PDA

You are viewing a trimmed-down version of the SkyscraperPage.com discussion forum.  For the full version follow the link below.

View Full Version : [Surrey] Park Avenue | 145m & 133m | 36 & 40 Floors | U/C



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

westcoast604
Sep 25, 2007, 7:58 PM
http://www.slurrey.com/images/skytowersrendering1.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/vannmann/sry.gif

Developer: Young-In Development
Use: Residential
Location: 137th St & 100 Ave

http://www.skycentralcity.com


Two high rise condominium projects are set to help define the skyline of Surrey’s City Centre.

The 36 and 40-storey Sky Towers are being developed by Young In Development headed up by CEO and South Korean businessman Hee Yong Yang. He is the same developer that took over responsibility for Surrey’s Infinity Towers.

The two new towers are expected to cost about $350 million and include 900 housing units.

When complete, the two structures will be the tallest buildings found between Vancouver and Calgary.

In addition to the housing units, each tower will feature a sky top solarium with a 50-foot glass atrium as well as a 4,000 square foot terrace.

The architect of the project said that he took an unusual approach to the development.

“We made the rooftop fully accessible to the residents,” says Patrick Cotter, from Patrick Cotter Architecture Inc.

He added that the top of such structures is generally considered prime real estate and not designed for the majority of tenants.

“The view is going to be so striking, it didn’t seem fair to give it one penthouse owner,” he says.

Cotter added that the top of the buildings will be quite distinctive.

“They (politicians in Surrey) wanted buildings that will be landmarks,” he says. “And these buildings accomplish that.”

The towers will make the most of adjacent green space and the 360 view of the Lower Mainland.

“We wanted to take full advantage of the unique site and setting for the new buildings,” he says.

Scheduled amenities include two entertainment rooms for large parties, two double height lounges, two theatre rooms and a 2,383 square foot fitness centre. All seven towers are a $1 billion endeavour and are expected to bring 2,900 housing units to market.

Infinity’s first tower is scheduled for completion in early 2008 with the second and third towers currently under construction.

They are expected to be completed in 2009.

The 36-storey SkyTower should be built by 2010 with the 40-storey tower scheduled to be completed the following year.

“The plan is to transform it (Surrey’s Central City) into a downtown core,” says Bryon Lee, a spokesman for Yang.

“The Infinity project was a cornerstone project in changing Surrey.”

He said that Yang recognized a need for this type of development.

“We see there is a lot of demand,” he said. “He saw an opportunity there.” The company, Incorporated Jung Developments, headed up by Yang, took over financing and construction of all five Infinity Towers after the first developer was unable to complete the project.

Yang moved to Vancouver in 2004 from South Korea, where he found success as the founder of the fast food chicken franchise Pelicana.

The fast food chain includes more than 2,000 restaurants across the country. Infinity and Sky Towers are Yang’s first foray into condominium development, although he has developed property as part of his fast food chicken franchise.

giallo
Sep 26, 2007, 1:40 AM
Solid looking towers. Any colour renderings?

Volksboi
Sep 26, 2007, 2:05 AM
Yea I agree, you wont be able to reconize surrey soon

Cypherus
Sep 27, 2007, 1:15 AM
Surrey is starting to give Metrotown a run for its money when it comes to high-rise clusters outside of downtown Vancouver.

Canadian Mind
Sep 27, 2007, 4:46 AM
those are... big. What is the floorplate on the 40 storey building? looks alot more than the typical 10 000-12 000 point tower... looks more like a 20-25 000 square foot Philadelphia commie-block tower... but with a much nicer exterior.

officedweller
Sep 27, 2007, 8:36 PM
The floorplate on the first Infinity tower is bigger than a Vancouver tower, too.

Looks like the scale of some of Surrey's buildings will be more "big city" (height and width) than Vancouver's.


**************
Anyone else notice that there are two versions of the renderings?

The one above shows the mechanical penthouse enclosed with a rectangular glass box - the latest ones I've seen in the newspaper show the mechanical penthouse enclosed with a taller wedge-shaped structure (which I'm not sure if I like).

Here's the pic from Canada.com. Only one is visible in the pic, but both have the same mechanical penthouse.

http://cdn.travidia.com/rop-sub/17759857

http://cdn.travidia.com/rop-ad/5079618

raggedy13
Sep 28, 2007, 2:04 AM
Well the wedge thing certainly makes them look a little less run-of-the-mill. Depending on how they pull it off, it could end up looking a little too tacked on though.

paradigm4
Sep 28, 2007, 4:33 AM
This is a picture of Inifinity Phase II beginning construction, but behind it, across the street, on the right side of the pic, is where the Sky Towers will be built.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1343/1449795297_29f645fa87.jpg

westcoast604
Sep 28, 2007, 6:34 AM
^ By Surrey Towers, you mean Sky Towers - Thread topic.

It looks as though Infinity 3 is also under construction in that pic. Infinity 2 would be off to the far left of the pit, behind the underground parking structure. You can see the elevator shaft starting to form for the 3rd tower to the right. Maybe we will see another crane go up soon?

officedweller
Sep 28, 2007, 7:28 PM
That makes sense, as towers 2 and 3 were sold together as Phase 2.

westcoast604
Sep 28, 2007, 8:58 PM
^Correcto..and Towers 2 & 3 were both included on the same development permit application.

androo3
Oct 2, 2007, 6:02 PM
I am a little confused with regard to this development. By the looks of the address these towers are right by the Infinity. Are they in the same area as infinity which would make them Infinity 4 and 5? Or are these the towers across the street that was going to be king george tower at 80 storeys but is now 2 towers half the size. Now either way those were both Jung not young in. So is Young In a spin off of Jung Developments or is this something new and I am totally lost as to where they are going?

westcoast604
Oct 2, 2007, 7:35 PM
These two towers are across the street from the 5-tower Infinity project. It is a separate development. Yes it is on the speculated site of the proposed 80-storey tower. That site was never confirmed though, just rumoured as the same site as this, on this board. So this could quite possibly have nothing to do with the once proposed Jung 80-Storey tower proposal, that wasn't even an official proposal to begin with.

androo3
Oct 3, 2007, 5:33 AM
Thanks that clears it up for me!

Calgarian
Oct 3, 2007, 5:43 AM
Looks like Surrey is adopting the "Calgary Twin" desigh (twin towers with different heights), hopefully this doesn't happen with a lot of your towers.

raggedy13
Oct 3, 2007, 6:29 AM
^Too late I'm afraid, the "Calgary Twin" design is already fairly common among suburban condos as well as those in downtown Vancouver. Personally I'd prefer it if some of them (especially the ones downtown - if it weren't for height restrictions) were just combined into a taller tower.

Calgarian
Oct 3, 2007, 4:36 PM
I would prefer to have 2 different towers than twins personally.

raggedy13
Oct 5, 2007, 10:08 AM
Sky Towers to help transform Surrey Central
Towers the cornerstone of new downtown community

Michael Kane, Vancouver Sun
Published: Friday, October 05, 2007

http://media.canada.com/8975269b-0529-4353-a446-596d133824d2/SKYtowers%201.jpg?size=l

Surrey's Central City area will get the two tallest towers between Vancouver and Calgary under plans unveiled Thursday by a Korean businessman.

The 36-storey and 40-storey residential Sky Towers will be directly across the street from the five Infinity highrises being built at the King George SkyTrain station in the formerly run-down Whalley neighbourhood.

With the first Infinity tower ready for occupancy in January, and four more towers on the way, the addition of the Sky Towers enhances the city's goal of turning Central City into Surrey's downtown community, Mayor Dianne Watts said in an interview.

This really fits into our vision for our city centre," Watts said. "The seven towers here are going to be just the cornerstone for the whole entrance into city centre."

She said applications are being processed for several more towers, both residential and commercial, over the next five years.

Hee Yong 'Edmond' Yang, who operates a 2,000-outlet fried chicken franchise in South Korea, took over the Infinity project after the previous developer, also Korean, faltered under a heavy debt load.

Designed by Patrick Cotter Architects, Sky Towers will contain 900 one- and two-bedroom suites, as well as 56 townhouses, with studios starting at $179,900.

Each tower will include a 1,000-square-foot rooftop solarium with 50-foot glass atriums, along with a 4,000 square foot rooftop patio offering unrestricted views.

The 36-storey Sky Tower is scheduled for completion in 2010, followed by the 40-storey tower.

"With Sky Towers and the Infinity project, we're looking to build a dense urban mecca," said Cameron McNeill of MAC Real Estate Marketing Solutions.

At its heart is the Surrey campus of Simon Fraser University, along with shops, restaurants and recreational facilities, all within walking distance of SkyTrain.

"If we look ahead five or 10 years, Central City is going to be one of the most significant urban centres in Western Canada," McNeill said in an interview. "Surrey is one of Canada's fastest growing cities and this is their downtown core."

Unlike Burnaby's Metrotown, which he likened to a mall surrounded by residential highrises, McNeill said Central City will become "a fully-integrated urban centre in a most modern sense, a mini downtown Vancouver."

With 150 homes priced at less than $250,000 -- almost half the cost of similar units in Vancouver -- he said it will also be highly affordable.

By "trying to deliver high-quality residences at affordable prices," Yang, 46, is living up to the three principles that have governed his life, said his spokesperson, lawyer Byron Lee.

"First of all you have to be a good person with a good heart. Secondly, whatever you do, you should try to do things righteously and honestly. Thirdly, you shouldn't be in business only to make money but you should aim at benefitting others."

Lee said Yang, who immigrated to Canada with his wife and three children in 2002, is looking for opportunities to build additional homes in the area.

"He thinks Central City will become a vibrant downtown community. It's very livable with a lot of amenities."

TOWERS IN THE SKY

- When complete, the combined Infinity and Sky Towers project will include seven highrise buildings located near the King George SkyTrain station in the Central City area of Surrey.

- The combined development will add 2,900 condominium suites to the area and is worth $1 billion.

- The second and third Infinity towers are under construction and are expected to be completed in 2009. A total of five Infinity towers will be built.

- Sky Towers presales will start later this month for 900 units which include studios, one- and two-bedroom units, and townhouses. Prices start at $179,900, with 150 units under $250,000.

Who's behind the project:

- Hee Yong (Edmond) Yang is CEO of Young In Development which has taken over financing and construction of both Infinity and Sky Towers.

- Yang is a founder of Pelicana, a chicken franchise that began with one restaurant in Daejeon, South Korea, in 1982 and has now grown to over 2,000 restaurants, meat packing plants and warehouses, according to a press release.

- Yang says he moved from South Korea to Vancouver in 2002 to find a better life for his family.

SFUVancouver
Oct 5, 2007, 10:27 AM
A fifteen-storey banner for Sky Towers has been hung on the first Infinity tower.

Volksboi
Oct 5, 2007, 9:45 PM
Yea I walked by there today, great marketing idea....Cant wait to see this all finished...

androo3
Oct 9, 2007, 6:27 PM
I knew they were the same developer... Figured something was up with Jung. So both Infinty and Sky are the same developer.

officedweller
Oct 9, 2007, 9:34 PM
More interesting is that Jung "faltered under heavy debt". Glad to see that the project was taken over and will proceed.

and this tidbit - which must be the pointy part of the new roof design.
Each tower will include a 1,000-square-foot rooftop solarium with 50-foot glass atriums, along with a 4,000 square foot rooftop patio offering unrestricted views.

vanman
Oct 9, 2007, 10:50 PM
^ I was going to mention that point as well . That sounds really cool. It may turn out to look quite ugly from the outside but imagine if you lived there having access to a 50 foot atrium and rooftop patio atop a 40 storey building . If I where looking to buy a condo in the area those amenities would be enough to lure me in.

vanman
Oct 9, 2007, 10:59 PM
dp

westcoast604
Oct 23, 2007, 9:17 PM
http://www.joconl.com/images/archivesid/24658/300.jpg

Oct. 10, 2007

Surrey mayor Dianne Watts and developer Hee Yong Yang shake hands in front of the architectural models of the Sky Towers at a press conference in Surrey October 4. The event was held in the unfinished lobby of the first of five Infinity Towers in Surrey, for which Yang is also the developer. The seven towers are a $1 billion investment that will bring more than 2,900 housing units to market. When completed the Sky Towers will be tallest buildings between downtown Vancouver and Calgary and will feature unique top-floor atriums atop the 36- and 40-storey buildings.

Bradley Fehr

http://www.joconl.com/article/id24658

Canadian Mind
Oct 23, 2007, 9:43 PM
any idea how tall in meters or feet these buildings will be? I'm venturing to guess between 420 and 460 feet.

SpongeG
Oct 23, 2007, 10:16 PM
that one building in surrey - the one almost done has a big banner for sky tower along its side - looks neat

slurrey
Oct 26, 2007, 6:25 AM
NEW RENDERS

http://www.slurrey.com/images/skytowersrendering1.jpg
http://www.slurrey.com/images/Sky_UnitB.jpg
http://www.slurrey.com/images/Sky_UnitD.jpg

East Van
Oct 26, 2007, 7:30 AM
any final heights ?

raggedy13
Oct 26, 2007, 10:25 AM
Thanks for the renderings slurrey. I love the roof structures on those towers. I'm also a fan of the less slender massing - those are some solid looking towers. They also have a nice art-deco-esque flavour to them. Way to go Surrey... making a great start at this whole densification thing.

Canadian Mind
Oct 26, 2007, 8:03 PM
Those are the kinda buildings I'd like to see south of False creek of just east of Downtown eastside. I love them. Very solid looking buildings, just wish they were 5-10 stories taller.

officedweller
Oct 26, 2007, 9:09 PM
Nice. Thanks.

Kinda wish the podiums were taller though.

vanman
Oct 26, 2007, 10:39 PM
Those buildings are going to sell fast. The views will be incredible and the interiors looks nicer than much more expensive buildings on the other side of the Fraser.Combine all that with the amenities plus the prime location next to skytrain and the affordable pricing and I wouldn't be surprised if most of the units are sold in the first month of sales.

westcoast604
Oct 27, 2007, 1:31 AM
Gourgious renderings. Does anyone know if the towers are fronting East Whalley Ring Rd or 100th Ave?

danby
Oct 27, 2007, 4:18 AM
WOW!

Very nice!

I will be looking into these!

The view on the top floor in the glassed area is going to be amazing!

renthefinn
Oct 27, 2007, 4:57 AM
Wow I'm not liking those kitchen cabinets!

danby
Oct 27, 2007, 9:27 PM
I like them..


Very modern! Most cabinet shops now are pushing wood like this now

raggedy13
Nov 6, 2007, 10:47 AM
From today's Vancouver Sun...

http://media.canada.com/1ceaa7d7-3889-4f4c-9003-991895e62419/Sky%20towers.jpg?size=l

Surrey's Sky Towers sell out

By Michael Kane, Vancouver Sun
Published: Monday, November 05, 2007

VANCOUVER - Surrey is Metro Vancouver's new condo capital after the recently announced 901-unit Sky Towers development sold out within 30 hours over the weekend.

A record 545 units were sold on Saturday, surpassing the previous one-day sales record of 536 units set at the Woodwards Towers in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside in April 2006. The remaining 356 units were sold on Sunday.

But there was none of the usual condo-mania with buyers sleeping on the sidewalk overnight, said sales manager Cam Good.

Saturday was an invitation-only affair for realtors and buyers who had done previous business with MAC Real Estate Marketing Solutions, as well as friends of developer Hee Yong 'Edmond' Yang.

"It was a very civilized affair on Saturday," Good said. "On Sunday, the public came and there were only about 15 people in line when I arrived, so I was worried based on past experiences. But by probably 11 a.m., we had 400 or 500 people in line."

The 36-storey and 40-storey Sky Towers in Surrey's Central City area are expected to be the tallest between Vancouver and Calgary when they are completed in 2010.

Designed by Patrick Cotter architects, each will include a 1,000-square-foot rooftop solarium with 50-foot glass atriums, along with a 4,000-square-foot rooftop patio offering unrestricted views.

With studios starting at $179,000 and upper-floor, two-bedroom units fetching more than $500,000, the total dollar value of the weekend sale was $280 million.

"We had condo-mania demand but chose to spread what normally happens in five hours over two days to give us the breathing room to deal with that much real estate," said Cameron McNeill of MAC Realty.

"People are just getting that this is going to be a significant urban centre 10 years down the road and they want to get in now."

Some 150 condos were priced as less than $250,000 - almost half the cost of similar units in Vancouver.

The towers are directly across the street from the five Infinity highrises being built at the King George SkyTrain station. Together the projects are valued at $1 billion and, along with the Surrey campus of Simon Fraser University, are being described as the nucleus of Surrey's first downtown community.

"This is the downtown of Surrey and most of the buyers I talked to believe that prices in Central City are going to close the gap with downtown Vancouver," Good said in an interview.

"About half of the buyers struck out the assignment privileges of their contracts, which would indicate that they are not short-term investors, that they are planning on completing.

"We did not have very many people planning to flip [their units] but we do have a lot of people thinking that they are going to get in now while it's affordable and be able to get some really high rents later."

Yang, the 46-year-old founder of a 2,000-outlet fried chicken franchise in South Korea, moved to Vancouver with his family in 2002. He took over the Infinity project after the previous developer, also a Korean, faltered under a heavy debt load.

mkane@png.canwest.com


© Vancouver Sun

vitc
Nov 6, 2007, 8:16 PM
Wow nice to see brisk sales - this will bring a ton of great projects online there!!

jo67sh
Nov 7, 2007, 11:23 PM
with a 5% downpayment and just another 5% in bond till completion,
when the bubble bursts, i can just see the korean developer aka.fast food chicken millionaire dressed up as a san diego chicken running around yelling "the SKY is falling, the SKY is falling!!":banana: :banana:

cornholio
Nov 8, 2007, 9:25 AM
"This is the downtown of Surrey and most of the buyers I talked to believe that prices in Central City are going to close the gap with downtown Vancouver," Good said in an interview.

Good luck waiting 50+ years when the supply of available land is finally exhausted and demand can really be higher then supply. At the moment its all artificial, it will change and keep dreaming if you think the developers will be organized enough to keep demand artificially higher then supply. Condo prices in downtown Vancouver have a chance of weathering the coming storm but condos in the suburbs are going to get royally f*$&#d, I really don't want to get in to the details of why but many of you should know why already.

twoNeurons
Nov 8, 2007, 5:17 PM
I was considering buying into Surrey a year ago, but decided against it. It just doesn't seem like a wise time to invest, unless you've got something to sell at these prices first.

MolsonExport
Nov 8, 2007, 5:29 PM
Amazing stuff for my old stomping grounds. I worked for years on East Whalley Ring Road. The area was quite dilapidated back in those days (mid 90's).

vanman
Nov 18, 2007, 12:41 AM
According to an ad in New Home buyers guide:

"SOLD OUT! The biggest weekend sell-out in Canadian history.900 homes sold in 30 hours."

I'm guessing that a significant amount of the buyers are investors but still it's pretty insane.

SpongeG
Nov 18, 2007, 9:53 PM
when they (TV news) interview people waiting in line its usually people "afraid" of being priced out so they rush to buy now while they can still afford it

what they don't seem to klnow is there are so many older and probably bigger condos in surrey priced better

but i guess they want all sparkly and new

SpongeG
Nov 18, 2007, 9:54 PM
Cora is coming on - drove by the other night - the bedrooms are so tiny - they look about the size of a car

lucky if people can get a bed in there

cc85
Nov 19, 2007, 6:35 AM
look to see density near king george station to hit the 50 floor mark ;)

Lead
Nov 19, 2007, 6:46 AM
look to see density near king george station to hit the 50 floor mark ;)
Say what?

vanman
Nov 19, 2007, 7:43 AM
^That wouldn't surprise me.

LeftCoaster
Nov 19, 2007, 4:36 PM
Excuse my ignorance but what kind of height restrictions if any are there in Surrey? Are they actual height restrictions or is it primarily based on FSR?

Canadian Mind
Nov 19, 2007, 4:41 PM
Don't think there is any.

raggedy13
Nov 20, 2007, 1:13 AM
From what I can recall when that 80 storey tower was 'proposed', there wasn't any mention in the media about there being any height limits that would be a barrier to it becoming a reality. The only issue I could recall was that Surrey has (had?) some sort of policy in place that required developments to have a certain setback from the street proportional by some factor of its height, meaning the taller the tower, the greater the setback so a 900 ft tower would have to be set back 100ft from the road on all sides of the block or something ridiculous like that.

I'm not quite sure on the details but I know it was some sort of policy along those lines. All it would've required was some sort of amendment to their development policies though. I'm sure the issue has been fixed with all the highrises going up now though.

Anybody know/recall anything about this?

raggedy13
Nov 20, 2007, 1:27 AM
look to see density near king george station to hit the 50 floor mark ;)

Is this based on known information or just speculation? Either way I wouldn't be surprised by this at all. It didn't take Surrey very long to reach the 40 floor mark (at least as far as approved projects go). And how long has Vancouver had 40+ storey buildings for? Well, including the Empire Landmark (built in '73), One Wall Centre was only the second 40+ storey tower built and it has only been around for about 6 years. And as for 40+ storey condo-only towers, Vancouver only just got its first finished this year - The Melville (though of course a handful more are currently under construction).

vanman
Nov 20, 2007, 1:47 AM
Hopefully Surrey builds the tallest residential (only) tower in Metro Vancouver, then maybe it would cause some healthy competition between Central City and downtown.

cc85
Nov 20, 2007, 4:34 AM
lets just say it's not speculation; nothing formal yet.

there is no height limit in the city centre.

vanman
Nov 20, 2007, 4:51 AM
Wow! Well with 900 units selling in just 30 hours the developer of sky towers could have technically sold out a 76 story condo tower so 50 stories sounds reasonable. Plus imagine all the media attention there would be on the tallest residential tower in Vancouver (and presumably western Canada).

Canadian Mind
Nov 20, 2007, 5:48 AM
Hopefully Surrey builds the tallest residential (only) tower in Metro Vancouver, then maybe it would cause some healthy competition between Central City and downtown.

Downtown doesn't have the balls.

vanman
Nov 20, 2007, 7:25 AM
^I know. That's why they'll have to be shamed by Surrey into building taller.

jlousa
Nov 20, 2007, 6:24 PM
*l* Surrey can build whatever they want, Vancouver won't get shamed into anything, Those old enougth to remember the Telus boot will know what I'm talking about. I'm a real estate bull obviously, but I'm not so sure all these Surrey projects that are already in the works will see completion let alone any major new ones.

LeftCoaster
Nov 20, 2007, 7:51 PM
Really? I would think the continuing errosion of affordability near and in the downtown core would only lead to a continued boom in the suburbs... especially in an underdeveloped transit corridor like Surrey City Centre.

And yes I dont think the CoV gives two shits about what happens in Surrey height wise.

jlousa
Nov 20, 2007, 8:02 PM
Fact of the matter is we've been in a boom cycle for too long, a bust is due, during bust cycles the suburbs face a much harder crunch. Labour costs are very sticky on the way down, but real estate prices alot less so. If a correction occurs and it's more then 10% which is very probable, it then makes financing very diffilcult if not impossible, as alot of the purchasers will decide to walk away as they can not get a mortgage for more then 100% of the new value. Builders will find it impossible to get their financing w/o large deposits from purchasers. A lot of these new developers are only asking for 10% down, it can come back and haunt them. I'm not hoping for this, but it appears to be becoming more apparent with each passing month.

Canadian Mind
Nov 20, 2007, 8:21 PM
Any idea when the bust will happen? 6 months, a year, 2 years?

LeftCoaster
Nov 20, 2007, 8:23 PM
Yeah I understand the economic principles, I just dont see this boom ending any time soon... to me it seems like it is being artifically propped up by the olympic fevour and a toasty hot economy. I see the end of this boom coming after the olympics and hitting hard.

But my thoughts on the matter are almost purely heresay.

cc85
Nov 20, 2007, 8:39 PM
As I said nothing is formal, but it is not speculation, figure it out.

As far as the boom goes, we've reached the plateau, properties will stagnate and then fall at least 25% by the end of 2008, if not 50% which is most likely, although timing of that upper drop is hard to say (before/after 2010). As jlousa mentioned, the suburbs will lose their value much faster than in d/t simply because the land is worthless here, and in richmond, and in burnaby, and in the tri-cities...OH and of course Abbotsford - what a joke that high-rise project is.

Those who bought in SkyTowers were the last segment of society to purchase an 'investment' as they believe that they must not be priced out of the market forever. Please, $149K for a studio in a concert block? You have to be kidding me. Aside from the inflated construction labour wages, the land value, the current market is just ridiculous. I'm glad to be leaving the job market just as the local recession hits.

jlousa
Nov 20, 2007, 10:39 PM
If I knew when the market correction would come and how much it would be, I'd be much richer then I am now, and I wouldn't tell anyone. *l*
While I beleive a correction is coming and that it will affect the industry, I don't beleive it will be anywhere near what the above poster mentioned. I'm betting on around 10-15% over 2 years mostly in the burbs, with the city proper maybe down 5% in real dollars. I then envison prices increasing back to current rates over the following 2-3 years before the next boom takes them to the next level.

LeftCoaster
Nov 20, 2007, 11:22 PM
So you think there will be a small correction squeezed in between now and the olympics, and then a boom following the olympics... interesting. I always assumed the olympics would keep things hot right up to and after the event then following the hubub we would get our slump in prices and activity.

If only we could know for sure....

cc85
Nov 21, 2007, 4:06 AM
5% in d/t heheh - thats crazy talk..no i mean thats my cousin, crazy talk.

cornholio
Nov 21, 2007, 8:18 AM
for a wile I was a bit afraid that there was no common sense left out there, but cc85 and jlousa proved me wrong ;).
i actually agree with cc85's projections much more and have no problem envisioning 50% price drops over a period of 2 or so years relatively soon for suburban condos, large drops for downtown as well and smaller drops for single family homes. what you have to remember is that with a condo you own nothing really, just location, and in the suburbs you have no location as a condo with the same location can be duplicated hundreds and thousands of times, a condo is supposed to just depreciate over time anyways. with single family homes you at least own land, land that is yours for ever, it doesn't disintegrate, it doesn't age it just becomes more scarce over time, though its still way overpriced in Vancouver. i actually wouldn't be surprised if some of the prices of these suburban condos will never reach their current prices again when they fall, and they will no questions about it. labor costs should come down considerably soon as the supply of new apprentices over shoots their demand, our economy slows down or worse which is starting to happen now, and price of materials should also come down as the whole world economy slows and supply reaches and outstrips demand. there is perfect storm brewing right now and everything i said was very vague and just a quick and ruff summary. also like jlousa said i cant predict when it will happen but ill say one thing, logic says it will happen before the olympics, in fact i wouldn't be surprised if the nearing of the olympics actually becomes the turning point in Vnacouver. imo personal opinion i always thought late 2008 would be the turning point and i have been saying that for probably 4 or so years. so far everything to me looks like thats very likely but we will have to wait and see. personally im going to feel very sorry for many people, well not for the idiots who invest their life savings in to a investment at a huge speculative peak, ready to tumble because there is nothing really to speculate about. see the problem with real estate is that every dumbass invests in to it with out thinking, i mean if you want to live in the home and think its worth that much then fine but your probably going to be nailed down to this city for a long time.

PitBoss
Nov 21, 2007, 6:31 PM
I totally don't agree with what is written. I'm from the UK and am here for 2 years representing an investment group. We are buying selective investments in the Lower Mainland and Fraser Valley. You need to look at a far wider spectrum than your simple focus on the local market. Important items such as Vancouver's strategic position on the Pacific Rim and the growth of trade with the future world economic hot spots such as China and India. The fact that you have an almost undiscovered world class city here, which the Olympics will help to reveal. The fact that every Olympic city to date has experienced at least 3 years of substantial equity growth following the Olympics (why should Vancouver be the odd ball). Then probably the single largest factor, which you all seem to be missing by a mile, this entire place from Downtown to Abbotsford is ridiculously CHEAP. It may seem on the high end to you people, but believe me, its some of the cheapest high end property available in the world. My corporate mandate through our London brokerage is to invest at least $3billion in property in this area and we are doing it very successfully. It's the old story, and I've been in the offshore investment industry for 35 years, if you keep saying the bubble will burst long enough, I promise you you'll be correct, but in the meantime I will have made millions. What's also true is that if the economy did slow, and there's no suggestion out there that it will, it recovers in grand style fairly quickly, so simply ride the waves. That's the historical roller-coaster of real estate ownership and investment, there isn't one piece of real estate on this planet that has ever gone down without reversing. Be thankful that you are blessed with such a great location offering one of the highest economic prospects available in the world today. These are great times, enjoy them and prosper.

SpongeG
Nov 21, 2007, 10:58 PM
well surrey does have some things in its favour over Vancouver

It still has loads of land left to build upon and it has a lot of room for industrial useage and its closer to the border and railway lines could just go there without needing to cross the river to get into vancouver etc.

I don't see why the Lower mainland can't have two great cities like our neighbours to the south

cc85
Nov 22, 2007, 2:26 AM
it took 26 years for the market to recover from the crash of 1981...vancouver is not a world class city; we are not a financial hub, nor are we even a head office hub - both of which are the primary reasons that world class cities develop and can afford to create high market rents and property values. Think tokyo, london, paris, new york, shanghai, hong kong, fair enough?

Are you know aware of the impending global recession? Oil at $99 a barrel, sky high commodity prices, high liquidation of american currency, climate change, terrorism?? the world is not doing too well all cause of your generation. thanks!

Bert
Nov 22, 2007, 2:57 AM
well surrey does have some things in its favour over Vancouver

It still has loads of land left to build upon and it has a lot of room for industrial useage and its closer to the border and railway lines could just go there without needing to cross the river to get into vancouver etc.
But Surrey's planning has been so horrendous for so long that it takes the same time or longer to drive within Surrey as it does to cross the river.

phesto
Nov 22, 2007, 3:45 AM
In speaking with industry experts on a daily basis (ie. developers who analyze this stuff to death, not realtors) I can tell you that while the general consensus is that we're due for a market correction, the estimates are far closer to those made by jlousa; in both the suburbs and downtown.

While I agree with many of the arguments being made here, I don't see justification for anything as dramatic as a 50% price drop in 2 years.

giallo
Nov 22, 2007, 3:57 AM
it took 26 years for the market to recover from the crash of 1981...vancouver is not a world class city; we are not a financial hub, nor are we even a head office hub - both of which are the primary reasons that world class cities develop and can afford to create high market rents and property values. Think tokyo, london, paris, new york, shanghai, hong kong, fair enough?

Are you know aware of the impending global recession? Oil at $99 a barrel, sky high commodity prices, high liquidation of american currency, climate change, terrorism?? the world is not doing too well all cause of your generation. thanks!


Even during a recession goods still need to be traded and transported, cc85. I think what PitBoss is trying to say is that Vancouver has a very bright future, one that we may not even fully realize. His company is investing 3 billion dollars, for god's sake. Companies don't throw around that kind of money unless they've made sure a proper profit can be made. Take his 35 years of knowledge and run with it. I think that's what he's trying to get across. Thanks the the insight, PitBoss.

Vancouver has a huge advantage being the primary port city of Canada. While Seattle, SF and LA fight over federal dollars to update their west coast ports, Vancouver is pretty much the sole beneficiary. Couple that with shorter travel times from Asia and decent infrastructure to move those goods, and you have a pretty good recipe for a very successful city in the near future.

cc85
Nov 22, 2007, 4:23 AM
In speaking with industry experts on a daily basis (ie. developers who analyze this stuff to death, not realtors) I can tell you that while the general consensus is that we're due for a market correction, the estimates are far closer to those made by jlousa; in both the suburbs and downtown.

While I agree with many of the arguments being made here, I don't see justification for anything as dramatic as a 50% price drop in 2 years.

You only need to look at the amount of rezoning and subdivision applications now being taken out in the growing cities to tell you that they are way down from earlier this year and major developers know that they've created too much supply that will push prices down once all of the local speculators (re: local misinformed buyers) find out that no one will rent their place for a value high enough to pay their monthly mortgage.

Anyways, sky towers, good good development, i think it needs an addition or two.:koko:

PitBoss
Nov 22, 2007, 4:49 AM
it took 26 years for the market to recover from the crash of 1981...vancouver is not a world class city; we are not a financial hub, nor are we even a head office hub - both of which are the primary reasons that world class cities develop and can afford to create high market rents and property values. Think tokyo, london, paris, new york, shanghai, hong kong, fair enough?

Are you know aware of the impending global recession? Oil at $99 a barrel, sky high commodity prices, high liquidation of american currency, climate change, terrorism?? the world is not doing too well all cause of your generation. thanks!

In the UK we are lightyears ahead of Canada in terms of market insight. What has yet to happen in Canada has happened to us over the past several hundreds of years. We have learned a great deal from these experiences. Economies adapt to cater for changes such as world oil prices and high commodity costs, they don't have to cause recessions.

The UK was in turmoil after World Wars I & II, but no recession occurred. Indeed the opposite happened, there was massive economical growth. This despite construction costs being 300% higher then pre-war prices and fuel prices over 400% higher. This equates to construction costs in Vancouver rising from $280 sqft to a staggering $1,120 sqft. Terrorism has been a daily part of our lives in the UK since the 1970's, it's only "new" to you here in North America. And so on and so on.

You have hit the nail right on the head my friend when you say "Vancouver is not a world class city" because to those of us in the UK and Europe that's exactly why we are prepared to invest so much in this wonderful and beautiful part of the world that you are privileged to live in. Through our long history of charted and documented growth we are able to see what it is that you can't see..............Vancouver is a world class city WAITING TO BE DISCOVERED. The answer is staring you in the face and sadly so many here are too blind to see it. Mark my word, this place will move from strength to strength, whether you like it or not. The vast trade with Europe opened up the East coast of the USA to immense wealth (as it also did to a lesser degree for Toronto and Montreal). The same will now happen to the West coast as massive trade grows with the Far East and Asia and, guess what, Vancouver sits in the most strategic position imaginable. I would go far as to say that if recession hit Canada (which it won't), the Vancouver area could probably remain immune to its effects.

We always have a chuckle in London when we hear of Quebec wanting to separate from Canada (into almost instant bankruptcy), the real situation should be Alberta and BC threatening to separate as that's where the whole future of Canada lies. Not only do you have the Pacific Rim potential economic explosion waiting to happen, you also have vast natural resources that the US will be begging you for in the next 20 years.

Stop looking at real estate for a moment and take the time to explore how many shipping companies are racing to expand their container fleets and container holdings to cope with the Pacific Rim trade that will happen over the next few decades, it will make your eyes bulge. Do you think they have it wrong as well?

You are some of the luckiest people on the planet. You have a strong economy, your national debt is rapidly disappearing, you have control on your interest rates (which are just about to be lowered again) and you are blessed to have some of the best real estate potential available in the world today. CONGRATULATIONS.

raggedy13
Nov 22, 2007, 7:45 AM
^Wow, I've never felt so optimistic about Vancouver's future until I read that, and I was pretty optimistic before.

Brings to mind "Adventure Capitalist" (non-fictional book about a really rich guy that does a road trip around the world) and how after visiting Vancouver (near the end of his trip) the author said it would be the next New York City.

It also brings to mind this news I heard today that apparently a study came out in the last day or two by some independent group stating that the population of Vancouver (Metro I assume) will grow by 1 million people in the next 12 years. Sounds crazy I know. I heard it from my brother who heard it from his wife (I don't know who she heard it from). Apparently either the City or the Metro held an emergency meeting regarding it. I couldn't find any mention of such a study online though. My bro said his wife would email me with some more info about it. If there is any truth to this news then that's pretty insane. I'll have to get back to you regarding the validity of it though. Even if the news is true though, who knows how accurate the actual study is. I would assume such a study must factor in the assumption that Vancouver's Olympic exposure will be very good marketing for it.

cornholio
Nov 22, 2007, 10:13 AM
In the UK we are lightyears ahead of Canada in terms of market insight. What has yet to happen in Canada has happened to us over the past several hundreds of years. We have learned a great deal from these experiences. Economies adapt to cater for changes such as world oil prices and high commodity costs, they don't have to cause recessions.

The UK was in turmoil after World Wars I & II, but no recession occurred. Indeed the opposite happened, there was massive economical growth. This despite construction costs being 300% higher then pre-war prices and fuel prices over 400% higher. This equates to construction costs in Vancouver rising from $280 sqft to a staggering $1,120 sqft. Terrorism has been a daily part of our lives in the UK since the 1970's, it's only "new" to you here in North America. And so on and so on.

You have hit the nail right on the head my friend when you say "Vancouver is not a world class city" because to those of us in the UK and Europe that's exactly why we are prepared to invest so much in this wonderful and beautiful part of the world that you are privileged to live in. Through our long history of charted and documented growth we are able to see what it is that you can't see..............Vancouver is a world class city WAITING TO BE DISCOVERED. The answer is staring you in the face and sadly so many here are too blind to see it. Mark my word, this place will move from strength to strength, whether you like it or not. The vast trade with Europe opened up the East coast of the USA to immense wealth (as it also did to a lesser degree for Toronto and Montreal). The same will now happen to the West coast as massive trade grows with the Far East and Asia and, guess what, Vancouver sits in the most strategic position imaginable. I would go far as to say that if recession hit Canada (which it won't), the Vancouver area could probably remain immune to its effects.

We always have a chuckle in London when we hear of Quebec wanting to separate from Canada (into almost instant bankruptcy), the real situation should be Alberta and BC threatening to separate as that's where the whole future of Canada lies. Not only do you have the Pacific Rim potential economic explosion waiting to happen, you also have vast natural resources that the US will be begging you for in the next 20 years.

Stop looking at real estate for a moment and take the time to explore how many shipping companies are racing to expand their container fleets and container holdings to cope with the Pacific Rim trade that will happen over the next few decades, it will make your eyes bulge. Do you think they have it wrong as well?

You are some of the luckiest people on the planet. You have a strong economy, your national debt is rapidly disappearing, you have control on your interest rates (which are just about to be lowered again) and you are blessed to have some of the best real estate potential available in the world today. CONGRATULATIONS.

Dont want to be an ass but clearly you either dont know what your talking about, or most likely you have allot of money riding on our current real estate situation and you are afraid. I find it interesting that although you only have 6 posts since march you have just spent allot of energy trying to convince us that not only is our market safe, but its only going to grow. I mean I would love to write a couple pages going over everything but I wont because I don't care that much and I have nothing riding on it nor will I in any scenario. As for the future if you are so knowledgeable you should know that one of the most important demographic waves that has been putting many things out of wack in many societies and countries for half a century and specifically relating to real estate has had a huge impact which has further been increased with a after wave that due to changing society has had its first big hit on real estate at the same time and both waves combined at the moment have fueled our economies because of a overlap of the second waves peaked productivity and the first waves declining yet still positive productivity which obviously further add fuel to real estate prices and our hot economy. Now obviously there are other factors but they hold a much lower importance then most people even think, that is if they ever think about the bigger picture of our world and how everything is connected. Having said this these effects on real estate will be reversed, and the next decade will begin to see this while the decade after will feel the biggest impact. imo the longterm outlook for real estate is not that good and although im not going to say that we are not going to see overall growth over the next few decades i also wouldn't be surprised if between 2015-2035 real estate increases dont average above the rate of inflation.

Now i actually agree that a 50% drop soon is probably way overblown but i also think that real estate price drops wont be equal across the board and think suburban condos and townhouses will be hit particularly hard. And again PittBoss no offense but not much of what you said made much sense, in fact allot of what you said is the flawed thinking of our society, it might be normal but its flawed. Anyways if you really have been in the industry for 35 years then you might have more at stake then you think, but i think i have ranted enough.

by the way after rereading my rant im not sure if it will make much sense to everyone but im not in the mood of editing. good luck to all on your investments and remember its always the unnormal ones that dont seem to follow the rest of society that make the best scientists, and investors, etc. if they have smarts, if they dont have smarts then well you know what then...
:shrug:

edit...all i said doesnt only apply to vancouver by the way, though vancouver unfortunately has a dose of a bit of extra speculation and when everyones speculating on real estate, or anything really, everyone looses.

edit again...actually i dont think anything made any sense in you post, but again i am not trying to be an ass, im just giving you my honest opininio

jlousa
Nov 22, 2007, 12:29 PM
I think we could move alot of this discussion into an new thread in the general section, can someone do that?
I'm curious as to where the 3 Billion dollars you're investing is going though, can you share?

giallo
Nov 22, 2007, 1:22 PM
''As for the future if you are so knowledgeable you should know that one of the most important demographic waves that has been putting many things out of wack in many societies and countries for half a century and specifically relating to real estate has had a huge impact which has further been increased with a after wave that due to changing society has had its first big hit on real estate at the same time and both waves combined at the moment have fueled our economies because of a overlap of the second waves peaked productivity and the first waves declining yet still positive productivity which obviously further add fuel to real estate prices and our hot economy.''


Er....a period would be nice. Ah, just messing with ya.
You brought up a good point regarding the baby boomers. It's had an effect on demand, especially in places like Vancouver, Victoria and Kelowna.

PitBoss
Nov 22, 2007, 3:38 PM
Great to hear your alternative comments, which sadly often seem to be the case in this part of the world. Let's hope the crash occurs and recession sets in, then you'll be right and feeling thoroughly satisfied :yes: .

Obviously "cornholio" as I've only posted 6 times in the past 6 months, in your eyes that makes me a novice..........great thinking, it certainly adds strength to your argument :koko: .

This will probably be the last post I make again for several months, so let's meet again and see where we are in the summer next year. I'm sure you'll still be pessimistic and I'll still be optimistic, but such is the way of the world............and something tells me that during those months I will have made a considerable profit for a good number of people. Cheers. :cheers:

jlousa
Nov 22, 2007, 4:59 PM
Pitboss before you go can you answer where the 3Billion is being invested?

cc85
Nov 22, 2007, 8:25 PM
cornholio I do agree with your assertion that the babyboomers will play a major role in the future of our economy, primarily the downsizing of it and the rapid increase in health care and pension costs which will have to be supported by a slowed growth rate of our population. Add the demographic transition to the mix, and we simply are not going to get the additional one million people in Metro Vancouver. Look to Asian and South America receiving the majority of immigrants from Africa in the next 25 years.

While it seems that pitboss has been with us since march and posted only six times I can only lead myself to believe he uses this board, as many others do, for insight on the market and happend to be reading the skytowers thread due it being the most recent - high profile sell out. As he has posted, he is trying to convey a sense of continued optismism of the market in an attempt to stave off any possible reduction of his 'company's' investment. Of which I believe is not residential, simply due to the fragmentation of the existing supply network. Alas, in order to use a sum of what 3 billion, it would have to be diversified in commercial or industrial lands in order to have enough low-priced properties add up to the sum.

As this board points out, we people, that is, urban invigorator wannabes are knowledgeable of the urban fabric, and I assume something equally important to that matter, land value is a necessary knowledge needed. However, I have been shown otherwise due to some peoples' lack of adequate probabilities regarding future prices.

I'm certainly happy for a market correction to hit and for people to lose considerable amounts of money simply because of the very greed that put them there. As much as I believe in a capitalist system, there is only a certain amount of market freedom that can be tolerated when something as pivotal as the provision of housing is factored in. These people are the reason why we have no social housing, poor land use planning, poor urban design. We have ignorant developers who continue to build the status quo because they are stupid, scared, unenlightened, uneducated, greedy, condesending, and more importantly unconcerned with society. :(

phesto
Nov 22, 2007, 11:12 PM
As this board points out, we people, that is, urban invigorator wannabes are knowledgeable of the urban fabric, and I assume something equally important to that matter, land value is a necessary knowledge needed. However, I have been shown otherwise due to some peoples' lack of adequate probabilities regarding future prices.


Huh?

LeftCoaster
Nov 22, 2007, 11:48 PM
I second that...:koko:

giallo
Nov 23, 2007, 1:23 AM
cornholio I do agree with your assertion that the babyboomers will play a major role in the future of our economy, primarily the downsizing of it and the rapid increase in health care and pension costs which will have to be supported by a slowed growth rate of our population. Add the demographic transition to the mix, and we simply are not going to get the additional one million people in Metro Vancouver. Look to Asian and South America receiving the majority of immigrants from Africa in the next 25 years.

While it seems that pitboss has been with us since march and posted only six times I can only lead myself to believe he uses this board, as many others do, for insight on the market and happend to be reading the skytowers thread due it being the most recent - high profile sell out. As he has posted, he is trying to convey a sense of continued optismism of the market in an attempt to stave off any possible reduction of his 'company's' investment. Of which I believe is not residential, simply due to the fragmentation of the existing supply network. Alas, in order to use a sum of what 3 billion, it would have to be diversified in commercial or industrial lands in order to have enough low-priced properties add up to the sum.

As this board points out, we people, that is, urban invigorator wannabes are knowledgeable of the urban fabric, and I assume something equally important to that matter, land value is a necessary knowledge needed. However, I have been shown otherwise due to some peoples' lack of adequate probabilities regarding future prices.

I'm certainly happy for a market correction to hit and for people to lose considerable amounts of money simply because of the very greed that put them there. As much as I believe in a capitalist system, there is only a certain amount of market freedom that can be tolerated when something as pivotal as the provision of housing is factored in. These people are the reason why we have no social housing, poor land use planning, poor urban design. We have ignorant developers who continue to build the status quo because they are stupid, scared, unenlightened, uneducated, greedy, condesending, and more importantly unconcerned with society. :(



I think your anger is misdirected. The developers shouldn't be at the brunt of your hate.

cc85
Nov 23, 2007, 1:37 AM
I think your anger is misdirected. The developers shouldn't be at the brunt of your hate.

I deal with land developers every day, they know jack shit about proper planning and the larger context :yes:.

Please excuse my language.

cornholio
Nov 23, 2007, 1:54 AM
Great to hear your alternative comments, which sadly often seem to be the case in this part of the world. Let's hope the crash occurs and recession sets in, then you'll be right and feeling thoroughly satisfied :yes: .

Obviously "cornholio" as I've only posted 6 times in the past 6 months, in your eyes that makes me a novice..........great thinking, it certainly adds strength to your argument :koko: .

This will probably be the last post I make again for several months, so let's meet again and see where we are in the summer next year. I'm sure you'll still be pessimistic and I'll still be optimistic, but such is the way of the world............and something tells me that during those months I will have made a considerable profit for a good number of people. Cheers. :cheers:

Well having been to Britain a few times, and to mainland Europe often and having lived there for a good chunck of my life I must say that people there are much more pessimistic then out here regarding everything and realestate. Realestate in Europe is not only in a completly different market but prices have also been driven up to record highs and are also at a tiping point due to to just about the same reasons I mentioned. By the way i dont consider my self pesimistic, i just like to look at the world and events in a unbiased logical way, infact the world needs recessions, ups and downs, and so on, they are just a fact of life and in the end help keep us chugging along. My only concern about your 6 posts was that it clearly showed that you have hidden intentions about convincing us that our market is doing good, that means the reliability of what you say drops.

I don't see serious problems at least until summer anyways, and more serious problems in another decade, not to mention that you can take your profits and have allot of fun with them in you death, which probably is close assuming your in your 60's. Personally I could care less.

By the way although the baby boomer's have a strong effect, its the baby echo or what ever its called that has a huge effect too and changes in our society has allowed the combination of them to unnaturally increase demand above what it should be and will be, temporarily off course, though temporarily means a good chuck of our life's.

Anyways I would love to take you previous post and dissect it and show why it made no sense.
Any how I find this a interesting discussion none the less.

cheers...

cornholio
Nov 23, 2007, 2:01 AM
.

Slippy
Nov 23, 2007, 3:05 AM
Let's get this thread back on track...

Has anyone bought into Sky? What did you buy and for how much?

Volksboi
Nov 23, 2007, 5:58 AM
I agree, This is a thread for Sky Towers not the furture of the realestate market. We all have different opinions of what will happen. I side with PitBoss, but each to there own.

Canadian Mind
Nov 23, 2007, 6:27 AM
I side with Jlousa, but I hope Pitboss is right. Like Manhattan in the US, I would love for this city to be virtually immune to economic turmoil.

Anyways, Skytowers, how many meters high are they???

SpongeG
Nov 23, 2007, 7:12 AM
they have that one road all closed and fenced off

the one between where sky will be and the station...

Volksboi
Nov 23, 2007, 8:06 AM
I just got an email from sky tower stating that they are releasing 40 units from people that could not get financed... they will probaly get snapped up pretty quick

cc85
Nov 23, 2007, 8:17 PM
people can't get financing for $149,000? i wonder if any of them would be overextended? no...can't be so

Volksboi
Nov 24, 2007, 4:41 AM
lol overextended? noooo never...lol

jhausner
Nov 29, 2007, 7:27 AM
The real estate market is a risk based market just like the stock market. People that invest take a chance no matter where it is. The people I know that purchased 5+ condos in Yaletown for under $100,000 when they started building that area up and then resold them for closer to $450,000 are laughing to the bank. The bubble could have burst then though and they could have been out the money.

Much like everyone today purchasing. You have to remember though that based on all Olympic cities over the last decade or so, they've enjoyed a boom after the Olympics and most of the condos being constructed right now in Surrey won't be complete until around 2010 so people would be required to get a mortgage until then.

For now we just need the 15% down payment (25%ish for rental properties). As a business (which I own) that means really my condo is only 75% of the total cost long term (that's the price risk) as 25% was paid in cash.

Either way, everyone is entitled to their opinions as always and as with everything, we'll see what the future holds. I mean an asteroid could strike the city tomorrow for all we know.

For the record, I've purchased into Infinity tower 3 which is currently under construction, 1 condo on the 21st floor and a unit on the 8th floor in the larger Sky Towers high-rise. It was reasonably priced per square foot compared to the other units.

I agree some units in there (such as the townhouses) are just insanity and some of the higher floor units are well above what I would deem as reasonable. But on the 8th floor the unit I purchased into was reasonably priced for rental income and resell value (being 1 bedroom).

Investing in real estate always requires people to step away from emotion and look at the hard numbers. Do I think some of the projects in Surrey are grossly overpriced such as Ultra? Sure. Do I think some of the units in Sky Towers are over inflated? Sure. But as long as you do some research and set reasonable boundaries for your money, you can mitigate the risk. And the fact again that we may perhaps see a down turn in prices before the Olympics doesn't concern me as again mortgage considerations won't be until at least 2011 for Sky Towers when the up turn would be in affect (post Olympics).

I do think Surrey Central does have a lot of potential if the current council continues its trek towards cleaning up crime as best it can and focusing more efforts on transportation or the lack thereof.

We shall see.

As for the releasing of the 40 units, I hope people don't just snatch them up without doing a bit of research. It also doesn't worry me as there are always fruit cakes that try to get in on the band wagon without having the necessary monetary resources. Given there were 900someodd units, 40 constitutes only ~4% which is negligible.

Just a piece of advice (and you may state my low post count on these forums as disqualifying anything I say if it makes you happy I won't lose any sleep), people rarely make a lot of money or get far in life without taking risks. Just use your head, ignore the rhetoric of people driven by emotion, and make a well educated decision that works for you and your financial position.

You may get burned. But you won't win the lottery unless you play it. :-)

I would love to see Surrey build a respectable downtown and sky-line I'd enjoy visiting and living in.

SunCoaster
Dec 24, 2007, 7:46 AM
Here's hoping that both towers get built soon with no height reductions etc. ... as a matter of fact I'd like to see all of the current Surrey/Whalley proposals get built ... for it's population Surrey currently has a pathetically meager skyline so all these projects will help to densify the Surrey's 'core' (eg. the King George Highway corridor)

... as an aside, but still on the issue of densification, Langley just amended it's downtown OCP and starting immediately Langley will permit towers up to 20 stories in its core (which Langley considers to be the area surrounding Willowbrook Mall - eg. area rezoned goes roughly from 192 Str on the west to 203 Str on the east and 66 Ave on the north to Logan Ave on the south) - the closer to Willowbrook Mall the closer the towers are permitted to be built to the 20 story maximum ... conversely, towers on the 'fringe' of the core will be permitted up to 10 stories ... translation as towers start appearing in Langley that city will eventually end up with the traditional tiered 'wedding cake' type core ...

vanman
Dec 24, 2007, 8:49 AM
^Didn't know that. It seems all the distance suburbs that 5 years ago I would have never guessed would allow towers in their core are all now down for densification. Maple Ridge, Abbotsford, Port Moody, Port Coquitlam and now Langley. It's pretty amazing.

Dylan Leblanc
Dec 24, 2007, 12:10 PM
This towers would fit right in in Mississauga.