Oakridge Park | 13 Towers | 154m | 52fl | 5M sqft | U/C

[djh]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

The old existing building units were purchased for pennies on the dollar compared to the new development. This is anything but apples-to-apples.

They are people that don't want the disruption. They could sell for big dollars or easily rent the units at a sizeable profit.

My point was, if a hypothetical buyer wanted to move into the area, and saw a, say 1000 sq. ft suite listed in the new Oakridge building, and a 1000 sq. ft suite listed in this old building, the buyer would probably want to go for the new suite.

My other point was that the owners in the old building would have to live with construction noise, dust, closed roads, disruption, and pollution for nearly a decade. Selling a property with chaos surrounding you is hard, so they would have been better off selling to the developer and living elsewhere with the premium that they were offered until all the building is done, and then coming back to the area.

[officedweller]

The older units would be much larger and the nearby development (condos and retail) will provide an uplift to the assessed values, despite being older. They won't be priced the same as the new units, but higher than they are now.
Agreed that there may be maintenance and repair costs, such as elevator replacement, but that brick facade looks solid and the patios may be larger than in the towers.

Note: That condo link about says no pets, no rentals. Amenities are: elevator (!), storage and in-suite laundry.
So definitely not the same market as the luxury suites in the towers.

[SpongeG]

Nov 2, 2022

2022-11-02_11-33-46 by snub_you, on Flickr

2022-11-02_11-33-52 by snub_you, on Flickr

[mcminsen]

Oct.31 '22, my pics

[dleung]

Wow, that's quite a relentless streetwall facing the little low/mid-rises north of 41st. Vancouver seemed to have done a better job at scale transitions in the past. For this location, i would've preferred something more like the proposed Passages development in Surrey below, with the mall located mainly underground (yes, have parking even lower) with a more porous ground plane, sort of mixed in with something like The Well in Toronto



For the same density, I'd rather have taller towers and no superblock podiums

[chrisel]

Originally Posted by dleung

Wow, that's quite a relentless streetwall facing the little low/mid-rises north of 41st. Vancouver seemed to have done a better job at scale transitions in the past. For this location, i would've preferred something more like the proposed Passages development in Surrey below, with the mall located mainly underground (yes, have parking even lower) with a more porous ground plane, sort of mixed in with something like The Well in Toronto

For the same density, I'd rather have taller towers and no superblock podiums

That wouldn't be possible in this case. The reason they were forced to revise the initial proposal in the first place was because of geological constraints. There is an aquifer below the site:

https://biv.com/article/2016/01/aqifer-discovery-forces-15-billon-oakridge-expansi

[officedweller]

I think the culprit is the previous phasing of the project.

Originally, the mall was to stay in place, so they built on the available remaining land around the periphery
- which resulted in the long podiums on the arterial streets.
But, then with Covid, etc., the phasing was thrown out the door and the entire mall was demolished.
So if they had originally planned on demolishing the entire mall, then I'll bet that the design of the project
would have provided for a more permeable built form with walkways and passages through the site.

**********
So this pit is the site of the office building?

Originally Posted by SpongeG

Nov 2, 2022

2022-11-02_11-33-52 by snub_you, on Flickr

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I think the culprit is the previous phasing of the project.

So this pit is the site of the office building?

Yeah it's in that general area.


More clear from this photo



https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=9737147&postcount=1689

[officedweller]

Thanks.

[Bcasey25raptor]

How many years until this project nears completion?

[gaviscon]

Donno the exact details for each building, but the ones already popping into the skyline = 2024. 2027 for full project completion.

[svlt]

Mall should be open by 2024 AFAIK

[Jimbo604]

Originally Posted by dleung

Wow, that's quite a relentless streetwall facing the little low/mid-rises north of 41st. Vancouver seemed to have done a better job at scale transitions in the past. For this location, i would've preferred something more like the proposed Passages development in Surrey below, with the mall located mainly underground (yes, have parking even lower) with a more porous ground plane, sort of mixed in with something like The Well in Toronto

I thought about this comment when I went by this dev on Cambie street the other day. Cambie side is also looking pretty relentless closer to 45th ave.

[osirisboy]

I’m a fan of “relentless” podiums!! I love it

[Capitol Hill]

I know Hudson’s Bay is going to be an anchor tenant, is there going to be a second one?

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Capitol Hill

I know Hudson’s Bay is going to be an anchor tenant, is there going to be a second one?

The last time retail mall plans were submitted to the City, there wasn't another department store space, but there could be a large junior anchor.

[gaviscon]

Time Out Market is coming to Oakridge!

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/time-out-market-vancouver

[jollyburger]

Site video:

• Video Link

[bb1510]

Will the tree in the old atrium by the RBC and White Spot be integrated into the new mall?

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by bb1510

Will the tree in the old atrium by the RBC and White Spot be integrated into the new mall?

Looking at Google Maps, I think the tree (along with the White Spot, RBC, the atrium and the mall) are long gone. The only currently protected trees are the three in front of Crate & Barrel.