Downtown Vancouver Updates II

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by chowhou

A strata housing building plan was scrapped in favour of a hotel (short term rental) plan. The point is clearly going straight over your head. No housing was lost, but as I originally stated quite clearly, the market adapts and housing development has been de-prioritized in favour of hotel (short term rental) development.

I know, I know, you don't believe in supply, but the facts are the facts regardless of how much you want to argue all the time.

Short term rental is usually used to refer to owners renting apartments for less than a 30 day period, usually to tourists, generally at rates significantly higher than a normal apartment rent.

There's demand for tourist and convention accommodation, as well as from residents who want to live in the city. If thousands of apartments are used illegally for short term rentals, then they aren't available to meet the demand for rental accommodation. Additionally, developers have been reluctant to invest in new hotels.

Now that short term rentals are being returned to the rental market, or sold to new owner occupiers, some of the housing demand is being met. And as a bonus, new hotels are being proposed. In this case it would replace an older, smaller hotel. On other sites Downtown they're replacing parking facilities or older retail buildings. As a result of the improved viability of new hotels, we're even getting the Listel, also in the West End, being redeveloped into a bigger hotel, with a rental residential tower as well.

It's not like we haven't lost hotel rooms to residential use in this area. The Coast on Denman was converted to rental units, and the Landmark was just replaced by condos and social housing.

[whatnext]

The most remarkable thing about this is that an established developer is admitting buyers for $4 million condos are gone for good, even with a great location. Makes you wonder who Anthem is going to peddle that project they keep deferring the CACs on. Similarly I'm surprised Landa is pushing ahead with 1818 Alberni which seems to be geared to that same market.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Short term rental is usually used to refer to owners renting apartments for less than a 30 day period, usually to tourists, generally at rates significantly higher than a normal apartment rent.

There's demand for tourist and convention accommodation, as well as from residents who want to live in the city. If thousands of apartments are used illegally for short term rentals, then they aren't available to meet the demand for rental accommodation. Additionally, developers have been reluctant to invest in new hotels.

Now that short term rentals are being returned to the rental market, or sold to new owner occupiers, some of the housing demand is being met. And as a bonus, new hotels are being proposed. In this case it would replace an older, smaller hotel. On other sites Downtown they're replacing parking facilities or older retail buildings. As a result of the improved viability of new hotels, we're even getting the Listel, also in the West End, being redeveloped into a bigger hotel, with a rental residential tower as well.

It's not like we haven't lost hotel rooms to residential use in this area. The Coast on Denman was converted to rental units, and the Landmark was just replaced by condos and social housing.

Hotels are short term rentals. We've just decided they're legal when operated by a dedicated corporation, but illegal when individually operated. Don't die on this hill. It's silly to pretend that hotels are not accommodation rented for less than 30 day periods, usually to tourists, at rates significantly higher than normal apartment rent. C'mon. Even the rezoning application explicitly states that they're building "short-term stay" units.

Now, new hotels are being built when new housing could have been built. Hence. The market adapts to individually operated short term rentals being restricted by investing in corporate operated short term rentals that can't easily be converted into housing. That is a damn shame. After all, aren't you the guy always making excuses for why development is slow because there isn't enough construction capacity?

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by chowhou

Hotels are short term rentals. We've just decided they're legal when operated by a dedicated corporation, but illegal when individually operated. Don't die on this hill. It's silly to pretend that hotels are not accommodation rented for less than 30 day periods, usually to tourists, at rates significantly higher than normal apartment rent. C'mon. Even the rezoning application explicitly states that they're building "short-term stay" units.

Now, new hotels are being built when new housing could have been built. Hence. The market adapts to individually operated short term rentals being restricted by investing in corporate operated short term rentals that can't easily be converted into housing. That is a damn shame. After all, aren't you the guy always making excuses for why development is slow because there isn't enough construction capacity?

So you don't want developers to build hotels, just housing. Is retail ok? Office space? Industrial buildings?

You're not understanding the application. It's for both short term stay and long term stay units. In other words, it reads as if it's like the Listel or the Hotel Blu, a mixture of hotel units and long stay rental units. And probably more than the boutique residential tower that the developer had already clearly abandoned.

And in the meantime you seem to want to ignore the extra units that have become available for residents to live in as a result of the changes to the rules about short stay accommodation.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Changing City

So you don't want developers to build hotels, just housing. Is retail ok? Office space? Industrial buildings?

It's already been well established that you don't want developers to build housing and are quite comfortable with the sorry state of housing costs in this city. I simply think they should be incentivized instead of disincentivized, but maybe that's just me. Perhaps the world where we stop providing housing supply is perfectly comfortable to you, but there are other people in the world that have needs beyond yours.

You're not understanding the application. It's for both short term stay and long term stay units. In other words, it reads as if it's like the Listel or the Hotel Blu, a mixture of hotel units and long stay rental units.

Thank you for admitting that hotels are short term rentals.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by chowhou

It's already been well established that you don't want developers to build housing and are quite comfortable with the sorry state of housing costs in this city. I simply think they should be incentivized instead of disincentivized, but maybe that's just me. Perhaps the world where we stop providing housing supply is perfectly comfortable to you, but there are other people in the world that have needs beyond yours.

Thank you for admitting that hotels are short term rentals.

You're inventing a narrative that doesn't exist. I have tried to explain to you why housing costs have remained stubbornly high, and with developers still building almost as many new homes as have ever been built in Metro Vancouver at one time, it's unlikely that construction of significantly more homes is likely in the immediate future.

Why you would prefer some of those housing units to be hijacked as 'hotels' I have no idea.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by whatnext

The most remarkable thing about this is that an established developer is admitting buyers for $4 million condos are gone for good, even with a great location. Makes you wonder who Anthem is going to peddle that project they keep deferring the CACs on. Similarly I'm surprised Landa is pushing ahead with 1818 Alberni which seems to be geared to that same market.

Landa appear to have 23 of the 54 units still for sale, so presumably they're past the number the financer required. The remaining homes are priced between $1,785 and $2,300 per square foot, depending on how far the unit is up the tower. That's not particularly outrageous for new homes in that location - a bit less than Bosa's Fifteen Fifteen.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Changing City

You're inventing a narrative that doesn't exist. I have tried to explain to you why housing costs have remained stubbornly high, and with developers still building almost as many new homes as have ever been built in Metro Vancouver at one time, it's unlikely that construction of significantly more homes is likely in the immediate future.

Why you would prefer some of those housing units to be hijacked as 'hotels' I have no idea.

You consistently come out in favour of every law and policy that discourages housing development. I don't need to invent any narrative when the facts speak for themselves.

Even here you are running defense for the results of government policy causing a fully approved housing project to be scrapped in favour of a hotel project.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by chowhou

You consistently come out in favour of every law and policy that discourages housing development. I don't need to invent any narrative when the facts speak for themselves.

Even here you are running defense for the results of government policy causing a fully approved housing project to be scrapped in favour of a hotel project.

What government policy caused the developer to decide to apply to build a hotel, with long term rental units, rather than a much smaller condo building?

If you mean that making short term rentals illegal in residential buildings has made the idea of a hotel possible, you're once again ignoring all the units that have now become available to rent. And nobody is stopping the developer from building the condo building - that's just the market in operation.

[officedweller]

From Daily Hive -

Coal Harbour Social Housing / School

August 8, 2024 shots by Kenneth Chan.


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/coal...tion-vancouver


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/coal...tion-vancouver


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/coal...tion-vancouver


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/coal...tion-vancouver

[Vin]

Originally Posted by chowhou

Hotels are short term rentals. We've just decided they're legal when operated by a dedicated corporation, but illegal when individually operated. Don't die on this hill. It's silly to pretend that hotels are not accommodation rented for less than 30 day periods, usually to tourists, at rates significantly higher than normal apartment rent. C'mon. Even the rezoning application explicitly states that they're building "short-term stay" units.

Now, new hotels are being built when new housing could have been built. Hence. The market adapts to individually operated short term rentals being restricted by investing in corporate operated short term rentals that can't easily be converted into housing. That is a damn shame. After all, aren't you the guy always making excuses for why development is slow because there isn't enough construction capacity?

The HUUUGGGGE difference is that a hotel building can accommodate a lot more short term visitors with tiny room units compared to Air-B&B style accommodation, which is able to offer long-term rentals. Hence I support the building of more hotel buildings and associated commercial spaces.

[Changing City]

The only remaining Bonnis project Downtown, 950 Granville, looks to be getting close to completion. There are five retail units with 'leased' signs in the window.

[jollyburger]

From May

Q: When will the new school open?
A: The planned occupancy date has been pushed to late January 2025, meaning a Spring 2025 mid-term move in-date may be feasible, unless there are further delays to construction completion. Mid-term move would transplant the current students and staff of the Lord Roberts Annex only.

Q: The building is mixed-use (school, housing, daycare). Will phased occupancy be a possible (e.g. school opens before housing)?
A: The architect and contractor have advised that phased occupancy is likely not possible.

https://www.vsb.bc.ca/roberts-annex/...ur-school-faqs

[officedweller]

Pic by me Sat. Aug 17th:

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Changing City

The only remaining Bonnis project Downtown, 950 Granville, looks to be getting close to completion. There are five retail units with 'leased' signs in the window.

950 Granville

Pics by me today.
The terracotta colour is a nice change from industrial gray.
Hopefully those blank walls will host blade signs in the future.








Royal Centre

Pic by me last night:

[jollyburger]

It's hard to tell but there's no indication of any mounting points for those blade signs?



https://storeys.com/vancouver-798-gr...e-street-sale/

They are about to get occupancy permits.

https://plposweb.vancouver.ca/Public...ctId=108080614

I assume the passport office is still going in but they had this change of use for the second floor.

22-May -2024 - Rev#3
Interior alterations at Level 3 - okay to be processed as BP Rev#3 per Kelly Anderson.
Change of major occupancy of second floor from retail (Group E) to gallery only (Group A-2). Retail use is NOT permitted on the second floor.

[Jimbo604]

Src: Google Street Views 2021, 2024

Nice, but a lot of effort to go from relatively recent two-storey to four-storey?

[csbvan]

Another office to hotel conversion. This one in Gastown at 211 Columbia Street.

https://www.shapeyourcity.ca/211-columbia-st

RH Architects Inc. has applied to the City of Vancouver for permission for interior alterations and change of use of Level 2 and Level 3 from a General Office use to a Hotel use, at the above-noted address, consisting of:

Maximum of 19 Hotel rooms
Proposed short term and long term rental
Under the site’s existing HA-2 zoning(External link), the application is “conditional” so it may be permitted. However, it requires the decision of the Director of Planning.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by csbvan

Another office to hotel conversion. This one in Gastown at 211 Columbia Street.

https://www.shapeyourcity.ca/211-columbia-st

That's the Commercial Block from 1893, the first in the city to have electric elevators. It was restored as office space in 2002, with a heritage designation that transferred density to another project.

[Changing City]

...