1322 Dolman - apartments/office rehab Lafayette Square

Discuss renovations and new residential construction in South City -- defined by the area south of Interstate 44/55.
If you half to pay to live in the city in my opinion I think it is worth the price subsidized housing is a failed government policy, (unless it is for students and other similar demographics) let the suburbs take the poor, the city has too much concentrated poverty that needs to be dispersed though out the metro.
If the big public housing complex were not proposed adjacent to other public housing across Truman, I'd be singing a different tune.

I think public housing is a great idea, but it can be a terrible idea when it's clustered in one place, and that results in an artificially low poverty rate elsewhere. The poverty rate in the city is 27%, which is well above that of the metro. In this instance, and because of adjacent public housing, the idea of building more subsidized housing across Truman seems stupid at the very least. Let me put it this way: If a developer wanted to turn 5 out of every 6 parcels east of Truman into market rate properties, and at the same time develop properties west of Truman that were 15%-20% subsidized (more in line with metro-wide poverty stats), then this would be an acceptable and good plan. Income diversity is good. Otherwise, not so much. Also, outside a couple choice munis, there are tons of sub $150k homes in good parts of the metro, including the city - that to say there is a shortage for middle class earning household is silliness.
oh I disagree. lafayette square could do with some diversity
onecity wrote:
If the big public housing complex were not proposed adjacent to other public housing across Truman, I'd be singing a different tune.

I think public housing is a great idea, but it can be a terrible idea when it's clustered in one place, and that results in an artificially low poverty rate elsewhere. The poverty rate in the city is 27%, which is well above that of the metro. In this instance, and because of adjacent public housing, the idea of building more subsidized housing across Truman seems stupid at the very least. Let me put it this way: If a developer wanted to turn 5 out of every 6 parcels east of Truman into market rate properties, and at the same time develop properties west of Truman that were 15%-20% subsidized (more in line with metro-wide poverty stats), then this would be an acceptable and good plan. Income diversity is good. Otherwise, not so much. Also, outside a couple choice munis, there are tons of sub $150k homes in good parts of the metro, including the city - that to say there is a shortage for middle class earning household is silliness.


So the city should take middle class but not working class? Got it! I swear in some people's eyes, subsidized tenants might as well have Ebola. A solid mixed-income project with good management and screening is perfect for reclaiming a difficult property.
So the city should take middle class but not working class?


The distinction being??? I am confused...
^ the legions of people who work hard but who aren't middle class and can't afford a market-rate apartment.
roger wyoming II wrote:
onecity wrote:
If the big public housing complex were not proposed adjacent to other public housing across Truman, I'd be singing a different tune.

I think public housing is a great idea, but it can be a terrible idea when it's clustered in one place, and that results in an artificially low poverty rate elsewhere. The poverty rate in the city is 27%, which is well above that of the metro. In this instance, and because of adjacent public housing, the idea of building more subsidized housing across Truman seems stupid at the very least. Let me put it this way: If a developer wanted to turn 5 out of every 6 parcels east of Truman into market rate properties, and at the same time develop properties west of Truman that were 15%-20% subsidized (more in line with metro-wide poverty stats), then this would be an acceptable and good plan. Income diversity is good. Otherwise, not so much. Also, outside a couple choice munis, there are tons of sub $150k homes in good parts of the metro, including the city - that to say there is a shortage for middle class earning household is silliness.


So the city should take middle class but not working class? Got it! I swear in some people's eyes, subsidized tenants might as well have Ebola. A solid mixed-income project with good management and screening is perfect for reclaiming a difficult property.


Yes. A main goal of St. Louis government should be to increase the value of property and the total amount of taxable income in St. Louis as much as it possibly can. It is perfectly legitimate for the residents of Lafayette Square to have the same goals for their neighborhood. St. Louis is under no legal obligation to allow any particular kind of housing for anyone.
roger wyoming II wrote:
^ the legions of people who work hard but who aren't middle class and can't afford a market-rate apartment.


St. Louis has amongst the cheapest housing of any metro over 2 million in the country. This is less of an issue here than in almost anywhere in the country.
Got it. The working poor is what you meant.

So, my take is this: The poverty rate in STL is off the hook relative to the region and that places a huge burden on the city to make itself both attractive to high earners and provide an acceptable level of service to low/nonearners and also be able to deal with crime from poverty. Thus the city's top priority, in my opinion, is growing its middle class. To me that means hh's that earn about 40k and up (or maybe $30k(?) if it's young, single resident hhs), if I'm going by your definition. This is a dollars in, dollars out issue. That middle class and corporate tax base is paramount. I would think with enough middle class workers living in the city, large employers would have a reason to locate and pay taxes in the city as well. Ceating a firm financial footing for the city to offer a higher level of service. If things get to this level or the city is clearly on a path toward this endpoint, then the subsidies should become feasible, but without knowing the math it's hard to speak to at what point it nets out. I don't know what the ideal and sustainable mix of affluent/middle/working/poor is. Obviously we don't want to be Manhattan and price out everyone but inv bankers, but STL is definitely tilted too far poor. I guess the big question is, after subsidies are factored in, does the addition of those working poor create a net gain or a net loss for the city after factoring in the money they spend, velocity, taxes paid, etc, and if a net loss, how many middle class households are required to balance that out. Does anyone know the answer to that?
^ I think you may be overanalyzing this wrt this proposed project.... we're not talking about a large public housing project that might put additional strain on city finances; instead it would put back into service a deteriorated building into mixed-income, mixed-use that so far 100% market rate forces have been unable to overcome.

From what we've heard, the proposal would put in both market rate and subsidized housing as well as commercial. The City will get increased property tax (although abatement may be in play), income taxes, and possibly sales taxes. It seems unlikely that it is not in the best interests of the City to see the property stalled and not get those additional people and commerce because some of the units may be subsidized by the state and/or feds. And like it or not, many of our older buildings in this non-booming city need just about every incentive thrown at them to make renovation work.
I agree. Any mechanism to save historic buildings right now . There is always the possibility in the future for the low income housing to move elsewhere and this building could be turned into more market-rate housing.
There seems to be very large misconception with the subsidized units. This is not Public Housing like across the street at Truman. This is the Metropolitan loft style housing that is cheaper but affordable to working individuals.

I applied to live in the Metropolitan lofts, I have several friends that do. They all work, they all are great additions to the city and for us to lump this in with public housing projects is not right. A 1br apartment in the Metro lofts still costs $726. I currently live in Lafayette Square in an apartment that is not subsidized and pay 800. So I am the working poor? Maybe. But IMO, my presence is a positive one in STL.
^Yes. This isn't Section 8 or a public housing project.

Maximum income for one person renting a LIHTC-funded apartment in St. Louis is around $33,000. That's full-time at $17/hour. The subsidized units will aim to support young professionals making in the low 30s. That's a very vibrant demographic that may be new to Lafayette Square.

The market rate units will aim for higher income professionals.
Lots of apartment rehabs Downtown feature this same kind of income restriction. I personally know several people who qualify and live in them. Genuine, grown-up, responsible adults. Believe me, there's nothing to worry about.
Anyone know if this latest proposal has any life left in it? I don't see any recent permit activity.

Also, I haven't been down to Laf. Sq, in some time... has anything replaced the Tripel spot?
Missouri didn't award the project Low Income Housing Tax Credits, citing more competitive projects elsewhere in the region.

The building is not currently on the market, though, so someone might be trying to make a project work without LIHTCs.
It's a Biz Journal sub article so I don't have details, but it looks like the owners are making another run at redevelopment.

http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/news ... are-s.html
Back as 50 market-rate units

New owners plan rehab of Bouras Mop building
http://www.stltoday.com/business/column ... ffa8a.html
STLrainbow wrote:
Wed Jan 11, 2017 1:14 pm
Back as 50 market-rate units

New owners plan rehab of Bouras Mop building
http://www.stltoday.com/business/column ... ffa8a.html
Is there been any update on this? The building is still sitting there with no work that I have noticed.

Who is online

In total there are 5 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 5 guests (based on users active over the past 30 minutes)
Most users ever online was 969 on Wed Oct 12, 2016 6:56 am

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests