Edmonton Construction 9 (2008-08)

[Habanero]

Originally Posted by CMD UW

Don't get me wrong, the amount of new office towers Calgary has built / continues to build is impressive. But the reality is that there is a significant amount of office space (both new and backfill) that will need to be absorbed before we see any new towers. O&G companies are sub-leasing space and/or consolidating and returning space to the market. It is reasonable to expect no new office construction in Calgary for at least 5 or so years once Encana and EAP are completed. The A-class market should be ok, but the B-class market, particularly buildings in the Beltline will find it difficult.

Yep, that sounds about right. If history repeats itself (which it often does) The office space will take while to get absorbed, and once the levels get down, it takes a while for a developer to get the ball rolling on a new project.

About 18 months from now Calgary's office space market will look alot like it did in 1983 just after Petro Canada tower was finished, and the then vacancy rate was 16%. The next new building in Calgary (Canterra) didn't start until about 5 years after that, in 1988. I'm betting we won't see a new office tower start up for at least 6 years minimum.

[Cow-garian]

Originally Posted by MrOilers

I really think this next boom will be Edmonton's turn to see a bunch of new downtown towers rise.

I really do hope so

I may not be the biggest 'oil country' fan, but we're all Albertans and the best thing for Alberta is that both the capital city and corporate city succeed and I think the recent announcement regarding the Edmonton LRT expansion will undoubtedly and exponentially help out development in your downtown.

Originally Posted by Habanero

I'm betting we won't see a new office tower start up for at least 6 years minimum.

For the short term at least, I don't think too many Calgarians will mind the slow down in pace, it'll be easier on the wallets (less demand) and less construction detour headaches. It'll be nice to take a breather and basically let the rest of the infrastructure and other things catch up.

[s211]

Originally Posted by 240glt

How's the leasing at EAP going ?

Very close to big deal, I hear (from a reliable source).

[Coldrsx]

Originally Posted by s211

Very close to big deal, I hear (from a reliable source).

yup, heard the same thing...

[Coldrsx]

EDMONTON — Construction of a massive green community at the City Centre Airport could start within three years, but Mayor Stephen Mandel isn’t sure he’ll be in office to see it happen.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/Mandel+mulls+future+mayor/2352575/story.html

[ue]

^have you read some of those comments? lord help them...

[Kevin_foster]

Sure a few more office towers would be nice, but let's not dwell on it...

For me, the key proponent in developing our downtown properly is to build a lot more condo towers (places for people to live) . I'd rather have 100% occupied 24/7 properties than 80% occupied 9 hours of the day - leaving downtown a deadzone after 6.

I think we need to put more of our efforts into making downtown into a lively place. No 50/60/70 storey office tower can do that.

Sure towers are nice to look at, but I'd much rather have the people and vibrancy thankyouverymuch. People create demand for services, restaurants, bars, shops, etc. Office towers do too, but not on the same scale.

Perhaps it's just me... but the nicer, more attractive, more vibrant, more populous downtown will do nothing but attract corporate players to choose to be where the action is.

Let's push downtown to be attractive to business, but we also need to market it better to our own people (and newcomers).

[feepa]

oh my , why did I go look. I purposely avoid the comments section. But EE mentioned it - and like a train wreck, I had to go look see and geeeezzzzzus christ are people ever stupid.

[Keats82]

My god, the replies regarding this article are ridiculous. People have too much time on their hands and seriously need a kick in the patoot.

My reply:

"I try not to assume things, but I'm pretty sure that most of you are armchair civic enthusiasts who have no real idea of what goes on in City Hall and the council.

Mandel has taken the role of mayor on like a champ, and made some very tough choices. The new art gallery is going to be a major hit, the earnings of the Indy have nothing to do with him but YOU, the consumer, going. He only wants to stick it out to fulfill the citys' terms of the conract.

All of this nonsense about taxes increasing is ridiculous. Edmonton is the same size as Chicago but with 1/5th the population base - meaning that all of the spectacular suburbs and services eventually call for higher taxes to clear roads, fund community centres, etc.

I'm really at a lost to see how people can make such immature and blatantly ignorant statements just to fuel their own perceptions or misgivings of one individual or service. Read more, understand both sides of the story, and maybe get a job vs. posting such tripe on the internet all day long."

[Keats82]

^^ Referencing one of my favorite qoutes from Judge Judy, the comments in that article are the perfect example as to why people should be tested before they are allowed to have children.

[ue]

I did a reply too, but didn't think to copy it. I basically said for people to ditch the small town mentality and realize the great things Mandel has done. He's not perfect, but much better than Smith. If he's up to it, I'd love to have him re-elected and for him to create even more visions for the city that actually get implemented. He ended a debate that lasted decades, ended with a closure to happen for an airport. He approved so many LRT projects and made it priority I'm sure we'd still only have Clareview-University if it weren't for him.

Originally Posted by Kevin_foster

Sure a few more office towers would be nice, but let's not dwell on it...

For me, the key proponent in developing our downtown properly is to build a lot more condo towers (places for people to live) . I'd rather have 100% occupied 24/7 properties than 80% occupied 9 hours of the day - leaving downtown a deadzone after 6.

I think we need to put more of our efforts into making downtown into a lively place. No 50/60/70 storey office tower can do that.

Sure towers are nice to look at, but I'd much rather have the people and vibrancy thankyouverymuch. People create demand for services, restaurants, bars, shops, etc. Office towers do too, but not on the same scale.

Perhaps it's just me... but the nicer, more attractive, more vibrant, more populous downtown will do nothing but attract corporate players to choose to be where the action is.

Let's push downtown to be attractive to business, but we also need to market it better to our own people (and newcomers).

Yes, and also, Edmonton doesn't actually need (nor does Calgary, or Seattle, or LA, or whatever) 200m tall buildings. China does, NY maybe, some places in Europe. Japan. Canada? Not really. We should fill as many places as possible and only have non buildings for parks and plazas, because to me it makes sense to kill two parking lots with two 20m tall condos than 1 40m tall condo and leaving one parking lot. And when demmad is needed in an area, and there is no where else to turn, then you go up, but make the most efficient use of space as possible beforehand.

That being said Calgary and Edmonton both have seen a refocus towards residential construction in downtown (well, for Calgary the Beltline area).

[craner]

Originally Posted by Habanero

Yep, that sounds about right. If history repeats itself (which it often does) The office space will take while to get absorbed, and once the levels get down, it takes a while for a developer to get the ball rolling on a new project.

About 18 months from now Calgary's office space market will look alot like it did in 1983 just after Petro Canada tower was finished, and the then vacancy rate was 16%. The next new building in Calgary (Canterra) didn't start until about 5 years after that, in 1988. I'm betting we won't see a new office tower start up for at least 6 years minimum.

Not to nit pick here, and I know this is the EDMONTON forum but . . .
Petro Canada finished up in 1984 and Canterra was U/C by 1986 (completed 1988). Having said that - if it's only 6 years until the next office tower proceeds in Calgary - I can live with that. (sorry for the hijack).

[kcantor]

Originally Posted by Habanero

Yep, that sounds about right. If history repeats itself (which it often does) The office space will take while to get absorbed, and once the levels get down, it takes a while for a developer to get the ball rolling on a new project.

About 18 months from now Calgary's office space market will look alot like it did in 1983 just after Petro Canada tower was finished, and the then vacancy rate was 16%. The next new building in Calgary (Canterra) didn't start until about 5 years after that, in 1988. I'm betting we won't see a new office tower start up for at least 6 years minimum.

you may well be right. on the other hand, you may well have a market a few hours north to take those cranes off your hands that you didn't have last time...

[vaportrail]

Originally Posted by cdnklc

you may well be right. on the other hand, you may well have a market a few hours north to take those cranes off your hands that you didn't have last time...

Oh, you sweet talker, you. You had me at cranes.

But what possible consideration would you have, other than wishful thinking, to air such bravado?

[Wooster]

Originally Posted by s211

Very close to big deal, I hear (from a reliable source).

Hmmm, any idea which company is rumoured to sign? Shell, CNRL and Imperial seem like the most likely suspects.

[ibz]

Originally Posted by Wooster

Hmmm, any idea which company is rumoured to sign? Shell, CNRL and Imperial seem like the most likely suspects.

Shell has been the subject of most rumours

[feepa]

I came back. See its still Calgary talk.

I'll try again tomorrow.

[kcantor]

Originally Posted by vaportrail

Oh, you sweet talker, you. You had me at cranes.

But what possible consideration would you have, other than wishful thinking, to air such bravado?

we only have three on our site at the moment and sometimes three isn't enough (the fourth one in the background is quest - it's not ours). what you're looking at is only about 1/3 of the overall project site and this tower only builds out about 1/4 of what's already planned.



and just in case you like climbing booms as much as cranes:



project phots courtesy of multivista

[WhipperSnapper]

Very close to big deal, I hear (from a reliable source).

EAP has been "close" to signing a major tenant for more than eight months. In fact, I've heard they have had several interested parties and that an agreement couldn't be reached with the first in line.

[Xelebes]

Come on folks, let's keep this about Edmonton construction, ok?