Downtown Vancouver Updates

[hollywoodnorth]

Originally Posted by Hed Kandi

[B][SIZE="4"]

At the site, a crane sat idle and there was no activity in the partially completed seven-storey-deep hole at the $180-million project that was scheduled to be finished by spring 2010.

Developer Tony Pappajohn of Jameson Developments Corp. confirmed in media reports a major unidentified Canadian bank had withdrawn its loan, despite pre-sales of 105 of the 144 upscale suites ranging from $500,000 to more than $5 million.

He couldn't be reached for comment yesterday.

At an average price of $3 million for each suite, buyers had committed over $300 million in total sales and had put down secured deposits of 15 to 25 per cent.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


"When the banks look at its economics and if its economics don't work, they won't advance the money."

He said banks are being "very vigilant" these days.

"He may have done nothing wrong, but he got caught up in the global economic restructuring," he said.

"The banks aren't willing to take risk."

how does this seem like a bad investment to a BIG BANK? I'm confused.................


- 180 Million Project Cost

- 300 million in total sales and had put down secured deposits of 15 to 25 per cent.

- 105 of the 144 upscale suites sold.....so STILL MORE UNITES TO BE SOLD...........more income to come in......



so WTF? 1 + 1 = 2 no?

[vanhattan]

Originally Posted by hollywoodnorth

how does this seem like a bad investment to a BIG BANK? I'm confused.................


- 180 Million Project Cost

- 300 million in total sales and had put down secured deposits of 15 to 25 per cent.

- 105 of the 144 upscale suites sold.....so STILL MORE UNITES TO BE SOLD...........more income to come in......



so WTF? 1 + 1 = 2 no?

Agreed.

The bank in question must be in a world of crap to pull out of a seeminly very profitable project. I do wonder why the bank in question is not named. Also, it would seem that in a deal this big, that there would be large penalties on the lenders end if they pulled out of the contract but that all depends on the verbiage of the deal.

Tough times in the financial sector for sure, but I did not think that the CA banks were being as pummeled as the US/EU banks were due to their severely conservative nature. Fear is all consuming and sometimes not very rational.

[Yume-sama]

Ridiculous they pulled the plug on it. I guess $120 million guaranteed profit (on top of the loan) isn't safe enough...

[johnjimbc]

I've had a strange feeling about this project for a long time, even well before the market slowed. It just seemed bizarrely slow out the gate, and has never really moved. Yes, they are above ground now . . . sorta. But just barely, and without a lot of "conviction". It reminds me of a project in DC that eventually did get finished . . . after 6 years, 3 major contractors, 2 major re-financings, and a couple of partner lawsuits thrown in for good measure.

When Jameson launched 2 1/2 years ago, they were touting the entire project would be completed by now. Think about that. Yes, projects encounter delays, but this is starting to test credibility. The numbers may say one thing, but how firm are they. Depending on the age of those contracts, many of those "purchasers" probably have the ability to cancel at this point just based on the length of the delays encountered already. I know any contract we have ever signed gives the developer great leeway, but all of them contained a (lenghty) time-frame after which we could cancel as well for a full return of deposit. It may even be standard clause here, as it was in the US. Even if not, I know it was in the contract we did sign here. So those numbers could collapse back down rather quickly in a sustained downturn.

More importantly, what is the dialogue that has been occurring between the bank and the developer. Have they too been dragged along with ever-changing projections? Was the original financing agreement based on completion by the end of 2008 perhaps, or with a delay to 2009 or 2010 at the latest? What if now the developer is projecting a 2011 date? At some point, a financial institution may just be running numbers and say, "you know, we can do better than this. Bye bye."

I just think it is more likely the project is having troubles, not the institution who pulled out. That is what the signs point to in my opinion. It would not be the first time a "great project on paper" and marketed well is executed very badly.

Don't get me wrong, I would LOVE to see this project in Vancouver. And I hope it is completed. It is a cool project and would be a great feather for downtown Vancouver's cap. But I am very suspicious of the remarkable lack of progress the developer has made considering they've been at this project for nearly 3 (visible) years at this point with so very little physical progress.

[subdude]

The new Safeway at Robson and Denman (photos by me):





This will be the new liquor store I assume:


View from Denman:

[officedweller]

Nice!
Even swoopier than the Save-on-Foods canopies!

[Architype]

Originally Posted by subdude

The new Safeway at Robson and Denman (photos by me):

Cool, it could almost be mistaken for a Skytrain station.

[SpongeG]

when is it scheduled to open? before christmas?

[flight_from_kamakura]

cool design. i'm sure glad they went ahead with this, even if the city's still insisting on keeping these damned height limits on robson (and those damned dinky sidewalks just kill me...)

[SpongeG]

Safeway owns that land so I don't think they wanted to make a highriose or condos above as it gets complicated for them

[city guy]

excuse me fellow forum-ers...i feel I have to weigh-in here

the new safeway is a piece of crap

it contains every bland cliche of architectural ideas generated in the last 15 years and manages to combine them into an insipid collection to disjointed elements:

it has the rusticated, painted concrete treatment which typifies of most of the downtown south highrises, and scotiabank theatre, it has the arching corner element introduced by save on foods on the island many years ago, and its completely aggressive on that corner

the tilting windows, midblock, allow only one view from the sidewalk, that of the ugliest flourescent light fixtures spec'd in recent years in the downtown penninsula...a whole bank of them...and, to boot, cast against a colour which most mothers would rush their babies to the hospital with, if witnessed on anyones skin

urbanistically it is a squat and relentless insult to 3/4 of a block of the downtown...the architects and planners should be ashamed of coopting so much space with such a lack of grace

the photos posted look much better than the actual building...go take a look for yourselves, and go at night so that you can witness the worst example of a commercial lighting strategy I have seen in a long time

[excel]

no^

[hollywoodnorth]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

when is it scheduled to open? before christmas?

2nd week of december

[hollywoodnorth]

Originally Posted by subdude

View from Denman:

what ended up doing into the new retail units on the LEFT side of your picture? anyone know? seems like one is occupied....

[Delirium]

Originally Posted by city guy

excuse me fellow forum-ers...i feel I have to weigh-in here

the new safeway is a piece of crap

it contains every bland cliche of architectural ideas generated in the last 15 years and manages to combine them into an insipid collection to disjointed elements:

it has the rusticated, painted concrete treatment which typifies of most of the downtown south highrises, and scotiabank theatre, it has the arching corner element introduced by save on foods on the island many years ago, and its completely aggressive on that corner

the tilting windows, midblock, allow only one view from the sidewalk, that of the ugliest flourescent light fixtures spec'd in recent years in the downtown penninsula...a whole bank of them...and, to boot, cast against a colour which most mothers would rush their babies to the hospital with, if witnessed on anyones skin

urbanistically it is a squat and relentless insult to 3/4 of a block of the downtown...the architects and planners should be ashamed of coopting so much space with such a lack of grace

the photos posted look much better than the actual building...go take a look for yourselves, and go at night so that you can witness the worst example of a commercial lighting strategy I have seen in a long time

my only comment; it's a grocery store!
let's not forget what was there before. vast improvement no?


moving on, thought this was a neat pic

[IdahoMountainBoy]

I'll second that. Since when are grocery stores suppose to be architectural marvels? I think its going to add nicely to that corner.

[AlexYVR]

Originally Posted by city guy

excuse me fellow forum-ers...i feel I have to weigh-in here

the new safeway is a piece of crap

it contains every bland cliche of architectural ideas generated in the last 15 years and manages to combine them into an insipid collection to disjointed elements:

it has the rusticated, painted concrete treatment which typifies of most of the downtown south highrises, and scotiabank theatre, it has the arching corner element introduced by save on foods on the island many years ago, and its completely aggressive on that corner

the tilting windows, midblock, allow only one view from the sidewalk, that of the ugliest flourescent light fixtures spec'd in recent years in the downtown penninsula...a whole bank of them...and, to boot, cast against a colour which most mothers would rush their babies to the hospital with, if witnessed on anyones skin

urbanistically it is a squat and relentless insult to 3/4 of a block of the downtown...the architects and planners should be ashamed of coopting so much space with such a lack of grace

the photos posted look much better than the actual building...go take a look for yourselves, and go at night so that you can witness the worst example of a commercial lighting strategy I have seen in a long time

I'll go to bat for Safeway (having seen it only from the pictures) and say a few things:

the 'tilting windows, midblock' are designed to allow diffuse sunlight without blinding the customer. You'll notice that this Safeway faces morning sun; the new Urban Fare, for example, faces west and is blocked from evening sun by Carmana plaza, and so they can do full glass.

Those horrible flourescent lights are actually (at least, my guess would be from the picture) direct/indirect lighting, which is about the nicest kind of fluoro you can have for people inside the building.

The 'rusticated, painted concrete' is found on so many buildings in Vancouver for several reasons; it typifies west coast minimalism (no carpet/paint coating means longevity, simplicity, and exposed elements); it wears well; and you're not going to have to pull that purple shag concrete in 10 years when it looks tacky instead of trendy.

All in all, from the pictures, I'd say it's a good update of what was a piss-poor Safeway location.

[thefly]

Originally Posted by hollywoodnorth

what ended up doing into the new retail units on the LEFT side of your picture? anyone know? seems like one is occupied....

The bottom one on the corner (which I believe is the only one occupied so far) is by Rogers.

[jlousa]

Nothing we didn't already know. This is the old Coast hotel for those that aren't sure.

Project: Hotel Conversion into Mixed-Use Building Status: Proposed
Location: 1030 DENMAN ST
Zoning: C5 to CD-1
Project Type: Rezoning Department: Planning Department
Application Date: 2008/11/19 No: 2008029
City Contact: Alison Higginson 604.873.7727
Description: To rezone this C-5 Site to a CD-1 by-law to permit conversion of the existing hotel rooms and facilities to residential (rental) use and office uses. Retail and Services Uses in existence will be retained. The existing density and height exceed the maximums permitted in the C-5 District (FSR 4.92 vs 2.20 and Heibht 83m vs 64m)

[officedweller]

From the SkyTrain today I noticed that the daycare being built on the east side of Firenze @ Intenational Village is really coming along - lots of steel erected - looking like there's a curved element to the design.