Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A group of investors are interested in acquiring a small number of rental properties. Two happen to be in a historical district. Being in a historical district how would the future development of that area affect the investment? Scenarios such as the city wants to develop that entire area and they buy up all the lots at higher prices and demolish the buildings. Or in some legal but unknown way they could force the residents to sell at big discounts to value, move, or vacate and the investment is lost or greatly diminished.
If it is in a registered historical district it will be very difficult to obtain properties for destruction. The very purpose of most historical districts is preservation of existing structures that have historical significance. Having said that of course anyone/organization with enough money and political clout can change existing laws in their favor.
I am also confused. In most historical districts, destroying property is not permitted. The city can't decide to buy everything and tear it down. Is this an unofficial historic district?
The investors are plain Joe people.
Buying residential property in a historical district should (could) in some way, be different (as in risks or reward) than buying outside a historical district. And of course the city is not going to reveal the risks, if any.
If there are no risks then the group can proceed. We know another person who sold their land to the state and came out many 100's of % better off.
I am also confused. In most historical districts, destroying property is not permitted. The city can't decide to buy everything and tear it down. Is this an unofficial historic district?
If you saw some of the dwellings in the entire half square mile area you'd vomit.
So forget your visualization of beautiful houses built in 1830 and to be preserved.
Forget tearing it down. Pretend there are no structures. The question is can the group get rich because someone wants to develop the area or can they lose all they have in the two properties due to some risk in buying in a historical district. The dwellings are low income housing at best so the land is what could be valuable in the future if someone wanted all the land to build some history related projects.
Is it or isn't it a historic district? I'm not quite understanding the issue. Most historic districts do not allow development unless severely restricted to fit the historic character of the neighborhood.
This sounds like real estate speculation, in my area there are groups of people that bought up land on the otherside of where a bridge was suppose to get built too, the state started talking about that bridge in the 60's. I think some of the investors have died and its very likely their heirs will die before a bridge is ever built.
But that's how people get rich. You don't make money buying property in areas where its already expensive.
It seems to me that, if you're buying inexpensive houses in a distressed historic district, you're doing so to restore or renovate them, trying to spur revitalization/gentrification of the neighborhood.
Being in a historic district should make it more difficult to tear the existing houses down for new development, by anyone. (city or private owner)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.