Can you say to what level it could end up being. Something minor? Or something bigger that could lead to some kind of development in town?
Generalities are fine.
Generalities are fine.
teachriss752 wrote: ↑Nov 30, 2019He was here for official business and not for a bank branch opening. I know why he was here and who he spoke with but can't say publicly.
- 474
Gotta be JPM as sponsor for MLS team, right? IMO, all news should be MLS related at this point. 
- 1,864
Tip of the hat to @Ebo for this, but a possible explanation would be Jamie Dimon's urban reinvestment program.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jamie-dimo ... 019-11-10/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jamie-dimo ... 019-11-10/
As much as I would love to see JP Morgan/Chase on 909 Chestnut, I do not see it happening; as the rumor was, it was previously a company already in the county that had expressed interest. I do not see JPM moving in that quickly on the abandoned building immediately after the sale feel through.
My hope would be whichever company had expressed interest in the building finds another way to move forward or at least continues to look at real estate in the city rather than another boring office complex in the county.
My hope would be whichever company had expressed interest in the building finds another way to move forward or at least continues to look at real estate in the city rather than another boring office complex in the county.
^ I agree in that I don't expect to see JPM in St. Louis. But KMOX reported that economic development officials in St. Louis are pitching JPM on this building, so there is a little truth to that. Doesn't make it anymore likely to happen but there has at least been some press coverage on it. More so than the rumor about a county company coming to 909 which I think was debunked a few pages back. I don't think there was ever any real truth to that.
And that is far more likely to be about acquisition or financing for investment purposes than it is about leasing or buying office space for themselves.sc4mayor wrote: ↑Dec 03, 2019^ I agree in that I don't expect to see JPM in St. Louis. But KMOX reported that economic development officials in St. Louis are pitching JPM on this building, so there is a little truth to that. Doesn't make it anymore likely to happen but there has at least been some press coverage on it. More so than the rumor about a county company coming to 909 which I think was debunked a few pages back. I don't think there was ever any real truth to that.
^ Not at all how KMOX laid it out.
https://kmox.radio.com/articles/news/jp ... ossibility
People here were just speculating based on the KMOX report. No one here is saying this is happening.Johnson (of STLEDA) says: "One of the things they're looking for, and it's increasingly hard to find in major metros, is the affordability that St. Louis offers. What it means to the company is that they can employ people who actually can afford to own their own home. They can employ people who don't have to commute an hour to 90 minutes each way."
St. Louis also has a million square feet of office space immediately available in the skyscraper at 909 Chestnut, plus the density and transit access that larger cities boast but without the congestion.
https://kmox.radio.com/articles/news/jp ... ossibility
The key words there being, "how KMOX laid it out".sc4mayor wrote: ↑Dec 03, 2019^ Not at all how KMOX laid it out.People here were just speculating based on the KMOX report. No one here is saying this is happening.Johnson (of STLEDA) says: "One of the things they're looking for, and it's increasingly hard to find in major metros, is the affordability that St. Louis offers. What it means to the company is that they can employ people who actually can afford to own their own home. They can employ people who don't have to commute an hour to 90 minutes each way."
St. Louis also has a million square feet of office space immediately available in the skyscraper at 909 Chestnut, plus the density and transit access that larger cities boast but without the congestion.
https://kmox.radio.com/articles/news/jp ... ossibility
- 3,757
I may be uneducated on the latest, but could somebody explain why if Clayco wanted to purchase the building and rehab it, why that deal fell through?
Did something fall through with the actual deal or is it speculated that the seller has a better option?
Did something fall through with the actual deal or is it speculated that the seller has a better option?
I’m just as clueless, but isn’t it possible the deal isn’t dead, just the structure and specific stakeholder of the deal. I found Clayco’s commentary to be more positive than what I’d expect from a dead deal. Specifically the language about delivering something beneficial to St. Louis.
I don’t have a lot of faith in a rumor that JP Morgan would relocate anything to STL, but they do own a their own buildings in other cities. Not to mention 909 is in an opportunity zone.
I don’t have a lot of faith in a rumor that JP Morgan would relocate anything to STL, but they do own a their own buildings in other cities. Not to mention 909 is in an opportunity zone.
I suspect there are multiple lenders / bondholders in line for compensation. Just because one of them (US Bank) foreclosed on the building, does not mean that all of the others have been satisfied and are fine with it being auctioned off to the highest bidder. It would be really difficult for Clayco / CRG to get financing for the project if that mess hasn't been untangled and ownership of the building might be in legal limbo for the foreseeable future.DogtownBnR wrote: ↑Dec 04, 2019I may be uneducated on the latest, but could somebody explain why if Clayco wanted to purchase the building and rehab it, why that deal fell through?
Did something fall through with the actual deal or is it speculated that the seller has a better option?
- 339
I wonder if it would be possible to demo the roof structure of this building and construct a multi-colored crown much like that on the Wilshire Grand Tower in LA (or the 4 Seasons). If this edition made the building become the tallest in Missouri, it could possibly have better luck attracting a tenant.
- 1,864
While I'd absolutely love to see something like this happen if/when renovations take place in the future, I don't think building height is an issue with attracting a tenant.
If anything making it taller would make it even harder to find a tenant. As is it's just too much building for any St. Louis tenant.chaifetz10 wrote: ↑Feb 10, 2020While I'd absolutely love to see something like this happen if/when renovations take place in the future, I don't think building height is an issue with attracting a tenant.
Instead of just demoning the roof structure as Elek proposed, I'd support the top 15-20 stories getting taken off to make it more marketable. This would bring it more in line with Centene Plaza, I think it's steel construction, which I believe would make selective demolition more feasible than concrete. Cutting it in half would bring it more in line with the square footage of Centene Plaza and Centene Tower.
HUH?? That makes absolutely no sense to me.wabash wrote: ↑Feb 10, 2020If anything making it taller would make it even harder to find a tenant. As is it's just too much building for any St. Louis tenant.chaifetz10 wrote: ↑Feb 10, 2020While I'd absolutely love to see something like this happen if/when renovations take place in the future, I don't think building height is an issue with attracting a tenant.
Instead of just demoning the roof structure as Elek proposed, I'd support the top 15-20 stories getting taken off to make it more marketable. This would bring it more in line with Centene Plaza, I think it's steel construction, which I believe would make selective demolition more feasible than concrete. Cutting it in half would bring it more in line with the square footage of Centene Plaza and Centene Tower.
- 1,864
Yeah, the costs associated with giving this building a haircut could just be used to update the interior systems to better fit multiple tenants. There is no creative "fix" required for this building - it just needs a corporation (or a few) looking for space.
- 595
This building needs a good modern update however that will be and when remains to be seen. Making it taller or short won’t change anything it’s about who wants the building for their future HQ and growth.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"The U.S. Department of Agriculture is in the market for 175,000 square feet of space in St. Louis, and its search has attracted the attention of at least one notable property: the vacant former AT&T tower in downtown St. Louis."
Hoping this one has legs.
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... awing.html
Hoping this one has legs.
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... awing.html
^ is this the RFP for office space released by GSA lye last year or in addition to?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- 226
Each floor is about 32,000 sf, so they would only take up about 6 floors of a 44-story tower. Would this size and kind of tenant help with a real and true redevelopment; who would own it? I would think it would need more than just this single tenant to get the ball rollin', though I bet they could move in and renovate/reconfigure floors as needed ?
I though that GSA leases the offices for the other branches of government. I believe that GSA was in-charge of USDA’s search in KC. Leasing, negotiations, etc went through GSA.Timmy wrote:^^I believe in addition to. GSA is looking for around 145k.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
^ Correct. But in addition to the USDA the GSA also maintains employees at Goodfellow. As does the VA and the SSA. They are all looking for new office space since Goodfellow is closing. Not sure if they’ll split them up or keep them all together though.
Why landing USDA may not be enough for troubled downtown tower
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... s_headline
Some highlights:
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... s_headline
Some highlights:
In terms of USDA, I think RX is a perfect fit.Wooing a major U.S. Department of Agriculture office to the former AT&T tower in downtown St. Louis will do little to turn around one of the region's largest vacant buildings, according to those in the commercial real estate community.
While many real estate experts believe that would offer some benefit, others have questioned what revenue, if any, a tenant of that size would bring and whether it would even be financially feasible to "re-open" the building. The lease would represent about 12.5% of the building's 1.4 million square feet, meaning it would have a more than 80% vacancy rate.
USDA's timeline of when it wants to occupy that space is likely "too aggressive of a timeline to work for the AT&T building," Steinbach added. Another unknown for the building is the amount of money ownership would need to invest in the building to get it ready for occupancy, let alone remain competitive. The building has been vacant since the summer of 2017, when employees of the previous tenant, AT&T, moved to nearby 1010 Pine St.
"The building is in limbo," said John Warren, director at Cushman & Wakefield. "If you put money into the building, like the lobby, elevators and amenities, the market may respond." Warren has seen how the market responds when ownership invests millions of dollars. He saw a noticeable difference in activity for his listing at 200 N. Broadway in downtown St. Louis when Balfour Pacific invested around $1.4 million to add a private "amenities floor" that includes a fitness center, locker rooms, patio terrace and bar, and a WiFi conference area. Nitrous Effect, a collective of several different creative marketing agencies, signed a lease to occupy two floors there.
JLL's Steinbach, too, has seen a major difference among his listings. One Metropolitan Square, also in downtown, was near default when owner The 601W Cos. was able to refinance and spend millions of dollars in tenant improvements, from a ground-floor food hall to an amenities floor. "With One Met Square, the ownership was completely was on board," Steinbach said. It's what helped JLL, whose St. Louis office is also based there, secure WeWork and boost the building's occupancy 12% since the owner's efforts began.
"It will happen with AT&T. It's just a matter of time," said Steinbach.