HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #321  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 5:24 PM
Tarsus's Avatar
Tarsus Tarsus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 2,062
Quote:
Originally Posted by 240glt View Post
Enbridge is sucking up vacant space in Edmonton like crazy right now. By the spring they should be occupying 35+ floors of CBD space with a rumour that they could be going on another hiring spree shortly in Edmonton
Enbridge is looking to hire around 2500 people this year. Just over a thousand for Edmonton and around 600 or so for Calgary. I'm sure that will help boost a tower or two for Edmonton.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #322  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 5:44 PM
Coldrsx's Avatar
Coldrsx Coldrsx is offline
Community Guy
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canmore, AB
Posts: 66,669
Maybe not a new tower themselves, but they will push vacancy down nicely and get some wheels turning.
__________________
"The destructive effects of automobiles are much less a cause than a symptom of our incompetence at city building" - Jane Jacobs 1961ish

Wake me up when I can see skyscrapers
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #323  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 7:11 PM
Surrealplaces's Avatar
Surrealplaces Surrealplaces is offline
Editor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Cowtropolis
Posts: 19,968
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldrsx View Post
Maybe not a new tower themselves, but they will push vacancy down nicely and get some wheels turning.
It would definitely suck up space enough to push start some new construction. Maybe a new tallest!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #324  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 7:14 PM
Coldrsx's Avatar
Coldrsx Coldrsx is offline
Community Guy
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canmore, AB
Posts: 66,669
Manulife 2 would be just that... at 161m.
__________________
"The destructive effects of automobiles are much less a cause than a symptom of our incompetence at city building" - Jane Jacobs 1961ish

Wake me up when I can see skyscrapers
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #325  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 7:14 PM
Surrealplaces's Avatar
Surrealplaces Surrealplaces is offline
Editor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Cowtropolis
Posts: 19,968
Good to hear CCC looks the most likely. Although Brookfield is the tallest of the bunch at 227m, It would be built on an already used lot and possible heritage building. Centennial III and CCC are on empty lots, or in the case of CCC an underutilized lot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoaster View Post
CCC is almost assuredly a go, expect to hear definitive confirmation within the next couple months. At this point it would take a major event to derail it.

My next bet would be Centennial III which I am also quite sure will go ahead within the next 12 months, although this one is slightly less certain than CCC.

Brookfield's project is still a coin toss due to its size and preleasing requirements as well as a few tricky encumbrances the site has to deal with in order to move forward.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #326  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 8:46 PM
bkd bkd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 363
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldrsx View Post
Manulife 2 would be just that... at 161m.
200m would be a lot nicer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #327  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 8:52 PM
Coldrsx's Avatar
Coldrsx Coldrsx is offline
Community Guy
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canmore, AB
Posts: 66,669
So would 300m

161 would be more than fine.
__________________
"The destructive effects of automobiles are much less a cause than a symptom of our incompetence at city building" - Jane Jacobs 1961ish

Wake me up when I can see skyscrapers
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #328  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 9:24 PM
rbt rbt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Surrealplaces View Post
It would definitely suck up space enough to push start some new construction. Maybe a new tallest!
Companies I worked for gave about 500sqft per employee (includes common spaces like bathrooms, kitchen, hallway, emergency exit routes, meeting spaces, etc.). More space if executives and less for call centre staff.

1000 employees is only about 50,000 sqft or 3 to 5 floors of a typical office building. A good sized lease but if they're not consolidating other staff into the same building, they won't even be the major tenant.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #329  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 9:27 PM
suburbanite's Avatar
suburbanite suburbanite is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Toronto & NYC
Posts: 5,373
Quote:
Scotiabank considers selling Toronto tower
Could be Canada's biggest commercial real estate deal

Scotiabank is in the early stages of hunting for buyers interested in Scotia Plaza, its skyscraper headquarters in downtown Toronto that could be worth as much as $1 billion.

The bank said Thursday that a sale of the second-tallest office tower in the country is being explored as part of Scotiabank's regular review of its operations.

"In the current low-interest rate environment, it's potentially a good time to sell and we have chosen to explore the sale of Scotia Plaza," bank spokeswoman Ann DeRabbie said in an email.
from CBC http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toront...ank-tower.html

If this happens then no Canadian bank will own its namesake tower anymore, and could mark the ceremonial end of an era on Bay Street.
__________________
Discontented suburbanite since 1994
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #330  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 9:31 PM
Bassic Lab Bassic Lab is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,934
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbt View Post
Companies I worked for gave about 500sqft per employee (includes common spaces like bathrooms, kitchen, hallway, emergency exit routes, meeting spaces, etc.). More space if executives and less for call centre staff.

1000 employees is only about 50,000 sqft or 3 to 5 floors of a typical office building. A good sized lease but if they're not consolidating other staff into the same building, they won't even be the major tenant.
You missed a decimal place there on one of those numbers. 1000*500=500,000.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #331  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 10:04 PM
freeweed's Avatar
freeweed freeweed is offline
Home of Hyperchange
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Dynamic City, Alberta
Posts: 17,566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bassic Lab View Post
You missed a decimal place there on one of those numbers. 1000*500=500,000.
I was gonna say... 1000 employees take up a hell of a lot more than 3-5 floors, unless everyone has a 2x2 (feet) cubicle and they're stacked 3 high per floor!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #332  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 10:05 PM
telyou's Avatar
telyou telyou is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Mafialand aka Montreal
Posts: 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by suburbanite View Post
If this happens then no Canadian bank will own its namesake tower anymore, and could mark the ceremonial end of an era on Bay Street.
Please clarify.
Very few banks actually own the towers they have offices in. It is not the type of business banks are in.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #333  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 10:09 PM
Coldrsx's Avatar
Coldrsx Coldrsx is offline
Community Guy
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canmore, AB
Posts: 66,669
Edmonton - Stationlands 2 by Qualico (beside Epcor to the east and adjacent to the new Royal Alberta Museum)


(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7021/6...e3a1b773f7.jpg)
__________________
"The destructive effects of automobiles are much less a cause than a symptom of our incompetence at city building" - Jane Jacobs 1961ish

Wake me up when I can see skyscrapers
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #334  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 10:27 PM
LeftCoaster's Avatar
LeftCoaster LeftCoaster is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toroncouver
Posts: 12,624
Quote:
Originally Posted by telyou View Post
Please clarify.
Very few banks actually own the towers they have offices in. It is not the type of business banks are in.
He is saying exactly what you are, that if Scotia Bank sells its HQ building, then NONE of the big Toronto banks will own their own HQ buildings anymore.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #335  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 10:28 PM
caltrane74's Avatar
caltrane74 caltrane74 is offline
gettin' rich!
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 34,167
Scotiabank is planning on selling their Toronto headquaters, they want to invest the cash.

Suggested Retail Price, $1 Billion Dollars Most expensive commercial real estate deal in Canadian history.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #336  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 10:38 PM
Rico Rommheim's Avatar
Rico Rommheim Rico Rommheim is offline
Look at me!
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: City of Bagels
Posts: 13,576
Buying a 20+ year old office building for 1 billion doesn't seem like a wise investment. What'll be their return on investment there? How long before whoever buys it sees a penny out of it?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #337  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 10:55 PM
Calgarian's Avatar
Calgarian Calgarian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 24,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldrsx View Post
Edmonton - Stationlands 2 by Qualico (beside Epcor to the east and adjacent to the new Royal Alberta Museum)


(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7021/6...e3a1b773f7.jpg)
Not a bad looking proposal, hopefully Manulife II goes ahead before this one does though, just to be sure it happens, I really like the render we saw for Manulife.
__________________
Git'er done!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #338  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2012, 11:31 PM
Doug's Avatar
Doug Doug is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 10,047
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim View Post
Buying a 20+ year old office building for 1 billion doesn't seem like a wise investment. What'll be their return on investment there? How long before whoever buys it sees a penny out of it?
Exactly why BNS is selling. If a sucker is willing to pay $1B, it is a great deal for BNS.

BNS isb't even the original owner of that tower. It was built by Campeau. I remember watching it rise when I worked in TD complex.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #339  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2012, 3:11 AM
whiteford's Avatar
whiteford whiteford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,526
Harold square will be well above 200 meters with their proposal. i also don't see centennial or Jamison as dressed up boxes. especially centennial. i think its a quality tower over all. really, who knows what type of proposals might come out of a office boom in Calgary at this point. its just warming up and anything could come down the pipe. i myself always feel another signature tower is only seconds away when it comes to Calgary.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #340  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2012, 3:31 AM
WhipperSnapper's Avatar
WhipperSnapper WhipperSnapper is offline
I am the law!
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Toronto+
Posts: 21,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbt View Post
Companies I worked for gave about 500sqft per employee (includes common spaces like bathrooms, kitchen, hallway, emergency exit routes, meeting spaces, etc.). More space if executives and less for call centre staff.

1000 employees is only about 50,000 sqft or 3 to 5 floors of a typical office building. A good sized lease but if they're not consolidating other staff into the same building, they won't even be the major tenant.


That's a lot of real estate. 1000 employees is closer to 100,000 square feet
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:05 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.