HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Downtown & City of Vancouver


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #3761  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2009, 1:09 AM
hollywoodnorth's Avatar
hollywoodnorth hollywoodnorth is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Downtown Vancouver
Posts: 6,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by sacrifice333 View Post
Concord Pacific is kicking the marketing of Cosmo back into high gear.

Prices seem fairly reasonable.

Cosmo Website.
ya looks like the sales center opening is next Thursday! Good news indeed!
__________________
Quote of the Decade on SSP: "what happens would it be?" - argon007

"orange vested guy" - towerguy3
     
     
  #3762  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2009, 1:58 AM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,371
Stumbled upon the following pic in my archives, thought I'd share it.
It was the original vision for False Creek by Concord Pacific, including a bunch of lagoons. Looks very modern day Dubaish. Glad they went the route they did instead of the original plan. The seawall wouldn't be the same and it the islands looked very gated-community like.

     
     
  #3763  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2009, 2:03 AM
hollywoodnorth's Avatar
hollywoodnorth hollywoodnorth is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Downtown Vancouver
Posts: 6,380
ya I have a few pics also from this proposal.

I do however LOVE the pod type buildings where GM Place is now.

also odd to see that the CURVED buildings have been reborn if you will as COLORS by Concord and more or less right at the Cambie Bridgehead as was invisioned back then.....
__________________
Quote of the Decade on SSP: "what happens would it be?" - argon007

"orange vested guy" - towerguy3
     
     
  #3764  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2009, 2:15 AM
Canadian Mind's Avatar
Canadian Mind Canadian Mind is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,907
From the air it looks nice, but I agree with you with regards to the gated-community feel.
__________________
"you're eating chicken periods" - Vid
"I love eggs, especially the ones with runny yolks" - Me
"EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW, you're disgusting!" - Vid
     
     
  #3765  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2009, 2:32 AM
Spork's Avatar
Spork Spork is offline
Shoebox Dweller
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,784
Never been to it, but it reminds me of Miami, which is a cool concept.
     
     
  #3766  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2009, 4:03 AM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 12,805
The canal-like waterway would have been pretty cool...not a fan of the architecture, except the ones where GM Place are - in my opinion world landmark potential akin to Hong Kong's HSBC building had it been built, but one of those islands built would have been nice.
     
     
  #3767  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2009, 5:38 AM
mrjauk mrjauk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 555
Quote:
Originally Posted by sacrifice333 View Post
Concord Pacific is kicking the marketing of Cosmo back into high gear.

Prices seem fairly reasonable.

Cosmo Website.
Reasonable? Really?

Okay, 2-Br + Den for 369,000. Add 6% GST and you get just over 390,000. Assume that you have 10% to put on a down payment (and very few people do these days), that takes you to 351,000 that has to be financed.

Assume a 5-year mortgage (amortized over 25 years) at about 5% (mortgage have been quickly increasing from the lowest in generations levels reached only a couple of months ago, just in time to snare the last batch of "better get in now, before I'm priced out forever" group).

The monthly payment is 2041.44. Add insurance and property tax (200/mth), plus strata fees ($400/mth see the new 2BR here, for a grand total of about $2700/month.

Rent for a similar place is about $1800/month.

So, the difference between renting and "owning" is about 900/month, which is 10,800/yr. Put that in the bank over five years (less rent increases,which will not be much over the next five years), and you'e got between 45,000 and 50,000 in the bank (less interest). Add in the 39,000 that you didn't have to use for your down payment, which has also been sitting in the bank collecting interest in a five-year note, and you got about 90,000 saved over the last five years from renting rather than "owning."

As the owner, you've retired about 40,000 of mortgage debt, even though you've dished out 60*2000, or $120,000 dollars. So you've paid almost as much to the bank in interest as the renter has saved. [This phenomenon will, of course, become advantageous to the owner in the latter years of the mortgage.]

Now, of course, you have housing wealth--equity of 310,000 dollars, so if after five years, you could sell your place for 430,000 (+6% realtor commission), or about 445,000 dollars, then you will have reached break even after five years. That assumes an annual increase in real estate values of just less than 4% annually.

But, remember that you've spent an additional $600 or so a month for insurance, property tax, and strata fees, all of which you would not be paying as a tenant. So, 600*60 months=another 36,000 dollars which you would not have been paying as a tenant. Thus, in order for you to break even after five years, your home would have to sell for (430,000+36,000)*1.06 (realtor's commission)=493,000 dollars. So, you're home would have to appreciate at about 6% annually for you to just break even after five years. But remember that the renter has not only broken even, but has about $90,000 in the bank (using very conservative assumptions about interest rates).

Now, what if instead of appreciating in value, your home actually decreases in value over the next five years? I'll leave that as an exercise for you to figure out on your own.

So, a good deal? Not quite... [I haven't accounted for any expenses related to possible repairs.]

Now you know why the old adage, "if you're not going to live there for at least five years, don't buy, rent instead" is a good piece of advice. I'd say more like 10 years minimum. The last 10 years or so have seen unprecedented increases in the value of real estate worldwide; methinks we're in for a wee bit of a correction over the next ten.

I'm sure you'll let me know if I've made any mistakes in my calculations above.

Last edited by mrjauk; Jun 16, 2009 at 5:44 AM. Reason: Adding bit about amortization schedule favoring owner in latter years of mortgage.
     
     
  #3768  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2009, 6:05 AM
Locked In's Avatar
Locked In Locked In is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,977
Another photo of Symphony Place - it's on the walk home.
My photo, taken today looking south(west) down Seymour:

     
     
  #3769  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2009, 6:25 AM
hollywoodnorth's Avatar
hollywoodnorth hollywoodnorth is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Downtown Vancouver
Posts: 6,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrjauk View Post
Reasonable? Really?

Okay, 2-Br + Den for 369,000. Add 6% GST and you get just over 390,000. Assume that you have 10% to put on a down payment (and very few people do these days), that takes you to 351,000 that has to be financed.

Assume a 5-year mortgage (amortized over 25 years) at about 5% (mortgage have been quickly increasing from the lowest in generations levels reached only a couple of months ago, just in time to snare the last batch of "better get in now, before I'm priced out forever" group).

The monthly payment is 2041.44. Add insurance and property tax (200/mth), plus strata fees ($400/mth see the new 2BR here, for a grand total of about $2700/month.

Rent for a similar place is about $1800/month.

So, the difference between renting and "owning" is about 900/month, which is 10,800/yr. Put that in the bank over five years (less rent increases,which will not be much over the next five years), and you'e got between 45,000 and 50,000 in the bank (less interest). Add in the 39,000 that you didn't have to use for your down payment, which has also been sitting in the bank collecting interest in a five-year note, and you got about 90,000 saved over the last five years from renting rather than "owning."

As the owner, you've retired about 40,000 of mortgage debt, even though you've dished out 60*2000, or $120,000 dollars. So you've paid almost as much to the bank in interest as the renter has saved. [This phenomenon will, of course, become advantageous to the owner in the latter years of the mortgage.]

Now, of course, you have housing wealth--equity of 310,000 dollars, so if after five years, you could sell your place for 430,000 (+6% realtor commission), or about 445,000 dollars, then you will have reached break even after five years. That assumes an annual increase in real estate values of just less than 4% annually.

But, remember that you've spent an additional $600 or so a month for insurance, property tax, and strata fees, all of which you would not be paying as a tenant. So, 600*60 months=another 36,000 dollars which you would not have been paying as a tenant. Thus, in order for you to break even after five years, your home would have to sell for (430,000+36,000)*1.06 (realtor's commission)=493,000 dollars. So, you're home would have to appreciate at about 6% annually for you to just break even after five years. But remember that the renter has not only broken even, but has about $90,000 in the bank (using very conservative assumptions about interest rates).

Now, what if instead of appreciating in value, your home actually decreases in value over the next five years? I'll leave that as an exercise for you to figure out on your own.

So, a good deal? Not quite... [I haven't accounted for any expenses related to possible repairs.]

Now you know why the old adage, "if you're not going to live there for at least five years, don't buy, rent instead" is a good piece of advice. I'd say more like 10 years minimum. The last 10 years or so have seen unprecedented increases in the value of real estate worldwide; methinks we're in for a wee bit of a correction over the next ten.

I'm sure you'll let me know if I've made any mistakes in my calculations above.
__________________
Quote of the Decade on SSP: "what happens would it be?" - argon007

"orange vested guy" - towerguy3
     
     
  #3770  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2009, 1:26 PM
sacrifice333 sacrifice333 is offline
Vancouver User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,460
You did make a little mistake... insurance should be owned/paid by renters also. They're both just for contents and often it's more expensive for tenants than owners.

I certainly agree that for many it still makes sense to rent. Though prices are coming down and are getting more reasonable. The key in these calculations is the downpayment amount available and the additional monthly income available for investing and/or mortgage.

I stand by my current guesstimate that late 2010 and into 2011 will be the time to buy.
__________________
Check out TripStyler.com {locally focused travel blog} | My instagram {Travel Photos}

Last edited by sacrifice333; Jun 16, 2009 at 3:12 PM.
     
     
  #3771  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2009, 3:41 PM
djh djh is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,976
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrjauk View Post
Reasonable? Really?

Okay, 2-Br + Den for 369,000. Add 6% GST and you get just over 390,000. Assume that you have 10% to put on a down payment (and very few people do these days), that takes you to 351,000 that has to be financed.

[snip]
I'm sure you'll let me know if I've made any mistakes in my calculations above.
Very good and clearly-explained calculations, mrjauk. Thanks for that.

Of course, the reality is that very very few renters are disciplined enough to put that money aside that they are "saving" from renting, and invest it every single month. Most people end up saying that since they have all of this "spare" cash, they can afford to "upgrade" in some other way - bigger rental apartment, better car, nicer electronics, and so on. So unforunately, that monthly financial advantage gets whittled down pretty quickly.
Saving doesn't work for our generation, have you not seen the statistics on how little savings the average Canadian has?
Ultimately, buying property is *forced* saving. Advantage: buyers.
     
     
  #3772  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2009, 4:21 PM
WarrenC12's Avatar
WarrenC12 WarrenC12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: East OV!
Posts: 24,516
Agree with mrjauk 100%.

Not to mention this building will probably end up a slum rental like spectrum.
     
     
  #3773  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2009, 8:21 PM
flight_from_kamakura's Avatar
flight_from_kamakura flight_from_kamakura is offline
testify
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: san francisco and montreal
Posts: 1,319
mr jauk = yes.
     
     
  #3774  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2009, 9:24 PM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 39,946
savings rates are quite crappy right now - i was the bank it was 0.75%
__________________
belowitall
     
     
  #3775  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2009, 9:44 PM
hollywoodnorth's Avatar
hollywoodnorth hollywoodnorth is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Downtown Vancouver
Posts: 6,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenC12 View Post
Agree with mrjauk 100%.

Not to mention this building will probably end up a slum rental like spectrum.
LOL Spectrum.....funny!
__________________
Quote of the Decade on SSP: "what happens would it be?" - argon007

"orange vested guy" - towerguy3
     
     
  #3776  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2009, 12:21 AM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 39,946
Vancouver's Orpheum theatre closes for $60-million restoration

VANCOUVER - The three main civic theatres will be dark this summer, as the city of Vancouver puts the finishing touches on an ambitious $60-million restoration program.

The Orpheum will close from July through September for a $5.5-million facelift. The Queen Elizabeth has been shut since May 11 and will be closed until Nov. 13, as contractors finish a multi-year, $48.5-million renovation. The Playhouse will also be closed from July through September for renos, including the installation of a new marquee outside.

The big change at the Orpheum is new seats.

“We tried fixing them, but they just fell apart,” says Rae Ackerman of Vancouver Civic Theatres.

“The seats that are there are basically 1946 seats, [but] they were re-upholstered in 1976.”

Other upgrades include expanded women’s washrooms, better lighting in the auditorium and “sound and light locks.”

“On the orchestra level we’re doubling the doors, in effect to seal off noise from the lobby, the street and the lane,” says Ackerman.

Wheelchair seating will be doubled to 16, and there will now be space for companions to sit beside people in wheelchairs. Interior signage will also be improved.

The changes have been a long time coming.

“The basic planning of this was done 16 or 17 years ago,” says Ackerman.

What took so long for them to be implemented?

“Money,” he replies. “And coming up in the priority list. It’s always a combination of what’s the priority and where’s the money.”

One big Orpheum reno that won’t be done this year is the new rehearsal space for the Vancouver Symphony. The rehearsal space is being built as a civic amenity in the Capital condo project just north of the theatre.

The room is being built, but Ackerman says there isn’t money to finish it off.

“That is something like a $10 to $20 million reno,” says Ackerman.

“There’s no money for that now. The big stage extension space is a concrete box. It’ll sit there, the space is claimed. When there is money and a pressing need, then it’ll happen.”

When the Queen Elizabeth renos were announced in 2003, the estimate was $15 million. It tripled to $48.5 million over the years, something Ackerman attributes to “time and construction cost escalation.”

“That’s the main part of it,” says Ackerman.

“Construction cost escalation was going up at one-and-a-half percent per month until the recession, it was just skrocketing for everybody. People talked about cost overruns at the convention centre as if it was somebody’s fault. No. We faced the same thing, it was killing us.”

The 50-year-old Queen E will also be getting new seats this summer, along with a slightly different seating plan.

“We’re revamping the sight lines,” he relates.

“The centre block orchestra seats that were directly behind [each] other, we’re fixing that. We’re reducing the depth of the orchestra mezzanine...so it’s not [so] much under the balcony.”

There will be new control booths, new and expanded washrooms, new acoustic reflectors and improved heating and air conditioning.

The foyer will also be a lot more dramatic.

“We’ve opened the main lobby ceiling,” he notes.

“We’ve opened a huge atrium there, so it’s now a three-storey high space which connects the space, connects the people, connects the experience.”

The interior Queen E renos should be finished by Nov. 13, the Orpheum will be finished Sept. 23. The city has applied to a federal heritage sites program to restore the Orpheum’s neon sign, chandeliers and Chinese tapestries, so more renos may be on the way next summer.

The 2,780-seat Orpheum is the busiest civic venue, with about 280 events per year. But things slow down in the summer — Ackerman says on average there are only about 18 shows from July to September. The 2,800-seat Queen E usually has about a dozen shows in the same timespan, although the number goes up if a big musical comes to town.

http://www.vancouversun.com/entertainmen...s+million+restoration/1702541/story.html
__________________
belowitall
     
     
  #3777  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2009, 1:36 AM
flight_from_kamakura's Avatar
flight_from_kamakura flight_from_kamakura is offline
testify
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: san francisco and montreal
Posts: 1,319
^ it's strange and a little sad, the realization that of all the dozens of theatres and playhouses that once existed, only a very few remain.
     
     
  #3778  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2009, 2:34 AM
agrant's Avatar
agrant agrant is offline
Cheers!
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,869
Would love to see the Orpheum sign get restored. It looks pretty beat up.
     
     
  #3779  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2009, 5:43 AM
mrjauk mrjauk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 555
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpongeG View Post
savings rates are quite crappy right now - i was the bank it was 0.75%
True dat. If you wanted more yield, you could buy corporate bonds, but you'd have to accept more risk. Then there's also term deposits.
     
     
  #3780  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2009, 5:52 AM
mrjauk mrjauk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 555
Quote:
Originally Posted by djh View Post
Very good and clearly-explained calculations, mrjauk. Thanks for that.

Of course, the reality is that very very few renters are disciplined enough to put that money aside that they are "saving" from renting, and invest it every single month. Most people end up saying that since they have all of this "spare" cash, they can afford to "upgrade" in some other way - bigger rental apartment, better car, nicer electronics, and so on. So unforunately, that monthly financial advantage gets whittled down pretty quickly.
Saving doesn't work for our generation, have you not seen the statistics on how little savings the average Canadian has?
Ultimately, buying property is *forced* saving. Advantage: buyers.
Yes, I agree that having a mortgage is good for "forced" saving. But, as you said the difference between what you pay to rent and what your mortgage--if it isn't saved--is going to increase one's utility in the form of present consumption that you would not have if you were paying a mortgage.

I'm not saying that one should never purchase real estate. Far from it; sometimes it makes financial sense to buy rather than rent. But, often it makes more financial sense to rent than buy, but you'll never hear anyone from the REIC--Real Estate Industrial Complex--tell you that.
     
     
This discussion thread continues

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

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Downtown & City of Vancouver
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:20 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.