Arkansas Blog

I'll bet ElsiJane Roy is pissed. She's lived there for over 20 years.

Who's buying all of these condos that are popping up around here like flowers in the Spring anyway? That's what I want to know.

As one of her neighbors, I can tell you she's not happy by a long shot. As she lives on the 11th floor, she's among the first that have to relocate. Many residents (including Judge Roy) renewed leases with the building's management in the previous 30, 60, and/or 90 days. Meaning, many leases will still have eight months remaining on the term when construction starts on the top three floors on April 1, 2007.

The management is offering incentives for current residents to renew their leases and stay in their units until the date construction is to begin on their floor. Further incentives are then offered to residents to relocate to a lower floor within the building after that date. In order to take full advantage of these incentives, residents have to relocate at least once within the building and continue their lease until the date construction begins on the lower floor. Elevator access in the 11-story building and access to the basement (which houses the laundry room, exercise room, and storage room) will also be severely restricted, creating an added inconvenience for tenants trapped in their lease, regardless of the incentives.

The management has not adequately explained how they plan to accommodate all the residents who are still under lease in the building on lower floors. Currently, I do not believe there to be 30+ empty units within the building. Additionally, the apartments on the 11th floor are larger than the apartments on lower floors. This means that these tenants will have to relocate from 1,200 or more square feet to 800 or fewer square feet. And then move again a few months later when either their lease expires or the floor they have relocated to begins renovation. Furthermore, the management has not explained how it anticipates resolving problems that arise if a two-bedroom apartment (or any apartment) is not available for a relocating two-bedroom tenant when it comes time for them to move. All that has been made clear is that the management does not intend to release any tenants from their lease ahead of the end of the lease's term, even if the lease was renewed in, seemingly, bad faith once the owner decided to sell the building and the new owners decided to begin renovation before the expiration of all of the current leases.

Besides Judge Roy, who has lived in the building for 25 years, other residents have lived at the Riviera for as many as 40 years or more. None are being given a "first look" option into purchasing a unit in the building, even at the ridiculous price of $250 per square foot. And I have to ask, as a person who is not opposed to the renovation in principle, if a $25 MILLION investment is being made in to the project, is the financing or profitability is contingent on beginning construction the day after the sale is closed? Is that good business sense to begin a project that cannot wait 8 short months for all of the current leases to expire before beginning construction? Seeking positive cash flow at the expense of negative PR and civic backlash by overturning an established city center community is indicative of a project that is led by management that is inexperienced, at best, and incompetent or corrupt at worst.

Great comments, Resident. The local TV news sugar coated things and made it sound like lease exceptions would be routine. Thanks for a more clear picture of what's going on down the hill.

If lease exceptions are to be routine, then that is an amendment to the policy that was made after a meeting with residents on Nov. 8. At that meeting the current owner was explicit that he expected all tenants to fulfill the term of their lease so long as he was the owner of the building. Including residents on the 11th floor who signed a new lease as recently as last week. The future owner did not specify his plans for those who have as many as 8 months remaining on their lease come April 1, 2007, other than the incentive package of reduced rent, rent credits, and free moving service within the building.

I would imagine once the stipulated 60 days notice is given for residents to vacate their apartment (residents on the 9th, 10th, and 11th floors will receive this notice on January 31, 2007) most judges would rule the remaining term of the lease unenforceable under the legal principle of "constructive eviction." Especially if a suitable replacement apartment is not available.

My lease is up several months before I am to receive notice to relocate. Most likely I will move when it expires. And certainly before construction begins. I don't think the measly credit I'll acrue for staying an additional six months is worth the trouble of living in a building under heavy renovation by management who do not see the current residents as part of their customer/client base. Beyond the inconvenience of the construction, I expect that Blue Cube will be less than concerned about maintanence/repairs/concerns for/of the residents in the yet-to-be-developed units. I also question how they will handle customer service for the buyers of the new condos. Anyone dropping a quarter mil on a tiny 1,100 square foot condo will not take kindly to being treated like a pest in the building.

On another note, does anyone have any recommendations for affordable housing in Little Rock, preferably in the Heignts / Hillcrest / Riverdale area? Until now, the experience of living at the Riveria has been tremendous. The rent is reasonable. My highest electric bill was $47. The view from the upper floors is terrific. And every unit has a terrace. Is it asking too much to expect to find a place that offers similar amenities for under $700 a month?