Landmark on Robson - U/C

[rofina]

Originally Posted by logan5

It's a sad statement on architecture today when the loss of this building is considered "heartbreaking". Lol.

How long has this demo been going on so far? Seems like months, and still a ways to go. Makes me wonder what the cost for just the demo is (must be huge), and how the developer can have a competitively priced product and still make a decent profit. Jesus. Prices are so sky high in Downtown Vancouver that tearing down a 42 story building ain't no thang.

This.

Would love to see the pro-forma on this.

I don't get the economics of this deal.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by rofina

This.

Would love to see the pro-forma on this.

I don't get the economics of this deal.

Well, they've owned and operated the hotel for 20 years [source] so they didn't pay anything close to the current site value. That would make the demolition costs much less of an issue in the overall financial calculation.

Until they started the demolition, never having been in the building, I hadn't realized that the parking was in the podium, behind the shiny glass. That would have presumably made any conversion to residential, or re-use of the podium for any other use much more complicated. It could also be part of the seismic problem - columned spaces like that are notoriously poor performers in an earthquake - that was apparently the problem with the City's East Wing office building, demolished last year.

[officedweller]

Denman Place also has above grade parking in the podium.
Don't know if it also has underground parking.

[osirisboy]

It does

[rofina]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Well, they've owned and operated the hotel for 20 years [source] so they didn't pay anything close to the current site value. That would make the demolition costs much less of an issue in the overall financial calculation.

Until they started the demolition, never having been in the building, I hadn't realized that the parking was in the podium, behind the shiny glass. That would have presumably made any conversion to residential, or re-use of the podium for any other use much more complicated. It could also be part of the seismic problem - columned spaces like that are notoriously poor performers in an earthquake - that was apparently the problem with the City's East Wing office building, demolished last year.

That makes a lot more sense. I did not realise they had owned the building for sometime.

Purchasing this at market rates, and doing demo seemed outrageously cost prohibitive.

[WhipperSnapper]

Demo is cheap. (not including any abatements)

[rofina]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Demo is cheap. (not including any abatements)

There is zero chance manually taking down a 40 story tower Downtown is cheap.

Maybe relative to constructions costs...

Or we have different definitions of cheap.

[WhipperSnapper]

How much do you think it costs?

The biggest cost here is time to redevelop. They will be doubling the square footage on the site if I remember correctly. The sunk costs of tearing down the tower should be minimal as they have owned it for decades.

[rofina]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

How much do you think it costs?

The biggest cost here is time to redevelop. They will be doubling the square footage on the site if I remember correctly. The sunk costs of tearing down the tower should be minimal as they have owned it for decades.

I honestly have no idea - no clue how manual demo of something this size would be costed.

I mean its in the millions for sure, but not sure the quantity of millions.

Its a solid concrete 40 story structure - disposal costs alone are blowing my mind. That's a lot of concrete getting shipped somewhere.

I would also be amazed if there was no remediation - this was probably started in early 70's?

[WhipperSnapper]

I can only guess too. Any abatements aside I can't see demolition of the structure costing more than a couple million to the owners with up to 90% of the building's materials sold for recycling. The bigger loss is not having any income during the duration of the redevelopment.

[logan5]

A couple of million? I guess they got a crack crew from Labour Ready taking this one down.

Taking a building down piece by piece has to be far more expensive than simply imploding it then hauling away all the debris. Maybe they will deconstruct down to a certain height, then implode it? Not a lot of info available here.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by logan5

A couple of million? I guess they got a crack crew from Labour Ready taking this one down.

Taking a building down piece by piece has to be far more expensive than simply imploding it then hauling away all the debris. Maybe they will deconstruct down to a certain height, then implode it? Not a lot of info available here.

There was a lot of news coverage when it was announced back in March. This is as comprehensive as any of the articles.

[s211]

For "green" reasons, the city will no longer permit implosions. Or so I've been told.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by logan5

A couple of million? I guess they got a crack crew from Labour Ready taking this one down.

Taking a building down piece by piece has to be far more expensive than simply imploding it then hauling away all the debris. Maybe they will deconstruct down to a certain height, then implode it? Not a lot of info available here.

Implosion has added insurance costs as well as shutting down a heavily populated area for at least half a day. There's months of prep as well. Long reach excavators can reach up 20 plus storeys now when you have some space to work in. I believe Implosion is still the best for post tensioned concrete and there's not a lot of that in Canada before the point towers on podium era.

In case you missed it, I didn't say the demolition will cost only a couple million. I said it will probably only cost a couple million to the owners. The contractor will make up the difference selling the debris for recycling.

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by s211

For "green" reasons, the city will no longer permit implosions. Or so I've been told.

No, it's because of WorkSafeBC.

[logan5]

Thanks for the link.

Demolition contractor JMX Contracting Inc. has been onsite since early November 2017 and is expected to finish work by February 2019. About 70 workers are now onsite. “We are anticipating removing one floor per week.”

There are about 35 weeks left until the end of February 2019 and it looks like they are not even close to demo'ing 1 floor. With 70 workers, labour costs alone would be over 5 million. (One would surmise).

[Changing City]

There's a webpage of the demolition on the development website for the project. It looks like they're set up a time lapse. (The update part of the page has some odd bits of standard body text they've forgotten to remove or replace).

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by logan5

Thanks for the link.



There are about 35 weeks left until the end of February 2019 and it looks like they are not even close to demo'ing 1 floor. With 70 workers, labour costs alone would be over 5 million. (One would surmise).

The developers website says it's until March 2019.

And there's nothing in the article that says all the workers are required for the entire demolition. Most of them could be doing abatement and the hard strip.



https://asiastandard.burstcreativegr...el-demolition/

[mcminsen]

Great pic! I took the liberty of adjusting it a bit.

Originally Posted by jollyburger

The developers website says it's until March 2019.

And there's nothing in the article that says all the workers are required for the entire demolition. Most of them could be doing abatement and the hard strip.



https://asiastandard.burstcreativegr...el-demolition/

[officedweller]

Nice find!