development approval process

C1: DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL PROCESS – WHAT DIFFERENCES AFFECT COMMERCIAL LEASES MODERATOR: GARY POONI, PRESIDENT, BROOK POONI & ASSOCIATES INC. PANEL: ANDREW LAURIE, SENIOR ASSOCIATE, OFFICE LEASING, CUSHMAN & WAKEFIELD LTD. GEOFF NAGLE, DIRECTOR, DEVELOPMENT, WESTERN CANADA, MORGUARD INVESTMENTS GORDON WYLIE, VICE PRESIDENT, DEVELOPMENT, IVANHOE CAMBRIDGE Development Approval Process
What Differences Effect Commercial Leases?
Gordon Wylie
VP Development, Ivanhoe Cambridge
November 1st 2012
VANCOUVER REAL ESTATE
LEASING CONFERNECE
Presentation Outline
•!
Developer’s Dream
•!
Case Studies (Metro Vancouver)
1.!
2.!
3.!
•!
Metropolis @ Metrotown
Guildford Town Centre
Oakridge Centre
Approval Processes – Key Lessons
VANCOUVER REAL ESTATE
LEASING CONFERNECE
Developer’s Dream
VANCOUVER REAL ESTATE
LEASING CONFERNECE
-<A>B<:>;;$
!9:;<;=>:?@$
*C>D<?=EF<B<=@$
!&/-.4,-7I$
2GE=$EC>$@9J$B99K<:L$M9CN$
*EC=:>C;G<H$
Case Studies
VANCOUVER REAL ESTATE
LEASING CONFERNECE
%>P>B9HA>:=$
-<A>MCEA>$
*C9O>?=$$
1) Metropolis
@ Metrotown
Burnaby
2) Guildford
Town Centre
Surrey
3) Oakridge
Centre
Vancouver
"
TUUT$V$TUUW$
$
.HHC9PEB;#$:;"7<"
!9:;=CJ?Q9:$ %>P>B9HA>:=$
'EBJ>$
*C9LCEA$
$
$
XYU$+$
$
$
Z$W[\$
&RHE:;<9:$
/>:9PEQ9:$
$
$
()2$]$
+&%48+$
$
$
XTYU$+$
$
$
Z$"`W\$
.:?G9C$
Z$TUU\$!/8$
$
$
+&%48+$
$
$
bX"$c$
$
$
Ud^$50/$Vb$
_dW$50/$
$
$
3463$
"
!9:;=CJ?Q9:#$:="7<"
$
TUU^$V$TU"_$
$
.HHC9PEB;#$;>"7<"
"
!9:;=CJ?Q9:#$?@"7<"
"
*9B<?@$TUU`$VU[$
/>a9:<:L$$
!"#!$%$#&$
$
.HHC9PEB;#$AB"7<"
"
!9:;=CJ?Q9:#$@B"7<"
.HHC9PEB$
!9AHB>R<=@$
S$/<;K$
1) Metrotown: Burnaby
VANCOUVER REAL ESTATE
LEASING CONFERNECE
*C>VTUUW$
1) Metrotown pre-2005: Burnaby
&E=9:$!>:=C>$
VANCOUVER REAL ESTATE
LEASING CONFERNECE
+>=C9=9e:$!>:=C>$
)(%$(4,\$
&%/$&"*'$%"
/)("/5*,"
)(%$5))%$
!)8/-$f("g$
1) Metrotown post-2005: Burnaby
&E=9:$!>:=C>$
,&2$(4,\$
VANCOUVER REAL ESTATE
LEASING CONFERNECE
+>=C9=9e:$!>:=C>$
,&2$5))%$
!)8/-$f(Tg$
&%/$&"*'$%"
/)("/5*,"
1) Metrotown: Burnaby
VANCOUVER REAL ESTATE
LEASING CONFERNECE
•!
Consistency of planning
•!
Timely approval phased approval process allowed
construction to proceed quickly
•!
Predictably of process allowed for smooth leasing
negotiations
•!
City saw us as a responsible partner and viewed
commercial component as a community amenity
•!
Certainty helped to deliver a risky project quickly and
minimized risk to all
•!
Our success was their success
2) Guildford Town Centre: Surrey
VANCOUVER REAL ESTATE
LEASING CONFERNECE
*C>VTUUW$
The Bay
Sears
Wal Mart
2) Guildford Town Centre: Surrey
•!
Walmart wanted
to expand
•!
City had denied
approvals to the
Tenant on other
sites
•!
IC wanted to
renovate and
expand Centre
VANCOUVER REAL ESTATE
LEASING CONFERNECE
2) Guildford Town Centre: Surrey
VANCOUVER REAL ESTATE
LEASING CONFERNECE
Worked with City as a partner to create a sensitive
design
•!
City worked to solve timing issues on approvals
•!
City trusted us to deliver
•!
The needs of the owner & the tenant were treated as
a partnership in City building
•!
2) Guildford Town Centre: Surrey
VANCOUVER REAL ESTATE
LEASING CONFERNECE
3) Oakridge Centre: Vancouver VANCOUVER REAL ESTATE
LEASING CONFERNECE
3) Oakridge Centre: Vancouver VANCOUVER REAL ESTATE
LEASING CONFERNECE
Masterplan
•!
Crate & Barrel
•!
Target
•!
TIPS Program
•!
)H>:<:L$+EC?G$"_$$
Approvals: Good v. Bad
VANCOUVER REAL ESTATE
LEASING CONFERNECE
\>@$5E?=9C;$$
699D$
cED$
Same approach across
municipalities
Municipalities as silos
Adapt to situation,
segment
implementation$
Longer to approve
than build$
City respects
implications of leasing
process with anchors
Business milestones are
not integrated in
approval timelines
Partnership
"
City as partner
"
City as adversary"
Certainty
"
Clear policies
"
Ad hoc policies
Consistency
Timeliness
Predictability
Thank-you
Uptown Case Study
November 1, 2012
Approvals Process Optimization
•! Base Assumption: project proposed is a
positive addition to the community
•!Clearly NOT advocating for easy approval of
bad projects
Where We Were
June 2012
Where We Were
Where We Are
Uptown
•! 860,000 sf urban mixed-use neighbourhood
•! LEED ND Gold overall project
•! Individual LEED Gold certified buildings
•! the most significant project proposed in Saanich in
decades
•! Catalyst project that will define and set the
standard for the emerging urban core of the
community
•! Could easily have become bogged down in the
approval process
Approvals Process Optimization
•! TIMELINESS
•!CERTAINTY / PREDICTABILITY
•!FLEXIBILITY
Timeliness : Concerns going in
•! anti-development reputation of Saanich and
southern Vancouver Island
•!Local politics of a divided council
•!Capacity/experience of city staff
•!Construction costs escalation
•!Availability of trades
•!Timelines of anchor-tenant lease terms
•!Ownership structure/opportunity cost
Timeliness: Result
•! 6 months from time of application to approval of
Development Permit for Uptown
•!Unanimous vote supporting the approval of the DP
at Saanich council
Certainty/Predictability
•! Staff and council did what they said they were
going to do, in time frames proposed at start of
process
•! We did what we said we were going to do, in time
frames proposed at the start of the process
•! Contrast to Vancouvers CAC process
Flexibility
•! DP achieved late 2007
•! Construction start May 2008 for Phase 1
•! Anchor office tenant identified late 2008,
necessitating acceleration of one office building by 6
months
•! Increased office demand identified, justifying DP
amendment
Flexibility: Results
•! Phased Occupancy approvals achieved in Phase 1,
allowing office workers in building to which streets
not yet accessible (!)
•! 1814 stall parking variance from existing bylaw
achieved
•! 200,000 sf of Class A LEED Gold office space
added to the project
•! if you want 1959 style development, hold to a
1959 parking bylaw…
Uptown Case Study
November 1, 2012
BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS •  The Scenario • 120
Days until expiry
• 5,000 SF
rentable area
• $200,000
renovation costs
+5'3(')4"#%$7'*"#$,0%&&"
•! 0IJK"<L"9GFE<MNDH"
8,$-')4"
($/8')4&"
#3/)"
06%0-%$"
0'*O"
#3/))')4"
,22'0%"
#%$7'*"
'&&5%("
,)"&'*%"
')&#%0*',)"
#'0-"5#"
#%$7'*"
>"8DDPQ"
R;!BBB1BB"STU"
+5'3(')4"#%$7'*"#$,0%&&"
•! 0IJK"<L"9GFE<MNDH"V"*DFGFJ"
'WXH<NDWDFJ"#H<YHGW"Z*'#[""
8,$-')4"
($/8')4&"
#3/)"
06%0-%$"
0'*O"
#3/))')4"
,22'0%"
#%$7'*"
'&&5%("
,)"&'*%"
')&#%0*',)"
#'0-"5#"
#%$7'*"
\"(/O&"
R:!B=]1BB"
+5'3(')4"#%$7'*"#$,0%&&"
•! 0IJK"<L"+MHFG^K"
8,$-')4"
($/8')4&"
#3/)"
06%0-%$"
0'*O"
#3/))')4"
,22'0%"
#%$7'*"
'&&5%("
,)"&'*%"
')&#%0*',)"
#'0-"5#"
#%$7'*"
>U="8%%-&"
R;!BBB1BB"STU"
+5'3(')4"#%$7'*"#$,0%&&"
•! 0IJK"<L"$IECW<F_"
8,$-')4"
($/8')4&"
#3/)"
06%0-%$"
0'*O"
#3/))')4"
,22'0%"
#%$7'*"
'&&5%("
,)"&'*%"
')&#%0*',)"
#'0-"5#"
#%$7'*"
@U:;"8%%-&"
R;!BB\1BB"
+5'3(')4"#%$7'*"#$,0%&&"
•! 0IJK"<L"&MHHDK"
8,$-')4"
($/8')4&"
#3/)"
06%0-%$"
0'*O"
#3/))')4"
,22'0%"
#%$7'*"
'&&5%("
,)"&'*%"
')&#%0*',)"
#'0-"5#"
#%$7'*"
>"8%%-&"
R;!BBB1BB"STU"
+MI`_IFY"#DHWIJ"#H<EDQQ"
•! &MWWGHK"
(GKQ"<L"
aGIbFYc"
=>"
\@"
;="
;="
\"
9GFE<MNDH"
*'#"
+MHFG^K"
$IECW<F_"
&MHHDK"
+MI`_IFY"#DHWIJ"#H<EDQQ"
•! &MWWGHK"
(GKQ"S"0<QJ"
R;!\BB""
=>"
\@"
R;!BBB""
R:!\BB""
R:!BBB""
;="
;="
R\BB""
\"
RB""
9GFE<MNDH"
*'#"
+MHFG^K"
$IECW<F_"
&MHHDK"
C1: DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL PROCESS – WHAT DIFFERENCES AFFECT COMMERCIAL LEASES MODERATOR: GARY POONI, PRESIDENT, BROOK POONI & ASSOCIATES INC. PANEL: ANDREW LAURIE, SENIOR ASSOCIATE, OFFICE LEASING, CUSHMAN & WAKEFIELD LTD. GEOFF NAGLE, DIRECTOR, DEVELOPMENT, WESTERN CANADA, MORGUARD INVESTMENTS GORDON WYLIE, VICE PRESIDENT, DEVELOPMENT, IVANHOE CAMBRIDGE