News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.5K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.7K     0 

What do you think of this project?


  • Total voters
    11
Apologies for the crappy location

20220513_122507.jpg
 
Please someone build on that parking lot… it would make such a difference

3 of the 4 corners in this prime intersection are undeveloped with two currently parking lots, so getting something going would be so nice.

What kind of development in this busy vehicular intersection seems most likely - a hotel, an office space (which we don't seem to need right now and could depend on what happens with the Regency site) or condos? Or a large dog park maybe? 😄
 
We seem to be very good in this City at cutting down large, old trees. Not sure what the health of these were or the importance of their removal to the overall scope of the project but sheesh, it takes 30 years for trees to grow this big in this part of the world. I hope there was a valid reason for their removal.
AE61325F-D8EF-4DCD-9758-CA0DDA0ECC52.jpeg
 
3 of the 4 corners in this prime intersection are undeveloped with two currently parking lots, so getting something going would be so nice.

What kind of development in this busy vehicular intersection seems most likely - a hotel, an office space (which we don't seem to need right now and could depend on what happens with the Regency site) or condos? Or a large dog park maybe? 😄
To be honest, an AAA office tower would be nice. Regency will likely take forever and it is HARD do find AAA space in the city for a competitive price.

For comparison, I have a client paying $1.36 + operating costs per sq ft in one of the BMO tower's top floors in Calgary, for a total below $25. Here the cheapest AA office space is going for at least $7 more than that, and you can find B towers close to that price range.

Because out office supply (and high quality office supply) is much more constrained, out prices are getting too high (on of the reasons why I've heard a few of my clients with offices here saying they're staying put in the South instead of even considering downtown, as easier as it would be to be DT)
 
Still way too many parking lots in DT Edmonton.
It wouldn't be so bad if we just continued to work away and fill the empty lots, which has been done with some success. However, people seem to keep on insisting to tearing down older buildings downtown that could be repurposed or fixed up and adding to the number of empty lots.

After some progress over the last decade it now seems like one step forward, one step or more back. I wish the city would crack down on letting people tear down older buildings. It is becoming a problem again.
 
It wouldn't be so bad if we just continued to work away and fill the empty lots, which has been done with some success. However, people seem to keep on insisting to tearing down older buildings downtown that could be repurposed or fixed up and adding to the number of empty lots.

After some progress over the last decade it now seems like one step forward, one step or more back. I wish the city would crack down on letting people tear down older buildings. It is becoming a problem again.
I will point out again, since it seems to be an issue:

You cannot force people to sell land they don't want to and, if you simply ban developments that are not done on empty parking lots, you'll simply push developers away from downtown.

If we start dictating too much and regulating the market too much, we might as well sign off on a dictator to rule and decide what is to be done and join the commie side of the force.

As much as I appreciate preserving our heritage, thanks, but no thanks.
 
And I think there in lies the problem. The buildings are a bit more troublesome for the speculator owner so those tend to be more available for the developers. The lots that are empty or were made empty years ago don't require as mush cost so those individuals who own those are willing to sit on the empty lot a whole lot longer waiting for a developer with deep pockets.
 
And I think there in lies the problem. The buildings are a bit more troublesome for the speculator owner so those tend to be more available for the developers. The lots that are empty or were made empty years ago don't require as mush cost so those individuals who own those are willing to sit on the empty lot a whole lot longer waiting for a developer with deep pockets.
Fun but probably bad idea: after a demolition permit is granted for a DC2 zoned lot, start a timer. After X years, the city assesses the property as if it were complete (even if it's not).

Maybe it starts at 10% of completed value, but increases every year. If the land gets sold to the city, the assessment returns to normal and can be auctioned off.

As a less punitive alternative, you could use the pre-demolition assessment instead.
 

Back
Top