CALGARY | Brookfield Place Calgary | 247M / 811 FT | 56 Floors - Page 39

Skyisnolimit · #**761** Posted **Jun 12, 2015, 8:37 AM**

Stantec's little brother going up fast

fatboy · #**762** Posted **Jun 12, 2015, 12:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyisnolimit

Stantec's little brother going up fast

Calling it Stantec's little brother would indicate they perhaps the two buildings are related or look the same...Stantec building is Fugly with a ridiculous spire added for total height.
Don't be surprised if Brookfield adds floors.
Can't see Calgary giving up tallest in west to a "city" with currently zero building's over 500ft.

Skyisnolimit · #**763** Posted **Jun 12, 2015, 12:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatboy

Calling it Stantec's little brother would indicate they perhaps the two buildings are related or look the same...Stantec building is Fugly with a ridiculous spire added for total height.
Don't be surprised if Brookfield adds floors.
Can't see Calgary giving up tallest in west to a "city" with currently zero building's over 500ft.

Stantec has no spire its 251 to roof get your facts straight and go eat your humble pie there. You were wrong on all posts and this one not surprising though its a trend of yours.

. Also stantec final design is different from origional try and keep up with the times. And our airport kept any buildings from being over 500 or there would of been many already. So maybe learn about the city you flame all the time knowledge is your friend.

WhipperSnapper · #**764** Posted **Jun 12, 2015, 1:37 PM**

Stantec and the whole Arena District is a once in a lifetime type of development. I have doubts that without the airport there would be many 500 foot towers already. The market and cost of land doesn't justify building tall. Case in point the 4 storey, wood framed condos next to the arena and the big box malls down the street. The Arena District will satisfy years of demand too.

We're talking about a paltry four metres on Brookfield or one floor. Prudence would be a wiser course than gloating.

DarthMalgus · #**765** Posted **Jun 12, 2015, 2:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatboy

Calling it Stantec's little brother would indicate they perhaps the two buildings are related or look the same...Stantec building is Fugly with a ridiculous spire added for total height.
Don't be surprised if Brookfield adds floors.
Can't see Calgary giving up tallest in west to a "city" with currently zero building's over 500ft.

I don't think Brookfield would be able to randomly add floors without a new Development Permit and possibly a Land Use Amendment to seek extra FAR. Then there may even be engineering revisions triggered by that. I don't think the economics are there to justify all that time and expense to add floors when the office market 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 right now.

I suspect Edmonton would have a few 500+ buildings (maybe 4 or so like Vancouver does) without the airport capping heights for all these years...but I would argue the biggest reason Calgary has a lot more 500+ buildings than the other big western cities is, it has twice as much office space in its downtown.

The more interesting story here, rather than the city-vs-city BS, is that after Suncor held the Tallest in the West title for nearly 30 years, Bow will have had it for only a few years, followed by a year or so for Brookfield, and then Stantec (for who knows how long - but I bet it's going to be a lot less than 30 years).

Bigtime · #**766** Posted **Jun 12, 2015, 2:03 PM**

Yeah, that is some pretty fast turnover for new-tallest for AB (and the west), a few years ago we probably all thought The Bow would hold it for at least a decade.

Daveography · #**767** Posted **Jun 12, 2015, 3:40 PM**

I really don't get the gloating and hating; neither are called for, not in this thread anyway.

Brookfield is a fantastic project, I'm really enjoying watching it go up. I look forward to being able to better see how the corners shift as it rises, too.

MrBigStuff · #**768** Posted **Jun 12, 2015, 7:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyisnolimit

Stantec has no spire its 251 to roof get your facts straight and go eat your humble pie there. You were wrong on all posts and this one not surprising though its a trend of yours.

. Also stantec final design is different from origional try and keep up with the times. And our airport kept any buildings from being over 500 or there would of been many already. So maybe learn about the city you flame all the time knowledge is your friend.

I would think now - with the closing of the Muni airport - that would greatly increase the chances of getting buildings built now - that are far taller than 500 feet. I like the idea of a rivalry between YYC and YEG as far as tall buildings go. It will be good for both centers - yea/no??

Coldrsx · #**769** Posted **Jun 12, 2015, 7:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Stantec and the whole Arena District is a once in a lifetime type of development. I have doubts that without the airport there would be many 500 foot towers already. The market and cost of land doesn't justify building tall. Case in point the 4 storey, wood framed condos next to the arena and the big box malls down the street. The Arena District will satisfy years of demand too.

We're talking about a paltry four metres on Brookfield or one floor. Prudence would be a wiser course than gloating.

This guy knows.

Calgarian · #**770** Posted **Jun 12, 2015, 8:04 PM**

Edmonton posters, please don't brag in every thread that you are getting a new tallest, Calgary posters, please don't take the bait when they do, it's immature all around. I'm glad Stantec is taller, will push developers here to regain the title in a few years, and might even get Vancouver into the race (though I doubt it).

MrBigStuff · #**771** Posted **Jun 12, 2015, 8:22 PM**

It would be nice to see Vancouver get in on the latest race to have a new tallest - but with the potential for severe earthquakes - would that not limit the height of buildings that could be built at Vancouver???

Bigtime · #**772** Posted **Jun 12, 2015, 8:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrBigStuff

It would be nice to see Vancouver get in on the latest race to have a new tallest - but with the potential for severe earthquakes - would that not limit the height of buildings that could be built at Vancouver???

It doesn't in lots of other earthquake prone cities.

firecracker1995 · #**773** Posted **Jun 12, 2015, 10:17 PM**

The first thing that comes to my mind about Brookfield and Stantec is that over in Edmonton they are just jealous of Calgary and all there buildings, (which I know isn't true) but why would a building in a city like Edmonton need 68 floors with the size of buildings that there really is there, I mean that is a big jump for a city like Edmonton, Brookfield place is going to be used and it feels like they are just making Stantec that tall because of what's going on in Calgary and of coarse there not because then it would be an empty tower like the ones bought by foreign investors in Vancouver sadly.

It would be truly immature for Brookfield to not need any more floors and to add more just because of some building war or something, if they need the extra space... then cool!... If Stantec needs 68 floors then cool as well!

I wonder when the windows will come in, I LOVE this tower!

Oilers1799 · #**774** Posted **Jun 12, 2015, 10:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bigtime

It doesn't in lots of other earthquake prone cities.

Indeed. I've been watching the Wilshire Grand Tower going up in Los Angeles. It's there new tallest I think. As far as Stantec, I'm just glad we are seeing a tower finally rise way above Manulife and EPCOR.

DarthMalgus · #**775** Posted **Jun 12, 2015, 10:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrBigStuff

It would be nice to see Vancouver get in on the latest race to have a new tallest - but with the potential for severe earthquakes - would that not limit the height of buildings that could be built at Vancouver???

Not sure the earthquakes have a lot to do with it, as already mentioned some cities in quake zones have loads of skyscrapers.

More to do, probably, with restrictions based on view cones and also the fact that Vancouver's highrise market is driven primarily by residential, which can go with lower floor to ceiling heights than office. It would take a residential building 70 to 80 floors high to reach the height of Stantec or Brookfield. Perhaps a more likely possibility is Vancouver joining the race with a mixed use tower along the lines of Stantec or Telus Sky (which, strangely, there don't seem to be a lot of in Vancouver).

WhipperSnapper · #**776** Posted **Jun 12, 2015, 10:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Labridniv

The first thing that comes to my mind about Brookfield and Stantec is that over in Edmonton they are just jealous of Calgary and all there buildings, (which I know isn't true) but why would a building in a city like Edmonton need 68 floors with the size of buildings that there really is there, I mean that is a big jump for a city like Edmonton, Brookfield place is going to be used and it feels like they are just making Stantec that tall because of what's going on in Calgary and of coarse there not because then it would be an empty tower like the ones bought by foreign investors in Vancouver sadly.

It would be truly immature for Brookfield to not need any more floors and to add more just because of some building war or something, if they need the extra space... then cool!... If Stantec needs 68 floors then cool as well!

I wonder when the windows will come in, I LOVE this tower!

I doubt Brookfield cares even for a measly 4 metres. Height wasn't the determining factor. The building contains a ton of floor space. It could have been massed differently with a shorter tower on a multi-level podium with 50 to 100 thousand square foot plates however, the market may not be interested in that.

Clearly we are in an age of height. Think we have more 500 footers under construction in Canada than we had built 10 years however, I think that reflects more the insane costs of everything and the need to build big. The ballsy developers of the 1970s and 1980s are few and far between today. Stantec reflects that era and, overall, I'd say it's a good thing. Just don't think it's the new norm. Love for a height war though. Just let me pull my money out first.

Surrealplaces · #**777** Posted **Jun 18, 2015, 5:19 PM**

Personally I think everyone has been mature about things. Most Calgarian posters have been treating it as friendly competition, and most Edmonton posters haven't been gloating. If you look at the Stantec thread and this one, it's always been the same two people causing all the grief......I think we know who I'm referring to.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calgarian

Edmonton posters, please don't brag in every thread that you are getting a new tallest, Calgary posters, please don't take the bait when they do, it's immature all around. I'm glad Stantec is taller, will push developers here to regain the title in a few years, and might even get Vancouver into the race (though I doubt it).

Surrealplaces · #**778** Posted **Jun 18, 2015, 5:21 PM**

Brookfield Place by Construction Mania, on Flickr

geotag277 · #**779** Posted **Jun 21, 2015, 12:37 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Stantec and the whole Arena District is a once in a lifetime type of development. I have doubts that without the airport there would be many 500 foot towers already. The market and cost of land doesn't justify building tall. Case in point the 4 storey, wood framed condos next to the arena and the big box malls down the street. The Arena District will satisfy years of demand too.

We're talking about a paltry four metres on Brookfield or one floor. Prudence would be a wiser course than gloating.

If there was such pent up demand for tall towers in Edmonton you would think they would have built more sub 500 footers in the last 25 years besides Epcor.

Stantec, Delta, & the City of Edmonton towers are good developments, but I suspect they will satisfy large scale development in Edmonton for a while.

FoxBat · #**780** Posted **Jun 22, 2015, 7:57 AM**

I find this thread funny, Brookfield will be an awesome addition to Calgary's great skyline, great looking building. If Stantec is a few meters higher or not, both Brookfield and Stantec will both be small fry to the hundreds of much taller building in the world. We are both over just a million in population, and both of these building will be great additions to our humble cities. Just be happy to be living in one of the greatest places to live.... Alberta. Not many places in the world are developing like both Edmonton and Calgary.