I didn't go through all 2762 posts in this thread so someone may have mentioned it already but Shangri-La has more floors than any building in Canada outside Toronto.
__________________
“I have never understood why it is greedy to want to keep the money you have earned but not greedy to want to take somebody else's money.”-Thomas Sowell
I didn't go through all 2762 posts in this thread so someone may have mentioned it already but Shangri-La has more floors than any building in Canada outside Toronto.
Even more than the Bow Tower in Calgary? Or is that just taller than ours in height?
Mohkínstsis — 1.6 million people at the Foothills of the Rocky Mountains, 400 high-rises, a 300-metre SE to NW climb, over 1000 kilometres of pathways, with 20% of the urban area as parkland.
Both Emporis and Wikipedia say Shangri-La is 62 stories. I was going to urge the nearest Vancouverite to go and check the elevator but even that's often inaccurate due to shit on the roof.
__________________
“I have never understood why it is greedy to want to keep the money you have earned but not greedy to want to take somebody else's money.”-Thomas Sowell
Anyone have the inside scoop?
Are maintenance fees sky-high? or is it the opposite - that the services are not exclusive enough?
Quote:
Shangri-La homebuyers sue developers
Strata corporation representing buyers claims developers of city’s tallest building falsely promised costs would be shared with hotel
By Glen Korstrom
Tue May 21, 2013 12:01am PST
The strata corporation representing homebuyers at the Shangri-La Hotel Vancouver is suing developers, marketers and lawyers for alleged “misrepresentations” that devalue home values and involve unexpected costs at Vancouver’s tallest building.
The strata corporation’s biggest concerns relate to the fact that it shares the high-end development with a hotel.
The strata corporation claims the developers:
•falsely made representations in disclosure statements to lead homebuyers to believe that, among other things, they would be buying into a strata corporation that “would have its own entrance lobby located on the ground floor with a concierge-security officer 24 hours a day”;
•promised in legal documents that the building would have three passenger elevators that would be for its members’ exclusive use.
•promised its members that they would have a number of amenities including a fitness centre, function rooms and foyer, library, games room, underground parking.
•promised buyers that costs related to these amenities would be “shared substantially” with the hotel and that the hotel’s valet service could be used by the project’s strata corporation members on a pay-per-use rather than a cost-sharing allocation basis.
The strata’s lawsuit also alleges that its members never “contemplated that rules and regulations would be unilaterally imposed by the hotel component.”
As a result of the alleged misrepresentations and failure to disclose all material facts, the strata corporation claims the developer has filed “void, invalid and unenforceable easements, leases, licences and cost-sharing agreements.”
One of the biggest issues is the strata is not happy with the amount of money being paid to the "remainder", they do not feel that the psf ratio being used represents an accurate representation of services consumed. It will be interesting to see how this one plays out as it will set precedent for many more cases pending.
Location: The People's Glorious Republic of ... Sigh...
Posts: 8,483
On-going management of mixed-use projects is a pretty hot topic, especially when you mix residential and commercial. Very few firms are set up to do both, and if you parcel management off, then conflicts are inevitable.
Location: Victoria (formerly Port Moody, then Winnipeg)
Posts: 2,446
Quote:
Originally Posted by s211
On-going management of mixed-use projects is a pretty hot topic, especially when you mix residential and commercial. Very few firms are set up to do both, and if you parcel management off, then conflicts are inevitable.
Sounds like a new class of property management that could be an opportunity for some brave individuals / companies who want to tackle this. I'd expect they could charge a premium for this service.
One of the biggest issues is the strata is not happy with the amount of money being paid to the "remainder", they do not feel that the psf ratio being used represents an accurate representation of services consumed. It will be interesting to see how this one plays out as it will set precedent for many more cases pending.
So the condo is overly subsidizing the hotel amenities, yet the hotel seems to have control over the amenities?
I wonder if this case is why 3 Civic Plaza decided to cut out all the amenities and make it known up front that any buyer would have to be willing to pay to use the hotel services, albiet at a reduced cost.
I think that is the arrangement for the Canadain ("at Wall Centre")
- maybe Klazu can answer whether that is also true for One Wall Centre (that residents don't have extensive amenities but can join the hotel's fitess facility for a reduced rate)?
I know Shangri-La has been seen from every possible angle on this forum, but it starts to be the last chance to see it without its soon-to-be neighbours, so here are few shots from today.
Care to explain your ? Looks pretty darn nice to me.
__________________
If it seems I'm ignoring what you may have written in response to something I have written, it's very likely that you're on my Ignore List. Please do not take it personally.
Prev
Linear Mode
