urbanMSP

As the downtown office market continues to heat up and the center of gravity moves slightly east, any chance the Accenture Tower would finally get its twin? Seems like it would be cheap to build... There's already parking underneath the greenspace on the block intended for the second tower.

If they ever do build a tower there it will not be a twin to the current tower. I've heard that the floor plates were not considered economical for most office users. They can still do a classy tower to compliment the Accenture Tower. But I think it is highly unlikely a matching tower will ever be built.

That's too bad because I think it's one of the classiest we have.

That's too bad because I think it's one of the classiest we have.

It was developed on the late 80's by a Texas developer, Lincoln Co. It was built on the front end of a real estate bubble. This has been one of my favorite building for design. Again most of our best buildings were done by out of town developers.

yea I have got all the newspaper clippings from those days.

Accenture about 18 months back.

http://alleycatmn.tumblr.com/post/53368 ... and-shadow

While I agree that the Accenture Tower is one of the best-designed in downtown, I'd prefer to see an equally well-designed, but different, tower on the other lot. One set of identical twins is enough.

*I'd still support Thrivent building their second tower, but that's just because I really dislike the "20-story blank wall" thing.

The Accenture building was my favorite to work in. Thrivent was my second to least favorite building to work in.

Which was your least favorite?

I was going to say Xcel (414 Nicollet) but the location may be a saving grace. Tiny windows though. Thrivent was fun because it had such huge windows on the 4th Ave side overlooking the County plaza with Accenture, Capella, and Ameriprise surrounding it. Very scenic view. My view in the Accenture building was the steam plant across the street.... that thing's quite the cloud maker on a cold day.

Office market update, and the news ain't great: http://finance-commerce.com/2014/12/loo ... ice-space/

I think it's pretty safe to say no one is going to be building large amounts of office space, at least not without a large anchor tenant lined up. The current trend of smallish build-to-suit projects (Xcel, Be the Match, etc.) looks likely to continue, supplemented by smaller Class A adds like Mayo Clinic Square or whatever is included in the Nicollet Hotel block. Seems pretty unlikely we're going to see any office proposals of 500,000 sf anytime soon, unless larger companies start decamping from the suburbs in waves.

What the heck are we going to do with that 1.5MM square feet of Class B? Are there any particular buildings y'all think would be good candidates for residential (or hotel) conversion? Or obsolete building(s) that could be torn down & replaced with residential? As much as we are adding tons of residential units to the edges of the CBD, I still believe we ought to add more residents within the core (i.e. within the extent of the current skyway system)

^^^I've been saying this for a while.

Are there any particular buildings y'all think would be good candidates for residential (or hotel) conversion?

I think the Baker building would be a great candidate for a residential conversion. I love that building.

Class B rents in dt Mpls are higher than Class A rents in dt St. Paul.

I have to agree that the number of office workers downtown is improving, but the long-term outlook is not keeping up with expectations of a urban renaissance. Really, the major fortune 500 companies decisions to either relocate to the suburbs altogether or build an offsite campus is what is holding us back, with Wells Fargo being the major exception. Remember, these office jobs have a huge multiplier effect on the other sectors of the downtown economy. People want to live downtown because they have high paying white collar jobs there, those residents then provide ready customers for retail businesses who need employees of their own, those retail businesses and white-collar businesses attract tourists and travelers who need hotels, and the cycle goes on.

Are there any particular buildings y'all think would be good candidates for residential (or hotel) conversion? Or obsolete building(s) that could be torn down & replaced with residential?

On the Baker block, I could see the Baker building being a beautiful residential conversion. Maybe the US Trust building. And the Roanoke building if they undid some of the nasty 60s exterior changes. These three buildings, especially Baker, seem to have small foorplates (you can see it from the skyway window to the "courtyard"). My ideal configuration? Conversion of Baker and US Trust to residential (maintaining the 2nd Ave blockface) then having Baker and Investors (with the larger floor plates) torn down for a new half block tower along Marquette.

As ugly as the Northstar block is, I see this one sticking around longer because it's more tightly integrated. I love Northstar East (the old bldg at 2nd Ave / 6th St) but the rest is just oppressive. Especially the 7th Street blockface with block long awfulness and the parking garage ramps between street and sidewalk. If that side could get chopped up somehow, the rest of the complex is redeemable.

Finally, if the TCF atrium stays with any TCF redevelopment, I'd love to see that atrium become surrounded by residential. That space has so much potential if it was a sort of indoor winter garden. Imagine patio-style dining even in the winter. It could be like the Christos in SPUD, but even brighter.

cranes everywhere. apartments, some condo, office space, multi-use. how is the long term outlook not keeping up specifically?

what major companies have relocated to the 'burbs? i mean recently, not 60 years ago when general mills left for golden valley. recently i can think of a few major firms that have relocated downtown. creative firms, law firms, accountants. the north loop is bursting.

the long term outlook is keeping with planners and dt council boosters projections.

I was going to say Xcel (414 Nicollet) but the location may be a saving grace. Tiny windows though. Thrivent was fun because it had such huge windows on the 4th Ave side overlooking the County plaza with Accenture, Capella, and Ameriprise surrounding it. Very scenic view. My view in the Accenture building was the steam plant across the street.... that thing's quite the cloud maker on a cold day.

After walking in St. Paul last week I figured out why so many of the buildings designed and or built in the late 60's and early 70's had the gun slit windows. After walking by the Federal Courthouse which has the gun slit windows on the lower levels, They were design for safety reasons due to the many protests and riots during the Vietnam war. This is why the Xcel, the public safety building, the federal courthouse and other buildings at the time were design the way they were. It made it difficult for protesters to smash windows and try and enter a building as a large group compared to a big plate glass windows. Just some food for thought for those that were not around during those turbulent times.

I don't know if I buy that. At least the claim that Brutalist buildings on college campuses were designed for such purposes is a myth (http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_eye/2013 ... riots.html), and I don't know why buildings downtown would be any more likely to be designed that way.

After walking in St. Paul last week I figured out why so many of the buildings designed and or built in the late 60's and early 70's had the gun slit windows. After walking by the Federal Courthouse which has the gun slit windows on the lower levels, They were design for safety reasons due to the many protests and riots during the Vietnam war. This is why the Xcel, the public safety building, the federal courthouse and other buildings at the time were design the way they were. It made it difficult for protesters to smash windows and try and enter a building as a large group compared to a big plate glass windows. Just some food for thought for those that were not around during those turbulent times.

That certainly would not hold true in the case of the Xcel building which is all glass on the ground level. I think one has to be careful about how much one reads into design choices in architecture. Often they are just merely what was fashionable at the time.

Can someone explain why companies would pay more to HQ in the suburbs than downtown? I genuinely just don't know.
I mean, I've been around West End and do think it's nice, but not necessarily more so than downtown..