One would think. All you mention would be a dream come true for many developers in most cases.
We keep hearing we are desperate for housing.

They're probably greedy for just those reasons. They know they can't afford building all the projects at once so theyll just sit on ugly land until they can get the capital to start something up.

The ultra white exterior is not going to age well methinks

I seem to recall in council minutes notwithstanding the City provided the whole site to CV for $1.00, an almost $4,000,000 fee was to flow from the non profit developer back to CV just for this portion of the site. This cost one must assume contributed substantially to over budgeting. The price for the balance of the site shall we say is consider “expensive” in the development community.

If the purchase price of the sites were more reasonable, I believe we would have had a better building and more action on the balance of the site.

This idea that the inflated sale price for the site should flow to CV to fund their operations may be one of the challenges to get the project off the ground.

I would rather the land be sold for a $1.00 to stimulate a great building than over pricing the land and expecting the developers to also pickup all the costs of roadwork, sidewalks landscaping etc.

In any case, I hope something gets built now but tenders are not in….

The $4,000,000.00 land cost should be adjusted to ensure project’s success …

One has to wonder how RNDSQR’s The Bend and Alston’s Pump House projects were conceived and built while those in charge of Marketlands continue to navel gaze…

Maybe someone can find that report / costing and fact check for me…


Thx

I have heard through a good source (not 100% verified though) that RNDSQR sold their other property on Gault. Too bad if that is the case, but leaves the window open for another developer to do something great.

you'd think.....downtown development isn't as attractive as it appears....it was a tough sell before the pandemic....now its impossible.

I thought you loved UWCRC.

I'm not sure selling city owned land for free to developers would be a popular idea. Land prices are below market, not inflated.

The budget challenges had nothing to do with land costs.

Wouldn't surprise me....i've heard leasing for 90 alexander is tough. They are taking a bath on that project.

Perhaps their leasing agency is part of the problem. I tried reaching out to them multiple times and never got a response.

RNDSQR recently listed its 2 multifamily developments sites in Calgary for sale so it is likely they will sell this. Seems like they are getting out of the multifamily game and focusing more on smaller missing middle type projects

[QUOTE=trueviking;10091501]I thought you loved UWCRC.

I'm not sure selling city owned land for free to developers would be a popular idea. Land prices are below market, not inflated.

The budget challenges had nothing to do with land costs.[/QUOTE

I do love UWCRC and wish them well. I would say that if they got the land for a dollar the way CV did they would have another $4,000,000 to utilize towards the project. That would be a good thing.

If the intent is for the government to build affordable housing I would suggest utilizing City owned land would also be a good thing.

While construction costs have nothing to do with land costs, land costs have everything to do with PROJECT costs. Saving $4,000,000 would be helpful. I would also suggest that on this project the soft costs were out of wack as well.

As for your idea the land cost are low and not inflated, I would suggest the latest land report by Colliers would suggest otherwise.

I just hope something gets built…

While I do understand RNDSQR’s reluctance to take on 90 Galt, for it to be “sold” surprises me. My understanding is there would be a development agreement in place by CV. I can’t see them having an ability to just sell it to a third party. It would have to find its way back to CV per the condition of sale and development agreement in place.

Trueviking may be privy to the site’s true status…

How is 90 Alexander fairing? I read a few days ago that they were having problems leasing it which seems strange as it is in a good location, has a modern design and downtown is not that bad depite what some posters think.

I went into the show suite and had a look. They seem modern and efficient so the issue must be price or lack of parking.

I really hope it leases up…

The good news is the project is finished and will not languish as a failed attempt at downtown housing…

There have been a few delays. The first tenants were supposed to move in on Sept 1st, but an email went out at the last minute stating that they were having issues getting an occupancy permit. This upset a lot of people... for good reason. It was an entire month before the first tenants moved in. The building is also still incomplete. I think the first few floors are available, but the other units won't be available until Jan 1st. No word on the CRU's, but the derelict wharf is an eyesore (supposedly plans are afoot), and the homeless encampments don't help either.

Anecdotal, but I know one person who was all set to move in to it until the occupancy delay came up, at which point they bailed and found another apartment elsewhere.

Marketlands has heavy equipment on it, and what looks like a few piles have already been set up.

prob parked there for a santa action construction scene for an upcoming hallmark movie

With how this project is going, I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not lol.

I was at City Hall this morning for a Wpg 150 reception.

We were provided with a salutation / certificate from the Mayor to honour my mother’s 100th birthday.

She remembers as a little girl, blocks of ice from the Red River delivered to her home by horse & wagon.

On my walk that way it does appear caissons / piles have commenced on the westerly boundary of the Market Lands site…

A crawler crane was being assembled as well.

Very hopeful news.