Maryland developer's projects mired i...

Maryland developer's projects mired in financial troubles

There are 14 comments on the Hampton Roads Daily Press story from Dec 16, 2007, titled Maryland developer's projects mired in financial troubles. In it, Hampton Roads Daily Press reports that:

A Maryland developer with two subdivisions under construction in Gloucester County apparently has abandoned the projects amid financial woes.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Hampton Roads Daily Press.

Does not surprise me

Gloucester, VA

#1 Dec 16, 2007
Gloucester wasn't ready for these projects....just like the wonderful illusive Villages of Gloucester.

Sounds like somebody is out of a whole lot of money and that some of the houses under construction will go into shambles around those who were unfortunate enough to believe they would prosper!

That's what you get when you invest in people with big ideas and no money to carry it out!

The looser will be the citizens of Gloucester....and the banks and builders taken advantage of for others gain, who took their profits and ran real fast out of Gloucester!
Jack

United States

#2 Dec 16, 2007
Does not surprise me wrote:
Gloucester wasn't ready for these projects....just like the wonderful illusive Villages of Gloucester.
Sounds like somebody is out of a whole lot of money and that some of the houses under construction will go into shambles around those who were unfortunate enough to believe they would prosper!
That's what you get when you invest in people with big ideas and no money to carry it out!
The looser will be the citizens of Gloucester....and the banks and builders taken advantage of for others gain, who took their profits and ran real fast out of Gloucester!
Oh the money was there to carry it out. Wilson and Foster got their millions and you can bet the developer is not out anything. The losers? The banks and the businesses that were not paid. Just another routing real estate scam that goes on every day.
John

Gloucester, VA

#3 Dec 16, 2007
Mike Wilson is just as big of a crook. When you are not a respectable man yourself how can you compliment another as being so?
R-Gloucester

AOL

#4 Dec 16, 2007
Wilson and Foster have got their's and moved on. These poeple have made Gloucester grow so fast, it ought to go back on Wilson and Foster. If it was going to be money in it,Wilson and Foster would have developed both of the projects instead of selling them. Both of them are crooks!

Since: Jul 07

Jacksonville, FL

#5 Dec 16, 2007
R-Gloucester wrote:
Wilson and Foster have got their's and moved on. These poeple have made Gloucester grow so fast, it ought to go back on Wilson and Foster. If it was going to be money in it,Wilson and Foster would have developed both of the projects instead of selling them. Both of them are crooks!
Let me see if I understand correctly. You believe the original developers are crooks because they legally purchased a piece of property, legally received approvals from the County, and legally sold it to another developer. What am I missing? Oh yeah, the jealousy.
Sad

Virginia Beach, VA

#6 Dec 17, 2007
I have met one couple that are living in a rental home while Somerset was building there home, and then the flew the coop! Now the family has nothing to show for all there money invested in the company. I worked for a commercial construction company for almost 4 years then I interviewed with Somerset to find something closer to home and the girl did not know half of the questions that I was asking her about her own company. That is a little sad. This does not suprise me. After all they had only done a "few" projects prior to "building up" G-Town! Im not saying anything is wrong with the Original compay I just think they counted the eggs before "some chicks hatched"!
Sue

Williamsburg, VA

#7 Dec 18, 2007
Gloucester is ready for some new developement, but they need some affordable homes, not high end homes. There isn't enough income in the community to support so many large, high end developements going in.
NICOLE

Wilson, NC

#9 Dec 19, 2007
Sue wrote:
Gloucester is ready for some new developement, but they need some affordable homes, not high end homes. There isn't enough income in the community to support so many large, high end developements going in.
THAT IS SO TRUE.......
Economy

Gloucester, VA

#10 Dec 20, 2007
Looks like the slide of the housing market hit Gloucester pretty hard. What would happen if this was the Villages with 1,000 houses under construction?

Have you seen the mess left behind by this builder? Partially built houses with the tar paper flying off?

Who would want a home that stood in the elements unfinished for years?

Sad times for the people who bought homes there that will have to look at this mess for years to come!

Nobody wins!
So disappointed

Hayes, VA

#11 Dec 23, 2007
I blame part of this on our Planning Commission. Why approve so many developments whose average home cost is $300,000 plus? Where does the "average" long-time, grown-up-in-Gloucester go to purchase an affordable home? I really feel for young couples. The original developers are not to blame. Blame it on the lack of good leadership in our County. Gloucester is a great place to call "home." The leadership needs to do everything they can to make it available to people from all walks of life and economic situations.

Since: Jul 07

Jacksonville, FL

#12 Dec 23, 2007
So disappointed wrote:
I blame part of this on our Planning Commission. Why approve so many developments whose average home cost is $300,000 plus? Where does the "average" long-time, grown-up-in-Gloucester go to purchase an affordable home? I really feel for young couples. The original developers are not to blame. Blame it on the lack of good leadership in our County. Gloucester is a great place to call "home." The leadership needs to do everything they can to make it available to people from all walks of life and economic situations.
The planning commission can't deny a project based on the potential value of the homes. Just think how absurd that is. If you wanted to build a house on your lot with 2 fireplaces, would you OK if the planning commission denied your request because the second fireplace would increase the value of your home to more than "average long-time, grown-up-in-Gloucester" resident can afford? I didn't think so.

Also, you want your government to ensure everyone can afford a home. That's called socialism. Give the citizens of Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela, and China a call and ask them how Socialism is working out for them.
southron_98

Gloucester, VA

#13 Jun 6, 2008
Letter to Gloucester County
I had been invited to attend a meeting of the Historical Committee where Timberneck Hall (Gazette Journal May 29,2008) offered them a historical home which they accepted The owners of Timberneck had originally offered the house to the County but who had rejected the offer, It was then offered to the Historical Committee who accepted it. It was claimed there would be safeguards in the transfer against lawsuits for personal injury but after having the situations reviewed by two different attorneys they both have serious concern; not to mention the real possibility that eventually, someway the taxpayer be responsible. There appears to be limited benefits for the taxpayer! This home was built in 1805 and would take two to two and a half million to refurbish; the owner is going to repair the foundation with bricks from Williamsburg which will cause it to lose its Historical Value. Homes like this should be repaired with period material which is available. The owner instead of donating the home offered a cash gift of over four hundred thousand dollars but instead the home was accepted. As I mentioned there is period material available for refurbishing historical buildings and there is reclaimer company in New Hampshire which would pay for the home which they would dismantle keeping every piece. So the County could make money two ways. In any event I believe this decision should be put to the voters not the Historical Committee. Since the beginning of our communication I have come to believe there is a problem in the Historical Committees Charter; as at the present they are making decisions that could affect the taxpayer and the County. Usually groups like Timberneck Hall would have first gone to the Committee made their offer, the committee in turn would have developed a proposal presenting it to the Board of Directors who would have made the decision whether or not to accept the home. Here the County all ready rejected the offer and the Historical Committee basically over ruled them. Speaking for myself and a ever larger growing group of taxpayers I would rather have had the money presenting it to the Library, the Museum there are so many departments which could use it. I also feel the County needs to reexamine the role of the Historical Committee and any other entity whose actions and decisions could affect the
taxpayer(s), County and community.

May-be you could either provide me guidance or direct me me to someone; who could provide me information on how we can change the way matters are handled by the Board of Directors (I might have the wrong group) how can we change how "sweetheart" deals are made?(Sommerset Developers) Instead of allowing that to be handled by government it should be by the voters on referendum.
Mike Esq

Gloucester, VA

#14 Jun 6, 2008
Being a attorney I have been kept busy with people losing their homes or who due to all these questionable deals cannot pay their taxes. Gloucester is at a breaking point you have people like G and his group who will either unseat these good ole boys, sue them or get the county on track. It will be a up hill battle as you no longer count on the media to be a"watchdog" they are too worried about advertising revue and law suits to report the truth. As such, I have even offered my services Pro bono publico this has to end, we need honest and responsible people in our governments.
Perfect Storm Gaelic

Little Valley, NY

#15 Jun 15, 2008
southron_98 wrote:
Letter to Gloucester County
I had been invited to attend a meeting of the Historical Committee where Timberneck Hall (Gazette Journal May 29,2008) offered them a historical home which they accepted The owners of Timberneck had originally offered the house to the County but who had rejected the offer, It was then offered to the Historical Committee who accepted it. It was claimed there would be safeguards in the transfer against lawsuits for personal injury but after having the situations reviewed by two different attorneys they both have serious concern; not to mention the real possibility that eventually, someway the taxpayer be responsible. There appears to be limited benefits for the taxpayer! This home was built in 1805 and would take two to two and a half million to refurbish; the owner is going to repair the foundation with bricks from Williamsburg which will cause it to lose its Historical Value. Homes like this should be repaired with period material which is available. The owner instead of donating the home offered a cash gift of over four hundred thousand dollars but instead the home was accepted. As I mentioned there is period material available for refurbishing historical buildings and there is reclaimer company in New Hampshire which would pay for the home which they would dismantle keeping every piece. So the County could make money two ways. In any event I believe this decision should be put to the voters not the Historical Committee. Since the beginning of our communication I have come to believe there is a problem in the Historical Committees Charter; as at the present they are making decisions that could affect the taxpayer and the County. Usually groups like Timberneck Hall would have first gone to the Committee made their offer, the committee in turn would have developed a proposal presenting it to the Board of Directors who would have made the decision whether or not to accept the home. Here the County all ready rejected the offer and the Historical Committee basically over ruled them. Speaking for myself and a ever larger growing group of taxpayers I would rather have had the money presenting it to the Library, the Museum there are so many departments which could use it. I also feel the County needs to reexamine the role of the Historical Committee and any other entity whose actions and decisions could affect the
taxpayer(s), County and community.
May-be you could either provide me guidance or direct me me to someone; who could provide me information on how we can change the way matters are handled by the Board of Directors (I might have the wrong group) how can we change how "sweetheart" deals are made?(Sommerset Developers) Instead of allowing that to be handled by government it should be by the voters on referendum.
Very well said. Interesting as well.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Hayes Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Owner of York County pipe/tobacco lounge arrest... (Nov '13) 7 hr Martin garey 35
News Couple to continue bakery tradition (Jan '08) Sun Sugarfoot 21
News NN man accused of raping 13-year-old girl (Mar '09) Sep 22 41young 32
News Stolen computer e-mails picture to owner (Jan '11) Sep 21 no to stealing co... 52
a person on go fund me.com is frauding people Sep 21 shame shame shame 8
Review: iLoveKickboxing- Newport News (Aug '16) Sep 21 Ydeleon24 63
News Racist Violence in America (Aug '14) Sep 18 Anonymous 20

Hayes Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Hayes Mortgages