Calgary SSP Development Listing

[ranchlandsselling]

Will be happy to see Osteria go down. Regardless, that has to be one of the worst intersections ever. I'd hate to live there and drive out of there at any point in time.

[Bigtime]

I am assuming we'll see Osteria take its place again at the base of the building, the development company's name is the last name of the owners of Osteria.

Access (for vehicles) is definitely one of the big challenges with the site, it will be interesting to see what is proposed to help with the congestion in the one-way back alley to the north of the site. I could see them closing it to 10th street and making it an exit in and out via 10a street instead.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by fotze

The Osteria folks are Bucci developments? God I hope its built, will make for years of glorious stories and lawsuits.

Bucci was the other one.

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by fotze

The Osteria folks are Bucci developments? God I hope its built, will make for years of glorious stories and lawsuits.

Nope, Bucci seems to be sticking with the 4 storey wood frame. The only exception in Calgary was their Xenex project in the Beltline.

[stampsx2]

Originally Posted by ranchlandsselling

Yeah, of course they're going to consider everything, but they've got different designs, one for multiple buildings, if the multiple buildings scenario goes - like EAP, they don't necessarily have to do it all at once. Bringing on a million sq. ft. of office space certainly doesn't have the diluting effect it once used to in the market - but it's still a lot of space. 2.8 is a ton of space. Additionally that parking lot cash flows half decent., no hurry to bring it down when Calgary already has a shortage of parking. As much as I'd love to see a gargantuan full block development it's a lot of construction to finance. As well Brookfield would want to bring on that many sq. ft. slowly (well not slowly, but...) so not to cannibalize their current buildings.

The good thing for Brookfield is they have a full block further away from the river than The Bow does.

If they want to build something ionic and taller than The Bow then they can. They don't have to be concerned about shadowing on the river like The Bow did.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by stampsx2

The good thing for Brookfield is they have a full block further away from the river than The Bow does.

If they want to build something ionic and taller than The Bow then they can. They don't have to be concerned about shadowing on the river like The Bow did.

Essentially it is two blocks further away than the Bow is. Looks like about 3 for the Bow and about 5 for Herald Square - both from the closest corner of the site to the river.

[Bigtime]

Come on 1000 footer in Calgary! Somebody has to pull the trigger on one at some point.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Come on 1000 footer in Calgary! Somebody has to pull the trigger on one at some point.

Herald Square is probably the best shot at one for a while.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Come on 1000 footer in Calgary! Somebody has to pull the trigger on one at some point.

Why don't skyscraper enthusiasts like metric?

[SebC]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Herald Square is probably the best shot at one for a while.

Does having the full block make it more or less likely that it will gain height in the re-design? My instincts says from a commercial standpoint more footprint = less need for height, but from an engineering/zoning/street-level standpoints, more footprint = it can be made taller.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by SebC

Why don't skyscraper enthusiasts like metric?

How tall are you?

Same reason you answered the way you did.

[GreatWhiteEbola]

Originally Posted by SebC

Why don't skyscraper enthusiasts like metric?

I did a Google search for the punch-line, it seems this is a serious question...

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by SebC

Why don't skyscraper enthusiasts like metric?

Because I'm also a pilot (that never flew in China or Russia). My brain works with height in feet.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by SebC

Does having the full block make it more or less likely that it will gain height in the re-design? My instincts says from a commercial standpoint more footprint = less need for height, but from an engineering/zoning/street-level standpoints, more footprint = it can be made taller.

It certainly allows them to go taller if they want to. With the whole block they can put something like 2.8 million square feet on the block. The Bow is only about 2 million. They will want to get close to the total allowed in order to maximize the rentable area. Splitting into two 1.4 million square foot towers (assumeing that they are exactly the same size) would mean that you still would have two very tall towers.

There would also be lots of room to build a large enough footprint to minimize the extra cost of elevators that would need to reach higher levels.

[stampsx2]

Originally Posted by SebC

Does having the full block make it more or less likely that it will gain height in the re-design? My instincts says from a commercial standpoint more footprint = less need for height, but from an engineering/zoning/street-level standpoints, more footprint = it can be made taller.

Being the tallest means decades of free advertising. Who in Calgary doesn't know what or where "The Bow"is?

[SebC]

So I was doing some reading on Wiki... the Bow cost about ~$1.4B, Burj Khalifa was ~$1.5B.

[GreatWhiteEbola]

Originally Posted by SebC

So I was doing some reading on Wiki... the Bow cost about ~$1.4B, Burj Khalifa was ~$1.5B.

Yeah, I just read that. Lower labour costs?

[SebC]

Originally Posted by GreatWhiteEbola

Yeah, I just read that. Lower labour costs?

Presumably. Still surprised me how close they are.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by GreatWhiteEbola

Yeah, I just read that. Lower labour costs?

Near-slave labour.

[GreatWhiteEbola]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Near-slave labour.

Quoted for truth.