urbanMSP

Build it to the sky! (or at least however tall the thirty some odd stories are)

Well, that floor plan seems to confirm that "Loring Park Apartments" is a placeholder name.

Somewhere I remember seeing a typical floor plan of Loring Park Apts and if I recall correctly , they are very spacious. I think they have only one or two studios per floor and even they were approx 600-700 square feet. So I'm pretty confident this project will not have a cramped feeling for its residents.

Here's a typical floor plan:

Yes! this is what I saw previously. Thanks Avian. Boy, this project sure looks like a thinly veiled future condo conversion. Doesn't it ? lol!

You keep saying that. It doesn't really to me. Large apartments are built all the time. I would actually think this would be more likely to stay apartments, as it will be the only building of it's kind in the area that is all rental.

Frankly, the floor plans are very uninteresting, unless you're renting one of the 'tips' on each floor. What is the market advantage of this building?

Did anybody want to try to contact the construction company to see if they will be willing to provide a webcam?

http://www.a-p.com/contact-us

I believe that is company who will be building the tower. I would do it myself but I been told my lack of grammar can make heads spin and we don't want our building crew to become plagued with light heads! As well as I think a few more established connected members would have much more persuasive impact

What is the market advantage? It will be the only new rental high rise, with much nicer finishes than the rest...pretty much all of the old ones are very outdated and haven't even been remodeled. They still charge a fortune for rent...110 Grant, Laurel Village...they look awful. 110 looks like you are in an episode of the Golden Girls(mirrored walls, really?), and I was just in Laurel Village last night, looks like you are in 1992.

The corner units look SO COOL! I love oddly-shaped spaces!!

What is the market advantage? It will be the only new rental high rise, with much nicer finishes than the rest...pretty much all of the old ones are very outdated and haven't even been remodeled. They still charge a fortune for rent...110 Grant, Laurel Village...they look awful. 110 looks like you are in an episode of the Golden Girls(mirrored walls, really?), and I was just in Laurel Village last night, looks like you are in 1992.

I'd imagine the views are also spectacular and unblocked above 20 floors, as well! I bet the corner units (especially the Western ones) would have views of both downtown AND the lakes -- how awesome is that?!

What is the market advantage? It will be the only new rental high rise, with much nicer finishes than the rest...pretty much all of the old ones are very outdated and haven't even been remodeled. They still charge a fortune for rent...110 Grant, Laurel Village...they look awful. 110 looks like you are in an episode of the Golden Girls(mirrored walls, really?), and I was just in Laurel Village last night, looks like you are in 1992.

When I was apartment shopping this year, I was really surprised how much those buildings and others like Marquette Place, etc were able to charge for their units. $1500 dollars for a one bedroom with no view in a building built almost thirty years ago? Hopefully this place helps drive down prices with the additional competition.

You can add Churchill, and Symphony place to dated and expensive apartments. I believe that the downtown markets can absorb lots of apartments, but that merely my firsthand impression after looking this spring.

^Seriously -- it's unreal how expensive it is to live "above the treeline" in Minneapolis, view or no!

You can add Churchill, and Symphony place to dated and expensive apartments. I believe that the downtown markets can absorb lots of apartments, but that merely my firsthand impression after looking this spring.

If this project succeeds and there's CLEARLY room to pluck tenants and demand away from the older/expensive apartments, new high-rises may be very successful if prices at the older ones continue to remain high.

For what it's worth, the average cost to build each unit in the Loring Tower is more than $282,000. Given the building's amenities, I wonder how much $$ you could ask just for a studio if the tower eventually went condo.

I believe that the downtown markets can absorb lots of apartments, but that merely my firsthand impression after looking this spring.

I agree 100%. There is so little inventory across the board it's almost unbelievable. If you want anything even moderately high-end you're left choosing from less than a handful of options. This tower most definitely helps fill a need.

I also wonder how much demand these new projects will create. Right now, I think there's a slice of people who are renting outside of downtown because they are displeased with high-priced rents for dated units and would rather rent in another neighborhood of the city as a result (getting more amenities or more space). Yet some of these people may want to reconsider these luxury rentals if they can get a brand new unit for close to the same rent as the dated units that were previously their main options downtown.

I also wonder how much demand these new projects will create. Right now, I think there's a slice of people who are renting outside of downtown because they are displeased with high-priced rents for dated units and would rather rent in another neighborhood of the city as a result (getting more amenities or more space). Yet some of these people may want to reconsider these luxury rentals if they can get a brand new unit for close to the same rent as the dated units that were previously their main options downtown.

I absolutely agree with your premise! You'd like to think ~$1,800 to $2,200 per month would get a nice 1-2BR in downtown but it really doesn't.

October 30th, 2012, 12:40 pm

Chef wrote:

Civilization wrote:
The two compelling factors for any tower discussed here is
1. how pretty it will be.
2. profitable.

Your fun is my lack of sleep and hassle getting around the community I live in.


I've lived next to construction projects. It isn't fun but it is price you pay for living in a city that isn't dying.


exactly. If you prefer a city with very little construction may I recommend a place like Detroit or Gary? OK I'm done having fun now, but really, how do you expect a city to be able to grow without constructing any new buildings?



The problem I have with how the city is going about this is multi-prong.

Loring Park is the most population dense neighborhood. EIS and EAW were done on towers with federal financing about 30 years ago. No tower has had a EIS or EAW that is privately funded and developed. So no idea no concrete data in regards to how much more development Loring Park can absorb environmentally or infastructurewise.

Next would be the average price of these units if sold is half the going rate of the average unit price. For homeowners this drives down their resale value.

Lastly I spent my online time this weekend looking at planning commission meeting documentation, who the planning commission is and what their employment history tells me. Then I looked for the same information on St.Paul which was much eaiser to find because it was on the city's website. Then I looked for similar information on the top ten cities in the USA. I am quite annoyed.

Since my dad worked in development 2 decades ago alot in Minneapolis has changed. And Minneapolis' population shrunk 40,000 while its policies evaprated.

Not exactly surprised. Plenty of talk in regards to marketability, but not sustainability.

There is much more that goes into a city's survival than whether it can rent out luxury condos.

Since Minneapolis' corporate office space leasing has tanked turning to luxury apartment buzz isnt going to make empty office space downtown go away.

There is a sister city here. And St. Paul actually tanked less in regards to corporate office leasing. Due to better planning and a planning commission with established professionals who werent seeking stable employment. Downtown St. Paul fared the recession better. Minneapolis planning commission is made up of young recent grads who went to work for companies that have had their projects sail through zoning and planning. And I wonder if their licenses through state agencies could be revoked.

And it is difficult for me to concede to that fact since I am a 20 year veteran of Minneapolis and my father was there to take part in many of Minneapolis landmarks that have been built.

Seriously I love big cities, adore tall towers but I have read literature on why major cities have shrunk and why other cities have grown.

And I do plan on moving out east to a bigger city then possibly come back to Minnesota to end my career or retire.

And just my luck would dictate I'd move back to Loring Park to experience the fallout of having this neighborhood privately financed and developed towers demolished because no one at city level asked the right question and made appropriate stipulations on sustainability.

You dont develop this perspective growing up in a small town.

I honestly have no idea what point you're trying to make. Maybe if you stated a clear thesis we could engage with you but if you just post a stream of consciousness nonsense with one sentence per line, nobody is going to do anything but mock you.

I also don't understand why you keep going on and on about selling the units, since these are rentals. How can you say that these will come on the market at half the cost of surrounding units when there's no sales price stated (because they're not for sale!). And even if you did have "sales prices" for these units, I'd still think it silly, because in what world would a developer fight tooth and nail to build something and then give away half their revenue for no apparent reason?

I'm also going to have a hard time buying an environmental argument against building dense housing, but it sounds like maybe you're trying to make that argument as well?