Gateway Mall Master Plan

Suds · PostOct 04, 2022#9262022-10-04T14:13+00:00

dweebe wrote:
Suds wrote: ↑
Oct 03, 2022
Let's focus on the hideous parking garages with the Hooter's and the empty restaurants before touching Peabody. Peabody obstructs views of the Arch, but it also houses several important businesses that we should prioritize keeping downtown.

Tear down Keiner garages

Build new Hilton on that footprint plus office space in those footprints

Tear down Hilton and fold it in to Ballpark Village

Tear down Gateway Mall tower.

Sounds like a winning timeline to me. Though I love 360, so that will need to be replaced somehow because there's an obvious market for a rooftop bar looking into Busch.

Also, the old Shannon's building has to go. Has there been more movement on that?

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

STLEnginerd · PostOct 04, 2022#9272022-10-04T15:47+00:00

dweebe wrote: ↑
Oct 04, 2022
Suds wrote: ↑
Oct 03, 2022
Let's focus on the hideous parking garages with the Hooter's and the empty restaurants before touching Peabody. Peabody obstructs views of the Arch, but it also houses several important businesses that we should prioritize keeping downtown.

Tear down Keiner garages

Build new Hilton on that footprint plus office space in those footprints

Tear down Hilton and fold it in to Ballpark Village

Tear down Gateway Mall tower.

1. Yes BUT this will not happen without replacement parking somewhere nearby. Just reality. Maybe the REX garage redevelopment (mentioned in different thread and still very much hypothetical) could be built with sufficient capacity to offset a removal here. I wish they had built an underground parking garage under Kiener Plaza when they redid that so that removal of Kiener Garages could be seriously considered. Missed opportunity there.

2. Ok no problem there, though its sort of up to Hilton.

3. Why? why not just rebrand as a different down market hotel or convert to residential. Why would we tear down a perfectly good building. If we are going to expand BPV expand it East and West, not North. Also its built on top of the historic Spanish Pavilion from the 1960 Worlds Fair so not something i would tear down on a whim.

4. What problem does this solve. I still don't see any justification that this the priority when Serra park still looks like crud, and the rest of the mall going west is underdeveloped. I just don't see a public need that can't be met with the current mall space. If we score an Olympics or Worlds Fair Exposition making seemingly nonsensical changes to the built environment could be justified under a more esoteric beautification initiative, or if the building becomes a nuisance because of maintenance, and vacancy issues. I don't see either of these in the near or mid term. Wishing something wasn't built is entirely different than removing it once its there. The bar is much higher.

Also if I'm being honest I like the mall being a little broken up by buildings rather than one long continuous park. I think views of the Arch from as many parts of St. Louis are important but so is keeping each park a little intimate experience. Even if Gateway tower came down i would prefer a building replace it. Keep it shorter, maybe 3 stories. And make it a timeless beauty of a building (whatever style you go with, but something to separate Kiener from City Garden makes sense. Maybe 2 buildings with a wide open arcade through the center or something all glass like the Climatron / Jewel Box / Butterflyhouse etc. Still not a priority but certainly a nice daydream.

_nomad_ · PostOct 04, 2022#9282022-10-04T17:17+00:00

I think having some public amenity/merchant in the base of the Peabody building is more of an asset than more park space. I think tearing it down to achieve an uninterrupted mall looks good from a bird's eye level but a cafe or some sort of business that can take advantage of that location makes the park more attractive at the human level. I think site planners sometime get caught up in looking at plans on paper and don't always think about what it will feel like to be in the space rather looking down on it from above.

PeterXCV · PostOct 04, 2022#9292022-10-04T18:47+00:00

The Peabody building is pretty forgettable imo, nothing much to look at but not ugly, don't get why people hate its aesthetics so much (Peabody Coal is a vile corporation though). I'm pretty much an absolutist in thinking that after 60+ of decline, St. Louis should never tear down buildings for parking or parks. We have enough open space, we don't have enough people. With low demand for new construction, we have to preserve urbanism where it already exists.

gone corporate · PostOct 04, 2022#9302022-10-04T20:24+00:00

OK, one of you guys step up and buy the Peabody Building, then tear it down. Don't use my tax dollars to buy it though, especially when we consider that this building has relatively high business occupancy, at least one public company HQ, and brings in Class A revenues. Also, you be the one to negotiate the relocation of these businesses around Downtown - if you can keep them in Downtown, let alone the City, after kicking them out of their offices - after demo for the purposes of aesthetics. I'm not a fan of the Peabody Building either, but it's unreasonable to think of tearing it down just because we just don't really like how it looks. Hey, if you have the cash and do this, I'll be there with a pick axe cheering you on. Until then, though, we're spinning our wheels...

What's much more obtainable for redevelopment?
The Kiener garages.
They should be first priority, IMHO.

Suds · PostOct 04, 2022#9312022-10-04T20:26+00:00

I've heard of at least one company that was planning to move from another Downtown building to Clayton, but was incentivized by Peabody to move in there instead.

symphonicpoet · PostOct 05, 2022#9322022-10-05T07:25+00:00

_nomad_ wrote: ↑
Oct 04, 2022
I think having some public amenity/merchant in the base of the Peabody building is more of an asset than more park space. I think tearing it down to achieve an uninterrupted mall looks good from a bird's eye level but a cafe or some sort of business that can take advantage of that location makes the park more attractive at the human level. I think site planners sometime get caught up in looking at plans on paper and don't always think about what it will feel like to be in the space rather looking down on it from above.

This. And that goes double for everything nearby. Even the parking garages would be less troublesome if they were cleaned up, beautified a little, activated, and occupied. I'm not opposed to replacing those, but even they could be made better short of tearing them down. And we have too much green space downtown anyway. Could we improve it? Absolutely. Will we ever need more? Most probably not. Build, build, build. Tear stuff down when we run out of space. (Though I'll consider an exception for the garages.)

shadrach · PostOct 05, 2022#9332022-10-05T11:51+00:00

My wish is that each Kiener garage is replaced with what’s proposed for 10 South Central in Clayton. Talk about a ‘sense of place’ and urban oasis. Why that hasn’t happened 50 years ago or a long-term objective for the City baffles me.

Suds · PostOct 05, 2022#9342022-10-05T14:29+00:00

symphonicpoet wrote:
_nomad_ wrote: ↑
Oct 04, 2022
I think having some public amenity/merchant in the base of the Peabody building is more of an asset than more park space. I think tearing it down to achieve an uninterrupted mall looks good from a bird's eye level but a cafe or some sort of business that can take advantage of that location makes the park more attractive at the human level. I think site planners sometime get caught up in looking at plans on paper and don't always think about what it will feel like to be in the space rather looking down on it from above.
This. And that goes double for everything nearby. Even the parking garages would be less troublesome if they were cleaned up, beautified a little, activated, and occupied. I'm not opposed to replacing those, but even they could be made better short of tearing them down. And we have too much green space downtown anyway. Could we improve it? Absolutely. Will we ever need more? Most probably not. Build, build, build. Tear stuff down when we run out of space. (Though I'll consider an exception for the garages.)

True. The new Chase branch is proof that the garages can be modified in a good way. Plus I think having the retail/restaurant space right on the mall is a good thing. Just need to have, at the very least, the garages not look so much like outdated garages on the outside.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

_nomad_ · PostOct 05, 2022#9352022-10-05T14:51+00:00

If they need stay, the Kiener garage could quickly become more attractive by turning the blank facades facing the plaza into an art wall. No idea if that would make it any more attractive to retailers to fill the storefronts. Ultimately being underneath a mega-garage is not a pleasant place to be regardless of how many "improvements" are made.

dbInSouthCity · PostOct 05, 2022#9362022-10-05T14:57+00:00

_nomad_ wrote: ↑
Oct 04, 2022
I think having some public amenity/merchant in the base of the Peabody building is more of an asset than more park space. I think tearing it down to achieve an uninterrupted mall looks good from a bird's eye level but a cafe or some sort of business that can take advantage of that location makes the park more attractive at the human level. I think site planners sometime get caught up in looking at plans on paper and don't always think about what it will feel like to be in the space rather looking down on it from above.

The cafe that’s there now, on the western side) Ukraft) is excellent and on the east side, Windows on Kiener I have no idea what it is, a bar? Event space? Restaurant? Hours?

pattimagee · PostOct 05, 2022#9372022-10-05T15:26+00:00

_nomad_ wrote: ↑
Oct 05, 2022
If they need stay, the Kiener garage could quickly become more attractive by turning the blank facades facing the plaza into an art wall. No idea if that would make it any more attractive to retailers to fill the storefronts. Ultimately being underneath a mega-garage is not a pleasant place to be regardless of how many "improvements" are made.

During the playoffs a few years ago the Cardinals put up these beautiful mesh banners on their parking garages on 8th street (I have a photo somewhere of it - I didn't have any luck finding them) and they looked so good. Its the same material that Purina uses on their HQ during the playoffs. You can see through it when you are close up to it... but just something simple like that with a fun messaging on it would be worth it, imo. A "Visit St. Louis" banner or a history of STL banner could look pretty cool... even a fun St. Louis word art would look cooler than the lame buildings. A few other examples/installments

MRNHS · PostOct 05, 2022#9382022-10-05T15:54+00:00

I'll actually go the opposite way. I wish that many of the Gateway mall parcels would be developed. Pretty much anything west of City Garden (yes, including Serra). I don't see any value in having this much green space in the complete middle of downtown when we are trying to promote density, walkability, and safety. While I don't love the building itself, I actually love that the Peabody building is in that spot. The current "mall" chops downtown in half and makes it quite a walk to get north/south. Never understood how we can value a cool view of the Arch over having a more dense and vibrant downtown.

jacob_rb_15 · PostOct 05, 2022#9392022-10-05T16:05+00:00

^Thank you. I've always pictured some low-rise residential buildings west of the Civil Courts building. Maybe keeping and renovating the green spaces across from Union Station and Kiel would be nice. We already have a national park in our downtown and the greatest urban park in America a little ways away, why not add some more density to downtown?

debaliviere · PostOct 05, 2022#9402022-10-05T16:16+00:00

As much as I dislike the Kiener garages, I would presume they're pretty important to Bryan Cave and the other tenants of Met Square.

Suds · PostOct 05, 2022#9412022-10-05T17:16+00:00

dbInSouthCity wrote:
_nomad_ wrote: ↑
Oct 04, 2022
I think having some public amenity/merchant in the base of the Peabody building is more of an asset than more park space. I think tearing it down to achieve an uninterrupted mall looks good from a bird's eye level but a cafe or some sort of business that can take advantage of that location makes the park more attractive at the human level. I think site planners sometime get caught up in looking at plans on paper and don't always think about what it will feel like to be in the space rather looking down on it from above.
The cafe that’s there now, on the western side) Ukraft) is excellent and on the east side, Windows on Kiener I have no idea what it is, a bar? Event space? Restaurant? Hours?

It's a weird mix of both. They offer lunch sporadically and happy hour every Wednesday ($2 drafts!!). But they're actually closed for renovations at the moment, presumably because they realized having nothing on the walls at all wasn't very attractive. I've seen them host corporate events and parties before Cardinals games too.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

DJJD · PostOct 05, 2022#9422022-10-05T19:17+00:00

debaliviere wrote: ↑
Oct 05, 2022
As much as I dislike the Kiener garages, I would presume they're pretty important to Bryan Cave and the other tenants of Met Square.

Not at all, actually. Met Square has 7 levels of parking inside the building (3 below ground, 4 above). Bryan Cave has their own parking level in the sub-basement. Even visitors to the building are instructed to park in the upper garage, and it never seems to completely fill up. This is how urban parking should be, by the way. Not non-existent, just inconspicuously included within the building. The subterranean garage at the Peabody Building is (surprisingly) another example of urban office parking done right.

debaliviere · PostOct 05, 2022#9432022-10-05T19:20+00:00

DJJD wrote: ↑
Oct 05, 2022
debaliviere wrote: ↑
Oct 05, 2022
As much as I dislike the Kiener garages, I would presume they're pretty important to Bryan Cave and the other tenants of Met Square.
Not at all, actually. Met Square has 7 levels of parking inside the building (3 below ground, 4 above). Bryan Cave has their own parking level in the sub-basement. Even visitors to the building are instructed to park in the upper garage, and it never seems to completely fill up. This is how urban parking should be, by the way. Not non-existent, just inconspicuously included within the building. The subterranean garage at the Peabody Building is (surprisingly) another example of urban office parking done right.

Ah - that is good to know. Gracias.

gone corporate · PostOct 05, 2022#9442022-10-05T19:26+00:00

Perhaps, just perhaps, the redevelopment of the old Famous-Barr/May Company garage (the Railroad Exchange Building garage) could create a very large, modern parking garage - with plenty of ground-level retail and street activation - that can directly compete with the Kiener garages for parking tenants. Perhaps that can be the impetus necessary for the Kiener garages being redeveloped into something more than what's there now.

Bart Harley Jarvis · PostOct 05, 2022#9452022-10-05T19:49+00:00

debaliviere wrote: ↑
Oct 05, 2022
DJJD wrote: ↑
Oct 05, 2022
debaliviere wrote: ↑
Oct 05, 2022
As much as I dislike the Kiener garages, I would presume they're pretty important to Bryan Cave and the other tenants of Met Square.
Not at all, actually. Met Square has 7 levels of parking inside the building (3 below ground, 4 above). Bryan Cave has their own parking level in the sub-basement. Even visitors to the building are instructed to park in the upper garage, and it never seems to completely fill up. This is how urban parking should be, by the way. Not non-existent, just inconspicuously included within the building. The subterranean garage at the Peabody Building is (surprisingly) another example of urban office parking done right.
Ah - that is good to know. Gracias.

When I worked at 1 Met Square, I was initially given parking in the Kiener Garage directly across Pine with the Jimmy John's, as the Met Square garage was too full. After a few months, I was able to move into the Met Square garage.

STLEnginerd · PostOct 05, 2022#9462022-10-05T20:58+00:00

gone corporate wrote: ↑
Oct 05, 2022
Perhaps, just perhaps, the redevelopment of the old Famous-Barr/May Company garage (the Railroad Exchange Building garage) could create a very large, modern parking garage - with plenty of ground-level retail and street activation - that can directly compete with the Kiener garages for parking tenants. Perhaps that can be the impetus necessary for the Kiener garages being redeveloped into something more than what's there now.

Perhaps. The biggest problem i see with this scheme is the Kiener garage's pricing power. New garage built w/ current money is way more expensive than 50 year old garage. So Kiener would be able to undercut the new garage on price easily. The other domino that has to fall to get rid of those garages is either there is such demand for new construction that pays a premium for the land since they would be demoing the garages, OR condemning the current garages making them unable to generate monetary returns.

There have been a few garages built in the same time frame face condemnation recently and the Kiener garages are definitely showing age so there is potential along that path. But i would definitely hate if they built a new mega garage and then nothing changed at Kiener which is a real possibility.

_nomad_ · PostOct 05, 2022#9472022-10-05T21:06+00:00

I can not imagine this city ever tearing down a garage unless it's falling apart (and even then it's only a maybe), this is one of the reasons to be very limited in building new ones. Those things stay forever regardless of how many people use them or not.

dbInSouthCity · PostOct 05, 2022#9482022-10-05T21:33+00:00

^ city literally ordered a 3rd party to stabilize a falling down garage at Tucker and locust and when the owner didn’t pay it got it and is now going to sell it

symphonicpoet · PostOct 06, 2022#9492022-10-06T02:47+00:00

I could get behind jacob_rb_15's suggestion to develop much of the western part of the Gateway Mall. I think I'd let Twain stay, but with better landscaping and connection to City Garden. But most of the time the stuff to the west is just wasted space. And we could just as easily close streets temporarily to use for outdoor concerts. We have more streets than we strictly need anyway. Maybe we could truncate the thing and admit it was a bad idea in the first place. (Would require a citywide vote, mind, but maybe that's not insurmountable if there's a good enough plan.)

framer · PostOct 06, 2022#9502022-10-06T12:20+00:00

Nope. Keep the Mall open. Active, yes: Cafes, sculpture, amphitheaters, etc., but no real buildings. I admit, I'm still a huge fan of the old City Beautiful movement. Our focus should be (re)developing the surrounding blocks.

Gateway Mall Master Plan

Choose Display Mode