Horne and Pitfield Building Redevelopment | ?m | ?s | Limak Investments

archited

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 21, 2015
Messages
3,776
Reaction score
9,597
Location
Ojai
I am largely in agreement with Planning Administration overview... this development is a bonus for the walk-ability of 104th Street and assists in underscoring the importance of the Ice District as a nodal area that needs to be intensified. Nicely packaged @IanO. The City needs to "handcuff" Limak to this deal so that they do not exercise an upgrade-and-"sale" scenario -- they should make sure that their reputation is on the line -- precise with no wiggle room.
 

kcantor

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 20, 2020
Messages
504
Reaction score
2,298
Location
Edmonton, Alberta
^

we shouldn’t have to figure out how to handicap limak - or anyone else - from not being able to exercise their development rights, we shouldn’t be giving away development rights like free popcorn and then trying to figure out how to claw them back..

zoning rights belongs to the land and flow with it, they’re independent of who owns the land and rightfully so.

as for limak completing this project, why in the world would they even consider it? the lift in land value is now already in the bank and is probably more than the net present value they would get by completing the actual project. they would be crazy to take on that additional development risk, as would anyone else. we’ve seen so much of this already, you’d think we’d learn by now.
 

EdmTrekker

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 9, 2020
Messages
394
Reaction score
998
^

we shouldn’t have to figure out how to handicap limak - or anyone else - from not being able to exercise their development rights, we shouldn’t be giving away development rights like free popcorn and then trying to figure out how to claw them back..

zoning rights belongs to the land and flow with it, they’re independent of who owns the land and rightfully so.

as for limak completing this project, why in the world would they even consider it? the lift in land value is now already in the bank and is probably more than the net present value they would get by completing the actual project. they would be crazy to take on that additional development risk, as would anyone else. we’ve seen so much of this already, you’d think we’d learn by now.
"the lift in land value is now already in the bank and is probably more than the net present value they would get by completing the actual project.". True so very true. I forget whether the site has been declared a historic site and if not - they best sell sooner than later to a developer that might want to demolish the existing building.

I am curious, Ken, what you think may have been the net gain they made by the rezoning?
 

kcantor

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 20, 2020
Messages
504
Reaction score
2,298
Location
Edmonton, Alberta
"the lift in land value is now already in the bank and is probably more than the net present value they would get by completing the actual project.". True so very true. I forget whether the site has been declared a historic site and if not - they best sell sooner than later to a developer that might want to demolish the existing building.

I am curious, Ken, what you think may have been the net gain they made by the rezoning?
downtown multi family sites seem to be trading in the range of $30 - 50 per buildable sf.

given that the bonus being given is achieved at the top where it is the most valuable square footage on the project, at $50 psf an additional 180,000 sf of buildable area would have a current theoretical value of $9,000,000.
 

EdmTrekker

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 9, 2020
Messages
394
Reaction score
998
downtown multi family sites seem to be trading in the range of $30 - 50 per buildable sf.

given that the bonus being given is achieved at the top where it is the most valuable square footage on the project, at $50 psf an additional 180,000 sf of buildable area would have a current theoretical value of $9,000,000.
A very nice gifting courtesy of the Taxpayers of Edmonton ... the City administration could have said no. I suppose that 180,000 sq ft might achieve 180-250 additional condos to what might have been built without the rezoning? Whats the residential tax payback to make up the gifted $9 million and what I am I forgetting? .
 

kcantor

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 20, 2020
Messages
504
Reaction score
2,298
Location
Edmonton, Alberta
A very nice gifting courtesy of the Taxpayers of Edmonton ... the City administration could have said no. I suppose that 180,000 sq ft might achieve 180-250 additional condos to what might have been built without the rezoning? Whats the residential tax payback to make up the gifted $9 million and what I am I forgetting? .
if you assume that those 180 - 250 purchasers will simply purchase another condo if these units don't get built (which is no different that would happen if the entire project doesn't go ahead but people still want/need a condo), then there there is no residential tax payback to make up the gifted $9,000,000.
 

EdmTrekker

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 9, 2020
Messages
394
Reaction score
998
if you assume that those 180 - 250 purchasers will simply purchase another condo if these units don't get built (which is no different that would happen if the entire project doesn't go ahead but people still want/need a condo), then there there is no residential tax payback to make up the gifted $9,000,000.
I am assuming it’s a sell out. The purchasers are new to Edmonton.
 

David A

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 17, 2020
Messages
328
Reaction score
1,379
If I was an outgoing councilor, I sure would not want my last legacy to be the destruction of another historic building likely to be replaced by another empty lot.

We are too eager to tear down things here in pursuit of nice pictures that end up being mirages and our city council has been duped too many times. I wish we would learn from past mistakes, instead of keeping on repeating them.
 

kcantor

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 20, 2020
Messages
504
Reaction score
2,298
Location
Edmonton, Alberta
I am assuming it’s a sell out. The purchasers are new to Edmonton.
it makes no difference... if those purchasers are "new to edmonton", i'm pretty sure they're not moving here specifically to buy a unit at the top of this building if it gets built.

if this doesn't get built or if something gets built that's 180,000 sf smaller, every one of those "new to edmonton" purchasers will simply buy something else to live in.

meaning there is no residential tax payback on the gifted $9,000,000 - they wouldn't be paying any taxes on these units that they wouldn't be paying elsewhere which means that all of the taxes that might be paid here are simply shifted from where they would still have been paid elsewhere.

it's a zero sum game for the city with nothing to be "won".
 

MCXavierL

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 7, 2011
Messages
331
Reaction score
1,966
Location
Edmonton, AB
What was the directive given to administration?

From the September 8th Council Minutes:

That Bylaw 19859 and Charter Bylaw 19860, be referred to Administration, to work with the applicant to protect more of the existing historic Horne & Pitfield building, including the potential designation of the entire building, and return to a future City Council Public Hearing.
Due Date: To be determined

In Favour (7)D. Iveson, A. Knack, B. Esslinger, S. McKeen, M. Nickel, A. Paquette, and T. Cartmell
Opposed (3)T. Caterina, J. Dziadyk, and M. Banga
Motion Carried (7 to 3)
 

Top