PERB In Need of Banner

81 storey, 900 foot tower for Surrey?

Do you like the idea of Canada's tallest building in Surrey?

  • I like it, Whalley is going to be a second "downtown" in 20 years anyway.

    Votes: 14 43.8%
  • I don't like it. Surrey should stay flat.

    Votes: 6 18.8%
  • As long as they name it "Throbber", a phallic tribute to Hatrick and the KG track!

    Votes: 12 37.5%

  • Total voters
    32

ghostie

ghostly user
Jul 8, 2005
721
0
0
This storey was in the paper a few days ago. The current proposal is to have it at the King Georege Sky strain station.

Towering plan set for Surrey
Would be Canada's highest at 81 storeys

Lori Culbert
Vancouver Sun

Thursday, October 27, 2005

SURREY - Preliminary plans are underway to construct Canada's tallest highrise in Surrey -- a massive 81-storey building with residential, commercial and hotel space, Mayor Doug McCallum says.

"This will be the tallest building in Canada," McCallum told The Vancouver Sun in an exclusive interview Wednesday.

"It's 81 floors. That's four times the height of Central City, which is the tallest building [in Surrey] now."

If built, the project would be much taller than Vancouver's current tallest building, the 48-storey Wall Centre, and the skyscraper that's going to take over that title, the 60-storey Shangri-La, once it's completed in about 2008.

First Canadian Place in Toronto says on its website that it is now the country's tallest highrise, at 72 storeys. The CN Tower in Toronto remains Canada's tallest free-standing structure, stretching 1,815 feet (553 metres).

The proposed 81-storey Surrey building to be located near the King George SkyTrain station would, at about 900 feet, be four times higher than the tallest structure in Surrey right now: the 20-storey Central City office tower, attached to a shopping mall and an SFU campus, on 102 Avenue.

McCallum claimed architectural drawings, financing and other details are being finalized, and added the property is already zoned for this type of mixed-use building. He said the only approval required from council will be building permits, and he did not anticipate its unprecedented height would delay the project.

"I expect that it's going to move very quickly, I really do. We could very well see it starting in the ground in the next six months."

McCallum, who has been mayor for nine years, is facing his toughest challenge for re-election yet in this year's municipal election in Surrey, a city often criticized for urban sprawl, business parks and monster homes.

Critics frequently say that Surrey's land-use strategy contradicts the GVRD's Livable Region Strategic Plan, which encourages cities to plan new developments near town centres and transit hubs.

McCallum counters that this proposed project and others -- such as five highrise towers being built in Whalley, and permits issued for five more -- are proof his city is planning and developing responsibility.

But Dianne Watts, McCallum's main challenger for the mayor's chair, cautioned that this highrise will not be a done deal until an application for a building permit is presented to city hall.

"We continually talk to developers and investors with regards to building towers in the downtown core, and some come to fruition and some don't," she said, adding these projects are often years in the making.

McCallum says the people behind the proposed building include architect James Cheng, who designed Shangri-La, and Jung Ventures, the Korean-based developers involved in the five-tower Central City residential project -- just west of where the new highrise would be located.

Jung Ventures president CEO Miyung-Soo Jung did not return phone messages Wednesday.

Two-term Coun. Bob Bose said there are problems with the proposal, including zoning bylaws that require the distance between the property line and the front of the building to be at least 50 per cent of the height of the structure.

"It's absurd. There would have to be massive variances permitted to the zoning. To achieve something of that height, without variances, would require a site of at least a square kilometre in size," he said.

Bose, a member of Surrey's new opposition party and a long-time foe of McCallum, said a phone call from The Sun late Wednesday was the first he'd heard of the project.

"So here we go again with the mayor making grand announcements on the eve of the election, on matters that have never been brought to council," Bose said.

He estimated an 81-storey building would be about 900 feet high, and that the building site is 300 feet above sea level -- putting the proposed skyscraper "perilously close to interfering with controlled airspace" for planes flying over Surrey en route to Vancouver airport.

Bose says he put forward a motion, which was not supported by councillors with McCallum's centre-right party, for Surrey to develop a plan to ensure it is paying attention to the quality of design of new towers.

"What is troubling me is that McCallum has never seen a high-rise he couldn't love," Bose said.
 

ghostie

ghostly user
Jul 8, 2005
721
0
0
Central City is a cool building...

it needs some company...

problem is, this new building will make it look like a duplex

Central city is 368 feet... and you know how much it stands out when you are entering Surrey from the West side of the Port Mann... so 900?? That's going to look fucking massive.

http://www.emporis.com/en/il/im/?id=338003
 
Last edited:

Discombobbled

Banned
Mar 12, 2005
729
0
0
If there's a place up top that we can throw off leprechauns then I'm all for it. Fuckin leprechauns!! :mad:
 

mustangjoe

Active member
May 16, 2004
1,043
0
36
yeah, it's really necessary to build such a tall building in a place like Surrey. Land is so scarce there and all.

Central City is NOT a good idea. It's shitty. What happens when the buildings are ready and hundreds, maybe thousands of the 'investors' who bought into the media induced frenzy in the summer go look for renters? Rent prices plummet and 'investors' start fighting over possible tenants by lowering their prices and standards. The buildings are all going to be crack houses and run into the ground. The drugs and hookers will scare off all the decent folk and in 5 years from opening the place will be filled with undesirables making Whalley worse off then ever.

When these so called investors take possession of their units who knows what interest rates will be. Chances are a lot higher then today's rate. Add to it property tax and maintenance fees, we are looking at a negative cash flow situation with the low rents. Some amateurs will simply walk away leaving their suite empty while the banks proceed with foreclosures. Leave a suite empty in there and squatters will find it. It's going to be a real fucking mess.

I paint a bleak picture and you heard it here first.
 

Discombobbled

Banned
Mar 12, 2005
729
0
0
mustangjoe said:
yeah, it's really necessary to build such a tall building in a place like Surrey. Land is so scarce there and all.

Central City is NOT a good idea. It's shitty. What happens when the buildings are ready and hundreds, maybe thousands of the 'investors' who bought into the media induced frenzy in the summer go look for renters? Rent prices plummet and 'investors' start fighting over possible tenants by lowering their prices and standards. The buildings are all going to be crack houses and run into the ground. The drugs and hookers will scare off all the decent folk and in 5 years from opening the place will be filled with undesirables making Whalley worse off then ever.

When these so called investors take possession of their units who knows what interest rates will be. Chances are a lot higher then today's rate. Add to it property tax and maintenance fees, we are looking at a negative cash flow situation with the low rents. Some amateurs will simply walk away leaving their suite empty while the banks proceed with foreclosures. Leave a suite empty in there and squatters will find it. It's going to be a real fucking mess.

I paint a bleak picture and you heard it here first.
So your bleak picture is different from any of your other posts how? :)
 

Damaged

New member
May 2, 2005
440
1
0
mustangjoe said:
yeah, it's really necessary to build such a tall building in a place like Surrey. Land is so scarce there and all.

Central City is NOT a good idea. It's shitty. What happens when the buildings are ready and hundreds, maybe thousands of the 'investors' who bought into the media induced frenzy in the summer go look for renters? Rent prices plummet and 'investors' start fighting over possible tenants by lowering their prices and standards. The buildings are all going to be crack houses and run into the ground. The drugs and hookers will scare off all the decent folk and in 5 years from opening the place will be filled with undesirables making Whalley worse off then ever.

When these so called investors take possession of their units who knows what interest rates will be. Chances are a lot higher then today's rate. Add to it property tax and maintenance fees, we are looking at a negative cash flow situation with the low rents. Some amateurs will simply walk away leaving their suite empty while the banks proceed with foreclosures. Leave a suite empty in there and squatters will find it. It's going to be a real fucking mess.

I paint a bleak picture and you heard it here first.
Put down the crack pipe. You've obviously had way too much!
 

Damaged

New member
May 2, 2005
440
1
0
ready set go said:
Is this mr or mrs Discombobbled?
This brings a question to my mind. How is it that Mrs. Discombobbled doesn't mind the fact that you are on an Escort review board?
 

Dakota Wood

Complex Goddess
Mar 2, 2005
585
0
0
51
Vancouver
Promises, promises...

Today he's claiming he will wipe out the annual $35 fee for cabbies. Last week he swore he would build a second hospital with all the money made from development. Just a thought, maybe he should fix things at SMH before he even thinks about a second one. :( That place is a dump, I wouldn't take my cat there to get his nails trimmed.
 

FuZzYknUckLeS

Monkey Abuser
May 11, 2005
2,215
0
0
Schmocation
I guess they're building it in Surrey 'cause they don't wanna risk having the building dept. make them change the fuckin' glass colour on the exterior after they have it half clad? :rolleyes: (not that I have issues with Wall Centre or anything...)

As for that Central City building, is that a 3-storey atrium space in the top centre?! Pretty strange if it is. :confused: Be a great office if its actual leaseable area though.
 
H

Hardatwork

Dakota Wood said:
Last week he swore he would build a second hospital with all the money made from development. Just a thought, maybe he should fix things at SMH before he even thinks about a second one. :( That place is a dump, I wouldn't take my cat there to get his nails trimmed.
Are you talking about this announcement?

http://www.set.ca/news/pressRel_Oct31st.pdf
 

Dakota Wood

Complex Goddess
Mar 2, 2005
585
0
0
51
Vancouver
Thanks fuzzy *smooch*

Much appreciated, there has been a few programs missing since I got my computer scrubbed.

And that was the announcement, hardatwork.
 

Slurpie

New member
Oct 27, 2005
91
0
0
Damaged said:
Put down the crack pipe. You've obviously had way too much!

The guy who designed this should have taken your advise. :D



 

Herb_The_Perb

Senior Member
Jan 4, 2005
2,014
1
0
Far South of the Border
Folks, don't worry -- this thing isn't going to happen on the scale that's been announced, 400', maybe, 300', more likely. Not built at all -- a strong possibility. Now money has been spent on even designing it, much less starting to build.

BTW, skyscraper heights are not measured in stories, they are measured in feet or meters.
If it were built at 900', it would be 3rd in Canada. TO has two taller ones.
 

ghostie

ghostly user
Jul 8, 2005
721
0
0
My understanding is that the Korean developers behind this project specifically want it to be "Canada's Tallest Building" and will build it to meet that target if they get the chance.

As you note, a 900 foot tall building would not meet that requirement. I think what was meant in the article was "roughly 900 ft." Note that this estimate on height comes from Councillor Bose, off the cuff, and not from McCallum or the developers - and then the paper just takes that figure and runs with it (without checking emporis!).

In other places in the article they are talking about a structure 4 times the height of Central City (which would put it over 1400 feet), and which would make it one of the tallest buildings in the world. (Taipei 101 is 509 m or 1,671 ft: http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=100765)

For some reliable information on how tall the buildings in Toronto are, look here:

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/ci/bu/?id=100993

The CN Tower is not normally considered a "building", as it is really just a massive slab of concrete with a couple of habitable rings hanging from it.

The two big ones in Toronto are:

First Canadian Place: 298 m (978 ft)

Scotia Plaza: 275 m (902 ft)
 

ghostie

ghostly user
Jul 8, 2005
721
0
0
Somebody on another board suggested that Surrey build one of these on either side of the tower:

<IMG SRC="http://img454.imageshack.us/img454/7397/xfl105028ka.jpg">

Now that would be classic Surrey!
 

Cock Throppled

Well-known member
Oct 1, 2003
4,712
572
113
Upstairs
That 900' building is McCallum's loud muffler. Not sure why these guys choose to adverstise their shortcomings. From what I hear he'll never be able to get this up either.
 
Vancouver Escorts