It may be a surprise to some but there was more construction in the City in the 2000-2009 time frame than 2010-2019.

2000-09: $6,206,699,721
2010-19: $6,449,736,938

While 10-19 number is obviously bigger but when you factor inflation $6.2b from 2000-09 is worth $7.4b in 2019

And a ward by ward breakdown- this decades development growth can mostly be accounted for in just 3 wards, in 17, 19 and 28.

Interesting data. Thanks for compiling/sharing. 

Interesting how the top two overall decliners (Wards 6 & 7) and the top three overall gainers (17, 19, 28) are all (primarily) in the Central Corridor. The 28th Ward should see a bit of a reversion now that the big Wash U East Campus investments are wrapping up. 

Nice to see the North Riverfront (Ward 2) posting the fourth highest gain in the City. Maybe P&G had something to do with that? 

Surprised to see a 19% decline in Ward 15 (mostly Tower Grove South). Even with the redevelopment of the Southside National Bank building last decade I would have expected it to show a gain. 

The story is obviously still the Central Corridor on the rise (+$500,000,000) and the Northside (-$224,000,000) and Southside (-$43,000,000) seeing declines. Still somehow seems like a pretty solid decade considering it was up against a historic housing bubble fueled by the easiest credit since the roaring 20's and a couple of outsized ground-up projects in Busch Stadium and Lumiere Casino that accounted for a combined $750,000,000 in the 7th Ward alone. 

It's worth noting that these aren't exact comparisons, as the wards were redrawn (albeit somewhat marginally, with no wholesale relocations of wards) after the 2010 census. 

2018 set a record with $1.2b but I think 2020
will break it by March of 2020 with NGA and mls totaling about $1.1b alone.

Wabash, I think the 15th had a considerable amount of commercial developments in the 2000's.... Gravois Plaza and Southtown come to mind. Would be interesting to see breakdown in commercial and residential for these wards.

Trololzilla wrote: ↑

Dec 20, 2019

Any indication as to how the Recession affected the current decade?

I’d say that the 2 recessions in the 2000s had bigger effect on that decade than the recovery post 2008 recession on the 2010s.   Development has slowed in the City the last decade but what’s happened is social media, forums like this that’s made people more aware of development than the 2000s so it seems like it’s been happening more

Just wanted to point out there is an error in the calculation in wards where value fell... 

As an example, for Ward 5, it is not possible for permit values to fall > 100%.  The actual drop there is 61%.

Likewise for Ward 6, the correct change is -27%, not -37%.

I think it’s just that the percentages listed are the (value change/‘10-‘19 total) for all of them. Instead of ‘00-‘09 which would give you the percentage change.

Trololzilla wrote: ↑

Dec 20, 2019

Any indication as to how the Recession affected the current decade?

Great Recession hammered building until 2014.... 2010 was a bit of an exception iirc with help of union funds supporting some big projects like the Union Pacific and Dillard's buildings. Since 2014 things seem more or less in line with the pre-recession boom of the 00's with 2020 poised to be a record-breaker if everything falls into place.

Not calling into the doubt the validity of the numbers, but it's always good to remember that all GCs and developers underreport true cost on the permit value (me included). The lower the number you can get away with, the more you can keep in your general requirements line for yourself. It was kind of comical how bad some where when I was doing a review of internal tax-abatement application data that had true construction numbers compared to the issued building permits date (knowing that MEP permits are issued separately and have their own value) for a report for a report to HUDZ on affordable housing production over the last 30 years (recorded on YouTube somewhere for posterity). Permit value is not an actual construction value, but it is a good indicator of what is going on at a high level.

MattnSTL wrote: ↑

Dec 21, 2019

Not calling into the doubt the validity of the numbers, but it's always good to remember that all GCs and developers underreport true cost on the permit value (me included). The lower the number you can get away with, the more you can keep in your general requirements line for yourself. It was kind of comical how bad some where when I was doing a review of internal tax-abatement application data that had true construction numbers compared to the issued building permits date (knowing that MEP permits are issued separately and have their own value) for a report for a report to HUDZ on affordable housing production over the last 30 years (recorded on YouTube somewhere for posterity). Permit value is not an actual construction value, but it is a good indicator of what is going on at a high level.

This is true but I don’t think it’s a thing that didn’t exist in the 2000s either.