Edmonton, Urbia, mixed use, 28 floors 104st 102ave - Page 6

Coldrsx · #**101** Posted **Feb 20, 2008, 3:52 PM**

i had almost forgot about this one...thanks for reminding me

newfangled · #**102** Posted **Feb 20, 2008, 4:11 PM**

So with the whole credit/liquidity crunch there's no way that these guys are raising $250M anytime soon. So assuming that they're in it for a flip, how far does it make sense for them to go?

One quickie appearance at the EDC to get shot down?

Or make like Ironwood and get shot down time after time, until they finally get it right, and then take it all the way through a DC2? But then they end up with a DC2 for a mixed-use with condos on the bottom and office on top? Who else would want to build that?

Can anyone explain how this makes sense?

Coldrsx · #**103** Posted **Feb 20, 2008, 4:20 PM**

that land is worth a lot less....A LOT LESS without a dc2 on it. Currently, if sold for $5,000,000, you would be hard pressed to get a return.

DC2 it with a decent design for 25-32 floors and pass it to a real developer

SHOFEAR · #**104** Posted **Feb 20, 2008, 4:31 PM**

Quote:

Or make like Ironwood and get shot down time after time, until they finally get it right, and then take it all the way through a DC2?

What's this about Ironwood finally getting it right???

newfangled · #**105** Posted **Feb 20, 2008, 4:50 PM**

^ Sorry, I mean that presumably Ironwood will keep going back again and again until they get it right. They at least seem to have a business plan of some sort.

But these Urbia guys...if they were really serious about going through the whole EDC and DC2 process wouldn't they have shown up with a concept that was at least plausible?

Coldrsx · #**106** Posted **Feb 20, 2008, 4:53 PM**

in Edmonton this design is the vernacular...unfortunately.

EIFS junk

kcantor · #**107** Posted **Feb 20, 2008, 7:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

that land is worth a lot less....A LOT LESS without a dc2 on it. Currently, if sold for $5,000,000, you would be hard pressed to get a return.

DC2 it with a decent design for 25-32 floors and pass it to a real developer

a dc2 only has value for the party prepared to develop exactly what it specifies internally as well as externally. for anyone not prepared to develop what a dc2 specifies, a dc2 site will have less value than outright zoning (i.e. core commercial arts if you are "downtown"). the time alone involved in amending a dc2 to something else vs obtaining permits and approvals under existing zoning can make the difference between getting a return and not getting a return. if a purchaser doesn't like it, that land is worth a lot less with a dc2 than without it. the dc2 that currently exists on the baccarat site is a prime example - noone in their right mind would build out what is contractually required to comply with that zoning.

Coldrsx · #**108** Posted **Feb 20, 2008, 7:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by cdnklc

a dc2 only has value for the party prepared to develop exactly what it specifies internally as well as externally. for anyone not prepared to develop what a dc2 specifies, a dc2 site will have less value than outright zoning (i.e. core commercial arts if you are "downtown"). the time alone involved in amending a dc2 to something else vs obtaining permits and approvals under existing zoning can make the difference between getting a return and not getting a return. if a purchaser doesn't like it, that land is worth a lot less with a dc2 than without it. the dc2 that currently exists on the baccarat site is a prime example - noone in their right mind would build out what is contractually required to comply with that zoning.

yes i understand that...most people do...and while entering into a dc2 can significantly raise the value of the property it can, as above said, lower it as well. You need to do a significant amount of research as to what is the most logical use there so that other buyers will buy in.

newfangled · #**109** Posted **Feb 20, 2008, 8:30 PM**

^That's what I was trying to get at. I really don't see them building this, but I don't see anyone else ever wanting to build it either, so the EDC process seems like a waste (other than the fun of a public flogging).

Still just wondering about the logic in their game.

Edmonchuck · #**110** Posted **Feb 20, 2008, 9:29 PM**

I think people said this before...this "proposal" was just to generate site interest to flip this. That is why the "design" was not that well thought out.

Coldrsx · #**111** Posted **Feb 20, 2008, 9:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edmonchuck

I think people said this before...this "proposal" was just to generate site interest to flip this. That is why the "design" was not that well thought out.

to be honest...the exterior is about par with most Edmonton projects...unfortunately.

Edmonchuck · #**112** Posted **Feb 20, 2008, 9:54 PM**

I haven't see the clownish ball hats nor the large cement letters on anything else around here.

Coldrsx · #**113** Posted **Feb 20, 2008, 9:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edmonchuck

I haven't see the clownish ball hats nor the large cement letters on anything else around here.

in an architectural context urbia tower is on par with PP, venetian, imperial, morris lofts, legacy, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

newfangled · #**114** Posted **Feb 20, 2008, 11:08 PM**

Still, none of this explains why they'd go to EDC. I assume that being laughed out of the building isn't going to increase the value of their site or raise their profile?

I'm still firmly believing that this is a flip, but why expose that the emperor has no clothes?

Do they just not realize what a drubbing they're in for? Because that would be awesome.

Coldrsx · #**115** Posted **Feb 20, 2008, 11:16 PM**

^no they dont IMO

CMD UW · #**116** Posted **Feb 21, 2008, 12:06 AM**

/\ Although Mr. Gooch knows all about the EDC and repeat performances > see Belcanto Court (Columbia Gardens), Time Square.

Coldrsx · #**117** Posted **Feb 21, 2008, 12:09 AM**

^indeed...