urbanMSP

I was thinking the same thing. His timing is a bit off.

This parcel is cursed as the developer of this and the 2006 proposal seem to come into the game just when the market's played out. I really doubt this will happen as a total rental project. If they propose a condo, condo/rental building, or other multi-use project they have a better chance.

Why do you doubt the market can handle 320 additional units? Do you think we're that tapped out right now?

I'm not sure I trust this guy's instincts either but his instincts don't dictate the market (in other words he can't curse the market).

Not to burst anyone's bubble, but didn't this proposal have about 10 floors of parking or something crazy like that? In the image the whole lower portion with the stone was to mask the parking structure. Don't know if this new proposal includes it, but he's using the Same image.

I don't believe there are any renderings of the proposal. The article has a picture of the Sexton II proposal, but I don't think there's any reason to think that what's being proposed will be the same as that.

The article said it may be similar though, but we certainly don't know enough details yet to get overly excited. Besides, the previous proposal in 2006 was a condo building (which understandably may require more parking spaces), and the current proposal may be condos, apartments, both or a mix of uses.

There's simply too much up in the air right now.

Seeing that 4Marq can't get off the ground, I doubt there is enough demand for this one. It would be nice though.

Quick question: where are residents of Sexton Lofts parking today? Phase 2 (the condo tower) was supposed to provide those condo owners structured parking. I see on Google maps that this lot where Portland Tower would go is actually just a completely fenced-off vacant lot, and not surface parking.

Another 1/4 of that same block lot is owned by Thrivent and is a pay parking lot. Sidebar question since we're in the area: does Thrivent provide their employees with free parking? They own 1.75 blocks of surface parking downtown.

Seeing that 4Marq can't get off the ground, I doubt there is enough demand for this one. It would be nice though.

This is entirely your speculation, with no actual evidence to support that claim.

The market for both rental and condos within the downtown core, as well as the city as a whole, is actually still quite strong. That's according to all the reports that have been in the news as of late.

If anything scuttles this proposal from becoming reality, I don't think it'll be lack of demand...

Quick question: where are residents of Sexton Lofts parking today? Phase 2 (the condo tower) was supposed to provide those condo owners structured parking. I see on Google maps that this lot where Portland Tower would go is actually just a completely fenced-off vacant lot, and not surface parking.

Another 1/4 of that same block lot is owned by Thrivent and is a pay parking lot. Sidebar question since we're in the area: does Thrivent provide their employees with free parking? They own 1.75 blocks of surface parking downtown.

From here: http://www.urbanminneapolishomes.com/sexton-lofts.php

"While they do not have their own underground parking garage, Sexton Lofts utilize contract parking next door at Centre Village condominiums."

Yep, they tried to use the Sexton II lot for temporary parking (since some actually purchased parking spots in a ramp that was never built on that site). But the city stuck to its moratorium on new surface lots downtown.

It's been a tough road for the original Sexton condo buyers.

Not to burst anyone's bubble, but didn't this proposal have about 10 floors of parking or something crazy like that? In the image the whole lower portion with the stone was to mask the parking structure. Don't know if this new proposal includes it, but he's using the Same image.

I actually think the developer is considering building something very similar to the 2006 proposal with some slight tweaking. It was already approved by the city and a large majority of the architectural planning/engineering work has been completed. Saves a very substantial amount of money and time for the developer to resurrect this canceled proposal. The big issue is obtaining 100 million dollar (or more) financing from a lender who is confident he has a viable plan.

Seeing that 4Marq can't get off the ground, I doubt there is enough demand for this one. It would be nice though.

This is entirely your speculation, with no actual evidence to support that claim.

The market for both rental and condos within the downtown core, as well as the city as a whole, is actually still quite strong. That's according to all the reports that have been in the news as of late.

If anything scuttles this proposal from becoming reality, I don't think it'll be lack of demand...

Eh...if you won the lottery today, would you sink $100 million of your own money into downtown residential opening 18 months from now?

Seeing that 4Marq can't get off the ground, I doubt there is enough demand for this one. It would be nice though.

This is entirely your speculation, with no actual evidence to support that claim.

The market for both rental and condos within the downtown core, as well as the city as a whole, is actually still quite strong. That's according to all the reports that have been in the news as of late.

If anything scuttles this proposal from becoming reality, I don't think it'll be lack of demand...

Eh...if you won the lottery today, would you sink $100 million of your own money into downtown residential opening 18 months from now?

Funny, I read this as Elf...if you won the lottery. And I'm going Nick is talking to himself.

This is entirely your speculation, with no actual evidence to support that claim.

Site work for 4Marq was suppose to begin in December 2013. Last time I checked there wasn't any activity. Furthermore, downtown apartment vacancy rates have doubled since last year. How much more evidence do you need? I would love to see these projects come to fruition, but you and I both know that most of the proposed high-rises never make it.

The market for both rental and condos within the downtown core, as well as the city as a whole, is actually still quite strong. That's according to all the reports that have been in the news as of late.

What reports?

What's the current/most-recent vacancy rate? Even if they doubled from 2% to 4%, aren't apartments designed to cash flow with something like 10-20% vacancy? I don't have an opinion on these investments one way or the other... that's up to the individual investors... but I hope we see more sustainable construction.

New apartments will no longer be built when the vacancy rate is high enough to reduce rents. From a quick google search, it looks like that is appx. 7% for rentals.

Typically hotels don't start making a profit until they reach 65% occupancy. Anything over that number is pure profit.

Apartments are certainly different and the profitability of a project like this has to account for the fixed expenses for all the common amenities. Since there's a massive up-front investment to pay off, I'd imagine developers are typically hoping for 90-95% occupancy rates for the first 10 years.

Even if we are sitting at a vacancy rate of 7%, there's no guarantee that the market can sustain more rental units that would obviously be priced way above the average market rates. A condo project is probably a better best, especially since the original plan was expected to be more affordable than Skyscape.

A condo project is probably a better best, especially since the original plan was expected to be more affordable than Skyscape.

I agree. Lenders may be more open to financing a project like this than even a year or two ago. Urban condo development is actually having a strong resurgence in many cities. While I don't think our downtown condo market is quite as hot as Seattle etc , we have created virtually no new inventory since 2007 other than Stonebridge Lofts. If this developer can get this project going fairly quickly, he could probably have these units ready for occupancy before Stanton's Eclipse project (which may or may not happen).