bakos wrote: ↑

Oct 30, 2018

Anybody have much background on this property?

https://www.coldwellbankerhomes.com/mo/ ... _18142119/

Used to live down the street from it and looking at the tax records it appears to still be owned by the Catholic Church but not finding out much else. Thoughts on redevelopment into an apartment complex with maybe some retail/restaurant space incorporated?

urban_dilettante wrote: ↑

Oct 31, 2018

^ so basically ESTL isn't cooperating and Spivey gets demolished?

Also this conversation should be in the South St. Louis section and not the Downtown section of the forum.

quincunx wrote: ↑

Oct 30, 2018

HTCs go through the state. It seems they're doing their best to award as few as possible in the end, if the experience one property I'm familiar with is typical.
https://ded.mo.gov/programs/business/hi ... eservation

Look into state neighborhood preservation tax credits.
https://ded.mo.gov/programs/community/n ... vation-act

I doubt TIF makes sense here. A property tax abatement is more suited I think. Talk to the alderman

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Oct 30, 2018

bakos wrote: ↑

Oct 30, 2018

Anybody have much background on this property?

https://www.coldwellbankerhomes.com/mo/ ... _18142119/

Used to live down the street from it and looking at the tax records it appears to still be owned by the Catholic Church but not finding out much else. Thoughts on redevelopment into an apartment complex with maybe some retail/restaurant space incorporated?

This is a building me and Scottie have looked at to renovate into the uses you brought up recently. We have taken a break on the Spivey in East STL and are looking at something in the City. This building came up, and we have looked at it in great detail even going as far as to brainstorm, but we haven't attmepted to acquire it yet. So if you want to acquire it, go ahead! I think it would do well (leasing wise) with 10 or 12 apartments here and some nice sized retail space. Soulard is hot right now, so a development like this would fill up quickly.

kinger wrote: ↑

Oct 31, 2018

We were close to going under contract on this several years ago when we found out it is deed restricted. The adjacent church sold it to the current owner, and when they did they restricted it so that no residential can be built here.

SO-- if you have a large office user looking in Soulard, this is your deal!

bakos wrote: ↑

Oct 31, 2018

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Oct 30, 2018

bakos wrote: ↑

Oct 30, 2018

Anybody have much background on this property?

https://www.coldwellbankerhomes.com/mo/ ... _18142119/

Used to live down the street from it and looking at the tax records it appears to still be owned by the Catholic Church but not finding out much else. Thoughts on redevelopment into an apartment complex with maybe some retail/restaurant space incorporated?

This is a building me and Scottie have looked at to renovate into the uses you brought up recently. We have taken a break on the Spivey in East STL and are looking at something in the City. This building came up, and we have looked at it in great detail even going as far as to brainstorm, but we haven't attmepted to acquire it yet. So if you want to acquire it, go ahead! I think it would do well (leasing wise) with 10 or 12 apartments here and some nice sized retail space. Soulard is hot right now, so a development like this would fill up quickly.

What type of conclusion did you come to that pushed you away from pursuing it? Just trying to pick your brain. I was thinking 4 levels with 4 2 bedroom apartments (or segmenting some of it into 1 bedrooms) and building out something on the rooftop or reserving some of the lowest level for retail.

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Oct 31, 2018

bakos wrote: ↑

Oct 31, 2018

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Oct 30, 2018

This is a building me and Scottie have looked at to renovate into the uses you brought up recently. We have taken a break on the Spivey in East STL and are looking at something in the City. This building came up, and we have looked at it in great detail even going as far as to brainstorm, but we haven't attmepted to acquire it yet. So if you want to acquire it, go ahead! I think it would do well (leasing wise) with 10 or 12 apartments here and some nice sized retail space. Soulard is hot right now, so a development like this would fill up quickly.

What type of conclusion did you come to that pushed you away from pursuing it? Just trying to pick your brain. I was thinking 4 levels with 4 2 bedroom apartments (or segmenting some of it into 1 bedrooms) and building out something on the rooftop or reserving some of the lowest level for retail.

Basically what Kinger said. The deed restricted the plans even though we constantly tried to contact the Church about seeing if they could change their tone on the deed. They people we talked to, at the church, were slightly open to it but they want it done a certain way which ultimately is leading to us a bottleneck. So we may pursue it or we may not. It ultimately comes down to if the Realtor is willing to accept a change in the deed from the Church if it's not to late.

If office was pursued, another floor would have to be added to make it more attractive overall. I have no doubt that this will fill up as office space (currently 19,000SF) and it could be marketed towards creative firms and small law offices. The additional floor could either be a rooftop bar or more office space but the cost of adding a floor would be astronomical as the main structure would have to be tested to see if it could handle an expansion.

bakos wrote: ↑

Nov 01, 2018

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Oct 31, 2018

bakos wrote: ↑

Oct 31, 2018

What type of conclusion did you come to that pushed you away from pursuing it? Just trying to pick your brain. I was thinking 4 levels with 4 2 bedroom apartments (or segmenting some of it into 1 bedrooms) and building out something on the rooftop or reserving some of the lowest level for retail.

Basically what Kinger said. The deed restricted the plans even though we constantly tried to contact the Church about seeing if they could change their tone on the deed. They people we talked to, at the church, were slightly open to it but they want it done a certain way which ultimately is leading to us a bottleneck. So we may pursue it or we may not. It ultimately comes down to if the Realtor is willing to accept a change in the deed from the Church if it's not to late.

If office was pursued, another floor would have to be added to make it more attractive overall. I have no doubt that this will fill up as office space (currently 19,000SF) and it could be marketed towards creative firms and small law offices. The additional floor could either be a rooftop bar or more office space but the cost of adding a floor would be astronomical as the main structure would have to be tested to see if it could handle an expansion.

I think that getting the deed changed would be a contingency. I agree that a creative firm or law offices might do well but I have less confidence in the demand for that type of space in Soulard (at least relying fully on it). Agree that adding a full floor would be a very significant expense; but I thought a mixed indoor outdoor space with the actual structure taking up maybe only a third of the roof would be less expensive and more realistic.

kinger wrote: ↑

Nov 01, 2018

bakos wrote: ↑

Nov 01, 2018

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Oct 31, 2018

Basically what Kinger said. The deed restricted the plans even though we constantly tried to contact the Church about seeing if they could change their tone on the deed. They people we talked to, at the church, were slightly open to it but they want it done a certain way which ultimately is leading to us a bottleneck. So we may pursue it or we may not. It ultimately comes down to if the Realtor is willing to accept a change in the deed from the Church if it's not to late.

If office was pursued, another floor would have to be added to make it more attractive overall. I have no doubt that this will fill up as office space (currently 19,000SF) and it could be marketed towards creative firms and small law offices. The additional floor could either be a rooftop bar or more office space but the cost of adding a floor would be astronomical as the main structure would have to be tested to see if it could handle an expansion.

I think that getting the deed changed would be a contingency. I agree that a creative firm or law offices might do well but I have less confidence in the demand for that type of space in Soulard (at least relying fully on it). Agree that adding a full floor would be a very significant expense; but I thought a mixed indoor outdoor space with the actual structure taking up maybe only a third of the roof would be less expensive and more realistic.

We met with the church a couple times... and even brought in one of their parishioners as a partner in our project as an attempt to remove the restriction, but it fell on deaf ears. They just do NOT want residential there.

kinger wrote: We met with the church a couple times... and even brought in one of their parishioners as a partner in our project as an attempt to remove the restriction, but it fell on deaf ears. They just do NOT want residential there.

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Nov 01, 2018

kinger wrote: We met with the church a couple times... and even brought in one of their parishioners as a partner in our project as an attempt to remove the restriction, but it fell on deaf ears. They just do NOT want residential there.

How long ago was this? Because when we met with them, they requested tons of restrictions for residential that ultimately made it seem like they still don't want it there. Clearly that's the case on their end but they seemed more open to talk about with us last month. Who knows why they don't want residents next door, we never got that far to ask them.

bakos wrote: ↑

Nov 01, 2018

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Nov 01, 2018

kinger wrote: We met with the church a couple times... and even brought in one of their parishioners as a partner in our project as an attempt to remove the restriction, but it fell on deaf ears. They just do NOT want residential there.

How long ago was this? Because when we met with them, they requested tons of restrictions for residential that ultimately made it seem like they still don't want it there. Clearly that's the case on their end but they seemed more open to talk about with us last month. Who knows why they don't want residents next door, we never got that far to ask them.

Hmm interesting. What types of restrictions were they looking for?

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Nov 01, 2018

bakos wrote: ↑

Nov 01, 2018

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Nov 01, 2018

How long ago was this? Because when we met with them, they requested tons of restrictions for residential that ultimately made it seem like they still don't want it there. Clearly that's the case on their end but they seemed more open to talk about with us last month. Who knows why they don't want residents next door, we never got that far to ask them.

Hmm interesting. What types of restrictions were they looking for?

- No outside amenities.
- Not to interfere with their events and doings.
- No more than 4 apartments
- All windows must be bricked up on the facade facing the church
- No bright lights outside (security, parking)

When asked if office was ok, they said yes and discarded their restrictions above,