Tower 101 | 175m | 50s | Regency Developments | DER + Associates

What do you think of this project?

  • Total voters
    46
I have a feeling that this site was a large raft and without piles.
 
BASE said:
We have 3 big residential projects underway around stationlands, The Parks, & Falcon along with an upcoming office tower for CWB in Ice District. I agree there is a bit too much gloom and doom. If we had absolutely nothing going on I could see it and yes downtown has its troubles but for every former BMO site there are things to be excited about (MacEwan school of business) so lets not live and die on every lot that isn't being developed this instant. A lot of talk about institutional confidence in the market, I would say boosters like ourselves need to show a little confidence first or at least save our negativity for that streetcar/LRT Frankentrain that should be opening in the next yearish.
Click to expand...

An up coming tower for CWB?

^
Agree with you on that one Ian.
 
IanO said:
I have a feeling that this site was a large raft and without piles.
Click to expand...

So if a buyer is looking at this site, will this be a negative for them? Seems like not having to dig up piles would potentially speed up an excavation for a tower
 
Clearshades said:
The less work you have to do on a lot would definitely mean a more expediently process for sure.
Click to expand...
assuming of course that that work is either costly or time-consuming relative to the project itself. in this case, i think the impact on the project, and therefor any residual land value, is probably nominal at best.
 
CaptainBL said:
This property has been privately shopped on the market by the seller for some time and has not sold. It is definitely for sale and not a test the market listing. The seller is looking for liquidity.

Informationally, a few of the detriments to being privately shopped have been:

1. Recently, institutional capital from outside Edmonton has not had a positive view on downtown for obvious reasons. Institutions are preferring to invest elsewhere with less risk and better returns
2. Downtown office vacancy, commercial and retail vacancy, and general vagrancy
3. The big players in Edmonton that could take on this land/project are tied up (Maclab has a lot of capital tied up in Garneau and the Parks; Pangman is tied up on a couple of large projects like Edmonton Motors not moving forward; AIMCo has refocused their real estate portfolio with less concentration in AB and already owns across the street) and one of the big players, Regency, is selling the property.

So I wouldn't go as far as saying this will go quickly. You may be surprised how slow it goes, especially given it has been privately for sale for some time.

Edit: What this site needs is a buyer from out of town who doesnt know the Edmonton market, doesnt know that CC is vacant and downtown is struggling and looks at this site as "wow a vacant site in the central business district of a major Canadian city!", or, a company not from Edmonton looking to expand into Alberta and build an owner/user office tower.
Click to expand...

I followed up on this for those that are interested and as I predicted in my note above from March for the reasons I listed this piece of land is STILL publicly listed for sale. There have been some can kickers but the fact that a piece of land in the commercial district of the downtown of a major Canadian city ripe for a hotel and/or office development has been both privately shopped with little to no interest and publicly shopped on the market for 135 days (as of today July 22) is not a good sign of confidence in the downtown Edmonton market.

For those on this forum that think downtown is ok as-is or simply that this is a negative poop on downtown post, I am presenting you with the objective fact that this was privately for sale and there were no buyers. Since then this has been publicly on the market for 135 days and no parties have been interested in transacting a value or vision.

For those that realize that downtown has significant issues preventing it from moving forward, this is an objective sign that you are correct and a wake up call that things need to change significantly.

And no, pricing asked by the seller has not been the issue at stake here.
 
Last edited:
^
all development land costs for a developer are a reflection of residual value, not simply what can be negotiated with a vendor.

for office and hotel and retail, current demand and market value for the end product by both tenants and buyers less current construction costs and the cost of capital whether for equity or debt financing are likely to yield net negative values for the land.

unfortunately it may be an awful lot longer than 135 days (as in longer by months or years, not days or weeks) before this becomes an attractive acquisition.
 
kcantor said:
^
all development land costs for a developer are a reflection of residual value, not simply what can be negotiated with a vendor.

for office and hotel and retail, current demand and market value for the end product by both tenants and buyers less current construction costs and the cost of capital whether for equity or debt financing are likely to yield net negative values for the land.

unfortunately it may be an awful lot longer than 135 days (as in longer by months or years, not days or weeks) before this becomes an attractive acquisition.
Click to expand...
Ken, yes while you are absolutely correct and to summarize for others on this forum (in layman’s terms Ken is effectively saying developers are looking for a return), some developers or owners will look at a specific return on investment (say that they need a 20% return) but justify it based on a future vision that the market will support that investment one day. Every party that has looked at this investment has not yet believed that the market will support their own respective return in the future. They have believed that there are not enough factors in place (and my god there’s an arena district, LRT investment, etc) that the fundamentals of a real estate investment in a core piece of land still do not make sense for many (all so far) potential buyers.
 
A proposal from Toronto that would fit well on this site, is sleek, relatively simple design and would inject a ton of life into the core.

49s-165m - 630 units

170-rohamton-jpg.436832


 
Proposals are easy.
The city has become completely unreasonable to work with lately, no one talks to each other or works together between different departments such as services, transportation, landscape, parks, garbage, design, etc.
The all have their demands and are difficult to work with when trying to come to a compromise and make everyone happy.
Its going to push developers out of the city and is a major problem right now in Edmonton
 
Vacs said:
Proposals are easy.
The city has become completely unreasonable to work with lately, no one talks to each other or works together between different departments such as services, transportation, landscape, parks, garbage, design, etc.
The all have their demands and are difficult to work with when trying to come to a compromise and make everyone happy.
Its going to push developers out of the city and is a major problem right now in Edmonton
Click to expand...
Shhhhhh you're just spreading negativity (as some would say on this forum).

This is the same sentiment I have heard (among many other non forward moving messages) in the development circles.

I was speaking recently with a large-name Edmonton developer last week and their comment was that the city needs to absolutely do something to get development going in the core. They mentioned that from their perspective, the last development incentive (the tax deferral program) was not helpful in spurring new projects, but if you had a project lined up and close to the shovel stage it was beneficial to those (essentially their comment was that incentive didn't make or break any new projects).

They also said they are working with other local developers to lobby the city on a new incentive program. While I get that developers lobbying a municipal government sounds like $$$, I understand it. Developers are getting squeezed, costs of construction continue up, financing costs are up, rental rates downtown are not increasing at the same level as costs are, and there is no condo market for sales, but everyone wants new development of towers downtown. AND on top of all that, exactly what you say about this city being unreasonable to deal with.

There is reason (or many reasons) we are not seeing the level of development we would like in the core.

Edit: With the high influx of emigration into Alberta (with some siphoning into Edmonton), if we are not able to take advantage of filling up some developments in the core with new residents then when the music slows we will have had a large missed opportunity.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top