Stevey_G
Active Member
Westrich: Flat developments for a flat market.
- Thread starter Daveography
- Start date
Westrich: Flat developments for a flat market.
NicolBolas
Active Member
Westrich: "Hey I know you guys like cool tall buildings that look nice and add value, but the best we can do is a six story wood building, but we will add at least two different colours of siding to it!"
ForestedImagination
New Member
Well, clearly Westrich still has it in them to develop high rises, like the Windsor project south of the river. But it'd be nice to have more of their towers downtown!!
whattheheck
Active Member
Can't really lay blame on Westrich or any other developer for not going taller. They are going for what the market allows and to ensure they remain profitable.
Perhaps, and here me out here, if the city was serious about DT disorder, cleanliness etc - that DT was a much more desireable place to be, then basic rules of supply and demand would take over. Despite the boosterism here.
Also, the reality is (and people will push back against this), the current infill policy makes building tall towers incredibly less appealing. Why go through the hassle of building tall when its way easier to infill. And that just dilutes the market for tall density. And that means places like DT and the Quarters will remain stagnant for years to come.
Perhaps, and here me out here, if the city was serious about DT disorder, cleanliness etc - that DT was a much more desireable place to be, then basic rules of supply and demand would take over. Despite the boosterism here.
Also, the reality is (and people will push back against this), the current infill policy makes building tall towers incredibly less appealing. Why go through the hassle of building tall when its way easier to infill. And that just dilutes the market for tall density. And that means places like DT and the Quarters will remain stagnant for years to come.
David A
Senior Member
I feel it is more about interest rates and the economy in general, given all the uncertainty in the world. There is a lot less disorder and problems west of 109 Street so I don't feel this is the main factor.
In any event, builders will build what they feel makes sense given current conditions and the location. However, if it is not going to be tall they may want to consider another name.
In any event, builders will build what they feel makes sense given current conditions and the location. However, if it is not going to be tall they may want to consider another name.
whattheheck
Active Member
^YYC doesn't seem to be having as much of an issue compared to Edmonton...
David A
Senior Member
They seem to be becoming overbuilt, particularly with condos.
thommyjo
Senior Member
I do think this is the quiet part people aren’t discussing enough. All these 8plexes are hundreds of “apartment” like units, directly competing with highrises.
The 3bdrm rowhomes upstairs beat a 2bdrm in a highrise for many due to sqft for cost. And the 1bdrm basement wins on pricing and has perks like easier parking.
Makes it tough for bigger projects to take off I think. Or to compete on pricing against small builders doing wood frame with free street parking.
Whattagame
Active Member
The name wasn't about the physical height of the buildings. It's quite clearly an homage to the greatest band from Beverly Hills 90210 to ever get their own spinoff series.
Yeggy
Active Member
YYC doesnt have near the undeveloped inner city land that we do.
Offworld
Active Member
No kidding; nailed it.
IanO
Superstar
The stat that was thrown around during the ~2011 Downtown Plan update was that we have something like 300yrs of land/density/FAR within Downtown to digest.
thommyjo
Senior Member
If only we had a population surge of 250k people in 5 years that we could have accommodated in denser housing more centrally vs dense apartments in car depedent suburbs….
fromyeg
Active Member
If that was in 2011 then we only have 285 years to digest now!