I also presume these two floors are the area to the right-rear of the first photo in this thread. This would place them against the wall shared by the residential property next door.
> On Thursday, 11 October 2012 16:22:05 UTC+1, Nigel Worsley wrote:
> > I also note the office space (up and down) comes to 908sq/ft per
> floor,
> For business rates purposes it has 87.5 sq m, which is 942 sq ft, no
> mention
> of two floors.
> Unit 24 is listed as 106.88 sq m which is 1150 sq ft (the measurements
> used for ratable value ignore things like loos, cupboards, boiler rooms
> etc.) so it is only 208 sq ft smaller - pretty much the size of the
> lobby.
No wonder it's been empty so long, a ten-year unbreakable lease in this economic climate sounds like a hard sell for even large businesses.
I certainly agree a long-term let like that is out of the question. So it's a write-off unless different terms could be agreed, such as the maintenance one suggested. But a rolling lease would be too impermanent for the space if we could be kicked out any time for a bigger party.
Sadly I doubt a special lease will have much bargaining power. A concrete floor isn't going to decay quickly no matter how much the roof leaks, so they won't need to be in a hurry. And I guess for a large letting firm gambling lost revenue in the short term is worth the peace of mind of a potential long-term lease later on? The thing's probably a sunk cost for them.
Still, maybe worth checking their own definition of long-term let?
> Well, I just re-read the email I got from the agents and it turns out
> I missed the bit where he said it's for long-term let only (in
> commercial property parlance that's 10 years plus with no break
> clause). I don't think that it would be prudent for us to go for a
> long term let, especially with all the other risks on that property. I
> can try and ask about a break clause but I get the impression that's
> not going to be possible.
Perhaps I am an optimist, but I think it is a surprise benefit that it belongs to the corporation of London.
It allows us the opportunity to get the attention of the Lord Mayor (and Boris/TechCity Investment Organisation) and see if he is interested in helping to support the hackspace organization, If publically supporting the UK's biggest amateur technology research and building facility in London is in their plan for London, we may be in good shape.
If we end up being interested in such an option we already have a few good contacts that could help us navigate that territory. (That's one social benefit of being so close to the local startup scene.)
> Perhaps I am an optimist, but I think it is a surprise benefit that it belongs to the corporation of London.
> It allows us the opportunity to get the attention of the Lord Mayor (and Boris/TechCity Investment Organisation) and see if he is interested in helping to support the hackspace organization, If publically supporting the UK's biggest amateur technology research and building facility in London is in their plan for London, we may be in good shape.
As you explain you have some good contacts which could help broker an agreement with the Corporation of London, would you be able to interface with them and see what help they would be prepared to give to help negotiate both a reasonable length lease (e.g. not for a very very long time), a repair job to the site prior to us arriving and a rent which reflects that we are a positive influence on the surrounding tech community.
Le jeudi 11 octobre 2012 16:01:36 UTC+1, Billy a écrit :
> If they won't give you more than a 2-year lease, then they will > probably be planning on developing.
> Standard terms with commercial leases, is with any lease longer than > two years, the tenant has the automatic right of renewal, for a new > lease of the same length of time as the original lease. Still got to > pay for the lease though. If you're renting out property, and you're > planning on developing the building, a standard tactic, is to only > offer a tenancy of two years, less 1 day. Keeps inside the limits.
Hmmmm, this sounds to me like something communicated that was only half-understood.
As a general rule any commercial lease over 6 months will be subject to part II of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, which gives reasonable security of tenure to the business tenant, subject to a statutory scheme of lease renewal. It is possible - and in some sectors routine - to contract out of that security. Doing so can be technically complicated and there have been times when a significant portion of my revenue stream was dealing with failures of parties to get it right.
There's no magic "two year" boundary in the law of commercial leases in England that I am aware of - and I would expect to be aware of such a thing.
That sounds a little more sensible. Initial story I got from a
conversation with a club-owner who also owned another building in
Soho. He was complaining about the rental market, and the hassles with
trying to re-develope part of the building. The evening ended with us
consuming a lot of malt whiskey, so I may have got the wrong end of
the stick...
On 22 Oct, 13:58, Francis Davey <fjm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Le jeudi 11 octobre 2012 16:01:36 UTC+1, Billy a écrit :
> > If they won't give you more than a 2-year lease, then they will
> > probably be planning on developing.
> > Standard terms with commercial leases, is with any lease longer than
> > two years, the tenant has the automatic right of renewal, for a new
> > lease of the same length of time as the original lease. Still got to
> > pay for the lease though. If you're renting out property, and you're
> > planning on developing the building, a standard tactic, is to only
> > offer a tenancy of two years, less 1 day. Keeps inside the limits.
> Hmmmm, this sounds to me like something communicated that was only
> half-understood.
> As a general rule any commercial lease over 6 months will be subject to
> part II of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, which gives reasonable
> security of tenure to the business tenant, subject to a statutory scheme of
> lease renewal. It is possible - and in some sectors routine - to contract
> out of that security. Doing so can be technically complicated and there
> have been times when a significant portion of my revenue stream was dealing
> with failures of parties to get it right.
> There's no magic "two year" boundary in the law of commercial leases in
> England that I am aware of - and I would expect to be aware of such a thing.
Le mardi 23 octobre 2012 09:10:59 UTC+1, Billy a écrit :
> Thanks for the info.
> That sounds a little more sensible. Initial story I got from a > conversation with a club-owner who also owned another building in > Soho. He was complaining about the rental market, and the hassles with > trying to re-develope part of the building. The evening ended with us > consuming a lot of malt whiskey, so I may have got the wrong end of > the stick...
Empirical evidence suggests that accurate advice and consumption of large quantities of alcohol are not easily compatible.
42 North Road is still occupied by squatters. They have moved in a large caravan and seem to be living there complete with dogs and various unwashed friends
Both the landlord and the Police have been notified, but I haven't seen any eviction activity so far. The squatters broke the lock on one of the doors to gain access and then use a yale type lock for daily access
I have spoken to someone who made a commercial bid for the site. They told me:
The landlord wants a long lease (5 to 10 years) with the new tennant taking on responsibility for refurbishment costs estimated at £1 million. Estimated rent is £11 per sq ft
This works out at approximately £165,000 per annum
I have spoken to a chartered surveyor who has inspected the property. He thinks the landlord has totally unrealistic expectations and no one is likely to pay or commit to what is being asked. This may explain why it has been unoccupied for 18 months or so.
I'm just wondering if the present situation could be an opportunity for Hackspace to offer to take over the premises for a few years at a heavily discounted rent until the rental market improves. Occupancy by Hackspace would have security benefits and would be producing some rental income for the landlord. It could be a win-win if the landlord is prepared to be sensible...
On Wednesday, 10 October 2012 10:51:40 UTC+1, Ian Henderson wrote:
> There has been mention of 42 North Road as a possible location for the > next Hackspace
> I currently rent an office at 39A North Road which is adjacent to 42 so > I've taken a few photographs. The post code is N7 9DP and the site is next > door to Caledonian Road Underground Station on the Picaddilly line (Zone 2)
> Number 42 was formerly used as a commercial garage (think QuickFit or > similar), it's a huge space - about 15,000 square feet and not in good > condition. Access is very easy and parking is reasonable with pay and > display bays outside the building between 9:30 and 4:30 Monday to Friday. > Outside these hours parking is free
> I think it's a great space but I'm not sure it would be suitable as the > next Hackspace without a lot of work
On 23 October 2012 12:38, Ian Henderson <i...@advancedforensics.com> wrote:
> The landlord wants a long lease (5 to 10 years) with the new tennant taking on responsibility for refurbishment costs estimated at £1 million. Estimated rent is £11 per sq ft
> This works out at approximately £165,000 per annum
£11 is a pretty ridiculous sum for that place, but even at half this
price it's realistically going to be out of our budget. When you add
on refurbishment costs, I maintain that we'd be biting off more than
we can chew.
On Wednesday, 10 October 2012 10:51:40 UTC+1, Ian Henderson wrote:
> There has been mention of 42 North Road as a possible location for the > next Hackspace
> I currently rent an office at 39A North Road which is adjacent to 42 so > I've taken a few photographs. The post code is N7 9DP and the site is next > door to Caledonian Road Underground Station on the Picaddilly line (Zone 2)
> Number 42 was formerly used as a commercial garage (think QuickFit or > similar), it's a huge space - about 15,000 square feet and not in good > condition. Access is very easy and parking is reasonable with pay and > display bays outside the building between 9:30 and 4:30 Monday to Friday. > Outside these hours parking is free
> I think it's a great space but I'm not sure it would be suitable as the > next Hackspace without a lot of work
Wow, this puts me firmly in the camp for rejecting this place. The last thing this landlord sounds like is sensible. Before they sounded maybe over-optimistic, but now they just sound stuck in a fantasy world. Avoid.
> 42 North Road is still occupied by squatters. They have moved in a large
> caravan and seem to be living there complete with dogs and various
> unwashed friends
> Both the landlord and the Police have been notified, but I haven't seen
> any eviction activity so far. The squatters broke the lock on one of the
> doors to gain access and then use a yale type lock for daily access
> I have spoken to someone who made a commercial bid for the site. They
> told me:
> The landlord wants a long lease (5 to 10 years) with the new tennant
> taking on responsibility for refurbishment costs estimated at £1
> million. Estimated rent is £11 per sq ft
> This works out at approximately £165,000 per annum
> I have spoken to a chartered surveyor who has inspected the property. He
> thinks the landlord has totally unrealistic expectations and no one is
> likely to pay or commit to what is being asked. This may explain why it
> has been unoccupied for 18 months or so.
> I'm just wondering if the present situation could be an opportunity for
> Hackspace to offer to take over the premises for a few years at a
> heavily discounted rent until the rental market improves. Occupancy by
> Hackspace would have security benefits and would be producing some
> rental income for the landlord. It could be a win-win if the landlord is
> prepared to be sensible...
> Thoughts?
> On Wednesday, 10 October 2012 10:51:40 UTC+1, Ian Henderson wrote:
> There has been mention of 42 North Road as a possible location for
> the next Hackspace
> I currently rent an office at 39A North Road which is adjacent to 42
> so I've taken a few photographs. The post code is N7 9DP and the
> site is next door to Caledonian Road Underground Station on the
> Picaddilly line (Zone 2)
> Number 42 was formerly used as a commercial garage (think QuickFit
> or similar), it's a huge space - about 15,000 square feet and not in
> good condition. Access is very easy and parking is reasonable with
> pay and display bays outside the building between 9:30 and 4:30
> Monday to Friday. Outside these hours parking is free
> I think it's a great space but I'm not sure it would be suitable as
> the next Hackspace without a lot of work
Another "avoid". Apart from anything else, I'd prefer us not to be
involved with evicting squatters, even if this place were a sensible
price. (Right now, "free if you refurbish it" is sounding like a
sensible price.)
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Peter "Sci" Turpin <s...@sci-fi-fox.com> wrote:
> Wow, this puts me firmly in the camp for rejecting this place. The last
> thing this landlord sounds like is sensible. Before they sounded maybe
> over-optimistic, but now they just sound stuck in a fantasy world. Avoid.
> On 23/10/2012 12:38, Ian Henderson wrote:
>> This is an update as requested:
>> 42 North Road is still occupied by squatters. They have moved in a large
>> caravan and seem to be living there complete with dogs and various
>> unwashed friends
>> Both the landlord and the Police have been notified, but I haven't seen
>> any eviction activity so far. The squatters broke the lock on one of the
>> doors to gain access and then use a yale type lock for daily access
>> I have spoken to someone who made a commercial bid for the site. They
>> told me:
>> The landlord wants a long lease (5 to 10 years) with the new tennant
>> taking on responsibility for refurbishment costs estimated at £1
>> million. Estimated rent is £11 per sq ft
>> This works out at approximately £165,000 per annum
>> I have spoken to a chartered surveyor who has inspected the property. He
>> thinks the landlord has totally unrealistic expectations and no one is
>> likely to pay or commit to what is being asked. This may explain why it
>> has been unoccupied for 18 months or so.
>> I'm just wondering if the present situation could be an opportunity for
>> Hackspace to offer to take over the premises for a few years at a
>> heavily discounted rent until the rental market improves. Occupancy by
>> Hackspace would have security benefits and would be producing some
>> rental income for the landlord. It could be a win-win if the landlord is
>> prepared to be sensible...
>> Thoughts?
>> On Wednesday, 10 October 2012 10:51:40 UTC+1, Ian Henderson wrote:
>> There has been mention of 42 North Road as a possible location for
>> the next Hackspace
>> I currently rent an office at 39A North Road which is adjacent to 42
>> so I've taken a few photographs. The post code is N7 9DP and the
>> site is next door to Caledonian Road Underground Station on the
>> Picaddilly line (Zone 2)
>> Number 42 was formerly used as a commercial garage (think QuickFit
>> or similar), it's a huge space - about 15,000 square feet and not in
>> good condition. Access is very easy and parking is reasonable with
>> pay and display bays outside the building between 9:30 and 4:30
>> Monday to Friday. Outside these hours parking is free
>> I think it's a great space but I'm not sure it would be suitable as
>> the next Hackspace without a lot of work
