Tuesday, December 06, 2011

Morning Real Estate Review


Pepco plans substation next to Friendship Heights Metro (Washington Examiner) Pepco aims to turn a site originally planned for a mixed-use development (which faced opposition) into a substation. Pepco bought the property at 5220 Wisconsin Ave. from Akridge for $14.5 million earlier this fall.

Introducing EDENS... (PR Newswire) Edens & Avant, one of the nation's leading shopping center owners and developers - planning to remake the Florida Ave/Cap City Market it refers to as "Union Market" - will now simply be known as EDENS.

Japanese firm to acquire stake in Homer building (Washington Business Journal) Mitsui Fudosan America would buy ING Office Fund’s 80 percent stake in the high-profile building at 601 13th St. NW for $315 million, or about $746 per square foot.

Freddie Mac Announces K-016 Offering (PR Newswire) Freddie Mac announced it will offer $1 billion in Structured Pass-Through Certificates ("K Certificates"), multifamily mortgage-backed securities.

Washington D.C. real estate development news

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Excuse me, but your reporting that the Akridge PUD was "defeated by opposition" is flatly untrue, and you should correct the account. Akridge got an order from the Zoning Commission to proceed with a PUD. Whether a softening retail or condo market or other factors caused them not to proceed and to sell to PEPCO, Akridge will have to speak to.

Kelly on Dec 6, 2011, 9:58:00 AM said...

I have changed to "faced opposition."

From the Washington Examiner story:

Real estate firm Akridge, the previous owner, fought with residents for years over plans to build a seven-story, 13,000-square-foot apartment building with retail space on the bottom. Those plans were approved by the D.C. Zoning Commission in 2007, but Akridge never began construction. Akridge spokeswoman Lisa Steen declined to comment on the sale of the property, referencing a confidentiality agreement.

Bob See on Dec 6, 2011, 11:17:00 AM said...

The fees that developers/property owners pay out to architects and lawyers (and time wasted) to get their projects through the stalling tactics can add up significantly and ultimately affect the feasibility of proceeding with construction, whether they are ultimately approved or not.

gg NIMBYs! A Pepco substation! You totally won.

Anonymous said...

@Bob See,

If I recall, Akridge could have built a building as a matter of right under zoning. Hopefully they would have hired architects, but would not have had to go through a contested proceeding at the zoning board. Akridge had to go through a contested proceeding, because it wanted a PUD to exceed the density allowed under zoning, etc., and certaintly they made an informed decision. In the end they got most of what they sought. This whole thing about the NIMBYs somehow causing Akridge to sell to PEPCO is a red herring, and probably has everything to do with the economy and Akridge's need to fund other projects.

Anonymous said...

I enjoy reading this blog but can't figure out why the construction/excavating in process on the 1700 block of East Capitol SE continues to receive little or no attention. Perhaps it is because you have attempted and failed to, as I have, reach the developers about the proposed 140 + condos named Kennedy Row. I know that this project isn’t as sexy as the SE waterfront or as glamorous as the meticulous millwork in a Georgetown residential renovation, but I would appreciate an update.


 

Kelly on Dec 6, 2011, 3:52:00 PM said...

To the last comment, I happened to be working on an update this morning... http://dcmud.blogspot.com/2011/12/new-apartments-for-hill-east-in-2013.html

Ken on Dec 7, 2011, 10:14:00 AM said...

To the first post, Akridge faced opposition that killed the project. There wasn't a great deal of opposition, but a small yet strong-willed group fought it throughout the process. Akridge ultimately prevailed in getting the PUD, but the opposition than filed a suit challenging the award of the PUD. While other factors may have also contributed to the project's demise, challenging the lawsuit was going to be time-consuming and costly, and helped sink it. The opposition group has themselves to blame for the failed building.

Anonymous said...

Ken, The timeline simply does not support your assertion. The timeline, including the two-month delay due to Akridge's filing proposed language that did not accurately reflect their commitment, is described in detail in the comments on the November 14 Housing Complex post on this topic.

 

DCmud - The Urban Real Estate Digest of Washington DC Copyright © 2008 Black Brown Pop Template by Ipiet's Blogger Template