Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

bluff2085

100 N Main building for sale

15 posts in this topic

Link to article from MBJ... article

Occupancy is only around 50%. The owners are asking for $20 million. Total office space is 436,280 sq ft. They say adaptive re-use w/ mixed uses would be the ideal re-development of the building, but 100 N Main's design poses a renovation nightmare to potential developers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I think it could be renovated into a large apartment building with mid-range rates. It's 60's architecture should be embraced and made trendy and retro. We need more apartments that appeal to UTHSC and future law students and young professionals. Rents should be in the $700 range for a one bedroom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to see the remaining half of the building turned into condos or apartments and then a boutique hotel...Philadelphia has a few of these types of hotels where seven floors are hotel and the rest is office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah i just think sometimes it's better to tear down than try and use it for something else.....the sterick will never be reused as anything, it's way too expensive to remodel and bring up to code. 100 n.main is just ugly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


yeah i just think sometimes it's better to tear down than try and use it for something else.....the sterick will never be reused as anything, it's way too expensive to remodel and bring up to code. 100 n.main is just ugly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sterick will never be reused, mark my words, it will continue to sit empty for maybe as long as ten years and then we will have to demolish it b/c bigger and bigger chunks will continue falling off killing bums and damaging other buildings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sterick will never be reused, mark my words, it will continue to sit empty for maybe as long as ten years and then we will have to demolish it b/c bigger and bigger chunks will continue falling off killing bums and damaging other buildings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no true at all. it was abandoned in the 80s. if demand continues to go up in downtown it will be reused, similer to the sears building in midtown. if you dont think skyscrapers that are old ''renovatable'' look at lincoln american tower in the same downtown as sterick....

for other examples of highrises that have been renovated and are older than sterick... one only look at just about every single New england city....

its far cheaper to renovate a building... than to tear it down and rebuild a modern facility. Tearing down a facility, requires demolition engineers, some structural engineers( like me) and time(thus lost money). then you have debris removal... which takes months and thus lost money. then you actually have to construct a new tower which takes structural engineers, some mechanical engineers, and some electrical engineers... plus crews to actaully build it... youre looking at a large dent in your wallet...

lets not forget the possible hazzards of demolition---ohhh perhaps the asbestos insulation--

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well let's hope you are right, but i doubt it will ever be reused for anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think in general it's a lot cheaper to try and rehab something than to tear it down and build anew. Just think about it: the cost of demolition, whatever myriad factors are invlolved with that process. Hiring an architect, designing the building, codes, approval, public hearings, etc. etc. Bidding on a contractor and finally construction with whatever cost fluctuations in building materials, weather delays or whatever might occur in that time span. These are just some of the issues that occur to me, a complete layman in regards to big development projects.

Maybe others have some more detailed insight on the hurdles of rehabing vs. new construction?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think in general it's a lot cheaper to try and rehab something than to tear it down and build anew. Just think about it: the cost of demolition, whatever myriad factors are invlolved with that process. Hiring an architect, designing the building, codes, approval, public hearings, etc. etc. Bidding on a contractor and finally construction with whatever cost fluctuations in building materials, weather delays or whatever might occur in that time span. These are just some of the issues that occur to me, a complete layman in regards to big development projects.

Maybe others have some more detailed insight on the hurdles of rehabing vs. new construction?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.