[strata]

Three thoughts about how to handle this better:

- Give the tenants more notice
- Provide an opportunity for existing tenants to get space in the new development similar to their existing lease and
- Develop new retail space in a different area from existing retail space, so as to minimize the time the community has no retail space.

#1 Fair enough
#2 Seriously? Do you know what kind of lease rates you need to charge to be able to support the cost of new construction, regardless of the location and land price?
#3 So in order for a developer to do a new project, they should be expected to purchase another adjacent site and build new retail space...which I assume would also require them charging at a lease rate under market for brand new space?

Come on now.

 

[Oilers99]

#1 Fair enough
#2 Seriously? Do you know what kind of lease rates you need to charge to be able to support the cost of new construction, regardless of the location and land price?
#3 So in order for a developer to do a new project, they should be expected to purchase another adjacent site and build new retail space...which I assume would also require them charging at a lease rate under market for brand new space?

Come on now.

David A lives in a made up world.

 

[crisp]

Like I said, annoying and stressful for the tenant, definitely. But they knew what they were getting into signing month-to-month leases at favorable rates. There's obviously a catch to such a deal and it was on them to always have a risk mitigation plan. They shouldn't be going to the media to make the developer look bad.

 

[David A]

#1 Fair enough
#2 Seriously? Do you know what kind of lease rates you need to charge to be able to support the cost of new construction, regardless of the location and land price?
#3 So in order for a developer to do a new project, they should be expected to purchase another adjacent site and build new retail space...which I assume would also require them charging at a lease rate under market for brand new space?

Come on now.

The question was asked what more could the developer do - these are all things the developer could do. They might not do all and they wouldn't be profitable in the short term, but could work out in the long term.

So, if you don't want to look like an uncaring, cold company only concerned about the bottom line and unconcerned about how it affects others, you actually have to walk the walk. Don't whine about bad PR if you don't make a real effort.

 

[quit]

The question was asked what more could the developer do - these are all things the developer could do. They might not do all and they wouldn't be profitable in the short term, but could work out in the long term.

So, if you don't want to look like an uncaring, cold company only concerned about the bottom line and unconcerned about how it affects others, you actually have to walk the walk. Don't whine about bad PR if you don't make a real effort.

Wasn't the real effort that the small businesses knew the project was downstream several years in advance and should have been planning for this? You can't lay all the blame on the developer here. This project has been well publicised for years and businesses should have planned accordingly. Their leases were structured so that the developer could give relatively short notice.

I don't know why the business owners say there were expecting more time in the article. So, they weren't being strategic whatsoever? That is on them more than the developer - the project was originally proposed 14 years ago. You could equally say don't whine if you don't make any real effort for the small businesses.

 

[David A]

Wasn't the real effort that the small businesses knew the project was downstream several years in advance and should have been planning for this? You can't lay all the blame on the developer here. This project has been well publicised for years and businesses should have planned accordingly. Their leases were structured so that the developer could give relatively short notice.

I don't know why the business owners say there were expecting more time in the article. So, they weren't being strategic whatsoever? That is on them more than the developer - the project was originally proposed 14 years ago. You could equally say don't whine if you don't make any real effort for the small businesses.

Probably because they expected their landlord to be decent. I guess that's their mistake.

 

[crisp]

From my experience, project planning may take very long, with continuous changes to plans. But access to funding and the final executive decision to start construction often happens very fast once it's a go. It is very probable that nobody involved with the project was aware that this is going forward any sooner than the tenants knew themselves.

The length of notice is probably an estimate of the project's permitting timeline as well.

 

[Oilers99]

The question was asked what more could the developer do - these are all things the developer could do. They might not do all and they wouldn't be profitable in the short term, but could work out in the long term.

So, if you don't want to look like an uncaring, cold company only concerned about the bottom line and unconcerned about how it affects others, you actually have to walk the walk. Don't whine about bad PR if you don't make a real effort.

in one response you mention the developer doesn't know how to maximize profits b/c they leave spaces not leased. now you're saying they are uncaring and cold?

 

[David A]

in one response you mention the developer doesn't know how to maximize profits b/c they leave spaces not leased. now you're saying they are uncaring and cold?

Well, I didn't say they were competent did I? In the rush to get rid of existing tenants who in their minds are not paying enough, they will upgrade to something shiny and new in the hopes of making a lot more.

However, it really wouldn't be surprising if some or much of the space sat empty for a long time. It probably wouldn't be the first time that happened. Actually, in the end you probably make more money if you treat your existing paying tenants well, but I realize some landlords don't get it.

 

[crisp]

@David A Landlord is adding high-density residential units to make money. Retail is more secondary, activating the street and keeping commercial options in the neighborhood. If developers had your mindset, we would never see development in the inner city. Edmonton would continue the massive suburban sprawl that it already has at an even faster pace.

 

[David A]

@David A Landlord is adding high-density residential units to make money. Retail is more secondary, activating the street and keeping commercial options in the neighborhood. If developers had your mindset, we would never see development in the inner city. Edmonton would continue the massive suburban sprawl that it already has at an even faster pace.

So is this area considered inner city, now?. Not exactly much development going on in the Quarters which actually is inner city. I suppose that's my fault.

If you treat people better, you don't get bad PR and you make money in the end. If you get too greedy you have a lot of problems and push back. This development has had a lot of them because of the short sighted focus.

Smarter people know how to make things a win win and those who are too greedy wonder why they are always beset by problems and their pot of gold never quite appears.

 

[EtoV]

Like it or not, developers need to make money. The options you've presented would be prohibitively expensive in 99% of cities, let alone Edmonton. Crisp is right in that if you require the steps your requested, redevelopment would never happen, Instead we would be only seeing new development occur as greenfield. It's a similar issue to affordable housing policies that are too aggressive, they end up killing the financial viability of projects, and the end result is that nothing gets built at all.

Also, the month-to-month rents and possibility of redevelopment can often be a two way street. There is a good chance that the businesses located here had discounted rents due to the uncertainty. There's trade-offs to be made, and the businesses operating here decided that those trade-offs were worth staying at this location. Now obviously the commercial rental market isn't a completely free market because commercial locations are artificially restricted by zoning, but commercial rents in Edmonton are some of the lowest in Canada, so the case remains that the deal was likely mutually beneficial.

 

[Oilers99]

So is this area considered inner city, now?. Not exactly much development going on in the Quarters which actually is inner city. I suppose that's my fault.

If you treat people better, you don't get bad PR and you make money in the end. If you get too greedy you have a lot of problems and push back. This development has had a lot of them because of the short sighted focus.

Smarter people know how to make things a win win and those who are too greedy wonder why they are always beset by problems and their pot of gold never quite appears.

You seem to really talk in absolutes in how developers should run their respective companies and projects. I think the guys with their capital at stake would know more about what to do then an internet commentator.

 

[Roland Bressmer]

 

[Roland Bressmer]