What do you think of this project?

  • Total voters
    46
i am not convinced that in the current climate - construction costs, financing costs and unavailability, equity costs, current rental rates or even projected rental rates, and current or even projected sales values that there is any level of incentive that the city could provide that would be affordable from the city's perspective or that would be large enough to actually make a difference from a developer/investor perspective.

incentives on the supply side for downtown development will not solve the problem any more than they have been able to solve the affordable housing problem.

if the city really wants to incentivize downtown development, they should use whatever dollars they are prepared to make available and invest them in increasing the demand side.

that means safety, cleanliness, ease of access and circulation for all modes of transportation, snow removal, tree replacement, relaxed permitting for vacant spaces (even if restricted to temporary uses) and for retail spaces in particular...

until construction starts why not create a "busker's zone" in the new warehouse park and kinistinaw and pay busker's who take out a license instead of charging them for a license (it would be a big improvement over listening to street preachers)?

why not issue a temporary permit for interim parking lots (whether legal or not at the moment) on the provision that they provide free power and water for at least one food truck along with two picnic tables per truck?

why not bring back "downtown ambassadors" but also have them provide on demand escort service (no, not that kind of escort service) from any business location in the core to wherever you parked or wherever you're going to catch your bus or lrt?

why not offer a nominal tax credit to any owner providing space for artists' studio or performance space provided that space is open to the public a minimum number of hours per week (ie early granville island days) whether that's for painting or sculpture or performance or even writing? maybe that incentive could be increased by 1/2 if lessons were also provided?

this kind of approach will also immediately support existing owners and tenants at least as much as new development (which could take years to deliver) and it would immediately support adjacent owners and tenants as well.

food for thought: why not take all the money the city is prepared to spend directly and indirectly to attract one time events like the 2030 commonwealth games etc. and invest it here in a special event called "celebrate downtown edmonton" festival that would be both immediate and ongoing?
 
There is a tendency in the corporate world to point the finger at government bureaucracy for periods of inactivity regardless of the underlying causes of that inactivity. This is about staying on message in efforts to de-regulate, increase profit, and reduce liability, and such sentiments should not always be taken at face value.
 
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...
I don't doubt the city is a pain the butt, they can't seem to get much right these days. I'm fairly critical of council, I get the sense there is little adult supervision or direction and so the bureaucracy runs amok. There are a lot of new councillors and there is a learning curve, but I thought by now they would have figured out how to run things a bit better.

However, in any event I think it is the market that drives projects. Ask people from Toronto about their city government and you may get an earful too, but if a project is lucrative people will jump through all kinds of hoops. If not, it may never happen regardless of how easy the city makes it.
 
David A said:
I don't doubt the city is a pain the butt, they can't seem to get much right these days. I'm fairly critical of council, I get the sense there is little adult supervision or direction and so the bureaucracy runs amok. There are a lot of new councillors and there is a learning curve, but I thought by now they would have figured out how to run things a bit better.

However, in any event I think it is the market that drives projects. Ask people from Toronto about their city government and you may get an earful too, but if a project is lucrative people will jump through all kinds of hoops. If not, it may never happen regardless of how easy the city makes it.
Click to expand...
Edmonton just needs to take a look at how well our southern neighbors are pushing projects through. Its night and day difference when working with the city there than in Edmonton.

Also the Calgary construction association does a lot more than the ECA with driving projects.

Edmonton needs to get on the same page
 
I honestly just think that the reason no one seems really interested in purchasing and developing this lot is because downtown Edmonton just is not an attractive place to invest right now.

I don't doubt that the City of Edmonton is a bureaucratic mess and a pain in the ass to work with, but so is Toronto (in fact, one can argue their council is an even bigger circus than ours) but you don't ever see a slowdown in developments and proposals despite that (as David pointed out).

I also agree the city's role in making this a worthwhile investment is to focus on safety, cleanliness, aesthetics (tree replacements, road + curb + sidewalk improvements) etc. and to make downtown a somewhat pleasant place to spend time in. Helping to change the perception of downtown as a "no go zone" would do wonders for investors and developers to reconsider ventures and potentially take a chance.
 
CaptainBL said:
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.
Click to expand...
Just because you feel like something is true, doesn't make it fact. I take no issue that improvements can be made, but permitting in Edmonton is actually quite good when it comes to residential development. Harping on the City based only on anecdote and opinion is a waste of time.
 
tkoe_ said:
Just because you feel like something is true, doesn't make it fact. I take no issue that improvements can be made, but permitting in Edmonton is actually quite good when it comes to residential development. Harping on the City based only on anecdote and opinion is a waste of time.
Click to expand...
I am not quite sure how to even respond to your post given I spoke nothing about permits or residential housing, but focused sharing comments on developments in the core specifically on tower 101, which is the topic of thread.

My personal experience is that I work with developers all day, every day, some big, some small, some local, some not local, with a focus in Edmonton, Calgary, and locations in B.C., and Ontario and have worked directly on projects currently under construction in downtown and even more that are not under construction (for many reasons I have shared in this thread and across other threads). I have no idea what your experience or background is but there are many on this forum that have no experience in development and come here out of interest to learn and understand the Edmonton development market and why things happen and why they dont.

My experience is not the only experience and opinion on this forum, however, my "anecdotes" and opinions are crafted and formed through my interactions, conversations, and direct work so I believe that my anecdotes are not a waste of time and are certainly not a waste of time for those that are not as plugged into the market as I am but if you feel like covering your ears and eyes to anything that doesn't fit your narrative you are more than welcome and I will continue to share my knowledge, conversations and insights with those that are interested.
 
Last edited:
_urbanite said:
We certainly need more this. But I think in this location specifically should command higher rents (at least higher than the newer rental product coming online) when considering the amenities and services right at it's doorstep.
Click to expand...
You cant charge higher rents just for the sake of charging higher rents. Multifamily buildings like this only work under CMHC financing (all multifamily projects that move forward today only move forward if they have CMHC financing and not traditional bank financing given the state of interest rates), which means you would need to have a % of the units as "affordable" rates.

Sky in Stantec was charging $3.10 per sq ft. (one of the highest if not the highest rate in downtown Edmonton), got little traction and now is still only 86% leased after 31-months on the market at an average of $2.85 per sq. ft. INCLUDING incentives of 1-month free rent, 6 months of free parking and a 6-month archetype gym membership.

I worked on a multifamily project that is under construction charging $2.88 per sqft. with bigger, nicer units than Sky, nicer surrounding area, better amenities, and not in dead zone of downtown. You cant charge higher rents just for the sake of charging higher rents as Katz's has demonstrated.
 
Not with a ton of price conscious renters and a lot of options and limited value prop for being right in the middle of it all.
 
IanO said:
Not with a ton of price conscious renters and a lot of options and limited value prop for being right in the middle of it all.
Click to expand...
For real

-Limited number of high paying jobs in Edm dt
-Wages fairly stagnant across the board in AB for almost a decade now
-Cost of living besides rent/mortgage increasing (groceries, insurance, utilities, vehicles, etc)
-Social disorder rampant including vandalism, theft

Frankly some days it astounds me that anyone is paying $2200+ for a two bed in Edmonton downtown.
 
I think about the amenities that would be near the Tower 101:
(1) Central, Churchill and 102 Street LRT Stations.
(2) Access to Rice Howard Way (Including CRAFT. Sherlock Holmes, and other food retail. Also, RHW is due for repairs, given the broken bricks in the sidewalk and street.
(3) Retail shopping nearby in City Centre, Manulife and other locations.
(4) Proximity to the downtown financial district.
(5) Proximity to hotels, Convention Centre, Rogers Place, and the Arts District.
 
The_Cat said:
(2) Access to Rice Howard Way (Including CRAFT. Sherlock Holmes, and other food retail. Also, RHW is due for repairs, given the broken bricks in the sidewalk and street.
Click to expand...
Interesting note: When Enbridge Centre was built, Pangman paid for a detailed concept plan for the redevelopment of RHW. Unfortunately it has never been prioritized and funded. I'll probably be long gone from the area by the time it is.

Amazing to me that Edmonton has not done more to keep one of it's best downtown pedestrian streets in better repair.

RHW Concept Plan 1.JPG
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top