1500 Monticello Ave

[cwilm79]

17 hours ago, vdogg said:

Could just be they're removing the fence because it's an eyesore. Maybe the city told them to take it down.

Very true and probably more likely.

Wish they would sell it if they don't intend to build it. Have to think if priced reasonably there would be plenty of developers interested in this market.

[cwilm79]

.......fence back up. Nevermind.

[cwilm79]

Anyone hear anything on this property? Still shows on developers website:

http://www.concordeastridge.com/projects/1500-monticello-avenue

[vdogg]

It's been 2.5 years since this article was posted. It's loopnet listing was last updated in 2018. It absolutely boggles my mind that in the middle of a substantial apartment boom they still can't get this off the ground. We now have years of data that show Norfolk can support the pace of apartments being built. I just can't understand why they can't get this financed.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pilotonline.com/business/article_5dfdb22c-65cb-5b0c-bae5-658e872434e0.html%3foutputType=amp

[urbanvb]

Just rode by this property last night. It’s amazing this prime piece of property is still sitting idle after all this time. Smh

Edited January 27, 2020 by urbanvb

[HRVA]

Don’t get excited but the property is on the City Council’s pending land use report as having a pre-submittal meeting. The only detail is ‘rezoning-remove conditions’ which could mean anything but something to watch. 

https://www.norfolk.gov/DocumentCenter/View/85963/Pending-Land-Use-Report

[Si7i]

5 hours ago, HRVA said:

Don’t get excited but the property is on the City Council’s pending land use report as having a pre-submittal meeting. The only detail is ‘rezoning-remove conditions’ which could mean anything but something to watch. 

https://www.norfolk.gov/DocumentCenter/View/85963/Pending-Land-Use-Report

Looks like the owner is going to ask the city to allow a drive-through and low-density development by subleasing the plot to multiple suburban restaurants. Seems as if half the property already has a potential leaser. The old listing still showed the former proposed apartment development, as of March 27th the listing was updated on Loopnet with these new low-density renderings. I hope the city doesn't budge on this and only allows multi-family or mixed-use. I miss when the Piliot used to dig into this stuff. 

[HRVA]

20 minutes ago, Si7i said:

Looks like the owner is going to ask the city to allow a drive-through and low-density development by subleasing the plot to multiple suburban restaurants. Seems as if half the property already has a potential leaser. The old listing still showed the former proposed apartment development, as of March 27th the listing was updated on Loopnet with these new low-density renderings. I hope the city doesn't budge on this and only allows multi-family or mixed-use. I miss when the Piliot used to dig into this stuff. 

Yea that’s unfortunately what I was expecting. It’s mind blowing they couldn’t make this project work even during the surge in demand and low interest rates during the pandemic. It would be a massive disappointment if this is approved. 

[baobabs727]

Anyone here work in commercial lending? There's got to be a secret to that application sauce that other developers have perfected here...and these people never could do ...even in the best of/better times. They blamed it on tertiary and quaternary market labels, but I think there was way more to the story, as others got their apartment developments approved all over the damn place. I am aware of many other factors determinant of lending underwriting decisions, and I won't spell them out here because I'm too lazy ....lol

[BFG]

That’s a waste of prime real estate. 

[baobabs727]

47 minutes ago, BFG said:

That’s a waste of prime real estate. 

Absolutely! I am doubtful that city govt will give its blessing on this one.

[BeagleAccountant]

23 hours ago, baobabs727 said:

Absolutely! I am doubtful that city govt will give its blessing on this one.

I agree bout it being a waste  but it's hard to see the argument against it. This use is consistent with that side of Monticello.

[baobabs727]

39 minutes ago, BeagleAccountant said:

I agree bout it being a waste  but it's hard to see the argument against it. This use is consistent with that side of Monticello.

haha...I was just about to say the same thing. Chick fil-a anyone? ugh.

[vdogg]

On 4/9/2024 at 12:29 PM, Si7i said:

Looks like the owner is going to ask the city to allow a drive-through and low-density development by subleasing the plot to multiple suburban restaurants. Seems as if half the property already has a potential leaser. The old listing still showed the former proposed apartment development, as of March 27th the listing was updated on Loopnet with these new low-density renderings. I hope the city doesn't budge on this and only allows multi-family or mixed-use. I miss when the Piliot used to dig into this stuff. 

That's ridiculous and completely at odds with where the city is trying to go in that area. Should get rejected, the city seems to finally be pushing for more urban development and sticking to their guns (for once).

[ONCE1stBlvd]

9 hours ago, vdogg said:

That's ridiculous and completely at odds with where the city is trying to go in that area. Should get rejected, the city seems to finally be pushing for more urban development and sticking to their guns (for once).

Bro, of the city okays that drive-thru crap I'm gonna be so disappointed . They gotta know that suburban styled development is crippling in a small, landlocked city like Norfolk. Especially this close to the "urban core"

[baobabs727]

2 hours ago, ONCE1stBlvd said:

Bro, of the city okays that drive-thru crap I'm gonna be so disappointed . They gotta know that suburban styled development is crippling in a small, landlocked city like Norfolk. Especially this close to the "urban core"

100. Problem is they let the damn Chick-fil-A build next door. Morons.