I really don't see how the current pace of apartment construction can continue in such a slow-growth area. Surely we're reaching saturation?
More Wustl Neuroscience. There's a big one, $151M, that's an addendum. Not sure how that gets counted. And the parking garage.
There's 2200 Lasalle
There's a $20M for 1710 MLK
$19M at 7110 N Broadway, warehouse?
Pres Sq
More Ameren
Rehab at Wintergarden and Park Place Apts
There's 2200 Lasalle
There's a $20M for 1710 MLK
$19M at 7110 N Broadway, warehouse?
Pres Sq
More Ameren
Rehab at Wintergarden and Park Place Apts
Or, alternatively, surely we're reaching a virtuous cycle in the Central Corridor of more residents, more retail, more jobs, and more overall density directly supported by transit infrastructure, that has little reason to abate other than the current nationwide headwinds of construction costs and supply chain issues.framer wrote: ↑May 10, 2021I really don't see how the current pace of apartment construction can continue in such a slow-growth area. Surely we're reaching saturation?
There's also the national trend of lower homeownership rates, it seems unlikely to me that we're ever going to see a return to the 2007 era peak.
There could be a saturation point for new apartments soon but with surging home prices + declining homeownership rates, there might be enough demand even in a slow growing region.
There could be a saturation point for new apartments soon but with surging home prices + declining homeownership rates, there might be enough demand even in a slow growing region.
I think the mixed used, apartment rental is still more driven by capital investing based on return of market over time. In that case, you have to assume that hopefully a few more developments breakground like Foundry phase II and Armory, Opus Spruce St downtown, so on. I think 2CW like One Cardinal Way isn't going after the traditional rental market so believe it is on safe ground. But as noted above, mixed apartment construction new starts are trending down on national average so only matter of time before that trend happens in St. Louis.
The interesting question in my mind, will investors/capital market build houses for their own holdings? Right now the seem to have embrace buying existing stock creating some stresses for first time home buyers and others which for all intents and purposes keep home ownership down. Overall, I think it is not a good trend and rather see feds reduce buying bonds at a rate of $120 billion a month and govt offer more 30 yr fixed mortgage support with maybe a 10-20% down grant program for first time buyers.
The interesting question in my mind, will investors/capital market build houses for their own holdings? Right now the seem to have embrace buying existing stock creating some stresses for first time home buyers and others which for all intents and purposes keep home ownership down. Overall, I think it is not a good trend and rather see feds reduce buying bonds at a rate of $120 billion a month and govt offer more 30 yr fixed mortgage support with maybe a 10-20% down grant program for first time buyers.
Ah, I thought those had all been issued already. $32 million building permit for the garage yet to be issued.quincunx wrote: ↑May 10, 2021More Wustl Neuroscience. There's a big one, $151M, that's an addendum. Not sure how that gets counted. And the parking garage.
And I see what you mean on the addendum. The original permit was $78 million for Interior Alterations, which was issued. The addendum is almost double that, for $151 million, and has yet to be issued. If that's correct, I'd assume the extra $73 million will just be added to the total.
I did notice that many of the upper floors on the original CDs were shown as raw space. I'm not sure how much of the Neuroscience building is leased space, but perhaps those floors were reserved for later expansion or were for lease, and they since found a tenant and/or decided to proceed with the expansion...
- 10K
This is just baffling to me.framer wrote: ↑May 10, 2021I really don't see how the current pace of apartment construction can continue in such a slow-growth area. Surely we're reaching saturation?
- 2,419
St. Louis will never defeat stagnation if they stop building.
Sometimes, you have to build the city that your own residents won't trash while speaking with vacationing out-of-towners.
Sometimes, you have to build the city that your own residents won't trash while speaking with vacationing out-of-towners.
- 2,631
A good portion of the new apartment construction can probably be attributed directly to the wave of single family conversions we have been seeing in south city. Renters have to go somewhere and now the central corridor is a desirable place to rent.
Plus STL is slow growth, but but rapidly changing in demographics. Poor blacks are leaving the city in droves while educated whites moving back into the city are unlikely to choose living north of Delmar. Hence NSTL hallows out while real estate booms south of Delmar. If we can get existing residents to stay in NSTL we might just get this city back on track.
Plus STL is slow growth, but but rapidly changing in demographics. Poor blacks are leaving the city in droves while educated whites moving back into the city are unlikely to choose living north of Delmar. Hence NSTL hallows out while real estate booms south of Delmar. If we can get existing residents to stay in NSTL we might just get this city back on track.
- 2,056
I think if you just isolate "educated-whites" moving into the city at a much high rate than previous decades, it should illuminate why we're seeing an apartment construction boom.
- 2,419
There are some things we can point to in North City with a hint of optimism. I'm not from St. Louis, but I think the jist of things is that this part of town has been in freefall since the 1950s or '60s.
Couple some of those wins we're seeing in North City with new, equity-minded leadership, and I think you might just have a North City community that feels it finally has a spot at the table and maybe less of a reason to walk out the door.
I truly believe St. Louis has a chance to turn things around.
Couple some of those wins we're seeing in North City with new, equity-minded leadership, and I think you might just have a North City community that feels it finally has a spot at the table and maybe less of a reason to walk out the door.
I truly believe St. Louis has a chance to turn things around.
^ You could add that North St Louis and St. Lousis for that matter being land rich is well suited for types of programs and grants that might embrace home ownership & equity for for those who might otherwise be renters. It might have to happen on fringe of Central Corridor and North St Louis but talk about an opportunity.
Put $50 million aside of the Covid Aid for 10% down payment grants w lot thrown in on home ownership would get you 2,000 new home owners in North St. Louis sat assuming average house build @ $250k. Doesn't seem like a lot but that would take a bite out of lots owned by land clearance authority, provide some stability if you concentrate to specific areas and add another $500 million in home construction (2000 homes at $250,000)
I just think of California big budget surplus and a big rent relief package coming. But at end of day rent relief doesn't change any equations and or helps minority communities build wealth. Its just another transfer of my tax dollars into landlords via renters. I think St Louis the has a chance to try something better if Mayor Jones is willing to put more money to first time home buyers simply because it has the land and the infrastructure in place to do it at minimal cost such as repaving streets and repairing sidewalks..
Put $50 million aside of the Covid Aid for 10% down payment grants w lot thrown in on home ownership would get you 2,000 new home owners in North St. Louis sat assuming average house build @ $250k. Doesn't seem like a lot but that would take a bite out of lots owned by land clearance authority, provide some stability if you concentrate to specific areas and add another $500 million in home construction (2000 homes at $250,000)
I just think of California big budget surplus and a big rent relief package coming. But at end of day rent relief doesn't change any equations and or helps minority communities build wealth. Its just another transfer of my tax dollars into landlords via renters. I think St Louis the has a chance to try something better if Mayor Jones is willing to put more money to first time home buyers simply because it has the land and the infrastructure in place to do it at minimal cost such as repaving streets and repairing sidewalks..
- 2,056
I'd agree with that ^ and with the demand for home buying right now, finding a way to lean into getting people into homes would be a big win. Even bigger if you can get people into homes that people aren't buying right now - so say 10-15K reimbursement for home improvement spending within the first 3 months could go a long way to get people into homes that were possibly scaring people away from buying? (roof issues, structural repairs, sewer line, etc)
- 2,419
I think investing in home ownership for minority communities would be such a wise investment in St. Louis.
Ownership is equity. It's a seat at the table. It's representation.
And I think home ownership will come with a whole bunch of other positives. Homeowners are far more likely to be invested in their neighborhood, for obvious reasons.
Ownership is equity. It's a seat at the table. It's representation.
And I think home ownership will come with a whole bunch of other positives. Homeowners are far more likely to be invested in their neighborhood, for obvious reasons.
- 6,119
^Isn't that basically what that GoFundMe was about the other day? Getting equity into the hands of the historically disenfranchised? Maybe if we build it they will come (back.) There's good folks out there with good ideas. I truly believe we're finally turning a corner.
- 2,419
I don't know if we're rounding the corner quite yet or not, but it feels like the corner is pretty darn close and that maybe we're finally reaching it.
St. Louis will have to leave its comfort zone, which has been too much to ask of it for a long time, in order to make this happen.
St. Louis will have to leave its comfort zone, which has been too much to ask of it for a long time, in order to make this happen.
Can certainly understand that every little bit helps but tough to see how a GoFundMe campaign can help but a few when the city will have a $500 million federal infusion for which even 5% setaside equates to $25 million of assistance of getting city owned lots/building into hands of new home ownerssymphonicpoet wrote: ↑May 12, 2021^Isn't that basically what that GoFundMe was about the other day? Getting equity into the hands of the historically disenfranchised? Maybe if we build it they will come (back.) There's good folks out there with good ideas. I truly believe we're finally turning a corner.
Making my one cent pitch across threads that getting the federal funds only to give out as one time payments as stimulus checks or rent relieve or however you want to frame it is not the route that the Mayor Jones needs to go. They need to leverage a significant chunk of the funds for capital investment as well as other Federal Grants and sources.
- 6,119
^I will absolutely agree with you that charity is not the answer. Government is. And your point about the 5% setaside pretty well illustrates that. No amount of our collective largess will even potentially have the impact that good government can have if we but allow it. Yes, we need to invest the stimulus money wisely.
How about some great news-
City building permits - new and rehab are kicking ass - Every category, multi-fam and single, is at an 3 year high (to date)
If we finish the second half strong we have the best year for permits in decades - The city has 745 new multi-fam permits alone!
https://www.stlhba.com/images/_HBASTL/P ... Report.pdf
City building permits - new and rehab are kicking ass - Every category, multi-fam and single, is at an 3 year high (to date)
If we finish the second half strong we have the best year for permits in decades - The city has 745 new multi-fam permits alone!
https://www.stlhba.com/images/_HBASTL/P ... Report.pdf
- 6,119
^Dear lord but is that an enormous increase! In multi-family we've already nearly tied last year. In early June. And we're ahead of pace in single family as well and outpacing every other county in the area save St. Charles. (And we're utterly annihilating everyone on multi-family so . . . overall it looks like the biggest growth is very much inside city limits. Wow!)
^Great news!
Any idea how many of those are tax-incented in some way? Anyone know how I could figure that out myself?
Any idea how many of those are tax-incented in some way? Anyone know how I could figure that out myself?
- 2,430
^ not easily. A good rule of thumb though is most multi-family is receiving some degree of subsidy.
Single-family is more mixed... I'd say most of the stuff going up in the larger projects is still getting subsidy (e.g. "La Collina" in The Hill, the singles going up on the WashU/Forest West properties in FPSE, and the SLU/SSM led develipment in The Gate District) but most of the small projects, both infill and rehab, no longer are. At least south of Delmar, even for a lot of these long vacant, former LRA properties in difficult shape. Some exceptions though.
Single-family is more mixed... I'd say most of the stuff going up in the larger projects is still getting subsidy (e.g. "La Collina" in The Hill, the singles going up on the WashU/Forest West properties in FPSE, and the SLU/SSM led develipment in The Gate District) but most of the small projects, both infill and rehab, no longer are. At least south of Delmar, even for a lot of these long vacant, former LRA properties in difficult shape. Some exceptions though.
^Interesting, thanks. Nice to hear the market has turned enough to get some non-subsidized development. Speaking of which, wasn't there some TIF reform advocacy group that was tracking these developments...Team TIF. Looks like their website is no longer hosted so guessing they've dissolved.
We had Dale Ruthsatz from SLDC speak at a neighborhood association meeting a few years ago. He indicated that they (or maybe it was some other agency) would be doing a program evaluation of the last 30+ years of tax-subsidized development to determine whether/to what degree the programs have delivered on their promises, i.e. improved the long-run tax base over/above the short/medium term subsidies. I'm thinking such report was never produced, or at least if it was I completely missed it. The efficacy of subsidizing sports stadiums is well documented, but is there a similar literature covering subsidized residential development?
We had Dale Ruthsatz from SLDC speak at a neighborhood association meeting a few years ago. He indicated that they (or maybe it was some other agency) would be doing a program evaluation of the last 30+ years of tax-subsidized development to determine whether/to what degree the programs have delivered on their promises, i.e. improved the long-run tax base over/above the short/medium term subsidies. I'm thinking such report was never produced, or at least if it was I completely missed it. The efficacy of subsidizing sports stadiums is well documented, but is there a similar literature covering subsidized residential development?
Convenient that groups like Team TIF dissolved in parallel with the leadership change in the city. I'm sure it is merely a coincidence and not a masked, politically driven, smear effort.SB in BH wrote: ↑Jun 03, 2021^Interesting, thanks. Nice to hear the market has turned enough to get some non-subsidized development. Speaking of which, wasn't there some TIF reform advocacy group that was tracking these developments...Team TIF. Looks like their website is no longer hosted so guessing they've dissolved.
We had Dale Ruthsatz from SLDC speak at a neighborhood association meeting a few years ago. He indicated that they (or maybe it was some other agency) would be doing a program evaluation of the last 30+ years of tax-subsidized development to determine whether/to what degree the programs have delivered on their promises, i.e. improved the long-run tax base over/above the short/medium term subsidies. I'm thinking such report was never produced, or at least if it was I completely missed it. The efficacy of subsidizing sports stadiums is well documented, but is there a similar literature covering subsidized residential development?