First Central West End Condo Project Since 2009 Proposed for 4101 Laclede

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook3Share on Reddit0Print this pageEmail this to someone

4101 Laclede proposal

For the first time since Nine North Lofts opened on Euclid Avenue, the city’s Central West End may see a for-sale condo development. Tonight, a proposal for 4101 Laclede was presented to the West Pine Laclede Neighborhood Association. The site is the northwest corner of Laclede and Sarah Street, adjacent to Six North apartments, Laclede Lofts and New Market Hardware Co.

The vision presented for the long vacant lot, designed by Trivers Associates, features 54 units and 6,000sf of retail fronting Sarah in a five-story building. Seventy-five covered parking spaces would be accessed from the alley to the north of the lot. Four two-level townhomes with apartments above, and private street and parking access would front Laclede. Trivers also designed the proposed mixed-use project at 32-40 North Euclid.

It’s anticipated that there will be more 1BR than 2BR units, with one parking space per bedroom. Parking would be incorporated in the building at ground-level and topped by a 10,000sf amenity deck featuring a pool and lounge area, and connected to a fitness center. The fifth story includes a rooftop clubhouse with a balcony at the southeast corner. The retail component is planned to accommodate two to three tenants.

4101 Laclede proposal4101 LacledeNW corner - Laclede/SarahThe $16M project is being co-developed by Austin Barzantny of Grove Properties, and Michael Gingrich of Atrium Residential. A 10-year tax abatement is being sought. The project as presented does not require any variances to meet the area’s form based code.

The neighborhood has seen the development of hundreds of apartment units over the past couple years, but no condos have been built since Nine North Lofts opened in 2009. That project features 52 units and reportedly pre-sold 37 condos in 2008, nearly a year before completion. Units in that development started at $250K and topped $400K for larger condos. No price point has been set for 4101 Laclede.

Nine North was the second condo project by Opus, after the adjacent 27-story Park East Tower, completed in 2007. Opus is currently building a 12-story mixed-use apartment building nearby at Lindell Bouelvard and Euclid, as well as breaking ground on a mixed-use apartment building on Central Avenue in Clayton. The success of the condo projects has been attributed to the lack of new construction for-sale units on the market. The 4101 Laclede project may find a similar landscape.

In the immediate area of 4101 Laclede, West Pine Lofts has been completed, IKEA opened, more apartments are under construction on West Pine, and townhomes have been proposed for a vacant lot at West Pine and Sarah. Over the past two years, 963 apartments have been built in the city’s central corridor near Forest Park and the Central West End, with many smaller projects adding more units. By our count, 557 more apartments are currently under construction, and at least 750 more have been proposed and approved. In all, the projects total nearly 4,000 beds. Read more about those projects here.

If all goes according to plan, the 4101 Laclede proposal will be presented to the Park Central Development Corporation before the end of the year. Marketing and sales could begin in spring, with an anticipated groundbreaking in June 2016. Construction would be scheduled for one year.

4101 elevation 1 4101 elevation 2 4101_floor plan_2 4101_floor plan_3 4101_floor plan_4 4101_floor plan

NE corner - Laclede/Sarah{northeast corner of Laclede and Sarah}

SE corner - Laclede/Sarah{southeast corner of Laclede and Sarah}

SW corner - Laclede/Sarah
{southwest corner of Laclede and Sarah}

________

Images added 05/11/2016

4101 Laclede 4101 Laclede 4101 Laclede 4101 Laclede 4101 Laclede 4101 Laclede 4101 Laclede 4101 Laclede 4101 Laclede

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook3Share on Reddit0Print this pageEmail this to someone
  • CWE1959

    Fencing up and construction expected to begin in September 2016.

  • CWE1959

    Permit pulled on this project!!!!! Let the progress continue.

    Project Type: New Const.
    Application Number: 530030
    Application Date: 06/23/2016
    Structure Type: Commercial
    Estimated Costs: $13,000,000.00
    Contractor: RAINERI CONSTRUCTION
    Application Description: NEW CONSTRUCTION MIXED USE PER PLANS

    • Justin

      Any idea why it was pulled?

      • CWE1959

        i suspect they’ve neared or met the 25% condo presale lender requirement. Construction may start soon.

    • Alex Ihnen

      This is a permit application and not an issued permit. They’re simply getting ready to move whenever the pre-sale goal is met.

  • Pingback: Development proposal for 4101 Laclede | West Pine Laclede Neighborhood Association()

  • Scott G Gilbert

    At the neighborhood meeting they mentioned 200K range for the 1 bedroom units but didn’t elaborate further… there are “townhome” condo units with private entrances planned along the Laclede side of the building – I imagine those will be significantly more. At a meeting a few months ago similar fee simple townhomes were discussed at Sarah and West Pine and projected in the 500K range.

    • CWE1959

      The 1 bedroom units were expected to start with approximately 800 square feet at an entry price in the $200,000’s. These numbers were preliminary, but based upon previous new construction condo/townhouses in the area will likely be priced $250-$400 per square foot.

  • DavidH

    Does anyone know what the price range will be for these condos?

  • John David

    10 year tax abatement and/or TIF = corporate welfare. Hopefully our “progressive” aldermen and alderwomen start organizing and demanding a public vote. Where’s the outrage™?

    • rbeedee

      Timely question. The HUDZ committee at the BOA has started to have TIF hearings to at least start analyzing TIF stats, and then begin making policy changes. My understanding is that as of right now, the city does not have an easy way to organize all of its data relevant to TIFs, which makes it hard to study their effect, determine if some are more or less effective then others, total cost vs estimated benefit, role in different neighborhoods, etc. According to Alderman Roddy’s Twitter, the SLDC is supposed to be presenting a new data analysis tool at today’s HUDZ meeting. Long time in coming, but better late than never.

      • Alex Ihnen

        Hopefully this is a good step. Many cities, especially where building costs are high and a typical lot has challenges such as submerged foundations, contamination, etc. use tax abatement to enable development. Cincinnati has a much more clear process than St. Louis, though I don’t know if that city has spent much time examining the impact:

        http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/community-development/housing-assistance/residential-property-tax-abatement/

        • Don

          This is a very good point re targeting subsidies to lots with structural ‘challenges’. A sensible and constructive use of subsidies.

          I dislike TIF/abatement abuse as much as anyone but simply throwing decisions on these issues to the uninformed will make future development impossible.

        • matimal

          The forces of historic preservation and adaptation are surprisingly strong in Cincinnati. I think that’s why Cincinnati puts money into remediation of abandoned properties.

    • matimal

      TIFs are an attempt to level the playing field against the massive subsidies that support suburbia.TIF’s are corporate welfare, but so are mortgage interest deductions and free expressways. Individuals use these, but without them big developers wouldn’t have the demand for their exurban developments.

      • Alex Ihnen

        Perhaps *were an attempt? There is hundreds of millions in TIF in STL’s suburbs. TIF was conceived as a way to level the playing field between difficult to develop parcels (due to old infrastructure, contamination, etc.), generally in urban locations, to help level the playing field. The but-for measure was meant to assist projects that would revitalize a lot that otherwise would not see development w/o a subsidy. Not it’s used when a developer says, I want to build luxury apartments and upscale retail (or a Walmart, or whatever), and I won’t do it without a subsidy.

        • matimal

          So TIF’s have been hijacked by the suburban industrial complex like so much else. For me, the larger point is that we are VERY far from anything remotely like a free market in property or transportation in the U.S.

          • Tim E

            I would rephrase that as suburban retail developer complex. St. Louis industrial/manufacturing shrunk considerably with closing of auto plants and the region has had a difficult time replacing those very good jobs. In the meantime, developers/TIF abuse continue to build out commercial big box retail space for the next round retailers who want to be in the market like Menards and or upsizing like Walmart (think Super Walmart in Shrewsbury not too far away from Maplewood Walmart). Having a state with very weak industrial/economic development agenda doesn’t help matters because it is difficult for St. Louis County let alone a muni like Hazelwood to compete against state of Georgia and will always will be

          • matimal

            By suburban industrial complex, I mean the set of free expressways, mortgage deductions and guarantees, and the retailers and manufacturers of the building materials, appliances, suburban streets, etc. who profit from this. I wasn’t really referring to manufacturing that happens to be located in suburban locations. The suburban industrial complex isn’t really industrial, it’s political and social. We’d have plenty of industry without the suburban industrial complex. Of course, many of the things that the suburban complex supports aren’t actually made in the U.S. at all anymore.

      • John David

        Spare me the anti-suburb BS. TIFs are a give-away. Plain and simple. TIF based redevelopment is structurally unsuited for assisting low and moderate income residents of a City.

        Most academic studies on TIF have concluded that growth would have occurred without TIF funding. TIFs also result in overt gentrification that has adverse affects on rental prices.

        Here’s the ultimate irony about this development in terms of your “argument”:

        Rich folks buying condos in this development not only get a partially publicly subsided build out, but they also get the benefits of Mortgage Interest Deduction. Let’s also figure in the 10 year tax abatement. How fucking wonderful is that? If you bought into Nine North Euclid, condo buyers were given 5 years of free property taxes as an incentive. Total fucking BS.

        Meanwhile, if you can’t afford to buy in, you stuck with rental rates rising well above inflation, or a property tax bill from day one after you close on your mortgage.

        • matimal

          I’m not anti-suburban, I’m anti-subsidy. Unfortunately, suburbia is massively subsidized in America. Would most growth have happened without mortgage deductions, government guarantees, and free expressways too? Of course, but it would have occurred IN cities.

          • John David

            I hate to break this to you, but the Cities are the new Suburbs.

          • matimal

            I’m glad to break it to you…you’re wrong. Suburbs don’t pay their own way. Cities, even slow-growing ones, produce wealth that suburban interests take away.

        • rgbose

          At least at the end of the abatement there remains a highly productive land use. Metro Lofts got a 10-year abatement and is now producing $170k/acre in property taxes. These buildings will stand many times longer than their abatement periods.

          On the other hand a big box with a big parking lot (or most anything auto-oriented) won’t be productive enough to cover the services and infrastructure required to serve it, and is likely to be abandoned much sooner than something like this project.

          • John David

            The land where Metro Lofts sits has been and will continue to be valuable enough to developers that it would have been redeveloped without public assistance through the tax abatement.

            There was no need for the city to assume a large part of a developer’s risk quotient. The City doesn’t have a luxury apartment problem. In fact there’s a glut of luxury development going on, mostly TIF and abatement financed. (And lovingly fawned over on these blog pages).

            The problem we do have is affordable housing, and Metro Lofts does little to alleviate that ongoing issue.

          • rgbose

            Doesn’t the increase in supply of high-end apts vacuum up those that are pushing up rents in the already existing buildings?

          • John David
          • rgbose

            Interesting, thanks. Sounds like they’re saying prices are sticky.

          • John R

            You have to analyze each project on its own merits, but Metro Lofts deserved subsidy… it had a LIHTC component and was built at a time when there wasn’t exactly a rush of development in the area. Today, I would look at abatement and TIF more closely in the CWE and probably would require some affordable housing accommodation as part of the approval process.

        • rgbose
          • John David

            They are now. But not from 2009-2013. I had a client who lived there, and the client was shocked when they got a fairly massive payout from their escrow fund that was collecting for the taxes that ultimately didn’t need to get paid. It paid for a trip to Sweden.

          • rgbose

            The info on the assessor’s website says taxes were paid in 2012 and 2013.

  • Thomas

    Any idea what the beige material is on the facade of this building? It’s the same material they are proposing for their Euclid development from what I can tell and their renderings (at least for that material) are really grainy.

    Otherwise really loving this design, finally some real modern risk taking design in the central corridor!

    • moorlander

      Maybe brick like this?

  • citylover

    Do you expect to see Central West End pop. 20,000 plus in 2020? As of 2010 it was something around 14,000. Do you think this will be the most dense, populous neighborhood in the city?
    Are there any other south St. Louis neighborhoods that might see a rebound in growth as well? I was thinking Dutchtown, but I hear that most South City neighborhoods are expected to flat line in 2020.

    • Alex Ihnen

      You’re right, the 2010 Census was just more than 14,000. With all the apartments coming online, it seems the CWE should be 15-16,000? In the last decade the (more populous) south side lost as many residents as the city’s north side. Shaw, Tower Grove South – “reboundeing” and popular neighborhoods, lost thousands of residents. This decade, the south side will continue lose population, as will the north side. Downtown gained big (350%) with loft conversions, and the central corridor generally gained. Downtown should gain again, but nothing like that number at all. The city lost 8%. My bet would be on the city being +/- 2% this decade.

      Here’s more on the neighborhood-by-neighborhood changes last decade: https://nextstl.com/2014/09/pxstl/

      • citylover

        What do you think is next for downtown? Are they doing anything with railway exchange building? is AT&T lease up at AT&T center? When are needed street lights coming? Once we fill up old buildings will new construction come? with all the new people coming downtown why no retail interest? What will the population have to be downtown for people to start to care and invest?

        Are there any companies in the county that would ever consider moving? Maybe bread co or energizer? It seems like a lot of companies have stitched themselves into the suburbs permanately. Edward jones is huge. there is now way they would ever leave their multi campus modern buildings would they? all those corporate campuses stacked on top of each other would make some beautiful towers downtown 🙂

  • CWE1959

    Great project. The developer’s presentation tonight was met with a lukewarm response by some NIMBY’s in the neighborhood, but the overall sentiments expressed were supportive. The project was supported contingent upon quality of building materials and details satisfying neighborhood stakeholders. As an area property owner, I’m excited to potentially see density, property ownership, and retail increase along Sarah.

  • matimal

    Do projects this size take this long to get done in Nashville or Dallas?

    • Alex Ihnen

      Yes.

      • matimal

        So, countless projects recently completed in those cities in the last few years got started in the depth of the financial collapse. Interesting…

        • Alex Ihnen

          If you have examples of projects like this that take less than a year to build, and less than six months for design, approval, and financing, I’d be interested in seeing them.

          • matimal

            I don’t. It just made me realize that the boom of large residential projects in sunbelt cities had to have gotten its start well before it was clear how the economy would come out of the financial collapse. Those cities ‘built on the dip’ while others waited until post-collapse economic trends and finances were clear. That’s the secret to their success…blind faith in the future of their economies and housing markets. How do we capture some of that in St. Louis?

          • James

            ^Some of that was captured with the large-scale projects in St. Louis that started construction and opened during and just after the recession.

          • matimal

            Only a very few and only in THE most desirable locations. Speculative developments are only getting going now in St. Louis. How do we get more developers to take the chances developers in sunbelt boom towns take?

          • Alex Ihnen

            Simple: we attract double digit population growth, add energy and banking jobs by the thousands, subsidize all of it (even more than we do now), and voila! (No, I don’t think this is happening.)

          • John R

            Yes, besides overall economic growth, the degree to which a city will open the subsidy spigot is an important factor. KC has seen an impressive boom in projects but is still handing out 25 yr. tax abatement. (10 yrs. at 100% plus 15 yrs. 50% abatement; PILOTS usually are required for schools, etc.) Looks like there finally is a serious push-back on that

            Here, I think we can look at limiting abatement in CWE but it’s probably going to be around a while for DT and other parts of the city.

          • Alex Ihnen

            Perhaps, but we shouldn’t forget that there are at least a half dozen big vacant lots in the CWE.

          • matimal

            Can we attract people with HOUSING instead of with jobs. Do jobs follow people sometimes instead of people following jobs? I know that I’d never consider a job if I wasn’t first familiar with and attracted to the place the job was located.

          • matimal

            We won’t attract the numbers, because stealing established businesses is not a long term strategy, I realize. But, you CAN frontload your economy with housing and have at least that driver of growth.

          • Alex Ihnen

            My take is that it’s much easier (less risky, and more possible to get financing) when your city is growing by double digits. In stagnant population regions like St. Louis it’s certainly more difficult. There was much less activity across the board in 2008-09-10. St. Louis started at a lower point of development activity, dipped, and has/is rebounding. I don’t think it’s reasonable to compare housing starts (and mixed-use multi-family projects) in St. Louis to Dallas or Atlanta.

          • matimal

            I’m not comparing stats, I’m comparing market psychology. I’m well aware of the different metro economies. I’m just wondering if housing is only and always an effect of other economic forces or if it can, and has, been a cause of economic growth. Wasn’t much of the growth in the sunbelt actually driven by housing itself? That is, didn’t many come for the cheap housing and the jobs in real estate, mortgage finance, skilled construction trades, building roads, sewers, water lines, and strip malls, hospitals, etc. and only later didn’t the political elites of sunbelt cities lure back offices from banks, tech and consumer product companies by advertising the supply of relatively cheap labor they had created previously by pulling out all the stops to get residential construction going first? Can’t St. Louis try to make housing a CAUSE of growth? Build urban neighborhoods otherwise unavailable outside of Chicago at lower prices and people in the center of America might just come for that only later to find jobs in St. Louis. I think this explains New Orleans growth since Katrina.

          • Alex Ihnen

            “I’m not comparing stats, I’m comparing market psychology. I’m well aware of the different metro economies.” <- IMO that's the answer to your question.

            I don't believe that housing drives a metro economy, but is the result of demand from increased population. It is an interesting topic though.

            The 'trick' for quite a few sunbelt cities was heavily subsidizing corporate relocation, relatively cheap non-union labor, and expansive greenfields open for development.

          • matimal

            You suggested that downtown had ironically become a suburb. Suburban growth WAS driven by housing. Can’t a larger and more systematic investment in housing in central St. Louis do the same? Jobs followed housing to suburbia, can’t jobs following housing to central St. Louis? If you can’t bet ’em, join ’em….

          • John R

            I’m interested in knowing how much more density b/w increased workers and/or residents we need in the Greater Downtown area before it can reach a semblance of vitality and get stitched together more seamlessly with surrounding areas such as CWE. etc.

          • matimal

            Downtown’s population has grown tremendously already. I don’t know an place in American that is “seamlessly” connected, so we shouldn’t set a standard for St. Louis that no one has or can meet. I’m just suggesting that a massive public and private agenda of housing in the central corridor might be the thing to bring the different parts of St. Louis together instead of big corporations.

          • Tim

            And an attractive climate for people looking for warmer weather, a place to retire or buy a vacation home.

          • Alex Ihnen

            Cities that didn’t boom because of warm weather or retirement homes: Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, Atlanta, Charlotte, Detroit, St. Louis…heck all cities save…I’m struggling to come up with one…Phoenix? I’ve always thought weather is almost entirely a red herring.

          • matimal

            The conventional wisdom is that Florida’s cities, Phoenix, L.A’.s inland burbs, Las Vegas, and Portland boomed because of their residential offerings and that the jobs followed the people. I don’t have any data, though.

          • Alex Ihnen

            Perhaps this topic is ripe for a podcast or a deeper look, but I haven’t seen this conventional wisdom expressed anywhere. Conversely, my understanding of the issue is that housing lags growth. The conflation of housing and economic growth sometimes happens when one looks at construction jobs, population growth etc. New home construction does add to economic growth. This happens where there is demand for housing. Demand for housing is a result of people being able to buy a house – having a job, having the confidence that the economy will grow, and being able to afford a particular house. In terms of supply – there’s no real shortage in St. Louis (as evidenced by home prices) and so if availability drove economic growth, shouldn’t we be growing? New homes (without population and job growth) simply replace existing homes, doing very little to grow a local economy. Perhaps restoring the nextSTL Forum for discussions like this is in order.

            Anyway…check out that 4101 Laclede proposal! 🙂

          • matimal
          • matimal

            How does this explain the tremendous success of Minneapolis, Seattle, or Chicago’s loop and north side?

          • Jeff Leonard

            I moved here from Columbus in 2012. By November of that year, Columbus had recovered ALL jobs lost in the recession. Since then, the region has added 40K additional jobs. Nashville was fully recovered by 2010 and has added 80K jobs. Dallas similarly recovered by 2010 and has added 400K jobs. St. Louis is close, but still has not recovered its peak employment from 2006. That’s a decade of lost growth.

            So when you comparing housing developments in those cities, you’re talking about strong economies which showed their resilience 3-4-5 years ago. Tens of thousands of new workers needing to live somewhere. St. Louis is in a much more tenuous position regionally, even though there are specific pockets of strength, like the central corridor.

        • Brian

          A recession can be a good time to build: property, capital, labor and materials are usually less expensive. When the economy turns around, you have pent-up demand looking for newly-constructed properties. The bandwagoners that wait until the economy gets hot will face rising costs for capital, labor and materials, and are more likely to face a saturated market when they finally come online. As in comedy, timing is everything.

  • Presbyterian

    I must say that I’m not only glad for the density and development… but for the actual design itself. This is a very hot design. I like it!

  • Billikens&Bricks

    Great news! Love the retail component. Just makes me wish the West Pine Lofts would have kept that as part of their plans.

    On a somewhat related note, are there any rumblings for the vacant lot a half block east on Laclede? The lot across from the post office? Development on both ends and land there aren’t very many developable parcels left in the area…

    • Alex Ihnen

      West Pine Lofts were allowed to not build without retail, claiming the project couldn’t move forward with it. IMO – continued development in the area shows that the form based code should have been enforced (that’s what it’s there for). The vacant lot you mention is owned by Cortex and will be developed, eventually.

      • Imran

        Interestingly, some of the ground floor of West Pine Lofts facing Sarah has large retail-like windows. I wonder if they wanted an option to retrof for retail in the future.