Tower 101 | 175m | 50s | Regency Developments | DER + Associates

What do you think of this project?

  • Total voters
    52
An absolute embarrassment. There needs to be some sort of change to policies to not allow for demolition without a guarantee of building within X months / years or something. Back-of-napkin stuff, I'm sure there are intricacies and issues for any sort of policy like that, I'm just tired of prominent lots getting demolished then left to sit and rot. :mad:
 
mcr said:
An absolute embarrassment. There needs to be some sort of change to policies to not allow for demolition without a guarantee of building within X months / years or something. Back-of-napkin stuff, I'm sure there are intricacies and issues for any sort of policy like that, I'm just tired of prominent lots getting demolished then left to sit and rot. :mad:
Click to expand...
I’ve often thought the simplest solution is for the property taxes to remain at the same level as they were in the year prior to demolition until such time as the site is redeveloped. To make it comply with the MGA, it could simply be a permit condition caveat registered on title and not technically a property tax.
 
IanO said:
A new proposal in Downtown Van that would look REALLY good here.

1761174036533
Click to expand...
Imagine that tower rising over the facade of the Tegler.
 
^ It's not impossible to build an exact likeness of the Tegler on this site (needs a different developer though methinks). It would be cool when/if that happened a rebirth of Zellers became the ground floor tenant. As to a tower above I think something more in contrast to the Tegler would be more exciting.
 
Well the Mac is not so new anymore, it is from the era of the Palliser, the Royal York and Hotel Vancouver. The JW and Doubletree Hilton are the only new hotels downtown in decades.

Also as the city continues to grow and gets busier, I expect there will be more severe problems with enough accommodation downtown for major events like the big concert in September.

I am surprised nothing new has happened with vacant lots in prime locations available and several older office buildings in good locations that could be converted to being hotels.
 
David A said:
Well the Mac is not so new anymore, it is from the era of the Palliser, the Royal York and Hotel Vancouver. The JW and Doubletree Hilton are the only new hotels downtown in decades.

Also as the city continues to grow and gets busier, I expect there will be more severe problems with enough accommodation downtown for major events like the big concert in September.

I am surprised nothing new has happened with vacant lots in prime locations available and several older office buildings in good locations that could be converted to being hotels.
Click to expand...
My bad, I just saw the nice, not the new part.
But yeah, I agree that we should get a couple more nice hotels DT. I have a friend from Calgary that comes up to Edmonton at least once a month for work and spends the week, and she's been finding it increasingly hard to book rooms at the good hotels, and when she can, rates are alarmingly high sometimes, even booking with 2-3 months in advance (as high as $500/night with corporate discounts). I feel like there's a missed opportunity by hotel chains and I wonder if it has to do with some of the perceptions of the city as a whole, not just DT, not being a tourist destination.

This friend used to stay at the JW almost every time, and sometimes at the Fairmont, and now she can barely find rooms at these, unless she books with a lot of advance. And I'm not even talking weekends, or anything. It's regular workdays she has to spend up in Edmonton.
 
Yes, I agree there are perception issues, not so much negative, but more Edmonton just not being on the radar of those elsewhere who consider new projects, in part because we are not as much of a tourist destination.

You can't go for almost four decades with only one new major hotel downtown while the city doubles in size and expect somehow that will work just fine.
 
David A said:
Yes, I agree there are perception issues, not so much negative, but more Edmonton just not being on the radar of those elsewhere who consider new projects, in part because we are not as much of a tourist destination.

You can't go for almost four decades with only one new major hotel downtown while the city doubles in size and expect somehow that will work just fine.
Click to expand...
It’s purely a function of room rates and revenue per room (which can be less than half the room rates) and noting that revenue per room is gross revenue and has to cover all expenses before there’s any margin. It’s not that we’re “not on the radar”, it’s that the numbers don’t pencil.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top