All Forum Posts by: Account Closed

titled should be 

I'm looking at a multifamily property that has been rezoned from MF to SF... so it is grandfathered as nonconforming use.   the area has been targeted for a planned development.

reading the regulations of nonconforming use.. 

1 if more than 50% of the market value of the building is destroyed by act of god or otherwise you can't rebuild except under current zoning which means that if one of the MF buildings in the complex goes down (there are several on the property) I take that to mean it's tough luck and you're stuck with a serious NOI hit unless you build SF.

on the plus side.. perhaps the land value will appreciate more in a planned redevelopment zone if you plan on holding long term? 

anyone have any thoughts or experience with this type of situation pros and cons?

thanks in advance

thanks... good discussion.. consensus is that you need to own over 50% to control the board and the HOA otherwise you're setting yourself up for potential problems...

have been seeing condo bldgs (20 units in a bldg, or scattered among multiple bldgs in a condo developent) being sold as MF.  wondering what are the pitfalls of this kind of deal for the buyer.  my thoughts:

1.  seller can't sell off condos individually and can make more money selling it as MF

2. for the buyer.--- CCR issues, HOA issues (less control of utilities and cost savings), renovations issues, dealing with a condo board - which often is and can be a nightmare.

anyone have experience or thoughts on this?

What's the best way to find out if a property has a mortgage or financing on it?

market rent data by complex... 

anyone know of a vendor who provides ALN type market data on Multifamily complexes in Seattle?

sometimes real estate is not about cash flow..  your midwest properties will most likely not appreciate as much as the one's you had in San Diego.

the midwest is about yield.. the coasts are about capital appreciation.

personally I would keep a few of the San Diego properties for diversification..or try to find properties that you feel will appreciate the most (SFH perhaps) in the area via 1031. long term you may do better with the San Diego properties. I could tell about low yielding properties in Brooklyn.. which over the coarse of 20 years appreciated over 10x.

bottom line though is most of the good deals are going to be off market.

problem with commercial brokers is that many have investment groups and will pick off the good deals.. by the time it hits the market many brokers passed on the deal, their buddies passed on the deal, fellow brokers passed on the deal, their preferred clients passed on the deal... you get the picture.

especially for the smaller complexes you're talking about... direct solicitation of the owner seems like the way to go.. This is what brokers do to source their deals so my personal opinion is that's the way to get the best deals.. and you have certain advantages over a broker in that case.  But it takes work and persistence.. so the easy route is go the broker route.. but you're paying retail.

i would agree with Steve on this..   avoid high crime areas.  ideally you want a C property in an A neighborhood or at least a B neighborhood.   more upside and less hassle.

things to consider in a high crime area.

1. how many of the complexes have been condemned and taken over by the city?

2. do neighboring properties hire security overnight?  this will give you an idea of what you're dealing with.

3. are the code inspectors going to be up your butt as the new kid on the block?  check with the city about code violations.. and enforcement on the property.  - you'll be surprised on what can of worms this will uncover in your due diligence.