1444 Alberni | 138M | 48fl, 43fl | Proposed

[svlt]

Originally Posted by griswold

Of all the projects failing to go forward this might be the most tragic, architecturally. Would love to see more of this classic style being built.

Agreed, it's distinct without being gaudy or needlessly complex for the sake of it. I hope it's realized one day.

[urbanight93]

The problem with this development is that it is designed for the luxury buyer ($$$) so unless that market comes back, this proposal will either be value-engineered to oblivion or completely scrapped in favour of something that can be marketed to a broader pool of buyers.

Personally i think the less we hear now the better while the real estate market regains its footing.

[Feathered Friend]

1444 Alberni Street and 740 Nicola Street - Application recently submitted. Staff preparing notification. To amend sections of the CD-1 and conditions to allow for the development of 51 in-kind social housing units, within the Council Approved 2018 Form of Development. The 2018 Council Approved Form of Development is not proposed to be changed, and consisted of 48-and 43-storey mixed-use residential buildings connected by a 6-storey podium with an in-kind 56-space childcare facility on the 7th floor. The proposal will not change the Form of Development of 14.48 FSR and a building height of 135.2 m (444 ft.). With approval of the CD-1 amendments, the site’s housing mix would be 314 strata-titled units, 78 market rental units, and 51 in-kind social housing units under the West End Community Plan.

In completely unexpected news, not only is this proposal back in the same shape/size, it's looking to convert 51 of it's market rental homes into social housing.

https://plposweb.vancouver.ca/Public/Default.aspx?PossePresentation=Guest&PosseObjectId=265469393

[urbanight93]

This is pretty crazy news. They either know something everyone else doesn't or their proforma was so good that redeveloping the site is a no brainer even if half the units don't sell.

Either way I'm very pleased they're moving ahead. Any idea what's the incentive for them to provide 50 social housing units? I can't imagine that's a selling point when targeting a high-end buyer.

[officedweller]

I guess it's safe to assume it's no longer a high end project?

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I guess it's safe to assume it's no longer a high end project?

Because?

[officedweller]

because of social housing in the same building being a hard sell for the luxury market, plus the market downturn?

The developer of CURV paid cash in lieu of social housing in its tower:
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/1059-107...ver-the-curv-social-housing-removed-cacs

For the Butterfly it's next door, not in the same building.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by officedweller

because of social housing in the same building being a hard sell for the luxury market, plus the market downturn?

The developer of CURV paid cash in lieu of social housing in its tower:
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/1059-107...ver-the-curv-social-housing-removed-cacs

For the Butterfly it's next door, not in the same building.

But I think this is the same developer as The Landmark - and that's distinctly high-end, (average sale price quoted as $1,816 /sqft) with the social housing units in the podium?

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Changing City

But I think this is the same developer as The Landmark - and that's distinctly high-end, (average sale price quoted as $1,816 /sqft) with the social housing units in the podium?

Yeah, it is.
- Asia Standard Americas.

The architecture of this one also seems to be more exclusive, but I still think it would be a hard sell.

[griswold]

This was first proposed back in 2017. They must not be serious about building anything

[Burquitlaman]

Originally Posted by griswold

This was first proposed back in 2017. They must not be serious about building anything

Yeah, social housing mixed with high end

[djh]

Originally Posted by Burquitlaman

Yeah, social housing mixed with high end

'Social Housing' doesn't have to mean meth-heads from the DTES.
A range of normal people could fit into the definition of Social Housing. Organisations that make homes specifically for women, for people with disabilities, for working people in certain fields, for people from certain ethnic backgrounds or religious groups, for people who are living in communal settings...all of these by the city's various definitions could be passed under the blanket of "Social Housing".

So, many of those groups would be very complementary to have in a fancypants tower. Plus, if you're living in a high-end tower, there's probably floor segregation anyway - i.e., all the rental or social housing floors will be the lower ones, and all the full-market suites will be the upper floors. You're never going to see or hear the 'normies' unless you happen to share an elevator with one (and some of these towers even have segregated elevators...)

I don't think it's going to be a problem. And I'm sure the groups that are going to be managing the rental and social housing components are going to have to bring their best presentations to the developer, to show their past experiences and exactly what groups they intend to occupy the development with. It'll be full of schoolteachers and firefighters and professionals new to the country and working single mothers with several kids who are supported by their religious groups, and such.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Burquitlaman

Yeah, social housing mixed with high end

I assume this is a Hong Kong based company? Anyone know if this kind of mix exists there?

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by whatnext

I assume this is a Hong Kong based company? Anyone know if this kind of mix exists there?

It exists here.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by djh

I don't think it's going to be a problem. And I'm sure the groups that are going to be managing the rental and social housing components are going to have to bring their best presentations to the developer, to show their past experiences and exactly what groups they intend to occupy the development with. It'll be full of schoolteachers and firefighters and professionals new to the country and working single mothers with several kids who are supported by their religious groups, and such.

There won't be a problem operating the two together.

The "problem" (not operationally, but for marketing purposes (i.e. the "hard sell") will be convincing luxury buyers to leave their spacious West Side or West Vancouver houses to downsize not only to a "shoebox" but to a shoebox shared in close proximity with others they may not like. These may be people who oppose things (towers, 6 storey blocks, commercial buildings, daycares, etc.) in their neighbourhood, let alone in their building.

Likewise, I wonder how high end restaurants manage to attract diners to locations in the DTES or eastern Gastown.

[LeftCoaster]

I'm struggling to understand the move here.

This is back and the revision is to move the existing approved zoning from market to social? With no offsetting increase in height or density?

Seems like a stalled project that is only getting harder to underwrite, unless I am missing something.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by officedweller

There won't be a problem operating the two together.

The "problem" (not operationally, but for marketing purposes (i.e. the "hard sell") will be convincing luxury buyers to leave their spacious West Side or West Vancouver houses to downsize not only to a "shoebox" but to a shoebox shared in close proximity with others they may not like. These may be people who oppose things (towers, 6 storey blocks, commercial buildings, daycares, etc.) in their neighbourhood, let alone in their building.

Likewise, I wonder how high end restaurants manage to attract diners to locations in the DTES or eastern Gastown.

It never ceases to amaze me that the excellent St.Lawrence is still in its Powell Street location and apparently doing well.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

I'm struggling to understand the move here.

This is back and the revision is to move the existing approved zoning from market to social? With no offsetting increase in height or density?

Seems like a stalled project that is only getting harder to underwrite, unless I am missing something.

I assume there's a related financial piece we don't know about yet. The original design had 314 condos (like this version), and 129 market rental units (with 13 of them renting below market). There was a $75m CAC offered, mostly as cash, with about $7m identified as the value of the childcare to be included in the project.

The new version splits out 51 of the rental units as social housing, and presumably the CAC (other than the childcare, which is still proposed) is either significantly reduced, or disappears completely. As the developer built the Landmark with a significant social housing podium, handed to the City as an air rights parcel, they presumably aren't put off by the idea, and with this project they probably will additionally have a buffer of several floors of market rental before the strata starts on the higher floors.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by whatnext

It never ceases to amaze me that the excellent St.Lawrence is still in its Powell Street location and apparently doing well.

Both Kissa Tanto in Chinatown and Barbara, (both on East Pender), have a Michelin star, and seem to thrive. Pidgin is still apparently going strong on Carrall Street, (since 2013) with Michelin Recommendations in 2022, 2023, and 2024. Ask For Luigi on Alexander also has a Michelin recommendation, as does Torafuku on Main (located under a BC Housing SRO). Phnom Penh has lineups to get a table, and a Michelin Bib Gourmand rating.

[mcj]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Both Kissa Tanto in Chinatown and Barbara, (both on East Pender), have a Michelin star, and seem to thrive. Pidgin is still apparently going strong on Carrall Street, (since 2013) with Michelin Recommendations in 2022, 2023, and 2024. Ask For Luigi on Alexander also has a Michelin recommendation, as does Torafuku on Main (located under a BC Housing SRO). Phnom Penh has lineups to get a table, and a Michelin Bib Gourmand rating.

The MacKenzie Room across from Oppenheimer Park just celebrated their 10th anniversary (Michellin Recommended 22/23/24 as well), and they're still going strong.

Turns out people will come out for good food and service, and the DTES/Railtown/Chinatown/Japantown offer cheap rents/real estate to make that happen for anyone without incredibly deep pockets.