The Stephens Empire: Big Plans for Downtown LR?

[LRU1967]

I honestly think I've been in a wig shop in downtown Little Rock, anyone have any names?

Downtown Wigs and Fashions, 305 Main

[LRU1967]

The momentum even in the 70s was negative though downtown was a few years from its nadir. The momentum now is overwhelmingly positive, at least.

You're right in that by the end of the 70s things had pretty much gone to pot. However in the first three or four years of the decade the big three of Little Rock retail, Dillards, Blass and M.M.Cohn were all still in business on Main Street.

[mcheiss]

Downtown Wigs and Fashions, 305 Main

Ah thanks, I remember going there a year ago.

[Aporkalypse]

Anything that would improve downtown is fine with me. Stephens appears to have the city's welfare at heart and if they can make a buck more power to them. I don't think downtown will ever be what it was even into the 70s but hopefully the tattoo parlors and wig shops will be gone.

I just wanted to point out that I think everyone agrees that Warren Stephens has the city's welfare at heart and is probably making suboptimal investments of his money because of the effect it will have on his hometown. I can't wait to see what he does have planned and I know it's a matter of waiting for the right timing.

[Aporkalypse]

The Demozette ran an article stating Stephens has the purchase option now but as was stated it is contingent on the elimination of the federal assistance portion from the lease, something that is unlikely to occur. The city is apparently working with Stephens and trying to help him.

Apparently the owners really let that project go to hell by all accounts.

[theman]

It hard to imagine that Block 2 has come down so fast. When this project was first completed, it was one of the first step in bringing residential units back downtown. Now it's gone to hell in a hand basket. I wish Stephens could purchase the property and update it, but that seems like it's not going to happen.

[Aporkalypse]

It hard to imagine that Block 2 has come down so fast. When this project was first completed, it was one of the first step in bringing residential units back downtown. Now it's gone to hell in a hand basket. I wish Stephens could purchase the property and update it, but that seems like it's not going to happen.

When I went to look at it when it opened I was really impressed and was looking to move there. It was a bit bare and industrial but really nice. At least Stephens has the city's strong backing so maybe they'll find a way around this. I don't think he's be pursuing it if there wasn't a possibility somewhere.

[skirby]

When I went to look at it when it opened I was really impressed and was looking to move there. It was a bit bare and industrial but really nice. At least Stephens has the city's strong backing so maybe they'll find a way around this. I don't think he's be pursuing it if there wasn't a possibility somewhere.

I don't know if the tax programs are the same but there was talk last year about the then pink apartments across from Dickey-Stephens. These also provide low income units and it was said the building could overcome this regulation if another building was built to make up for these units. Does anyone know how many low income units there are at Block2?

[Aporkalypse]

None of the apartments are designated as being for low income renters but of the 145 apartments up to half of the apartments can be federally subsidized which lowers the tenant's rent. This is a similar setup to Madison Heights (at the old Highland Court location) and the Bowman Heights complex on Napa Valley's hillside.

Here's an older but interesting article about the Block 2 redevelopment and similar projects from the St Louis Fed:

Loft Apartment Renaissance

[skirby]

None of the apartments are designated as being for low income renters but of the 145 apartments up to half of the apartments can be federally subsidized which lowers the tenant's rent. This is a similar setup to Madison Heights (at the old Highland Court location) and the Bowman Heights complex on Napa Valley's hillside.

Here's an older but interesting article about the Block 2 redevelopment and similar projects from the St Louis Fed:

Loft Apartment Renaissance

From your linked article "Therefore, the property was set up as mixed-use and mixed-income lofts. One-half of the lofts are market rate and one-half are affordable." It also states it used low income tax credits and they would be marketed to those who made $10,000 a year. If this is not meaning low income I don't know what is.

[Aporkalypse]

From your linked article "Therefore, the property was set up as mixed-use and mixed-income lofts. One-half of the lofts are market rate and one-half are affordable." It also states it used low income tax credits and they would be marketed to those who made $10,000 a year. If this is not meaning low income I don't know what is.

Remember, though, that one half of the lofts are rented at market rate but this half are not separated out - one apartment could be a "market rate" apt and be rent subsidized later by other tenants, the groups are mixed together.

When they opened it they thought they could market it at students, who often make very low incomes. For reasons I don't completely understand, students receiving other financial aid are ineligible for these types of housing assistance.

I agree, you're going to end up with big problems if you're trying to gentrify an area and at the same time adding residents well below the poverty line.

The "market rate" rents are pretty high - when they opened I was looking at $950 for a roughly 1000 SF 2-bedroom loft.

[LRU1967]

I remember touring the Block 2 project when it was first completed. It looked like a great place for a younger person to live. Would it be possible to separate the subsidized renters into one of the buildings, say the old Wallace building? The DP&L and the Archer buildings seem more desirable. I can imagine this wouldn't be a good PR move. However it would solve a problem namely having apartments side by side one paying half the rent of the other.

[Aporkalypse]

I remember touring the Block 2 project when it was first completed. It looked like a great place for a younger person to live. Would it be possible to separate the subsidized renters into one of the buildings, say the old Wallace building? The DP&L and the Archer buildings seem more desirable. I can imagine this wouldn't be a good PR move. However it would solve a problem namely having apartments side by side one paying half the rent of the other.

Never underestimate the allure of walking home from the bars to a 20-something.

The proliferation of condos down there has left a vacant niche for nice apartments and if Block 2 can right itself it should do well even with premium rents. I bet the new apartment building in NLR does shockingly well when it's finally built.

[theman]

I remember touring the Block 2 project when it was first completed. It looked like a great place for a younger person to live. Would it be possible to separate the subsidized renters into one of the buildings, say the old Wallace building? The DP&L and the Archer buildings seem more desirable. I can imagine this wouldn't be a good PR move. However it would solve a problem namely having apartments side by side one paying half the rent of the other.

Seperating the subsidized units from the market rate units would defeat the purpose of why developments like this and Madison Heights were created. The old way of doing things, building large housing developments for only low income people, created the Higland Courts of the world. Mixing low income with those who make a good living is to suppose to bring up the low income people. It is suppose to bring pride to those that they would keep up their property. This seems to be working in Madison Heights so far. It seems like the owners of Block 2 have dropped the ball with some of the maintainence issues. If an owner could be found that would keep up the property, a lot of the problems we are hearing about now probably would go away. Also being a little more choosy of potential tenants could help also. Enforce the rules of the property so you won't have so many problems with tenants. This one thing that Madison Heights does.

[LRU1967]

Seperating the subsidized units from the market rate units would defeat the purpose of why developments like this and Madison Heights were created. The old way of doing things, building large housing developments for only low income people, created the Higland Courts of the world. Mixing low income with those who make a good living is to suppose to bring up the low income people. It is suppose to bring pride to those that they would keep up their property. This seems to be working in Madison Heights so far. It seems like the owners of Block 2 have dropped the ball with some of the maintainence issues. If an owner could be found that would keep up the property, a lot of the problems we are hearing about now probably would go away. Also being a little more choosy of potential tenants could help also. Enforce the rules of the property so you won't have so many problems with tenants. This one thing that Madison Heights does.

What's the breakdown at Madison Heights between low income and market rate renters?

[Aporkalypse]

Seperating the subsidized units from the market rate units would defeat the purpose of why developments like this and Madison Heights were created. The old way of doing things, building large housing developments for only low income people, created the Higland Courts of the world. Mixing low income with those who make a good living is to suppose to bring up the low income people. It is suppose to bring pride to those that they would keep up their property. This seems to be working in Madison Heights so far. It seems like the owners of Block 2 have dropped the ball with some of the maintainence issues. If an owner could be found that would keep up the property, a lot of the problems we are hearing about now probably would go away. Also being a little more choosy of potential tenants could help also. Enforce the rules of the property so you won't have so many problems with tenants. This one thing that Madison Heights does.

Madison Heights and Block 2 are different animals. In the section of town where Madison Heights is located market rate renters can expect low rents, which in fact they get. They are in the same basic class as those who live next to them with assistance.

In Block 2, you have market rate renters charging premium rents for lofts, as high as you will find for apartments in Little Rock, while living adjacent to families living well below the poverty line. This clearly doesn't jive and you can't keep those paying rent happy with the situation.

Besides, the very high utility costs of living in lofts isn't compatible with those living below poverty.

[skirby]

All gone.

[theman]

The Lafayette Square project is behind schedule with "supply shortages". Most likely the problem is that the condos aren't selling as quickly as the developer thought. If Stephens would go ahead and announce what he going to do with all of the property he has aquired along Main, it would help out the Lafayette Square development.

[skirby]

The Lafayette Square project is behind schedule with "supply shortages". Most likely the problem is that the condos aren't selling as quickly as the developer thought. If Stephens would go ahead and announce what he going to do with all of the property he has aquired along Main, it would help out the Lafayette Square development.

About three weeks ago the MLS showed only six units for sale in the Lafayette building. There are no longer any units listed.

[Aporkalypse]

About three weeks ago the MLS showed only six units for sale in the Lafayette building. There are no longer any units listed.

You sly dog. I never thought about doing that.

[theman]

About three weeks ago the MLS showed only six units for sale in the Lafayette building. There are no longer any units listed.

If that is the case then I'm completely wrong with my assessment. I'm glad to see that they are selling well. Why wouldn't they announce that they are selling that well. In the news article the developers wouldn't say how many units have sold. You see advertisements for 300 Third that say that 65% of the units have been sold.

[Aporkalypse]

If that is the case then I'm completely wrong with my assessment. I'm glad to see that they are selling well. Why wouldn't they announce that they are selling that well. In the news article the developers wouldn't say how many units have sold. You see advertisements for 300 Third that say that 65% of the units have been sold.

I agree. When it comes to condo developments hype pushes sales. When people are afraid that prices might go up significantly post-construction they are far more apt to go ahead and get in on the action early.

[Aporkalypse]

Warren Stephens finished his buyout of his cousin's stock so he retains sole ownership of Stephens, Inc.

The investment banking firm has $409 million in assets and is the largest off-Wall Street brokerage in the country. They have offices in 17 states and the UK.

His cousins, Elizabeth and Witt, Jr retain 50% of other Stephens family investments including Stephens Media Group. They are building offices to manage their investments on the riverfront near downtown LR.

[Architect]

Warren Stephens finished his buyout of his cousin's stock so he retains sole ownership of Stephens, Inc.

The investment banking firm has $409 million in assets and is the largest off-Wall Street brokerage in the country. They have offices in 17 states and the UK.

His cousins, Elizabeth and Witt, Jr retain 50% of other Stephens family investments including Stephens Media Group. They are building offices to manage their investments on the riverfront near downtown LR.

I'm interested to see what type of development (scale) they pursue.

[Aporkalypse]

I'm interested to see what type of development (scale) they pursue.

I am as well. I am greatly relieved the family elected to stay in Little Rock.