Back before the BoA this week:
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... 1#cxrecs_s
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... 1#cxrecs_s
Under amended deal, developer would finish Jefferson Arms renovation by 2025
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... -2025.html
![]()
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... -2025.html
Dallas-based developer Alterra Worldwide would start renovation of the vacant Jefferson Arms building downtown by June 2022 and finish by 2025, according to terms of an amended redevelopment proposal before the city of St. Louis.
Alderwoman Tammika Hubbard, whose ward encompasses the Jefferson Arms building, introduced both the proposed amended agreement, and a bill seeking the creation of a community improvement district and transportation development district for the redevelopment before the city's Board of Aldermen of Friday. The proposed amended agreement between Alterra and the city of St. Louis also outlines the developer's intentions to follow the city's goals for minority- and women-owned business inclusion for the project and to pay all outstanding property taxes. The city's website shows Alterra has not paid property taxes since 2017 and owes $231,064.49 for the three parcels that encompass the Jefferson Arms property.
But the proposed amended agreement also includes a "force majeure" clause for Alterra — a legal provision that can free a party from adhering to a contract due to unforeseen circumstances or circumstances out of its control.
...............
The city has yet to officially weigh in on the proposed amended agreement, CID and TDD. The proposed amended agreementis slated to go before the Board of Aldermen's Housing, Urban Development and Zoning Committee on Dec. 16. It's not clear when the CID and TDD will be reviewed.
- 339
What are the odds that this actually gets going and completed by that date? I know Alterra is interested in investing in the city, but this is such a tricky first project in almost all regards.
So glad to hear this moving ahead again. Will really bring more hustle and bustle to that block.
^ I wouldn't say it's moving ahead yet. Still more BoA hearings and there are outstanding tax bills. I'm honestly not yet convinced Alterra can get this done, but it is nice to see some news.
truesc4mayor wrote: ↑Dec 10, 2020^ I wouldn't say it's moving ahead yet. Still more BoA hearings and there are outstanding tax bills. I'm honestly not yet convinced Alterra can get this done, but it is nice to see some news.
So, did they ever explain what they want to do with the TDD proceeds on this project?
Are they planning on converting part of the building to a public parking garage? The only other use I could imagine for a TDD here is if they were going to close St. Charles St. and make it a pedestrian plaza, or I suppose, actually more like a half alley, half ped plaza...
Are they planning on converting part of the building to a public parking garage? The only other use I could imagine for a TDD here is if they were going to close St. Charles St. and make it a pedestrian plaza, or I suppose, actually more like a half alley, half ped plaza...
A Board of Aldermen panel approved of the extension. 7-1 vote. Cara Spencer was the only member to vote against it. It now moves to the full Board.
One interesting thing to note, financing is not yet lined up. https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/gov ... 2a154.html
One interesting thing to note, financing is not yet lined up. https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/gov ... 2a154.html
^ Not only that, but:
Kidding, kidding (kinda)....
Good luck, Mike!!! Hope you pull it off and it's AWESOME!!!
Sounds like the reply my gramps uses when his primary care physician asks him if he's gotten a preventive colorectal screening yet.Asked by Alderman Cara Spencer, D-20th Ward, whether Alterra had paid back property taxes it owes the city on the building, Sarimsakci said the company had not but that it is “getting ready” to do so. City records show Alterra owing the city more than $160,000 in taxes, interest and penalties for 2018 and 2019 on the Jefferson Arms property.
Kidding, kidding (kinda)....
Good luck, Mike!!! Hope you pull it off and it's AWESOME!!!
- 9,559
this project will NOT start before its June 2022 deadline, if ever. this guy is just throwing sh*t on the wall hoping it sticks
^I'm wondering what his motivation might be, if he doesn't expect to actually do the redevelopment. Sell his concept, designs, approvals, etc. to some other developer? What does he hope to get out of it?
- 9,559
I mean i think they want to get this done i just dont think they know how to, look at their website- they've only done 2 projects start to finish and of the 4 in development (including this one) 2 are some pipe dream projects in Niger Africa.framer wrote: ↑Dec 17, 2020^I'm wondering what his motivation might be, if he doesn't expect to actually do the redevelopment. Sell his concept, designs, approvals, etc. to some other developer? What does he hope to get out of it?
City approves new Jefferson Arms deal, though developer Alterra Worldwide still faces tax issues
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... 6#cxrecs_s
![]()
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... 6#cxrecs_s
Seems like he's actually made some tax payments...though I'm still pretty skeptical of this whole thing.The vote all but assures the city's endorsement of a plan to give Dallas-based developer Alterra Worldwide $17.3 million in tax increment financing to redevelop the Jefferson Arms building, a more than $100 million project that's been in the works since 2016. The deal also sets a timeline for the project to begin in June 2022 and finish by 2025.
The vote, however, came after Alderwoman Tammika Hubbard, whose ward encompasses the building at 415 N. Tucker Blvd., told the board that Alterra had paid all of its outstanding property taxes. Alterra, however, still owes two years worth of taxes totaling $119,132.23, according to the city's Collector of Revenues office. Reached after the meeting, Hubbard said she learned late that Alterra had paid up to 2018. Even so, she said that still represents a "considerable payment." The developer previously owed $231,064.49 in unpaid taxes.
- 2,056
I feel like we're all skeptical, while keeping our fingers crossed it can make it, lol.
What an embarrassment.sc4mayor wrote: ↑Jan 15, 2021Alderwoman Tammika Hubbard.... told the board [of Aldermen] that Alterra had paid all of its outstanding property taxes. Alterra, however, still owes two years worth of taxes totaling $119,132.23, according to the city's Collector of Revenues office. Reached after the meeting, Hubbard said she learned late that Alterra had paid up to 2018.
^ Seriously...I feel bad saying this, but between Collins-Muhammad and Hubbard the North Side could really use some new aldermen (and women).
People who will actually represent the needs of the community instead of their family, friends, and cronies. Pretty sure it’s the fault of several North Side aldermen that the City can’t seat its Freeholders. Like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
People who will actually represent the needs of the community instead of their family, friends, and cronies. Pretty sure it’s the fault of several North Side aldermen that the City can’t seat its Freeholders. Like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
From what I've heard, as a result of the anticipated absorption rate after project completion, Alterra has had a difficult time securing financing. I wouldn't hold my breath for a 2022 start date.
That seem like a bit of a cop out. The absorption rate Downtown could certainly be a concern (The Arcade and OCW seemed to do pretty well, but have better locations and unique characteristics from this assumedly marker-rate project). But lenders are going to look at a host of considerations when determining whether to entrust a developer with 10s of millions of their depositors' dollars. Considerations like: Does this developer have a successful track record in this market? If this developer hasn't been able to pay their taxes for years on end, will they be able pay a loan's interest on time?STLAPTS wrote: ↑Jan 18, 2021From what I've heard, as a result of the anticipated absorption rate after project completion, Alterra has had a difficult time securing financing. I wouldn't hold my breath for a 2022 start date.
We haven't seen anything break ground yet, but developer interest in DT residential seems to be picking back up with the 1801 Washington and 1014 Spruce proposals. I wouldn't be surprised to see one (especially 1014 Spruce) or both of those get financing. Saying Alterra's difficulties are simply due to "anticipated absorption rate" just seem like a bit of an oversimplification.
A myriad of factors go into a lender's decision to finance any project especially one of this size and scope. All of those factors play into their decision. Absorption rate being the driving factor but obviously not the only with this specific project.wabash wrote: ↑Jan 18, 2021That seem like a bit of a cop out. The absorption rate Downtown could certainly be a concern (The Arcade and OCW seemed to do pretty well, but have better locations and unique characteristics from this assumedly marker-rate project). But lenders are going to look at a host of considerations when determining whether to entrust a developer with 10s of millions of their depositors' dollars. Considerations like: Does this developer have a successful track record in this market? If this developer hasn't been able to pay their taxes for years on end, will they be able pay a loan's interest on time?STLAPTS wrote: ↑Jan 18, 2021From what I've heard, as a result of the anticipated absorption rate after project completion, Alterra has had a difficult time securing financing. I wouldn't hold my breath for a 2022 start date.
We haven't seen anything break ground yet, but developer interest in DT residential seems to be picking back up with the 1801 Washington and 1014 Spruce proposals. I wouldn't be surprised to see one (especially 1014 Spruce) or both of those get financing. Saying Alterra's difficulties are simply due to "anticipated absorption rate" just seem like a bit of an oversimplification.
1014 Spruce is being developed by the OPUS Group. OPUS is a national developer still owned by the same Minnesota family that founded it 70 plus years ago. They are so well funded the family created a billion dollar plus endowment for the company to ensure its continued operations and legacy. Financing considerations I imagine are slightly different for OPUS.
Talk with any banker financing downtown and downtown west projects and absorption rate is at the top of the list of concerns.
Exactly. Absorption rate could be one of many factors in Alterra not getting funding, and doesn't mean it would prevent a more successful, established and well funded developer, with a smaller project with fewer moving parts (e.g. Opus/1014 Spruce) from getting funding.STLAPTS wrote: ↑Jan 18, 2021A myriad of factors go into a lender's decision to finance any project especially one of this size and scope. All of those factors play into their decision. Absorption rate being the driving factor but obviously not the only with this specific project.wabash wrote: ↑Jan 18, 2021That seem like a bit of a cop out. The absorption rate Downtown could certainly be a concern (The Arcade and OCW seemed to do pretty well, but have better locations and unique characteristics from this assumedly marker-rate project). But lenders are going to look at a host of considerations when determining whether to entrust a developer with 10s of millions of their depositors' dollars. Considerations like: Does this developer have a successful track record in this market? If this developer hasn't been able to pay their taxes for years on end, will they be able pay a loan's interest on time?STLAPTS wrote: ↑Jan 18, 2021From what I've heard, as a result of the anticipated absorption rate after project completion, Alterra has had a difficult time securing financing. I wouldn't hold my breath for a 2022 start date.
We haven't seen anything break ground yet, but developer interest in DT residential seems to be picking back up with the 1801 Washington and 1014 Spruce proposals. I wouldn't be surprised to see one (especially 1014 Spruce) or both of those get financing. Saying Alterra's difficulties are simply due to "anticipated absorption rate" just seem like a bit of an oversimplification.
1014 Spruce is being developed by the OPUS Group. OPUS is a national developer still owned by the same Minnesota family that founded it 70 plus years ago. They are so well funded the family created a billion dollar plus endowment for the company to ensure its continued operations and legacy. Financing considerations I imagine are slightly different for OPUS.
Talk with any banker financing downtown and downtown west projects and absorption rate is at the top of the list of concerns.
Please stop twisting my words / posts.wabash wrote: ↑Jan 18, 2021Exactly. Absorption rate could be one of many factors in Alterra not getting funding, and doesn't mean it would prevent a more successful, established and well funded developer, with a smaller project with fewer moving parts (e.g. Opus/1014 Spruce) from getting fundingSTLAPTS wrote: ↑Jan 18, 2021A myriad of factors go into a lender's decision to finance any project especially one of this size and scope. All of those factors play into their decision. Absorption rate being the driving factor but obviously not the only with this specific project.wabash wrote: ↑Jan 18, 2021That seem like a bit of a cop out. The absorption rate Downtown could certainly be a concern (The Arcade and OCW seemed to do pretty well, but have better locations and unique characteristics from this assumedly marker-rate project). But lenders are going to look at a host of considerations when determining whether to entrust a developer with 10s of millions of their depositors' dollars. Considerations like: Does this developer have a successful track record in this market? If this developer hasn't been able to pay their taxes for years on end, will they be able pay a loan's interest on time?
We haven't seen anything break ground yet, but developer interest in DT residential seems to be picking back up with the 1801 Washington and 1014 Spruce proposals. I wouldn't be surprised to see one (especially 1014 Spruce) or both of those get financing. Saying Alterra's difficulties are simply due to "anticipated absorption rate" just seem like a bit of an oversimplification.
1014 Spruce is being developed by the OPUS Group. OPUS is a national developer still owned by the same Minnesota family that founded it 70 plus years ago. They are so well funded the family created a billion dollar plus endowment for the company to ensure its continued operations and legacy. Financing considerations I imagine are slightly different for OPUS.
Talk with any banker financing downtown and downtown west projects and absorption rate is at the top of the list of concerns.
My two cents, any developer who was depending on foreign visa dollars (foreigners who were willing to invest to get in front of the visa line) was probably already on shaky ground with traditional capital markets. Especially considering this is all pre covid and a multi leasing market that has been underserve & pretty decent for the region as a whole.
Not twisting anything STLAPTS. I totally agree with you. A myriad of factors go into a lenders decision to finance any project, especially one the size and scope of the Jefferson Arms.STLAPTS wrote: ↑Jan 18, 2021Please stop twisting my words / posts.wabash wrote: ↑Jan 18, 2021Exactly. Absorption rate could be one of many factors in Alterra not getting funding, and doesn't mean it would prevent a more successful, established and well funded developer, with a smaller project with fewer moving parts (e.g. Opus/1014 Spruce) from getting fundingSTLAPTS wrote: ↑Jan 18, 2021A myriad of factors go into a lender's decision to finance any project especially one of this size and scope. All of those factors play into their decision. Absorption rate being the driving factor but obviously not the only with this specific project.
1014 Spruce is being developed by the OPUS Group. OPUS is a national developer still owned by the same Minnesota family that founded it 70 plus years ago. They are so well funded the family created a billion dollar plus endowment for the company to ensure its continued operations and legacy. Financing considerations I imagine are slightly different for OPUS.
Talk with any banker financing downtown and downtown west projects and absorption rate is at the top of the list of concerns.
dredger, I agree. I assume there's a different level of due diligence by a foreign investor looking to obtain a visa than a local bank looking to get paid back - and that developers going after EB-5 money were kind of depending on that difference.
I hope things come together for the Jefferson Arms, but it's certainly gotten off to a bumpy start.
