HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2012, 11:11 PM
dleung's Avatar
dleung dleung is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,952
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
I like most of the office towers in Aus, especially how they tend to be so well integrated into the urban environment rather than stuck on huge podiums that half a block had to be razed in order to build. And I like that they have more texture and whimsy rather than just being straight-laced corporate looking.
I fully share those sentiments. I prefer delicate insertions rather than half-block podiums and razings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrewjm3D View Post
This tower is nice but look at all the crap around it. We have no reason to be envious of Australia.
Talk about grasping at straws. Crap/old office towers vastly outnumber the gems in all cities, including Toronto... only difference is we had no gems since the 80s, while Sydney alone has half a dozen since 2001
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2012, 11:33 PM
Nicko999's Avatar
Nicko999 Nicko999 is offline
Go Chiefs!
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 19,006
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidivivid View Post
Ivanhoé Cambridge, the real estate subsidiary of the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec, is building the following $750M towers... in Paris. It is designed by Jean Nouvel and it will be the first time since the infamous Tour Montparnasse (1976) that such a high constructions are allowed to be built "intra-muros". So the question is: would we want to see these towers in a canadian city?
No
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2012, 11:38 PM
Chadillaccc's Avatar
Chadillaccc Chadillaccc is offline
ARTchitecture
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Cala Ghearraidh
Posts: 22,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-tacular View Post
This makes me so sad for the loss of the Bow's skypods and the south Bow block's new neutered design that no longer has the amazing canyon of glass atrium facing the northern tower.
The Bow isn't going to have the three large atriums anymore? That fucking blows
__________________
Strong & Free

Mohkínstsis — 1.6 million people at the Foothills of the Rocky Mountains, 400 high-rises, a 300-metre SE to NW climb, over 1000 kilometres of pathways, with 20% of the urban area as parkland.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2012, 11:44 PM
dleung's Avatar
dleung dleung is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,952
^^It still has the atriums, but they've become so small that a double-skin facade is a more accurate description.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2012, 11:47 PM
Chadillaccc's Avatar
Chadillaccc Chadillaccc is offline
ARTchitecture
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Cala Ghearraidh
Posts: 22,842
Are they still open to the public? why did they shrink them?
__________________
Strong & Free

Mohkínstsis — 1.6 million people at the Foothills of the Rocky Mountains, 400 high-rises, a 300-metre SE to NW climb, over 1000 kilometres of pathways, with 20% of the urban area as parkland.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2012, 2:32 AM
osmo osmo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by Welkin View Post
Regardless of their design styles (I find that both Canada and Australia have enough interesting buildings) I am disappointed that both countries lack a super tall. Most of Sydney's buildings range in the 200-230M range and Melbourne only has one building pushing the 250M range. Every developer in Toronto seems afraid to go past First Canadian's 298M and that was in 1975. I was so disappointed that Scotia Plaza did not push the 300-350M range. Everyone seems happy with just a new 235M building. Imagine downtown Toronto with something like the 500M Shanghai World Financial Center. It may have 101 floors, but downtown Toronto does have a 5% vacancy rate and has over 150 floors of proposed office space. Why put it in three mediocre buildings when the market would support at least one super tall.
Market values play into this quite a bit. Toronto's core was in a Coma really until the early 00's a few builds here and there but nothing substantial. Now was we see development ramping up there is still only one area where a corporate super tall could be built and that is the traditional Bay Street corridor.

I am happy with Scotia's height as many as stated I will take design over size any day. BAC is tall but since all the costs we're pumped into making the thing LEED the design took a big flop for cost reasons, if it will a shorter tower it would of been constructed with way better design.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2012, 3:25 AM
Welkin Welkin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 396
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoaster View Post
I think you might be a bit confused. Melbourne's tallest is 297M and has a several more built, U/C or proposed around the 250 mark.
I am sorry, I should clarify my post. Neither Canada nor Australia have a super tall office building. Melbourne has the 297M Eureka Tower, but most of the conversation on this thread has been towards office towers. Maybe it is my own bias, but for some reason, I have never considered very tall condo towers (which Toronto has dozens and dozens) to be in the same league as very tall office towers. So I stand corrected.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2012, 2:31 PM
koops65's Avatar
koops65 koops65 is online now
Intergalactic Barfly
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Quarks Bar
Posts: 7,215
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoaster View Post
I think you might be a bit confused. Melbourne's tallest is 297M and has a several more built, U/C or proposed around the 250 mark.
That 297M tower is residential, and has nothing to do with this thread. Melbourne does indeed have a 250M office tower, Rialto Towers, built in 86. And Toronto only has 2 office towers that break 250M, 3 if you count the spire on TDCT.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2012, 9:35 PM
Andrewjm3D's Avatar
Andrewjm3D Andrewjm3D is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by dleung View Post
Talk about grasping at straws. Crap/old office towers vastly outnumber the gems in all cities, including Toronto... only difference is we had no gems since the 80s, while Sydney alone has half a dozen since 2001

Talk about how your obsession with Toronto never ends. I bet each night you either have a nightmare or a wet dream about Toronto perhaps both.

Is the Bow not a gem? There's nothing to be jealous of about Sydney except maybe there weather but only if you don't like winter sports. lol
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2012, 10:18 PM
dleung's Avatar
dleung dleung is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,952
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewJM3d
Quote:
Originally Posted by dleung
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewJM3D
This tower is nice but look at all the crap around it. We have no reason to be envious of Australia.
Talk about grasping at straws. Crap/old office towers vastly outnumber the gems in all cities, including Toronto... only difference is we had no gems since the 80s, while Sydney alone has half a dozen since 2001
Talk about how your obsession with Toronto never ends. I bet each night you either have a nightmare or a wet dream about Toronto perhaps both.
Well, looks like we have a debate winner...


Notice you're the only one here with his head stuck in the sand?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted May 2, 2012, 4:48 PM
O-tacular's Avatar
O-tacular O-tacular is offline
Fake News
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 23,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadillaccc View Post
Are they still open to the public? why did they shrink them?
I don't think they were ever intended to be open to the public. The 3 large skygardens still exist and are something like 6 stories each. However, the space in between the skygradens has been shrunk to something like 10 feet (hence the double skinned reference from dleung) and no longer are there floating skypods. They were cut to increase floor space and reduce costs. As it is apparently the building won't house all of Cenovus and Encana's employees.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted May 6, 2012, 11:14 AM
tayser's Avatar
tayser tayser is offline
Vires acquirit eundo
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,231
a lot of fallacies about Australia in general in this thread.

but anyhow, I'd actually like to see an office tower built in Melbourne. There's about 150,000sqm U/C in the central city at the moment, but 95% of it all 'groundscrapers' - it's all short and stumpy as tenants are all demanding huge floorplates rather than spreading themselves over multiple smaller floors.

This is your typical commercial development going on right now - NAB's going to be consolidating 3 sites into here and will only have 3 sites when complete:

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSC








And another example of what's going on - Macquarie Bank's new Melbourne site

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSC












RATHER than this: most recent office proposal, but no-one's really hopefull it'll get up because it will have tiny floorplates, 220m 56 Levels.

Quote:




^ and it's as boring as batshit anyhow.

This proposal has been around for 3 years and still not got a tenant, there's been many leasing deals done in Docklands / elsewhere in groundscapers before this went on the hunt for a prime tenant to kick off construction... 206m


Quote:
Originally Posted by SSC






Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted May 6, 2012, 2:10 PM
RyeJay RyeJay is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,086
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidivivid View Post


I'm curious: what is the aesthetical appeal of building something that looks broken? This is like taking a hammer to someone's symetrical face, inflicting considerable damage, and then saying -- "There...much better!"...

These towers look like they were pieced together by a grade two student for art class...

What do people find so nice about them -- aside from how "oh so interesting and rare" they are?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted May 7, 2012, 12:25 AM
taal taal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 138
I just wish Toronto could see as much office construction as this, clearly Calgary is already ahead per capita I'm sure ... I think they absorbed as much space as Toronto in one quarter.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted May 16, 2012, 7:19 PM
davidivivid's Avatar
davidivivid davidivivid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ville de Québec City
Posts: 2,877
Allright, I'm envious of this one. I would have liked to see that tower in Montréal. (200m)

Quote:
Caisse to invest $300M in Chicago’s largest real estate project in past five years

MONTREAL — Canada’s largest pension fund manager is investing $300-million to build a 45-storey office tower in downtown Chicago, the largest real estate project launched in the city in the past five years.

The Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec’s Ivanhoe Cambridge real estate subsidiary is partnering with international property firm Hines on the project. The investment is expected to close by the end of May with construction starting before year end occupancy starting in early 2016, Ivanhoe said Wednesday.

The River Point tower will be built at 444 West Lake Street on the western bank of the Chicago River, near two rail hubs in the city’s so-called West Loop looking toward Lake Michigan. The building will house about 900,000 square feet of leasable space.

[...]
http://business.financialpost.com/20...st-five-years/







http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?p=91448349
__________________
"I went on a diet, swore off drinking and heavy eating, and in fourteen days I lost two weeks" Joe E. Lewis
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted May 16, 2012, 8:08 PM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is offline
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 9,001
It's ok; I'm not really that crazy about the design, but it looks pretty high quality.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted May 24, 2012, 4:30 PM
O-tacular's Avatar
O-tacular O-tacular is offline
Fake News
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 23,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by tayser View Post
a lot of fallacies about Australia in general in this thread.

but anyhow, I'd actually like to see an office tower built in Melbourne. There's about 150,000sqm U/C in the central city at the moment, but 95% of it all 'groundscrapers' - it's all short and stumpy as tenants are all demanding huge floorplates rather than spreading themselves over multiple smaller floors.

This is your typical commercial development going on right now - NAB's going to be consolidating 3 sites into here and will only have 3 sites when complete:



And another example of what's going on - Macquarie Bank's new Melbourne site



RATHER than this: most recent office proposal, but no-one's really hopefull it'll get up because it will have tiny floorplates, 220m 56 Levels.



^ and it's as boring as batshit anyhow.

This proposal has been around for 3 years and still not got a tenant, there's been many leasing deals done in Docklands / elsewhere in groundscapers before this went on the hunt for a prime tenant to kick off construction... 206m
Holy shit! Who cares if these are "groundscrapers". I'd take 10 of this calibre over any bland 50 story glass box any day. You're very spoiled in Melbourne.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted May 24, 2012, 4:32 PM
O-tacular's Avatar
O-tacular O-tacular is offline
Fake News
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 23,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyeJay View Post
I'm curious: what is the aesthetical appeal of building something that looks broken? This is like taking a hammer to someone's symetrical face, inflicting considerable damage, and then saying -- "There...much better!"...

These towers look like they were pieced together by a grade two student for art class...

What do people find so nice about them -- aside from how "oh so interesting and rare" they are?
That's a very funny analogy. Typically I like asymetrical different looking architecture, but in this case I'd have to agree. Normally Jean Nouvel has nicer projects than this. This just looks so.... I think it'll age very badly too.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted May 24, 2012, 6:27 PM
davidivivid's Avatar
davidivivid davidivivid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ville de Québec City
Posts: 2,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-tacular View Post
Normally Jean Nouvel has nicer projects than this. This just looks so.... I think it'll age very badly too.
Agreed
__________________
"I went on a diet, swore off drinking and heavy eating, and in fourteen days I lost two weeks" Joe E. Lewis
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted May 24, 2012, 11:01 PM
DrJoe's Avatar
DrJoe DrJoe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: TO, ON
Posts: 2,624
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-tacular View Post
Holy shit! Who cares if these are "groundscrapers". I'd take 10 of this calibre over any bland 50 story glass box any day. You're very spoiled in Melbourne.
I personally think they look like a mish-mashed train wreck. Sometimes I think people equate a lot of "stuff" happening for no apparent reason as better.
__________________
*
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:12 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.