CALGARY | City Centre I & II | 530' / 161.5M | 36 F

Surrealplaces · #1 Posted **Jul 3, 2012, 5:48 PM**

City Centre I (the office tower portion) has just recently started construction. Demo completed, pile drivers on site. Tower II is a 47 story mixed use hotel condo tower.

City Center 2 by Calgary Renders, on Flickr

City Center 1 by Calgary Renders, on Flickr

5 Star hotel portion

Source: http://calgarycitycentre.ca/hotel.php

Surrealplaces · #2 Posted **Jul 3, 2012, 5:49 PM**

From Canterra in the Calgary section

Quote:

Originally Posted by Canterra

- demo still in progress
- picture by me

Davis137 · #3 Posted **Jul 4, 2012, 12:34 AM**

WOW, that looks great! Wish there was stuff like that going up in Ottawa...

Hed Kandi · #4 Posted **Jul 4, 2012, 3:28 AM**

Excellent design!

Spoolmak · #5 Posted **Jul 4, 2012, 4:48 AM**

Can you please send whoever designs these gorgeous buildings to Vancouver? It would be greatly appreciated.

Ayreonaut · #6 Posted **Jul 4, 2012, 4:52 AM**

This should be a fun one to watch rise. I prefer the residential tower though, so hopefully that starts sooner rather than later.

Edit: Actually, I think they compliment each other nicely. I don't know which one I like more.

TallBob · #7 Posted **Jul 4, 2012, 6:03 AM**

I'd like to see the shorter portion of the tower "chopped off" and add about 7-8 floors. But there are shadowing issues I believe. Still a nice tower.

colemonkee · #8 Posted **Jul 5, 2012, 6:14 PM**

I really like the design of both towers, though I would have sited the residential tower a little further away from the office tower just to give residents on that side a little more breathing room from the office tower windows. The stepped up greenhouses on the residential side of the podium are a cool feature, though I feel like they missed an opportunity to have a rooftop pool deck. Is that something that's not very common in Calgary?

And what is it with pedestrian skybridges? Sure, they're convenient for people too lazy to leave the floor their on, but they really kill the pedestrian experience on the ground.

LeftCoaster · #9 Posted **Jul 5, 2012, 6:17 PM**

Look at the average temperatures in Calgary in January and you will understand why there are skybridges. It has nothing to do with lazyness.

I've got a lot of HD renderings of this guy at my disposal, I'll put some of them up when I get a chance.

Wooster · #10 Posted **Jul 5, 2012, 6:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Look at the average temperatures in Calgary in January and you will understand why there are skybridges. It has nothing to do with lazyness.

I've got a lot of HD renderings of this guy at my disposal, I'll put some of them up when I get a chance.

-2.8 high in Calgary
-2.0 high in Toronto

Not that different.

LeftCoaster · #11 Posted **Jul 5, 2012, 6:35 PM**

What's your point? Both cities are immensely cold in the winter.

Calgary has skybridges Toronto has the path.

Both are to avoid the cold not to promote lazyness...

yarabundi · #12 Posted **Jul 5, 2012, 10:15 PM**

Montréal and Toronto have both pedestrian networks -most of which in both cities are underground : it has nothing to do with laziness !! Quite the contrary !! It mostly have to do with avoiding heavy street traffic and staying in controlled temperature year round. Most north american cities have skybridge and Calgary is no exception.

If Montréal's experience with the largest indoor network in the world is any indication, it didn't kill the street's activities. Skybridge in Calgary shouldn't either !!

fatboy · #13 Posted **Jul 6, 2012, 11:48 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wooster

-2.8 high in Calgary
-2.0 high in Toronto

Not that different.

Chinooks skew the numbers, I lived through the -40 without windchill in January... Although Toronto at -12 feels like -30.

Surrealplaces · #14 Posted **Jul 13, 2012, 3:26 PM**

It's a combination of reasons. The first skybridges were built in Minneapolis for the cold weather, but a large part of Calgary's reason to build them was pedestrian traffic. It was a way of helping keep pedestrians off the street crossings and slowing down traffic....seriously lol!

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

What's your point? Both cities are immensely cold in the winter.

Calgary has skybridges Toronto has the path.

Both are to avoid the cold not to promote lazyness...

caltrane74 · #15 Posted **Jul 13, 2012, 3:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wooster

-2.8 high in Calgary
-2.0 high in Toronto

Not that different.

No point to this post at all. - He mentioned nothing about Toronto, just pointed out that it's cold in Calgary in January.

.. which is true.

Surrealplaces · #16 Posted **Jul 13, 2012, 3:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by caltrane74

No point to this post at all. - He mentioned nothing about Toronto, just pointed out that it's cold in Calgary in January.

.. which is true.

Wooster's point was that the +15 sky bridges aren't a special thing in Calgary due to extreme cold weather as all Canadian cities (save the west coast) have cold weather in winter, but not all cities have the skybridge or underground network. The bridge walkways weren't actually instituted because of weather reasons, but more for traffic reasons.

TallBob · #17 Posted **Jul 15, 2012, 11:19 PM**

I don't think the skybridge system in any city from Edmonton to all points south has really helped cities all that much in keeping pedesrian traffic and buisnesses from leaving Dt's and moving to suburbs! Also think it's an unneccassary expense to developers. Just my 2 cents!

isaidso · #18 Posted **Jul 16, 2012, 2:24 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

It has nothing to do with lazyness.

Agree, but they do kill the pedestrian experience. Most of downtown Toronto is dense enough to get away with it. Calgary is not.

Just Build It · #19 Posted **Jul 16, 2012, 7:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by isaidso

Agree, but they do kill the pedestrian experience. Most of downtown Toronto is dense enough to get away with it. Calgary is not.

I would disagree. Downtown Calgary may not be as dense as Downtown Toronto, but its downtown commercial core area (where the ped bridges are) is not that far off. Despite the pedestrian bridges the sidewalks are always busy during week days. The walkways are closed on weekends, so it has no impact at times when it's less busy. Even on really cold days when most people use them, sidewalk traffic is still pretty good.

isaidso · #20 Posted **Jul 17, 2012, 1:44 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Build It

I would disagree. Downtown Calgary may not be as dense as Downtown Toronto, but its downtown commercial core area (where the ped bridges are) is not that far off. Despite the pedestrian bridges the sidewalks are always busy during week days. The walkways are closed on weekends, so it has no impact at times when it's less busy. Even on really cold days when most people use them, sidewalk traffic is still pretty good.

That may be the case, but a skywalk is still diverting pedestrian traffic off the sidewalk. In one sense, it's preferable to PATH in Toronto because PATH also diverts retail off the street which creates a rather sterile environment above ground; especially after 5 pm. Toronto's CBD is almost devoid of retail because 99% of it has been put underground.