Our City Online

Messageboard

NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard. As of 05/22/16 they have been closed to new comments and replies, but will remain accessible for archived searches and reference. For more information CLICK HERE

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 151 through 165 (of 172 total)
  • Author
    Posts

  • JD3
    Member

    Mercurius wrote >>

    jpizzow wrote >>
    ughhhhhhhhhhhh

    +1

    +2
    Email has been sent. I’ll let you know if anything new comes to light.


    JD3
    Member

    I said the same thing to Travis and he said that the developers have stressed that point.


    JD3
    Member

    I posted this on the Ibiza interview thread too, but it’s easy to copy and paste!
    I talked to Travis at Ibiza yesterday b/c I was starting to let my mind run a little wild about this project. I won’t expound on my theories b/c they’re just that, theories. I’ve bashed enough morons on here talking nonsense so I’m not going to do that, but I had some of that nonsense running through my head after the latest delay.
    Long story short, I’ve had my expectations set up and knocked down several times with Ibiza. All you have to do is look back through these threads to see all the speculation of start dates. Most recently, my expectations were set that construction was to begin by the end of this month (2-4 weeks after City Council passed the tax deal, which was the end of March). This week, when I saw that the lot looked exactly like it did a year ago, I called Travis. The explanation for the latest delay is that since they are using government money for this project that the details must be made public for 2 weeks. In other words an explanation of how tax payer money will be spent must be public knowledge so that people can complain if they want to (do I smell a tea party, haha?). Anyway, I understand that, but my question was, “Why was this a surprise, it’s not the first place you’ve built.” Travis’ answer was that they’ve never had to go through city council or the state to get taxpayer money, so they were completely caught off guard by this. They got it into the Dispatch as soon as they could. The good news is that last weekend was the second weekend that it was run in the Dispatch so it’s officially with the state at this point.
    We probably talked about the project for 30 minutes. By the end of our conversation Travis convinced me that the project is still a ’go’. I was even invited to sit down with the developers if I wanted to. I didn’t accept the offer, but I appreciated it. It’s not financing that is holding this project up, there have simply been a lot of hoops to jump through….way more than anticipated.
    Travis is a good guy and answered any question that I threw at him over the phone. I bet he’d be willing to do the same for you if you have any questions, but if you need a Realtor let me know, haha! He was confident that units will be delivered by next year at this time and he’s hoping to send an email with a dig date soon. Hope this info helps.


    JD3
    Member

    misskitty wrote >>

    surber17 wrote >>
    miss kitty, where did you get that the inner condos have no windows? I’m pretty sure all the condos have windows, the inner ones would just be looking into the courtyard.

    Oh I see that I was thinking it was just inner condos. So there is a court yard Directly in the middle of the towers?

    Yeah, the inside unit’s have windows looking into the courtyard. Well, they’re supposed to at any rate.


    JD3
    Member

    aaminian wrote >>

    misskitty wrote >>
    Am I the only one that finds the note on the web site that says add 25k Per parking space crazy ?

    Not surprised. I live in Victorian Gate, and the single-car detached garage units get auctioned off starting at $30,000 when they become available– and they go FAST.

    Any place with a parking spot is simply another 25K anyway. At least you have the option of whether or not to buy it, which I like.


    JD3
    Member

    jawjack187 wrote >>
    The legislation for this project should be up for a vote at City Council at the March 30 meeting.

    I hope you’re right.


    JD3
    Member

    jpizzow wrote >>

    JD3 wrote >>

    CbusIslander wrote >>
    The construction loan business is extremely rough right now. I believe this project is “on hold” like many other projects out there. I will be optimistic till Walker hears directly from the source. Hope the project actually starts soon because I think this would be a great addition to the neighborhood.

    I just spoke to someone at ARMS and they assured me that financing is secured. They also mentioned that they may be starting by the end of this month or early next month. Fingers crossed.

    I’ll believe it when I see it. Until then, I shall remain pissed.

    Agreed…hopefully we’ll all be happy soon.


    JD3
    Member

    CbusIslander wrote >>
    The construction loan business is extremely rough right now. I believe this project is “on hold” like many other projects out there. I will be optimistic till Walker hears directly from the source. Hope the project actually starts soon because I think this would be a great addition to the neighborhood.

    I just spoke to someone at ARMS and they assured me that financing is secured. They also mentioned that they may be starting by the end of this month or early next month. Fingers crossed.


    JD3
    Member

    enzo wrote >>

    joev wrote >>
    More rich people living downtown = bigger tax base. That’s why we should emulate Portland. Aside from topographical barriers, Portland has a strict land use ordinance. You can’t build something new without taking down something old and putting it on the same land. Keeps sprawl way down and helps spotty neighborhood rebound quicker.

    That is aweseome…..I wanted this to be implemented to all of the new home builders, developers etc. NO MORE CLEAR CUTTING or tearing down unless you improve what we already have rather than abandoning and leaving empty,trashed out neighborhoods behind. This is a mandatory change. Have all of them sink their money and time into improving what we have.

    Good idea in theory and where it’s really necessary due to the physical lay of the land. However, if you think property downtown in too expensive now…..Often times it’s cheaper to tear down and rebuild. Not sure what clear cutting has to do with anything though.


    JD3
    Member

    Walker wrote >>
    Setting up a time for lunch and interview/q&a. :D Will post more about it soon.

    Good to know, please ask about their financing.


    JD3
    Member

    Walker wrote >>

    drew wrote >>
    It sure would be nice if someone from Ibiza would comment on their ridiculously obvious lack of progress…

    I sent an email to Rajesh Lahoti yesterday. I’ve only met him once before, and he seemed like a nice enough guy to me. Hopefully I can get some comments out of him and get a few questions answered. :D

    Did you ever get a chance to speak with Rajesh?


    JD3
    Member

    Walker wrote >>

    drew wrote >>
    It sure would be nice if someone from Ibiza would comment on their ridiculously obvious lack of progress…

    I sent an email to Rajesh Lahoti yesterday. I’ve only met him once before, and he seemed like a nice enough guy to me. Hopefully I can get some comments out of him and get a few questions answered. :D

    That’s great man, please get us some news from someone who is at least part of the project. However, what I have heard from the sources and what I have seen with my eyes have been two different things so I’ll probably take it with a grain of salt all the same.


    JD3
    Member

    drew wrote >>
    It sure would be nice if someone from Ibiza would comment on their ridiculously obvious lack of progress…

    AMEN!!


    JD3
    Member

    ShimmyKnocker wrote >>

    JD3 wrote >>

    ShimmyKnocker wrote >>
    Surber, I am not sure where you are getting your facts from, other than possibly the Ibiza website which is completely misleading and biase in favor of marketing the building to potential buyers. As for the tenants (not tennents) who have “already secured a mortgage”, this is false. I am a seasoned veteran in the mortgage industry and rest assured these folks do not have a mortgage. Banks do not lend to individual buyers based on something that is not standing and has not received its C.O. (Certificate of Occupancy).
    Regarding the “economic climate” of the Short North. These studies were done at a time when the economic indicators nationwide were strong, except for a few select cities. If the growth of the Short North was as strong as your “facts” claim, then why has there been a number of stores losing business and closing their doors? Maybe you should know your community better than you seem to.
    Next, “why are rental units bad?”. Well, while rental units might “pay the bills”, the building developer has not accomplished its intended purpose as an income generating property through the sale of condos that were built for the purpose of selling, and sold to investors and banks for this purpose. The idea of building any development is to build quick, sell quick, and make a marginal profit, not become an apartment complex. Also, converting these condos into rental properties will depreciate the value of the properties, affecting homeowners who have purchased units in the building, as well as surrounding condo projects in the area.

    It’s bias or biased (not biase) and it would be proper to use quickly (not quick) when talking about the idea of building a development. Sorry, had to do that.

    Your corrections are noted and appreciated. I apologize, I should not be talking on the phone while typing such Pulitzer Prize winning material!

    haha, I couldn’t help it. As for the mortgages, there are some places that will hold a rate for you for a year (for a fee), but that’s about the extent of it.


    JD3
    Member

    ShimmyKnocker wrote >>
    Surber, I am not sure where you are getting your facts from, other than possibly the Ibiza website which is completely misleading and biase in favor of marketing the building to potential buyers. As for the tenants (not tennents) who have “already secured a mortgage”, this is false. I am a seasoned veteran in the mortgage industry and rest assured these folks do not have a mortgage. Banks do not lend to individual buyers based on something that is not standing and has not received its C.O. (Certificate of Occupancy).
    Regarding the “economic climate” of the Short North. These studies were done at a time when the economic indicators nationwide were strong, except for a few select cities. If the growth of the Short North was as strong as your “facts” claim, then why has there been a number of stores losing business and closing their doors? Maybe you should know your community better than you seem to.
    Next, “why are rental units bad?”. Well, while rental units might “pay the bills”, the building developer has not accomplished its intended purpose as an income generating property through the sale of condos that were built for the purpose of selling, and sold to investors and banks for this purpose. The idea of building any development is to build quick, sell quick, and make a marginal profit, not become an apartment complex. Also, converting these condos into rental properties will depreciate the value of the properties, affecting homeowners who have purchased units in the building, as well as surrounding condo projects in the area.

    It’s bias or biased (not biase) and it would be proper to use quickly (not quick) when talking about the idea of building a development. Sorry, had to do that.

Viewing 15 posts - 151 through 165 (of 172 total)

The Columbus Coffee Festival Returns!

The 6th Annual Columbus Coffee Festival returns on Saturday September 25th and Sunday September 26th!

CLICK HERE FOR TICKETS & INFORMATION