Jump to content

Tradition Tower


downtowninvestor

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

They went before the CRA advisory board yesterday and all 6 of the members rejected the idea of giving up the air rights without some sort of monetary compensation. Steve Walsh, the main guy for Broad Street Partners said as clear as he could "if we do not get air rights, this project will not be built". He said it about 5 times. The contract now goes to city coucil without the CRA's approval. City Council could approve it and give up the air rights, but I would not count on it . I believe Vargo and Diamond were against it, which Walsh mentioned in the meeting yesterday.

So what do you guys think? This is a great buiding, but should the city give up their air rights therefore decreasing the value of the property, or stand against?

The developer said that the air rights woud restrict any new building to around 12 stories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, I believe the council already approved the air rights deal, at least *provisionally*.

Or maybe I'm just remembering where they approved the incentives package, provisionally, and only Vargo was reported to have raised concerns about the air rights issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the main sticking point here is not the air rights themselves (why would the city need air rights for a parking garage? Who parks on the top level for the view?) but the compensation for the air rights. Regardless of whether they use the air rights or not, the city just wants to get paid for giving up their air rights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The developer said that he needed air rights to ensure buyers that their views would not be blocked. Their units are $450 a sq. ft. and he could not charge that if there was a posibility that another building would go right beside it. Broad St. Partners said that they decreasd the total number of units to 270 and had to charge $450 and up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The developer said that he needed air rights to ensure buyers that their views would not be blocked.  Their units are $450 a sq. ft. and he could not charge that if there was a posibility that another building would go right beside it.  Broad St. Partners said that they decreasd the total number of units to 270 and had to charge $450 and up.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So do you get the impression that the developer will not budge ? No negotiation ? All or nothing ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why the reduction from 325 units? Has the design or height changed?

I'm concerned that the city won't budge either because the commisioners that want compenstation for these air rights also see these other projects being proposed with no tax incentives.

I hope this gets worked out. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When the Board meeting was over, one of the developer's walked over to the executive director of the CRA and said "I am serious, if we do not get those air rights, the building will not be built.

They did not give a reason why they reduced the number of units. But with 7,000 units uc or planned, the council may not budge.

I think they go before council in mid september

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The developer said that he needed air rights to ensure buyers that their views would not be blocked.  Their units are $450 a sq. ft. and he could not charge that if there was a posibility that another building would go right beside it.  Broad St. Partners said that they decreasd the total number of units to 270 and had to charge $450 and up.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why should the city give in because Broad Street Partners was stupid and decreased their units to charge an insane amount????Sounds like another poorly managed project (See 55 West Thread).

Don't worry the University Club wants this lot developed and we could always end up with a Central Park Apts type development here....This was a mistake to give city incentives to this high priced development. The incentive money should be geared to affordable projects....Thi is definetly not affordable. All the projects that have decent prices are selling out in record time.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why should the city give in because Broad Street Partners was stupid and decreased their units to charge an insane amount????Sounds like another poorly managed project (See 55 West Thread).

Don't worry the University Club wants this lot developed and we could always end up with a Central Park Apts type development here....This was a mistake to give city incentives to this high priced development. The incentive money should be geared to affordable projects....Thi is definetly not affordable. All the projects that have decent prices are selling out in record time.......

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The Sentinel's Mike Thomas certainly excoriated Broad Street for the incentives package they claimed was necessary to build.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't worry the University Club wants this lot developed and we could always end up with a Central Park Apts type development here....This was a mistake to give city incentives to this high priced development. The incentive money should be geared to affordable projects....Thi is definetly not affordable. All the projects that have decent prices are selling out in record time.......

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...

Great news from the 10/3 City Council Agenda! It looks like the developer agreed to compensation for the air rights over the city garage. The following is an ammendment to the Incentive Agreement:

"Since the Garage Height Restriction will limit the value of the property upon which the Library Parking Garage is located and further limit the City

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still not crazy about height restrictions on any property. Who knows what could have been built there in the future. Maybe someone would come along and want to put up another 400 foot or taller building on this site which would add even more to the skyline. I am glad to see that Tradition Towers will probably move forward though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also of note from the agreement is that they have 2 years to commence construction from the date of the agreement.

"The above incentives are contingent upon the Developer's compliance with certain covenants and performance benchmarks, including the following:

1. Commencement of construction within 24 months, and completion of construction within 30 months from commencement."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In today's Sentinel is an article about the City Commision approving the city an addition to the Incentive Agreement including the air rights over the parking garge in exchange for a $300,000 doatiion to the Nap Ford School.

I think this a good thing. This is a great project and that lot where the parking garage is at has a pretty good use a parking garage. There's still so many surface lots and other blocks prime for redevelopment that this should not become an issue.

Link To Article

Link to comment
Share on other sites

$300,000 is pretty inexepensive for the permanent rights to anything downtown. I have a feeling that secretly Buddy would have sold the rights for a dollar just to see this thing built. This building is the real deal. The only thing that suprises me about the article is that this is only a $170 million project. It just seems a bit low considering it's size and scope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.