Sunday, December 24, 2006
Good news and bad news: The good news is, the moral quandary mentioned in my last blog entry has been resolved. The bad news is, someone else just went into contract on the property I was interested in.
Since it's most likely no longer a purchase possibility, I'll go ahead and state that the building in question is known in Austin as "The Castle," a.k.a. the edifice for which the city's Castle Hill neighborhood was named. It was built in 1870 and the original home of the Texas Military Institute, the foundation of what is known today as Texas A&M University. Who bought the place? I'm not exactly sure, but I hear from my sources that they want to convert it into condos. (Can't say I blame them, given the location.)
The building's current owner is Gary Bradley, known (and reviled) in certain Austin circles as the developer behind Circle C Ranch, now one of the largest subdivisions in the metro area. Not that everyone in lefty circles is inherently anti-subdivision, but the problem with Circle C is that it's built directly on top of the Edwards Aquifer, Austin's primary source of drinking water, and Bradley and his crew weren't exactly worried about environmental ramifications when they ramrodded Circle C through the permit approval process. It was built in the typical clear-cut, zero-lot-line, cul-de-sac suburban style, which results in a lot of rain runoff in the sewers. That runoff could potentially contaminate the aquifer, and it's become a major area of concern for the city government. Partially as a result of the Circle C controversy, they've instituted strict developmental controls to prevent the kind of unbridled construction for which Circle C has become the poster child. I'll spare you a lengthy recap of Bradley's sketchy history, but if you're interested, Amy Smith at the Austin Chronicle did an in-depth article about it a while back. (FYI, the Castle is one of the many properties owned by the Lazarus trust Bradley is purportedly using to shield his assets from bankruptcy recovery by the government.)
On that mildly unsavory note, I wish all of you Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays, and I bid you a temporary farewell. I'm heading to the literal end of the Earth in the coming weeks -- we're taking an expedition down to Antarctica, though I'm stopping in Utah first and Buenos Aires afterwards -- and I won't have regular Internet access again until mid-January. There are plenty of hotel-development topics I have yet to delve into here -- my potential business partner Diego, for instance, or the downtown building we met with a hotel development consultant last week in regards to revamping -- but I promise I'll do so in the new year.
Since it's most likely no longer a purchase possibility, I'll go ahead and state that the building in question is known in Austin as "The Castle," a.k.a. the edifice for which the city's Castle Hill neighborhood was named. It was built in 1870 and the original home of the Texas Military Institute, the foundation of what is known today as Texas A&M University. Who bought the place? I'm not exactly sure, but I hear from my sources that they want to convert it into condos. (Can't say I blame them, given the location.)
The building's current owner is Gary Bradley, known (and reviled) in certain Austin circles as the developer behind Circle C Ranch, now one of the largest subdivisions in the metro area. Not that everyone in lefty circles is inherently anti-subdivision, but the problem with Circle C is that it's built directly on top of the Edwards Aquifer, Austin's primary source of drinking water, and Bradley and his crew weren't exactly worried about environmental ramifications when they ramrodded Circle C through the permit approval process. It was built in the typical clear-cut, zero-lot-line, cul-de-sac suburban style, which results in a lot of rain runoff in the sewers. That runoff could potentially contaminate the aquifer, and it's become a major area of concern for the city government. Partially as a result of the Circle C controversy, they've instituted strict developmental controls to prevent the kind of unbridled construction for which Circle C has become the poster child. I'll spare you a lengthy recap of Bradley's sketchy history, but if you're interested, Amy Smith at the Austin Chronicle did an in-depth article about it a while back. (FYI, the Castle is one of the many properties owned by the Lazarus trust Bradley is purportedly using to shield his assets from bankruptcy recovery by the government.)
On that mildly unsavory note, I wish all of you Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays, and I bid you a temporary farewell. I'm heading to the literal end of the Earth in the coming weeks -- we're taking an expedition down to Antarctica, though I'm stopping in Utah first and Buenos Aires afterwards -- and I won't have regular Internet access again until mid-January. There are plenty of hotel-development topics I have yet to delve into here -- my potential business partner Diego, for instance, or the downtown building we met with a hotel development consultant last week in regards to revamping -- but I promise I'll do so in the new year.
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Wow - I'm at the very beginning of this whole hotel-development process and I've already encountered a major moral conundrum. (I expected this might happen down the road -- if, say, a neighborhood association objected to my development plans for a given property -- but wasn't anticipating it quite so soon.) I've found the perfect property for conversion into a small luxury inn. It's historically significant; has ample parking, as well as land to expand; it's ideally situated, with an amazing view of downtown; and it's presently vacant.
What's the conundrum? The property is owned by a trust allegedly controlled by one of Austin's most reviled characters, a seriously shady developer who owes over $100 million to the FDIC and IRS. The government alleges that he's using the trust to shield his assets -- including this building -- from seizure, and various courts have ruled in its favor. The problem is that it's extremely difficult to dissolve a trust of this nature, and thus far (this has been ongoing for several years now btw) the government has been unable to do so. The developer says he's willing to facilitate the release of all of the trust's assets to the government ... provided they negate the not-so-little issue of the $100 million judgment against him.
Am I willing to make a deal with the devil to get this hotel up and running?
What's the conundrum? The property is owned by a trust allegedly controlled by one of Austin's most reviled characters, a seriously shady developer who owes over $100 million to the FDIC and IRS. The government alleges that he's using the trust to shield his assets -- including this building -- from seizure, and various courts have ruled in its favor. The problem is that it's extremely difficult to dissolve a trust of this nature, and thus far (this has been ongoing for several years now btw) the government has been unable to do so. The developer says he's willing to facilitate the release of all of the trust's assets to the government ... provided they negate the not-so-little issue of the $100 million judgment against him.
Am I willing to make a deal with the devil to get this hotel up and running?