1040-1080 Barclay Street | 174.5m & 173m | 60Fl & 57Fl | Proposed

[Klazu]

Most of the rental prices will still be out of reach for an average Vancouverite. I see a lot of purpose-built rentals on Craigslist trying to command the same price as market-built, although the product and units are way poorer quality.

[LeftCoaster]

Rental is often built to a higher spec than condo, as it is being built by the developer for the developer's long term hold or sale to an institutional grade investor. There may not be as much splash in some of the appliance packages or other sales focused items, but the general build quality and materials/equipment choices are picked for durability and longevity and will hold up better than the stuff you find in condos. That, along with supposed better management, is why you see a premium for purpose built rental.

[Klazu]

While that would make some sense, I would still respectfully disagree, although my experience is limited to only seeing few purpose-built rental towers. I saw several of the penthouse units in the curvy tower next to the viaducts and building and material quality were very shoddy and poor. Then again, you find the same with many condo towers as well, only few buildings being truly luxurious. Same paper doors and scratchy tabletops everywhere.

[bb1510]

Originally Posted by Klazu

While that would make some sense, I would still respectfully disagree, although my experience is limited to only seeing few purpose-built rental towers. I saw several of the penthouse units in the curvy tower next to the viaducts and building and material quality were very shoddy and poor. Then again, you find the same with many condo towers as well, only few buildings being truly luxurious. Same paper doors and scratchy tabletops everywhere.

Yes, surface finishes will still be poor/cost maximized are they are disposable and wear and tear items for the developer and/or institutional investor for purpose built rentals. Generally speaking, the items that are superior are hidden to sight items and things that are costly to repair such as piping, waterproofing, etc.

In market housing, anything that's hidden is cut to the maximum while surface finishes and brand name items are where the money is put. There's a reason why liability is minimized with each project held in a subsidiary or numbered company

[rofina]

Originally Posted by bb1510

Yes, surface finishes will still be poor/cost maximized are they are disposable and wear and tear items for the developer and/or institutional investor for purpose built rentals. Generally speaking, the items that are superior are hidden to sight items and things that are costly to repair such as piping, waterproofing, etc.

In market housing, anything that's hidden is cut to the maximum while surface finishes and brand name items are where the money is put. There's a reason why liability is minimized with each project held in a subsidiary or numbered company

I came here to say this.

I think people think quality is visual, and that's definitely true to an extent.

But the real nightmares can be hidden behind walls, that's where money can be spent without a ever being seen, but the pay off it measured in maintenance and longevity.

Not things the developer has to worry about if the building ceases to be their problem after warranty expires.

[Klazu]

Fair enough but then again as a tenant I don't really care how reliable the building or things inside walls are. I am paying for what I can use and touch, and there the purpose-built buildings lack in quality and anything one would categorize as luxury. So I would never pay the same rent for a purpose-built vs market unit, which the current market seems to be expecting.

I also think tenant quality may be slightly higher on market buildings, as it is in the owner's best interest to find good tenants. I know this doesn't always happen but rental buildings constantly have residents changing which can be a security risk. Nobody knows anyone as people change so much.

[rofina]

Originally Posted by Klazu

Fair enough but then again as a tenant I don't really care how reliable the building or things inside walls are. I am paying for what I can use and touch, and there the purpose-built buildings lack in quality and anything one would categorize as luxury. So I would never pay the same rent for a purpose-built vs market unit, which the current market seems to be expecting.

Makes total sense. You're not invested in it, might as well have the luxury where you can feel and see it.

I also think tenant quality may be slightly higher on market buildings, as it is in the owner's best interest to find good tenants. I know this doesn't always happen but rental buildings constantly have residents changing which can be a security risk. Nobody knows anyone as people change so much.

Probably true. Its crazy how much rotation some building have in general though, be it condo or rental.

Condo living definitely hasn't been the most social experience in Vancouver.

Most times its hard to know whos even on your floor, very little interaction, and very little need to interact.

In some ways, its a little sad.

[officedweller]

Redesigned project:

Mostly rentals in proposed downtown Vancouver towers with 1,100 homes
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/1040-1080-barclay-street-vancouver-rental-housing

Now by Perkins & Will, the previously proposed 48 (449 ft) and 49 (458 ft) storey towers
will now be replaced by 56 (541 ft) and 59 (545 ft) storey towers.

The West Tower closest to the intersection is now 541 ft with 56 storeys, while the East Tower is 545 ft with 59 storeys. The taller heights intrude into the 341-ft height limit of View Cone 3.2 emanating from Queen Elizabeth Park, but height increases of up to 550 ft are permitted under the city’s General Policy for Higher Buildings, as the site is within the city’s Central Business District Shoulder area.

With the added height, both towers now carry a total of 1,100 homes combined, with 735 units or 67% designated as a form of rental housing tenure. This new figure is almost twice as many homes as the previous proposal.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/1040-1080-barclay-street-vancouver-rental-housing


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/1040-1080-barclay-street-vancouver-rental-housing


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/1040-1080-barclay-street-vancouver-rental-housing


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/1040-1080-barclay-street-vancouver-rental-housing


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/1040-1080-barclay-street-vancouver-rental-housing


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/1040-1080-barclay-street-vancouver-rental-housing

[vanman]

-improved design
-more rental homes
-taller towers

Nothing but good news all around.

[Repthe250]

Wow. That’s fricken awesome. I love the designs of these towers especially the contrast of the old Washington Place apartments. This is definitely a win by the City of Vancouver, finally.

[Repthe250]

Oh nevermind. I had to take a second glance. This is on Barclay as the title suggests so I take back the incorporation of Washington Place. So what is the tower behind it?

[Metro-One]

Well, this is some good news!

[idunno]

Looking great. Will this be the densest block downtown after all is said and done?

[Vin]

Some token retail, but OK since there isn't any here at the moment.

It is amazing to see how much the West End can grow once taller building restrictions are removed. Right across the street on Thurlow, where status quo remains, time stands still.

[officedweller]

I like this design better than the Ole Sheeren design too.
I assume that the breaks / terraces in the condo tower are special units but could be common areas (?).
Too bad the rental tower doesn't have the same variation.

[madog222]

Originally Posted by Repthe250

Oh nevermind. I had to take a second glance. This is on Barclay as the title suggests so I take back the incorporation of Washington Place. So what is the tower behind it?

Clockwise from the left is Patina (existing), The Butterfly (under construction), and 1059-1075 Nelson Street (proposed).


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/1040-1080-barclay-street-vancouver-rental-housing

[connect2source]

Looks like the vaginal section of the Nelson Street tower will align perfectly between the space of these two towers. Sexy!

[Repthe250]

This is going to be a beautiful little node of towers. They’re going to add elegance AND height to the skyline. Which is rare as it’s usually one or the other in Vancouver

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by Repthe250

This is going to be a beautiful little node of towers. They’re going to add elegance AND height to the skyline. Which is rare as it’s usually one or the other in Vancouver

There is nothing little about this area as all towers are now massive! Those that bought on the upper floors of Butterfly and the Nelson project must be pissed by the extra height blocking their multi-million dollar views.

One of the towers has social housing and residential strata in the same building. Must be separate entrances as otherwise that makes no sense?

I do love the red color. We need more colour all around Metro Vancouver.

[madog222]

Originally Posted by Klazu

One of the towers has social housing and residential strata in the same building. Must be separate entrances as otherwise that makes no sense?

Yes, in these types of developments the social housing is owned by CoV (or a non-profit organization) outside of the Strata with separate entrances, amenities, and budgets.