Edmonton Construction 11 (November 2011) - Page 17

kcantor · #**321** Posted **Dec 6, 2011, 4:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by s211

Having worked in the field, and having had conversations with the bigger players, it's always a wicked fight trying to get them past their perceptions of Edmonton. Perception's (almost) everything, and I know of several of the big players that can't be bothered with Edmonton, and that's upsetting because unless Edmonton can get some positive trajectory with these players, Edmonton will continue to be ignored to its own detriment and the larger investors will instead focus on more up-and-coming centres (e.g. Calgary).

Are you happy with settling for second tier, or do you want to fight for all it's worth to be something better?

i think you are equating second tier product with second tier market... if you are looking for trophy investments, there simply aren't many here and they won't trade often enough to create a market. those bigger players you talk about are looking for top tier product, not just a top tier market. not having one does not equate to not having the other.

as for your last question, we're just finishing off a nice little trophy building and have a dp for two or three more. it's not simply a matter of "fighting for all it's worth" - if you want something better you either have to build it or be prepared to pay for someone else to build it for you. if you want to get personal about it, what are you doing to make it something better?

Coldrsx · #**322** Posted **Dec 6, 2011, 5:11 PM**

Hear hear Ken!

All you have to do is go to a presentation at a real estate conference in this Province. In Edmonton you hear Calgary mentioned about a dozen times in reference. At Calgary's forum you do not hear Edmonton once, but rather how Calgary is comparing relative to Toronto.

We need to continue to enlighten people about our fair city and dispel some of the misconceptions and prejudices.

This is also found on the residential side... for Calgary is now seeing Toronto and Vancouver developers enter the marketplace, yet we struggle to even have local developers invest in the downtown.

dancinb · #**323** Posted **Dec 6, 2011, 5:54 PM**

^ You just said Calgary 4 times.

Coldrsx · #**324** Posted **Dec 6, 2011, 6:13 PM**

Only repeating what I am hearing.

kcantor · #**325** Posted **Dec 6, 2011, 6:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Hear hear Ken!

All you have to do is go to a presentation at a real estate conference in this Province. In Edmonton you hear Calgary mentioned about a dozen times in reference. At Calgary's forum you do not hear Edmonton once, but rather how Calgary is comparing relative to Toronto.

We need to continue to enlighten people about our fair city and dispel some of the misconceptions and prejudices.

This is also found on the residential side... for Calgary is now seeing Toronto and Vancouver developers enter the marketplace, yet we struggle to even have local developers invest in the downtown.

you missed what i was saying... you hear calgary mentioned like that because calgary builds and pays for the kind of product those developers (whether from elsewhere or local) are looking to build.

you're not going to find high end developers coming to a market to build vinyl clad wood frame product... my point was that if you want to see high end product in your market - wherever it is - you have to pay for it. if you want high end office space, you need $40 rents, you don't need "better developers". if you want high rise curtain wall residential, you need purchasers ready to pay 500 psf and not 300 psf instead of whining that for 300 psf they don't get the quality of product or developer "they want".

you don't need to enlighten people about our fair city - if the opportunity is here they already know all about our city - you need to enlighten our city. the old expression that "you get what you pay for" is true in the development business just as it is in any other.

Coldrsx · #**326** Posted **Dec 6, 2011, 7:01 PM**

and you missed what I was saying...

Regardless of rents, price per sqft, Edmonton is simply not 'on the radar' for many people. Be it opportunity cost, perception, misconception, or perceived opportunity, we still suffer greatly from not only being 300km north of a certain city, but also being in their proverbial shadow.

That said, you do touch on an extremely valid point and one that I have harped on as well for some time. You do indeed get what you pay for and people need to recognize that. We are a product of our own 'desires' to a certain extent.

That said, we seem to not be able to do more with less and that is perhaps my biggest issue of contention. We are slow to innovate, to shift with pricing or demand. Competition is lacking as is consumer demand which is an interesting spiral. You do not need $500 a foot to do good design and deliver good product. However, you can deliver good product at 450-500 a foot and provide killer units should we as consumers recognize that perhaps 600sqft is actually enough for a 1bdrm and that sacrificing that extra hundred sqft will put you way up a tier in terms of level of finish, material use and design.

Jasper and one o nin · #**327** Posted **Dec 6, 2011, 7:02 PM**

Urban design economics.
http://www.sfu.ca/continuing-studies/courses/urbd/economic-fundamentals.html

Coldrsx · #**328** Posted **Dec 6, 2011, 7:18 PM**

^Funny you mention that... I have been interested in taking the Sustainable Community Development Certificate.

s211 · #**329** Posted **Dec 6, 2011, 7:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by cdnklc

i think you are equating second tier product with second tier market... if you are looking for trophy investments, there simply aren't many here and they won't trade often enough to create a market. those bigger players you talk about are looking for top tier product, not just a top tier market. not having one does not equate to not having the other.

as for your last question, we're just finishing off a nice little trophy building and have a dp for two or three more. it's not simply a matter of "fighting for all it's worth" - if you want something better you either have to build it or be prepared to pay for someone else to build it for you. if you want to get personal about it, what are you doing to make it something better?

How about trying to convince the purchaser of a large national portfolio to not carve the Edmonton assets out of the deal because of its perceptions? That enough for you?

Coldrsx · #**330** Posted **Dec 6, 2011, 7:27 PM**

I am officially excited.

Interesting developments

hilman · #**331** Posted **Dec 6, 2011, 7:30 PM**

Wow, looks amazing, I can't wait to see this built.

Jasper and one o nin · #**332** Posted **Dec 6, 2011, 7:38 PM**

Giddie!!!!!!

kcantor · #**333** Posted **Dec 6, 2011, 7:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

and you missed what I was saying...

Regardless of rents, price per sqft, Edmonton is simply not 'on the radar' for many people. Be it opportunity cost, perception, misconception, or perceived opportunity, we still suffer greatly from not only being 300km north of a certain city, but also being in their proverbial shadow.

That said, you do touch on an extremely valid point and one that I have harped on as well for some time. You do indeed get what you pay for and people need to recognize that. We are a product of our own 'desires' to a certain extent.

That said, we seem to not be able to do more with less and that is perhaps my biggest issue of contention. We are slow to innovate, to shift with pricing or demand. Competition is lacking as is consumer demand which is an interesting spiral. You do not need $500 a foot to do good design and deliver good product. However, you can deliver good product at 450-500 a foot and provide killer units should we as consumers recognize that perhaps 600sqft is actually enough for a 1bdrm and that sacrificing that extra hundred sqft will put you way up a tier in terms of level of finish, material use and design.

you probably can - except that's still an awfull lot more than current condo prices in our market...

kcantor · #**334** Posted **Dec 6, 2011, 7:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by s211

How about trying to convince the purchaser of a large national portfolio to not carve the Edmonton assets out of the deal because of its perceptions? That enough for you?

didn't mean to get "personal" like that but i was responding in kind and shouldn't have but i stand by the overall point i was making, the end result being what you are dealing with (not the other way around).

Coldrsx · #**335** Posted **Dec 6, 2011, 7:53 PM**

^On par with Quest, Pearl, Illuminada...

I should have mentioned though that touring some buildings in non downtown Vancouver and West downtown Toronto, I have seen some killer stuff for $350-450.

s4.audios · #**336** Posted **Dec 6, 2011, 8:15 PM**

Our downtown is just not attractive enough to have the vast majority wanting to pay more to live within it. This is why the new RAM, new Arena, Jasper redevelopment, Cap. Blvd, and even building iconic office highrises like Manu2 are so crucial. If all goes well and funding for all this DOES occur, the condo market will soon be on the rise. And with good quality higher priced condos as well.

Coldrsx · #**337** Posted **Dec 6, 2011, 8:28 PM**

^that is part of the problem and those are part of the solutions, but it has more to do with the spread between single family and a condo. If avg. joe can buy a 1500 sqft house in ellerslie for $300k and a 600sqft condo downtown for 300k... well you know the deal.

However, if there was a spread of 100k or 200k...

However, we have 'infinite' developable land in the region and continue to make it much easier and with less risk to develop greenfield than to infill. Until that changes, we will not see much difference. This is not about hurting greenfield per se, but rather finding ways to reduce risk, reduce time, and improve demand for infill development.

Provide lower costs for utility tie ins, shorter review periods at SD, lower DP costs, and a zoning bylaw that rewards good quality infill with FAR, density, and or height.

Coldrsx · #**338** Posted **Dec 6, 2011, 8:58 PM**

Apparently Council will vote to go from 4.5 to 5.25% so they can borrow $312mil for a new NW police station, Walterdale bridge and LRT land acquisition.

Coldrsx · #**339** Posted **Dec 6, 2011, 9:06 PM**

From 'dwntwngme' on c2e

"Rumour Alert

Not sure how accurate this one is, but the Procura Hotel & Condo tower by Hotel Mac apparently has been tendered and awarded to Ellis Don.

This same source did tell me in early 2011 that Mayfair North had already been awarded, so again...not sure how true this rumour really is. Food for thought at the very least."

Jasper and one o nin · #**340** Posted **Dec 6, 2011, 9:39 PM**

That is a prime peice of land for hotel development.
Has the rezoning gone through?