Minneapolis Armory

[David Greene]

Ok, consider me educated.

[Wedgeguy]

The project as a whole will cost $30-32 million

What?!? That seems totally outrageous. In the end, there doesn't seem to be that much in this project unless they are really pulling out the stops on historic renovation, which would be odd for a concert venue. Capping 35W through Cedar-Riverside is estimated to cost about $50 million.

http://www.minnpost.com/cityscape/2014/ ... etch-i-35w

Think about that. That's not only the cost of concrete and the associated labor to install it, but also an entire ventilation system and emergency egress infrastructure.

Seriously, this project costs $20 million less than capping 35W?!?

Considering the past uses and when it was built. I'm sure there will be some brownfield remediation that will have to be taken into account on this project. There will be petroleum from when the Armory was used for vehicles, most likely asbestos, and probably some lead paint in certain area of the building. That can add up fast. I also think that they are expanding the scope of what they were going to do.

[min-chi-cbus]

That number for capping 35W has always struck me as completely bogus. I wouldn't put too much faith in it.

You know I never understood where they came up with pricing freeway projects.....To repave a freeway for 10 miles costs like $100 million or so. To add a lane in each direction for 10 miles is at least $500 million. To fix a bridge it's $25 million per bridge for the bare-bones variety replacement. And yet somehow this entire nation is covered in freeways -- some up to 10 lanes in each direction! It's no wonder cities and states can't keep up with maintaining road infrastructure in the short or long run, and yet as we try to find more sustainable ways of transporting people the opposition brings up the notion that it "costs too much".

Back to the Armory, I have no idea how they came up with that price to replace the roof -- it's just yet another one of these incredible mysteries of supply and labor price inflation, not unlike the cost of building major league stadiums! I'm glad they're doing it though, and one thing is certain: if they are willing to put in $32M to replace the roof then I would imagine the investors would expect to see something come out of that investment, making the Armory useful again.

[nordeast homer]

It could be a beautiful building if it's rehabbed right. Right now it looks like it's just about to the point of fix it now or forget about saving it. This will bring some much needed life to an area that's kind of a dead spot downtown.

[5th Ave Guy]

That number for capping 35W has always struck me as completely bogus. I wouldn't put too much faith in it.

You know I never understood where they came up with pricing freeway projects.....To repave a freeway for 10 miles costs like $100 million or so. To add a lane in each direction for 10 miles is at least $500 million. To fix a bridge it's $25 million per bridge for the bare-bones variety replacement. And yet somehow this entire nation is covered in freeways -- some up to 10 lanes in each direction! It's no wonder cities and states can't keep up with maintaining road infrastructure in the short or long run, and yet as we try to find more sustainable ways of transporting people the opposition brings up the notion that it "costs too much".

Back to the Armory, I have no idea how they came up with that price to replace the roof -- it's just yet another one of these incredible mysteries of supply and labor price inflation, not unlike the cost of building major league stadiums! I'm glad they're doing it though, and one thing is certain: if they are willing to put in $32M to replace the roof then I would imagine the investors would expect to see something come out of that investment, making the Armory useful again.

I think the $32M is for the entire project, not just the roof.

I really hope this means that once this is done I never have to go to Roy Wilkins for another show. That place is awful.

[Nathan]

I've said it before, and I don't know how it complies with the historic nature of the building but a glass or transparent roof/ skylights would be amazing.

[go4guy]

That number for capping 35W has always struck me as completely bogus. I wouldn't put too much faith in it.

You know I never understood where they came up with pricing freeway projects.....To repave a freeway for 10 miles costs like $100 million or so. To add a lane in each direction for 10 miles is at least $500 million. To fix a bridge it's $25 million per bridge for the bare-bones variety replacement. And yet somehow this entire nation is covered in freeways -- some up to 10 lanes in each direction! It's no wonder cities and states can't keep up with maintaining road infrastructure in the short or long run, and yet as we try to find more sustainable ways of transporting people the opposition brings up the notion that it "costs too much".

Back to the Armory, I have no idea how they came up with that price to replace the roof -- it's just yet another one of these incredible mysteries of supply and labor price inflation, not unlike the cost of building major league stadiums! I'm glad they're doing it though, and one thing is certain: if they are willing to put in $32M to replace the roof then I would imagine the investors would expect to see something come out of that investment, making the Armory useful again.

I think your numbers on freeway projects are more than actual costs by a long shot. They are increasing a 2.5 mile stretch from Rogers to St Michael on I-94 to include an additional lane in each direction. With that, they are expanding 2 bridges, extending an exit ramp, and installing a sound wall. All for $28.3 million.

[David Greene]

I think your numbers on freeway projects are more than actual costs by a long shot. They are increasing a 2.5 mile stretch from Rogers to St Michael on I-94 to include an additional lane in each direction. With that, they are expanding 2 bridges, extending an exit ramp, and installing a sound wall. All for $28.3 million.

That's in a rural area. It's get expensive mighty quickly when working in a built environment.

[go4guy]

I think your numbers on freeway projects are more than actual costs by a long shot. They are increasing a 2.5 mile stretch from Rogers to St Michael on I-94 to include an additional lane in each direction. With that, they are expanding 2 bridges, extending an exit ramp, and installing a sound wall. All for $28.3 million.

That's in a rural area. It's get expensive mighty quickly when working in a built environment.

Like Plymouth? I think there they are adding a lane in each direction for about 5 miles. This includes replacing 4 bridges over the freeway, and installing sound walls. This for $86 million. Not saying it isnt expensive, but the numbers he threw out were made up and have no substance. The complete resurfacing of I-94 in a very urban setting didnt cost anywhere near what he stated.

[David Greene]

That's in a rural area. It's get expensive mighty quickly when working in a built environment.

Like Plymouth? I think there they are adding a lane in each direction for about 5 miles. This includes replacing 4 bridges over the freeway, and installing sound walls. This for $86 million. Not saying it isnt expensive, but the numbers he threw out were made up and have no substance. The complete resurfacing of I-94 in a very urban setting didnt cost anywhere near what he stated.

A bridge from Stillwater to Norwheresville, WI costs 3/4 of a billion dollars. One bridge.

[mattaudio]

Can a mod move this sidetrack to the Tpo forum?

The Plymouth project is dubbed a "rehabilitation." MnDOT has recently become very good at doing cheap improvements due to political and funding constraints, but it's not clear they will stand the test of time. These cheap projects may very well end up costing us much more down the road than a full reconstruction.

[nickmgray]

I'm sure we'd all love to see 35 covered up and the creation of a new park or neighborhood. But that's not happening. What is happening is that the Armory is going to be renovated - and that's extremely exciting. While the main draw of the building may be for sports and concerts, I could see this as a place to host smaller trade shows, medium sized conferences or even the downtown Thursday farmers market in the winter.

[min-chi-cbus]

I think your numbers on freeway projects are more than actual costs by a long shot. They are increasing a 2.5 mile stretch from Rogers to St Michael on I-94 to include an additional lane in each direction. With that, they are expanding 2 bridges, extending an exit ramp, and installing a sound wall. All for $28.3 million.

That's in a rural area. It's get expensive mighty quickly when working in a built environment.

Like Plymouth? I think there they are adding a lane in each direction for about 5 miles. This includes replacing 4 bridges over the freeway, and installing sound walls. This for $86 million. Not saying it isnt expensive, but the numbers he threw out were made up and have no substance. The complete resurfacing of I-94 in a very urban setting didnt cost anywhere near what he stated.

The numbers weren't supposed to be 100% accurate, just highlight my point that construction costs are insane. How much was the I-35W bridge -- a couple hundred million? What about the Crosstown Commons project -- half a billion to a billion? Do I need to research the actual costs for projects or do you get the gist of what I'm talking about?

[seanrichardryan]

A R M O R Y.

[go4guy]

The Crosstown Commons project was $288 million dollars. If you are going to throw out numbers to try and prove a point, you should probably know how much those projects cost. Drastically inflating them does you no good. And it only gives others false information. And obviously numbers aren't going to be 100% correct. But the claimed numbers shouldnt be 2-10 times the actual cost.

[min-chi-cbus]

The Crosstown Commons project was $288 million dollars. If you are going to throw out numbers to try and prove a point, you should probably know how much those projects cost. Drastically inflating them does you no good. And it only gives others false information. And obviously numbers aren't going to be 100% correct. But the claimed numbers shouldnt be 2-10 times the actual cost.

You're right, it's almost $300M, not the $700M figure I remember hearing at one point when the project was either on hold or there was some labor dispute with one of the contractors (I don't know why that's the figure that stuck in my head). So $300M for 1 mile of freeway, some of it including bridges and overlays, so not exactly your typical freeway mile. Your point is...... what -- that is not too expensive, or that is not much more expensive than even 10-15 years ago?

Here is a neat article that outlines the revenue and expenditure streams for highway financing over time that I think can address some of this more objectively.

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/2008cpr/chap6.htm#1

And here's an article that actually addresses my own question and point about construction costs (stadiums, in this case) increasing seemingly exponentially lately (instead of denying that this is true):

http://www.athleticbusiness.com/stadium ... lions.html

The Vikings stadium proposal has been talked about for at least 15 years now, and the cost of building a stadium went from $250M to $400M to $850M to now over $1B during that span (*Note: those are NOT quoted numbers, just figures I think I remember over 15 years of news on the subject).

Here's another neat chart showing the latest stadiums built and their costs (the "oldest" being the Tampa Bucs' stadium opening in 1998):

http://www.thedeets.com/wp-content/uplo ... art_41.png

[MN Fats]

Looks like conversation got off topic and this thread was locked. Does anyone have any updates here? Sounds like something may have been going in to motion when this thread derailed.

[Rich]

The owner of the old Armory, an underused property abutting the Commons to the south, also is pushing a new idea that could be the first domino to fall in this corridor. The plan envisions turning the cavernous building into a mixed-use space for events as varied as concerts and Vikings ­activities. "We are continuing on with the proposed historic redevelopment of the Armory,” said site owner Doug Hoskins. “By May, we will have a determination of whether or not the Vikings will be a partner.”

http://www.startribune.com/local/minnea ... 84281.html

[mnlife]

The armory really is a beautiful building at least on the outside. The inside is depressing, but it is a large space with potential for sure.

[VacantLuxuries]

Armory sold, event venue planned.