1875
Senior Member
downtown seems like such an unattractive place to live vs the beltline, kensington, inglewood, bridgeland, east village etc. guess if they build enough residential it could change but that seems like a long way off.
downtown seems like such an unattractive place to live vs the beltline, kensington, inglewood, bridgeland, east village etc. guess if they build enough residential it could change but that seems like a long way off.
I agree - as a kid who loved (and still loves) skyscrapers I remember how excited I was when the project appeared on the front page of the Herald. I have been lamenting that the 64 storey tower never got built since it was capped at ground level (hence my member name and avatarFCC 2 not being built is probably the biggest skyline miss of the 80s boom. I've always been a fan of the tower that did get built, but a city's tallest in that spot would've been so sweet.
I get what you are saying, but it really isn't that long ago that Bridgeland and East Village were not attractive places to live. Both of them have been a while in getting going, but they also both required a bunch of new infrastructure, while DT could probably add 10 000 units tomorrow with relatively little new infrastructure. There are already a decent amount of amenities downtown that Bridge land and EV didn't have when they got started. DT residents would rely on EV or Beltline for groceries (Superstore & Safeway), but realistically that isn't a big concern anymore....I live in West Hillhurst and get probably 75% of my groceries delivered now because it's only about $15 and I don't need to take an hour out of my day to do it.downtown seems like such an unattractive place to live vs the beltline, kensington, inglewood, bridgeland, east village etc. guess if they build enough residential it could change but that seems like a long way off.
Only way to fix that is to add residents... These conversions are a massive step up and exactly what downtown needs.downtown seems like such an unattractive place to live vs the beltline, kensington, inglewood, bridgeland, east village etc. guess if they build enough residential it could change but that seems like a long way off.
I doubt anyone is betting on an office boom, that'd be a pretty terrible strategy considering offices are down significantly all over North America. Calgary had some recovery years from the oil collapse and that's only brought us marginally down to 29% vacancy with essentially no new build coming to market. Not sure what catalyst could possibly lead to an office boom.I just can't see them building a 65 storey tower. This is just a flip betting on an office boom. They could buy several more major office towers for the cost to build a 65 storey tower.
The commercial real estate collapse hit Calgary well before other cities. The recent surge in transaction is likely a sign that valuations have bottomed out. Other cities have yet to test the bottom.I doubt anyone is betting on an office boom, that'd be a pretty terrible strategy considering offices are down significantly all over North America. Calgary had some recovery years from the oil collapse and that's only brought us marginally down to 29% vacancy with essentially no new build coming to market. Not sure what catalyst could possibly lead to an office boom.
CF looked into this in recent memory. The members who serve there overwhelmingly wished for the location to stay put. There are now some auxiliary facilities in the NE where vehicles and equipment are stored.Could you not consolidate the Military recruiting services to the 17th military site, the military museum, or the Currie Barracks location?
Boom was the wrong choice of word. The purchase prices are so heavily devalued For FCC and BVS that a modest recovery with vacancies dropping to the mid to high teens would positively affect valuation. Armoyan is the majority stakeholder in Slate which is teetering on insolvency so he needs a recovery in commercial property valuations in any case.I doubt anyone is betting on an office boom, that'd be a pretty terrible strategy considering offices are down significantly all over North America. Calgary had some recovery years from the oil collapse and that's only brought us marginally down to 29% vacancy with essentially no new build coming to market. Not sure what catalyst could possibly lead to an office boom.
How high was vacancies in BVS and FCC? They took their leasing sites down after they got bought. Without making improvements, wouldn't it be hard to see leasing increase, considering many other buildings are starting renovations.Boom was the wrong choice of word. The purchase prices are so heavily devalued For FCC and BVS that a modest recovery with vacancies dropping to the mid to high teens would positively affect valuation. Armoyan is the majority stakeholder in Slate which is teetering on insolvency so he needs a recovery in commercial property valuations in any case.
This real estate investment fund buys low and sells high. They make minimal improvements to increase property values. They don't develop and they have never built anything as big and costly as a 65 storey tower. They will seek approval from the federal housing initiatives if there is any seriousness.
I don't think I see a world where another office tower is built, likely for another few decades that isn't medical office like the one across from the new Cancer Centre.Boom was the wrong choice of word. The purchase prices are so heavily devalued For FCC and BVS that a modest recovery with vacancies dropping to the mid to high teens would positively affect valuation. Armoyan is the majority stakeholder in Slate which is teetering on insolvency so he needs a recovery in commercial property valuations in any case.
This real estate investment fund buys low and sells high. They make minimal improvements to increase property values. They don't develop and they have never built anything as big and costly as a 65 storey tower. They will seek approval from the federal housing initiatives if there is any seriousness.




