HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage Forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2010, 7:27 PM
caltrane74's Avatar
caltrane74 caltrane74 is offline
Stuffum'n'Cuffum
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 28,268
I think it's fun to have this topic.. so long as Calgary, Vancouver and Montreal are included in the chase...

We're just having fun, and now there is nothing wrong with that.
__________________
Learn Here about the 187 Tallest Buildings U/C in Toronto The Toronto Skyscraper Blog
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2010, 7:29 PM
feepa's Avatar
feepa feepa is offline
Change is good
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,232
Lets just abolish all the subsections in the Canada section, and have a free-for-all.

Perhaps the reason people get upset about all the Toronto centric topics is because there is no home for Toronto topics, and they tend to dominate the Canada section.

Oh, and by the by, Those of you that think Toronto or Calgary get their unfair share of abuse here are full of yourself and your city-ego. Edmonton, Winnipeg, Vancouver and Montreal all get their share of love/hate on these forums, so just take it. It's a sign of your success if others are jealous. By Tony's logic, there shouldn't be any presence from any region in Canada in this section, because we have all been scared away boo hoo hoo. Right.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2010, 7:30 PM
haljackey's Avatar
haljackey haljackey is offline
User Registered
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 1,825
Easiest way to get a supertall:

Add a couple floors to First Canadian Place. It's 298m.. a floor or two should get it past 300m for supertall status.

Or add a spire to Scociabank plaza or something
__________________
My Twitter

My Simcity Stuff
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2010, 7:32 PM
Tony's Avatar
Tony Tony is offline
Super Moderator / Sr. Committee
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 5,869
Quote:
Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin View Post
I just fail to see the important of some having a building that meets some arbitrary 300 m height and also arbitrarily isn't a building of a certain type or doesn't include spires (unless its "decorative"...also arbitrary). Skyscrapers are cool and all, but this whole "herp derp when we gonna get a supertall?" thing strikes me as some sort of juvenile penis-envy thing. And for all intents and purposes, we already have multiple "supertalls" (FCP & CN Tower, at the very least).
So because you've said so, nobody can ask the question?

Get out of the thread if you don't care, cuz those who want to participate in the discussion "don't care" what you have to say.
__________________
Hunan, China 1 | Hunan, China 2 | Hong Kong | NYC 2 | NYC 1 | Florence | Venice | Rome | London | Paris


Flickr®
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2010, 7:34 PM
Yume-sama's Avatar
Yume-sama Yume-sama is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Vancouver / Calgary / Tokyo
Posts: 7,525
I never understood why it seems this forum seems to have some fixation on Skyscrapers either.

__________________
Visit me on Flickr! Really! I'm lonely.
http://www.flickr.com/syume
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2010, 7:35 PM
Calgarian's Avatar
Calgarian Calgarian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 18,745
I think if Toronto doesn't build a supertall within 10 years, Calgary might just beat you to the punch. OUr vacancr rate is a lot lower than people expected it to be right now, and the rate of absorption is pretty strong. I thnk now that we have the Bow, corporations in this city will see the benefit of having a signature building as their corporate HQ and a few more will try it out.
__________________
Git'er done!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2010, 7:37 PM
freeweed's Avatar
freeweed freeweed is offline
Home of Hyperchange
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Dynamic City, Alberta
Posts: 17,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yume-sama View Post
I never understood why it seems this forum seems to have some fixation on Skyscrapers either.
You win the Internet for today! (Or at least the SSP portion)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2010, 7:38 PM
Yume-sama's Avatar
Yume-sama Yume-sama is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Vancouver / Calgary / Tokyo
Posts: 7,525
Toronto is the most logical, Vancouver it could never happen (in the city proper anyways), and Calgary could very well be the dark horse.

I would LOVE to see a nice mixed-use building, pushing 300+m in Calgary. Retail / Office / Condos on top

Are their strict height limits in the downtown core now? What about on the "other" side of the tracks that looks like a whole different slightly impoverished city lol~
__________________
Visit me on Flickr! Really! I'm lonely.
http://www.flickr.com/syume
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2010, 7:40 PM
Ramako's Avatar
Ramako Ramako is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,828
I'm still not sure why the CN Tower is not counted as a supertall. I know that it's a building and not a tower, but it's not like the world is swimming with 300+ metre towers. In fact, they're more rare than supertall buildings.

Supertall buildings built or U/C in the world = 119
http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=48827348

Supertall towers built or U/C in the world = 40
http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=48827329
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2010, 7:49 PM
hrisemiky hrisemiky is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 230
lets be real theres only two maybe three citys that would look good with a supertall in canada
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2010, 7:54 PM
PoscStudent's Avatar
PoscStudent PoscStudent is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: St. John's
Posts: 3,146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgarian View Post
I think if Toronto doesn't build a supertall within 10 years, Calgary might just beat you to the punch. OUr vacancr rate is a lot lower than people expected it to be right now, and the rate of absorption is pretty strong. I thnk now that we have the Bow, corporations in this city will see the benefit of having a signature building as their corporate HQ and a few more will try it out.
From articles I read early the year Calgary's vacancy rate was in the high teens and was expected to increase over the year, has there been a big change in this?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2010, 8:11 PM
Bigtime's Avatar
Bigtime Bigtime is offline
Very tall. Such Scrape.
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Sunnyside, Calgary
Posts: 15,769
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoscStudent View Post
From articles I read early the year Calgary's vacancy rate was in the high teens and was expected to increase over the year, has there been a big change in this?
Yes, yes there has. Now they are only forecasting low double digits and possibly into the single digits.
__________________
Proud supporter of Naheed Nenshi as Mayor!
Bigtime Goes to Antarctica
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2010, 8:17 PM
Calgarian's Avatar
Calgarian Calgarian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 18,745
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigtime View Post
Yes, yes there has. Now they are only forecasting low double digits and possibly into the single digits.
Pretty much.

With Oil prices still high, and gas prices on the rebound, I think Calgary should continue to do well in the near future, and should do really well in the next 10+ years.

I agree that there are only a couple cities that could have a 300m tower and not look ridiculous, and they are Calgary, Montreal and obviously Toronto. Edmonton and Vancouver needs a couple 200m towers first. Don't know enough about Mississauga to weigh in there.
__________________
Git'er done!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2010, 8:22 PM
MolsonExport's Avatar
MolsonExport MolsonExport is offline
The Vomit Bag.
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Liver & Onions
Posts: 21,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by freeweed View Post
Tony, I can't disagree with a word you've said, except to point out that it's by no means Toronto-only. Calgary has the exact same issue, pretty much word-for-word the way you described it. I've started calling us the "Toronto of the West" when discussing how Canadians treat the city. There's also a strong parallel in that both cities are full of people who are very proud of their city and genuinely happy to live where they do, which offends some. Also, both of our hockey teams currently suck donkey balls.

Hence my subtle joke about a Muslim mayor for Toronto, referencing the last time someone DARED make a city-specific thread that wasn't Winnipeg or Edmonton.
And almost every single french-speaking Quebecker left SSP for Mtl.urb. The Quebec subforum was once the busiest of all on SSP.
__________________
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know. -Donald Rumsfeld
Didn't you notice on the plane when you started talking, eventually I started reading the vomit bag?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2010, 8:24 PM
hrisemiky hrisemiky is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 230
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgarian View Post
Pretty much.

With Oil prices still high, and gas prices on the rebound, I think Calgary should continue to do well in the near future, and should do really well in the next 10+ years.

I agree that there are only a couple cities that could have a 300m tower and not look ridiculous, and they are Calgary, Montreal and obviously Toronto. Edmonton and Vancouver needs a couple 200m towers first. Don't know enough about Mississauga to weigh in there.
my thoughts exactly
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2010, 8:29 PM
samne's Avatar
samne samne is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Eastend
Posts: 2,248
Quote:
Don't know enough about Mississauga to weigh in there
I think Mississauga is the DarkHorse. I can see the Sausage getting a "Signature" SuperTall at some point.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2010, 9:18 PM
PoscStudent's Avatar
PoscStudent PoscStudent is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: St. John's
Posts: 3,146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgarian View Post
Pretty much.

With Oil prices still high, and gas prices on the rebound, I think Calgary should continue to do well in the near future, and should do really well in the next 10+ years.

I agree that there are only a couple cities that could have a 300m tower and not look ridiculous, and they are Calgary, Montreal and obviously Toronto. Edmonton and Vancouver needs a couple 200m towers first. Don't know enough about Mississauga to weigh in there.
I saw this week that oil is expected to be $300 a barrel by 2020 so St. John's and Calgary will be laughing. Maybe we'll even get a skyline.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2010, 9:20 PM
floobie floobie is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Calgary
Posts: 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgarian View Post

I agree that there are only a couple cities that could have a 300m tower and not look ridiculous, and they are Calgary, Montreal and obviously Toronto. Edmonton and Vancouver needs a couple 200m towers first. Don't know enough about Mississauga to weigh in there.
I'll... third this. The aesthetics of it should be considered. Honestly, even in Calgary or Montreal, I think it could be tricky to pull it off without it completely dwarfing the rest of the skyline. Though, that does depend on how "supertall" we're talking.

Though, that might not be a terrible thing. Look at Taipei. They have Taipei 101, their next tallest is somewhere around 200 meters, and the rest of the CBD has buildings more or less the height of Vancouver/Edmonton. What they ended up with was a truly landmark tower that completely defines the city, and nothing else even comes close. It might not look as cool as a big cluster of tallish skyscrapers, but it still leaves a very lasting impression. When I think Taipei, Taipei 101 is at the top of the list of what I think of. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone on that.

So, I guess it depends on what we're after here. A landmark tower that defines the city, or something big that adds to the existing skyline, but doesn't completely overpower it. And, obviously the best answer is somewhere in the middle, rendering all my babbling useless. I apologize.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2010, 9:45 PM
hrisemiky hrisemiky is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 230
I dont think a 300m tower would look out of place in calgary
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2010, 10:07 PM
dleung dleung is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,826
It really depends on what role the supertall plays in the skyline. By some standards, even the Bow can be considered "too large", but personally I find it to be extremely appropriate for Calgary and serves as an anchor/landmark, rather than attempting to fit in with the scale of the CBD. The Bow is a true Prairie skyscraper.

PS, the seemingly SSC-endorsed regional boycott of SSP sounds kinda immature...
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 5:56 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.