Build-out extensions

[tsutcli]

Does the Memorandum of Agreement for that lot in Watercolor say they have to commence construction, and make a continuing and ongoing effort to complete construction or merely commence construction?

I believe the original agreement said you had 3 years to begin construction and a year to complete - which is a complete joke as there is no way to complete a house, especially there, in 1 year.

 

[Matt J]

I believe the original agreement said you had 3 years to begin construction and a year to complete - which is a complete joke as there is no way to complete a house, especially there, in 1 year.

Based on what? I have person knowledge of several homes completed in less than a year. I watched them go up from clearing to finished product. That's not an unheard of deadline.

 

[AAbsolute]

We've built a house in Watersound in 110 days start to finish and have others that go twice as long just to get to the sheetrock phase. It's always up to the homeowner. Some people know exactly what they want, others have no idea at all what they want. I understand the rules to now be a $500 fine to the builder, not the homeowner, if it takes more than a year in Watercolor and Watersound.

We've built a home in Rosemary Beach in 140 days and a home in Rosemary Beach in 2 years. No fixed price builder ever wants a job to take more than 8 months.

 

[tsutcli]

And I have personal knowledge of several that took much longer than a year so I guess its a draw

 

[Matt J]

And I have personal knowledge of several that took much longer than a year so I guess its a draw

I don't want to get in an argument over the issue, but you stated originally that it was impossible.

there is no way to complete a house, especially there, in 1 year

 

[Little Fish]

Just noticed 19 Salt Box Lane (Lot 65) in WaterSound sold in April for $870,000. The original listing was for a distress sale at $1.575MM and was non-negotiable. Looks like someone was unable to complete construction and the new owner expects to spend $370,000 to complete the project.

Anyone care to opine on whether or not this was a good deal for the new owner ($353 sq. ft.)?

Little Fish

 

[AAbsolute]

Just noticed 19 Salt Box Lane (Lot 65) in WaterSound sold in April for $870,000. The original listing was for a distress sale at $1.575MM and was non-negotiable. Looks like someone was unable to complete construction and the new owner expects to spend $370,000 to complete the project.

Anyone care to opine on whether or not this was a good deal for the new owner ($353 sq. ft.)?

Little Fish

We've been kicking it around on that same home for quite some time on the message board. Check it out from a while back. Figure the current lot value at + or - 350,000 for that lot and then take in account that the word on the message board was that the new owner required + or - 300,000 to complete construction. A guess would be the appraisal is 1.3.

I don't know if it came with Beach Club Membership or not. I know there is no gulf view as you can't get farther from the beach in Watersound Beach. It is directly on an amenity, Puttering Park. Check out that math and make your own assumption. That's my 2 cents.

 

[steyou]

Build out time

Can't sit on my beach, get off:angry:

$500 fuel bills going back and forth over the bay for service workers:bicycle:

Obama

Capitalism

Carl Marx

Just some of my thoughts.

 

[BeachBumChick]

I just saw this, JOE extended the build outs to protect their own butts. They didn't want to purchase back the lots is the main reason. It really didn't have anything to do with "helping" out owners. It just got spun that way.

This could be true, but the buyback is just an option for St. Joe. If the owner does not build, they do not have to exercise that option. I have heard a few people that were trying to legally make St. Joe purchase back the lot because they were going under, but I never heard anything else come of this so I guess the owner didn't pursue or St. Joe handled in a different way (the Crescent Keel exchanges?). I believe that the option is that St. Joe can purchase the lot back for the original purchase price too, but I am not really sure on that point.

 

[Matt J]

This could be true, but the buyback is just an option for St. Joe. If the owner does not build, they do not have to exercise that option. I have heard a few people that were trying to legally make St. Joe purchase back the lot because they were going under, but I never heard anything else come of this so I guess the owner didn't pursue or St. Joe handled in a different way (the Crescent Keel exchanges?). I believe that the option is that St. Joe can purchase the lot back for the original purchase price too, but I am not really sure on that point.

I believe legally they can't buy back some due to failure to build and not others. In other words they can't buy back a gulf front or gulf view lot and turn down an interior "Viewless" lot as that would most likely result in a lawsuit.