The Ultimate Vancouver Rumour Thread!

[officedweller]

I saw that too - I wonder how true that is? I can't really see TransLink selling cars if it's going to be refurbishing them - unless it's an exchange deal where we lease some cars to them for a few years and then receive their old SRT cars in return.

This doesn't sound like a done deal:

http://www.translink.ca/en/About-Tra...lishments.aspx

• The plan to refurbish the older MK I SkyTrain vehicles is under review and is being compared with the alternative of replacing them with a smaller number of MK II cars, which can carry more passengers per car.

[LeftCoaster]

Can't share much, but there is a new office tower in the works for Vancouver which has the possibility to be the city's largest. It is a few years off but the process is in motion.

I'll keep you guys updated when I can.

[Denscity]

Whoa cool!!

[Winnipegger@Heart]

Any preliminaries you can share??? Height?

[Prometheus]

By "largest," do you mean tallest? And if you mean tallest, do you mean tallest office tower, or tallest tower period?

[Metro-One]

So I guess it is time to add another rumoured tower to the pile....

We have how many stuck in the pipe currently?

What happened to Amacon? The Stilts? GM tower? Our new popcorn tower???

I feel office tower proposals in downtown are like all the "new tallest" proposals for Surrey.

I dont buy into these proposals until there is a tower actually being built now.

[LeftCoaster]

Patience Metro, Office towers are an entirely different beast than a condo tower, they can't just spring up in a year, at least not in North America, they take years of planning and coordination.

Like I said this one is a few years off, so dont lose hope simply because you dont see much project in the next 12-16 months, it has a very experienced team behind it and the funding to match.

Originally Posted by Winnipegger@Heart

Any preliminaries you can share??? Height?

No there is nothing I can share, not because I cant divluge it, but becuase this project is in its infancy so it has not yet been determined. I do not know if it will become a new tallest becuase that decision has not yet been made, but I do know it has the potential to be the tallest office building in the city, I would be surprised if it passed Shangri-la in raw height however.

[SpongeG]

how come they can't build office towers but the suburbs fill up with office parks? so many offices in surrey its crazy - they could easily make one tower with all the office space are they amking out there in the suburbs

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Patience Metro, Office towers are an entirely different beast than a condo tower, they can't just spring up in a year, at least not in North America, they take years of planning and coordination.

Like I said this one is a few years off, so dont lose hope simply because you dont see much project in the next 12-16 months, it has a very experienced team behind it and the funding to match.



No there is nothing I can share, not because I cant divluge it, but becuase this project is in its infancy so it has not yet been determined. I do not know if it will become a new tallest because that decision has not yet been made, but I do know it has the potential to be the tallest office building in the city, I would be surprised if it passed Shangri-la in raw height however.

I know, but it just seems one would think with all of the new condos / residents downtown that at least 1 of these proposed office tower projects that have been rumored over the last 5 years would have started construction.

And yet I have seem countless business parks open up in the burbs during this time.

My personal opinion (remember, this is not fact) is that land prices downtown are killing future office towers along with how the city of Vancouver loves making it so inaccessible by car. I feel their resort style "livability" is starting to show some of its ugly consequences.

Livability is fine, but it seems Vancouver is starting to mistake resort life style for the wealthy with livability.

Let me just say, in filming construction safety videos, nearly all of the tradesmen who build the towers downtown can not afford to live downtown and commute (with all of their equipment) from the burbs.....

[djh]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

how come they can't build office towers but the suburbs fill up with office parks? so many offices in surrey its crazy - they could easily make one tower with all the office space are they amking out there in the suburbs

Simple.
The tenants who want suburban office park space either want a large contiguous amount of square footage, or low rents (or both).

Office towers downtown rarely have one or the other or both. And the kind of tenants who really really really want all of those needs met...can afford to build their own office tower (e.g., Scotia Tower, TD Tower, RBC Tower, HSBC Tower, see any pattern...?)

[Locked In]

^ Actually, I don't think the banks usually build office towers - it's usually pension funds etc, and the banks lease space (and signage).

Metro, I think the more likely reason that office towers haven't been going up in Vancouver is that there simply haven't been many tenants willing to commit to large amounts of space at high rents, due to the nature of the companies doing business here. High land values probably contribute to the high rents, but the City is likely doing what they can about that by designating portions of downtown off-limit to residential.

I don't really see what the City is doing to make downtown 'inaccessible' by car, and doubt that's having much effect on office tower construction. That's how I see it anyways.

[Metro-One]

It probably has a bit to do with it, as i said not fact, just a feeling, of course combined with many other factors as others have shown. I do find it strange though how large office parks have been popping up in the burbs like wild flowers, and the only office tower to have been completed this last year is in Brentwood Town Centre, which is equally serviced by mass transit and car. (and the only other one to have broken ground is metro tower 3, again relatively well serviced by rail and vehicle).

I was talking to one of the Vancouver councilors the other night at the Broadway Rapid Transit Expansion open house, and I asked him about future road use in Metro-Vancouver and he said "We are planning on tearing down the viaducts"

He didn't say "we are studying" or "we may be" he said "we are planning to" This tells me that some councilors minds are made up and they sure are not waiting for any study. (A study I believe is going to be biased in the first place, when considering how it came up)

He also went on to explain how if the street car does get built they now want it to dip south in front of the Olympic Village station simply so they can take away 1 or 2 lanes of traffic from W 2 Ave.

To me this thinking is not about how we can improve transit, but how we can punish drivers.

That thinking I do not like, I fully agree with enhancing public transport, but making it zig zag on the primary principal to simply punish drivers is becoming far to vindictive of thinking IMO. Especially when a rail row bed already exists in that location. This is the thinking of your Vancouver councilors.

If I was looking to move my business (videography) to a new office, I would also be looking for somewhere in the burbs that is well serviced by skytrain and roadways, since I need to use both depending on the job.

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

It probably has a bit to do with it, as i said not fact, just a feeling, of course combined with many other factors as others have shown. I do find it strange though how large office parks have been popping up in the burbs like wild flowers, and the only office tower to have been completed this last year is in Brentwood Town Centre, which is equally serviced by mass transit and car. (and the only other one to have broken ground is metro tower 3, again relatively well serviced by rail and vehicle).

I was talking to one of the Vancouver councilors the other night at the Broadway Rapid Transit Expansion open house, and I asked him about future road use in Metro-Vancouver and he said "We are planning on tearing down the viaducts"

He didn't say "we are studying" or "we may be" he said "we are planning to" This tells me that some councilors minds are made up and they sure are not waiting for any study. (A study I believe is going to be biased in the first place, when considering how it came up)

He also went on to explain how if the street car does get built they now want it to dip south in front of the Olympic Village station simply so they can take away 1 or 2 lanes of traffic from W 2 Ave.

To me this thinking is not about how we can improve transit, but how we can punish drivers.

That thinking I do not like, I fully agree with enhancing public transport, but making it zig zag on the primary principal to simply punish drivers is becoming far to vindictive of thinking IMO. Especially when a rail row bed already exists in that location. This is the thinking of your Vancouver councilors.

If I was looking to move my business (videography) to a new office, I would also be looking for somewhere in the burbs that is well serviced by skytrain and roadways, since I need to use both depending on the job.

Why on earth would you make the streetcar go on 2nd Avenue when there's a rail right-of-way right behind the Olympic Village Station entrance? That absolutely boggles my mind.

Actually, this one is really hurting my head.

2nd Avenue is an incredibly well-used artery. Two lanes were taken away at Cambie and 2nd during Canada Line construction and it was gridlock for 3 blocks in both directions on 2nd for years. That little section added anywhere between 5 to 10-minutes for the no. 84 bus trips I had during that period.

As for the "plan" to tear down the viaducts, perhaps it was just a slip on wording? Besides, an election is coming fast...in less than a year and a half. I highly doubt the current council will get far on any plans to tear down the viaducts, similar to Tim Louis' (2002-2005 councillor) failed plans to rid Vancouver of its nuclear weapons.



I can think of quite a few reasons why Downtown has had very little progress on the office front, but I think most of that is behind us now...we're slowly going the other way, the business/office climate seems to be a bit more friendly - we've made progress over the last 2 years.

[Spoolmak]

I hope they keep the viaducts.

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

No there is nothing I can share, not because I cant divluge it, but becuase this project is in its infancy so it has not yet been determined. I do not know if it will become a new tallest becuase that decision has not yet been made, but I do know it has the potential to be the tallest office building in the city, I would be surprised if it passed Shangri-la in raw height however.

Thanks for the info, I'm really excited.

Is this the Bay parakde? :p

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by Spoolmak

I hope they keep the viaducts.

Same here, especially since they want to implement the street car below and change most of the surface streets into local pedestrian orientated streets as the new condo towers are built. Not to mention the increased introduction of pedestrian traffic in the area, such as the new proposed walkway alongside BC Place stadium. Sure seems like a good idea to have the main vehicle traffic grade separated from such pedestrian walkways........

And to Mr. X, when he told me that plan for the street car it also made my head ache as well, hehe.

It seems like the biggest lose lose idea I have ever heard, let's clog vehicle traffic by making the street car trip longer, making it more expensive and disruptive to build by not using the existing ROW in that spot, and have it conflict with pedestrian traffic on the side walks...

On the up side that same councilor supported skytrain for UBC, so at least we had a bit of common ground, hehe.

[raggedy13]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Let me just say, in filming construction safety videos, nearly all of the tradesmen who build the towers downtown can not afford to live downtown and commute (with all of their equipment) from the burbs.....

I think it is more a lifestyle choice than anything. If I can afford to live downtown (renting) then tradesmen definitely can (they make a lot more than I do, trust me). I have a friend who is an electrician. He worked on the new Coast Hotel, commuting from White Rock the whole time. He makes much more than I do but he just plain doesn't want to live downtown or in a condo. He wants his vehicle and his house in the burbs (he doesn't have his own place just yet but that is his goal). I can't see why any tradesmen couldn't afford to live downtown (renting) if they wanted to. Personally I couldn't afford to buy anything anywhere right now (other than Detroit perhaps) so I won't touch on issues of ownership.

[Metro-One]

Well, I think it comes down to that the burbs are far more accomodating to a tradesman.

First of all, a tradesman essentially needs a work vehicle, to haul tools, supplies (such as lumber, dry wall, paint, etc...) to take out garbage (trust me there is a lot of garbage that you can not throw in the local dumpster, hehe) and owning / storing such work vehicles downtown is very expensive.

Also, tradesmen tend to work all over the metro region, downtown for 1 job, Surrey for another, Maple Ridge for another, etc...

Being downtown is being trapped on a peninsula that is slow to escape by vehicle south and east (where most of the metro and trades jobs are located). Therefore starting from a location in the burbs gives one more access to our highway system and shorter travel times to the varried work places. Again, if drving from downtown and Vancouver was a little easier and not being made more difficult every day on purpose then maybe more tradesmen would live downtown.

Remember, not everyone has a stationary job, an office job, a 9 to 5 job, or a job that does not require the transport of heavy / awkward tools and goods.

Also many tradesmen love having garages where you can work on some projects at home. and store your tools and supplies.

[paradigm4]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

I was talking to one of the Vancouver councilors the other night at the Broadway Rapid Transit Expansion open house, and I asked him about future road use in Metro-Vancouver and he said "We are planning on tearing down the viaducts"

Which councillor was it?

[Metro-One]

Hey, sent you a private message because i am not sure if it is OK to publicly name names in such an situation on this forum.