EAP Phase 2?

greg_a · #1 Posted: **Nov 10, 2009, 3:05 AM**

Will the second phase of Eighth Avenue Place begin construction in the next 12 months?

http://www.eighthavenueplace.com/

Wooster · #2 Posted: **Nov 10, 2009, 3:26 AM**

Well, obviously not. It's a miracle the first tower is getting built considering that it is 0% leased.

Bigtime · #3 Posted: **Nov 10, 2009, 3:29 AM**

I just can't see it happening within the next 12 months.

greg_a · #4 Posted: **Nov 10, 2009, 3:50 AM**

Over the last couple of weeks a pervasive rumor seems to have spread throughout the brokerage community that Shell has signed a deal and is leaving Oxford's building. The second rumor is that the general contractor for EAP has just bought the materials for the second phase.

frinkprof · #5 Posted: **Nov 10, 2009, 3:57 AM**

Like with the first EAP building, I'll believe it when I see it.

I look at the possibility of the second EAP tower going up as similar to how Banker's Hall or First Canadian Centre went with their second phases. Several years later, or not at all.

Personally I think EAP only proposed two towers to get more parking approved, with few intentions of actually building the second phase, or only doing so when the market is very favourable.

mersar · #6 Posted: **Nov 10, 2009, 4:02 AM**

Yeah. On the upside at least with EAP we'll get the podium level built for the entire project, so it won't be empty land

craner · #7 Posted: **Nov 10, 2009, 4:53 AM**

I'm glad they built the taller tower first for once.

Centenial also did this but it turned out to be a moot point as both phases are U/C.

I wish these twinned projects just went with one taller tower in most cases. Imagine a single 80 storey EAP, or a 64 storey Centenial tower.

How about a 76 storey Arriva ?

ibz · #8 Posted: **Nov 10, 2009, 5:44 AM**

This rumour was discussed at length at the Calgary Real Estate Forum a few weeks back, clearly it shouldnt be a surprise that a big empty building in this market would be talking to every big name in town that already hasnt moved.

Even if they do land a big tenant, you can't seriously think they would go ahead with the second tower, there would still be a couple million of sq ft in the market to absorb...

Bokimon · #9 Posted: **Nov 10, 2009, 6:09 AM**

Second tower is still nothing but a mechanical doghouse. The podium will be the only item to be a full build out. However crane opening slots are being left open so in the future they wouldnt have to knock out the slabs and just insert the shaft as needed..

WhipperSnapper · #10 Posted: **Nov 10, 2009, 6:19 AM**

sexy

bob1954 · #11 Posted: **Nov 10, 2009, 6:25 AM**

I still say and have said all along, it should have been a single 60 story tower and the developer could of built something else on the remainder of the land. It might have been something other than office.

Doug · #12 Posted: **Nov 10, 2009, 7:30 AM**

Maybe within in the next 12 years

AirGuitarChampion · #13 Posted: **Nov 10, 2009, 3:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mersar

Yeah. On the upside at least with EAP we'll get the podium level built for the entire project, so it won't be empty land

Walking by on the Centennial Parkade side this morning one gets a pretty impressive view of the tower with nothing (even a short podium) in the way.

If it was empty land, or say a very lightly developed couryard (say, you know, you could put up a large tent 10 days a year in, and have other smaller stuff going on the rest of the time...) I wouldn't be too opposed to that. You'd have Olympic Plaza anchoring at one end, this new Courtyard at the other anchoring Stephen Ave.

If it's 11 years, 12 years, or never for phase 2, they can take that rebar they just put above grade, add it to the top of phase 1, leave the courtyard and call it a day. If only I could find the parallel universe this is happening in...

Surrealplaces · #14 Posted: **Nov 10, 2009, 7:22 PM**

Nope, won't see it built for quite some time, if ever. I don't care if they ever build it, as long as the podium gets built, which looks to be the case. If they do build the second tower, I hope it's 15 years from now and a different design. We've got too many twins already.

KONYS · #15 Posted: **Nov 10, 2009, 11:49 PM**

Enough twins.

Calgarian · #16 Posted: **Nov 11, 2009, 3:13 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KONYS

Enough twins.

here here

Frenzy · #17 Posted: **Nov 11, 2009, 3:18 AM**

If phase 2 does go ahead, I hope there will be a different design then phase 1.

bob1954 · #18 Posted: **Nov 11, 2009, 5:46 AM**

Exactly my rant about having a "taller" single tower instead of 2-3 of the same design. Forget the shadow nonsense.... My opinion of course!

frinkprof · #19 Posted: **Nov 11, 2009, 5:59 AM**

^In a lot of cases, for example EAP, Banker's Hall, etc. the two towers has to do with phasing. For the developer, it is a lot less risky to build it in two separate phases of a "small" tower each, rather than one big tower in a single phase. So in some cases it is either two (or three or more) smaller towers, or none at all. Rolling all that square footage into a single building that has to be constructed all in one go is not a risk some developers are willing to take in Calgary's market.

It's not always about shadows. Besides, if a developer wanted to build a taller tower, they would acquire a site where shadows wouldn't limit that. Plenty of these sites exist.

bob1954 · #20 Posted: **Nov 11, 2009, 7:40 AM**

"Frinkprof": I think it's probably a little more complicated than that, but I'll accept that. Sometimes it is'nt about just buying a parcel of land that does'nt have shadow restrictions. It can be difficult and time consuming putting together deals when there are muliple owners of a particular site. I just don't like twins and don't care for height limits, but that's just me. The powers to be could care less what I or other folks think.... IMO