Thursday, March 17, 2011

Best practices lost in transaction

I am truly sorry, but not very surprised, that the Ecovillage project died. I thought the concept of live/work space was great and one of the selling points at conception was to have eyes and ears in River Landing on a 24/7 basis.

What I don't understand is why funding could not be secured if 60 of the 65 units were pre-sold, which I assume they were based on the fact that 60 people put deposits down. I can only guess that the cost of building to a LEEDS platinum standard were astronomical and that the units could not be constructed for the pre-sold estimates.

What causes me further concern is that the city allowed this property to be tied up on this project for years without any diligence testing on the developer or without penalty for not proceeding with the purchase.

Deposits on real estate offers are generally required to show good faith on the part of the purchaser and conditions generally have tight time lines in order to prevent the prospective purchasers from tying up property on lost ventures. In fact this developer secured the property at 2008 prices and didn't have to put any money down until they requested the extension last year. Clearly conditions where is place that allowed the developer to recover the deposit thus having nothing to lose if they dragged their feet. In essence the developer had nothing to lose and much to gain. Very strange.

Although as taxpayers we lost potential revenue from this land for years, the up side is that the value of the land has increased by several million dollars - assuming of course that council will now sell the land for its current value. That may be a big assumption on my part.

On the down side we could have another publicly funded project and get nothing but debt and increased taxation. Ah, I digress. Just last week the Mayor said budgets were now being driven on a strictly needs basis.


  1. The greenies are willing to insist on their LEEDS standards when taxpayers are footing the bill (eg. Sean Shaw wanting a LEED swimming pool with a payback period of almost 2 centuries) but aren't inclined to pay the full freight themselves.

    Just check out Vancouver's Olympic Village as no buyers want to pony up for the lease costs of the energy use monitors in the Condos. The company in charge of the development went into receivership and the City of Vancouver is ready to take a financial bath.

    Oh, the Olympic Village won the Excellence in Green Building Practices Award and has been heralded as the greenest neighbourhood on the planet. Unfortunately that green neighbourhood is currently a very expensive ghost town.

  2. Wow I didn't realize that the Olympic Village was in such dire straits. Just another example of how shrouding any project in the cloak of being for 'the environment' immediately scares off any criticism. Whatever project you want to do just put Eco in front of it and people will not even question it.

    It is one of the great successes of the Environmental Agenda that is perpetuated by the greenies. If you even doubt the feasibility of a project aimed at conserving the environment you are deemed evil. Not only that but they dupe the Government into paying exorbitant prices by holding them hostage to their agenda.

    Good bye Eco-Village and hello to feasible realistic project.....unless the Station 20 people get involved and try to save this money pit as well......a government subsidized upscale Eco-Village?

  3. break out the tinfoil hats!

  4. I wonder if Mr. Wallace or city planning has any further information to add. I think this was stinky from the start.... and we would have been paying for it ?

  5. Does anyone else find it a bit ironic that the likes of Clark and Hill were continually all over the Lake Placid project demanding more info, more accountability, more this and more that while that joke of a project Eco Village slide along under the radar for years?


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.