City Place...whats the low down?

[TheProfessor]

I heard some new-to-me info today regarding the guy downstairs in the sales/leasing office. A classmate of mine was telling me how he was doing some contract work in the building in late 2008 and it turns out some of those 60 units are desginated for low-income/government assistance housing.

Like I said, it's word of mouth from someone else who already had a negative perception of downtown, but if what he said is true it does seems like a bit of a stepbackwards in terms of urban renewal. That's pretty much what those units were used for before...

Any truth to the above Braeburn? 

[braeburn]

The last remaining 60 or so units in the building were in a shortsale from the developer of the condo conversion, Eric Nathanson.

The guy who purchased them is Cetin Altan Demiray of Demiray Holdings, LLC. He purchased the last 60 or so residential units and the remaining commercial spaces (ca$h).

What he failed to realize was that in doing so he completely screwed everyone else who owned there and wanted to resell their property - generally, lenders won't finance on the place if one entity has that much ownership in an entire association. As of this writing, I believe the maximum is 10%. He's sitting at roughly 30%. It is also easy for him to steal customers that were procured from other owners, as he has a supposed "Sales and Leasing Office" downstairs that essentially makes him look like he's the developer. He is not, at all. The association is the residents, not a developer.

Given market circumstances, he also has an interest to cover the cost of the taxes and condo fees - which would total around 3-400 or so per month per unit. Multiply that by 60+ and you can figure that he would do anything he could to rent his properties out to cover those costs.

I believe anyone can accept Section 8 or HUD housing (rental) - it would be wise for the pocket, as Section 8 is a guaranteed tenant who will never *not* pay their rent. It does screw the other people who live in the building, but he doesn't care about that. He wants to sell his condos for double what he paid for them, and if he can't sell them he will rent them out. In a way he could potentially turn our building into a "partial" rental property, but that will never work because we are a condo association, not an apartment complex.

I am not certain as to this "contract" work that he has done, as I would never step foot into his office ever again. I can call the property management tomorrow though and find out if the rumor is true, or crack open the condo docs and take a look. I must say however, that I highly doubt the current "other" residents, including myself, and our new management company will ever allow the building to step backwards. Plenty of measures have been taken or are being undertaken to prevent the property from ever reverting back to what it used to be, which from what I have heard was quite a diabolical place.

Our condo association has to approve ANY prospective tenant who wishes to rent an owners condo - it is both background AND credit based. The association also requires ample deposit and also proof of ability to pay the rent. While in the past this used to not be enforced hardly at all, rest assured they have this one by the balls now. That much I do know. Anyone who breaks these rules will have their access card deactivated, and I believe they can also take other medieval actions to prevent any slumlording or breaking of the rules.

[fatcat]

i think many condo association have the no-hud clause but I cannot imagine how do one deal with ownership of 30%.

[Joe]

The situation that braeburn described is very common. It's slightly unusual in that the surplus unit holder is normally the developer himself, not a third party investor. In South Florida, it is extremely common for the developer and the HOA to sue each other after completion of the project. A common reason is bitterness over developer-held units which cause the HOA some manner of grief - vacant units, renters, undercutting sales, etc.

Braeburn, in a way, you should actually be very happy about this Demiray guy. Often times, the developer has clauses in the condo docs that give them special rights - rights that supersede the rights of the HOA - as long as they hold a certain percentage of the units. However, Demiray is subject to the majority vote of the HOA. So your position is probably much stronger against him than against a developer that had retained 60 units.

[braeburn]

I would rather the building not have someone with that many condos 

[szhigbz]

my friends and i are thinking of renting out a unit in cityplace by the 3rd week of september. do they still have available units for rent? or is someone here renting out their unit? im looking for a 1 bedroom/ 1 bathroom (not the studio type) fully furnished if possible.

[Omarvelous09]

Another thing...if you rent from the in-house realtor, do you have to pay building fees?

[braeburn]

Not that I am aware of.

The "In-House" realtor is really just an agent for the guy who owns 60 of the condos. He's not a developer. The guy you'd be renting from ultimately is responsible for the fees... I cannot speak for if he is passing them down to his tenants or not.

[kidrcth]

Sorry to bring the thread back from the dead.

But tomorrow i hopefully will be signing a lease for City Place, a SE unit on the 16th floor. I know its a great unit. My mother visited it today for me because i am currently in Texas till march. I am returning from a tour to Iraq, and just want a place to call home. I love downtown.

My questions are what is the current demographic like here. Im not really too worried just curious. Also parking, i have a motorcycle, what would one recommend. I see 1st baptist has a garage. do they sell passes? If worst comes to worst ill just chain it to a telephone pole. NBD. but id rather resort to that as a last measure.



Thanks,
Shane