Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan
i'm sorry, but i didn't see any "mindless villainizing" in pianowizard's post.
he merely expressed his opinion that the developers over-reached on this project, trying to charge ultra-luxury condo prices in a non-ultra-luxury location.
if they had aimed lower, they might've sold more units, and thus gotten the project funded.
but here we are........
|
Agreed. Very well could have been a programmatic/target market miscalculation which was indeed mainly or partially greed-driven. It's at least a legitimate possibility. Not exceedingly difficult to think of various product compositions of a similar FAR project at this site which may have produced a lower return on paper but were more likely to actually be.....built (at a profit).
At any rate, it was always a weird - and dumb - decision to drop the rental section. If this tower had a composition (in percentage terms) like One Bennett Park rental/condo (at a submarket-appropriate price point), this very well may have been topped-off - or open - by now. Or frankly possibly all-rental as well, for that matter.
So, who here actually buys the developer's media claim that they had halted construction due to physical distancing concerns at this particular job? Anybody?