Eight Feet Jolted a $180M Real Estate Deal
nytimes.com
Eight Feet Jolted a $180M Real Estate Deal
1–10 of 114 posts
Re: Eight Feet Jolted a $180M Real Estate Deal
#2Re: Eight Feet Jolted a $180M Real Estate Deal
#3I think a case can be made that covenants like this should be disallowed.
Sure, allow contracts to be signed, where if a condition is violated then a penalty can be paid. But here? There's no one to buy off to relax the constraint. It's held in perpetuity by the dead hand of the past.
To put it another way: there's a property right here (in that setback) that is just sort of floating in the air, not owned by anyone alive. That makes it untaxable, when all sorts of other property is taxable. It should be possible for the city government to condemn that "property" and then change the covenant. They wouldn't even have to pay anyone, since there's no owner.
Re: Eight Feet Jolted a $180M Real Estate Deal
#4Anyone know why the rule against perpetuities wouldn’t apply? Also, is there anyone who could meaningfully enforce this covenant? I appreciate that you wouldn’t necessarily want to risk it anyway, but just to ensure I understand the issue here.
Re: Eight Feet Jolted a $180M Real Estate Deal
#5I think a case can be made that covenants like this should be disallowed. Sure, allow contracts to be signed, where if a condition is violated then a penalty can be paid. But here? There's no one to buy off to relax the constraint. It's held in perpetuity by the dead hand of the past. To put it another way: there's a property right here (in that setback) that is just sort of floating in the air, not owned by anyone a…
There are procedures to strike down covenants, they just involve time and expense. Obviously the expense wasn't deemed worth it.
Re: Eight Feet Jolted a $180M Real Estate Deal
#6That was anticlimactic (based on the headline, which is an editor's choice, not the author's). They knew about the requirement and followed it, no jolting involved. The setback is used for a sidewalk. Probably makes more sense for it to be public, but that's not how the man laying out the suburb decided to do it.
Re: Eight Feet Jolted a $180M Real Estate Deal
#7I think a case can be made that covenants like this should be disallowed. Sure, allow contracts to be signed, where if a condition is violated then a penalty can be paid. But here? There's no one to buy off to relax the constraint. It's held in perpetuity by the dead hand of the past. To put it another way: there's a property right here (in that setback) that is just sort of floating in the air, not owned by anyone a…
Setbacks are part of the property that is still owned by the school. Schools don't (currently) pay property taxes in New York, but whoever buys the buildings will still owe taxes on the property, including the setback.
One of the potential buyers are trying to stop the sale to a different buyer, so the setback isn't at issue. The most one could say is that the setback diminishes the potential taxable value of the property by not allowing larger buildings, but that's somewhat subjective (does the setback itself make the existing footage more desirable?).
Re: Eight Feet Jolted a $180M Real Estate Deal
#8I think a case can be made that covenants like this should be disallowed. Sure, allow contracts to be signed, where if a condition is violated then a penalty can be paid. But here? There's no one to buy off to relax the constraint. It's held in perpetuity by the dead hand of the past. To put it another way: there's a property right here (in that setback) that is just sort of floating in the air, not owned by anyone a…
There are procedures to strike down covenants, they just involve time and expense. Obviously the expense wasn't deemed worth it.
That's nice. It would be nicer if the time and expensive involved were zero.
Re: Eight Feet Jolted a $180M Real Estate Deal
#9Not that there shouldn't be such restrictions in some form, but as the article mentions "It’s an agreement that was made in the past.".
Makes you wonder who was involved in that agreement and if it matters now. And I wonder if this applies? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_against_perpetuities
Semi related: Who approved those signs, all caps, that spacing?
https://static01.nyt.com/images/2024/04/19/multimedia/bkheig...
Re: Eight Feet Jolted a $180M Real Estate Deal
#10I don't fully understand why it's so hard for a legislative body to eliminate such covenants.