Building with more than 100 floors in Calgary?

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

Thanks for posting that; I've seen the picture of the tower a lot, but that's the first time I've seen that article giving a bit of context around the whole building.

[carom]

100 floors is weak, I hope they build this 500+ story building some day:



The Illinois

[driveway]

100-floor buildings are intense. Here in Taipei we've got Taipei 101 and it completely dominates the city. Most of Taipei is mid-rise, existing between 10 and 20 stories with a few 30-story buildings and then there's this gigantic spike that shoots up into the sky.

It's like living in the shadow of the Dark Tower. You're constantly aware of the building's presence, you orient everything by where it is and when you can't see it, you're aware of that too.

Big pic

Spoiler!

[Wormius]

^ Me loves a good bandwidth stealin'.

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by frinkprof

Originally Posted by LOLZpersonok

Does anyone know if any of the above proposals may be true sometime?

Well some of them have definitely become stale proposals or "never builts", but quite a few in there have been built:

-Vetro
-Stampede Station
-Nuera
-Penn West I & II
-Eighth Avenue Place
-The Bow
-Jamieson Place
-Riverfront Pointe I & II
-Waterfront Condos I & II

Images that will be built:

-arriVa II & III are now The Guardian (tower 1 starting soon)
-City Centre (in Eau Claire)

[zuluking]

Originally Posted by Slava

I think that they're afraid it could change the ecosystem in general if there is a virtually permanent shadow on a part of the river.

You mean like bridges?

[Bigtime]

If I am not mistaken the shadowing bylaw applies to the river pathway along the south bank of the bow river (and not the river itself).

[Muta]

Originally Posted by calgaryred

Still remember when Bankers Hall was set to be built how big of a deal that was

I remember that was a big deal, for sure. It's a shame they're both horredously ugly. They really do define the Calgary skyline.

[fredr123]

From the City of Calgary Land Use Bylaw, Part 12 Division 1:

Riverbank Sunlight
1234 Buildings must not place in shadow an area 20.0 metres wide throughout abutting the top of the south bank of the Bow River, from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Mountain Daylight Time on September 21 except areas already in shadow as a result of a building which was legally existing or approved prior to the effective date of this Bylaw

Also, the Eau Claire Area Redevelopment Plan has a bunch of stuff on the maximum number of stories permissible for buildings in the area too: http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&...k8pjvZpuX9F_Zg

[Travis Munroe]

It is the pathways they are concerned about.

I believe this is why the harry hays building has the design it does as well based on google maps.

[wookster]

Originally Posted by Mass_nerder

I believe it's just because they don't want to ruin peoples' possible enjoyment of the river walk area.
I'm not 100% certain. I was able to attend a small presentation from the local Calgary firm working with Foster + Partners on the Bow. The height question was raised, and that was the answer we were given.
Originally it was designed to be 74 (maybe 78? I can't remember exactly) stories, but was scaled back to comply with bylaws.

The bow was scaled back because at certain times of the year it would cast a shadow on the bird sanctuary along the river and there were fears that it would mess with bird migrations and such. Don't have an article link but I used to work for EnCana and thats the reasoning they gave us as to why it was being "chopped" by a few storeys.

[moncton golden flames]

/\/\

there is no bird sanctuary close to downtown, aside from the one in inglewood, so whoever fed you that line was not correct.

[You Need a Thneed]

The shadowing Bylaw is to keep the pathway generally in the sun for 6 months a year. Not for a bird sanctuary, or for the fish, but simply to make the pathway a nice place to be in the summer.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by fotze

This isn't the thread for it, but why is there never any sort of commercial interests along any point of the river. Sure we be cool to have a river walk type area with cool restaurants and bars. Get more money seeling it to real estate developers?

Like the River Cafe?

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by fotze

This isn't the thread for it, but why is there never any sort of commercial interests along any point of the river. Sure we be cool to have a river walk type area with cool restaurants and bars. Get more money seeling it to real estate developers?

I think the parcels of land in the East Village that will front the new Riverwalk pathway will provide excellent opportunities for just that. I think the Simmons building has had a lot of interest when they put the word out for potential tenants.

[moncton golden flames]

Originally Posted by fotze

I wonder who the owners there had to fata/kill to get that real estate, although if they bid it out to the highest bidder it would be a Chili's or Margaritaville.

that ownership group obviously has a good 'in' with the city. boxwood, the restaurant in central memorial park is owned by the same people iirc.

[iggnuef]

Rumour has it that Imperial Oil wants to build a 71 story tower soon. But it will be further south then the Bow tower so it won't cast a shadow on the river. No idea of the location tho.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by fotze

I wonder who the owners there had to fata/kill to get that real estate, although if they bid it out to the highest bidder it would be a Chili's or Margaritaville.

Olive Garden.

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by iggnuef

Rumour has it that Imperial Oil wants to build a 71 story tower soon. But it will be further south then the Bow tower so it won't cast a shadow on the river. No idea of the location tho.

That rumour has been around since before the Bow was announced, Imperial owns vacant land right in the core (at 5th Ave & 4th St SW). But most of the info is that Imperial keeps the purse strings pretty tight, so it would be hard to see them go out and build an iconic tower that would be taller than the Bow (versus a big floorplate tower around the 600-700' height).

The option that makes the most sense is if Brookfield is courting them as a major tenant for a re-worked Herald Square proposal (7th Ave & 2nd St SW), and then it could be Brookfield that decides to go for it and built a major tower on their land.

[trumpethead]

Originally Posted by fotze

I wonder who the owners there had to fata/kill to get that real estate, although if they bid it out to the highest bidder it would be a Chili's or Margaritaville.

I'm guessing Chili's would miss out on a big part of their demographic if the opened a restaurant without a parking lot in front of it.