1,093
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,093

PostSep 09, 2011#326

It'll probably go for less than half of that.

3,544
Life MemberLife Member
3,544

PostNov 10, 2011#327

Metro has been talking a lot lately about TOD. Since this is on top of the Metrolink stop, why doesn't Metro buy it and turn it into a mixed use project?
They recently ran a piece about the Hong Kong Metro and how its actively involved in development.

11K
Life MemberLife Member
11K

PostNov 10, 2011#328

^ Good question. Bi-State should be a larger regional player in TOD.

5,705
Life MemberLife Member
5,705

PostNov 10, 2011#329

goat314 wrote:Metro has been talking a lot lately about TOD. Since this is on top of the Metrolink stop, why doesn't Metro buy it and turn it into a mixed use project?
They recently ran a piece about the Hong Kong Metro and how its actively involved in development.
I believe the Forest Park station was going to be there first stab at TOD Development with Baron McCormick's proposed mixed use. Maybe I'm mistaken, but haven't heard or seen anything on it lately

3,544
Life MemberLife Member
3,544

PostNov 10, 2011#330

I dont know if there is any laws against Metro buying and developing property, but I would love to see them buy large plots of land and develop high density housing around the stations. My dream is for them to buy the Arcade and Chemical buildings and develop them into rental apartments. Revenues would go to Metro.

I'm also surprised that these very large buildings in the core of downtown haven't attracted developers looking to convert them into rental apartments. I've been hearing that downtown St. Louis has the strongest rental market in the region. There is obviously still a large pent up demand for urban living considering how well the Park Pacific and Laurel apartments have done.

How long before St. Louis sees the type of development and infill that is regularly seen in other cities? The Jefferson Arms is obviously a good recent example, but that project is targeted to teachers and shouldn't there be more in general?

11K
Life MemberLife Member
11K

PostNov 10, 2011#331

^ Don't know - though will say that IMO St. Louis has seen as much or more development of buildings like this than any city in its peer group.

623
Senior MemberSenior Member
623

PostJun 05, 2012#332

8th Street between Pine and Olive is blocked off and workers are constructing an exterior construction elevator.

I know some developers were taking a very serious look at this recently, but hadn't heard of anything official.

Has the redevelopment started?

10K
AdministratorAdministrator
10K

PostJun 05, 2012#333

mattonarsenal wrote:8th Street between Pine and Olive is blocked off and workers are constructing an exterior construction elevator.

I know some developers were taking a very serious look at this recently, but hadn't heard of anything official.

Has the redevelopment started?
Last I heard, there is environmental remediation taking place there.

678
Senior MemberSenior Member
678

PostJun 05, 2012#334

It sure seems like the project, whatever it is, is getting bigger.

2,386
Life MemberLife Member
2,386

PostJun 05, 2012#335

Please let this be true. This building is going to be absolutely critical to downtown's revitalization.

1,093
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,093

PostJun 06, 2012#336

Its just environmental remediation on floors 3 - 9 (I believe).

623
Senior MemberSenior Member
623

PostJun 06, 2012#337

Who is doing the remediation? Why now after so long a period of inactivity? Seem strange to put this much into a remediation if there wasn't a larger plan.

21
New MemberNew Member
21

PostJun 06, 2012#338

I was told last night that the property cannot be developed until this remediation is complete. I was further told that there is a developer who is seriously considering developing this property. I am told that development of this property is very likely.

1,093
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,093

PostJun 06, 2012#339

mattonarsenal wrote:Who is doing the remediation? Why now after so long a period of inactivity? Seem strange to put this much into a remediation if there wasn't a larger plan.
The city is paying for it. They are doing it to make the building more marketable for development.

8,908
Life MemberLife Member
8,908

PostJun 06, 2012#340

This building is a treasure. I'm anxious to hear what the plans are and hope they include a residential and hotel component.

512
Senior MemberSenior Member
512

PostJun 06, 2012#341

I was pretty intrigued by the proposal a couple years back turning it into a Chinese exchange/small-production office (minus the $1.00 building bid...). If I remember correctly, the plan would have made use of most of the available space and brought several hundred feet to the street as workers. And potentially some much-needed downtown diversity.

(Though I don't know what they would have been requesting for TIFS, HTCs, etc.)

11K
Life MemberLife Member
11K

PostJun 06, 2012#342

It's interesting because at the time the city basically said it wouldn't give the building away for free, yet it seems that they are considering do just that with the Municipal Courts building.

623
Senior MemberSenior Member
623

PostJun 06, 2012#343

I can confirm STL317's statement that there is serious interest in the property from a well-known developer for use as apartments with retail.

I wasn't sure if the current work was evidence of that project moving forward. Maybe indirectly it is??? Let's hope.

3,544
Life MemberLife Member
3,544

PostJun 06, 2012#344

This would be the biggest apartment building downtown if rehabbed....right? Seems like you could fit about 500-600 units in this monster. I think the rental market downtown is hot. I know plenty of young people that cant wait to move out of mommy and daddy's house and into the city. I even know some people that have rented downtown dwellings and also own houses in the county. I'm surprised we haven't seen more proposals come on line. Are developers not bullish on downtown? What's going on?

4,553
Life MemberLife Member
4,553

PostJun 06, 2012#345

They definitely seem bullish on downtown. Two huge projects, the MX Apartments and Park Pacific, started leasing within the last year. Both represent huge investments and big additions to downtown's apartment stock.

10K
AdministratorAdministrator
10K

PostJun 06, 2012#346

It's kind of surprising to me that the Arcade would be generating more interest than the Chemical.

21
New MemberNew Member
21

PostJun 07, 2012#347

I do not know specifics, but I am told that the Arcade is eligible for some brownfield tax credits. That is part of the current remediation, and those funds could be rolled over to the development.

It is my further understanding that the Chemical Building would not be eligible for the same funds.

Perhaps this is the difference.

722
Senior MemberSenior Member
722

PostJun 07, 2012#348

StL317 wrote:I do not know specifics, but I am told that the Arcade is eligible for some brownfield tax credits. That is part of the current remediation, and those funds could be rolled over to the development.

It is my further understanding that the Chemical Building would not be eligible for the same funds.

Perhaps this is the difference.
Perhaps if the Arcade-Wright Building is redeveloped, it will provide some sort of impetus for the Chemical Building to get some tenants. Or at least... maybe... be turned into a....... parking agarage? :shock:

2,386
Life MemberLife Member
2,386

PostJun 07, 2012#349

^I seriously hope you are joking, otherwise a lifetime ban might be in order for even uttering that statement.


If SLU law is looking to develop residential downtown, why aren't they looking at the chemical? It is right down the street from the law building and is MUCH better located in terms of ameneties and available parking (garage-mahal) than the Muni Courts building.

1,093
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,093

PostJun 07, 2012#350

debaliviere wrote:It's kind of surprising to me that the Arcade would be generating more interest than the Chemical.
What makes you think the Arcade is generating more interest? The city owns the Arcade so they want to do what they can to make it attractive for development. The Chemical is owned by a bank. The previous owners already did (to the Chemical) what the city is doing to the Arcade.
StL317 wrote:I do not know specifics, but I am told that the Arcade is eligible for some brownfield tax credits. That is part of the current remediation, and those funds could be rolled over to the development.

It is my further understanding that the Chemical Building would not be eligible for the same funds.

Perhaps this is the difference.
They say the Arcade will be eligible for Brownfields but if the city completes the remediation, I don't think Brownfields would be necessary any more. And developers would have to reapply for the tax credits.

Each project is eligible for state and federal historic tax credits.

Read more posts (412 remaining)