221 York Boulevard | ? | 15 fl | Approved
 

Rendering....

http://www.raisethehammer.org/images/hess_york_01.jpg

just so everyone is clear, this project has been approved for the CURRENT OWNERS only.
if they sell, the city money is removed (in the process of being removed as we speak in order to apply it to a different project that actually has a chance of being built) and the new owners will need to apply from scratch.
buyers know that, and would be crazy to pay the asking price for this site knowing that they'd be back at square 1 with no approvals or money for anything.

I think it was just a ploy at getting people in at Premier.
As we all know, Pemier is a sham company. That old Barn site has been "under renovations" for at least 4 years. The Premier on Upper James / Stonechurch was u/c for almost the same length of time.
If ppl see a brand new, hot gym (like in that render) they may consider buying a membership... little do they know they'll have to travel to eastgate or upp james / stnchrch to use it!

Let's hope this $$$ gets passed onto someone who actually wants it!

really?? i thought there was a gym in there already. i have a friend who used to work out there when they lived downtown.

yep, it may not look like it from the outside but there's a gym inside.

yikes. where did they purchase their equipment? The Titanic Artifacts Display at the Science Ctr!? hahaha

I really hope someone finds a developer who's not too reliant on that gym b/c waiting on them (Premier) is like waiting on the Trinity Landing lofts! It just aint ever gonna get finished (or started for that matter)!

it is a prime piece of real estate...and HUGE. could fit a couple of towers, not just one.
they put up the new Premier sign today.lol...now it looks like a gym.

Here's the sign that's up....

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1303/...38649b33_b.jpg

That the conditional loan commitment under the Hamilton Downtown Residential Loan Program for 221 York Boulevard, previously approved in the amount of $2,760,000.00 be cancelled due to the owner not proceeding with the residential development project at this time.

all these cancellations are just adding to this horrible day so far:(

I'm finally starting to understand why BCTed/Goldfinger seems to take pleasure in the failures of this city. There's just too much constant disappointment that one starts to convert that disappointment into hostility. No one does anything here! Plans are announced, cheesy renderings are drawn up, and sweetheart loans are negotiated with the city, but nothing ever gets done. Sometimes it seems like everything in this city is either a scam or a pipedream. It's too frustrating for words.

Sometimes I don't know whether to commend or to pity the Hamilton boosters who remain indefatigably optimistic ...

This string of bad news comes as no surprise. The turmoil in the credit markets have had a HUGE impact on the availability of construction financing. The Hamilton condo market is precarious at the best of times, so when there are clouds on the horizon, these are the first projects they pull back on. Developers are now in risk management mode until things calm down in the markets and the spreads come back down.

I think we will be seeing alot more project cancellations in other markets as well.

!!please...... this project was announced two years ago at least. Plenty of time to get financing, well before the credit crisis.

It was a speculation job. Someone trying to jack up neighbouring property values for a quick flip profit. It was never intended to be built.

Stinson will still build his tower if that's what you're hinting at.

Above is my post from last October. There has never been any reason to believe this was going to get built. Even back then my city hall sources had told me that they were planning on removing the loan in order to apply it to "a different project that actually has a chance of being built".

That IS what's happening, by the way. That money isn't just being yanked from all these project to sit in an account somewhere. There are other projects ready to start that are waiting on this money. Perhaps Stinson is one of them??

As Goldfinger pointed out--the credit market is extraordinarily tight--ignoring this a serious lack of understanding of development financing. At the best of times the major Canadian lenders were shy of lending to projects in the core--a trend that will only become tighter before it improves.

What you hint at resembles redlining and I certainly doubt the specific location of downtown Hamilton had anything to do with it. The projects, regardless of location, would receive financing if their business plan were built on sound economic principles. Downtown Hamilton or Tim-buck-too are non issues.

Withdrawing the funds from deadbeat speculators don't intend to build is a reality. Trial and error is the only way to learn from this. As better developers are attracted over time, these shady types will eventually be eliminated.

Yes, I think Stinson will be next to be elimanated.

You will not get financing without at least 50% of the project pre-sold, sometimes even more. The sale was for the entire site so i don't know how they could approach a lender with a site rendering and not much else. Definately a spec sale but it doesn't change the fact that there were no takers, even from the mysterious Toronto developers that you guys keep dreaming about.

Face the facts, national developers have written Hamilton off long ago and have no interest in losing their shirts here.

Has he received funds from the city. No.

Regarding the credit crises urban construction markets have remained stable

The housing crisis has lowered construction material costs a boon to contractors north of the border. Otherwise there will be some slowdown in 2008 but nothing like the US.

http://www.jeffreyteam.com/blog/misc...l-real-estate/

US Downturn Affects Local Real Estate

How Would the U.S Market Crunch Affect Canadian Real Estate in 2008?

The market crisis along the south border has many homebuyers wondering how it will affect the real estate market in Canada, but Canadian market analysts feel the problems the U.S. is experiencing should have little impact on real estate in this country.

Canada is not expected to experience the same downturn as the U.S. market for many reasons. First, the Canadian economy is simpler and the investment environment is more conservative than the United States. Secondly, Canadian federal surpluses have given consumers more confidence which has led to increased spendings on homes, retail goods, and business expansion. Additionally, the Canadian real estate market has not been artificially driven by bad lending practices. And, unlike the U.S., all mortgages in Canada are insured.

However, Canada’s booming real estate market could loose heat by the end of the year. The impact of the U.S. sub-prime crisis is expected to be felt by Canadians in three different ways.

First, a tightening of credit markets will occur as lenders move to correct their losses because of the investments in commercial papers. To borrowers, this may also mean smaller discounts off the posted mortgage rate.

Secondly, due to the overall economic impact and the soaring Canadian dollar, the impact will also be felt. There may be a slowdown in some business sectors related to real estate and that may impact Canadian consumer confidence.

Thirdly, the impact on our economy could come form the falling purchasing power of the U.S. consumers, which in turn impacts large ticket purchases that involves Canadian made products - the auto sector is a good example.

“The Canadian real estate market will slow down a bit in 2008, but that slowdown will be nothing compared to what happened in some U.S. markets in 2007. In Canada, the real estate market has been setting records for volume and units sold for five consecutive years. We believe things are just moving back towards a more ‘normal’ growth pace, but that still means the 2008 MLS home sales activity will be the second highest on record, second only to the overall record was set in 2007″, says the Canadian Real Estate Associations’s Chief Economist.

The Canadian Real Estate Associations’s market analysis for 2008 also does not show any dramatic adjustment in the average MLS residential price, again contrary to the conditions in some U.S. markets. The Canadian Real Estate Associations’s analysis shows prices setting new records in every province in 2007 and in 2008, but price increases will be smaller in 2008.

In effect, price increases will become smaller as the real estate market becomes more balanced. Manitoba and Nova Scotia are expected to post an increase in average price of 7% or more in 2008, while New Brunswick and Newfoundland are expected to show the smallest increase in average price of 4% annually. The national average residential MLS price is expected to increase 5.5%.

“The real estate market is expected to grow at a more moderate pace this year. However, this will be the result of decreasing affordability rather than the impact of U.S. sub-prime woes”, said Craig Alexander, deputy chief economist at Toronto-Dominion Bank.

To conclude, real estate markets will remain tightest in the western provinces in 2008. Even though Alberta and British Colombia are expected to pull back from the blistering pace they set earlier in 2007, housing there will remain in high demand. The days of 25% or 30% increases in average price are over, but prices are forecasted to go up in Alberta and British Colombia by 5.2% and 5.1%, respectively. Ontario’s market and other eastern provinces are expected to keep its momentum with a slight slow down.

Wrong.

The potential of profit is to great too dismiss anymore. A major segment of first time buyers and aging baby boomers are buying into the condo market. This macro trend will occur in all major Canadian Centers. Once again Hamilton is non specific as a market impediment. Second to this provincial policy has changed and is geared towrds infill and urban development.

Hamilton is feeling a surge of GTA new home buyers right now. This is the tail wind of speculators feeding off the last remains of non-greenbelt land. This will be a short surge as construction markets adjust to new policy and construction trends.

^^ I agree 100%, Retro. Years ago, Goldfinger's comments may have been true however since moving downtown, I have seen a great surge in 'legit' residents living down here. Infact, for the 1st time in years my building has no empty units and are actually selling them faster than they ever could!

So sorry, Goldfinger's comments (from my point of view anyway) are incorrect... esp relating to my building!

The GTA influx is absolutely a fact of life, which is why you are seeing so much hated "sprawl" pop up. Those willing to come into the city and live the urban lifestyle will be a factor--but not nearly the factor that those seeking relatively inexpensive and accessible suburban homes will be. There is plenty of money to finance those projects, because their success is all but guaranteed.

Yes, redlining exists, to deny this is to bury your head in the sand a little deeper.

As for the situation in the U.S.--I think it's important to point out that Canada's economic numbers are heavily skewed by the resource sector. Considering we all live in Ontario--which functions is a nearly seemless economic unit with Ohio, Indiana, Michigan and Illinois--it might be wise to have a long hard look at the current state of the manufacturing sector--which Ontario's economy is built upon. You can choose to believe that the current economic malaise will be isolated to the U.S. (all the easier to blame Bush and U.S. foreign policy and neo-Conservatives)--but doing so is merely raising a glass of Kool-Aid and chugging back. Open your eyes.

Sorry. There is plenty of money to finance those projects. There is limited land in Central Ontario. Look at the trends in urban projects compared to suburban in the GTA. The clear trend is condos and infill up and suburban down. Toronto's hinterland cities like Kitchener, Hamilton, and Barrie are the benefactors of intaking this suburban growth. Take a look at the numbers. Hamilton's land supply and suburban growth will be limited. It is only a matter of time before land supply is used up.

Redlining is illegal, and it is not a factor in financing downtown Hamilton projects. In Canada, redlining is an urban myths that gets thrown around when deadbeat developers cry fowl. It is the economic viability of these projects based on the developer's business plans and access to financing that holds up the downtown projects. If Concord arrived in Hamilton do you think anyone would blink an eye over financing them. Not likely.

Our manufacturing may be joined at the hip to the US, but our banking is not. Ontario's manufacturers will still be able to take insured loans from Canadian banks. These threats to manufacturing will have implications for the higher ups and sectors that rely primarily on export to the US. We are about 90% insulated from these problems as long as local consumption remains strong.

Have a look at CIBC and BMO's financials thanks to their investment in the subprime lending business. TD, RBC and BMO all have major retail banking operations in the U.S. This whole debate on development and financing is an interesting one--because all I hear is that the developers that are here are deadbeats--and that if legitimate developers arrived things would be different--fair enough, so where are these 'legitimate' developers who are beating down the door to do these projects? Secondly, redlining is unto itself illegal--however, location is factored as part of the business plan of any projects--and that goes into the equation as far as risk is concerned with the lender. Hence, if Stinson fails in Hamilton and decides he wants to build Sapphire in Brantford, do you think location would be a factor in risk assessment--despite the fact that downtown Brantford can't legally be "redlined"? I am actually starting to believe that there are people living in a complete and utter fantasy world here--there are projects (such as CoreLofts) that have been amazingly successful--and there will be more to come--given time, market conditions/growth and developer interest.

We are not even close to running out of land--not even if you take McGuinty and Companys Greenbelt "plan" into account.

Are you suggesting the majority of manufactured goods are consumed locally and regionally? I don't even know what to do with that statement except to assume it's a typo.

TYPO. Regionally or in the Canadian market, thus are substantially insulated from US windfalls.

OK,

Here is RE finance 101 for you guys.

Banks and most lenders don't lend out their own funds. They are spread lenders, i.e. they borrow from others and re-lend and charge a small premium.

Construction finance has been primarily funded by the CMBS market, it allows developers access to heavily levered financing with very little equity requirements, i.e 75-85% typically. It's important to realize that there is no border for CMBS market. They are underwritten by investment banks and sold like shares to investors all over the world. As long as there are investors, the money keeps flowing and lenders can underwrite more loans.

The CMBS pool contracts when investors get spooked. So even though the Canadian RE market is healthy, it doesn't really matter if there is no money available. There is less money available to finance construction projects and renew mortgages. To cope with the shortage, lenders do two things, 1. increase the equity requirements of developers/owners or 2. only cherry pick which projects you want and dump the rest. In either cases, the spreads are increased signifcantly from the 10 yr. So a guy looking for a construction loan would have paid a 2 point spread last year, is now paying a 4-6 point spread.

Sorry. I don't share your optimism regarding this. I guess we are entitled to our own pipe dreams.

Well, how can you dispute an article written by 2 Century 21 Residential Agents.

BTW their brokerage has been convicted the RECO with using unlicenced sales people.

http://www.reco.on.ca/SearchRegistra...Company&K=9554

Agreed: the renderings for these condo projects are quattro formaggio (pure cheese). Do these people not ever leave the 905 area code to get a look at real design in real cities?

I wouldn't say that I take pleasure in the failures, I'm just being a realist. The city has had downtown renewal on the front burner since '96 when they started offering DC and rezoning refunds for developers. We have seen some progress, but overall, i think downtown has gone even further downhill in the 12 years since. I have been concerned with the calibre of alot of the projects, what bothers me most is that I don't see truly net new buildings go up except for affordable housing. The only real growth I see there is poverty.

I think you are intentionally slandering the downtown to push your own agenda. The city has not invested nearly enough of what it needs too. Rapid transit is needed at a minimum. Funding to the BIAs needs to increase significantly. Social services need to be dispersed more evenly through the city including into the suburbs. Jackson Square and the Eaton's Center need a complete overhaul with housing. The one ways need to go. More dedicated street parking and parkades are needed. Control of retail expansion into the suburbs needs to occur. Downtown renewal is a major project that has not started in a serious way yet.

You state the city started downtown renewal in 1996. I think this is an utter and complete falsity. The city has not even began doing the hard things that need to happen to turn around the downtown. They have thrown a few dollars at it through the downtown loans project, but that is it.

To recast your statement, policies that artificially impeded downtown Hamilton redevelopment started slowing down at little in 1996.

I am sick of hearing this failure of downtown propaganda. There is no failure. Nothing significant has been done to turn things around.

A city is not going to change course overnight, especially when nothing is being done about it.

Clearly not. We're treated by developers as though we're just another centre of sprawl. They simply do not think of Hamilton as a properly urban market deserving of properly urban architecture.

For instance, here is the rendering for a Staybridge Suites in Chicago:

http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/3...ybridge7ax.jpg

And now here is the rendering for the Staybridge Suites in Hamilton (built by our own Darko Vranich, saviour of the city!):

http://www.hotelsconventioncenter.co...90f988593a.jpg

Just rubbish. We certainly don't merit the scale of the Chicago project, but we do deserve progressively-minded architecture.

Boy there has been a lot of needless wringing of hands over these city loan cancellations, some in despair and some in glee. But lets try to keep some perspective on this.

Two of these projects were from the 2004 program, and the other three were from the 2006 program. There were some 19 loans that the city approved in those years under the downtown residential loan program. Of these, the city has cancelled five. Two were cancelled because the properties were either sold or in the process of being sold. Resale automatically cancells the city loan to avoid artificial inflation of property values for speculative purposes.

It is important to note that the three remaining properties' development plans have not been abandoned. Rather, the owners indicated to the city that they were not shovel-ready by the December 31, 2007 deadline, thereby missing a loan condition, which led to their cancellation. All three indicated their desire to reapply once they were in a position to proceed with their projects.

Also important to note is that, of the 19 loans, 14 have met the conditions. That means there are 14 downtown development/redevelopment projects that benefitted from this program and have been completed or are currently under construction.

Shhh, don't tell us that. The Hamilton haters want to hijack the forum.

for the record, quattro formaggio = four cheese.

The condo renderings are generally uncreative, but to be fair, Hamilton certainly does not have a monopoly on this. Architectural mediocrity is practically universal in the condo business.

I would tend to agree but there are obviously varying levels of mediocrity. In fact, it might be more accurate to say that the bulk of condo projects proposed for Hamilton actually slips below the mediocrity threshold into sheer ugliness.

There certainly are some attractive condos out there. The form itself is not unamenable to high quality design. If you read the New York Times you'll see every sunday a number of very high quality condo projects being advertised in the magazine section (usually designed by very well regarded firms). Of course, these are consistently priced above $2m, so go figure ...

As an aside, I don't think JT Jacobs's translation was intended to be a literal one ...

Re the cheese thing: I know, it wasn't a literal translation (it's also a good pizza!).

Okay, first, there's nothing anti-Hamilton or Hamilton-hating about my criticism of these condo projects (recall, criticism is not a pejorative term); those who love their city must critique it in order for that city to be its best.

Next, it's a commonplace observation to say that there's an abundance of bad architecture the world over--but so what? Does that mean we just sigh and indulge it, or do we continue to demand better? I for one will always demand better. It's laziness and cheapness that informs these bad designs. But the condo buyer, even in Hamilton, is far too savvy to buy this crap.

I think you overestimae the savviness of the condo buyer. If mediocrity was not acceptable to them, then how can we explain the overwhelming success of the condo market in Toronto, where mediocrity is the norm?

I agree. it wasn't just the awkward design, the perspective seemed to be on the wonky side. Clearly not the work of skilled illustrators, which always made me think this project was a farse from the start. A real plan would've revealed more then one elevation, site layouts, a website etc

I think another major problem with condo sales in Hamilton is that developpers keep marketting them towards Torontonians. You're not going to get a Torontonian to pick a condo in Hamilton if they're hardcore Torontonians... so they're limiting their market.

Maybe developpers should start marketing units towards Hamiltonians!? I don't know exactly how to go about that, I never studied marketing. Maybe that means a Tim Horton's in the lobby, or plenty of parking spaces, I dunno!?

My point is that in order to attract Hamilton professionals to these units, you need to understand what a Hamiltonian Professional wants/needs as opposed to what Torontonians have now come to expect in condos: yuppy salons & fitness centres that are too pretty to actually work out in! haha

EDIT: Another quick point, what's so wrong with condo/rental mixes? My bldg is set up this way, and it works out great. I have never felt part of a community in and apt bldg before, but I get that sense at Olympia. Sometimes when you get all owners in a bldg, they tend to be snotty and don't interact with ppl. In my bldg, renters/owners inter-mingle at building parties, in the rec ctr, etc.

Thank you HamRetro for saying that about "Redlining". this term is so overused and can mean anything. The naysayers would have you believe that there is an entire redline around Hamilton proper.

Smart business is recognizing undervalued investments. That's why Stinson is here, he recognizes the hidden, unrealized value.

People like to throw around that term 'red line' around to sound smart, but they're hiding behind it. Originally the term referred to unofficial racial segregation in US cities.

People don't buy a condo because markbarbera thinks it looks good. People buy lifestyle and affordability. Toronto's condo sucess is built on both of those things.

Possibly. However, projects like the Allenby Lofts and the Core Lofts have been done fairly well, even by Toronto and Vancouver condo standards, which are much higher than Hamilton, quite obviously.

Comparing Toronto's condo market to Hamilton's is really not apposite. It would be like comparing a test score by a Rhodes scholar and a second grader. It's simply not a worthy comparison.

Yes, there are of course shoddy TO condos, but we really don't have any worthy condo projects taller than five stories, with the exception of the Pigott building, perhaps.

Look, I'm not arguing such an elementary point. Look out your window at the Olympia and then scan TO's skyline. I would simply like to see better design in terms of Hamilton's condos. There's a reason why such projects like the Madison have not sold well. They look chintzy; the finishing is shabby; the buildings are locked in a time warp, and so on. And, finally, for what you get, they are expensive.

I'm sorry my head is still spinning over the notion that the vast majority of our manufactured goods are consumed in Canada--and thus we are magically insulated from the U.S. economy. Apparently everything I've ever learned or been taught about the economy was an utter fabrication.

It also amazes me that anyone who presents a dissenting opinion here is automatically a naysayer and/or Hamilton hater--actually nothing could be further from the truth.

The bottom line for me is that if developers build something of decent quality that represents value, it will surely sell out in Hamilton. I believe that Stinson will prove this to be true. People don't want to feel extorted, after all, when they buy a condo, or anything, for that matter. Hence projects like the Core Lofts sell out instantly.

I would, but I'm not up high enough. I look into the ultra-commie Oakland Towers haha I DO have a nice view of the escarpment tho!

I agree, TO condos are FARRRRR better in terms of quality than any recent Hamilton project (ie: Cityplace @ Caroline/Napier behind the new Fed Bldg).

and IMO, Allenby Lofts are the best in Hamilton... probably best I have seen! They're spacious, units are super tall & it's in 'THE' neighbourhood! haha But they're actually more expensive than the Core Lofts!

So rather than argue about it, maybe we should come up w/ a plan to sell condos to Hamiltonians!
We need to a) get them to froget this 'suburban dream' of wanting to live large, have a big house, five cars etc...
b) help them understand that a dense neighbourhood is more healthy than a sprawling suburb in terms of the environment AND phisical health (not to meantion urban health)
c) get rid of this "but it's Hamilton" attitude!

So what do Hamiltonians want in a condo? Let me hear it!!

I don't know how to post images here (sorry). Here's a link to an image of an approved condo tower in Kelowna called Waterscapes:

forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?p=3180964

Kelowna is a city of just over 100,000, and they are beginning to build condos that one could easily visualize on the Vancouver or Toronto skylines.

My point is that Hamilton should be able to do so much more. Nearly a billion dollars in construction last year. Only Barrie and Hamilton posted construction gains, which is quite revealing about Hamilton's progress (cheap real estate attracts developers at all times but especially during recessionary periods). This year will be mammoth for Hamilton, I'd say. I, and I'm sure many listers here, would love to see these construction dollars be spent on quality projects, instead of more eyesores that really do nothing for the city.

By the way, the Chicago Staybridge image that RePinion posted makes all the points I verbosely try to better: Hamilton typically chooses inferior projects. However, I don't believe that this trend will continue for much longer. But we must demand better.

What do I want to see? I'd like to see buildings like 220 Dundurn ST S be converted into lofts. A smart developer could make a killing in Hamilton. The real estate could be acquired cheaply. There should be a hundred Allenby Lofts in Hamilton instead of this isolated example of quality. Quality should be the rule not the celebrated exception.