urbanSTL

Insomniacafe wrote:

There is such an overabundance of downtown parking it's hard to imagine that being an issue

I don't think there would an issue with parking in the wide area. However, we all know that fans and people attending general events, want convenient parking, close the venue, so they do not have to walk 'a great distance' or get 'mugged'. As dumb as that sounds, I'm sure there would be a ton of suburbanites, that perceive the City as unsafe, that would not appreciate a walk. I've heard many complain about the distance from lot to venue at the chaifetz arena. That is a short walk past a few fields. Then you have to consider
the fact that the Blues or Cards could overlap an MLS event on the same
night, creating a parking nightmare. I hate to say it, but if they put a
venue there, it will have to have a significant amount of parking right next to the venue.

insomniacafe wrote:There is such an overabundance of downtown parking it's hard to imagine that being an issue.

But we still come back to the recent insistence that LHM has no plans for this at all. And, frankly, it does seem a bit more big and revolutionary than LHM has, up to this point, been with their projects.

I suppose time will tell if they're just being sly or if this idea came out of nowehere. I imagine Alex won't share his source, but I sure would be interested to hear from him whether he buys what LHM is publicly saying or not.

Share the same thoughts,

Which gets to some pure speculation on my part as THF was mentioned at one point being involved and the fact that Stan K is the money man behind THF. I would speculate that something is happening on the financial side between LHM and THF/Stan K as this is their third hotel rehab in the region in short order - Clayton, Airport Marriot I believe and now Union Station. I undersatand that LHM is strong and establish hotelier who has probably some sound financing behind just as is Drury family has put together a good business/company. But fun none the less to think that Stan K is getting into the hotel business via a homegrown hotel company.

The other thought and more speculation on my part, big part Stan K's business is now sports and therefore entertainment. The only way I see MLS coming to St. Louis is his involvement directly and or indirectly. A stadium part of or next to US makes a lot of sense when you consider Clark Street is already home to Scottrade, Peabody and Busch Stadium, plenty of hotel rooms to be had and eateries as such, and best access you can find in the region either it be freeway or transit. Everytime money goes into Cupples it is a proven success and I have no doubt residential/mix use will be succeed at Ballpark Village if Dewitt/Cordish would ever get their act together and actually take on a little risk.

In other words, I hope Alex found out about a grand vision that I think everybody desires on this blog.

dredger wrote:The other thought and more speculation on my part, big part Stan K's business is now sports and therefore entertainment. The only way I see MLS coming to St. Louis is his involvement directly and or indirectly. A stadium part of or next to US makes a lot of sense when you consider Clark Street is already home to Scottrade, Peabody and Busch Stadium, plenty of hotel rooms to be had and eateries as such, and best access you can find in the region either it be freeway or transit. Everytime money goes into Cupples it is a proven success and I have no doubt residential/mix use will be succeed at Ballpark Village if Dewitt/Cordish would ever get their act together and actually take on a little risk.

In other words, I hope Alex found out about a grand vision that I think everybody desires on this blog.

Why is that the only way you see MLS coming to STL? He's not the only person with a large bank account. Several AB execs made out nicely after the Inbev deal and there are several local private billion dollar companies with exec's who've been making multi million dollar salaries over the past 10-20 years. Even though it may not look like it, there's A LOT of money here so thats not an issue.

Also, you have to remember, its easy to say that Dewitt/Cordish should take "a little risk" on BPV. But in reality, when youre dealing with $50-$100 million, you want to make sure youre gonna be right. And STL hasnt shown that we're ready for anything in BPV except more entertainment choices. I blame our civic leaders on a lackluster job of business attraction and retention.

DogtownBnR wrote:Last night on KMOX, Chris Kerber mentioned the USMNT games coming up, then
went on the mention that an article on NEXTSTL contains information on a project
at Union Station, that may include an MLS stadium. He told listeners to go to
the site and take a look at the article. Great plug for the site and he didn't call
it a "hipster forum"!

Cool.

Then now we just wait! And hope you'll keep us updated when and if you hear more

I was listening The St. Louis United FC Radio Show this past weekend and they were talking about the stadium and how after some searching they couldn't confirm anything. But an interesting comment was made that caught my ear. I guess while trying to find out about the stadium they contacted a higher level MLS figure who said that if STL would build a SSS then a team would be relocated there. If this is true then that's great. We don't need to worry about the huge expansion fees or getting this done before the last round of expansion happened. From their discussion it sounded like the MLS wants Chivas out of LA cause they cant compete with the Galaxy and would be happy if STL was that city.

That is a very interesting comment. Not having to pay a $50M expansion fee would certainly seem to make MLS ownership here much more likely.

The owners would have to want to move to STL as well. And STL is pretty far from home. Then you would have to assume that the current owners, who just took complete ownership a few months ago, would sell you a stake. We have a lot of history here and it would probably be better (and more beneficial) to have owners who understand that. With that said, I would much rather pay $50M for a new team with a clean slate.

^I took the comment as "MLS doesn't want chivas where they are, would rather have them sold to an ownership group in St. Louis."

So, for a hypothetical owner here, you would be talking, say $100M versus $150M. That, to me, would make it seem more likely to happen.

$100M vs $150M? Theres no 'expansion fee' plus the original 'franchise fee', one would only pay a franchise fee. The last club, Montreal paid $50M franchise fee. MLS might not want Chivas where they are, as in sharing a stadium with the Galaxy. I would just think the owners would move them to where it would make sense culturally and logistically. Mexican owner, mexican brand. Probably would move to where theres a significant Mexican population. Maybe a new location in southern Cal, Texas, Arizona.

Yes, him selling his team is still an option which very well could happen. But I dont think the price would be that much different from "buying new".

Just figured out where our disagreement here is.

You are assuming teams are worth the actual value it takes to get them at this point in time. I think the $50M franchise fee puts the owners of the teams in a fiscal hole. Franchises will (IMO) recoup this cost and eventually be worth more than (IMO, again) NHL and NBA franchises. However, at this point in time, I don't think the teams are worth what they cost during the expansion periods if they were to be sold on the open market.

So, hypothetically, if another franchise had to sell, I believe it would be at a (potentially) significant discount to what it would cost to obtain a team via expansion.

You do not, apparently, which very well may be the case. It would be interesting to see.

Sorry for the confusion.

Chivas was $10M when they came into the league. With their recent sale a few months ago, DC United is valued at $50M.

I think it just depends on which team sells to know whether or not it will be at a discount. For instance, if Chivas sold, then yes. But the Galaxy will be near $50M if not right at it.

Yes, it will be interesting to see.

STLEnginerd wrote:Not to rehash ideas whose opportunity has passed but why didn't Amtrack build their new facility at union station. They could have kept the same under the highway concept but just put it over there instead. Was it even considered, did the operator of US didn't want it? a *sigh* lack of parking?... i am just curious of their reasoning here.

No idea.

When I have boarded Amtrak downtown, it seemed to sit there a long time before we got going. It didn't just take off. So I'm not sure why it couldn't pull in and out of a terminal as they do in Washington just as fast.

stlhistory wrote:

STLEnginerd wrote:Not to rehash ideas whose opportunity has passed but why didn't Amtrack build their new facility at union station.

1. Union Station is not a through station (it's a terminal stop, so it's similar to the Union Station at Chicago), so it takes much longer to disembark passengers. Compare that to the current facility, which can disembark passengers and continue on; Chicago can make a terminal station work, but it's hard in STL. Interesting related topic is that the LA Union Station has undergone major renovations to create "run-through" trackage to solve this problem. That works, too, if you have enough trains to make it financially appropriate (LA has 4,400 Amtrak boardings a day, STL has about 900).

2. Amtrak didn't own Union Station when the building was rebuilt into the festival marketplace concept in the 1980s. I don't think it would have financially benefited the owners to invite what was at the time seen as a dying enterprise (passenger rail) back into a well-heeled shopping center that had undergone a total renovation. When Amtrak finally got into building a new facility, the reason above was a big part as was cost (the new building was only $31.4 million, a bargain compared to reinstallation of trackage and facilities at Union Station).

I also understand that their was a dispute between TRRA (switching railroad owned by other the class I's to move freight within the St. Louois area)and Amtrak on the fees associated with a back in/switching fee into the Union Station. I believe TRRA actually owns the tracks into Union Station and the rules associated withs such tracks are very different then the current arrangement in which Amtrak owns the rails at its current station configuration and UP/BNSF are obligated under federal law to accomondate usage of Amtrak on their mainline. In other words, Union Station required four parties to be involved where as the current arrangement suits Amtrak and Class I railroads well (Amtrak can justify its facility costs, park trains on their own tracks, and they are out of the way as a liability to Class I's until needing to depart)

FYI... Posted some pics of my trip to Live Strong in KC, under the photography section.
This venue is awesome. I hope that SS venue like this will happen in STL. If not at Union Station, somewhere in the area, somewhere close to the City. This venue should be used as a model for any future venue in STL. The owners took many of the best
characteristics from venues around the world and incorporated them in this one.
Since they did all of the work, all a developer here would have to do, is copy
what they did in KC. Anyhow, awesome venue. I hope to see one here some day, soon!

newstl2020 wrote:LHM is unaware of an effort to build a stadium at the site. Owner of LHM says he "has not talked to anyone about it" according to most recent Building Blocks article on StLToday.com

THF is developing Union Station and is now owned by Stan Kroenke. I hear Mr. Kroenke is a soccer fan...

http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/ ... eec89.html