Olympic Village & Southeast False Creek Updates Discussion

[Porfiry]

Originally Posted by Yume-sama

A private developer on their own would never have risked some 1200 units, built to the highest specifications possible, without pre-sale buyers.

Well, I don't think that's fair. Millennium wasn't coerced into taking this project on, they obviously thought they could deliver the requirements (regardless of how high those specifications were) and make a profit. They accepted the business risk, and any failure in that regard is theirs and theirs alone.

If the government deserves blame, it is for choosing to work with Millennium instead of someone with more stable financial backing.

[wrenegade]

They deserve the blame for a whole lot more than just that.

[dreambrother808]

Originally Posted by Yume-sama

greenbots

Such condescending terminology.

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by Yume-sama

Well, there's no doubt the media is helping to make it a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Precisely...

[sacrifice333]

Originally Posted by Yume-sama

Well, there's no doubt the media is helping to make it a self-fulfilling prophecy.

what else is knew, eh?

[Yume-sama]

Originally Posted by dreambrother808

Such condescending terminology.

I could think of worse. It is appropriate in this case, as their whole sales strategy was pointing out how GREEN it is.

So, obviously they over-estimated how much that actually matters to people. At least, to actually pay tens of thousands extra for it.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by privatejet

^I thin;k OD is referring to the Erickson buildings at Olympic Village; Canada House, not Concord building, the Erickson.

Yeah, that's right, thanks.

[delboy]

the reality is nothing is selling anwhere in teh city at the moment. It comes down to market forces and the fact that the market will define the prices not the seller. Its laughable what they are asking.

[officedweller]

BTW - did anyone see the article in yesterday's Globe & Mail that was, in effect,
a — match between Peter Busby arguing for green at all cost versus Bob Rennie saying that green is too expensive?

Interestingly, it doesn't seem to appear on the G&M website.

EDIT: Found it:

News from globeandmail.com

Green building: the next generation
Tuesday, October 5, 2010

The easy steps toward environmentally sound construction have been taken.
Now the painful part: Will consumers pay for improvements that really make a difference?

FRANCES BULA
Special to The Globe and Mail

Building green has become the Holy Grail for Canadian cities and the development industry. New service stations along Ontario's Highway 401 are being built to LEED Silver standards. New office towers in Toronto are striving to outdo each other in greenness. And Vancouver has committed to making "net zero" buildings - energy saved or generated equals energy used - the standard for all rezonings by 2030.

But some worry about what the new rush for green building is really accomplishing. Is it greenwashing? Or is it actually fundamentally changing the basics of construction and, as a result, the environmental impact of new buildings? And the big third question: Are buyers willing to pay for it?

We've brought together Peter Busby, one of Canada's leaders in green architecture, and Bob Rennie, the influential Vancouver condo marketer who is the last say for many developers on what will sell.

Frances Bula: Bob said recently that 85 per cent of any green project is fine, it's doable, and then the last 15 per cent costs a fortune - roof gardens that require expensive watering systems, blinds to reduce solar heating, or whatever. It drives a project way over budget and people won't pay for it.

Peter Busby: The easy part of green is done, I agree with you. Previously, developers kind of got away without having to tackle the energy issues. Now they're being forced to do more, by new building codes or the need to get more [LEED] points. So what that means is radiant energy systems, proper window shading and a better envelope.

Ms. Bula: By envelope, you mean the outside shell of the building.

Mr. Busby: Yes, and that's where you get the real energy savings. Under the next version of LEED and the building code changes that are being considered across Canada, you have to do a better envelope, and that's where it costs money. Putting in C02 monitors or a bit of green roof or some bicycle racks doesn't cost much. But when you have to do things like really insulate all the edges of the concrete slabs for each floor, now you're starting to spend. It goes from 60 bucks a square foot to 80 bucks a square foot.

Bob Rennie: So if it adds $20,000 to the cost of the suite, and somebody has to finance that suite, and drive to work three years longer or two years longer to pay that off, I don't know where the real savings for the planet happens.

Mr. Busby: It's not $20,000. Typical elevation of a condo is nine feet high and 22 feet wide, max, which is 200 square feet - it's $4,000 bucks. So for $4,000 a suite, you get a high level of energy performance. You can reduce your energy consumption in that building by half.

Mr. Rennie: By half?

Mr. Busby: By half. It pays. In Toronto, buildings consume twice as much energy because it's colder in the winter and hotter in the summer. So the financial saving is far more significant. The worst case is Vancouver.

Mr. Rennie: But aren't we going in 2030 to net zero? And net zero today is about a 25 per cent additional cost to a traditional building.

Mr. Busby: I would disagree with that.

Mr. Rennie: What price would you say?

Mr. Busby: I think a high level of LEED Platinum is seven to 10 per cent premium on costs. Those are the Dockside [Green] costs; we believe that Dockside costs are seven per cent over traditional building.

Mr. Rennie: And did it make money, sir? [SILENCE] I'll take that as a no.

Mr. Busby: It did not make money because it was priced competitively against non-green product. Dockside was competing against buildings that weren't trying to do anything in terms of green, so [the developer] didn't get much of a premium in the marketplace for his green features. And that came out of his profit. And that's why the project's dead right now. And that's why we have to have improved building codes. They must pay for a better envelope. Everything else is greenwash. If you don't make a better building that performs better, you're just putting green fuzz on buildings.

Mr. Rennie: But to just say we're going to raise all the prices - and I guess I'm looking at Vancouver, where the cost of housing is already very high - you have to have some conscience on affordability and home ownership.

Mr. Busby: I'm saying it's worth the investment. It's worth it from an emissions point of view. It's worth it to save the planet. It's worth it to have a healthier, more efficient unit to live in. It's worth it to have flooring and adhesives and paints that don't kill you when you're living there.

Mr. Rennie: So what we have to say is the cost of housing just went up.

Mr. Busby: By one per cent. You know, I've got so many really hard facts about the dollars spent and saved for each item, I've got such a volume of real cost information, but we surely don't have the time or space here. Bob, I really would like you to see what we've got. Real facts. Because I think you'll be surprised.

Mr. Rennie: Well, then my developers are lying to me.

Mr. Busby: Well, developers will always construe facts to suit themselves. They'd rather not do the green stuff so they'll tell you it costs five or 10 per cent more. But you know what, we have to get them to do it. We're going to bring in four or five of our best developer clients and we're going to sit them down and say, 'Okay, here's -

Mr. Rennie: I want to sit in on it.

Mr. Busby: Yeah. I'm going to invite you. You need to know, you need to be informed, you need to have the facts.

Mr. Rennie: I'll be there. But we can't just tell the consumer to pay more. This has to work for them and, if it doesn't, they aren't going to buy it. They'll move somewhere else, out of Vancouver. And, in the end, that's what we have to look at, not just what rich people in the city are willing to pay for.

******

THE EXPERTS

PETER BUSBY

Peter Busby is a Vancouver architect whose creations, from SkyTrain stations to towers, are city landmarks. A founder of the Canada Green Building Council, he was the architect for North America's pioneer green residential project, Dockside Green in Victoria. He is also building green residential projects in Toronto, Ottawa and Calgary, as well as working on projects around the world.

BOB RENNIE

Bob Rennie is the best-known condo marketer in Vancouver. His company, Rennie Marketing, racked up $1.5-billion in sales in 2007, at the height of the pre-recession condo boom. But marketing is only part of what he does. Mr. Rennie also plays a significant role in shaping developments and mediating among regulators, developers, politicians and architects. Mr. Rennie lives in an ultra-modernist condo designed by Mr. Busby.

https://secure.globeadvisor.com/servlet/ArticleNews/story/gam/20101005/SRPROPERTYGREEN1005ATL

[Yume-sama]

That is a good back and forth. Evidently, rich people aren't willing to pay the premium either.

I suppose the next logical step (in the minds of the current city government) would be to mandate it, and raise taxes to give tax credits to pay for it.

[Porfiry]

The Mark is going for LEED Gold and their prices are roughly in line with the market, as far as I can tell.

[jlousa]

Getting LEED silver and even LEED Gold isn't tough nor expensive, it really depends on which points you go after. Some points are a lot more expensive then others. Heck some points don't cost anything at all. The new city policy lays out some of the points as mandatory which will increase the effectiveness of the program.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by delboy

the reality is nothing is selling anwhere in teh city at the moment. It comes down to market forces and the fact that the market will define the prices not the seller. Its laughable what they are asking.

Detached homes are selling quite well. By and large its new condos that have been sideswiped by the HST.

[dleung]

Originally Posted by jlousa

Getting LEED silver and even LEED Gold isn't tough nor expensive, it really depends on which points you go after. Some points are a lot more expensive then others. Heck some points don't cost anything at all. The new city policy lays out some of the points as mandatory which will increase the effectiveness of the program.

I wish the city mandated that all rooftops (especially podiums) have to be, say, 70% planted. The industry will be forced to make that happen more economically if it becomes the standard.

[mrjauk]

Originally Posted by Yume-sama

Particularly here the government is the one that forced the green design, the higher standards, etc., to impress the European media.

They over-estimated, quite simply, the amount of greenbots in Vancouver willing to spend $300 / sq. ft more on average for these extras.

A private developer on their own would never have risked some 1200 units, built to the highest specifications possible, without pre-sale buyers.

Government likes to think in ideals, and philosophy, rather than reality. And we all pay quite dearly for it

Yet, as I noted in my previous post, government was responsible to both Champlain Heights and False Creek South west of the Cambie Street bridge. Those didn't turn out too badly. The fact is that in a democratic society, in which politicians are ultimately accountable to the public, governments and politicians ultimately have to deliver results, i.e., reality.

[SFUVancouver]

Southeast False Creek as seen from Second Avenue and Cambie Street. The crane in the foreground is for Maynards Block and the building under construction is Pinnacle Living False Creek.

Taken by SFUVancouver, October 6th, 2010.

Southeast False Creek as seen from the Cambie Street Bridge. The painted bicycle lanes were added a few days ago.

Taken by SFUVancouver, October 6th, 2010.

Maynards Block

Taken by SFUVancouver, October 6th, 2010.

The second crane should go up for Maynards this week.

Taken by SFUVancouver, October 6th, 2010.

Pinnacle Living False Creek as seen from the Cambie Street Bridge.

Taken by SFUVancouver, October 6th, 2010.

Pinnacle Living False Creek as seen from Crowe Street.

Taken by SFUVancouver, October 6th, 2010.

James’ excavation has begun.

Taken by SFUVancouver, October 6th, 2010.

It looks like a temporary park is being created on the large site opposite the Olympic Village between Ontario and Manitoba.

Taken by SFUVancouver, October 6th, 2010.

First and Main supportive housing is at grade.

Taken by SFUVancouver, October 6th, 2010.

[Coldrsx]

Good article between Busby and Rennie. Obviously we have to find a balancing point between designing/living more sustainably and keeping places affordable, but right now I think that far too many people simply are not willing to change habits and do not realize that 'reallocation of resources or time' might make THAT CHANGE a 'net zero' if you will.

[Prometheus]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Good article between Busby and Rennie. Obviously we have to find a balancing point between designing/living more sustainably and keeping places affordable, but right now I think that far too many people simply are not willing to change habits and do not realize that 'reallocation of resources or time' might make THAT CHANGE a 'net zero' if you will.

If by "habits" you mean "buying homes that one can afford," then let us hope such quaint habits never change. Far too many people buying homes that they could not afford (which was encouraged by U.S. government intervention into the housing market) is what led to the collapse of the U.S. economy in 2008.

[Coldrsx]

^by habits i mean location proximity to work, transit lines, size of housing perceived to be needed, choice of where we purchase goods, etc.

[TwoFace]

I heard somewhere that today homebuyer allocates about 70% of his income toward housing payments, based on the Bank’s guidelines it should not exceed 40%.

So, with India and China undergoing an Industrial revolution that have minor environmental concerns, or a BP spill setting the global movement back 20 years.
Does today’s homebuyer think about lowering his environmental footprint or putting food on the table.