Is Avondale Ready For A 7-Eleven?

[logical]

Gators 312...Sorry, I don't understand your question.

[Captain Zissou]

Logical?  Is it a coherent North Miami?   

I was thinking the same exact thing.

For Logical:  The fastest way to show your ignorance is to assume you are the smartest person in the room.  The people on this forum are letting you get away with a lot, because every few paragraphs or so you say something informative.  I don't know why you choose to use the rest of your posts to try and insult the other people on this forum.  We are all here to learn, not get in the pissing contests that you seem to enjoy so much.

Lately I've been thinking about the old poker saying "If you can't spot the sucker at the table, it's you".  I think the opposite is also true: "If you think everyone else at the table is a sucker, it's probably you". 

[logical]

For Captain:  and the point of you jumping in again is, what, to be informative?  In your two posts (on behalf of your friend, Chris), you have called me "mean spirited...having a vendetta against Chris...being holier than thou,...slandering people...and being a sucker...[plus one of Chris' gems:  a vitriolic message board snark...]".  Those words are posted and they speak volumes about your and Chris' purpose...certainly not to be informative

And when I write a response that is 100% informative (to 'mtraininjax), your friend, Chris, can't resist seizing on one sentence and making up something out of nothing.

[Thank you 'stephendare' for your kind remarks.  You gave me a refreshing pause.]

And do you want fries with that?       

[Know Growth]

Logical?  Is it a coherent North Miami?   

I was thinking the same exact thing.

14 pages......think more!!Or less.

Thinking more or less about the $1.9 tag-likely not an incoherent decision,but perhaps arrived at as the result of a nudge,assumptions.
N.M.

[Know Growth]

Logical?  Is it a coherent North Miami?   

I was thinking the same exact thing.

14 pages......think more!!Or less.

Thinking,guessing more or less about the $1.9 tag-likely not an incoherent decision,but perhaps arrived at as the result of a nudge,assumptions.
Could it be that the owners owe a significant amount on the property?Just a wild azzz wonder,amount owed can lead otherwise coherent owners to over price.
N.M.

[mtraininjax]

My guess is the State issued a NFA because it has been a long time since that last well was installed.

Logical, I have first hand knowledge at how the State works. One of our buildings is located on the old City dump site, from the 40s where the City would borrow out 10 foot tracts and dump household garbage in these tracts. They are here on the Southside and the city has washed their hands of it, like many things.

So in about 1950, an auto-plating company came along and decided to build a concrete block structure and then proceed to build a drainage pond in the back of the property. The pond contains affluents of Nickel and Cadmium and there have been wells dug since the 1970s on the property where the state has been monitoring the runoff. The state still reviews this, even as the landlord has taken soil out that has been contaminated.

Our company has been the tenant on this space for over 10 years, we have not disturbed the land, or removed anything from the area, yet the Auto plating plant is now owned by a Fortune 500 company and the State cannot or will not get the company to clean the property to the level of getting the No Further Action letter. We will not buy the property without it, because as our attorney has stated, without an NFA letter, the State can come back and mandate that you clean the property, using any means they deem necessary. Forget just digging up the dirt, you may have to dig it up, burn it, then recycle it which would make it the most expensive property on the southside.

I do not have any intention of buying the Shell Station, my intent was to make anyone who was interested aware that if there is no NFA on the property, run like hell away from it, cause even though the tanks were taken out, and dirt of some sort put back, who knows what still lurks under the structure, behind in the alley, you really need to make sure, as an owner, that the environmental analysis contains that letter for proper CYA.  Good points though and great topic!

[logical]

My guess is the State issued a NFA because it has been a long time since that last well was installed.

I do not have any intention of buying the Shell Station, my intent was to make anyone who was interested aware that if there is no NFA on the property, run like hell away from it, cause even though the tanks were taken out, and dirt of some sort put back, who knows what still lurks under the structure, behind in the alley, you really need to make sure, as an owner, that the environmental analysis contains that letter for proper CYA.  Good points though and great topic!

To: mtrainiinjax...apparently you read my post #188 because your quoted sentence came from it.  So, what gives an even 'slight' hint there may not be a NFA for the Shell property?  Anyone can find out for sure by calling the broker (see the sign in front of the property for his name and phone number).  Again, the well installed in the middle of "The Dig" at least a year ago wasn't sunk just for the heck of it.  That well had to have been required as part of the final stages to obtain a NFA letter, and I saw a company taking samples from several of the monitoring wells soon after that last well was sunk.  I will bet the farm there is a NFA letter and it was likely issued by the State months ago.

You are spot on saying to readers to not touch any site with known or suspected contaminants, although there are legal avenues to buy such property and indemnify the buyers if contaminants are later found...still, doing so is not without risks.

[logical]

To 'traininjax'...your quote at the end of your posts refer to ex-mayor Peyton saying "[sic}the $115 will save Jacksonville from financial ruin".  I remember him saying something like that, but can't for the life of me remember for what the $115 was to have been paid.  Please refresh my memory.  And I like your quote of Reagan.

[Dog Walker]

You are spot on saying to readers to not touch any site with known or suspected contaminants, although there are legal avenues to buy such property and indemnify the buyers if contaminants are later found...still, doing so is not without risks.

In 1989 I had already put down a huge deposit on a big building on Powers Ave.  We were doing a final inspection before closing when I noticed some tank vents on the roof.  When I asked the realtor if there had been chemical tanks on the property he gave a big guilty start and wouldn't look at me again.  He then admitted that a previous owner of the building had been a company that made carpet cleaning solutions.

Don't depend on your realtor to reveal this sort of thing.  ASK!

Turns out the whole area was highly contaminated with all sorts of noxious chemicals, not only from the carpet solution company dumping stuff, but from a nearby printer who was dumping solvents down his drains into a septic tank.

The realtor actually refused to return my deposit at first until my lawyer called the franchise office.  I knew we had dodged a nasty nightmare.

[thelakelander]

When buying property, get a phase 1 environment report done. If not that, at least go to the main library and look up the property's history on your own.

[logical]

When buying property, get a phase 1 environment report done. If not that, at least go to the main library and look up the property's history on your own.

You dodged a bullet.  A buyer can still get any NFA information from the seller's broker, including the date the NFA was issued, a copy of the NFA, the property description and even the D.E.R. property identification information, including any phase 1, 2, or 3 documentation; however, if the tests were done many years ago, other contaminants may have leached onto the property from "miles" away.  Groundwater, usually at levels about 6 feet and 30 feet 'down', continually moves, and will pick up contanimants as it does so.

If a business has been "the same" business for decades and test wells are in place, a quick, inexpensive phase 2 can be done.  If the buyer knows the right companies or a good Environmental Engineer (one man business), the buyer can hire the testing companies direct and won't get charged an arm, leg, and his first-born for doing the tests.  "Inexpensive" means do not get a lawyer involved.  He/she will gladly charge $400 p/hr to have his/her para legal make the same phone calls to the same people you could deal with direct and avoid spending thousands of $$ on legal fees.

If you ultimately bought the property, I hope you got a good deal and turned it into a profitable enterprise.

And, do you want fries with that?   

[logical]

You are spot on saying to readers to not touch any site with known or suspected contaminants, although there are legal avenues to buy such property and indemnify the buyers if contaminants are later found...still, doing so is not without risks.

In 1989 I had already put down a huge deposit on a big building on Powers Ave.  We were doing a final inspection before closing when I noticed some tank vents on the roof.  When I asked the realtor if there had been chemical tanks on the property he gave a big guilty start and wouldn't look at me again.  He then admitted that a previous owner of the building had been a company that made carpet cleaning solutions.

Don't depend on your realtor to reveal this sort of thing.  ASK!

Turns out the whole area was highly contaminated with all sorts of noxious chemicals, not only from the carpet solution company dumping stuff, but from a nearby printer who was dumping solvents down his drains into a septic tank.

The realtor actually refused to return my deposit at first until my lawyer called the franchise office.  I knew we had dodged a nasty nightmare.

Note to Dog Walker.  Never turn over a deposit to the seller or seller's broker.  At the point of putting hard money down, you have to get an attorney who will handle the closing on your behalf.  Your attorney and the seller's attorney will open an account to hold all monies until closing, when your deposit, all attorney's fees and closing costs are known, the final payment is made, and the closing papers are signed by both parties.  Then and only then the sale balance may be "wire transferred" to an account set up in the name of the seller, or company name of the seller.  Trust but verify

[ChriswUfGator]

do not get a lawyer involved.  He/she will gladly charge $400 p/hr to have his/her para legal make the same phone calls to the same people you could deal with direct and avoid spending thousands of $$ on legal fees.

Note to Dog Walker.  Never turn over a deposit to the seller or seller's broker.  At the point of putting hard money down, you have to get an attorney who will handle the closing on your behalf.  Your attorney and the seller's attorney will open an account to hold all monies until closing, when your deposit, all attorney's fees and closing costs are known, the final payment is made, and the closing papers are signed by both parties.  Then and only then the sale balance may be "wire transferred" to an account set up in the name of the seller, or company name of the seller.  Trust but verify

LOL

You really have gotta change your screen name...

[WmNussbaum]

In a commercial real estate transaction the rule of the road is still caveat emptor - buyer beware. Due diligence is the sine qua non in such a deal. I would not hesitate to okay making a binder deposit with a licensed real estate agent. I would never advise giving it to the seller.

[Dog Walker]

Did NOT buy that property and it sat vacant for many years.  Found a piece of uncontaminated land (had it tested!) not far away and built a custom designed building.  Among the best moves ever.  That building is still making me money and we saved a two hundred year old Live Oak in the process.