I'm sure Bob took a pound of flesh, Browne must've been desperate to get the deal done.
Who designed the wonderful modernist St. Andrew Kim church in U. City, now slated to be demolished for the Costco project?
Thank you.
Richard
Thank you.
Richard
^Not sure, but here are a few pics from Chris Naffziger at St. Louis Patina:
http://stlouispatina.com/st-andrew-kim-university-city/
![]()
http://stlouispatina.com/st-andrew-kim-university-city/
Out of future sales and property tax revenues.
U City - University City Receives Three Million Dollars for Third Ward Improvements
https://www.ucitymo.org/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=993
U City - University City Receives Three Million Dollars for Third Ward Improvements
https://www.ucitymo.org/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=993
From 1993 NORTHSIDE UNIVERSITY CITY Inventory of Historic Buildingsrichlion1 wrote: ↑Mar 31, 2021Who designed the wonderful modernist St. Andrew Kim church in U. City, now slated to be demolished for the Costco project?
Thank you.
Richard
St. Andrew Kim church was formerly St. Patrick.
"Both St. Patrick's Catholic Church and Firehouse Number 3 proved to be works by Murphy & Wischmeyer, the same partnership that produced the loggia of the Muny Opera in Forest Park. Working separately after World War II, both Joseph Murphy and Kenneth Wischmeyer produced a large body of distinguished work, and Murphy may be regarded along with Gyo Obata as the defining architect of the 1950s and 1960s in St. Louis."
Interesting tidbit... I grew up a block away from Joseph Murphy's University City home and often played whiffle ball on "Murphy's Lot" as we called the empty lot next to the house.
Seems weird that they never mentioned a check is supposed to come from Novus.quincunx wrote: ↑Apr 01, 2021Out of future sales and property tax revenues.
U City - University City Receives Three Million Dollars for Third Ward Improvements
https://www.ucitymo.org/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=993
Thank you for sharing this information! It's a beautiful chapel. It's unfortunate that the Archdiocese of St. Louis didn't fight for its Korea community or the historic building more.bigreid74 wrote: ↑Apr 01, 2021From 1993 NORTHSIDE UNIVERSITY CITY Inventory of Historic Buildingsrichlion1 wrote: ↑Mar 31, 2021Who designed the wonderful modernist St. Andrew Kim church in U. City, now slated to be demolished for the Costco project?
Thank you.
Richard
St. Andrew Kim church was formerly St. Patrick.
"Both St. Patrick's Catholic Church and Firehouse Number 3 proved to be works by Murphy & Wischmeyer, the same partnership that produced the loggia of the Muny Opera in Forest Park. Working separately after World War II, both Joseph Murphy and Kenneth Wischmeyer produced a large body of distinguished work, and Murphy may be regarded along with Gyo Obata as the defining architect of the 1950s and 1960s in St. Louis."
Interesting tidbit... I grew up a block away from Joseph Murphy's University City home and often played whiffle ball on "Murphy's Lot" as we called the empty lot next to the house.
- 443
So, can we just call it what is then with Bob Clark? He wanted a swanky Chicago lifestyle and thats why he moved Clayco. He blasted StL for lacking dynamism (Chicago isn’t really dynamic either. It’s just big and has a lot of inertia) yet he funds this project which maybe the least dynamic thing I’ve ever seen
He's backed and been involved in too many great projects - including plenty since the Chicago move - to just throw him under the bus.BellaVilla wrote: ↑Apr 05, 2021So, can we just call it what is then with Bob Clark? He wanted a swanky Chicago lifestyle and thats why he moved Clayco. He blasted StL for lacking dynamism (Chicago isn’t really dynamic either. It’s just big and has a lot of inertia) yet he funds this project which maybe the least dynamic thing I’ve ever seen
Exactly. And why wouldn't he move his globally expanding company to a place where such travel is possible. Chicago is an alpha city any way you look at it. Big fish little pond or growing fish big pond. Bob made the right choice.wabash wrote: ↑Apr 05, 2021He's backed and been involved in too many great projects - including plenty since the Chicago move - to just throw him under the bus.BellaVilla wrote: ↑Apr 05, 2021So, can we just call it what is then with Bob Clark? He wanted a swanky Chicago lifestyle and thats why he moved Clayco. He blasted StL for lacking dynamism (Chicago isn’t really dynamic either. It’s just big and has a lot of inertia) yet he funds this project which maybe the least dynamic thing I’ve ever seen
I'm not sure leaving St. Louis was a good idea. But Clayco lining it pockets by being a white knight for the Costco project doesn't negate all of its contributions to St. Louis' built environment.STLinCHI wrote: ↑Apr 06, 2021Exactly. And why wouldn't he move his globally expanding company to a place where such travel is possible. Chicago is an alpha city any way you look at it. Big fish little pond or growing fish big pond. Bob made the right choice.wabash wrote: ↑Apr 05, 2021He's backed and been involved in too many great projects - including plenty since the Chicago move - to just throw him under the bus.BellaVilla wrote: ↑Apr 05, 2021So, can we just call it what is then with Bob Clark? He wanted a swanky Chicago lifestyle and thats why he moved Clayco. He blasted StL for lacking dynamism (Chicago isn’t really dynamic either. It’s just big and has a lot of inertia) yet he funds this project which maybe the least dynamic thing I’ve ever seen
This Costco project is an abomination, but I'd rather see its proceeds winding up with Clayco - which at least has a strong track record of participating in St. Louis project - than, say, a New York private equity fund or some other lender/investor of last resort.
I think it is a mixed bag when it comes to Clayco and how much a companies direction and location is driven by the C-suite for various reasons and perception. Can certainly see where a city with a hub is a big plus for larger corporations especially the Boeings or say Coca Cola's of the world. At same time, my bet is Bob Clark and key executive spend most their travel in private jet which is much more convenient and time efficient for executive..
It is also interesting to look at it from the perspective of three different St. Louis founded companies in contracting and architecture with revenues in billions (which are big numbers in the industry). You literally have three national to international known companies with HOK, Clayco and McCarthy. McCarthy has kept its home office pretty much intact in St. Louis and opened satellite offices in key markets where they have grown like a lot of mid to large size contractors, where as HOK has become world renown firm with key offices, partners, and executive spread through out where their client is at, and finally not least Clayco/Bob Clark has moved its executive suite to Chicago but still has a big St. Louis presence that will only contine to grow if the company continues to grow
So I take Wabash view. I think St. Louis is still for the better even it get some duds with Bob Clark/Clayco's success & growth. You also have to remember that a big part of Clayco's success has been industrial and warehose development so not much of stretch that they would try to find an avenue to get in with Costco. Who knows, they almost pulled off securing 909 Chestnut and for all we know might still be developer to convince bondholder to take it off the auction block with a new proposal. I might be mistaken but thought they were one of the partner that was teaming up with Koplar on coming up with a development for Kingshighway & Lindell (they built One Hundred next door)
It is also interesting to look at it from the perspective of three different St. Louis founded companies in contracting and architecture with revenues in billions (which are big numbers in the industry). You literally have three national to international known companies with HOK, Clayco and McCarthy. McCarthy has kept its home office pretty much intact in St. Louis and opened satellite offices in key markets where they have grown like a lot of mid to large size contractors, where as HOK has become world renown firm with key offices, partners, and executive spread through out where their client is at, and finally not least Clayco/Bob Clark has moved its executive suite to Chicago but still has a big St. Louis presence that will only contine to grow if the company continues to grow
So I take Wabash view. I think St. Louis is still for the better even it get some duds with Bob Clark/Clayco's success & growth. You also have to remember that a big part of Clayco's success has been industrial and warehose development so not much of stretch that they would try to find an avenue to get in with Costco. Who knows, they almost pulled off securing 909 Chestnut and for all we know might still be developer to convince bondholder to take it off the auction block with a new proposal. I might be mistaken but thought they were one of the partner that was teaming up with Koplar on coming up with a development for Kingshighway & Lindell (they built One Hundred next door)
- 443
So every growing StL company should just move to Chicago then? Stifle oughta be on the it’s way out the door?STLinCHI wrote: ↑Apr 06, 2021Exactly. And why wouldn't he move his globally expanding company to a place where such travel is possible. Chicago is an alpha city any way you look at it. Big fish little pond or growing fish big pond. Bob made the right choice.wabash wrote: ↑Apr 05, 2021He's backed and been involved in too many great projects - including plenty since the Chicago move - to just throw him under the bus.BellaVilla wrote: ↑Apr 05, 2021So, can we just call it what is then with Bob Clark? He wanted a swanky Chicago lifestyle and thats why he moved Clayco. He blasted StL for lacking dynamism (Chicago isn’t really dynamic either. It’s just big and has a lot of inertia) yet he funds this project which maybe the least dynamic thing I’ve ever seen
- 991
If Stifel thought it would help them strategically and really wanted to, sure.
In STLinCHI's defense, what they wrote is completely fair and logical. They did not say that every company should move to Chicago, just that Clayco had sound reasoning behind the move.
In STLinCHI's defense, what they wrote is completely fair and logical. They did not say that every company should move to Chicago, just that Clayco had sound reasoning behind the move.
I think y'all are reading too much into Clayco's involvement. It's still a very much Novus run show. Given that Novus only announced financing at the very last moment, Browne must've been desperate for financing. No one knows what the terms are, and how much they are tilted towards Clayco or downside protection there is.
I think people are also forgetting that this project almost collapsed due to a basic error in the math and UC had to pile more money into the developer's pocket to keep it going. This project is hardly a home run.
I think people are also forgetting that this project almost collapsed due to a basic error in the math and UC had to pile more money into the developer's pocket to keep it going. This project is hardly a home run.
^ I think it is more of a diverging conversation than reading too much into Clayco involvement.
My two sense is this was an easy one for Clayco GRG group with Clayco's balance sheet behind to help out NOVUS/throw some money at the development not so much that it was too good to pass up as a biz opportunity or for NOVUS sake or even University City sake but more or less get another way for Clayco to gain a connection with COTSCO, maybe an indirect connection but connection none the less. Go to their projects listed on their website and you see a lot of big names as clients but didn't any with COTSCO. Of course complete speculation on my part but the reason why I think Bob Clark's group got involved.
My two sense is this was an easy one for Clayco GRG group with Clayco's balance sheet behind to help out NOVUS/throw some money at the development not so much that it was too good to pass up as a biz opportunity or for NOVUS sake or even University City sake but more or less get another way for Clayco to gain a connection with COTSCO, maybe an indirect connection but connection none the less. Go to their projects listed on their website and you see a lot of big names as clients but didn't any with COTSCO. Of course complete speculation on my part but the reason why I think Bob Clark's group got involved.
Novus is supposed to deliver the site to Costco construction ready. Clayco will probably be building the rest of the development, besides the Costco. Clayco has taken plenty of TIF money from the City.
I think they got involved because they saw they can make money, without losing it. If they wanted to build Costcos, they would've low bid the contract to build them.
I think they got involved because they saw they can make money, without losing it. If they wanted to build Costcos, they would've low bid the contract to build them.
Posted on Nextdoor by the owner of Beyer's Lumber & Hardware, shared with permission (Beyer's is a long-time U City business being forced out by the new development):
"Greetings, Bart with Beyers Lumber & Hardware.
A lot of interesting insights here. I appreciate everyone's concern. I can only speak as one person, with one business:
After 3 long years of costly (out of pocket) good faith, negotiations with Novus, we received U City's "Intent to Acquire Property" notice last month. Correspondence has now been redirected to Larry Chapman (Chapman Ventures). No longer John Browne (Novus). After making this switch, U City remains silent and unable to answer for itself, but seemingly in control of this project.
I would suggest that Novus was the wrong choice in Developers, that financial numbers have been fumbled (to say the least), transparency has been at a minimum, and the heavy hand of government has always loomed. Eroding a much needed confidence in this endeavor (IMHO). Revenues continue to be promoted and touted, but costs (over 3yrs) swept under the proverbial rug.
With Costco committed to going in on the Northside of Olive, and Novus aside, we (on the Southside) hope Chapman/U City can use this Costco momentum to move things forward regarding "RPA 1". However, due to the City's recent notice to "Acquire Property", it is unlikely that Mr. Chapman is able to secure the (valuable) properties in question either, and U City intends to "Blight" the area, reduce property values, pursuing Eminent Domain.
My father's health has declined as a result of U City / Novus efforts and I am now stuck with moving a 75yr old business, with no assistance from U City, nor invitation to remain within its borders. I personally would like to see this area redeveloped. It is not a matter of necessary progress and improvement, but rather how. The ends inseparable from the means. That is the problem with this (re)development, Eminent Domain and TIF incentives as I see it: Taking from one to provide to others (at a discount). America should remain a Nation of prosperity and choice, not desperation and despotism.
I would be willing to discuss alternatives to Eminent Domain with U City. However, it might be that U City prefers the legal & financial mechanics of Eminent Domain over organic good faith and fairness. Business and Property owners have their own issues that U City seems unwilling to acknowledge, or address. Focused solely on providing (tax deferred) solutions to Corporate America.
Thank you, Bart Beyers (4th Generation)"
"Greetings, Bart with Beyers Lumber & Hardware.
A lot of interesting insights here. I appreciate everyone's concern. I can only speak as one person, with one business:
After 3 long years of costly (out of pocket) good faith, negotiations with Novus, we received U City's "Intent to Acquire Property" notice last month. Correspondence has now been redirected to Larry Chapman (Chapman Ventures). No longer John Browne (Novus). After making this switch, U City remains silent and unable to answer for itself, but seemingly in control of this project.
I would suggest that Novus was the wrong choice in Developers, that financial numbers have been fumbled (to say the least), transparency has been at a minimum, and the heavy hand of government has always loomed. Eroding a much needed confidence in this endeavor (IMHO). Revenues continue to be promoted and touted, but costs (over 3yrs) swept under the proverbial rug.
With Costco committed to going in on the Northside of Olive, and Novus aside, we (on the Southside) hope Chapman/U City can use this Costco momentum to move things forward regarding "RPA 1". However, due to the City's recent notice to "Acquire Property", it is unlikely that Mr. Chapman is able to secure the (valuable) properties in question either, and U City intends to "Blight" the area, reduce property values, pursuing Eminent Domain.
My father's health has declined as a result of U City / Novus efforts and I am now stuck with moving a 75yr old business, with no assistance from U City, nor invitation to remain within its borders. I personally would like to see this area redeveloped. It is not a matter of necessary progress and improvement, but rather how. The ends inseparable from the means. That is the problem with this (re)development, Eminent Domain and TIF incentives as I see it: Taking from one to provide to others (at a discount). America should remain a Nation of prosperity and choice, not desperation and despotism.
I would be willing to discuss alternatives to Eminent Domain with U City. However, it might be that U City prefers the legal & financial mechanics of Eminent Domain over organic good faith and fairness. Business and Property owners have their own issues that U City seems unwilling to acknowledge, or address. Focused solely on providing (tax deferred) solutions to Corporate America.
Thank you, Bart Beyers (4th Generation)"
- 3,762
^ that would make a great letter to the editor in the PD.
If Beyers is dealing with Chapman now, it sure sounds like Novus sold the development to them. In that case the probability of something actually getting built has gone up. And here's a link to an archived copy of the UC statement.qwerty112 wrote: ↑Apr 01, 2021Seems weird that they never mentioned a check is supposed to come from Novus.quincunx wrote: ↑Apr 01, 2021Out of future sales and property tax revenues.
U City - University City Receives Three Million Dollars for Third Ward Improvements
https://www.ucitymo.org/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=993
https://web.archive.org/web/20210401131 ... px?AID=993
Stltoday - Irv Logan: Costco plan in University City not what was promised
https://www.stltoday.com/opinion/column ... b21b2.html
https://www.stltoday.com/opinion/column ... b21b2.html
- 6,123
^That's quite the well articulated and carefully considered laundry list of objections. Well said.
A lot of this could be cleared up with better communication, if it's not the poor communication covering for them lying about the status of the project. U City is pretty incompetent, so I really have no idea.