noticed this today on the journal of commerce website
OFFICE TOWER, COMMERCIAL Proj: 9065978-3
Vancouver, Greater Vancouver RD BC PREPARING PLANS
745 Thurlow St & Alberni, V6E 3V5
$62,000,000 est
Start: 2009
Note: Currently in the final stages of rezoning and going to Public Hearing Sept 16/08. Further update at the end of 2008.
Project: steel pile foundation, cast-in-place concrete structural frame, 02220; building demolition, 02230; site clearing, 02315; excavation, 08800; glazing systems, 14280; elevator equipment and controls, proposed commercial office tower; demolition of a few existing bldgs; approx two-three levels of CRU space at the base; approx 33,274 sq m of office space & 3,799 sq m of retail/service space; three-four levels u/g prkg; to use green bldg elements & to achieve a LEED Gold standard.
Scope: 37,073 m²; 22 storeys; 3 storeys below grade; parking for 399 cars; 2,413 m²
Development: New
Category: Commercial offices
Was too caught up in the EFL development approval last night that I forgot to mentions that the City approved the increase in density for this tower to 15.4FSR up from the 7.0 it was zoned for. So the final hurdle has now been cleared.
the skyscraper future is in surrey, downtown vancouver is too far from surrey's growing population.
There's plenty of room yet for more downtown skyscrapers (especially farther to the east).
The Surrey planning department needs to get their shit together and stop approving so many low density, single use developments. The current projects in the Whalley area are a start, but they're not nearly enough.
__________________ Bill: Be excellent to each other. Ted: Party on, dudes.
Unfortunately for Surrey is they are starting all this good work just as the economy is turning. But at least they will have some better guidelines for the next boom.
The Surrey planning department needs to get their shit together and stop approving so many low density, single use developments.
I too would prefer less single houses and much denser neighborhoods.
But Surrey is just doing what Vancouver did a hundred years ago, and it's what most cities do when they have undeveloped land. I don't think high density sprouts from nothing. Does it?
Latest I've heard on this one is that barring some massive pre-lease commitment, Bentall will not be buying out the leases on the existing building. Those leases are set to expire in 2011, so we're not likely to see movement on this (ie. demolition) until then.
Presumably all the necessary approvals could be in place and ready to go before that time, but completion would be 2013/2014.
Wow, I’m somewhat surprised about this, I always thought the best time to build office space was during an economic downturn. I wonder if this is a sign of Bentall being somewhat trepidatious or if it is a larger sign of a market which has been artificially propped up by high resource prices and is finally showing its weaknesses.
The collapse of resource prices hurts office deals here more than most with the number of large (or not-so-large anymore) mining companies we have based here. But that isn't really the biggest deal. Yes, construction prices are coming down and will likely come down further, but whether it costs $200 million to build a new tower or $100 million to build a tower, it's really really tough to get financing for ANYTHING right now. It's tough getting financing to close on a $30 million sale of income-generating shopping centre for god's sake. The debt markets suck out there.
Chances are the only big projects that will be starting from here on out (next year at least) will be infrastructure projects by the federal or provincial governments because they are the only ones with a strong enough covenant. With the city backstopping the Olympic Village loan, even their credit rating won't be what it used to be. Plus more sub-lease space is coming back on the market. Lululemon's 80k sq. ft. of space at Crossroads and 2 of Intrawest's floors at 200 Burrard are only 2 of what is likely to be much more good space coming available.
I'm sure Bentall would like to be aggressive and be the first to deliver a new building, but unlike previous cycles, or when they went ahead with Bentall5 phase 2, the pension funds for whom they manage these assets (in this case bcIMC) are now over-allocated in their real estate investments and are being very cautious about proceeding with both investments and new developments. The prospects for financing and leasing in the short-term are not good, but I still think they'll move ahead in a couple of years even in a down market as financing (pre-lease) requirements ease and construction costs come down.
91 whole meters....wow...NOT! They should tear down the first 2 Bentall towers and build a sixty to seventy floor tower and simply call it Bentall One.
It would be in the long run cause you would get much better use out of a particular sight, and it can be built in stages anyways as was the case in Bentall 5 instead a bunch of stubby office towers.
Leave the Bentall towers alone, there are so many other sites in downtown where you could build office. Those two towers are a huge part of downtown's office supply, it makes no sense to demolish them. but instead.....i.e. demolish Sears and use it as an expansion of Pacific Centre on lower levels and maybe 60/70-levels of office above, with an exception to view cones/height restrictions.
Figured it's time to dig this thread back out of hibernation. There is an application before the city to increase this project from 22 floors to 23floors, the height will remain the same at 300', the fsr will increase to 16.1 (418,000sqft) that's a very large project. Some new updated renders in the pdfs.
Prev
I don't think high density sprouts from nothing. Does it?
My point exactly. 
Linear Mode
