Page 3 of 33 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 300 of 3260

Thread: Edmonton Tower | 129.9 m, 426', 29 floors |

  1. #201
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,973

    Default

    Sounds like end of June/early july.

    I believe just award, but not entirely sure on that.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  2. #202
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Edmonton of course
    Posts
    1,145

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chmilz View Post
    And of course we do need to consider what things look like in Edmonton for 8 months of the year...

    After seeing this picture , I know the true meaning of fugly now.
    live for happiness because without it everything seems ho hum

  3. #203
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    2,482

    Default

    I LOVE the E building.

    How can you call it fugly??

    So glassy and sexy!

  4. #204
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,973

    Default

    Exactly, an incredible design.

    If it was chosen/built, it would easily become one of 'the' buildings architecturally in Canada's new office market design wise.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  5. #205
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton Downtown Core
    Posts
    4,430

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Exactly, an incredible design.

    If it was chosen/built, it would easily become one of 'the' buildings architecturally in Canada's new office market design wise.
    IF built as portrayed. Reality is the landscaping between floors would be gone, and we have no idea of what the VE changes will bring...shades of the hotel at the airport. Then there is the functional aspect of what is proposed - where design trumps function.

  6. #206
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,198

    Default

    The reality is, knowing the developer, is that this was more of a design exercise than anything.

    CoE would be so incredibly foolish to build new when other options are available. I believe they'll do the smart thing and consolidate in an existing building, thuse not sending the vac. rate through the roof and lowering the property values downtown, affecting lease rates and the taxation rate for the CRL, etc..
    Parkdale

  7. #207
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,688

    Default

    ^I can't answer this question but I know that there are some on here that can. Is there any one building here in the city that can accommodate a complete consolidation? I thought that the reason they are looking for a new building is because there isn't a building with enough space.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  8. #208
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,198

    Default

    ^ the bigger question is: does it make any kind of sense to move something like a call centre to a brand new building @ $40/sf + Op. costs ?

    The CoE could use a consolidation yes, as some of their offices are too spread out. But there are some departments that gain nothing from being in one giant tower. There are several existing options that would work well for the city, without the city becoming a tenant in a new building with the highest lease rate in the city.
    Parkdale

  9. #209
    You registered but never posted. username to be deleted.
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    800

    Default

    ^I think you are exaggerating a little, no offense. The building would presumably be about 500k square feet, that would not put the vacancy rate through the roof.

  10. #210
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,597

    Default

    anyone else here a rumored pitch for a Sun Life - ATB Place combo + refit for the C of E ?
    Or the obvious Stn Lnds 2
    Still waiting for the Arlington site to be reborn .......

  11. #211

    Default

    The city report on department consolidation was tabled... there was substantial savings. Hence the reason there is now a call out on proposals. Further to that we need newer up to date office space in this city.

    My 2 cents. Yes they should move into a new building which would allow chancery to be vacated and renoed, it would help with the library reno as well.

    A bigger newer building makes sense and the org city hall design called for more office space as well.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  12. #212

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blueline View Post
    anyone else here a rumored pitch for a Sun Life - ATB Place combo + refit for the C of E ?
    Or the obvious Stn Lnds 2
    You mean the city would share its new building with ATB and Sun Life? Or are you talking two separate buildings here?

  13. #213
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,973

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rico View Post
    ^I think you are exaggerating a little, no offense. The building would presumably be about 500k square feet, that would not put the vacancy rate through the roof.
    We need some new quality space in this marketplace and it would allow for backfill space at a lower rate for others.

    Not to mention that we average 150k a yr in absorption.

    I predict that we will see 2 if not 3 new office towers u/c in 2014.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  14. #214
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,198

    Default

    ^ you're saying the city should occupy the brand new space and let the market backfill at a lower rate ?? Damn Ian, glad you're not in property management..

    How it should work is that the city occupies the lower end stuff (I repeat, NO WAY should the city be paying the highest lease rates in the city) And let the market demand for higher quality space drive construction. You are completely *** backwards on this one... but as long as we get a shiny new tower, nobody seems to care, right ?

    Oh, and Rico, Industry leaders have gone directly to the mayors office with this concern. We're probably in negative absorption right now, so yes, 500k SF on new office space would have a pretty dramatic effect on our small market

    No we won't see 3 towers in 2014. We will see 1. Then one in 2016. That's my educated guess.
    Parkdale

  15. #215
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,973

    Default

    ^not saying that the City should specifically be the tenant no... $40 a foot for many departments/uses is absurd.

    Don't jump to conclusions so fast mate.

    Q1 was ~ 41k positive absorption in the financial district.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  16. #216
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,973

    Default

    'No we won't see 3 towers in 2014. We will see 1. Then one in 2016. That's my educated guess.'

    KR - summer 2013
    AIMCO - 2015 my guess
    Other - 2015/16
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  17. #217
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,198

    Default

    ^^ That figure is for financial and government. Financial hardly budged.

    There's still +/- 8.5% vacancy out there. Adding a half mil to our inventory would have a pretty profound effect. I'd rather the market drive the inventory than the city. Let our firms trade up to nicer digs.. the city does not need or warrant that.


    KR 2014 (it won't be under construction this year I don't think)

    AIMCO maybe 2014 IF they get their star tenant... which is a possibility, but if not, 2015-2016
    Parkdale

  18. #218
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,139

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 240GLT
    Adding a half mil to our inventory would have a pretty profound effect.
    It's about 5% of our total A inventory downtown, which is about 10.6 million feet. Anything under 10% I believe is considered a relatively healthy market, so if there's even a moderate amount of absorption (say 100k a year) over the 2-3 years it will take to build a tower, that means that the vacancy rate will still be somewhere around 10%.

    Kelly Ramsay isn't an overly large office tower either, as it's half hotel. So there's certainly room for whatever RFP the city chooses and KR Block to both get in the ground this year or next. How 102 figures in to that remains to be seen I guess.

  19. #219
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,198

    Default

    ^ there's some doubt about whether a hotel will be going in there. It may end up being all office.

    Yes the market is stable and relatively healthy, but all it takes is a few bad quarters and +500k SF addedto the market to push us way up. We're not Calgary.. we don't absorb like that. Over the past ten, we've had good years and bad years. WE've also been lucky a few times.

    I'm not trying to be a downer here but just trying to instill some rationality into this conversation. We will see new space, as I believe there is a trade-up market in Edmonton. And that's what should drive a new build. Not the city. That's all I'm sayin'
    Parkdale

  20. #220

    Default

    Does a City of Edmonton office tower have to be downtown, or could it be near downtown, on an LRT line, at Blatchford, to kick start that development? The city has to expropriate land their anyways. The land cost would be less then building a new tower downtown, and it would make the NAIT line even more fully utilized.
    Last edited by Ustauk; 20-06-2013 at 03:50 PM.

  21. #221
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,973

    Default

    ^we need more concentration of offices downtown and while the City has offices outside of the downtown, part of this is to ensure we keep them downtown and potentially contribute to the CRL.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  22. #222
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    128

    Default

    Some of the comments posted seem to equate office space like Chancery or the CN buiding as interchangeable with Manulife or TD Tower. This simply isn't the case. The market is asking for higher quality space, and/or, large contiguous space for consolidation (ie. City) in one building for efficiency purposes. Nothing in the 8.5% vacancy universe can handle that need. The driver for new builds is the market.


    I agree with IanO. KR is underway. The city will kick off another building, probably in 2014. And 2015-6 will see yet another. And yes, vacancy will increase and rates will drop.

    Does adding that mcuh space to a market that typically absorbs 150k/year make sense? On the surface, no it does not. It sure makes better sense at 2-3% vacant. But it makes sense to add space downtown to accommodate the needs of the market instead of losing them to a campus in the 'burbs or heaven forbid losing them altogether to an unnamed city south of Edmonton.

    Let's not forget the 'luck' we've had in the recent past. TD backfilled more space than was lost when Epcor and the Feds moved to the new Epcor building. Jacobs (and others) backfilling a majority of the old Epcor Tower. Add to that the amount of investment being poured into downtown (AED, Prov. Museum, condo development) and I see a shift happening. It shouldn't really come as a surprise.

    This is not developer driven. It is ALL market driven. No one is pulling the trigger on a new building without being 50-70% pre-leased.

  23. #223

    Default

    I can't think of a better way to kick start even more development than the CoE signing a lease to kickstart a new tower and esp if that tower can result in operational savings that result in a over all savings.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  24. #224
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    5,476

    Default

    IIRC the Galleria backers have asked the City, when it vacates Chancery to let a non-profit foundation have it to help pay for / run the Galleria.

    Tenents, btw, would be arts groups.
    ... gobsmacked

  25. #225
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    2,482

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 240GLT View Post
    ^ you're saying the city should occupy the brand new space and let the market backfill at a lower rate ?? Damn Ian, glad you're not in property management..

    How it should work is that the city occupies the lower end stuff (I repeat, NO WAY should the city be paying the highest lease rates in the city) And let the market demand for higher quality space drive construction. You are completely *** backwards on this one... but as long as we get a shiny new tower, nobody seems to care, right ?

    Oh, and Rico, Industry leaders have gone directly to the mayors office with this concern. We're probably in negative absorption right now, so yes, 500k SF on new office space would have a pretty dramatic effect on our small market

    No we won't see 3 towers in 2014. We will see 1. Then one in 2016. That's my educated guess.
    You are very very misguided on this one.

    If the city can be a catalyst for a new tower - it must responsibly do it.

    What will result is a great deal of vacancy in the Class C and Class B markets - a GREAT thing not a bad thing as you claim. Why will it be great? Because it will spur renovation of these buildings that are currently sh***y. Or perhaps even condo conversions. No point having the city keep occupying such mediocre space.

  26. #226

    Default

    Could a vacancy in those class B/C buildings make it more affordable for companies to relocate downtown if they are currently elsewhere? or is that type of shift uncommon and not tend to happen?

  27. #227
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,973

    Default

    It absolutely will open the downtown market to others.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  28. #228
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    203

    Default

    This decision does not purely come down to dollars and cents. One of the advantages of having a small office market is that the city can make a real impact. If we can kick-start new downtown construction, while opening B and C office space for others (as Ian rightly suggests), this has a similar impact as any of the other glamour projects in the press.

    The city needs to engage not in only budgeting but city-making. A great downtown economy has a mix of large and small players present, something this tower will encourage. Obviously there is a price-tag and if the city can save money through consolidation it is a wonderful incentive but not the sole purpose.

  29. #229
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,973

    Default

    Keep in mind that the City had an RFEI out for Chancery to repurpose it into residential potentially or mixed use.

    I'd love to see 120 small lofts similar to Cambridge in there.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  30. #230
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    60

    Default

    Any updates? Going to council in Fall? Waiting for new council?

  31. #231
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,973

    Default

    Waiting till post election
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  32. #232

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post

    That sexy angular corner tower would be GRAND!!! Even if the CoE doesn't go for that space I hope they build it.. I would move my office into there in a heart beat!! I prefer my current digs because it's close to home and my employees like it. But that just speaks to me! So sexy!!!

    I hope it gets built because that would be so amazing to see added to our shoebox boring skyline!!!

    Bring on the angles!!!

  33. #233
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Ozerna, North Edmonton
    Posts
    8,961

    Default

    Edmonton arena developers preferred contractor for city office space

    By Ryan Tumilty
    Metro Edmonton

    While the city has officially suspended the process to find 350,000 square feet of office space, city administrators were recommending in July an agreement be negotiated with the developers of the downtown arena.

    Instead of starting those negotiations however, city councillors asked for more information and voted to postpone the process until after the election.

    The revelation comes in copies of a private report provided exclusively to Metro.

    In an in camera session in July, council was presented with a report suggesting the city should start negotiations with the EAD Development partnership, which is developing the area around the arena.

    After reviewing 14 requests for the new space, the report concluded the proposal for a new office tower on the corner of 101 Street and 104 Avenue, the current Staples store, was the clear winner.

    “A systematic review of all 14 submissions was undertaken using the council approved criteria. As a result there were three that distinguished themselves from all received; however the EAD development Partnership project scored higher than all others,” reads the report.

    Currently, city staff work across nine downtown office buildings in a variety of leased and city-owned space and the hope was to consolidate.

    The city put forward the request for proposals in February and had a specific evaluation criteria for selecting the successful bidder and a fairness advisor who saw no problems with the city’s process.

    Jodi Tauber, a spokesperson for the city, stressed no decision has been made on the project and that council only asked for more information.

    “The motion that council actually made was that no decision be made and it come back on November 13 with additional information,” she said. “They requested more information.”

    In a letter to all 14 bidders on the city’s contract were told the process had been suspended, but there was no mention the city already had a preferred proponent.
    http://metronews.ca/news/edmonton/82...-office-space/

  34. #234

    Default

    I thought that was going to be the Stantec HQs, or would they share?

  35. #235
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,530

    Default

    Obviously part of the motivation there is to help kickstart the redevelopment of the arena district.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  36. #236
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,198

    Default

    Say it again.. love the idea of a new tower.. but the city occupying it is beyond foolishness.
    Parkdale

  37. #237
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Perspective View Post
    I thought that was going to be the Stantec HQs, or would they share?
    Stantec hasn't made a decision yet. It was the location many were speculating about as they are the architect for the building. There is also the EAD office tower location across 104 (right beside the arena) from this that they could possible go for.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    Obviously part of the motivation there is to help kickstart the redevelopment of the arena district.
    That, and the fact that City Hall is a block away probably doesn't hurt either.
    Don't feed the trolls!

  38. #238
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,688

    Default

    One way or another it's going to bring a whole lot more people to the area.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  39. #239
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    Obviously part of the motivation there is to help kickstart the redevelopment of the arena district.
    It shouldn't be. I was glad to see another development-catalyst option close to city hall ( the Galleria/arts thing) so admin would be forced to take a good look at at least two options and not just blindly go to the arena district.

  40. #240

    Default

    ^exactly, plus the city shouldn't have to kickstart the district, it already did with the arena itself. The site is suppose to attract companies/clients on its own - to my understanding at least - which was one of the main reasons for the whole arena and such.

    Also if it is the CoE moving there, it will bring more people in the area from other parts of downtown, just shifting - it won't be bringing in 'new' people.

  41. #241

    Default

    I thought the article stated they wanted more information as three proposals are considered. Most likely this one along with station 2 and 102st centre...

  42. #242

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by buildthemhigh View Post
    After seeing this picture , I know the true meaning of fugly now.
    I disagree, its an interesting looking mid-rise. Not sure I like the green balconies though, that's a bit generic and will date quickly I think.

  43. #243
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    7,385

    Default

    The City's decision to move forward with consolidating office space is on hold and will likely be that way for awhile. I still believe Stantec is going to choose the AED Tower.

  44. #244

    Default

    My gut instinct would agree with you. Its time for them to be at the heart of the city and shine a little bit. They went from medium and fairly successful to big time.

  45. #245
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,165

    Default

    Agreed. I know they have a fiscal responsibility to shareholders but Stantec really does need a new home. They're too big for their HQ and being spread out just isn't as efficient. Would they be building or leasing a new HQ?
    Last edited by etownboarder; 21-10-2013 at 12:13 AM.

  46. #246
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,530

    Default

    Yes they are looking at consolidating to a new downtown office tower...I'm sure there was a news piece posted here on that.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  47. #247
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,165

    Default

    ^ there was a thread.

  48. #248
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,973

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisD View Post
    The City's decision to move forward with consolidating office space is on hold and will likely be that way for awhile. I still believe Stantec is going to choose the AED Tower.
    Bingo. Stanny IMO.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  49. #249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by etownboarder View Post
    Agreed. I know they have a fiscal responsibility to shareholders but Stantec really does need a new home. They're too big for their HQ and being spread out just isn't as efficient. Would they be building or leasing a new HQ?
    I don't think too many shareholders would be upset that the business is expanding enough to need a bigger more centralized headquarters.


    But this does make me wonder. I know that the regional offices are important to Stantec, but is there any chance that if a new corporate headquarters was built that there'd be consolidation of the business from other cities as well?
    Go down a few dark alleys.

  50. #250
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    128

    Default

    I believe the majority of Edmonton-area staff at Stantec work on Alberta-based projects, specifically infrastructure and oil & gas, and are not head office types. Basically, 300,000 SF with an option for another 150,000 SF is to accommodate ongoing projects, so consolidating offices from elsewhere would just put Stantec back into a situation of not having the room the need (or the room to grow) for Alberta based work.

  51. #251

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mnugent View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by etownboarder View Post
    Agreed. I know they have a fiscal responsibility to shareholders but Stantec really does need a new home. They're too big for their HQ and being spread out just isn't as efficient. Would they be building or leasing a new HQ?
    I don't think too many shareholders would be upset that the business is expanding enough to need a bigger more centralized headquarters.


    But this does make me wonder. I know that the regional offices are important to Stantec, but is there any chance that if a new corporate headquarters was built that there'd be consolidation of the business from other cities as well?
    I have followed Stantec since my early 20s. They have done many take overs across North America and the Bahamas. They would not amalgamate as they need offices in those regions to engage with clients within respective zones.

  52. #252
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,198

    Default

    ^ Correct. they'll look to amalgamate their current offices at their main campus, The Devonian building and the Centre Club into one building. They moved to those satellite offices out of necessity, not strategically.
    Parkdale

  53. #253
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,137

    Default

    ^^ They still need regional offices.
    Don't feed the trolls!

  54. #254
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,137

    Default

    Red Brick isn't happy about the bidding process. Also, great comments from Ken taking the opposite approach on it.

    Process for bidding on City of Edmonton office space draws concerns
    Don't feed the trolls!

  55. #255
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Estates of Lewis - Etown
    Posts
    258

    Default Council to mull city office tower


  56. #256
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,973

    Default

    Twill be interesting to see what they decide...
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  57. #257

    Default

    Indeed it will be.

  58. #258
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,688

    Default

    Well I wouldn't mind seeing that tower that was proposed for the Quarters, that would further change the area in the right direction.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  59. #259

    Default

    Very Exciting
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  60. #260
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Westmount
    Posts
    3,160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmcowboy11 View Post
    Well I wouldn't mind seeing that tower that was proposed for the Quarters, that would further change the area in the right direction.
    Given that RedBrick has been complaining about the city's selection process in the press, I wouldn't be optimistic about that one...

    http://metronews.ca/news/edmonton/83...raws-concerns/

  61. #261
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,973

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmcowboy11 View Post
    Well I wouldn't mind seeing that tower that was proposed for the Quarters, that would further change the area in the right direction.
    Doesnt meet the requirements of the city really.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  62. #262

    Default

    Cmon angled corner tower, cmon angled corner tower, cmon angled corner tower, cmon angled corner tower.... Whooooops, I need a towel..

  63. #263

    Default

    I can't see this tower will be chosen for the city, but i can see it built for office in general. Very nice proposal.

  64. #264
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,518

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmcowboy11 View Post
    Well I wouldn't mind seeing that tower that was proposed for the Quarters, that would further change the area in the right direction.
    Doesnt meet the requirements of the city really.
    How so?

    Are you an insider who knows the secret City office building handshake, or is the above statement just a reflection of your personal bias as an arena/Katz Group cheerleader?

    City Council better be darn careful. If, as some of the arena cheerleaders on this forum even suggested, the RFP process was nothing more than a sham with the outcome preordained, the City could be opening itself up to some expensive lawsuits.

  65. #265
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,973

    Default

    No bias here thank you very much, love this tower, but it it simply did not seem to meet certain criteria from the RFP... or not as well as others.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  66. #266
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,518

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    No bias here thank you very much, love this tower, but it it simply did not seem to meet certain criteria from the RFP... or not as well as others.
    Could you be specific as to which criteria the Red Brick proposal failed to meet? And what about the other 12 other apparently unsuccessful proponents? Where did they fall short?

    If you are going to make statements where you pose as someone with insider knowledge to which the unwashed masses are not privy, be prepared to back them up with specifics. You are certainly not obliged to do so, but then I will conclude the statements reflect your personal bias in favour of the arena/Katz Group tower.
    Last edited by East McCauley; 19-11-2013 at 01:56 PM.

  67. #267
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,597

    Default

    I think the red brick folks missed the "Do not ***** About Being Eliminated In The Press" criteria
    Still waiting for the Arlington site to be reborn .......

  68. #268

    Default

    Which one was the redbrick proposal, and could it have been the election that led to the cities decission? Location wise, the three choices that are logical would be Stationland, AED, and 102st. centre in no particular order. Too logical and pragmatic due to access, time management, and ability to connect to city hall in an enclosed environment- winter days. If the proposed delegates didn't factor that then it is their downfall for attempting. If proposal aspects would consume their finance, they shouldn't even attempt to play the game. That is like an average guy trying to court the scene of the wealthy and thinking they belong there.

  69. #269

    Default

    Just because administration backs something doesn't mean that is going to be chosen....

    Relax everyone.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  70. #270
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Alberta Ave
    Posts
    373

    Default

    the redbrick submission may not have been the only proposal for the quarters..

  71. #271
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,973

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    No bias here thank you very much, love this tower, but it it simply did not seem to meet certain criteria from the RFP... or not as well as others.
    Could you be specific as to which criteria the Red Brick proposal failed to meet? And what about the other 12 other apparently unsuccessful proponents? Where did they fall short?

    If you are going to make statements where you pose as someone with insider knowledge to which the unwashed masses are not privy, be prepared to back them up with specifics. You are certainly not obliged to do so, but then I will conclude the statements reflect your personal bias in favour of the arena/Katz Group tower.
    To be very clear:

    1. I was not privy to anything more than what is in the public record now.
    2. I am not biased towards Tower D, sure I want it to go, but I do not have a bias towards it for this.

    I believe the criteria included proximity to LRT, distance to City Hall/other City offices and room for expansion adjacent to it or within it for expansion. This proposal likely scored lower than others on those or similar criteria, that is all... and again, I LOVE the design... but just think it likely is not as strong overall as other submissions.

    If anyone can add to the RFP criteria or correct me, please do.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  72. #272

    Default

    Fair analysis.

  73. #273
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,518

    Default

    ^^According to the July 3, 2013 Administration report leaked to Metro News, "the evaluation criteria and weighting incorporated in the RFP included the following:
    1. Net present cost of the lease over the term of the agreement (35%)
    2. Net present value of the potential property tax lifts of the primary building and any directly associated development (15%)
    3. Transformational benefits associated with the Capital City Downtown Plan or the Quarters ARP (10%)
    4. Building attributes (15%)
    5. Interior design attributes (15%)
    6. Proponents ability, capacity and acceptance of lease terms (10%)."

    And contrary to claims made by some posters above that leasing would not increase the City's debt, the Administration wants to structure the recommended deal with the Katz Group as a capital lease, meaning that the City will have to borrow at least some of the money to build the office tower (see page 3 of 3 of leaked report).

  74. #274
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,973

    Default

    '3. Transformational benefits associated with the Capital City Downtown Plan or the Quarters ARP (10%)
    4. Building attributes (15%)'

    This was more or less what I was referring to... and there was a specific need for expansion within or adjacent.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  75. #275
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,530

    Default

    City of Edmonton in negotiations with Oilers owner for new skyscraper

    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/sport...911/story.html

    EDMONTON - The city is working on a deal to consolidate many of its workers in a new downtown office tower the Katz Group would build in the arena district, the Edmonton Journal has learned.

    The structure would be constructed at the southwest corner of 101st Street and 104th Avenue, site of the former Staples store, which closed last summer.
    The new tower could become Edmonton’s tallest skyscraper, depending on whether all the city offices went to a single location, Wosnack said.

    Councillors spent hours behind closed doors Dec. 11 discussing downtown accommodation planning before voting 10-3 in favour of action set out in a still-secret report.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  76. #276

    Default

    still wish the atelier was being built someday I will build a structure like that for my business..

  77. #277
    C2E Super Addict
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Beautiful BC
    Posts
    1,657

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    City of Edmonton in negotiations with Oilers owner for new skyscraper

    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/sport...911/story.html

    EDMONTON - The city is working on a deal to consolidate many of its workers in a new downtown office tower the Katz Group would build in the arena district, the Edmonton Journal has learned.
    I, for one, welcome our new land over lord!
    "The only really positive thing one could say about Vancouver is, it’s not the rest of Canada." Oink (britishexpats.com)

  78. #278
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    2,482

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    City of Edmonton in negotiations with Oilers owner for new skyscraper

    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/sport...911/story.html

    EDMONTON - The city is working on a deal to consolidate many of its workers in a new downtown office tower the Katz Group would build in the arena district, the Edmonton Journal has learned.

    The structure would be constructed at the southwest corner of 101st Street and 104th Avenue, site of the former Staples store, which closed last summer.
    The new tower could become Edmonton’s tallest skyscraper, depending on whether all the city offices went to a single location, Wosnack said.

    Councillors spent hours behind closed doors Dec. 11 discussing downtown accommodation planning before voting 10-3 in favour of action set out in a still-secret report.
    Now this is news!!!

  79. #279
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,518

    Default

    Never saw that one coming.

  80. #280

    Default

    What's that smell? This is another travesty for democracy!!! After my pubic $$$$ going to a non tendered contractor, for the areana now a city tower? How is this legal is what I'd like to know?

  81. #281

    Default

    But, but, everything happened because Mandel and Krushell were Katz's lapdogs!!! How can this be now that they're not on council? All of city hall must be in his pocket! Rabble rabble rabble! Pitchforks!
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  82. #282
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Westmount
    Posts
    3,160

    Default

    Wasn't the Staples site considered the likely front-runner for Stantec? Or am I mistaken? I'm somewhat disappointed by this news, although there are plenty of other opportunities for Stantec downtown.

  83. #283
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    2,482

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JamesL View Post
    Wasn't the Staples site considered the likely front-runner for Stantec? Or am I mistaken? I'm somewhat disappointed by this news, although there are plenty of other opportunities for Stantec downtown.
    Quite right.

    So perhaps this will turn into a mega-tower for both City of Edmonton and Stantec? Or another tower, more likely perhaps. Very interesting

  84. #284
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    If Katz Group has an offer from Stantec and from the city for their tower it might make things interesting. That would explain the sudden height increase.
    I'd rather see two smaller towers, but if they're competing for Tower D's location I expect Stantec could outbid what the City should be willing to spend.
    A location further north across 104 ave might be enough that Katz/WAM's proposal would no longer be ranked #1 for the city.

    I'm disappointed that the City didn't Say, shortlist 3 or 4 favorites and have an open competition between them.
    Last edited by highlander; 07-01-2014 at 11:45 PM.

  85. #285
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,530

    Default

    It could be a bidding war between Stantec and the City. Remember that the article says the City was given the green light to negotiate for AED, but that's as far as it goes at this point.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  86. #286

    Default

    Yes, so there are still 3-4 candidates are there not?

  87. #287
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,198

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chmilz View Post
    But, but, everything happened because Mandel and Krushell were Katz's lapdogs!!! How can this be now that they're not on council? All of city hall must be in his pocket! Rabble rabble rabble! Pitchforks!
    Except Madel is now collecting a paycheque from the Katz Group

    So you apologists can make all the condescending jokes you want but the optics are incredibly poor
    Parkdale

  88. #288
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,503

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 240GLT View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chmilz View Post
    But, but, everything happened because Mandel and Krushell were Katz's lapdogs!!! How can this be now that they're not on council? All of city hall must be in his pocket! Rabble rabble rabble! Pitchforks!
    Except Madel is now collecting a paycheque from the Katz Group

    So you apologists can make all the condescending jokes you want but the optics are incredibly poor
    Got proof of that?

  89. #289

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swillv8 View Post
    What's that smell? This is another travesty for democracy!!! After my pubic $$$$ going to a non tendered contractor, for the areana now a city tower? How is this legal is what I'd like to know?
    It was tendered.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  90. #290
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,137

    Default

    *sighs*

    RFP process = tendering

    I was personally hoping that they would be going with one of the other proposals so that we wouldn't be hearing some of this misinformation in reaction to it.
    Last edited by ScottieA; 08-01-2014 at 09:27 AM.
    Don't feed the trolls!

  91. #291

    Default

    It was inevitable from the start that a tower close to city hall would be the logical choice. How many of the other proposals are so conveniently located?

  92. #292
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent View Post
    It was inevitable from the start that a tower close to city hall would be the logical choice. How many of the other proposals are so conveniently located?
    Kelly Ramsay
    Stationlands 2
    Crossroads (http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/forum...ad.php?t=31747)
    Procura Hotel Mac tower
    Don't feed the trolls!

  93. #293
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,432
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    ...aka...pretty much all of them...in fact, IIRC...it was a requirement for it to be within a certain distance of City Hall...
    Since calm logic doesn't work, I guess it is time to employ sarcasm. ...and before you call me an a-hole...remember, I am a Dick.

  94. #294

    Default

    Only Stationlands and AED are within a couple of blocks of city hall. That gives those two a huge advantage. The closer the better.

  95. #295

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ScottieA View Post
    *sighs*

    RFP process = tendering

    I was personally hoping that they would be going with one of the other proposals so that we wouldn't be hearing some of this misinformation in reaction to it.
    Hey if katz wants to use the office tower as a loss leader... so be it.

    It sounds like the lease rate was too good to turn down.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  96. #296
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    7,385

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 240GLT View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chmilz View Post
    But, but, everything happened because Mandel and Krushell were Katz's lapdogs!!! How can this be now that they're not on council? All of city hall must be in his pocket! Rabble rabble rabble! Pitchforks!
    Except Madel is now collecting a paycheque from the Katz Group

    So you apologists can make all the condescending jokes you want but the optics are incredibly poor
    Since when? Regardless, the current Council still has to vote on approving the budget for the arena.

  97. #297
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,973

    Default

    Interesting...
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  98. #298

    Default

    Iverson on CBC with Neishi at lunch said there has been no decision made on who will build the new tower. They had 14 good proposals and will only choose the most economical option.

  99. #299

    Default

    Only choose the most economical? So that is the overriding factor now? Why didn't they just say that from the start.

  100. #300
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,503

    Default

    economical doesn't necessarily mean cheap.

    someone could put forward a SUPER CHEAP option 20 blocks away which wouldn't be economical at all for the city since they'd have to factor in interoffice travel and whatnot

Page 3 of 33 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •