urbanSTL

dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑

Aug 30, 2023

There are some positive developments happening and a lot of people working to make a project here move forward.

dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑

Aug 30, 2023

There are some positive developments happening and a lot of people working to make a project here move forward.

soulardx wrote: ↑

Aug 31, 2023

dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑

Aug 30, 2023

There are some positive developments happening and a lot of people working to make a project here move forward.

Fair to assume that any final project would be wholly/mostly residential?

RockChalkSTL wrote: ↑

Sep 19, 2023

Walking past the building this morning, and I can verify that this building is pathetically protected. 

I like to see more -- or at least new -- barriers put up. 

TheWayoftheArch_V2.0 wrote:We see so many wrongful /sham uses of eminent domain.  This is a situation where is should be used and would be for the public good.  

 

The city of St. Louis is set to consider using eminent domain on the troubled Railway Exchange Building downtown, vacant for years, damaged by trespassers and with no active redevelopment plan.
Alderwoman Cara Spencer, whose 8th Ward includes downtown, has filed legislation allowing for eminent domain at the site, 600 Locust St., plus instructing the government to secure it using steel plates, hire security, and to send the bill to the building's owner, Hudson Holdings.

"This is one of the most important structures in the region and city; its relevance to downtown infrastructure can't be overstated," Spencer said. "The danger it poses in its current condition, with people coming in and out, cannot be overstated. We're working to secure it and get control of it and put it back in public use." The city would have to OK Spencer's legislation to initiate eminent domain proceedings against Hudson; a court would then determine what the city would pay to acquire the 1.24 million-square-foot structure, the region's second largest by square footage, in what could be a lengthy process.
Spencer said she hoped the threat of the security bill would prompt Hudson to again pay for its own security at the site.
She said she has also secured government funding to acquire the property via eminent domain, though she declined to identify a source.
Redevelopment of the Railway Exchange is currently encumbered by a tax subsidy issued years ago for a different redeveloper, an entity tied to Rick Yackey. That tax-increment financing note is currently held by Invesco, giving the Atlanta investment management firm rights to new, or incremental, sales and real estate tax proceeds involving the property, though what's currently being generated isn't substantial. A TIF note secures the right to receive those revenue streams and is usually held by developers, but can be sold to third parties, typically accredited investors. An Invesco predecessor, OppenheimerFunds, in 2010 bought the note for $4.5 million.
Invesco has so far rebuffed offers to buy its note, complicating any sale of the property itself.

Hudson's lender, New York-based Gamma Real Estate Capital, has sought to sell its note tied to the property, but no buyer emerged during an auction in July.
Spencer said that during committee hearings, she would look to add to the eminent domain bill language allowing the city to "take back" the TIF note.
Hudson officials couldn't be reached for comment.
Neal Richardson, president and CEO of city development agency St. Louis Development Corp., said in a statement: "We must hold property owners accountable and be more proactive in reactivating blighted assets across the City of St. Louis, including Downtown. This means using all economic development tools available to us — including eminent domain — which may be necessary to preserve and redevelop this historically significant and valuable building. We prefer a negotiated resolution, but timing is increasingly critical due to security concerns and deteriorating conditions of Railway Exchange."