HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Never Built & Visionary Projects > Cancelled Project Threads Archive


 

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Apr 16, 2009, 1:41 PM
RBB's Avatar
RBB RBB is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 156
ST. LOUIS - McGowan Tower idea is still around

Didn't see any older threads on this proposal. Mods, if I've overlooked one feel free to merge:

http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/bui...-still-around/

Quote:
The McGowan Tower idea is still around
By Tim Bryant
St. Louis Post-Dispatch

A fifth of downtown St. Louis office space is vacant but that hasn’t stopped several real estate experts from insisting the area needs new office buildings.

They point out that most of the emptiness is in older buildings with few amenities. New Class A space is needed to keep existing employers and attract new ones, the experts say. One, Richard Ward of Zimmer Real Estate Services, says that, for starters, downtown needs 500,000 square feet of additional class A offices.

That brings us to developer Kevin McGowan, who has a much bigger project in mind. He wants to build a 1,000-foot, 80- to 90-story giant somewhere near the proposed Chouteau Lake development in the southwest section of downtown.

Projected to be nearly as tall as the Chrysler Building in New York, the McGowan tower would dwarf the 630-foot Arch. Put another way, it would be as tall as the Laclede Gas Building stacked atop Met Square.

McGowan, head of Blue Urban LLC and best known as a loft developer, said recently he has studied his skyscraper proposal “pretty hard” for four years.

“If a brand new tower was built, it would be A space and would immediately make everything else B space, or less, in St. Louis,” he said. “That’s the reality of where we’re at.”

McGowan said the building would combine offices, residences and a hotel. Financing seemed close about 18 months ago but then the recession hit and money pools evaporated, said McGowan, adding he believes his tower could be built for about $300 million. Downtown needs something to make St. Louis internationally recognized for something more than the Arch, he said.

“A 10-story building won’t do much,” McGowan said. “What I’m talking about is a landmark that begins a national discussion about St. Louis. I want the rest of the country talking about St. Louis.”

We’ll talk more if we get new information about this project.
-RBB
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Apr 16, 2009, 8:25 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
Quote:
“What I’m talking about is a landmark that begins a national discussion about St. Louis. I want the rest of the country talking about St. Louis.”
A supertall wouldn't hurt. Actually, any new tallest wouldn't be bad.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Apr 20, 2009, 3:24 PM
Moorlands Moorlands is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Clayton, MO
Posts: 230
It may or may not look like the building on the right

     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Apr 20, 2009, 5:22 PM
ChiPsy's Avatar
ChiPsy ChiPsy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 443
What on earth is the source of that photo? It combines a downscaled St. Louis skyline in front of an inflated Kansas City skyline, plus a rendering of an awkward, charmless building that hopefully isn't this "McGowan" proposal.

If the Gateway Arch is going to be usurped in downtown St. Louis (a very bad idea imo), the new height champ had better be spectacular. If this is McGowan's proposal, he would in fact "get the rest of the country talking about St. Louis" -- but for all the wrong reasons.
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Apr 21, 2009, 4:36 PM
IMADreamer IMADreamer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 226
I would love to see him build a spectacular super tall in STL but I'm just not sure it's needed. Then again maybe he's right and it would get people talking about STL and make it grow.

I do think if he is going to build something taller then the arch it better be epic.
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2009, 2:29 PM
Moorlands Moorlands is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Clayton, MO
Posts: 230
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiPsy View Post
What on earth is the source of that photo? It combines a downscaled St. Louis skyline in front of an inflated Kansas City skyline, plus a rendering of an awkward, charmless building that hopefully isn't this "McGowan" proposal.

If the Gateway Arch is going to be usurped in downtown St. Louis (a very bad idea imo), the new height champ had better be spectacular. If this is McGowan's proposal, he would in fact "get the rest of the country talking about St. Louis" -- but for all the wrong reasons.

The rendering came from the developer's website. McGowan has made his monies on historic rehab in the two Missouri cities shown in the rendering ( St. Louis and Kansas City.) Building taller than the arch is certainly a split issue among the nearly 3 million locals, however, most progressive thinkers see the importance of building tall. What St. Louis needs more than anything is large contiguous tracks of class A office space, not only to compete within the metro area with other central business districts like Clayton, but to attract new buisiness downtown from the within the metro as well as internationally. I feel that once this global economy starts to pick up, downtown St. Louis could be on the cusp of a new construction building boom.

I've yet to hear a strong arguement as to why to not build higher than the arch. In fact, I don't even see why there is a debate.

Last edited by Moorlands; Apr 22, 2009 at 7:25 PM. Reason: typo
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2009, 6:15 PM
samoen313's Avatar
samoen313 samoen313 is offline
millard fillmore
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: ys
Posts: 202
Unless they build something right on the river edge, the Arch will always be front and center in St. Louis. There is no reason not to build taller than the Arch. What happened to the Gentleman's Agreement in Philadelphia? The city languished until someone finally got up the nerve to build taller than City Hall. Does anyone really regret that?
__________________
the sky is falling.
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2009, 10:26 PM
LucasS6 LucasS6 is offline
Accountz Payabo
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Mililani, HI
Posts: 1,492
WOW!~!! Looks to be over 2300 ft at least!!!!!11
     
     
End
 
 
 

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Never Built & Visionary Projects > Cancelled Project Threads Archive
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:29 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.