General Vancouver Updates - Page 51

Metro-One · #**1001** Posted **Mar 15, 2009, 4:09 AM**

Quote:

They will be getting more density but do not expect any towers.

So would we be looking more in the realm of 4 to 5 story wood framed apartments?

officedweller · #**1002** Posted **Mar 15, 2009, 5:53 AM**

http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Wos...couver+highrises+sale/1386325/story.html

Quote:

Wosk family puts eight Vancouver highrises up for sale

By BRUCE CONSTANTINEAU, Vancouver Sun
March 13, 2009

Vancouver's Wosk family has put eight city apartment highrises up for sale — including four towers with about 15 per cent of the West End's rental apartment supply.

There's no asking price in the listing from Colliers International but the total portfolio is believed to be worth from $350 million to $400 million.

The four Beach Towers in the West End — at 1600 Beach Ave. and 1651 Harwood St. — have 598 units and a zero-per-cent vacancy rate.

Four more highrises and an apartment/townhouse complex near 57th and Cambie, known as Langara Gardens, have 605 units and a vacancy rate of 0.2 per cent.

The properties are being sold by Liberty Investments Limited, which is controlled by the Wosk family.

A marketing brochure describes the properties as "flagship assets" that will enhance the value of any portfolio. It says the units collectively represent about two per cent of private rental apartments in the city of Vancouver.

The West End properties sit on about one hectare of waterfront land while the Langara Gardens complex lies on about eight hectares.

The listing agents for the properties are Colliers representatives Avtar Bains and Simon Lim.

© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun

A November, 1962 file photo of the announcement of Beach Towers development in the West End.
Photograph by: George Diack, Vancouver Sun Files
http://a123.g.akamai.net/f/123/12465/1d/...es+sale/1386325/1386350.bin?size=620x400

An aerial view of the four Beach Towers in the West End at 1600 Beach Ave. and 1651 Harwood St. looking west.
Photograph by: Screen grab, MSN Maps
http://a123.g.akamai.net/f/123/12465/1d/...es+sale/1386325/1387024.bin?size=620x400

An aerial view of the apartment/townhouse complex near 57th and Cambie, known as Langara Gardens, looking north.
Photograph by: Screen grab, MSN Maps
http://a123.g.akamai.net/f/123/12465/1d/...es+sale/1386325/1387022.bin?size=620x400

CBeats · #**1003** Posted **Mar 15, 2009, 9:20 AM**

^^^ destroy! destroy! destroy!

impossible, but wouldn't it be nice if someone bought all of them and had the buildings demolished so they could develop new ones?

osirisboy · #**1004** Posted **Mar 15, 2009, 11:17 AM**

yup thats what i was thinking when I read this. especially the ones on beach ugh theyre awful.

Canadian Mind · #**1005** Posted **Mar 15, 2009, 6:48 PM**

looks liek they are surrounded by alot of lowrise too... demolish and densify.

Metro-One · #**1006** Posted **Mar 15, 2009, 7:05 PM**

The funny thing is i had the opposite reaction to the three posted above me, mine was "uhoh, Vancouver is about to lose a huge chunk of its rental units to new overpriced Yaletown style condos" I love the street feel around that area of Vancouver, it has a vibe and flavor that is not found in the cookie cutter Yaletown areas and i would hate for it to be lost.

red-paladin · #**1007** Posted **Mar 15, 2009, 7:11 PM**

I wish those towers looked more like the models shown.
I hate the rough concrete walls, since they are almost impossible to paint even if you wanted to

officedweller · #**1008** Posted **Mar 15, 2009, 7:44 PM**

Yeah, I was thinking that for Beach Towers, the model looked better than the as-built (actually looks like something that could be built today!

SpongeG · #**1009** Posted **Mar 15, 2009, 7:59 PM**

replace rental housing with over priced condos?

how could anyone be pro that?

Canadian Mind · #**1010** Posted **Mar 15, 2009, 9:17 PM**

I never suggested overpriced condo's, we have far to many of the damned things as is.

If you densify the area further, instead of having only 600 rental units in those four towers, you could stick four towers in there with 600 units apiece, thusly 2400 rental units.

MistyMountainHop · #**1011** Posted **Mar 15, 2009, 9:39 PM**

As long as they keep it rental, redevelopment would be good. Maybe the city can offer some density bonuses for more rental units?

Metro-One · #**1012** Posted **Mar 15, 2009, 9:41 PM**

Yeah, i agree with that. Areas downtown with substantial rental tend to have more street life and people are usually more open when it comes to festivals and other events (probably because they are often younger). I would hate that area to become another half empty vacation condo spot. Although Yaletown is definitely starting to improve on this.

SpongeG · #**1013** Posted **Mar 15, 2009, 10:16 PM**

they would never replace those with rentals

rental building is almost non-existant these days

Canadian Mind · #**1014** Posted **Mar 15, 2009, 10:52 PM**

Which is — retarded if they want to make downtown, and the city as a whole, livable. No point having the rich live downtown who don't neccisarily work downtown, but the general office worker has to commute 20-50km daily because they can't afford anythign near their place of work.

LeftCoaster · #**1015** Posted **Mar 15, 2009, 11:20 PM**

I dont think towers of that size are being re-developed any time soon guys, they will just be sold to another holding company or reit as a constant source of revenue. The more interesting question is why these towers are being sold, as it is quite a large sum of money being liquidated, which could be used to build something quite large

Quote:

Originally Posted by officedweller

Too bad the level section of track for a possibe Telus Building SkyTrain station is on the Burnaby side. No hope in heck of Vancouver seeking that as a perk for the project.

haha I didn't even think of that, good call od. I still would like to see a station, maybe one straddling boundary with shared costs between the COV, Burnaby and translink. With Swanguard and the density around the boundary/kingsway area it just seems like a great spot for a station, even if it is a little close to Joyce and Patterson.

SpongeG · #**1016** Posted **Mar 15, 2009, 11:37 PM**

well if i were in that family i'd rather have the $300+ million in my bank account than on paper

danby · #**1017** Posted **Mar 16, 2009, 1:08 AM**

So are they converting these into condos??? Or is the building just becoming new owneship?

SpongeG · #**1018** Posted **Mar 16, 2009, 1:16 AM**

they are selling them

itys not determined yet what the new owners will do - if they even get sold

hrhsheba · #**1019** Posted **Mar 16, 2009, 6:24 PM**

Assuming that these get sold, and, eventually, they will, I think the lure of "filthy lucre" will take hold. Despite the condo glut, the three towers along beach hold a completely unobstructed, and killer, view - that adds huge $$ to the price tag for a well-designed condo. A developer could go seriously high end and start them off at around $7m. I would suggest the life expectancy of at least two of those towers is probably not more than five to seven years.

Metro-One · #**1020** Posted **Mar 16, 2009, 6:32 PM**

And there goes one of the best atmospheres downtown, i love that area of the city, the only thing i would change there is adding more density that is not tailored for the rich and a streetcar/tram down Denmen.