1020 replies to this topic

[citylife]

GvilleSC, on 04 February 2012 - 02:20 PM, said:

Anyone hearing news on the the 5 apartment developments that are supposed to be under construction this year? Obviously, two of them are very much under way. Although not very big, I'd love to see the [West End] Green Monster replacement begin.

I didn't think RiverWalk or 100 East were included in the five projects because they started construction before 2012. I could be wrong though.

[scgubers]

gsupstate, on 03 February 2012 - 11:43 AM, said:

I'd be quite shocked if it were the Doubletree brand as Hilton is doing almost zero new builds with that brand.  95% of the growth in the Doubletree brand is taking existing hotel properties (with an affection toward mid century 50's, 60's and some early 70"s properties) and remodeling them.  Hilton is using Doubletree as a brand to target much of the same demographic that currently prefers Starwood properties.
JHM's tighest relationship is with Marriott Corp.

You are correct with those statements. However JHM has a proven track record and a strong presence in Greenville to get the job done. Also the Doubletree in Charleston is very successful and Hilton would like to mirror that. And as you said "[Hillton] is doing almost zero new builds with that brand." Doubletree has extremely high name recognition in the market and is still associated with luxury service, something that Downtown needs/wants.

[citylife]

Regarding the hotel downtown: The site is slated to close in late February/early March. There are currently no firm plans for the site but JHM will hold onto the site. After the Hyatt project is complete they will decide what they want to do beginning at that time. Expect a Greenville News story on this soon.

[citylife]

In the Greenville market, the downtown apartment activity is bustling. Hughes Investments recently delivered the Riverwalk at Riverplace, a mixed-use development that consists of 44 units as a New Markets Tax Credit deal. Davis Property Group’s 100 East project consisting of 48 units will boast a rooftop pool. Both are reported to be fully pre-leased and are good indicators for what current apartment demand looks like in our rapidly changing market. Subsequently, there are two new proposed developments with no less than 300 units combined now pursuing the downtown area.

Source: http://www.southeast...highlight1.html

[scgubers]

citylife, on 24 April 2012 - 08:30 PM, said:

In the Greenville market, the downtown apartment activity is bustling. Hughes Investments recently delivered the Riverwalk at Riverplace, a mixed-use development that consists of 44 units as a New Markets Tax Credit deal. Davis Property Group’s 100 East project consisting of 48 units will boast a rooftop pool. Both are reported to be fully pre-leased and are good indicators for what current apartment demand looks like in our rapidly changing market. Subsequently, there are two new proposed developments with no less than 300 units combined now pursuing the downtown area.

Source: http://www.southeast...highlight1.html

That is very interesting. And you have a source

[GvilleSC]

citylife, on 24 April 2012 - 08:30 PM, said:

In the Greenville market, the downtown apartment activity is bustling. Hughes Investments recently delivered the Riverwalk at Riverplace, a mixed-use development that consists of 44 units as a New Markets Tax Credit deal. Davis Property Group’s 100 East project consisting of 48 units will boast a rooftop pool. Both are reported to be fully pre-leased and are good indicators for what current apartment demand looks like in our rapidly changing market. Subsequently, there are two new proposed developments with no less than 300 units combined now pursuing the downtown area.

Source: http://www.southeast...highlight1.html

WOW! So, whatever apartment project that is still flying under the radar contains 200 units. Very interesting!

[Greenville]

GvilleSC, on 24 April 2012 - 09:57 PM, said:

WOW! So, whatever apartment project that is still flying under the radar contains 200 units. Very interesting!

Such a development would have to include a sizable building height in order to accommodate so many apartment units.  Just saying.

Edited by Greenville, 25 April 2012 - 12:16 AM.

[GvilleSC]

Greenville, on 25 April 2012 - 12:15 AM, said:

Such a development would have to include a sizable building height in order to accommodate so many apartment units.  Just saying.

The first thing that came to mind when I read this was: Gateway site. However, I'm trying to wrap my mind around how 200 units would potentially be massed on that large of a site. Resultantly, I can't decide if it would create a building that is worthy for the said site. Then again, our current alternative is a green, wooden barrier.

Speculate away....

Edited by GvilleSC, 25 April 2012 - 07:29 AM.

[Skyliner]

98 East McBee Avenue?  Think about it.

[GvilleSC]

Skyliner, on 25 April 2012 - 07:32 AM, said:

98 East McBee Avenue?  Think about it.

I LIKE where your head is at, Sky! To say this is perfect, would be an understatement.

[citylife]

Skyliner, on 25 April 2012 - 07:32 AM, said:

98 East McBee Avenue?  Think about it.

140 apartment units proposed for that site I believe. Whether it gets built or not is a bit iffy mainly due to the parking situation and financing.

[Skyliner]

citylife, on 25 April 2012 - 07:48 AM, said:

140 apartment units proposed for that site I believe. Whether it gets built or not is a bit iffy mainly due to the parking situation and financing.

That may have been an initial proposal, but I can imagine the developers increasing the capacity to match market demand.  Parking will be in issue regardless of what is built at the site.

[GvilleSC]

Parking IS just across the street though. Riverwalk is going to be the same way once its temporary parking lot is developed. Heck, McBee Station's parking is a similar distance from its units. If you're hoping to rent in an urban area, then you should be prepared for this kind of arrangment, IMO. Obviously, condos are problematic because of the price point and what people come to expect with that. Financing could be an issue, but I don't buy parking as an issue.

[Greenville]

I like the way this is sounding.  Skyliner, have you heard something you can't expound upon?

[Urban Infill]

I believe the proposed sites mentioned in that article are Tom Croft's 100 Unit deal on Rhett Street and another 100 Unit deal on Rhett St closer to the baseball stadium that is going in front of the DRB in June (from what I have heard).I honestly think the 100 Unit deal (not Croft's) is the most likely to happen. While 140 units have been proposed for the Peacock site, I believe that deal is very unrealistic from a financing standpoint. There are several major problems: 1. the current owners would have to write off a huge sum of money which would destroy their numbers. 2. The required construction type to get that proposed density would be incredibly expensive and I don’t think they could justify the necessary rents to achieve a yield that would satisfy the equity and debt component. 3. There is no parking. The city financed the Spring Street garage with Tax Exempt bonds and there is an IRS regulation associated with those bonds that states that no more than a certain percentage of the spaces can be master leased. The 100 East project captured the remaining guaranteed spaces and no lender would ever think about financing a deal without a parking agreement in place. If the city were to refinance/restructure the current bonds, then there may be a chance this could work but I don’t see that happening anytime soon. I could be totally wrong about that site. Maybe Peacock can throw enough money at it to make something happen

The Bi-lo center site was in play for 200 units but the current owners could never make the numbers work....and the access is terrible. It is currently back on the market for sale.

Again, I may be way off base and this is only my opinion.

[Skyliner]

UF, thank you for your detailed explanation.  I was merely speculating based on previous information regarding 98 East McBee combined with the current rumor regarding the potential addition of 300 new apartment units in downtown.  Would you be willing to share further details regarding the viability of the Tom Croftis proposal?  I like the scale and design, but am puzzled by your statement that you believe the other Rhett Street project is more likely to be developed.  Regardless of their potential, both of these projects apparently total approximately 200 units, which does not back up the "300 units" mentioned above.

[vicupstate]

I won't speak for Urban Infill, but since Hughes is involved with the Rhett -River-Boggs site, that would indicate it has a solid chance of happening, from my viewpoint.

Someone had posted somewhere on the Greenville forum that an out-of-town developer was looking to build apartments on Rhett, but he was not certain of the parcel. Since Croft and Hughes are local, neither could be the developer in mind.  Perhaps there is another Rhett project lurking?

Hopefully if Croft and Hughes' projects both come out of the ground soon, it will spur something with the Green Monster site and the site behind that one, facing Rhett.

[Urban Infill]

Perhaps I misspoke regarding the Croft site. There is certainly a chance it may happen; I just think his stated timeline (breaking ground this summer) may be a little aggressive. I have no idea how his deal is/would be structured, but based on his stated project cost and the proposed unit count, he would have to convince a lender that he can achieve some significant rents to get the deal financed.

The other site is on Rhett Street and there is a very solid out of town developer with deep pockets that I would believe to have figured it out. The reason I said this deal was more likely because I think he can get started sooner. When there is a limited absorption rate, usually the first one to the table wins. While I think the downtown market can absorb 300 additional units rather easily, I don’t think it can absorb that many units and sustain the same rents that are currently seen in the market.....the rents I think Croft would have to get to make his deal feasible.

I don’t mean to be a pessimist and I certainly hope both sites get developed, but in reality getting a project of this magnitude (in today's lending environment) is a very complex process. You can have the greatest site, the greatest use and the greatest product but if the numbers don’t work, then the deal doesn’t work. I don't think Croft's numbers work as stated in that GSA article.

* I should probably put a disclaimer that the above is only my humble opinion for fun discussion purposes. In no way are my statements meant to be taken as facts - or seriously for that matter. I love talking about new deals and then trying to understand if they are realistic. I would welcome any positive criticism or a different viewpoints. Thanks!

[vicupstate]

^^  So there is an out of town developer that has a site under control on Rhett, and that site is not next to Croft's (since Hughes owns that one).  I'm sure you can't divulge the location, but do you yourself KNOW the location?

[Urban Infill]

It's definitely not Hughes's site. Think closer to the Drive Stadium on Rhett. There are several "For Sale" signs........