Why no interest for supertall office buildings in this country?

[YannickTO]

Originally Posted by whatnext

For what purpose?

Landmark purposes I guess. Attracting visitors and create tourism dollars. Having skyscraper buffs visiting the place. Showing what our architects can do. I don't know. We could come up with something great. Again... what purpose... Legacy? Landmark? Leaving something spectacular for future generations?

[FFX-ME]

We have the CN tower in Toronto, 40 years running the tallest free standing structure and the stade Olympique with the world's tallest leaning tower. We have the West Edmonton Mall, the largest mall in North American and formerly the world (and still the largest actually being used). We have the series of castles built for the railroad sprinkled across the nation. We have some of the most beautiful museums, such as the museum of human rights in Winnipeg, the Museum of nature in Ottawa, and the museum of history in Gatineau. We have tons of natural landmarks as well such as Banff, Jasper, Hopewell rocks, Niagara Falls... We have tons of historical landmarks such as old Québec, l'anse aux medows, including architechtural ones such as the parliament buildings.

We are not lacking in landmarks to the point that we need to copy China in building obscene buildings that will find no use. Those buildings don't say "We are better than you", they say "We are pathetic" or "we are trying to compensate for something". If you want a new landmark that would cost over 1 billion dollars, make it something uniquely Canadian that will represent the people and this time.

[MolsonExport]

with 45 times Canada's population, I am sure most Chinese Supertall buildings are being (or will be) used. Certainly the most impressive big three cluster anywhere on earth:

skyrisecities.com

I am happy to report that I have been to the top of all three (Jin Mao, SWFC, Shanghai Tower), during my 2013 and 2016 trips.

[J.OT13]

Another argument is building one random supertall would be out of place in any Canadian city. The CN Tower worked because it balanced the financial district that was still considerably tall, but something twice the height of any other building would look unbalanced.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by YannickTO

And what if we would just show off for just ONE building? Office market, residential market, hotel business, government offices, entertainment complexes, museums or galleries, etc etc.

Why don't they all join together in order to at least build ONE giant modern skyscraper? Toronto built the highest structure on Earth back 40 years ago (I know that the tower was useful in many ways back then), but don't you think it was a bit of a show off moment for Canada back then? We could still pull it off if we present the right project, at the right place.

It's not a question if we could pull it off - it's a question of who pays for it.

Is there a demand for that kind of office space? Is it more profitable to operate smaller buildings? Can any of the large cities in Canada cope with that sort of huge influx of office space?

If you want government to do it, that's a whole different ballgame. Then you have a national argument about who gets it and why and why should taxpayers be financing something that would ordinarily be provided by the private sector.

I don't see the value here.

[J.OT13]

One word; Amazon.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by YannickTO

Landmark purposes I guess. Attracting visitors and create tourism dollars. Having skyscraper buffs visiting the place. Showing what our architects can do. I don't know. We could come up with something great. Again... what purpose... Legacy? Landmark? Leaving something spectacular for future generations?

Landmarks for landmark's sakes rarely pay the bills.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Landmarks for landmark's sakes rarely pay the bills.

I don't actually think this is always important. I actually think Canada is starved for landmarks; I just don't think a megatall is the way to go.

I mean aside from the CN Tower, is there really anything in Canada that's world famous the way The Empire State Building, the Hollywood sign, Mount Rushmore, the St. Louis Arch, the Lincoln Memorial, the Golden Gate Bridge, the White House or the Sydney Opera House are? I won't even get into Europe.

It wouldn't kill us to have more symbols to offer the world aside from the Rocky Mountains.

[koops65]

The argument about taller = less floor space is BS. That may have been true decades ago, but new towers are being built with new technologies and new materials now. They are stronger and lighter than ever before, and they are taller and bigger than ever before... the future trend is still bigger and taller, that hasn't stopped yet. North America truly is falling out of the skyscraper "game" if you want to call it that. (having the WTB is what I mean)

We may not need towers that big though, and we may not have an economic way to build them either, but they CAN be built...

[christmas]

Toronto's about to get the M+G towers soon. That's certainly a "show-off" supertall for any city.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

I don't actually think this is always important. I actually think Canada is starved for landmarks; I just don't think a megatall is the way to go.

I mean aside from the CN Tower, is there really anything in Canada that's world famous the way The Empire State Building, the Hollywood sign, Mount Rushmore, the St. Louis Arch, the Lincoln Memorial, the Golden Gate Bridge, the White House or the Sydney Opera House are? I won't even get into Europe.

It wouldn't kill us to have more symbols to offer the world aside from the Rocky Mountains.

A few more major landmarks would be nice, but one of the reasons why so many landmarks in the USA are so famous is because the US is very very very good at branding itself. Many of these landmarks are famous by no mistake.

Canada actually has many landmarks that could be just as famous, we just don't market ourselves as well.

And it is not just Canada, can you think of any other world famous man made landmarks in australia outside of the Sydney Opera House and Harbour Bridge?

How about New Zealand?

Or the Philippines?

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

I don't actually think this is always important. I actually think Canada is starved for landmarks; I just don't think a megatall is the way to go.

I mean aside from the CN Tower, is there really anything in Canada that's world famous the way The Empire State Building, the Hollywood sign, Mount Rushmore, the St. Louis Arch, the Lincoln Memorial, the Golden Gate Bridge, the White House or the Sydney Opera House are? I won't even get into Europe.

It wouldn't kill us to have more symbols to offer the world aside from the Rocky Mountains.

We have Moose and Maple Syrup, Toques, and Hockey!



I suspect that Canada has less famous landmarks partly because Canada is, let's face it, just not very famous. Australia is all by itself, with weird animals. The USA is, USA!!USA!!! Europe is peerless for historical buildings, partly due to its dark ages (wonderful cathedrals) and endless conflict (castles, walled cities), and partly due to its colonialism (the loot paying for many a nice building/statue). Asia has so many people and so many ancient civilizations.

Canada is rather banal in comparison to many other places. Which makes it a nice place to live, but just not a very interesting one to visit.

Proof in point: the high fives for glass tower skylines.

[YannickTO]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

One word; Amazon.

Wouldn't it be amazing, surprise of the decade, out of nowhere, they choose a medium size city like Halifax, Winnipeg, Regina, etc and they offer a mega project of several towers, campuses, entertainment and a major supertall tower. LOL ... One can dream, eh?!

[MolsonExport]

I heard that b/c of Migs, Amazon is giving serious consideration to Regina.

[DrNest]

Incorporating a viewing level open to the public atop a supertall would certainly be a welcome addition in Toronto. Depending on location it would give a very different perspective of the city rather than the all too commonly seen view from the CN Tower.
Somewhere in the vicinity of Dundas Square or Yonge/Bloor for example would be quite different. New York and Chicago both have multiple supertalls that cater for touristic views. I see no reason for why a second one appropriately placed wouldn't work in Toronto.

[ericmacm]

I think we will see supertall office towers in Toronto within the next decade. I bet that the next major office development after CIBC Square will be a supertall development. The only problem with offices in Canada is that it's getting harder to find a large anchor tenant. I could potentially see Amazon (if they choose Toronto for HQ2), Rogers, or an oil company wanting a Toronto presence. Either way, most large Canadian companies already have enough office space.

The closest we got to supertall offices was with the Oxford Place casino/convention centre/office complex back in 2014. Unfortunately, that proposal got shot down because the city didn't want a giant casino downtown. Fortunately, the proposal is back under the name Union Park, it seems to have dropped the casino part and still has the giant towers, so it could have a chance this time around.

[MolsonExport]

Rogers

given how lousy their customer service is, I am surprised that they have any customers at all.

does anybody actually like Rogers?


ihaterogers.ca

[J.OT13]

No. But I think the same can be said of Bell. I do however, prefer Bell to Rogers.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

A few more major landmarks would be nice, but one of the reasons why so many landmarks in the USA are so famous is because the US is very very very good at branding itself. Many of these landmarks are famous by no mistake.

Canada actually has many landmarks that could be just as famous, we just don't market ourselves as well.

And it is not just Canada, can you think of any other world famous man made landmarks in australia outside of the Sydney Opera House and Harbour Bridge?

How about New Zealand?

Or the Philippines?

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

We have Moose and Maple Syrup, Toques, and Hockey!



I suspect that Canada has less famous landmarks partly because Canada is, let's face it, just not very famous. Australia is all by itself, with weird animals. The USA is, USA!!USA!!! Europe is peerless for historical buildings, partly due to its dark ages (wonderful cathedrals) and endless conflict (castles, walled cities), and partly due to its colonialism (the loot paying for many a nice building/statue). Asia has so many people and so many ancient civilizations.

Canada is rather banal in comparison to many other places. Which makes it a nice place to live, but just not a very interesting one to visit.

Proof in point: the high fives for glass tower skylines.

I agree that the US does a good job of branding and that Canada just doesn't really, but it doesn't have to be that way.

I struggle to think of what could be marketed that way though. The Lions Gate Bridge? The Peace Tower? Neither are particularly interesting examples of bridges or capital buildings.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by ericmacm

I think we will see supertall office towers in Toronto within the next decade. I bet that the next major office development after CIBC Square will be a supertall development. The only problem with offices in Canada is that it's getting harder to find a large anchor tenant. I could potentially see Amazon (if they choose Toronto for HQ2), Rogers, or an oil company wanting a Toronto presence. Either way, most large Canadian companies already have enough office space.

The closest we got to supertall offices was with the Oxford Place casino/convention centre/office complex back in 2014. Unfortunately, that proposal got shot down because the city didn't want a giant casino downtown. Fortunately, the proposal is back under the name Union Park, it seems to have dropped the casino part and still has the giant towers, so it could have a chance this time around.

Wishful thinking that oil/energy will move back to Toronto and Oxford was, in any way, committed to building Oxford Place as rendered if the city allowed casinos. No renderings of Union Park have been made public either.

Amazon is follow the trend for campus style midrise complexes with HQ1. It's unlike they will go a different direction with HQ2.