633 Third Avenue | 167.02m | 46s | BentallGreenOak | Gibbs Gage

... which is attracting a lot of international investors driving up real estate value that everyone building hopes to bank on with resale in the future. There is instability with this thought process. Someone will eventually be stuck with property that barely breaks even.
 
Renders as seen in the city's online CPC planning agenda document.

0-2016 Feb 6 011.JPG

0-2016 Feb 6 002.JPG
 

Attachments

  • 0-2016 Feb 6 011.JPG
    0-2016 Feb 6 011.JPG
    70 KB · Views: 648
  • 0-2016 Feb 6 002.JPG
    0-2016 Feb 6 002.JPG
    61.3 KB · Views: 1,235
Last edited:
Hmmm. I did like the original 3EC building design.
This is very very different, and i'm not a huge fan of white or cementy-tan at the top (if that is in fact white, and not clear or otherwise) but i'd be content seeing this one rise on up.
I like the height on it for sure :)
 
I'm very happy the original 3EC design never saw the light of day and this is it's replacement. Looks pretty solid. The undulating planes add some visual interest and distraction as the tower shifts from office to residential. The street level looks like a giant lobby though. Reminds me of Wanda in Chi-town.
 
Plus, even though vacancy rates are high, there are still tenants out there, and leases come up all the time. I'm sure they could get a tenant for a lower cost, even if only to generate revenue until the vacancy rate comes down again.
 
Very cool. I like the rendering (not the most exciting mind you, but definitely solid.) and I like that it fills in a surface lot. Is there a height estimate on this one?
 
Plus, even though vacancy rates are high, there are still tenants out there, and leases come up all the time. I'm sure they could get a tenant for a lower cost, even if only to generate revenue until the vacancy rate comes down again.

I believe the original 3EC had signed Shaw as a tenant, or Shaw was at least interested. This could be the case, and would be a great move for Shaw if they're looking to expand, considering it's next-door and +15 connectable to their existing headquarters.
 
I believe the original 3EC had signed Shaw as a tenant, or Shaw was at least interested. This could be the case, and would be a great move for Shaw if they're looking to expand, considering it's next-door and +15 connectable to their existing headquarters.
It's possible. Shaw has been downsizing, but they still have people spread out over multiple buildings, so it's always a possibility. It would be nice if they were the anchor tenant for the building, and a non-O&G company taking more space in the core. Shaw picked up their current building for a cheap price during a previous downturn.
 
Unless Shaw has expressed interest in the office space due to location, I can't see that component going ahead as planned. Bentall is aligned with BCIMC, but it already has a substantial office portfolio in Calgary: Jamieson Place, Livingston Place, CBE Building, IBM Corporate Place. Any new speculative office development would stand high risk of cannibalizing tenants from its existing buildings.
 
There's no sense for them to build and offer discounted rates or for a tenant to pay top dollar with all the available space in the city. It is promising developers are still planning office space. It suggests faith that office rates will recover in reasonable time to make new construction worthwhile.
 
Very cool. I like the rendering (not the most exciting mind you, but definitely solid.) and I like that it fills in a surface lot. Is there a height estimate on this one?
The title says 167m, 46 stories ... not sure if that's old news or not
but looks like a tall one either way.
 
Hi Group,
This Would B Interesting if It ever gets Blt. Not sure whats on the Land off hand. It Escapes Me at the Moment. Older House etc? I do Know Ont Thing ,Bentall Kennedy is a First Class Dvlpr so if they Plan to Bld They will B doing a Lot of Homework B 4 s Shovel Goes into the Ground. I will B Interested to follow this Project if it Ever Happens.
Tnx,
Operater
 

Back
Top