Three Light

Come here for discussion about the new downtown entertainment district.
User avatar
normalthings
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2414
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: Three Light

Post by normalthings »

DColeKC wrote:
Sat Feb 08, 2020 10:34 pm
missingkc wrote:
Sat Feb 08, 2020 9:33 pm
Knife-wielding homeless people can be dealt with using a finer instrument than permanent, private control of what should be a public space. What would Cordish do with that person that I, or you, couldn't do? Banish them? Like some, the most likely to be violent, homeless people could care. Cordish can call the police; you or I could call the police.
It would fall under the watchful eye and patrol of their third party private security team who currently patrol the district 24/7. This is why the homeless tend to hang on the fridges of the district, because it’s common knowledge they’ll be escorted out of the PNL district. Matter of fact, one of the main reasons Cordish took over control of parking garages was because of the homeless problem in them and the lack of effort by the city to do anything about it. And yes, you banish them and charge them with trespassing if they return. It happens all the time and dozens upon dozens of homeless are banned from entering the district due to causing issues in the past. If they show up, they are arrested by the security team and held for the police. That’s something we can’t do.

Let’s reel it back here a bit and make it clear that I’m not implying Cordish would control all of the space or even a majority. I’m simply saying if they tossed money in they’d likely want some resident only amenities. Now if they were to pay for 100% of the project, you’d think they’d only do so if they would own the land.

I mean they literally own the sidewalks in the PNL district which is very odd for most downtown areas. So who knows what would be worked out. I just don’t see Cordish putting in a substantial amount of money if it’s 100% public. So maybe it won’t ever happen because it won’t happen without money from Cordish.
Would a happy medium be the ability to build a commercial structure over the highway with an entirely public park over the rest?

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Ambassador
Posts: 17828
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: Three Light

Post by DaveKCMO »

MoDOT will not allow commercial construction on their right of way, otherwise the proposal would indeed be for tax generating building instead of a costly park.

DColeKC
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 227
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:50 am

Re: Three Light

Post by DColeKC »

missingkc wrote:
Sat Feb 08, 2020 11:40 pm
A private company owning sidewalks in downtown - or on the Plaza - is, well, I can't think of another word at this hour - an abomination. If Cordish wants private green space, supply it on the 8th floor of 4 light, including a place for dogs to, well, shit. Leave the city streets, parks, rights-of-way to the city and the people. No private control of what should be public spaces. Let them keep their money. Better there be no cap. How hard is that?
We are not talking about existing public space here. I agree with you there. This would be new space created with a large percentage of private funds. It would be massively beneficial to the city, public, PNL and crossroads even if a tiny amount was for private use.

Cordish owning sidewalks isn’t a big deal and is great for the city. They’re not on the hook for maintaining them and Cordish isn't going to do anything to mess with pedestrian access considering they need pedestrians to make money.

DColeKC
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 227
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:50 am

Re: Three Light

Post by DColeKC »

DaveKCMO wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 9:07 am
MoDOT will not allow commercial construction on their right of way, otherwise the proposal would indeed be for tax generating building instead of a costly park.
Do we know how the convention center gets away with this?

User avatar
normalthings
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2414
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: Three Light

Post by normalthings »

DColeKC wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 12:12 pm
DaveKCMO wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 9:07 am
MoDOT will not allow commercial construction on their right of way, otherwise the proposal would indeed be for tax generating building instead of a costly park.
Do we know how the convention center gets away with this?
It’s not a commercial structure.

User avatar
GRID
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14499
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: Three Light

Post by GRID »

You know, with these buildings going up right up against 670 (Loews, 2,3,4 lights, W&R and maybe more someday, driving down 670 and being in that urban canyon will be quite a site. The buildings look even taller from the highway. Not saying a deck should not be built, just saying that it will pretty could to drive through there and just have buildings towering over you. Of course it would look pretty cool from a park too.

DColeKC
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 227
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:50 am

Re: Three Light

Post by DColeKC »

Personally, my biggest reason for wanting the cap is noise. I love my south view currently in two light. I plan to continue my tour through the light buildings by moving into three and eventually four. You can only block so much noise with glass and currently the standard highway traffic noise isn’t an issue. It’s the semis who insist on using their jake brakes at all hours of the night that I find annoying. A cap would eliminate that issue.

WoodDraw
Valencia Place
Valencia Place
Posts: 1625
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:53 pm

Re: Three Light

Post by WoodDraw »

I think I'd be against making any of the park private. Downtown already lacks good outdoor community and park space. Privatizing what should be a public, shared space seems antithetical to good urban development.

Obviously that impacts what Cordish is willing to contribute, and so be it.

DColeKC
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 227
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:50 am

Re: Three Light

Post by DColeKC »

WoodDraw wrote:
Mon Feb 10, 2020 11:01 am
I think I'd be against making any of the park private. Downtown already lacks good outdoor community and park space. Privatizing what should be a public, shared space seems antithetical to good urban development.

Obviously that impacts what Cordish is willing to contribute, and so be it.
For the sake of conversation, I probably overstated what Cordish would actually expect. I do think they'd want a very small portion private since they'd be losing their private two light dog park. It would be a large park and this would represent at most 5-10% of the park. I made it sound like Cordish would be greedy but in all the years I spent working for them, I never once felt that way about them. The opposite really. They are smart urban developers and value community relationships. After seeing the pushback here (and they will too), I'm sure it would end up being a compromise where they get a small dog park, the rest is public but Cordish oversees the upkeep and security.

I derailed the topic. With the sky bridge making the final design, I'm anxious to see how amenity spaces will be shared between two and three light.

User avatar
GRID
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14499
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: Three Light

Post by GRID »

How does this building compare to One Cardinal Way in unites, height, cost etc? One Cardinal Way looks taller, but maybe because it's more isolated?

bryan
Parking Garage
Parking Garage
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 12:23 pm
Location: Union Hill

Re: Three Light

Post by bryan »

Looks like they're nearly identical on height according to this and the drawings that were previously posted. Not sure on costs but sourced these numbers from that link and CityScene's article.

3 Light
  • 332 feet (303 feet occupied)
  • 32 stories
  • 321 units
1 Cardinal Way
  • 334 feet (299 feet occupied)
  • 29 stories
  • 297 units
GRID wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 2:06 am
How does this building compare to One Cardinal Way in unites, height, cost etc? One Cardinal Way looks taller, but maybe because it's more isolated?

kenrbnj
Pad site
Pad site
Posts: 76
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2019 9:16 am

Re: Three Light

Post by kenrbnj »

..To sound pithy and silly...

If these guys placed ornamental stuff to goose the building upwards to 353 feet -- they'd be in the "top ten", in terms of building height within the city.

21 feet..

:)

flyingember
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 8074
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Three Light

Post by flyingember »

kenrbnj wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 4:42 pm
..To sound pithy and silly...

If these guys placed ornamental stuff to goose the building upwards to 353 feet -- they'd be in the "top ten", in terms of building height within the city.

21 feet..

:)
353 feet would be 11th place.

1. One KC Place 624
2. Town Pavilion 591
3. Sheraton Crown Center 504
4. P&L 481
5. 909 Walnut 454
6. City Hall 443
7. 1201 Walnut 425
8. Commerce Tower 407
9. City Center Square 402
10. Oak Tower 379
11. 2345 Grand 352
12. 2555 Grand 347
13. Bryant Building 318
14. Crowne Plaza 299
15. Reserve 298

User avatar
normalthings
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2414
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: Three Light

Post by normalthings »

flyingember wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 5:11 pm
kenrbnj wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 4:42 pm
..To sound pithy and silly...

If these guys placed ornamental stuff to goose the building upwards to 353 feet -- they'd be in the "top ten", in terms of building height within the city.

21 feet..

:)
353 feet would be 11th place.

1. One KC Place 624
2. Town Pavilion 591
3. Sheraton Crown Center 504
4. P&L 481
5. 909 Walnut 454
6. City Hall 443
7. 1201 Walnut 425
8. Commerce Tower 407
9. City Center Square 402
10. Oak Tower 379
11. 2345 Grand 352
12. 2555 Grand 347
13. Bryant Building 318
14. Crowne Plaza 299
15. Reserve 298
A 40 floor - 4 Light could land around 5th-7th place on that list.

These dead - envisioned proposals would have really redefined the skyline.

Garmin Landmark Tower 53 stories
Burns & McDonnell Square 45 stories
JW Marriott 60 stories

moderne
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 4351
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Mount Hope

Re: Three Light

Post by moderne »

The St. Louis version appears surprisingly lofty and prominent in the classic over-the-Mississippi view even without the peak yet constructed. Sure will be the same here from the classic Liberty Mem view.

Chris Stritzel
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 213
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2017 9:27 pm
Location: St. Louis/Kansas City

Re: Three Light

Post by Chris Stritzel »

One Cardinal Way is dark and pretty ugly at the ground level. It will suck to walk by it along Broadway. Just based on the renderings of 3 Light, it will be a higher quality project.

DColeKC
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 227
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:50 am

Re: Three Light

Post by DColeKC »

Chris Stritzel wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 6:31 pm
One Cardinal Way is dark and pretty ugly at the ground level. It will suck to walk by it along Broadway. Just based on the renderings of 3 Light, it will be a higher quality project.
You think so? I like the lower level of OCW. They did a great job going from the glass tower to transitioning into something that will blend in nicely with all the brick exteriors. I haven't seen what it looks like walking by on broadway, but it looks great from the other three sides.

As for quality, OCW is on par with Three Light as far as amenities and finishes. Actually, due to the relationship with the Cardinals and proximity to Busch, I'd say it's got a major edge in the amenities category. It's main downfall is the fact downtown STL still has work to do in regards to crime and safety.

Chris Stritzel
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 213
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2017 9:27 pm
Location: St. Louis/Kansas City

Re: Three Light

Post by Chris Stritzel »

DColeKC wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 8:46 pm
Chris Stritzel wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 6:31 pm
One Cardinal Way is dark and pretty ugly at the ground level. It will suck to walk by it along Broadway. Just based on the renderings of 3 Light, it will be a higher quality project.
You think so? I like the lower level of OCW. They did a great job going from the glass tower to transitioning into something that will blend in nicely with all the brick exteriors. I haven't seen what it looks like walking by on broadway, but it looks great from the other three sides.

As for quality, OCW is on par with Three Light as far as amenities and finishes. Actually, due to the relationship with the Cardinals and proximity to Busch, I'd say it's got a major edge in the amenities category. It's main downfall is the fact downtown STL still has work to do in regards to crime and safety.
The charcoal colors on the parking garage are flat our ugly. It blends in well with the Busch Stadium parking garages in terms of looking like a prison. They tried to make it blend in, but I honestly believe they failed. When the sidewalk opens along Broadway, it will be mostly a blank wall, the parking garage entrance, and a loading dock. Only a little bit of the frontage will have glass. It will be a depressing walk along that stretch. Zero activation on either side of the street. Failure. Downtown St. Louis is also pretty depressing at night. Barely any street life, empty store fronts on Washington Avenue (our showcase street), and multiple former bars and entertainment districts that are empty and in need of redevelopment. Laclede's Landing is a prime example. Downtown St. Louis just isn't the place to be at this point in time. Downtown Kansas City is far more lively than Downtown STL in a lot of ways.

Three Light just looks like it will be better. The parking garage and street level situation is what makes me not like OCW. At least with Three Light they are putting glass and retail space on the Main and Truman sides. That will make it pedestrian friendly. The minimal parking garage entrance on Truman isn't that bad. And the already built retail space along 14th is a great thing they did. Thought way ahead. Meanwhile at BPV, it's such a smaller area, that you really can't do that.

Power and Light District is more popular and busy that Ballpark Village for a reason.

DColeKC
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 227
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:50 am

Re: Three Light

Post by DColeKC »

True, but BPV and PNL are different concepts really. BPV is all about sports and stays very busy with so many home cards games. They've been doing really well on Blues game nights as well. For sure a much smaller space and they hope BPV will be the inspiration to transform downtown STL, similar to how PNL helped transform downtown KC.

I haven't seen OCW for a few months, so just going by photos for now. I think broadway in general is somewhat of a disaster in that area. The Hilton lobby entrance is a complete mess and the broadway side of Busch is lack luster at best. I assume they put the dollars and design into the clark street side as well as the side thats towards the entertainment district.

Long term, I hope BPV in general does inspire some outward development. Once that area is built out, there's nowhere to go for Cordish and the Cardinals.

User avatar
KCPowercat
Ambassador
Posts: 29844
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: Three Light

Post by KCPowercat »

This isn't at all a KC v. STL thing but I was really unimpressed by BPV. Felt like a weird indoor very large sports bar. Very happy with what Cordish did here vs. there.

Post Reply