HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #3561  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2014, 11:14 PM
mhays mhays is online now
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,748
A few percent is way more than a few dollars. At pretty much every income level that's a big deal for many renters.

Owners will make their profits because there will be a reduction in new units until rents are pushed up enough to justify the traditional rates of return/risk.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3562  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2014, 12:21 AM
summersm343's Avatar
summersm343 summersm343 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 18,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakman View Post
Welcome to the capitalistic version supply and demand. Imposing rent caps could cause Seattle's housing construction to slow. Are there incentives towards developers to provide affordable units?
In Philadelphia there are incentives for developers to add affordable housing. Like, you can build taller in an area with a height limit, therefore increasing the overall amount of units in your development by adding a small percentage of affordable housing.

Something like this does not harm development but perhaps (arguably) makes the better projects.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3563  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2014, 2:02 AM
mhays mhays is online now
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,748
Seattle has that currently (a fee for added height), but the price is too high. A lot of developers use the old lower heights to avoid the fee. It's a classic example of the City Council having little concept about how developers will react.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3564  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2014, 5:05 AM
alki alki is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,647
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays View Post
A few percent is way more than a few dollars. At pretty much every income level that's a big deal for many renters.

Owners will make their profits because there will be a reduction in new units until rents are pushed up enough to justify the traditional rates of return/risk.
Its 3-5% of units; not rents. So then, a developer proposes a project with 100 units. According to the law, s/he would have to set aside 3-5 units with rents that are affordable to individuals who make 80% of the median income for Seattle. That means those people must not pay more than $1118 for a studio; $1198 for a 1 bdr. and $1438 for a 2 bdr.:

http://www.seattle.gov/housing/devel...ental_HOME.pdf

The Vue apts just opened up in W. Seattle. The rent for the cheapest market rate studio is $1180, for the cheapest 1 bdr its $1213, and for the cheapest 2 bdr its $2400. Let's say the VUE has 100 units. Lets assume the worse.........it has to make 5 studios affordable to meet the city's requirement. That would leave the project with $360 less income per month; income that will have to be picked up by the rest of the units. That would result in a rent increase of < $4 per unit for the remaining 95 units.

If they made the 5 units all 1 bdr, the deficit would be $75 per month and would result in increased rents of < $1 per mo for each of the remaining 95 units.

If they made the 5 units all 2 bdr, the shortfall would be much greater. The deficit would be $4810 per mo, meaning the remaining 95 units would have to pay $50 per unit per mo.

Assuming I understand how the new law will work, only a set side of 5 2 bdr units could potentially hurt the developer's profit margin and might require a subsidy on his/her part. Otherwise I think this new law is not a bad deal for the developer......again assuming I am understanding it and all its ramifications correctly.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3565  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2014, 5:47 AM
mhays mhays is online now
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,748
If it's anywhere near Downtown etc. the requirement would be at the high end of the range, and units tend to be more expensive to begin with since they're often concrete, land is expensive, historic protections, etc. The difference is greater (like you're noting for two bedrooms) so the subsidy is greater. The administrative side would be a cost, with variables in how onerous the process could be both during development and ongoing. The building's value would also be impacted by duration and conditions of the requirement. At least with the basic fee there's no ongoing process.

For residential projects, including the units in the building would be cheaper than paying the fees. Commercial projects have no such alternative.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3566  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2014, 7:03 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,696
Thread is up for 2015 2nd Avenue.

Looks like it will be a very nice tower and construction will start shortly on it. It follows the same height of many other towers (440 feet) and it has pretty high ceiling heights as well being 34 floors.

Thread: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...89#post6782389


http://www.djc.com/stories/images/20...nental_big.jpg
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3567  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2014, 5:36 PM
alki alki is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,647
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris08876 View Post
Thread is up for 2015 2nd Avenue.

Looks like it will be a very nice tower and construction will start shortly on it. It follows the same height of many other towers (440 feet) and it has pretty high ceiling heights as well being 34 floors.

Thread: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...89#post6782389


http://www.djc.com/stories/images/20...nental_big.jpg
One of the proposed projects I like a lot.........I didn't think it would get into construction. From the article, an interesting observation:

Continental President Claudio Guincher said the decision will be made by the end of 2015. If they are condos, marketing will start then. If they are apartments, marketing will start in 2016.

“They're both good options and we're going to wait and read the market — both the condominium market and the rental market — in a year from now instead of making the decision now,” he said.

This unusual move is the result of downtown Seattle's unusually strong apartment market. Building after building is filling up, and rents are rising.

Last edited by alki; Oct 25, 2014 at 7:21 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3568  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2014, 5:39 PM
alki alki is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,647
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays View Post
If it's anywhere near Downtown etc. the requirement would be at the high end of the range, and units tend to be more expensive to begin with since they're often concrete, land is expensive, historic protections, etc. The difference is greater (like you're noting for two bedrooms) so the subsidy is greater. The administrative side would be a cost, with variables in how onerous the process could be both during development and ongoing. The building's value would also be impacted by duration and conditions of the requirement. At least with the basic fee there's no ongoing process.

For residential projects, including the units in the building would be cheaper than paying the fees. Commercial projects have no such alternative.
You're right.......for projects in DT Seattle, the law will cut more into profit margins. I still don't think it will deter development of projects.

As to your second comment, I thought this law applied only to residential projects. No?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3569  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2014, 12:04 AM
mhays mhays is online now
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,748
The tax would apply to all commercial and multifamily projects. Houses get a free pass.

That's really odd. Houses are the worst offender if the issue is affordability. I don't know where the dividing line would be...four packs are generally good for affordability, but single family houses are bad news from that perspective, since they don't really add to supply. My guess is this is the City Council being afraid of the single-family voters, since they're hypocrites more concerned with politics than affordability.

Offices, hotels, and retail costs will be up by maybe 8% on average if they're in core areas. The outcome is pretty obvious for those of us who build all of these types...sometimes it'll be worth it, and sometimes it won't.

Housing will follow the same economic laws everything else does. A few percent cost increase (or more like the 8% if going fee-only) will cause some people to suck it up and pay more, some demand to move outside the city, some effect on square footage per unit, and so on. It won't stop construction, but there's no question that it'll have a very significant effect.

People attempted the same debates with today's height bonus fees. But the results were just as predictable. In key locations the fees are worth it in today's hot market. In other locations most development is still the lower heights, and the fees are a big reason. Even publicly some clearly say that the fees are the reason for their choices.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3570  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2014, 11:34 PM
alki alki is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,647
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays View Post
The tax would apply to all commercial and multifamily projects. Houses get a free pass.

That's really odd. Houses are the worst offender if the issue is affordability. I don't know where the dividing line would be...four packs are generally good for affordability, but single family houses are bad news from that perspective, since they don't really add to supply. My guess is this is the City Council being afraid of the single-family voters, since they're hypocrites more concerned with politics than affordability.
Straw man. There are very few if any single family homes getting built in Seattle these days. Nonetheless, SFH is an important part of the housing mix in Seattle and should be in the future.

Quote:
Offices, hotels, and retail costs will be up by maybe 8% on average if they're in core areas. The outcome is pretty obvious for those of us who build all of these types...sometimes it'll be worth it, and sometimes it won't.
It looks like mixed use will be the solution.

Quote:
Housing will follow the same economic laws everything else does. A few percent cost increase (or more like the 8% if going fee-only) will cause some people to suck it up and pay more, some demand to move outside the city, some effect on square footage per unit, and so on. It won't stop construction, but there's no question that it'll have a very significant effect.

People attempted the same debates with today's height bonus fees. But the results were just as predictable. In key locations the fees are worth it in today's hot market. In other locations most development is still the lower heights, and the fees are a big reason. Even publicly some clearly say that the fees are the reason for their choices
.
We'll see. I think developers are pretty creative....at least the good ones.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3571  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2014, 11:59 PM
Vashon118's Avatar
Vashon118 Vashon118 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Vashon, WA
Posts: 1,050
5th and Columbia


5th and Columbia 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


5th and Columbia 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


5th and Columbia 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr

204 Pine Street


204 Pine St 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


204 Pine St 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


204 Pine St 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


204 Pine St 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


204 Pine St 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


204 Pine St 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


204 Pine St 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr

1007 Stewart Street


1007 Stewart St 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr

2000 3rd Ave


2000 3rd Ave 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr

2021 7th Ave


2021 7th Ave 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


2021 7th Ave 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


2021 7th Ave 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


2021 7th Ave 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


2021 7th Ave 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


2021 7th Ave 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


2021 7th Ave 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


2021 7th Ave 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


2021 7th Ave 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr

2025 Terry Ave


2025 Terry Ave 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


2025 Terry Ave 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


2025 Terry Ave 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


2025 Terry Ave 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


2025 Terry Ave 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


2025 Terry Ave 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


2025 Terry Ave 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


2025 Terry Ave 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr

2030 8th


2030 8th 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


2030 8th 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


2030 8th 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


2030 8th 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr

2101 7th Ave


2101 7th Ave 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


2101 7th Ave 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


2101 7th Ave 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr

Cielo


Cielo 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Cielo 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Cielo 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Cielo 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Cielo 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Cielo 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Cielo 2014-10-18 (07) by planet_lb, on Flickr


Cielo 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Cielo 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Cielo 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Cielo 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr

Insignia


Insignia 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Insignia 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Insignia 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Insignia 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Insignia 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Insignia 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Insignia 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Insignia 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Insignia 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Insignia 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Insignia 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Insignia 2014-10-17 by planet_lb, on Flickr

Luma Condominiums (1321 Seneca)

Luma Condominiums 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Luma Condominiums 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr

Madison Centre


Madison Centre 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Madison Centre 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Madison Centre 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Madison Centre 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Madison Centre 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Madison Centre 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr

Potala Tower


Potala Tower 2014-10-22 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Potala Tower 2014-10-22 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Potala Tower 2014-10-22 by planet_lb, on Flickr

Stadium Place (east block)


Stadium Place (east block) 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Stadium Place (east block) 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr


Stadium Place (east block) 2014-10-18 by planet_lb, on Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3572  
Old Posted Oct 27, 2014, 5:25 AM
mhays mhays is online now
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by alki View Post
Straw man. There are very few if any single family homes getting built in Seattle these days. Nonetheless, SFH is an important part of the housing mix in Seattle and should be in the future.

It looks like mixed use will be the solution.

We'll see. I think developers are pretty creative....at least the good ones.
Seattle builds hundreds of SFRs per year. Many townhouses are single-family, in addition to basic rebuilds and so on. Read the DPD bulletins.

I don't get your point on mixed-use. Are you suggesting that these uses should be discouraged unless there's a mix of uses? Mixing uses tends to be expensive on a square foot basis. If another Amazon comes along they'd probably pay the fee, but some users will leave the city limits.

Developers are creative? Of course they are...in building where there aren't fees. I know you've managed apartments before, but spend some time on the development side and this will be very clear.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3573  
Old Posted Oct 27, 2014, 5:33 AM
mhays mhays is online now
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,748
Vashon, thanks for another epic post! Things move slowly on the ground but wow is that a lot, especially considering it's only the stuff over 200'!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3574  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2014, 4:17 AM
alki alki is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,647
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays View Post
Seattle builds hundreds of SFRs per year. Many townhouses are single-family, in addition to basic rebuilds and so on. Read the DPD bulletins.

I don't get your point on mixed-use. Are you suggesting that these uses should be discouraged unless there's a mix of uses? Mixing uses tends to be expensive on a square foot basis. If another Amazon comes along they'd probably pay the fee, but some users will leave the city limits.
I am suggesting that commercial developers include housing in their development so they can meet the affordable unit, set aside requirement of the proposed law, assuming that its directed at commercial developments as well as residential projects.

Quote:
Developers are creative? Of course they are...in building where there aren't fees. I know you've managed apartments before, but spend some time on the development side and this will be very clear.
I haven't done only prop mgmt. I have been on the development side as well.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3575  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2014, 4:43 AM
mhays mhays is online now
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,748
Then you know that mixed-use isn't easy, and tends to be expensive. And therefore it's a route a lot of developers would skip since they have easier options elsewhere.

That goes double if the housing wouldn't be seen as an asset to the other use. Hotels build housing on top because residential height limits are higher. But that only works if the housing will use hotel services, and the units are expensive enough to justify a very high construction cost per square foot.

Mixing uses in one building is tough for a bunch of reasons. Every use tends to have its own substantial demands on the ground level between parking, entrances, lobbies, and so on. Sometimes these don't mix (like residential and office lobbies) so you can quickly run out of room. For financing, the market needs to be ok for all of the uses you propose. This tends to work when high rents are possible, and not overly diminished by your inconvenient elevator layout or whatever.

So many will pay the fee or not build. The result is things cost more for everyone...which appears to be your life's mission.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3576  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2014, 5:40 AM
alki alki is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,647
Clise's 40-Story Denny Triangle Tower Goes Round & Round

Tuesday, October 28, 2014, by Sean Keeley



http://seattle.curbed.com/archives/2...ound-round.php
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3577  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2014, 6:03 AM
alki alki is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,647
Move along, nothing to see at this downtown Seattle high-rise site

Oct 27, 2014, 12:52pm PDT Updated: Oct 27, 2014, 5:52pm PDT




Even though construction fencing is up and equipment is onsite at a downtown Seattle high-rise development site, only preliminary work is occurring, the owner's representative said Monday.

But based on city permitting records, full-on construction seems imminent.

The owner, for instance, has received the construction permit for the 43-story apartment tower that the British Columbia Investment Management Corp. (bcIMC) is planning north of the Bed, Bath & Beyond store at Third and Virginia.

bcIMC, which bought the property late last year for $17.75 million, is one of Canada's largest institutional fund managers. It manages more than $114.0 billion (CAD) of assets for public-sector pension plans and other clients.

The bcIMC representative, who asked not to be named, said there's no construction start date for the tower, which he said will have 433 apartments. Crews from Sellen Construction are just doing "really preliminary" work that will expedite building of the tower once the owner decides to build the tower.

The city OK'd the project in 2007, before the Great Recession. In November 2013, the city issued the construction permit to bcIMC's local representative, Bentall Kennedy, just ahead of bcIMC's acquisition of the property.

This spring, the city gave the project team a permit to install a construction power system, and two weeks ago Sellen got a noise variance to pour "high-strength concrete" for an electrical duct bank in the street right-of-way.

The Third and Virginia property is three blocks from Amazon.com's future high-rise campus. It's also near two other large projects now under construction, a 40-story luxury apartment development at 204 Pine St., and a hotel and apartment development at First and Stewart.

Page 1
2
|View All


http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/b...n-seattle.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3578  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2014, 6:09 AM
alki alki is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,647
Residences Down & Retail Up For 901 Harrison Mixed-User



http://seattle.curbed.com/archives/2...-mixeduser.php
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3579  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2014, 6:12 AM
alki alki is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,647
Mixed-Use Complex Bringing The 'Minnie' Back to 1st & Denny

Monday, October 27, 2014, by Sean Keeley




http://seattle.curbed.com/archives/2...-1st-denny.php
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3580  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2014, 9:21 PM
joeg1985 joeg1985 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 324
Great photo update Vashon.

Are they already starting construction on the second tower at Insignia? Is that what the crane in the picture is for?
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:37 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.