PHILADELPHIA | 1001 S. Broad Street Phase I | 180 FT | 14 FLOORS

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by City Wide

It seems fitting that this project is turning out to be a circus considering one of the last uses of the lot was for the same.

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by Cro Burnham

Now this is getting interesting. Or not.

http://www.phillymag.com/property/2016/0...ad-washington-cant-seek-zoning-approval/

Blatstein is so full of schnizzit. Apparently his agreement of sale expired (yes, it seems he does not even have a valid agreement of sale, let alone title, to the site at this point. . . who knew?).

All this is much ado about nothing, I suppose. The plans are comical, as is the execution so far. I think the man is slipping in to some kind of dementia. Blumenfeld is proving to be less full of it than Blatstein. Pretty amazing.

Unreal. Who would waste their own time and money, not to mention the time of everyone else, like that?

[summersm343]

Hahaha. It's just funny at this point. What a mess.

[boxbot]

Originally Posted by Knight Hospitaller

Unreal. Who would waste their own time and money, not to mention the time of everyone else, like that?

To be fair, no one at any of the ZBA hearings asked him if he owned the property.

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by boxbot

To be fair, no one at any of the ZBA hearings asked him if he owned the property.

That they cannot shoot straight is already established, but even having to sit there and ask would've wasted their time.

[City Wide]

Originally Posted by boxbot

To be fair, no one at any of the ZBA hearings asked him if he owned the property.

In years past the first step in getting a permit was to show you had legal standing to do so; otherwise I could get a permit to demo your house.

So it could be the case that when Blatstein started the permitting process with the City he did have legal permission from the 'real' owner to do so. But the City was probably not party to any dates on any possible sales agreement or any other time limits that Blatstein was/is working under.

It seems to be the sortof situation that could be easily taken care of with a simple box on the zoning permit application that one has to 'mark' if they aren't the owner of record.

This is egg on the face of the City that might not be of their making.

But if this blows up at all and makes the City look bad, it might not be forgotten if/when Blatstein has zoning issues in the future. But a few checks $$$ dropped into the proper hands can go a long way.

[philatonian]

This is insane, literally. All of them...

1. NH Properties let Blatstein ramble on and on about their land for two months after the deadline.

2. Blatstein ignored the fact that their was a deadline and continued to push for his Tiny Town. Considering there was a deadline, he should have been playing nice in every way to get it approved back in March.

3. Johnson, with all his apparent interest in this lot, had no idea that the deadline expired two months ago, and moved ahead with his ridiculous bill to ban all construction for a year.

What are these people on? These are multi-million deals being brokered, managed, and presided over by people who couldn't run a used car dealership.

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by philatonian

This is insane, literally. All of them...

1. NH Properties let Blatstein ramble on and on about their land for two months after the deadline.

2. Blatstein ignored the fact that their was a deadline and continued to push for his Tiny Town. Considering there was a deadline, he should have been playing nice in every way to get it approved back in March.

3. Johnson, with all his apparent interest in this lot, had no idea that the deadline expired two months ago, and moved ahead with his ridiculous bill to ban all construction for a year.

What are these people on? These are multi-million deals being brokered, managed, and presided over by people who couldn't run a used car dealership.

Far be it from me to defend Johnson, but would he even be privy to the terms of an agreement of sale? He could've gone looking for the deed, I suppose. However, like the zoning board, he wouldn't necessarily have reason to doubt that the guy with big plans, spending big money to push his fantasy, didn't actually own the property. I'm quite sure nobody will make that mistake again.

[Williard Mouse]

—?.........from Philadelphia Business Journal:
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/business/20160518_Blatstein_tower_gets_initial_approval.html

[City Wide]

well, I was wrong. Philly.com just reported that the zoning board gave Blatstein what he was looking for in spite of the owner requesting otherwise.

As strange as all this is turning out to be, I half expect construction to start as soon as the building permit is issued. Why not?

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by City Wide

well, I was wrong. Philly.com just reported that the zoning board gave Blatstein what he was looking for in spite of the owner requesting otherwise.

As strange as all this is turning out to be, I half expect construction to start as soon as the building permit is issued. Why not?

Because Blatstein allegedly doesn't hold title to the property. Maybe the dispute over timing in the agreement of sale is only going to be used to get some additional cash from Blatstein, but until it's resolved this is going to be quite a circus if he tried to stick a shovel in the ground.

[Cro Burnham]

Originally Posted by Knight Hospitaller

Because Blatstein allegedly doesn't hold title to the property. Maybe the dispute over timing in the agreement of sale is only going to be used to get some additional cash from Blatstein, but until it's resolved this is going to be quite a circus if he tried to stick a shovel in the ground.

Assuming the agreement of sale expired, theoretically wouldn't the existing owner be able to keep the value created by Blatstein's securing of the zoning approval? That's what I assume they are angling for: Blatstein did the legwork of getting the approval so he could flip the site for a killing but apparently did not abide by the terms of the AOS. Now they must think they can reap the benefits of his toil. That would be funny if that's how it worked out.

One thing seems likely: this should be stuck in a web of litigation for quite some time. I hope. But in the end, either way, we will probably get a pile of — project.

And did I mention the ZBA is a complete joke? Tragic such a bunch of no-taste, know-nothing hacks has been charged with making critical urban planning decisions for Philadelphia.

What a mess.

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by Cro Burnham

Assuming the agreement of sale expired, theoretically wouldn't the existing owner be able to keep the value created by Blatstein's securing of the zoning approval? That's what I assume they are angling for: Blatstein did the legwork of getting the approval so he could flip the site for a killing but apparently did not abide by the terms of the AOS. Now they must think they can reap the benefits of his toil. That would be funny if that's how it worked out.

One thing seems likely: this should be stuck in a web of litigation for quite some time. I hope. But in the end, either way, we will probably get a pile of — project.

And did I mention the ZBA is a complete joke? Tragic such a bunch of no-taste, know-nothing hacks has been charged with making critical urban planning decisions for Philadelphia.

What a mess.

This has potential litigation "out the wazoo." It would be funny if the owner gets liquidated damages plus the special exceptions. Not a bad days work when you can turn around and market the property again. No kidding about the ZBA.

[Arch+Eng]

Rooftop Villages FTW

[City Wide]

[QUOTE=Cro Burnham;7444459]Assuming the agreement of sale expired, theoretically wouldn't the existing owner be able to keep the value created by Blatstein's securing of the zoning approval? That's what I assume they are angling for: Blatstein did the legwork of getting the approval so he could flip the site for a killing but apparently did not abide by the terms of the AOS. Now they must think they can reap the benefits of his toil. That would be funny if that's how it worked out.

One thing seems likely: this should be stuck in a web of litigation for quite some time. I hope. But in the end, either way, we will probably get a pile of — project.

And did I mention the ZBA is a complete joke? Tragic such a bunch of no-taste, know-nothing hacks has been charged with making critical urban planning decisions for Philadelphia.


Its my understanding and experience that the zoning goes with the property not with the specific project; which is another crazy part of how the ZBA works.

If Blatstein can get a zoning permit I don't know why he couldn't use whatever reasoning he put forth for that to also move forward with a building permit. Sure it doesn't make sense, but this whole proposal right from the start has smelled fishy. (let me count the ways!)

But if Blatstein knows this plan isn't going to happen or questions his ability to go forward then he has no reason to push for a building permit. Those permits are project specific. For zoning concept drawings are enough, but for building permits, and all the individual trade permits, the drawings get much more detailed, therefor much more expensive.

Maybe the circus will come back and use the lot.

"What a mess."

[summersm343]

Article on the ZBA approval from Philly Mag

http://www.phillymag.com/property/2016/05/17/zoning-vote-blatstein-broad-washington/

[Larry King]

I hope this works out in Bart's favor, love the idea of a 400 footer there.

[summersm343]

Site owner's lawyer tells Blatstein: Walk away

What a mess!

The owner of the sprawling South Philadelphia lot where Bart Blatstein has proposed an apartment and retail complex sought in court Tuesday to free itself of its contract with the developer so the property can be sold to another buyer.

Blatstein no longer has any legal claim to the South Broad Street site after missing a March 15 deadline to complete his purchase of the land, John A. Guernsey, a lawyer for New York-based owner Hudson Realty Capital L.L.C., said during a Common Pleas Court hearing in Philadelphia.

Hudson has already identified parties willing to pay more than the $18 million for which Blatstein had the roughly five-acre site under contract in their original October 2013 agreement, which was not contingent on zoning approvals, Guernsey said.

The real estate investment firm also is entitled to $800,000 in deposits that Blatstein had placed in escrow to secure the property, Guernsey said.

Broad & Washington L.P., the affiliate of Blatstein's Tower Investments Inc. that had been under contract with Hudson, is "obligated to walk away," Guernsey said. "They are done."

During Tuesday's court hearing, Blatstein attorney William A. Harvey accused Hudson and its lawyers of meddling behind the scenes by disputing Blatstein's interest in the property in letters to the zoning board and Johnson's office.

Harvey said that the purchase agreement between Blatstein and Hudson should be interpreted as continuing beyond the March 15 settlement date, and that his client had been in contact with the investment firm during the intervening months as he pursued zoning approvals for the site.

Hudson wanted those approvals in place when it backed out of its deal with Blatstein, since they would "materially enhance the value of the property," Harvey said. "They wanted to inspire us to continue to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to get those approvals."

Blatstein said after its adjournment that he was grateful for the zoning board approval and undeterred by the legal wrangling.

"I'm optimistic that we'll be the developers of the property," he said.

Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/business/20...nitial_approval.html#AzPU7uoVxF2Y42Mf.99

[boxbot]

[summersm343]

Report: Blatstein Offered $18 Million for Vacant Lot at Broad & Washington

Developer Bart Blatstein agreed to pay $18 million for a vacant lot at the corner of Broad & Washington under a contract with the property’s owner that’s now in question, according to a report in the Inquirer this morning.

Blatstein and representatives of N/H Philadelphia Properties, a New York-based real estate investment firm that owns the lot, met in court on Tuesday. The owner is seeking to send Blatstein on his way empty-handed, claiming that the agreement of sale expired on May 15. Blatstein, who got approval from the Zoning Board of Adjustment to build a 32-story apartment tower and rooftop retail village on the site Tuesday, still believes he’ll be able to build his project.

$18 million for a vacant lot, y’all. Though the property is assessed at $5.2 million, the owners say they’ve already received offers that exceed $18 million from other parties. Blatstein’s lawyers said that the owners are trying to cut off Blatstein while exploiting the process he went through to get additional zoning approvals on the property, according to the Inquirer.

Read more at http://www.phillymag.com/property/2016/0...at-broad-washington/#QvGCt5rHHGy6Peqv.99