Parking Lot Owner Pitches a High Rise using Tax Credits

**JDKeepsmiling** · December-04-14, 01:31 PM

So apparently the owner of this parking lot is spicing up his potential parking lot sales listing by proposing the new owner put up the tallest building in Detroit. So here are my questions to the DYes! faithful:

1. Is this some kind of scheme? is this legit? Some sort of development shenanigans?

2. What do you think of the design?

http://detroit.curbed.com/archives/2...g-lot.php#more

**nain rouge** · December-04-14, 01:42 PM

It raises the question: if it's such a great idea, why doesn't the current owner do it?

**mikeg19** · December-04-14, 01:47 PM

WTF? I don't even know where to begin on that listing.

On the other hand, Mike Illitch should do this with all of his gravel parking lots. Downtown Detroit would look like Tokyo in no time....

**iheartthed** · December-04-14, 01:52 PM

Originally Posted by nain rouge

It raises the question: if it's such a great idea, why doesn't the current owner do it?

Maybe it's not what he wants to do with his life.

It is a little refreshing that infilling a surface parking lot in Detroit is even up for discussion now, no matter how far fetched the proposal may be. It was barely two years ago that they were still actively engaged in tearing down buildings in the CBD to create more empty lots...

**JDKeepsmiling** · December-04-14, 01:58 PM

Basically, because he is a parking lot owner. He is willing to put no more work into his property then to repaint some lines every 5 years. sometimes he goes 7 years if money is tight.

**animatedmartian** · December-04-14, 01:59 PM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Maybe it's not what he wants to do with his life.

It is a little refreshing that infilling a surface parking lot in Detroit is even up for discussion now, no matter how far fetched the proposal may be. It was barely two years ago that they were still actively engaged in tearing down buildings in the CBD to create more empty lots...

Then what's the point of being an investor if you never want to do any work?!

I'd also like to point out this same investor owns other downtown properties and has done very little with them. At the very least, he's maintained them and kept them from crumbling like a few other ill-named landlords, but I personally wish he was a lot more productive with his properties and not just looking for quick cash.

**iheartthed** · December-04-14, 02:07 PM

Originally Posted by animatedmartian

Then what's the point of being an investor if you never want to do any work?!

I'd also like to point out this same investor owns other downtown properties and has done very little with them. At the very least, he's maintained them and kept them from crumbling like a few other ill-named landlords, but I personally wish he was a lot more productive with his properties and not just looking for quick cash.

Investor, not developer. Two different things. I just did a cursory Google of him and it seems like he's just been trying to take advantage of real estate market volatility in downtown Detroit, which is fully in line with what he's proposed here.

**belleislerunner** · December-04-14, 02:29 PM

This guy does nothing but move from one part of the country to another - buying buildings, doing nothing and then selling them a few years later with hype. Slumlords are what we call them.

He just happens to be better at picking the right markets/buildings than those out of staters who bought homes on McNichols/75. Or elsewhere.

There's nothing to be celebrated. Just a crude attempt to maximize his millions on wishful thinking/dreams. Those who disagree can show how marvelous the Clark Lofts, Scott Building and Free Press renovations are coming along. Don't they open next month too?

http://www.advocateadvisors.com/detroit-investment/

**animatedmartian** · December-04-14, 03:45 PM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Investor, not developer. Two different things. I just did a cursory Google of him and it seems like he's just been trying to take advantage of real estate market volatility in downtown Detroit, which is fully in line with what he's proposed here.

I mean, what's the point of investing in buildings if you're not going to develop or improve them?

I understand the difference, but Uralli is sort of acting like an investor whose in the stock market. An investor in real estate either has someone else actively managing the property or actively doing it himself. Uralli does neither.

**iheartthed** · December-04-14, 04:04 PM

Originally Posted by animatedmartian

I mean, what's the point of investing in buildings if you're not going to develop or improve them?

I understand the difference, but Uralli is sort of acting like an investor whose in the stock market. An investor in real estate either has someone else actively managing the property or actively doing it himself. Uralli does neither.

It's a function of the capitalist market. Are you criticizing him in particular or the system in general?

I feel like we can have multiple conversations here, so let's just keep it to what this means for the downtown real estate market. I feel that it is far-fetched that the building gets built as proposed, but still see it as a positive that there is a property owner/investor marketing a piece of property in downtown Detroit for a productive use.

**1953** · December-04-14, 04:49 PM

Funny you mention McNichols and 75. I always think of that neighborhood as very well positioned geographically, and wonder why someone doesn't put up some new buildings there.

1953

**animatedmartian** · December-04-14, 04:57 PM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

It's a function of the capitalist market. Are you criticizing him in particular or the system in general?

I feel like we can have multiple conversations here, so let's just keep it to what this means for the downtown real estate market. I feel that it is far-fetched that the building gets built as proposed, but still see it as a positive that there is a property owner/investor marketing a piece of property in downtown Detroit for a productive use.

I just don't understand why he's proposing a building at all if he is not the one who intends to build it. I would assume that any would-be developer would generally already have a vision for what they would want to build when buying the property. Otherwise, Uralli is kind of doing that part for them and it gives the impression that a would-be buyer would be financing/taking part in a project that Uralli intends to build.

He seems like he's a feign developer or investor but in reality he's just a speculator. The problem I have is when it comes to the lack of development on his part because sometimes it's good to speculate. However, excessive speculating for the sake of making a profit can cause distortions and that's how you end up with real estate bubbles.

**canuck** · December-04-14, 08:56 PM

Originally Posted by JDKeepsmiling

Basically, because he is a parking lot owner. He is willing to put no more work into his property then to repaint some lines every 5 years. sometimes he goes 7 years if money is tight.

Funny because I used to think the same of these guys too, except one guy in Montreal is doing that very thing. Metropolitan parking's James Essaris is now developing skyscrapers on top of his former parking lots.