Skip to content
×
Pro Members Get
Full Access!
Get off the sidelines and take action in real estate investing with BiggerPockets Pro. Our comprehensive suite of tools and resources minimize mistakes, support informed decisions, and propel you to success.
Advanced networking features
Market and Deal Finder tools
Property analysis calculators
Landlord Command Center
ANNUAL Save 54%
$32.50 /mo
$390 billed annualy
MONTHLY
$69 /mo
billed monthly
7 day free trial. Cancel anytime
Pick markets, find deals, analyze and manage properties. Try BiggerPockets PRO.
x
All Forum Categories
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

All Forum Posts by: Chris Morris

Chris Morris has started 14 posts and replied 63 times.

I have a potential off-market deal coming my way. If it works out, I'll need a contract. What recommendations for a real estate attorney do you have to help me with this? Preferably, someone you have used and would use again. Please do not recommend anyone that you have a financial interest in recommending.

I already found my architect on BP for another project. BP, don't fail me now!

Thanks!

Quote from @Adrian Jenkins:
Quote from @Jason Kudo:
Quote from @Chris Strandburg:

Hey everyone. I've followed BP for years but have become serious more recently. I've read multiple books and through some of the forums and blogs. I'm considering doing a short term rental (duplex) in the Playa Del Rey area. From what I've read in the forums, the consensus for STRs in LA seems to be "Don't do it!" 

I think I understand a few of the reasons why (and I'm sure there are many others), but I was curious if anyone is actually making it work. If so, is it sustainable for you? Are you hating your life? Since I've seen some STR listings in the LA beach areas, part of me thinks it might be possible. But I don't know how much pain those hosts are going through. I'd appreciate any tips or insights from anyone--thank you!

 @Chris Strandburg I have a contrarian take on this with a caveat. First thing to know about LA County, except for a few cities (Malibu, Topanga, Long Beach for example), only a primary residence can be utilized as a short-term rental. So, a duplex is not eligible unless you're living in it. If you live in one side and want to STR the other, that won't work because each unit is its own primary residence.

That said, I have clients who have successfully rented out a guest house/ADU in LA on a short-term basis and since they occupy the main residence, they are not bound by the 120 day limit to fulfill the primary residence occupancy requirements.


I thought LA banned ADU's as STR.


You can have an STR as long as it is owner-occupied for > 50% of the year.

Quote from @Chris Seveney:

@Chris Morris

That seems extremely excessive I would say $5-$10k at most


 Thanks Chris. I am finding it to be $4K - $6K w/ the person I'm using.

Quote from @Steven S.:
Quote from @Chris Morris:
Quote from @Steven S.:
Quote from @Chris Morris:
Quote from @Steven S.:

The market has done well since posting! Price & absorption steady/picking up in Los Angeles, San Diego, and San Francisco:

Isn't absorption decreasing?
Absorption is still down from normal, although it has mostly leveled off or showed small signs of growth (definitely not continuing its drastic decline), alongside a pretty steady growth in $/sf across all 3 markets. 

I know the charts look like they go down at the most recent Q, but that is because the transactions for that Q have not finished yet (Q4 in LA for example, see the below gSlides I made). Also, SD & SF hasn't been updated since Q3 '23, so no Q4 results are there, just no clients to keep it updated for, and I have little personal gain/use from this data, might update them once Q4 finishes). I was thinking of adding some predictive % filled algo to plot the unfinished Q's current absorption performance (estimating the outcome/performance based on the current performance) and plotting that, but it felt speculative and not in line with the raw-data approach this app uses. The $/sf average is already accurate at showing the current Q's $/sf performance compared to the last Q's, because it just averages the closed $/sf of transactions that have occurred--it just may be drastically higher/lower until enough transactions have occurred to balance it out.

To clarify chart reading and the data provided/plotted, I made this short slideshow, flip through it to be certain you are properly analyzing the charts. Some developer insights re market timing in there too:
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Dut9OpqZHzwGeYlStU-g...

How would you plot the absorption of the current Q if this was your app? (I removed it, thought of estimating it, and decided on 'fill up' as described above)
And did the slideshow change your opinion of the charts/market performance?

 Hey Steven, I didn't take the time to go through the slides, just to be candid. :-) My comment was because the 'absorption' line in your graph goes down from 2023 Q2 to 2023 Q3 (and from Q3 to Q4) for all the graphs you posted, which is a decrease, IIUC.

Still interested in brainstorming how you would you plot the absorption of the current Q if this was your app (I removed it, thought of estimating it, and decided on 'fill up' as described above)

Do you see a better, less-confusing way to plot this? Right now the most recent Q will always have negative slope until there are enough closed transactions to 'fill up'. So until the Q ends, we won't know if absorption went up or down, which is quite delayed IMO

 Sorry. No recommendations at this time! Thanks Steven.

Quote from @Steven S.:
Quote from @Chris Morris:
Quote from @Steven S.:

The market has done well since posting! Price & absorption steady/picking up in Los Angeles, San Diego, and San Francisco:

Isn't absorption decreasing?
Absorption is still down from normal, although it has mostly leveled off or showed small signs of growth (definitely not continuing its drastic decline), alongside a pretty steady growth in $/sf across all 3 markets. 

I know the charts look like they go down at the most recent Q, but that is because the transactions for that Q have not finished yet (Q4 in LA for example, see the below gSlides I made). Also, SD & SF hasn't been updated since Q3 '23, so no Q4 results are there, just no clients to keep it updated for, and I have little personal gain/use from this data, might update them once Q4 finishes). I was thinking of adding some predictive % filled algo to plot the unfinished Q's current absorption performance (estimating the outcome/performance based on the current performance) and plotting that, but it felt speculative and not in line with the raw-data approach this app uses. The $/sf average is already accurate at showing the current Q's $/sf performance compared to the last Q's, because it just averages the closed $/sf of transactions that have occurred--it just may be drastically higher/lower until enough transactions have occurred to balance it out.

To clarify chart reading and the data provided/plotted, I made this short slideshow, flip through it to be certain you are properly analyzing the charts. Some developer insights re market timing in there too:
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Dut9OpqZHzwGeYlStU-g...

How would you plot the absorption of the current Q if this was your app? (I removed it, thought of estimating it, and decided on 'fill up' as described above)
And did the slideshow change your opinion of the charts/market performance?

 Hey Steven, I didn't take the time to go through the slides, just to be candid. :-) My comment was because the 'absorption' line in your graph goes down from 2023 Q2 to 2023 Q3 (and from Q3 to Q4) for all the graphs you posted, which is a decrease, IIUC.

Quote from @Steven S.:

The market has done well since posting! Price & absorption steady/picking up in Los Angeles, San Diego, and San Francisco:

Isn't absorption decreasing?
Quote from @Kristi Kandel:

The AHJs will never take responsibility for their misses. I've worked in land development for over 17 years. It's up to the developer to have the right team, ask the right questions, and ultimately be responsible for all aspects of the project. 

In this case, rather than completely unwind every step you can take this as a learning experience and know to specifically add these questions into your due diligence and ask the city during the planning process PRIOR to spending money on the MEP, Structural, etc. 

I like to take extreme ownership and parlay that into future decisions and projects to mitigate those risks in the future. 

You'll never ask all of the right questions but you'll learn to ask the big ones that can kill a deal later. Building contingency into projects for the soft costs like this one is crucial to making sure something small doesn't kill a deal. 


 Thanks Kristi.

Quote from @Jay Chang:

The accountability for covering additional expenditures incurred as a result of the city's and/or the architect's oversight or errors might vary based on specific circumstances, contractual agreements, and local rules. Here are some general thoughts:

  1. Contractual Agreements. Conditions of the owner's (or project developer's) contract with the architect, as well as any contracts with the construction team, are crucial. The contract may specify who is responsible for design flaws, omissions, or oversight. In some scenarios, the architect will reduce their fees or give a refund to the Owner. Unfortunately, most of the time, the Owner has to absorb the additional costs.
  2. Professional Liability Insurance, (also known as errors and omissions insurance) is frequently carried by architects to cover costs resulting from design faults. If the architect is at blame, their insurance may reimburse some or all of the extra costs.
  3. Municipal Liability, If the city or local municipality is responsible for permission or inspection errors or oversights, they may be held liable for some of the increased expenses. Pursuing legal action against a government organization, on the other hand, can be complicated and may require special procedures and constraints. Very rarely do people sue the City, so this is a very unlikely case.
  4. Change Orders, If errors or omissions are discovered during construction, the parties may negotiate contract modification orders to compensate for the increased costs. This could entail the owner, architect, and construction staff all collaborating to develop a solution.
  5. Mediation and Legal Action, Disputes about who should cover the additional costs may lead to mediation or legal action in some situations. The facts, contractual agreements, and applicable legislation will all influence the conclusion.
  6. Owner’s Responsibility, The project owner is responsible for ensuring that the project is finished according to their standards. If the overlook or error does not obviously rest on the architect or the city, the owner may be responsible for the additional expenditures.

To reduce the risk of errors and to provide a process for addressing and resolving concerns that may arise, all parties involved (the owner, architect, contractors, and local authorities) must maintain clear communication and documentation throughout the project. Legal counsel and insurance specialists may also be called to assist in determining culpability and resolving any issues. These challenges are frequently resolved through discussion and may vary from case to case. Legal and contractual details serve a key influence in determining who eventually compensates for additional costs incurred as a result of oversights.


 Thanks Jay. 

Quote from @Chris Seveney:

@Chris Morris

This is why I always put these trades under the architect (structural and MEP), then it’s their problem.

In this instance I would as the owner pay the cost.


 Thanks Chris, what does 'put these trades under the architect' mean?

Quote from @Sebastian Marroquin:

Sorry to say that David is correct. 

Now, this is a learning lesson for you, as it is your first project. You have to negotiate these things before they happen not after or during (and I know you didn't know what you didn't know... and that  should have been the architects duty, to coach you through the fact that the city always (always) finds things to correct in that process. This is a blessing actually, luckily they found it now and not later when you will be in the process of building. That would be much more annoying and expensive and it happens all the time. 

Always know and negotiate corrections: some architects put it in their numbers to do 2 to 3 corrections within the same price point. Think about it, the engineer gets consulted on projects and they already spent hours doing their calculations based on information given to them at the time, now they have to do it again with new info... not fair. 

It also depends on how much you paid the architect from the start. If they are doing a full build and are charging you less than $10k, then they are not making a whole lot of money with you, but if they are charging you more than $30k then maybe you can negotiate a discounted correction or even free. (just for chuckles: how much is he charging you and for what? :) I'll tell you if it is a good price or not) ;) 

We have had to do new calculations and new details on foundations once onsite and during construction, also roof lines or framing. New interior framing bc of AC ducts etc 

Get ready bc this is just the beginning. You will find more things to adapt to once you are building 

You have to be ready mentally for these events. Reach out if you want some pointers on anything. 

Thanks Sebastian. It's even more complicated, I think, than the way you are describing it. The charges are not coming from the architect, but from the structural engineer. But the structural engineer has to make revisions because of an oversight of the city (during 2 preliminary plan checks) and architect. I probably should have written the cost of revisions into the structural engineering contract, as you indicated, or modified the contract to require all work needed to bring it through plan check. The architect has made significant revisions post plan-check submittal and has not charged me any additional amount for it.

In addition, the interpretation of the regulation is clear, which is why I am asking who should pay. It was simply an oversight regarding where the encroachment plane starts from: the property line or the setback. The building code text clearly states it is the latter and even includes a visual diagram.

If the interpretation was unclear, I would have no question about who is responsible.



architect cost:

- $150/hour for the feasibility study (I am asking for something that is pushing the limits of what can be done).

- $15,800 total for the schematic, the full design (after I approve the schematic), and then taking it through the permitting process. This is broken up into three payments, where each payment is made at the end of the completion of the corresponding stage. This does not include the cost paid to the city for permits; this cost was passed along to me.

structural engineer cost:
- $4,000 initially, broken up into two stages of payments
- now an additional $800 for the revisions

I also paid for a site survey and a Title 24 energy report.