Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I think the price per square foot is about $500 not $700. Still expensive.

I stand corrected... bottom floor looking away from city with no "vue" of skyline <_<

~$320k / ~571 sqft. =~ $560 / sqft

But yes, still very (comparatively) expensive... not to mention the # of units they have to sell!

Im not looking for a sarcastic lecture, but rather a discussion on the drastic difference in $/sqft the Vue demands. That includes talking about the "price worthy" amentities that I, myself am not recognizing to be that much differnt than the ones at Ave, Trademark, Catalyst. :scared:

Id like to hear what I am obviously (with the 60% sales mark already met) misunderstanding about the value for buying here. No knock on anyone, just good discussion :whistling:

Edited by QC-NC
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I had a conversation just a few weeks ago where I learned that that specific banner cost somewhere around $30k.

And on another note, how many more decades do we think the “VUE Now Leasing” sign will remain on the south facing side at the top?  They’ve really gotten their money’s worth out of those banners. 

See and I'm thinking "well, the kerning between the V and A is terrible, and the secondary/primary hierarchy is reversed"

Posted Images

I stand corrected... bottom floor looking away from city with no "vue" of skyline <_<

~$320k / ~571 sqft. =~ $560 / sqft

But yes, still very (comparatively) expensive... not to mention the # of units they have to sell!

Im not looking for a sarcastic lecture, but rather a discussion on the drastic difference in $/sqft the Vue demands. That includes talking about the "price worthy" amentities that I, myself am not recognizing to be that much differnt than the ones at Ave, Trademark, Catalyst. :scared:

Id like to hear what I am obviously (with the 60% sales mark already met) misunderstanding about the value for buying here. No knock on anyone, just good discussion :whistling:

Just from what i've seen. It seems the layouts are much nicer than any previous project.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just from what i've seen. It seems the layouts are much nicer than any previous project.

The finishes that the VUE offers are higher end than the Ave and Trademark. The VUE offers professional kitchens and really nice bathrooms. Top of the line hardwood floors, appliances, cabinets, finishes/fixtures, and bathrooms have an immediate impact on the $/sq ft.

Link to post
Share on other sites

.....

Id like to hear what I am obviously (with the 60% sales mark already met) misunderstanding about the value for buying here. No knock on anyone, just good discussion :whistling:

It will be the tallest residential tower in the Carolinas and one of the tallest in the SE so I guess they feel they can charge a premium for this fact alone. The interiors really look not much better than stuff that one can get at Lowes so I don't think this is the reason. Also, as I mentioned earlier, when a building of this height is constructed, they have to charge more just because the cost/sq ft vs lesser buildings is higher.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be the tallest residential tower in the Carolinas and one of the tallest in the SE so I guess they feel they can charge a premium for this fact alone. The interiors really look not much better than stuff that one can get at Lowes so I don't think this is the reason. Also, as I mentioned earlier, when a building of this height is constructed, they have to charge more just because the cost/sq ft vs lesser buildings is higher.

Sorry - can you clarify whether you mean the stuff that one can get at Lowes (home improvement stores) or at Lowes (the condo project surrounding the new Lowes store in South End)?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I beleive the finishes in the Vue are a step above the Avenue and the Trademark. Most of what you're getting at the Vue would have been an upgrade at the other two buildings. The Vue will have four elevators which is a huge bonus compared to Trademark's two. The pool at the Vue will be much larger than the Avenue and Trademark's pool and the overall size of their community rooms are larger. Although the difference is only a few blocks I think you could make the case that the Vue is in a better location than the other towers. Also I think if you talk to a few residents at the other buildings you could make the point of a higher clientale at the Vue. Since the vast majority of the buyers at the Vue are over the age of 40 I doubt they will have some of the same problems the other buildings have had such as five story bongs down to the pool deck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I beleive the finishes in the Vue are a step above the Avenue and the Trademark. Most of what you're getting at the Vue would have been an upgrade at the other two buildings. The Vue will have four elevators which is a huge bonus compared to Trademark's two.....
It's a 50 story building, it needs 4 elevators just to hold it's own.
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a 50 story building, it needs 4 elevators just to hold it's own.

Good point. One of the elevators at the Vue is a service elevator. This is one of the things Furman skimped out on so therefore on most wknds one of the elevators at Trademark is being used for movers. Almost a year after the first closings one of the Trademark elevators still has the protective blankets and carpet taped to the floor so as to use it as a service elevator. The Vue won't have to worry about this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As has been discussed on this forum in the past, but not necessarily in this particular topic, residential towers are not very practical above 25 stories and preferably they should be less than 20. That is probably the biggest reason you don't see such spectacles in most places, even in places that actually might need them due to land and population pressures.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So one interesting note to make about the previously stated FACT, is that the Vue sales person noted it was the tallest ALL residential bldg...implying there is no office, major retail combo (like Trademark, or plenty of other mixed use tall bldgs in ATL, Orlando, Jacksonville)

Funny how we are going for such a vertical push when we realistically dont need to at all! (like it tho :shades: )

Edited by QC-NC
Link to post
Share on other sites

Five story bongs?!!? Where? When? And how is this a problem? :silly:

Look at the last couple of pages on the Trademark thread. About a month ago, there was a party at Trademark. Beer bong from around the 12th floor, down to the pool. Organized by owners and renters, but I believe it was more owners than renters. I reckon that people have been bent out of shape about it because the revelers were, apparently, "intimidating" (being familiar with them, this is BS) and they don't like the "Frat Boy" image of their building that is presented. There is concern over deterioration in value.

To answer your question, five story bongs are only a problem when you run out of beer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The finishes that the VUE offers are higher end than the Ave and Trademark. The VUE offers professional kitchens and really nice bathrooms. Top of the line hardwood floors, appliances, cabinets, finishes/fixtures, and bathrooms have an immediate impact on the $/sq ft.

I don't think having a KitchenAid or even Viking fridge i/o GE Profile and/or having brazilian cherry floors i/o bamboo justifies a $100/sqft increase value. Surely the sell from the developer is such, but I think there is a distinct divergence in price vs. value here and that is precisely what is wrong with condo economics now.

No doubt the Vue promises a higher end product than the other buildings, but the "other" buildings promised a lot too.

Edited by palmetto75
Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless it has changed, there was 6000 sq ft of ground floor retail space. Certainly not major, just point that out.

The Three Retail units all have there own entrances. The VUE is still considered a single use Residential building as the retail doesn't use the Lobby entrance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As has been discussed on this forum in the past, but not necessarily in this particular topic, residential towers are not very practical above 25 stories and preferably they should be less than 20. That is probably the biggest reason you don't see such spectacles in most places, even in places that actually might need them due to land and population pressures.

While I don't disagree with that, it seems that Atlanta, of all places, would be all about some spectacles, since most of its buildings are designed to be pretty from the interstate.

So one interesting note to make about the previously stated FACT, is that the Vue sales person noted it was the tallest ALL residential bldg...implying there is no office, major retail combo (like Trademark, or plenty of other mixed use tall bldgs in ATL, Orlando, Jacksonville)

Funny how we are going for such a vertical push when we realistically dont need to at all! (like it tho :shades: )

Even though this isn't true, its still not something we should be bragging about. Having a building this tall that isn't mixed use (namely streetfront retail) would be a horrible tragedy. For example, see the BofA HQ, BofA Plaza, 1 Wachovia, Charlotte Plaza, whatever that white and gold building is called, the Westin, etc....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though this isn't true

Can you reference a credible soure? or please give some basis for your denouncing of this sales manager delivered information? :dontknow:

Having a building this tall that isn't mixed use (namely streetfront retail) would be a horrible tragedy.

Not entirely true, I wouldnt call Westin, BOA HQ or any aformentioned bldgs "tragedies." I will agree to some extent and support the idea that mixed use design allows for a dynamic environment in many situations, yet still some bldgs probably serve better / operate more efficiently as a single use structure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As has been discussed on this forum in the past, but not necessarily in this particular topic, residential towers are not very practical above 25 stories and preferably they should be less than 20. That is probably the biggest reason you don't see such spectacles in most places, even in places that actually might need them due to land and population pressures.

People live in unpractical places...like the beach, the entire state of Florida, the desert in Phoenix, a mountainside in Asheville or Vail, or a 22 million person populated NYC. People purchase and live in spectacles(tall buildings, mcmansions, real mansions, palaces, castles, purple houses, art houses, homes that people love b/c of their unique nature). Therefore, I don't know if your factually stated opinion has any validity or true value. You cannot argue with simple demand economics...

Link to post
Share on other sites

... You cannot argue with simple demand economics...
Indeed. Simple economics says you don't build them in Charlotte where much of downtown is still covered in parking lots. It's been discussed elsewhere on this forum about the economies of building a skyscraper in the middle of a sea of parking lots. It's a logical fallacy to equate a skyscraper in the middle of a southern city to Manhattan island. Simple economics answers the question on why you don't see more of these buildings which was the question asked. They don't make economic sense, and when people actually move into them, they find they don't like living day to day so high up. This is why in such places that you mention like Manhattan or Tokyo the most expensive properties are those where the inhabitant can walk right out onto the street. It's already being discovered in Charlotte where numerous highrises have been canceled, or stopped work and where resales since the first of the year have been dropping in price since January.

This is why beyond the past 5 year bubble, you don't see many 50+ story residential towers. (and we have been able to build these things for at least 75 years)

Link to post
Share on other sites

... They don't make economic sense, and when people actually move into them, they find they don't like living day to day so high up.

...

Where has that been said? I have not heard one example of people who bought in a highrise and suddenly find out they dont like living high up.

There is certainly a demand for it since we've had numerous high rise condo towers go up. The ones that have been canceled, delayed, or work stopped, were, for the most part, for reasons other then demand. Bad management, under priced, office tenents pulling out, etc. The economy will be the achilles heal now.

Edited by Mobuchu
Link to post
Share on other sites

They don't make economic sense, and when people actually move into them, they find they don't like living day to day so high up. This is why in such places that you mention like Manhattan or Tokyo the most expensive properties are those where the inhabitant can walk right out onto the street. It's already being discovered in Charlotte where numerous highrises have been canceled, or stopped work and where resales since the first of the year have been dropping in price since January.

These are assumptions that may or may not be true. There are many factors that need to be included in your conclusions.

I also wonder whether the opinion that 'they find don't like living day to day so high up' can be backed up. I know many people living in almost all the high-rises we have uptown and don't know of any that aren't happy with their choice.

Resale prices dropping the first year can also be a factor of: who thought that it was a guarantee that you can buy a new condo, mark the price up, and flip it? with so many doing it there is no wonder that when they flooded the market (at the same time that the lending world collapsed) they couldn't sell them. Many of us expected this to happen.

Finally, its been bought up over and over again that the cancelled or stopped projects DID have plenty of pre-sales, it was other factors like a lawsuit, losing a large corporate tenant for the office component, and financing issues that stopped the projects, not lack of buyer demand.

As for economic sense based on number of parking lots, one of the primary economic factors that goes into going verticle isn't the simple ratio of parking lots to developed land, but the cost and/or value that the vacant land has in a given area -- say inside 277. At some point, at some price, you have to go denser and higher to make economic sense of buying or developing a plot in an area like uptown Charlotte.

Edited by Charlotte_native
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • 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.