urbanMSP

CPM buys office building in North Loop
http://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/b ... -loop.html

"The 78,000-square-foot office building at 409 Washington Ave. N. was sold by North Loop Partners, an entity controlled by the Steelman family, which owned the Minneapolis property since 1969."
...
"The public filing indicates that the planned use for the parcel will remain office. However CPM, led by principals Daniel Oberpriller and Nick Walton, might see an opportunity to develop the parking lot into something with higher density such as apartments or a hotel, which they've developed before."
...

^^^ Great to hear. That parking lot is prime spot for some retail with it being on 5th and across from Arctic Cat and new brew pub. Due to the slope of the topography they could do 1 1/2 levels of retail. Due to the proximity to the rail I would think office over residential on this piece of land.

Wooooow. The owner sold because parking was too difficult to find.

http://finance-commerce.com/2016/01/why ... -building/

“We left because the city doesn’t want any more cars (in the neighborhood),” said Gerald Steelman, principal for S&S.

Steelman said the sale of his only Minneapolis office building comes at a time when the North Loop’s office market has become “very close to being overbuilt, just like it is with apartments.” Parking has become a concern among building owners and tenants as more office projects are planned in the district, he said.

Wooooow. The owner sold because parking was too difficult to find.

http://finance-commerce.com/2016/01/why ... -building/

“We left because the city doesn’t want any more cars (in the neighborhood),” said Gerald Steelman, principal for S&S.

Steelman said the sale of his only Minneapolis office building comes at a time when the North Loop’s office market has become “very close to being overbuilt, just like it is with apartments.” Parking has become a concern among building owners and tenants as more office projects are planned in the district, he said.

Honest question, but why is this SO hard to believe? I'm assuming that you think that by your response Grant, but perhaps I'm wrong. Whether we believe it, like it, etc. automobiles are still how the vast majority of people get from place to place. I personally chose to take public transit, but many can't/won't/etc. Having parking for your employees/residents is an issue when deciding where to have offices. We are getting better - but we certainly have a long way to go.

Honest question, but why is this SO hard to believe?

The proximity of the "B" and "C" ramps in particular makes it hard for me to believe. Sure, there may not be parking immediately in front of one's destination, but there is certainly parking nearby.

They own a their own parking lot and 4 blocks away from the C ramp and the ramp near Darbys.

Are we upset? If that's their reason, so be it. Cpm will probably build more parking for the existing building and whatever their new project is when they develop the surface lot, making both buildings viable for car people. If the current owner can't see that possibility. Sell.

I would think that despite proximity to the B and C ramps, there's a mental barrier with the rail trench. There's a lot of parking in the neighborhood, but it's almost all private/permit stuff. There aren't really any pay lots or ramps

It's a bit of a silly reason to sell a property, but I wouldn't say it's unwarranted, especially given how transit-poor much of the neighborhood is.

Maybe there would be less parking demand if employers didn't incentivize driving by paying for employees' parking? (As opposed to paying a transportation benefit and allowing employees to choose how they spend that money.)

I've said it before, but I know a few people that work in the North Loop that could pretty easily take transit or bike to work, they bike for social gatherings and going out, just not to work. Since their employer pays for their parking, why not drive? If more employers provided a parking cash out, I'm sure lots of people would take advantage.

^This, precisely. I know at least three people who work at haute firms (marketing, tech, and tech) in the North Loop who drive and park. Because there's free/easy parking. Despite living in Minneapolis neighborhoods like Uptown, "CenHen," and Seward.

One thing that *would* help out would be better transit between the downtown core and the North Loop. For people who work "beyond the trench," walking is not necessarily appealing. And a transfer to a low-frequency 14 is not appealing either. So of course driving looks appealing, especially when it's subsidized compared to other mode choices.

Sure, Phil. That's a totally valid point.

But I'd agree that if you're a visitor to the North Loop, and if you can't find on-street parking, it's not very obvious where you can park. There's the Designer's Guild ramp, and the 900 Washington Ave ramp (which used to have weird hours, but maybe they've fixed that with the uptick in North Loop night life?).

To echo the comments above, there's still a lot of parking in the neighborhood, but most of it is private and permitted.

Smack a bit of "nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded."

Maybe there would be less parking demand if employers didn't incentivize driving by paying for employees' parking? (As opposed to paying a transportation benefit and allowing employees to choose how they spend that money.)

I've said it before, but I know a few people that work in the North Loop that could pretty easily take transit or bike to work, they bike for social gatherings and going out, just not to work. Since their employer pays for their parking, why not drive? If more employers provided a parking cash out, I'm sure lots of people would take advantage.

Do that many employers offer parking benefits without also offering transit benefits? Other than, I suppose, having free parking (which even for most North Loop employees isn’t all that common).

Maybe I’m in the right industry or have been lucky with employers, but 100 percent of my post-college jobs have offered a MetroPass. In fact, none of my downtown employers have offered free parking (the ones in Northeast and the Northside both had free lots) to regular employees, so drivers are normally shelling out extra. The closest I’ve seen for a parking subsidy are with my current employer’s flexible spending accounts where apparently you can put pre-tax money away to pay for stuff like parking.

The North Loop’s biggest issue is shitty transit. The main drag through the neighborhood has one bus route that essentially runs every 15-20 minutes.

If more employers provided a parking cash out, I'm sure lots of people would take advantage.

So I posted the link on our employee IRC and a shitstorm followed.

"Government conspiracy!" (bestworkpaces.org was started by the EPA)

"How dare the government tell me not to drive!"

*sigh*

By the way, I'm happy the Internet Exchange building is being sold if it's going to be updated. Saw 18 open spaces in their lot today also.

Do that many employers offer parking benefits without also offering transit benefits? Other than, I suppose, having free parking (which even for most North Loop employees isn’t all that common).

Unfortunately, the only way Cray would move downtown is if they could give free parking to all their employees. That's why there's a clusterf*ck of parking in Galtier. Too many cars for the space.

The only transit benefit I get is that I can pay for my metropass with pre-tax money.

That’s the only benefit I get too, but I know of several people whose employers pay part or all of the MetroPass cost. But at least with the companies I’ve work at, they also don’t give any benefits for driving beyond offering a pre-tax flexible spending program that employees can use for a variety of costs, including parking.

I’d guess our split is roughly 50-50 transit and driving. But I’d also guess my company has a higher-than-average percentage of young (and older) people that live in the city, so transit is a pretty obvious choice. We also seem to have a pretty large chunk of people who carpool from the nearby suburbs.

On the CoW agenda for the 31st: http://minneapolismn.gov/www/groups/pub ... 176409.pdf

The applicant [CPM] is proposing to construct a ten-story office building in the location of the existing surface
parking lot. A second level skyway would be constructed to connect the new building to the third level
of the existing office building that fronts on Washington Avenue. Per the zoning code definitions of
height and stories, the building is 168 feet in height and 11 stories. One underground level of parking
would be accessed from the existing alley and one at grade level of parking, at the rear of the property,
would be accessed from North Third Street.

All brick exterior. 7000 sf commercial space (could be subdivided) with excellent frontage on 5th Ave N. 77 parking stalls on at-grade and below grade levels.

Basically an arms race now between CPM, Schafer-Richardson, and United to bring their various 10-story speculative office developments to fruition. Who breaks ground first?

Basically an arms race now between CPM, Schafer-Richardson, and United to bring their various 10-story speculative office developments to fruition. Who breaks ground first?

Is there any reason all three of these wouldn't be built? I'm not entirely sure, but isn't the North Loop submarket for office space vacancies low enough to warrant more than one of these?

Basically an arms race now between CPM, Schafer-Richardson, and United to bring their various 10-story speculative office developments to fruition. Who breaks ground first?

Is there any reason all three of these wouldn't be built? I'm not entirely sure, but isn't the North Loop submarket for office space vacancies low enough to warrant more than one of these?

I touched on this before in a post that got deleted in the mess of things. Between those three, T3, and all the historic renovations we're looking at around a million square feet of premium spec office space being proposed. That's a ton. And, T3 hasn't announced a single tenant yet so we have no idea if the market can even command the kind of rents they want yet ( T3 is only slightly less expensive than the IDS center).

I'm honestly surprised CPM put their proposal out first and so far ahead of the other two.

Plus TCF Bank redevelopment, NorthStar and Baker Center vacancies from WF moves. All of these proposals will not move forward. But the developers need to have options available to shop for potential tenants. The future anchor tenant(s) decides which project moves forward and which one(s) die for lack of an anchor tenant. I believe all but T3 (self funded by Hines) have stated that they will not proceed without an anchor tenant.