Tomorrow is the official announcement but I went down to the sales centre on Sunday, which was hopping. All kinds of people had driven down on a whim to take a look and then parked their cars once they found out they could tour the four presentation suites available. (In contrast to the picture I’m posting here of the sales centre, the gawkers were a very diverse crowd.)

Shierley Chelliah and her parents were scouting them out while I was there. They said they hadn’t even bothered checking the village before, because they thought the prices were too high for them. They — along with quite a few others I stopped and spoke to — had been enticed to take a look by news that units would be 30 per cent lower than before, on average, with some up to 50 per cent.

Those kinds of discounts weren’t in evidence with the four suites being shown off, though there were discounts of up to $350,000. That was on the two-bedroom that was previously $1.3 million. (Picture of the living room posted below.) A larger one bedroom (862 SF) was being listed at 599,900 instead of $695,000 and a smaller one-bedroom (812 SF, with a bedroom not large enough for a queen bed) was $539,000, down from $684,900.

For amateur presentation-suite hounds, the four units have all been decorated by different firms and are very lovely. Wouldn’t look like that if I moved in, is all I know.

Some realtors are disgruntled with the pre-launch activities, though. One called Jeff Lee at the Sun (his blog post and story here, with Mr. Rennie in full flight) and one called me.  Apparently Rennie Marketing invited down some people from the list of interested buyers they’ve been maintaining and gave them a chance to buy in advance on the weekend.

I’m told this is a practice in the development industry used to pre-test prices and make sure they’re pitched right to attract people. That’s what Rennie said he was doing, by getting 25 buyers committed in the four price categories they’re marketing.

But a few realtors were mad because they lost clients and commissions, as a result. The one who phoned me said that, although he’s used to that kind of thing on other developments, he thought a city-owned project would be more above-board.

Just goes to prove my theory that anything that happens at the village becomes news when it wouldn’t be news on another development.

That’s all the bits and pieces of news for today. I’d be interested to hear what people thinking of the prices and suites, if they visited already or visit tomorrow.

Vancouver has seen massive protests in the past over expanded gaming. This time, the opposition has been strangely slow to muster. I looked at why, in brief.

One thing I noted, but didn’t have spaceto go into, is the lack of political leadership.

Every party has a mixed record on this. Although the NPA led the charge against the Steve Wynn casino in the mid-1990s, the NPA’s two councillors voted differently on increasing the slots at Hastings Racetrack in 2004. Peter Ladner was against, while Sam Sullivan, in what was viewed as a mysterious about–face, supported them.

Opposing the Paragon Gaming proposal for the new casino is tricky for the NPA now, as well, because it was the NPA council that agreed to the province’s aggressive push to get the city to allow more density around BC Place in order to find a way to pay for the stadium’s renovations. At the time, people thought that would mean lots of condos.

If Concord Pacific — the only other bidder on the land besides Paragon Gaming — had been successful, that’s what might have happened. But, to no one’s suprise, they weren’t the successful bidder.

As for Vision — well, several of the Vision (then COPE) councillors also supported increased slots at both the racetrack and a casino at Edgewater under the then-leadership of Larry Campbell, who went on to become a director in his post-council life at the Great Canadian Gaming Corporation. It was the most unpopular decision the COPE council made. But many union members were supportive of slots and casinos, as a way of preserving jobs.

And, according to the record, as the Georgia Straight noted, COPE Councillor David Cadman was also on the pro side of Edgewater casino vote in 2004. Ellen Woodsworth was absent, but she was getting a lot of pressure from women’s groups who received casino money to support it.

We heard the anti-bike lane case from Rob Macdonald last week. In fairness, here’s the counter-argument from Peter Ladner. This column appeared in Business in Vancouver.

“What do you think of the new bike lanes on Hornby Street?” asked my Aunt Glo over dinner a few weeks ago.

She’s in her 80s and uses a walker.

“I hate them,” she said. “Last week I had to go downtown for a lunch and my taxi was backed up along Hornby. Do you know how many bikes there were in the bike lanes?”

This is the latest from Justason Market Intelligence, which has gone in for a series of polls on civic issues this year. (Usually, we have no idea what people are thinking in this town til close to election day.)

Interesting numbers on Vision Vancouver, the mayor, casinos, bike lanes and more.

Barb Justason notes that, even though polling numbers have improved for Vision, the disapproval ratings for the mayor are holding steady, as are disapproval numbers for issues like the handling of the Olympic village and the Hornby bike lane.

Going through the 112-page report from the Olympic village receivers in detail makes it clear that getting the village into an upward spiral is not going to be easy. I itemize a few of the interlocked problems here.

The receivers don’t mention it, but part of the problem is that the village has become a political football.

Vision Vancouver campaigners piled on during the election, making hay of the news that it was over-budget and that the city had had to start lending money. After the election, they blamed the previous administration for all kinds of bad decisions.

Now, NPAers and those affiliated with them seem to revel in leaked documents that portend disaster and are out in front of every microphone predicting losses in the $100-million-plus range.

In both cases, it’s been like the anti-marketing campaign of all time.

So, with that as the backdrop, the report paints a picture of interlocking problems where no one solution appears ideal and every move affects all the other pieces. Drop the prices too much or sell it off in bulk — the city definitely loses money and the equity of existing buyers is eroded. Rent some units? Helps populate the village, but it comes with all kinds of hidden costs. Hold some units back from the market since it’s too much to sell in one go? Helps reduce the competition for the existing units, but the city has to pay interest and strata fees for everything it holds back.

Some of what’s in the report are the standard issues that are part of any development project in the city. Although it might seem as though real estate in Vancouver sells itself, in fact there are developments that get into trouble and have to try new tactics to sell themselves. Or, like the village, they have people moving in who are unhappy about things that don’t work.

(Like the Woodward’s project, where all I heard from residents for months after the move-in was how much griping was going on about the counters — apparently they weren’t sealed properly, so they stained with red wine or lemon juice. Fixed now, but my goodness, the carrying on.)

The difference here is that, because this is now a public project, we get to sit in on every marketing meeting (or the equivalent) and hear exactly what strategies the receiver and marketer are going to try. And everyone becomes an armchair expert in what they’re doing right or wrong.

People have been waiting for four months, ever since the Olympic village went into receivership, to see what the strategy was going to be. Rumours of bulk buyers (someone who would take the whole project off the city’s hands at garage-sale prices) abounded. Plus there was a lot of sideline advice about what to do with this or that piece.

As my story here indicates, it appears the final plan (due to be filed with the court sometime this morning) will be a mix of a little this, a little that. Yes, reduced prices: up to 50 per cent on a couple of condos, with an average reduction of 30 per cent.

Some condos will be held back from sale; some will be rented out. That means not selling everything at once in desperation (so no “fire sale,” as some were hoping and as some might infer from the decreases), but moving to get it populated.

The maintenance fees for both existing and future buyers will be lowered, because of a decision to absorb the costs of the health-club’s mortgage and an expensive lease on the EnerPro energy-use monitors in every suite.

Oh, and no more Millennium Water. Instead, The Village on False Creek.

Rob Macdonald is well-known in the development world (best-known holdings or developments include the St. Regis Hotel at Dunsmuir and Seymour and the Hudson/Shore Club building next door that he announced as his first celebratory project when the NDP were defeated in 2001).

But he’s been stepping out into the media world more lately, with columns on the Olympic village mess (blaming various city administrations for their bad decisionsand now, this week, on bike lanes.

I’ve been hearing rumours from people in both Vision and the NPA that he’s thinking of running for council. If he does, he won’t have any shortage of strong opinions. His speech to the Urban Development Institute a year ago went around like wildfire.

In spite of his reputation for outspokenness, he tends to be mild-mannered, almost courtly, in private conversations. If he did enter politics, there’s one guarantee: He wouldn’t be dull.

Here’s his salvo on bike lanes.

[Read more →]

We love the Canada Line, but not because of its stations — concrete boxes that are as utilitarian as you can get (with not enough stair or escalator space already).

Not like here.

Someone has been emailing this doc to bloggers here, there and everywhere.

Due to a technical glitch, I can’t put up the PDF I got, but it’s the same thing as here on the Citycaucus blog. This is in response to city manager Penny Ballem’s recent memo, which detailed the rate of staff turnover to show that staff aren’t leaving in droves. That seems to have stirred up a hornet’s nest inside city hall.

I feel obliged to note for the record that the blog Civicscene seems to be in a coma. No posts, no tweets since Jan. 6. The blog, written by ommunications guy, sometime Liberal campaign organizer Jonathan Ross, made a few headlines last fall with news reports that he seemed to be getting paid for the blog by the same communications firm working for the mayor’s office.

I have no idea what has happened. Perhaps Jonathan can elaborate.

On the other hand, the anti-Vision Citycaucus blog, run by two people who worked closely with former mayor Sam Sullivan, seems to be going wild for tweeting. More tweets than most journalists I know who work full-time at this stuff.

A quick count in the last four days shows 23 tweets in the previous 24 hours, 18 tweets on Sunday (I know that seems like an overlap, but that’s how Twitter labels them), 28 on Saturday, 27 on Friday, and a startling 75 on the previous Thursday. (There was a going-away thingie for Gordon Campbell, plus news tidbits emerging out of John Furlong’s new book accounting for a large chunk of that.)

Sounds like someone is going to be ready for the civic election.