Love seeing any transformation of vacant lots and surface lots in the Cortex area. Hopefully the product comes out better than the renderingsgone corporate wrote: ↑8:42 PM - Mar 10Iris, a.k.a., Cortex K, is confirmed under construction!
STL Biz Journal: Keeley Properties breaks ground on $37M mixed-use Cortex development
Keeley Properties has broken ground on the Cortex Innovation District's first new‑construction residential project, which has been in the works for years.
Located at 4108 Clayton Ave. near the Cortex MetroLink station, the mixed-use development, named Iris, will have ground-floor retail space and 174 apartments, 17 of which will be classified as affordable housing.
The project is a $37.4 million development, a Cortex spokesperson said Tuesday.
- 139
- 1,607
Way better than the garbage that went up at Olive and 170. If the full floor height/wrap around windows at the end are real I think this will be pretty impactful from a lot of angles/nearby streets.
-$51M cost ($294k/unit)
-Will include 17 affordable units for 10 years
-Developer will donate $250,000 to the city's affordable housing fund
-Development gets a sales tax exemption ($870,000)
-No property tax abatement
I was told this is impossible.
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
- 502
Something’s off there because I know this got a tax abatement at some point. Granted it’s been planned for a decade or so, so maybe it got one and expired.
Though if I were them, I wouldn’t contribute a penny to the affordable housing fund or build affordable units if there’s no incentive attached. That’s just burning through money for the sake of doing so.
Though if I were them, I wouldn’t contribute a penny to the affordable housing fund or build affordable units if there’s no incentive attached. That’s just burning through money for the sake of doing so.
- 1,794
See how capitalism incentivises good people to do/say evil things?
Financial support to affordable housing is “burning money for the sake of burning money”? JFC dude.
Financial support to affordable housing is “burning money for the sake of burning money”? JFC dude.
- 502
So, will you cut a check of $250k to the City for the affordable housing fund without having an incentive issued? Because you and STLAlex seem to live in a world of unicorns and rainbows that’s not ground in reality on this issue, or pretty much anything else recently. Doing something for the sake of doing it, and setting an example, isn’t necessarily a bad thing but in this case, it would definitely slow other developments down if every developer is expected to contribute to the trust fund and never receive a tax incentive again.JaneJacobsGhost wrote: ↑6:55 PM - Mar 11See how capitalism incentivises good people to do/say evil things?
Financial support to affordable housing is “burning money for the sake of burning money”? JFC dude.
Brother, there is a sales tax exemption to the tune of nearly $1M.Chris Stritzel wrote:Something’s off there because I know this got a tax abatement at some point. Granted it’s been planned for a decade or so, so maybe it got one and expired.
Though if I were them, I wouldn’t contribute a penny to the affordable housing fund or build affordable units if there’s no incentive attached. That’s just burning through money for the sake of doing so.
The city's building information website says there's no property tax abatement and the BJ article didn't mention one, I assumed there would be one though.
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
I know you claim to be Christian, the entire Christian faith is based on the idea of doing something righteous for righteousness' sake.Chris Stritzel wrote:So, will you cut a check of $250k to the City for the affordable housing fund without having an incentive issued? Because you and STLAlex seem to live in a world of unicorns and rainbows that’s not ground in reality on this issue, or pretty much anything else recently. Doing something for the sake of doing it, and setting an example, isn’t necessarily a bad thing but in this case, it would definitely slow other developments down if every developer is expected to contribute to the trust fund and never receive a tax incentive again.JaneJacobsGhost wrote: ↑6:55 PM - Mar 11See how capitalism incentivises good people to do/say evil things?
Financial support to affordable housing is “burning money for the sake of burning money”? JFC dude.
Rich business owners used to build extravagant things and fund "useless" stuff all the time for the sake of the civic good. Why do you think AmEx is signing on for WTC2 other than for the civic pride of being HQd at the WTC? Why did JPM build a statement tower in NYC? It would have been cheaper to build a basic suburban business park in Long Island or Westchester.
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
- 502
Invoking someone’s faith for the sake of trying to make an argument is low, even by your standards.
Your worldview should be based on your faith if you truly believe your faith. It's not low at all, it's the basics of your faith. Your faith should come before all.Chris Stritzel wrote:Invoking someone’s faith for the sake of trying to make an argument is low, even by your standards.
And I added a 2nd, secular, half that gets the same point across.
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
- 172
“Faith: not wanting to know what the truth is.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche
― Friedrich Nietzsche
- 2,928
Amazing... @Chris Stritzel posted a question on the numbers for an economic development project. The responses don't address the subject matter, not in the least. Instead, the responses are critiques of the very concept of Capitalism and personal insults regarding Christianity, plus insulting the reconstruction of the World Trade Center site for good measure... Are we sure these trolls aren't Russian bots?
Back on point: I cannot comment smartly to those economic incentives numbers. I can say that Clayton Ave across from the site has had barriers up for a few days, and a whole lot of dirt was being dug up by two earth movers this morning. Glad to see this progressing.
The rich business owners of the gilded age as well as a majority of their modern day peers gave away their wealth and "build extravagant things" after they retired from business or passed away. As far as JP Morgan and AMEX, it made business sense to build their office towers in Manhattan. It was't charity. It was good business. To compare Keeley to any of the aforementioned is laughable.StlAlex wrote: ↑7:27 PM - Mar 11I know you claim to be Christian, the entire Christian faith is based on the idea of doing something righteous for righteousness' sake.Chris Stritzel wrote:So, will you cut a check of $250k to the City for the affordable housing fund without having an incentive issued? Because you and STLAlex seem to live in a world of unicorns and rainbows that’s not ground in reality on this issue, or pretty much anything else recently. Doing something for the sake of doing it, and setting an example, isn’t necessarily a bad thing but in this case, it would definitely slow other developments down if every developer is expected to contribute to the trust fund and never receive a tax incentive again.JaneJacobsGhost wrote: ↑6:55 PM - Mar 11See how capitalism incentivises good people to do/say evil things?
Financial support to affordable housing is “burning money for the sake of burning money”? JFC dude.
Rich business owners used to build extravagant things and fund "useless" stuff all the time for the sake of the civic good. Why do you think AmEx is signing on for WTC2 other than for the civic pride of being HQd at the WTC? Why did JPM build a statement tower in NYC? It would have been cheaper to build a basic suburban business park in Long Island or Westchester.
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
- 951
Middle class culture, any culture, can only stand if it is rewarded. In prior times middle class culture was fundamentally supported by the upper classes, who invested in America, creating vast wealth.
They modeled sobriety, hard-work, risk and reward. The working classes modeled the behavior through church and labor guilds, standing together for each other and the nation.
The wealthy have abandoned America, and the working classes have abandoned religion, guilds, and each other. Into that void steps cultural anarchy.
Society requires hard-work, and discipline. It requires accountability, primarily of the wealthy. I tire of prose that lament the loss of culture without holding those accountable who have abandoned their responsibilities.
They modeled sobriety, hard-work, risk and reward. The working classes modeled the behavior through church and labor guilds, standing together for each other and the nation.
The wealthy have abandoned America, and the working classes have abandoned religion, guilds, and each other. Into that void steps cultural anarchy.
Society requires hard-work, and discipline. It requires accountability, primarily of the wealthy. I tire of prose that lament the loss of culture without holding those accountable who have abandoned their responsibilities.
This thread took a weird turn. Anyway, are they not getting some of the sweet, sweet Cortex District TIF? I thought that was the reason for including some "affordable" units, but I could be misremembering.
America was literally built off of exploitation.chris fuller wrote: ↑11:25 PM - Mar 11Middle class culture, any culture, can only stand if it is rewarded. In prior times middle class culture was fundamentally supported by the upper classes, who invested in America, creating vast wealth.
They modeled sobriety, hard-work, risk and reward. The working classes modeled the behavior through church and labor guilds, standing together for each other and the nation.
The wealthy have abandoned America, and the working classes have abandoned religion, guilds, and each other. Into that void steps cultural anarchy.
Society requires hard-work, and discipline. It requires accountability, primarily of the wealthy. I tire of prose that lament the loss of culture without holding those accountable who have abandoned their responsibilities.
- 8,904
Wish the mods would step in and get this Forum back on track.gone corporate wrote:
Amazing... @Chris Stritzel posted a question on the numbers for an economic development project. The responses don't address the subject matter, not in the least. Instead, the responses are critiques of the very concept of Capitalism and personal insults regarding Christianity, plus insulting the reconstruction of the World Trade Center site for good measure... Are we sure these trolls aren't Russian bots?
Back on point: I cannot comment smartly to those economic incentives numbers. I can say that Clayton Ave across from the site has had barriers up for a few days, and a whole lot of dirt was being dug up by two earth movers this morning. Glad to see this progressing.
It wasn't mentioned in the BJ article, but could be true.MattnSTL wrote:This thread took a weird turn. Anyway, are they not getting some of the sweet, sweet Cortex District TIF? I thought that was the reason for including some "affordable" units, but I could be misremembering.
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
You don't actually believe that what JPM and AmEx are doing is the move that will generate the most revenue/benefit vs cost, don't pretend that you do.STLAPTS wrote:The rich business owners of the gilded age as well as a majority of their modern day peers gave away their wealth and "build extravagant things" after they retired from business or passed away. As far as JP Morgan and AMEX, it made business sense to build their office towers in Manhattan. It was't charity. It was good business. To compare Keeley to any of the aforementioned is laughable.StlAlex wrote: ↑7:27 PM - Mar 11I know you claim to be Christian, the entire Christian faith is based on the idea of doing something righteous for righteousness' sake.Chris Stritzel wrote: So, will you cut a check of $250k to the City for the affordable housing fund without having an incentive issued? Because you and STLAlex seem to live in a world of unicorns and rainbows that’s not ground in reality on this issue, or pretty much anything else recently. Doing something for the sake of doing it, and setting an example, isn’t necessarily a bad thing but in this case, it would definitely slow other developments down if every developer is expected to contribute to the trust fund and never receive a tax incentive again.
Rich business owners used to build extravagant things and fund "useless" stuff all the time for the sake of the civic good. Why do you think AmEx is signing on for WTC2 other than for the civic pride of being HQd at the WTC? Why did JPM build a statement tower in NYC? It would have been cheaper to build a basic suburban business park in Long Island or Westchester.
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
If you actually read anything on here and saw anything past your nose, you'd see that Chris repeatedly suggests that there is no economic benefit to the developer for providing affordable units and making a contribution to the city's affordable housing fund, which helps ~20,000 residents of the city with their housing needs. He actually compared it to burning money.gone corporate wrote:
Amazing... @Chris Stritzel posted a question on the numbers for an economic development project. The responses don't address the subject matter, not in the least. Instead, the responses are critiques of the very concept of Capitalism and personal insults regarding Christianity, plus insulting the reconstruction of the World Trade Center site for good measure... Are we sure these trolls aren't Russian bots?
Back on point: I cannot comment smartly to those economic incentives numbers. I can say that Clayton Ave across from the site has had barriers up for a few days, and a whole lot of dirt was being dug up by two earth movers this morning. Glad to see this progressing.
He said this despite there literally being a $1M tax subsidy as part of the development and possibly Cortex TIF funds available as well. Basically, he made a stupid comment about something he was not informed on.
Also it's amazing how you interpret my mentioning of the WTC as "insulting" when tbe entire point of bringing it up was to praise it. Kinda shows where your head is at. People like you or Chris would say that they shouldn't build an extravagant tower for their HQ because it would cost too much and be "burning money" for the sake of burning money. But the point of what theyre doing is to build an extravagant tower for the sake of pride in NYC, and that's admirable.
The point is that maybe the STL Housing Authority actually helps people live a better life, and that contributing money to is actually an admirable and righteous thing to do for the sake of the city and its residents.
Youre 100% not a bot though. A bots know how analogies work.
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
I do. For example, JP Morgan’s 3.4B headquarters is the initial phase of a much larger real development by JP Morgan in Midtown Manhattan. They are developing a multi-block campus in Midtown Manhattan beyond its new 270 Park Ave headquarters. Another example is Citadel, who left Chicago for Miami, is now building a 4.5 billion dollar office in Midtown. Ken Griffin is not doing that because he feels like he has some obligation to society. He is doing it because it is a must location in finance to attract top talent just like JP and AMEX did or are doing.StlAlex wrote: ↑7:08 AM - Mar 12You don't actually believe that what JPM and AmEx are doing is the move that will generate the most revenue/benefit vs cost, don't pretend that you do.STLAPTS wrote:The rich business owners of the gilded age as well as a majority of their modern day peers gave away their wealth and "build extravagant things" after they retired from business or passed away. As far as JP Morgan and AMEX, it made business sense to build their office towers in Manhattan. It was't charity. It was good business. To compare Keeley to any of the aforementioned is laughable.StlAlex wrote: ↑7:27 PM - Mar 11I know you claim to be Christian, the entire Christian faith is based on the idea of doing something righteous for righteousness' sake.
Rich business owners used to build extravagant things and fund "useless" stuff all the time for the sake of the civic good. Why do you think AmEx is signing on for WTC2 other than for the civic pride of being HQd at the WTC? Why did JPM build a statement tower in NYC? It would have been cheaper to build a basic suburban business park in Long Island or Westchester.
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
- 2,430
Re subsidies, the apartment building indeed is getting TIF and the 17 affordable housing units (10% of the total) were part of the agreement for the TIF approval. Some cities have "inclusionary housing" mandates that require a certain percentage of units be affordable or a contribution be made to affordable housing funds even without subsidies provided by the city. Some would call the Iris "funded inclusionary housing" in contrast to "unfunded inclusionary housing" that some of the hotter markets require.
Also, it's pretty wild it's taken 13 years I believe for the first residential to break ground in the Cortex TIF District, which was intended to have residential since its inception. Anyone old enough to remember the Silo Lofts RFP?
Also, it's pretty wild it's taken 13 years I believe for the first residential to break ground in the Cortex TIF District, which was intended to have residential since its inception. Anyone old enough to remember the Silo Lofts RFP?
Agreed, especially when Cortex is nestled between the two hottest residential submarkets in the city. If Cortex had built half as many apartments as have been built in the Grove in the last 10 years it'd feel way more vibrant.STLrainbow wrote: ↑12:31 PM - Mar 12Also, it's pretty wild it's taken 13 years I believe for the first residential to break ground in the Cortex TIF District, which was intended to have residential since its inception. Anyone old enough to remember the Silo Lofts RFP?