Canadian City Proposals

[giallo]

Originally Posted by logan5

In the context of this latest wave of more sophisticated designs, I find Vancouver House plain and simplistic. The Kengo tower is much more interesting to look at without being garish (imo).


There is another proposal that will be revealed soon, that will be right across the street from this one. "Exploding" was the word to describe it. Those twin towers in Korea come to mind.

Whoa. First time seeing this one. I already like this way more than Vancouver House.

[Metro-One]

I still really like Vancouver House, mainly due to its interaction with the Granville Street Bridge viaducts.

Vancouver has had an amazing wave of funky new designs this last couple years.

Content removed

[Black Star]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

Lol!!! It's not right dammit! Oh well we're still ahead of you guys on the design front. We're obviously not Vancouver yet but we have a solid decade on the Chuck. You guys have us beat on the arena front, though I don't envy you guys for getting fucked by Katz.

A recap again for you


Quoting from Hillman, who clears up some misconceptions regarding taxpayers paying for the Edmonton area. What he says is all part of public record:

Cost of the arena is $480 million, $130 million paid by the Katz Group, $125 million paid for by a ticket tax on all tickets sold at the venue and $200 million from the City and $25 million from other levels of government for the second ice surface/community rink to be used for the public and nearby university. The City's portion will be paid via a Community Revitalization Zone Levy (CRL) and other extra revenue like parking. Note that there was no tax rate increase in order to pay for any part of the arena.

The philosophy behind the CRL program is:

Major revitalization projects attract and increase local activity, investment and development. Economic growth creates additional tax revenue for all orders of government. Additional municipal and provincial property taxes from the economic growth will help fund the original project.

The amount of new tax revenue that the lands in and around the arena will make for the City on an annual basis, FAR exceeds the $200 million that the City has seeded into this project. There is currently over $2.5 billion in construction going on in the Arena district itself including a 50+ floor hotel (might be as high as 60), 62 floor office/condo (might be as high as 70), a 29 floor office and other retail businesses including a grocer, movie theater complex, restaurants, bars, etc. This district has fast forwarded many new condo high rises that have been announced since the arena was started and would not have existed without the new arena.

The CRL funding forecasts are based on only 40% of the growth predicted in Rollo’s conservative model, and still the CRL was calculated to generate, in net present value, $473 million in new taxes over 20 years.

So how investing $200 million in this multi billion district, getting almost $500 million in new taxation revenue (maybe more) AND revitalizing the city's downtown at the same time is a bad deal?

[Coldrsx]

Cause it clearly is. Clearly.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by thomax

I don't think this has been posted yet. Here are some renderings of Brantford's new YMCA & Wilfrid Laurier University Recreation Complex. Construction has started.


source


source

Larger Sizes:

source


source

The new development is replacing 41 buildings that were built between 1850-1937. They were all demolished back in 2010...

2009:

source

2012:

source

2017:

source

I was going to say I liked this until I saw what they destroyed.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by Black Star

A recap again for you


Quoting from Hillman, who clears up some misconceptions regarding taxpayers paying for the Edmonton area. What he says is all part of public record:

Cost of the arena is $480 million, $130 million paid by the Katz Group, $125 million paid for by a ticket tax on all tickets sold at the venue and $200 million from the City and $25 million from other levels of government for the second ice surface/community rink to be used for the public and nearby university. The City's portion will be paid via a Community Revitalization Zone Levy (CRL) and other extra revenue like parking. Note that there was no tax rate increase in order to pay for any part of the arena.

The philosophy behind the CRL program is:

Major revitalization projects attract and increase local activity, investment and development. Economic growth creates additional tax revenue for all orders of government. Additional municipal and provincial property taxes from the economic growth will help fund the original project.

The amount of new tax revenue that the lands in and around the arena will make for the City on an annual basis, FAR exceeds the $200 million that the City has seeded into this project. There is currently over $2.5 billion in construction going on in the Arena district itself including a 50+ floor hotel (might be as high as 60), 62 floor office/condo (might be as high as 70), a 29 floor office and other retail businesses including a grocer, movie theater complex, restaurants, bars, etc. This district has fast forwarded many new condo high rises that have been announced since the arena was started and would not have existed without the new arena.

The CRL funding forecasts are based on only 40% of the growth predicted in Rollo’s conservative model, and still the CRL was calculated to generate, in net present value, $473 million in new taxes over 20 years.

So how investing $200 million in this multi billion district, getting almost $500 million in new taxation revenue (maybe more) AND revitalizing the city's downtown at the same time is a bad deal?

I was under the impression that Katz only had to pay $17 mil upfront with the rest being collected via tax over 20 years? Either way Edmonton seems to be a rare (if not the only example recently) of a new sports venue actually contributing positively the way it was sold. In reality this wouldn't work In Calgary the same way.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by Black Star

A recap again for you


Quoting from Hillman, who clears up some misconceptions regarding taxpayers paying for the Edmonton area. What he says is all part of public record:

Cost of the arena is $480 million, $130 million paid by the Katz Group, $125 million paid for by a ticket tax on all tickets sold at the venue and $200 million from the City and $25 million from other levels of government for the second ice surface/community rink to be used for the public and nearby university. The City's portion will be paid via a Community Revitalization Zone Levy (CRL) and other extra revenue like parking. Note that there was no tax rate increase in order to pay for any part of the arena.

The philosophy behind the CRL program is:

Major revitalization projects attract and increase local activity, investment and development. Economic growth creates additional tax revenue for all orders of government. Additional municipal and provincial property taxes from the economic growth will help fund the original project.

The amount of new tax revenue that the lands in and around the arena will make for the City on an annual basis, FAR exceeds the $200 million that the City has seeded into this project. There is currently over $2.5 billion in construction going on in the Arena district itself including a 50+ floor hotel (might be as high as 60), 62 floor office/condo (might be as high as 70), a 29 floor office and other retail businesses including a grocer, movie theater complex, restaurants, bars, etc. This district has fast forwarded many new condo high rises that have been announced since the arena was started and would not have existed without the new arena.

The CRL funding forecasts are based on only 40% of the growth predicted in Rollo’s conservative model, and still the CRL was calculated to generate, in net present value, $473 million in new taxes over 20 years.

So how investing $200 million in this multi billion district, getting almost $500 million in new taxation revenue (maybe more) AND revitalizing the city's downtown at the same time is a bad deal?

In Toronto, the city may decide to invest in the arena providing ownership but would also command ten of millions in community contributions on top of very high development charges. So, what is Edmonton getting beyond additional tax revenue? A bridge? A Park? 300 foot Gretzky statue? Don't vtell me community usage of the practice arena is all.

[Black Star]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

In Toronto, the city may decide to invest in the arena providing ownership but would also command ten of millions in community contributions on top of very high development charges. So, what is Edmonton getting beyond additional tax revenue? A bridge? A Park? 300 foot Gretzky statue? Don't vtell me community usage of the practice arena is all.

Well....this. And then refer to post above for additional review and consumption

[WhipperSnapper]

So really nothing.

C'mon guys. The "CRL" or whatever you choose to call it is a ruse. The ICE district may generate more tax revenue but, it will also cost the city a lot more to service. The only way for this levies to make sense is for the improvement district to be ten times the target site. Taxes may not increase but, funds will get reallocated. Dozen of blocks with be subsidizing their service and maintenance for the development of those 4.

Is that a good thing? Ask those people.

[Black Star]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

So really nothing.

C'mon guys. The "CRL" or whatever you choose to call it is a ruse. The ICE district may generate more tax revenue but, it will also cost the city a lot more to service. The only way for this levies to make sense is for the improvement district to be ten times the target site. Taxes may not increase but, funds will get reallocated. Dozen of blocks with be subsidizing their service and maintenance for the development of those 4.

Is that a good thing? Ask those people.

Pal...Why are you so worried about this lol. Its ok...let it go.

Its done. Its not going to change or be reversed cause you don't like it.

[Coldrsx]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

So really nothing.

C'mon guys. The "CRL" or whatever you choose to call it is a ruse. The ICE district may generate more tax revenue but, it will also cost the city a lot more to service. The only way for this levies to make sense is for the improvement district to be ten times the target site. Taxes may not increase but, funds will get reallocated. Dozen of blocks with be subsidizing their service and maintenance for the development of those 4.

Is that a good thing? Ask those people.

The CRL is exceptionally conservative, even if a bit of a shell game, and is on target to be 2-4 times that value... Maybe more.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by Black Star

Pal...Why are you so worried about this lol. Its ok...let it go.

Its done. Its not going to change or be reversed cause you don't like it.

LMAO ... worried?!?

I just had to repond to your ridiculous post though. Almost as nuts as a rich booming city giving developers breaks.

[Xelebes]

Cleaned the thread up a little. Keeping the thread nice and cool, you know.

[Klazu]

Higher resolution rendering og Vancouver's new 1550 Alberni Street proposal. 40 floors and looking amazing!!

Vancouver is clearly transitioning to a new level of international architecture with several WOW proposals.

[dreambrother808]

More here:





http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2015/09/1550-alberni-street-vancouver-tower/

[WhipperSnapper]

The grand piano gets around.

[Martin Mtl]

Looks amazing.

[TorontoDrew]

That is cool! It's about time Vancouver put up some towers that don't just blend in with the rest. You need some Iconic tall structures.

[OTSkyline]

Very cool and innovative tower proposal for Vancouver!

I can just see the promo material for it though "Prices starting at 72.5M"