Woodward Lofts moving forward on Tower Grove Ave

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Reddit31Share on LinkedIn0Print this pageEmail this to someone

Woodward Lofts LLC closed last month on the Suburban Packaging building on Tower Grove Avenue just North of Vandeventer. The sale moves forward a plan to convert the massive warehouse into 160 market-rate apartments with 200 enclosed parking spaces and ground-floor retail. The project is expected to be completed in 2018.

New renderings from Trivers show a rooftop terrace with pool, with housing units and common spaces grouped around exterior courtyards. Parking spaces will be inside the structure.

Listed on the National Register of Historic Places, the building is the former home of the Woodward & Tiernan Printing Company, which was the 5th largest printing company in the country in the 1920s.

An initial $16 million permit was applied for in April for the $30 million project.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

More on this project from November 2016:
https://nextstl.com/2016/11/apartments-retail-planned-industrial-building-forest-park-southeast/

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Reddit31Share on LinkedIn0Print this pageEmail this to someone
  • Boo

    No joke, is that Justin Bierber behind the table in the fourth render

  • Dahmen Piotraschke

    Now that is a bold undertaking and a very stand out property, which has been passed by for years. Next to the curved railroad…it just might work due to its proximity to the Grove, and Tower Grove/Botanical Gardens. The intersection could be updated and built up to allow pedestrian and bike crossing Vandeventer, which is not possible now.

  • I think I’d take my risks strolling over the RR tracks before attempting to stroll over that crossing point.

    • STLEnginerd

      bit dramatic. Its one cross walk across a two lane road with a stop light intersection and every time I’ve driven it it has been only lightly traveled.

      I think they aren’t super worried about people walking south for the time being anyway. Kind of a dead zone until you cross under 44, so the joggers might head that way but most of the pedestrian traffic will go north.

      • STLEnginerd

        three lane road i meant

      • Whipple

        Every time you have DRIVEN by it… get out of your car, you will have a different perspective

  • Pingback: Woodward Lofts Moving Forward on Tower Grove Avenue - ConstructForSTL()

  • Latin_Guru

    The city needs to continue to develop all this historic and unused bldgs. as well as the empty lots. The more middle to high middle class communities the more taxes the city collects and better schools and services will be provided to residents. Low income houses should be built but not in no historic bldgs. Saint Louis needs to focus on green urban development and bring more attractions for the tourists.

  • A.S.

    This is not harmful gentrification. There are no low-income citizens in residential properties being neglected, boarded-up then converted to lifestyle living. From what I understand, this is an investment and repurposing of an historic, but unproductive property.
    If done well, it will doubtless increase the demand for services and attract more investments nearby. That having been said, more should be done to encourage badly needed lower income housing development. Both are possible.

  • CR

    $1,300 for a one bedroom loft in an underdeveloped-yet-trendy neighborhood of St. Louis? Beyond ridiculous. Knowing the demographics of the area this is the last type of development that site – and St. Louis in general – needs.

    How many overpriced complexes can we support? Another example of developers and investors looking to squeeze out a large number of low to moderate income people by making housing too expensive. This is a problem not only nationwide but worldwide. These repeated types of developments are the exact opposite of what we should be doing to tackle the problems of crime and poverty we struggle with in St. Louis.

    We need more AFFORDABLE, ECONOMICALLY INTEGRATED AND MIXED housing, not less, in order to break up the racial and economic ghettos that allow problems to fester. Instead we’re squeezing those who need moderate to low rent options into worse and smaller areas.

    • MarlboroSmokesOutdoorAdventure

      Agreed. More affordable housing is needed for low-income and middle-income folks. I guess the new development serves the housing needs of those that can afford $1300 for a 1-bedroom. For that kind of rent, why can’t these folks buy houses? Promote home ownership for those that can afford. I realize that not everybody wants to buy but heck, those rental rates are sky high and could be put to better use in building equity in a house.

      To their credit, Trivers does a great design job. Love the layout. Looks great. It’s super awesome.

      • chaifetz10

        Two words: Student Loans.

        It’s one thing to be able to afford rent of $1,300 and another to get approved for a house. Keep in mind that banks like to see a debt/equity ratio around 43% (give or take based on your credit score). So if you make $50k a year, have a car payment of $250, student loans of $1,000, and calculate for required insurance, PMI, and taxes (roughing those in at about $150 which would be on the low side honestly) then you would already be up to about 33% utilization. Most lenders would say you have somewhere around $390 ($391.67 per my back of the napkin calculations) left to spend on a mortgage which would get you… well, not much.

        This whole idea of young people being able to buy homes instead of paying $1,300 for apartments just isn’t accurate. How do I know? I’m a prime example. We know we can functionally (and comfortably) spend $1,250 a month on a mortgage but we just can’t get approved for a home more than $150k at the moment.

    • Whipple

      St Louis is the most affordable big city in the Country, because there is low demand and its overbuilt. So it’s already affordable, and that’s a BAD sign, I don’t think you know how this works.

    • Nick

      There’s already plenty of affordable housing all over this city, including new affordable housing being built in this same neighborhood. Also no developer is going to spend $30 million to renovate an old warehouse to then make 1/2 or 1/3 market rates by allocating this space to affordable housing, even if they build it far less luxurious than what Trivers has planned.

    • M

      No we need gentrification, especially on the south side. I want crime and low class out of the city. They can go to north county.

  • Adam

    Fantastic. I’ve been wondering about this one.

  • PD

    This is going to be great for the towergrove -grove disconnect. It will bridge the two neighborhoods together and make it walk-able.

  • Whipple

    Lets see if this pays walkable dividends. Will tower grove and Vandaventer see any pedestrian improvement (easy walk to a shopping node at mccree and TG, but crossing Vandy to get there is a death trap)? Or will this be a population of car slaves just happy with secure parking?

  • Brian

    Are there any subsidies / public money for this project?

    • Presbyterian

      I believe they were planning to seek 10 year tax abatement. Not sure what the city will agree to. This project is eligible for state and federal historic tax credits.

      • John

        I am fine with the historic tax credits, but not the tax abatement. It seems too convenient for developers to ask for handouts (both abatement and TIFs) with the excuse that the projects could not be funded without them. The historic tax credits serve a purpose for rehab/renovation, but the tax abatement is a loss for the City tax budget. Despite that concern, the renderings look great and the project is exciting.

        • PD

          Im ok with abatement projects which have a 30-40year life span, not internet companies looking to get acquired and risky businesses. What should qualify for a tax abatement if not something like this?

          • John

            A project with ROI potential…I don’t know the ROI projections on this project. however, I am skeptical the tax abatement would generate a long-term economic return. And if so, at what point in time when you factor in the time-value of money. The historic tax credits are enough of a handout in my opinion.

            Also, if the rent will truly be $1,300 for a one bedroom loft, the developer doesn’t need the public welfare handout of tax abatement.

          • PD

            Thats 130 more people paying income tax in the city. And ROI is there from the start. The building would sit vacant and be a stain on the neighborhood that washu wants to build 80!!!! $300k houses in if not for the abatement. You again failed to mention what does deserve a tax abatement besides a long term tax+ project like this.

  • Nick

    Glad to see all the new articles and authorship on Next STL!