struck.’ I’m not privy to all the mechanics of development but wanting ‘something to be so’ because it ‘should be so’ feels rather idealistic. But what is this forum if not 43% idealism?
Sure. Idealism aside. But I suppose I would just like to know if someone actually attempted to do anything outside of the "easy" solution of replacing this building when there are so many absolute eyesores surrounding the stadium. It just seems that between all the incentives the city passes on to rich developers and the available eyesore space, that something else could have been at least explored further, and deemed financially feasible, and done in the better interest of the city. Do I think Coatar could do more to encourage developing other lots? Absolutely. I simply wonder if he did his part in the better interest of the city with this project.
Again, it still feels weird that HDA said that they were starting the project as renovating the existing building, then all of a sudden want to throw up a 33 story tower. They must know what they can get due to development history.
Again, it still feels weird that HDA said that they were starting the project as renovating the existing building, then all of a sudden want to throw up a 33 story tower. They must know what they can get due to development history.
- 1,864
Please keep in mind that the parking lots and garages are still owned by someone. It takes two to make a deal and the city can't force an owner to sell (short of Eminent Domain, which is not a good route to go down). As people have pointed out dozens of times on UrbanSTL, the owners of the parking garage are based out west (Phoenix, AZ?) and are happy with the annual parking revenue they bring in.
While it's easy to say that the parking garage or nearby lots would have been a better choice, the financial costs to purchase those (since the current owners either don't want to sell or are asking for the moon) would make any high-rise development financially impossible. The fact in this case is that the community college wanted to sell and their asking price was more in line with what the developer was looking for.
While it's easy to say that the parking garage or nearby lots would have been a better choice, the financial costs to purchase those (since the current owners either don't want to sell or are asking for the moon) would make any high-rise development financially impossible. The fact in this case is that the community college wanted to sell and their asking price was more in line with what the developer was looking for.
To elaborate... Real estate trades on cash flow. Any decent sized surface lot nearby would cost more than this building; any garage nearby would cost in the ballpark of 10 - 15x the price of this building. In most cities, there isn't such a discrepancy between parking facilities and leasable buildings, but there definitely is in STL.
If we had ANY job growth, perhaps office demand would be such that BUILDINGS would trade at sky-high prices, but unfortunately that isn't the case and parking is making a killing. Instead of shaking our fingers at city leaders for approving development incentives, we should be asking how they are going to reverse a decades-long trend of job loss.
If we had ANY job growth, perhaps office demand would be such that BUILDINGS would trade at sky-high prices, but unfortunately that isn't the case and parking is making a killing. Instead of shaking our fingers at city leaders for approving development incentives, we should be asking how they are going to reverse a decades-long trend of job loss.
^^Very true. A one-story office building in Ladue just sold for $9 million. Whereas 1010 Market--a 20-story office building downtown--just sold for under $5 million.
- 2,430
Not disagreeing with your larger point on real estate, but I do think we have some job growth downtown. But more definitely is needed; also some better data to know more precisely where we are would be nice.
- 1,864
I would say that we would need like 10-20x the growth we currently have to see a major shift in real estate valuation.