CHICAGO | Waterview Tower | 1,047' Official / 1,035' Roof | 89 FLOORS |NEVER BUILT - Page 122

Mojava · #**2421** Posted **Oct 29, 2008, 8:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alliance

My question is, with sales as high as they are reporting, why weren't (past tense) they able to land a loan? Those figures were just as high before the credit freeze.

there's been talk that the project has been way over budget therefore not making economic sense for a lender. This is one of many drawbacks of being owner/developer/architect/engineer/GC, etc.

IBuildemTALL · #**2422** Posted **Oct 29, 2008, 9:23 PM**

The hoist is running right thru the parking ramp....good luck turning this into a functional parking garage without removing the hoist and having a concrete contractor come and infill the missing section of the ramp.

Rilestone75 · #**2423** Posted **Oct 29, 2008, 9:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alliance

My question is, with sales as high as they are reporting, why weren't (past tense) they able to land a loan? Those figures were just as high before the credit freeze.

With the credit freeze and the rapidly declining residential market, there is almost certainly a small percentage of those people who have entered into a contract with Teng for one of the units, but would not be able to close on the unit, because as the mortgage company re-underwrites these units and the contract price is now higher than the appraised value...

honte · #**2424** Posted **Oct 29, 2008, 9:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by budman

I think the point JC is trying to make is that even the developer doesnt know what's going to happen right now. And, as much of an interest most of the posters here take in this building, the developer's interest is much more real and meaningful, as is the interest of those of us who have purchased at Waterview. Teng is entitled to keep proprietary information confidential, and some public disclosures could jeapordize parts or all of the project. The "we dont have shareholders" comment only means that Teng is under no legal obligation to to disclose anything, unlike publicly traded companies, who are. If you think you are unhappy with what's going on, imagine how we feel. I encourage anyone from the inside to keep posting.

I agree.

I have to commend TENG for trying to do something spectacular, regardless of what the outcome will be. I could really care less about "bombed-out shells" - this is a very short-term and selfish critique to a building of this magnitude, kind of like the people complaining about the slow zones for repairs on the CTA. What TENG was trying to do would have (could still) give great pride to the city and be a lasting accomplishment. Even if it fails, I am proud of TENG for trying to make a building one step above the status quo.

For those worried about the shell, it won't stay that way for long.

Mehow · #**2425** Posted **Oct 30, 2008, 12:32 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by IBuildemTALL

The hoist is running right thru the parking ramp....good luck turning this into a functional parking garage without removing the hoist and having a concrete contractor come and infill the missing section of the ramp.

The hoist also runs through the kitchens for the hotel, to open the hotel/parking garage would take considerable amount of planning.

lawfin · #**2426** Posted **Oct 30, 2008, 5:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by honte

I agree.

I have to commend TENG for trying to do something spectacular, regardless of what the outcome will be. I could really care less about "bombed-out shells" - this is a very short-term and selfish critique to a building of this magnitude, kind of like the people complaining about the slow zones for repairs on the CTA. What TENG was trying to do would have (could still) give great pride to the city and be a lasting accomplishment. Even if it fails, I am proud of TENG for trying to make a building one step above the status quo.

For those worried about the shell, it won't stay that way for long.

Until otherwise.....horseshoes & hand grenades

intrepidDesign · #**2427** Posted **Oct 30, 2008, 6:38 PM**

I'm curious about a few things. At what point do they sell enough units to assure a loan? 85%, 90%, 100%? At what point does the building become profitable, and how long will the sale center remain open trying to sell units before they throw in the towel. At a certain point I would think that they are leading on the people who have already signed up. Even if their money is in an interest bearing escrow, I would rather be closing on something tangible. I'm glad that they are still trying to get a loan and still pushing for sales as I desperately want to see this building finished per its original design.

budman · #**2428** Posted **Oct 30, 2008, 6:55 PM**

The deal is much more complicated because of the hotel and the condo/hotel concept. I think that if this were a residential-only tower, they would not have had the same problems financing the development. Even if you are 100% sold on the residential portion, the lender has to consider the impact and cost of building out the hotel portion.

dagobert · #**2429** Posted **Oct 30, 2008, 7:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by intrepidDesign

I'm curious about a few things. At what point do they sell enough units to assure a loan? 85%, 90%, 100%? At what point does the building become profitable, and how long will the sale center remain open trying to sell units before they throw in the towel. At a certain point I would think that they are leading on the people who have already signed up. Even if their money is in an interest bearing escrow, I would rather be closing on something tangible. I'm glad that they are still trying to get a loan and still pushing for sales as I desperately want to see this building finished per its original design.

My understanding is that there were significant problems with nailing down the costs for the hotel portion. Apparently Shangri La people were frustrating Teng people by changing the interior finish requirements of the hotel and thus preventing Teng from getting a solid lock on the cost estimate for the hotel portion. The constantly fluctuating costs for the hotel were in turn causing problems with getting an estimate of the entire construction cost. In effect it is the hotel that mostly prevented Teng from getting the loan because the banks didn’t really know how much it would really cost to build this thing. So Budman is right in saying that if this was a traditional 100% residential project getting a loan might have been easier. Without the hotel though, the tower wouldn’t be this tall.

chi-arch · #**2430** Posted **Oct 30, 2008, 8:25 PM**

...and historically moving back to the origination of the project the "hotel" portion of this development was to be office. The configuration was nearly identical with regards to the parking, massing, fenestration, etc., etc. of the lower floors. People bought into the condo tower knowing that the lower floors would be office(including me). Within the first year of sales and prior to any construction start the developer(TENG) switched the project to a hotel. Then the search went out for the hotel operator, which became the Shangri-La. These complications and shift in use had an impact on the schedule and consequently the timing of the loans and on and on to where we are today.

TowerGuy37 · #**2431** Posted **Oct 30, 2008, 10:18 PM**

what was going on here today? i may have missed something said here recently cuZ i haven't been on,,, I was driving south on clark and it looked as if the crane was going up and down doing something this afternoon! im sure it wasnt what we all wished for!

Mehow · #**2432** Posted **Oct 31, 2008, 2:28 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TowerGuy37

what was going on here today? i may have missed something said here recently cuZ i haven't been on,,, I was driving south on clark and it looked as if the crane was going up and down doing something this afternoon! im sure it wasnt what we all wished for!

The mechanical contractor packed up their tools/material ( one off the last hopefuls that this project was going to would move forward) and the concrete sub was removing all the reshores off sight. Keep your eyes on the sight,rumors have it that the offices over the ally are next week.

harryc · #**2433** Posted **Oct 31, 2008, 10:32 AM**

cbotnyse · #**2434** Posted **Oct 31, 2008, 1:20 PM**

I saw an Adjustable Forms flat bed truck on the site this morning, presumably packing up their stuff.

chrslyp · #**2435** Posted **Oct 31, 2008, 2:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by chi-arch

...and historically moving back to the origination of the project the "hotel" portion of this development was to be office. The configuration was nearly identical with regards to the parking, massing, fenestration, etc., etc. of the lower floors. People bought into the condo tower knowing that the lower floors would be office(including me). Within the first year of sales and prior to any construction start the developer(TENG) switched the project to a hotel. Then the search went out for the hotel operator, which became the Shangri-La. These complications and shift in use had an impact on the schedule and consequently the timing of the loans and on and on to where we are today.

so, do you think if teng would have left the hotel portion as office that they would have received financing? also, in your opinion, why change the office to hotel in the first place?

chi-arch · #**2436** Posted **Oct 31, 2008, 6:28 PM**

^ There are as many answers to that question as floors in this building and only Teng knows the real reason. I know that they were going to move their offices in there originally and perhaps when they decided not to do that they weren't too enamored with being an office space Landlord. Perhaps the hotel added more cachet to the project for them and the thought was it would help with the sales in the tower

I have said this before- the profit is in the tower; and any means to sell out those units and progress rapidly will deliver the largest profit to the developer.

To start the project without the financing in place was indeed extremely risky, however they must have been very confident that the financing was attainable and forged ahead. In my opinion only, I do believe the straight office use would have been an easier finance then the Condo Hotel. It would seem now that the project may be going to sleep until spring, or longer. We shall see.

honte · #**2437** Posted **Oct 31, 2008, 7:37 PM**

^ A lot of people, including Donald Trump, misgauged the Chicago office market. Looking at vacancies or net absorption primarily, they didn't realize as Buck and Hines did that premier companies would be taking new office space and paying a premium over their existing space for the comfort of new quarters and the potential bonus of increased floorplate efficiency, leading to reduced overall space requirements.

Teng's project would have been a harder sell since the floorplate is smaller than the typical new space in demand. But I'm sure Trump was really kicking himself with each new lease signing.

The other factor of course is the weaker market in the area of these towers vs. West Loop.

Nunc Pro Tunc · #**2438** Posted **Nov 1, 2008, 1:54 AM**

From the office, approx 10:00 a.m. today, I saw many construction workers on the top floor AND they were using the crane to move things around. I have no idea what they were doing though -- or if this is good news or bad.

i_am_hydrogen · #**2439** Posted **Nov 1, 2008, 2:14 AM**

Taken tonight:

Mehow · #**2440** Posted **Nov 1, 2008, 9:10 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nunc Pro Tunc

From the office, approx 10:00 a.m. today, I saw many construction workers on the top floor AND they were using the crane to move things around. I have no idea what they were doing though -- or if this is good news or bad.

It is not good news.