Jump to content

astrohip

Full Member
  • Posts

    289
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by astrohip

  1. 13 hours ago, HTX1121 said:

    Oxy bought their site within the development.

    Interesting development (and thanks for posting!). What does this mean for both their building, and the entire RO project? Does this mean they can build what they want, using who they want, and not have to go thru the developer? I'm assuming there are certain restrictions in the sale, but in general, what are the ramifications of this?

  2. 13 hours ago, 004n063 said:

    Those poor Southamptonites. Such a downtrodden bunch.

    The person who started the protest is from Southgate, not Southampton. So technically it's' "those poor Southgatorades".

    So this appears to be more of a "leave my Village alone", than a neighborhood protest, since Southgate is a good distance from this project. But I think the "leave the Village alone" horse has long left the building.

    • Haha 5
  3. On 4/2/2024 at 1:10 PM, urbanize713 said:

    I am being told: "We are working through contract reviews on this now. Short answer is that we will start design this spring, that will take 12-18 months, then another 12 months of permitting and then construction (another 12-18 months). We are at least three years out. These projects take forever. "

    • Like 8
    • Thanks 1
  4. 43 minutes ago, Amlaham said:

    That seems... astounding.

    I wonder if the buyers are all future residents? Does anyone know if the HOA rules prohibit renting, short or long term? I'm thinking maybe people buying as an investment property, with intentions to rent?

    Because $250MM is an unbelievable number.

    • Like 1
  5. I drive by this all the time. I've often wondered about it, since there's no sign. It's next door to an imaging place, I sometimes thought maybe they used.

    It's really small. Doesn't seem like residential would be likely, Edloe ain't a great street for new residential. Maybe a small office bldg? But there's plenty of that around, and available, so the economics would be challenging.

    I'll be curious to follow this one.

    • Like 1
  6. 6 hours ago, __nevii said:

    Yeah, I don't really understand that line of thinking either. Especially when "fiscal responsibility is the pretense" ... while living in a city that literally involves itself in enforcing deed restrictions of SINGULAR SUBDIVISIONS.

    I ask out of ignorance... I thought the city couldn't enforce deed restrictions, since they weren't laws or regulations.

    When I lived in Southampton (strong deed restrictions), we had a resident who flagrantly violated one restriction. Built a permanent structure in a deed-restricted part of his lot (think "easement"). But since there wasn't any city code violation (it wasn't a legal easement, only a deed restriction), the city had zero interest in our problem. We had to sue to get him to remove it.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...