See this tweet: https://twitter.com/emily_sawicki/status/1580360066300928002. Santa Monica lost its ability to impose restrictions and this project got auto-approved. But... will it actually happen?
This resolves to YES if, on the lot specified, a majority of the quantity of approved apartments (1,201 or more) are ultimately built without the market first resolving to NO, or if the market is reliably trading 99%+ for a month or more.
This resolves to NO if the project is clearly abandoned, clearly has no legal path forward to being built, or ground is not broken within 5 years (10/13/2027) or 1,201 apartments are not completed by (1/1/2030), or if the market is reliably trading 1%- for a month or more.
Related questions
π Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | αΉ248 | |
| 2 | αΉ134 | |
| 3 | αΉ49 | |
| 4 | αΉ40 | |
| 5 | αΉ21 |
@ZviMowshowitz I'm confident the answer here is no at this point. I believe it should resolve No.
In addition to what Mike stated, Santa Monica settled in May with the developer of 3030 Nebraska Ave (at that point, documented as having 1601 units) to withdraw their building application. The developer has officially stated the project is terminated :(
https://smmirror.com/2023/05/affordable-housing-development-brought-back-to-zoning-rules-with-council-approved-settlement/
@RobertCousineau Damn. As a precaution I will give everyone a few days to disagree, and otherwise resolve this to NO.
Betting on housing being allowed to get built in California seems like a fraught proposition, but I'll take the action in this case. I think the momentum there seems to be swinging towards a somewhat saner land use policy. And on paper at least, the project fits the law to a T, so the opposition is basically going to have to either buy him off or get the state supreme court to strike enough of the operational language of the law.