Falcon Towers | 170m | 44s | Langham Developments | Arc Studio

[thommyjo]

What is statuses to date as far as sales is concerned? Westrich's 'The View' and this came out at the same time and one is soon to be at grade level.

I had requested information from them. They only gave me ground to level 8, then 24 and up. It showed about half of those were sold. I wonder if the middle ones they didn't sell are therefore for rentals potentially?

 

[Clearshades]

Just to clarify, that was 1/2 of the allotted suites designated for sale, or 1/2 of all units to be developed?

 

[thommyjo]

Just to clarify, that was 1/2 of the allotted suites designated for sale, or 1/2 of all units to be developed?

It was about half of the units sent to me on a document. But mysteriously most middle floors were completely missing. I doubt they were all sold out. So it seems like they just weren't for sale. Potentially being reserved for rentals was my theory?

 

[Clearshades]

A good wild guest would be around 25% ...

 

[IanO]

Last I recall checking in on this, it was 25-30% pre-sold.

 

[Avenuer]

Last I recall checking in on this, it was 25-30% pre-sold.

Not great, especially since they want to put up a second tower eventually.

 

[Hugh Jazz]

Does anyone know the legal implications of setting up a building with both rental units (owned by a single landlord) and condos? I recall talking to a developer a while back who indicated it's not very common due in part to the tricky regulations surrounding condo boards. I assume it comes down to condo board vs landlord relationships but I was always curious about what exactly was so tricky?

Stantec has gone ahead with it, so it must not be impossible - but it certainly is rare in this province.

 

[westcoastjos]

Does anyone know the legal implications of setting up a building with both rental units (owned by a single landlord) and condos? I recall talking to a developer a while back who indicated it's not very common due in part to the tricky regulations surrounding condo boards. I assume it comes down to condo board vs landlord relationships but I was always curious about what exactly was so tricky?

Stantec has gone ahead with it, so it must not be impossible - but it certainly is rare in this province.

There are stipulations about the developer sitting on the condo board and what voting power they have relative to the rest of the condo board. IIRC, they don't necessarily get more voting power just because they are retaining x amount of units for rentals. In addition, there are still time implications as to when the developer has to turn over the so called power to the condo board to manage the corporation.

I believe at the end of the day the legislation favours individual owners.

 

[Clearshades]

@ Hugh J, what are some if the issues talked about?

 

[Hugh Jazz]

@ Hugh J, what are some if the issues talked about?

Mostly it was the issue of ongoing maintenance and ops costs & how those costs are handled. This kind of made sense to me, as condos and rentals generally have slightly different wants/needs simply due to the nature of occupants and the rate of turnover. However, I was not aware of the condo board voting power issue that @westcoastjos mentioned - that makes a lot of sense as to why developers would be hesitant to pursue this route.

 

[Clearshades]

Thank you!
If that's the case, perhaps a monthly fee of "X" amount added to the rental prices? If half are allocated for condos, prorate out each owner's monthly contributions and add that same amount into the rental prices...
Dont make complications; make "win win".

 

[IanO]

The Amazing Brentwood has a few towers that are 50/50; complicated, but possible.

 

[David A]

It is more complicated, but not impossible. I suppose this gives the builder the option of proceeding by relying on rental income in the short term and then gradually selling those units off. The rental market here is better than the condo market now, so it does make some sense. With Stantec it was more a switch to Plan B after the building was already built, not the original option. Here seems to be a different scenario.

 

[Avenuer]

The lots for this development only just transferred to Langham at the end of November, so perhaps we will see them start working on the site now that they have full ownership.

 

[Daveography]

Reference ID: Job No 326906292-013
Description: To construct interior / exterior alterations (reducing the # of Storeys from 38 to 29, reducing the # of Dwellings from 304 to 240, and reducing the # of underground parking levels from 7 to 5) to an Apartment House / General Retail Store building (Falcon Tower One)
Location: 10023 - 104 STREET NW
Plan NB Blk 3 Lot 69
Applicant: ARC STUDIO
Status: Intake - Payment and More Info Requested
Create Date: 1/14/2021 3:45:28 PM
Neighbourhood: DOWNTOWN