I agree with this statement 100%. A very handsome example of the period. And our community continues to tear them down.framer wrote: ↑May 20, 2022I'm really going to miss that el-shaped building. It's quite handsome, and a classic example of that period. More of our architectural heritage lost.
- 36
$1.1M Demo permit application submitted for Wells Fargo Bldgs A-B and Atrium Connect Bldg C
Demolition of the existing buildings should be complete this year…with an estimated 2Q ground breaking next year. Sounds like this was on the drawing board before the MLS news broke.
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... treet.html
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... treet.html
- 2,928
STL Biz Journal: Hotels planned at corner of Market and Jefferson downtown
Idea: When these hotels open, the Pear Tree Inn's full redevelopment will start.
Reasoning: For quite a long time, Wells Fargo Advisors had their new hires from their retail brokerage sites nationwide fly into STL for training sessions. These training sessions are for everyone on the Financial Advisor scale, from veteran IAs changing firm affiliations to green rookies fresh out of college. Some of us may have noticed the signs for Wells Fargo Advisors University Training Center, along Market west of Beaumont. Training programs at the STL HQ go back to the AG Edwards days.
Wells Fargo Advisors is the third-largest brokerage firm in the US. Many thousands of people come to STL for training at 1 North Jefferson every year.
Now, these Financial Advisors receiving training at the STL HQ have historically stayed at the Pear Tree Inn, east of the Jefferson campus. For the Pear Tree Inn, the WFAU Training Program is a solid revenue generator, keeping the lights on and the steady money coming in throughout the year. It's quite reasonable to think that, when these new hotels are completed, the FA Training Program will have their new hires stay here - right across Beaumont from the WFAU Training Center - instead of at the Pear Tree Inn, preferring their trainees staying on-campus at their brand new on-site hotels rather than at the old hotel that definitely needs modern updating. The two brands make perfect sense, too: rookie FAs will be booked at the Staybridge Suites, and the major corporate guests (and maybe monied rookie FAs) will stay at the Kimpton.
The likely loss of this business would break the Pear Tree Inn's current business model of guaranteed WFA revenues. It will compel the hotel to adapt if it is to survive. Meanwhile, considering that their site footprint is right next door to the new MLS stadium, I think they'll be all right in the long term.
Therefore, once the steady revenues from the WFAU Training Program are gone and no longer coming back, I anticipate the Pear Tree Inn will then progress on their major redevelopment, whether a hotel modernization or a full teardown & reconstruction to best capitalize on working with their new soccer stadium neighbors.
Idea: When these hotels open, the Pear Tree Inn's full redevelopment will start.
Reasoning: For quite a long time, Wells Fargo Advisors had their new hires from their retail brokerage sites nationwide fly into STL for training sessions. These training sessions are for everyone on the Financial Advisor scale, from veteran IAs changing firm affiliations to green rookies fresh out of college. Some of us may have noticed the signs for Wells Fargo Advisors University Training Center, along Market west of Beaumont. Training programs at the STL HQ go back to the AG Edwards days.
Wells Fargo Advisors is the third-largest brokerage firm in the US. Many thousands of people come to STL for training at 1 North Jefferson every year.
Now, these Financial Advisors receiving training at the STL HQ have historically stayed at the Pear Tree Inn, east of the Jefferson campus. For the Pear Tree Inn, the WFAU Training Program is a solid revenue generator, keeping the lights on and the steady money coming in throughout the year. It's quite reasonable to think that, when these new hotels are completed, the FA Training Program will have their new hires stay here - right across Beaumont from the WFAU Training Center - instead of at the Pear Tree Inn, preferring their trainees staying on-campus at their brand new on-site hotels rather than at the old hotel that definitely needs modern updating. The two brands make perfect sense, too: rookie FAs will be booked at the Staybridge Suites, and the major corporate guests (and maybe monied rookie FAs) will stay at the Kimpton.
The likely loss of this business would break the Pear Tree Inn's current business model of guaranteed WFA revenues. It will compel the hotel to adapt if it is to survive. Meanwhile, considering that their site footprint is right next door to the new MLS stadium, I think they'll be all right in the long term.
Therefore, once the steady revenues from the WFAU Training Program are gone and no longer coming back, I anticipate the Pear Tree Inn will then progress on their major redevelopment, whether a hotel modernization or a full teardown & reconstruction to best capitalize on working with their new soccer stadium neighbors.
Fencing is up and a Spirtas trailer is on site in front of the two corner buildings.
- 2,419
That has been the case for a while now.
I don't know if it's posturing or if something is actually about to happen.
I don't know if it's posturing or if something is actually about to happen.
- 2,928
RockChalkSTL wrote: ↑Sep 19, 2022That has been the case for a while now.
I don't know if it's posturing or if something is actually about to happen.
It's already been reported that demolition could start before the end of this year. One demolition permit was applied for in May, another in July. That end of year timeline seems likely now.
Not sure what Spirtas would be "posturing" for.
Not sure what Spirtas would be "posturing" for.
- 2,419
I say posturing because we've seen a demolition company leave equipment in front of those vacant Kingshighway properties and that ultimately meant nothing. It was 100% posturing.
The trailer you're mentioning has been there for a while.
The trailer you're mentioning has been there for a while.
- 991
Apples and oranges. They could also be doing some internal work to prep for demo that we can't see right now.
- 2,419
I understand that it's likely apples and oranges, but I've followed development long enough now to know that demo fencing and demo trailers don't always mean anything until you see actual demo. That's all I'm saying.
The trailers are not new to that site. They've been there for several months.
I hope work starts soon.
The trailers are not new to that site. They've been there for several months.
I hope work starts soon.
They also did a bunch of rooftop demo work over the last several months...easily noticeable on Google Earth imagery between 9/2021 and June/July of 2022. Certainly doesn't appear to be typical wear and tear.
BuildStLouis mentioned here back towards the end of May that crews were using cranes to remove equipment from the roof.
The city hasn't issued the most recently applied for permits so, clearly we aren't expecting to see exterior demolition starting tomorrow. Doesn't mean there aren't reasons they're planning for it...considering work that's already been completed...
BuildStLouis mentioned here back towards the end of May that crews were using cranes to remove equipment from the roof.
The city hasn't issued the most recently applied for permits so, clearly we aren't expecting to see exterior demolition starting tomorrow. Doesn't mean there aren't reasons they're planning for it...considering work that's already been completed...
- 2,419
I wasn't aware of the existing work, which definitely changes things.
I think some projects may end up biting the dust with these growing fears of a recession, but these two hotels seem like a no-brainer to go through no matter what due to proximity to Centene Stadium. It'd be great if we could see that garage start to come down by the end of the year.
I think some projects may end up biting the dust with these growing fears of a recession, but these two hotels seem like a no-brainer to go through no matter what due to proximity to Centene Stadium. It'd be great if we could see that garage start to come down by the end of the year.
Any chance there's asbestos in those old buildings that could mean a period of interior work that's not apparent and that's preventing them from going straight to wrecking ball?sc4mayor wrote: ↑Sep 19, 2022They also did a bunch of rooftop demo work over the last several months...easily noticeable on Google Earth imagery between 9/2021 and June/July of 2022. Certainly doesn't appear to be typical wear and tear.
BuildStLouis mentioned here back towards the end of May that crews were using cranes to remove equipment from the roof.
The city hasn't issued the most recently applied for permits so, clearly we aren't expecting to see exterior demolition starting tomorrow. Doesn't mean there aren't reasons they're planning for it...considering work that's already been completed...
- 320
Developer seeks OK to demo former Wells Fargo office in Midtown for 2 hotels
https://www.stltoday.com/business/local/developer-seeks-ok-to-demo-former-wells-fargo-office-in-midtown-for-2-hotels/article_31004fa5-559f-5956-a32a-9ca77993d313.html#tracking-source=home-top-story2601 Market Hotel Investors LLC — an entity affiliated with St. Louis-based Green Street Real Estate Ventures — is scheduled to go before the St. Louis Preservation Board on Dec. 5 to seek approval for the demolition at Market Street and Jefferson Avenue, according to a board agenda. Green Street bought the property from the St. Louis-based brokerage unit of Wells Fargo & Co. in 2020 for nearly $6 million.
The company said earlier this year that it is partnering with another developer, Maryland Heights-based hotelier Midas, to build a 170-room boutique Kimpton Hotels & Restaurants and a 129-room extended-stay Staybridge Suites at the site. A Green Street representative did not immediately return a request for comment on Friday.
Cultural Resources Office is recommending approval for the demotion for new hotels. New images.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
RFT - Midtown Building's Demolition Faces Holdup Over Hotel Plans
https://www.riverfronttimes.com/news/mi ... s-39170096
https://www.riverfronttimes.com/news/mi ... s-39170096
$1.1M demo permit application submitted Dec 21.
They went back to the Preservation Board asking for the building permit contingency for demo be removed as it would be of great financial risk to the project given increasing construction costs. They haven't submitted construction drawings for the new buildings, which makes the PB nervous. They all decided to look into the developer posting a bond, perhaps $250k as an accountability measure. I'd wager eating $250k (plus another $1M for the hoteliers, plus the acquisition and demo costs) if it turns out the numbers don't work to the tune of millions, but eating the other losses sounds tough to swallow.
They went back to the Preservation Board asking for the building permit contingency for demo be removed as it would be of great financial risk to the project given increasing construction costs. They haven't submitted construction drawings for the new buildings, which makes the PB nervous. They all decided to look into the developer posting a bond, perhaps $250k as an accountability measure. I'd wager eating $250k (plus another $1M for the hoteliers, plus the acquisition and demo costs) if it turns out the numbers don't work to the tune of millions, but eating the other losses sounds tough to swallow.
As they should be.
I commented on Chris’ site, I think this project is a red herring to allow WF to demo the structures. I doubt there’s any intent to build these hotels.
I commented on Chris’ site, I think this project is a red herring to allow WF to demo the structures. I doubt there’s any intent to build these hotels.
- 9,539
^ GreenStreet isn’t bluffing and putting its reputation on the line to help WS demo a building, that’s ridiculous, why would they take all the blow back risk. Sometime the explanation is the simple one- plans aren’t ready to be submitted and they want to demo while the plans are being finished.
To add some more detail, it sounds like they want to have the new facade construction on the building that is staying where they currently connect done before starting work on the new hotels. The building demolition has to happen to allow for that. I think requiring a bond of some size is a great idea, but I also don't think Green Street/Midas is acting in bad faith here.
Definitely need to put some money on the line before demo. Also, they should reduce the curb cuts from 2 to 1 on Jefferson - the garage and eastern drop-off zone don't need separate curb cuts.
Okay, so I’m getting beaten up in the comments by someone on Chris’ FB page, but he attacks my ignorance yet hasn’t answered my question.
So again (Not related to permits):
Why do you need to demo before doing construction drawings?
The STLToday story is paywalled (so I can’t chapter/verse) but when I read it yesterday, the developers were acting like they can’t start drawings until the building’s demoed. I thought that was so odd. That’s why I’m asking, getting red flags. Then there was (to me) obfuscation about timing and inflation and a bunch of unrelated things all bumping into each other. I reread the paragraph to try and understand but got more confused with each rereading. (Could be STLtoday’s writer)
Here my take on the demo—
The buildings are past useful life, expensive to maintain and WF wants to demo them but the PB has designated them ‘merit’ buildings in a historic district so demo will be difficult if not impossible
WF decides to sell the land/buildings to developer. WF unloads the buildings, a dazzling redevelopment plan (Klimpton) will make demo possible.
Now it’s up to the developer to get rid of them. If the project happens, great. If the deal falls apart, the buildings are still demoed and WF can quietly re-acquire the property and put in a paved parking lot.
So, IMO, I think this is a bloated, round about way of demoing buildings. The development is earnest but only came about to circumvent PB reluctance to demo the buildings. Also, IMO, the PB board sees right through it and is making sure they are doing what they say they are.
For the parties involved, these buildings have to go. That’s why they’re acting like caged animals.
So again (Not related to permits):
Why do you need to demo before doing construction drawings?
The STLToday story is paywalled (so I can’t chapter/verse) but when I read it yesterday, the developers were acting like they can’t start drawings until the building’s demoed. I thought that was so odd. That’s why I’m asking, getting red flags. Then there was (to me) obfuscation about timing and inflation and a bunch of unrelated things all bumping into each other. I reread the paragraph to try and understand but got more confused with each rereading. (Could be STLtoday’s writer)
Here my take on the demo—
The buildings are past useful life, expensive to maintain and WF wants to demo them but the PB has designated them ‘merit’ buildings in a historic district so demo will be difficult if not impossible
WF decides to sell the land/buildings to developer. WF unloads the buildings, a dazzling redevelopment plan (Klimpton) will make demo possible.
Now it’s up to the developer to get rid of them. If the project happens, great. If the deal falls apart, the buildings are still demoed and WF can quietly re-acquire the property and put in a paved parking lot.
So, IMO, I think this is a bloated, round about way of demoing buildings. The development is earnest but only came about to circumvent PB reluctance to demo the buildings. Also, IMO, the PB board sees right through it and is making sure they are doing what they say they are.
For the parties involved, these buildings have to go. That’s why they’re acting like caged animals.
Shadrach, Boyd was removed from my group. I was getting tired of his nonsense.
As far as the demolition debate goes, the city is asking something similar to what Lux offered on the Optimist project. The legality needs to be reviewed, but I think it’s an ok thing to do since it holds the developer accountable.
As far as the demolition debate goes, the city is asking something similar to what Lux offered on the Optimist project. The legality needs to be reviewed, but I think it’s an ok thing to do since it holds the developer accountable.