ElricSeven
-
Posts
832 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Project Database
User Guide
Store
Events
Posts posted by ElricSeven
-
-
Ahh it will be interesting to see how this turns out. Some time ago, I don't exactly remember when, this neighborhood association was given tens of millions of dollars by the city for urban revitalization. They were supposed to take the money, renovate the homes, and make it a showcase example of what public/private partnerships can do to make the city better.
There was no oversight.
The Observer did one of it's investigations into the matter and found the people hired to do the work were relatives of the head of the HOW at the time. (at least that is what they said) Much of the money simply disappeared. They deny it, but there is no denying the results over there and lots of taxpayer money down the drain.
I will be surprised if anyone can get clean title to the land.
It saddens me that the most oppressed of people tend to be abused most often by their own rhetoric spewing, self-appointed representatives. Beware of anyone who says you can trust them because they can feel your pain and they look like you.
-
I still don't see how they are going to add street level retail on College. The bottom level of Founders Hall is one level above College Street, so it's not just a matter of adding street level entrances, and changing the facing of the individual stores to make them more friendly to the outside pedestrian. I also don't think any current Founders Hall tennants are at street level.
Yeah, I wondered about that too.
-
What kind of retail has moved into the Furman buildings? IE..gourmet, restaurants, specialty, etc? Does Furman have certain clientele in mind to fill those shopping areas? That is, wouldn't it make sense if the businesses were geared for the practical needs of the residents in that particular building and those adjacent to them....such as a gourmet grocery store or a Starbucks! First Ward is in desperate need of these. The government area is just around the corner of Quarterside!
Has anyone spoken to future residents or retailer tenents and asked what they would like to see in retailers for convenience sake?
Reids is a great gourmet grocery store in first ward.
-
The Pizza Place is supposed to be going in the bottom of City View Lofts at the corner of 10th and Davidson.
Furman has not signed a tenet for the Courtside retail. He said a number of tenets can't make the space work due to the lack of parking at the site.
I hope it is something good, I don't want to live above a porn bookstore or anything like that.
-
And?
It was nifty. Looked like a mini-Trademark with green glass. Surprising considering the small size of the lot, but I think that's because it can go right to the lot line. Parking garage, boutique hotel up to 17th floor and then 120 units of condos above that. I forget how many floors for that, somewhere around 18 or 20 for a total of like 35 floors. The condos will be really small.
I guess we need to put this under first ward highrise projects. (grin)
-
Interested to know what was said at the meeting.
Saw the tower.
-
The problem is, courts are generally unfriendly to the concept of "lost potential profit". A stronger case would be something like: Being assured a unit would be ready by a certain date, incurring difficulty and expense in your life while you waited beyond that date, then losing your unit.
That would be "promissory estoppel" and a case for a lawsuit. But if you had the money to live elsewhere ,and did not really incur any definable damages, it's going to be a tougher to recover anything.
The facts of lost profits can be difficult to provde in many cases, yes. But, with such a well-established appraisal system for real estate and the ability to value the units at exactly what the current developer is now selling them for, I would think the chances would be much better than your average damage award. Making the plaintiff "whole" in this case would be, in effect, giving them what was needed to put them in a similar unit at the same price they'd contracted for. That won't require the same mental gymnastics that your usual contractual agreement for sales of widgets that were never received, licensing revenue on songs never sold, etc.
Funny thing is that I'm reading a case right now in which lost profits were successful and read two yesterday. So, perhaps lost profits are under conventional wisdom considered harder to prove, but I would hardly call them rare. Just one of those things where consulting an attorney is just a good idea for anyone. My point was more the latter and trying to point out how much could be at stake.
-
To me, what makes sense as a buyer, is that you would expect to collect a premium.
You face the hassle of waiting, needing to close when the builder says GO!, potentially living in a building with construction continuing in other parts of it. There is the risk it will never be built - while you had to part with your deposit for a year or two... something which may have impacted your life in all kinds of ways. (And finally, the risk that you won't get your deposit back, which despite assurances, can happen anyway-- if the builder goes BK.
) Good grief, if you have to pay "true market price" - then just buy a resale, and be done with it.Producers in the commodities futures market, don't get to change their mind, if they underprice the underlying goods which they must deliver. That builders can do this, is just plain slimy.
Here's an article in the Washington Post that discusses the abuse of "force majure" clauses by developer who are trying to merely get out of paying increased costs on completing the development.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6102700638.html
My guess is that the Renwick might have a similar situation. As far as the price increase goes, I believe there are many people who were initial contract holders that would have profits in the $100,000 and more range. If I was them, I would seek out a good lawyer to ensure that they are fully aware of their rights under the contract. That's a lifetime of savings for many people.
-
That is true as well CN. I guess its a result of a combination of factors and its replicated in cities all over the country. I think this type of gentrification is more acute in Charlotte because we are a relatively smaller and new city. In New York or Boston or Philly and other older cities there is always the next "hood" to be discovered, I don't see the next burgeoning NoDa or PlazaMidwood elsewhere in central Charlotte and that is worrying. And I don't have any animosity towards yuppies, they just seem to outnumber me everywhere I live :-)
There are plenty of [insert alternative word for crap]holes that the edgy folks can go to next. They're being created as rapidly as they're being destroyed. Head out past Woodlawn along S. Blvd for instance, or along West Blvd.
-
Someone really should run an article about this....the best justice is for no one to buy any of the units when they are put back on the market.
As far as what seems reasonable in a lawsuit, I'm not an attorney, but he should at least be paid the average of the 10-year treasury yeild on his downpayment. Beyond that, it is easy for the developer to argue that if it was bought as an investment, there is an inherent risk with investing......getting his money back is better than a lot of people who bought Red Hat at $100.
It all depends on the wording of the contract. They might have had an escape clause in there, but usually (not always, but usually) they're conditioned on something. My guess is that the letter mimicked the condition required to invoke their right to cancellation. Be that as it may, merely reciting the wording doesn't mean it is in fact true. Sort of like disclaimers which are wrong all the time. Big trucks that say "Not responsible for damage or injury caused by falling material." To which I say, "BS". If something falls off their truck and kills someone or damages something due to their negligence, then they're responsible. So, if I was that guy I would ask my attorney to read the contract closely and see exactly what is required for cancellation. That's what you fight about.
If it is an unconditional right of cancellation, then that might be more problematic. There might be some statutory regulation not allowing unconditional rights of cancellation on a RE contract. My specialty isn't RE law however.
In sum, don't just fold up and sign the check (waiving the right to contest) until some serious due-diligence has been performed by an attorney with experience in RE and contract law.
-
Those units in odd places can probably be rented out fairly easily, but I doubt anyone would buy one of those to live in.
I don't know if I'd call them odd, the concrete floors are thick enough that no noise is going to come from anything that goes in in the retail space below. As far as street noise goes, you get that half way up the building. I just think no one wants to be on the bottom because, well, who wants to be the ugliest guy in the room? The floor above them has been sold out since the beginning. Not sure there's much more than an emotional reason why.
-
Another bottom floor unit (I'm assuming the bottom is floor is floor 3) came on the market last week from an investor. They are touting it as being beneficial because of the "rare opportunity to park on same floor as unit..."
I guess that is one way to look at it!
It is convenient. I park on the same floor as I live on, but up higher you've got to drive in quite a few circles to get to the spot. Of course you don't get in you car except on weekends, so it isn't that much of a bother.
-
Not quite there. The developer has 2 or 3 for sale and 5 that are pending but not closed yet. Essentially for the developer this is sold out.
And the pending, not closed ones are not finished with construction. Of the 3 for sale, two are on the lowest floor (3rd floor) and are really quite a bargain considering what people are lining up to buy in other buildings. Easily twice the cost per square foot. No one wants to be on the bottom floor, though, maybe it's an ego thing.
-
You're not learning your sunk cost lesson very well cltheel. Go ask Dr. Benevie (or whoever you actually have) for more help. The idea of sunk costs is that they are already spent and are not recoverable. They should never factor in decision making. Decision making should be based on future variable costs.
That is, sunk costs are not part rational decision making, it doesn't mean that people don't end up factoring them it. But they shouldn't, theoretically.
Mr. Ghazi could look at this project and determine he will lose MORE money by continuing, then the project could be cancelled.
Right, but either conclusion could be supported depending upon the circumstances, but if the original project appeared to be supported by rental rates, then with half the job done already (or half the expense paid) it would still make more sense to finish even if they're only sure of renting half of it out. And, I bet they're well past half completed on the expense side. Implosion, cleanup and foundation work have to be pretty darn expensive and they've also poured a few levels. There's only a few more levels on the retail side - I would guess the equivalent expense of putting something in the burbs - and it will bring in top-drawer retail rates.
Think of it this way, if someone offered the project as is to you for one dollar out of bankruptcy, would you buy it? My guess is that you'd jump on the deal and get financing quite easily with the assurance that the remaining costs would be well-supported by the leases.
-
Just the visual of seeing construction crews, concrete being poured, and site work all over the place. I suspect if there were going to nix parts or all of this project they would quit spending that money on this progress.
The 210 folks are still fully marketing the project as well. I have no insider info and know nothing more, just that I have rarely seen something moving along that stopped forever (other than The Park but they are now seemingly moving forward, albiet at a snails pace). Even the Pink Building halted for quite a while (can't remember how long) but was finally finished.
I think the retail part will finish just because the most expensive work is probably already finished and the remainder (using a forward-looking going concern value) is more than supported by potential retail revenue. Decisions are made as to what makes sense on future capital and return because you can't get back what you've already spent.
-
Can someone ask to buy their brand?
Historic businesses often have new life with new owners.
This sounds crazy, but a perfect location would be in the bottom of Courtside. People could walk over from the Arena events and from the bars on College street. Although I'm not sure how cool I would be with being kept up all night as an owner.
-
ElricSeven this reminds me: I was wondering if you could post some pics of your unit and the interior of courtside. I think that would be cool! Thanks.
I'm a bit technologically challenged on posting pics, but I'll take some and then perhaps give it a try. I'm a little leery of my privacy, though. I'll think about it.
-
As far as developers canceling purchase contracts, I did a quick search online, and found enough stories/blogs/message board threads to come to the conclusion that this is happening all over the US right now. A lot of the stories seem to be located in markets that have been categorized as a "bubble".
Is this the first to happen recently in Charlotte?
These are cancellations, though, so the developer can resell the units at a HIGHER price. Not dismantle the project due to lack of interest. Completely opposite thing.
-
As respects the Renwick, this may be true, but mortgage companies certainly do make and close residential mortgage loans on properties under construction.
I think they do, but if my experience at Courtside is any indication, it requires that the unit be inspected and approved for occupancy. So the unit itself is not under construction, even if the rest of the project still is.
-
What Gazumpers. I thought this was a British thing, but I guess America has it's own version in construction financing.
http://www.themovechannel.com/howto/buy/wh...s-gazumping.asp
I think the Renwick buyers do have a written contract, that's the difference.
-
Developers a few years back based pre-construction pricing on the "current" pricing at the time they announced the project and began taking contracts or reservations. This was when the condo market in center city and close in areas was less proven and they needed to sell quickly for the banks to fund the project. They also didn't know, themselves, whether sales would be brisk or not.
Confidence in sales is high in the Charlotte market so now they add in some additional pricing to more match the 'current' pricing for when they are done. Call it built-in assumed inflation. Across the board in Charlotte condo projects are priced just above, or far above, what the same unit would fetch today.
They did this partly from watching investors buy and flip over the past few years and realized how much cash was being left on the table. Generally this stepped up pricing started about a year or two ago.
Like I said, they've got some hubris to have the buyer shoulder a bunch of the risk and not leave any of the profits to the buyer. I guess there will be a bunch of buyers dumb enough to fall for it, but eventually this will come home to roost when very high anticipated gains don't materialize and people closing find themselves upside down by 20%. One anecdotal story of such an occurence will go a long way to chilling sales for everyone for a long time.
-
Pre-steel/concrete price run-up vs. post-cost run-up.
But yes...there is a very serious middle area that has little inventory which is the $275-$325psf range....the question is, will existing properties quickly rise into this hole in pricing, or will flippers take a hit and fall in the hole.
I suspect things will be skewed until 2010 or so, when the new construction boom has ended and ARM's have adjusted. We will have a real sense then, if there is enough demand to lift all properties, or if this was a passing fad, and the newest and shiniest have to fall back to reality.
My understanding is that construction inflation-based increases usually stick much better than speculative gains. There's a finite amount that were purchased by the flippers, so even if they cause a divot, you would think that would dry up with inventory.
-
I'm pretty confident that we will see prices set above $375k per square foot.
Is it me or does there seem to be a serious disconnect between what condo resales are going for versus what they're asking for new construction?
-
If they are affordable and marketed to young people, it will really give the Whole Foods an interesting vibe, like the uptown Teet.
Nothing like having a grocery full of people from upstairs in their pajamas, picking up a bowl of cereal or and sub sandwich.
If MetMidtown is any indication, this place will be gawdaful expensive also. The hubris of Pappas on setting the price for MetMidtown astounds me.
) Good grief, if you have to pay "true market price" - then just buy a resale, and be done with it.
. Go ask Dr. Benevie (or whoever you actually have) for more help. The idea of sunk costs is that they are already spent and are not recoverable. They should never factor in decision making. Decision making should be based on future variable costs.
3rd Ward Midrise Projects
in Charlotte
Posted
It's really only an announcement boom at this point. Let's wait until we see construction starting before we get too excited.