New Condos and Skyscrapers

Joined
Aug 8, 2002
Messages
9,922
Now, many may have heard about Calgary's economic boom. Well, as a city that likes to look bigger than it actually is, Calgary is taking the opportunity to pump out a lot of new office buildings and high-rise condos (for a city of only a million).

Below are a number of the buildings that will be put up over the coming 4 years or so. Feel free to post the cool new phallic extensions that your city is planning. :)

Condos
(All three in this picture are to be built)
ArriVa.jpg

colours.gif

project_montana_1.jpg

unionsquare.jpg

Montrouxcivfanatics.JPG

vetro.jpg

skytower_000.jpg


Office and Other Mixed Use
encana3.jpg

Jamieson.jpg

Penny_Lane.jpg

stampede_station.jpg
 
Yeah! Baby!:rockon: Places I cannot afford!:dance:
 
Looks like what the regular Chinese city is going through ;)

:lol: The hilarious part is that there are only a million people in the middle of the prairies... and almost everyone STILL lives in suburbs. It is weird because there is very little transition. It is just suburb, suburb, suburb, then BAM, huge buildings.

Though I guess we do have the most widely used light rail transit in North America, funnelling everyone into downtown, and since there are not really any significant neighbouring municipalities, Calgary is almost a perfect example of the theoretical monocity.
 
Already built at my uni:

devonshire_front.jpg

Devonshire-Building-Newcast.jpg
 
Yeah, i forget how but the whole building is pretty much self sufficient/futuristic in most things
 
Geez thats pretty swish!
 
Look, I do not know if this is true. But if it is, here is what it is going to happen with Bucharest:


Spoiler :
1) we will receive funds for culture and construction from the EU

2) in the first 4 years, there will be rings and rings of new houses around Bucharest. They have a pretty good organization, if we trust what they say. From what I've seen, they took a great decision and won't build the houses in new style. They are going to build most of them in a Brancovenesc (a unique Romanian) style.

3) the people from blocks will be moved in those houses. I mean moved, as in the houses have from 3 to 6 rooms, and in exchange for your apartment, they are going to give a small house with a small garden in the periphery for free.
- during the communist times, the whole city was filled with very stupid, idiotic, ugly-looking, grey, cube-shaped blocks of flats. The old charm of the city, "the small Paris", has been lost.

4) they are going to tear down all the blocks

5) they will build near the "Piata Unirii" (square of the unification) a series of blocks resembling the civic center style of Ceausescu (which was very nice IMO, unlike his normal blocks).

- in districts where (ugly) blocks are the main place of living, they are going to build good houses, completely remake (and reorganize) the streets (which are horrible), and small (3-floors maximum) stylish blocks.

6) they are going to make 3 centers of the city: the main center (the current actual center of the city), the industrial, (production and business) center, to the east of the actual center, the cultural center, to the west of the actual center, and the entertainment center, to the south-east of the city, right near my place!! They are going to make the biggest artificial fun-lake in Europe, and build some really modern streets and suspended ways from the Tineretului park (biggest of Bucharest) to the current empty area near me. There will also be casinos there (not that I care about that)

7) the industrial center will have skyscrapers. We have no skyscrapers currently, at all. The highest building in Bucharest is 23 floors tall, which is very low compared to the rest of the (civilized) world.

8) the culture center will be right at the west of the actual center, close to the main squares of Bucharest, along the shores of the Dambovita (the river that crosses Bucharest). They are going to repaint in nice colors all the buildings with potential there. They are going to just demolish all the ugly useless buildings and build something really nice. They want to make a romantic and cultural main street, between the "Piata Natiunilor Unite", and "Piata Eroilor". If the pics they've shown are really what's going to be made, it's great! Really. :eek:

9) the entertainment center will be very modern, unlike the cultural center. :) I'm very excited that it's right near my place. It's going to be great fun going there.

10) they are additionally going to make a smaller center at the north of the actual main center of the city, near the "Victoriei" square.

11) as I said, the cultural center will be at the west, the industrial/business center will be at the east (the one with skyscrapers), and the "fun" center is going to be at the south-east, near the big park and my place. This means the city's productive/important areas will be mainly oriented on a west-east axis. The blocks of flats change will take place mainly in the south, and a little in the north (which is currently the best place to live in Bucharest).

12) considering Bucharest has a population growth rate of about 5% a year, with the boost these projects will get, it is expected to have almost 5 million inhabitants only in the city area in 5 years since the project is started, and by that time the urban area to have close to 7 million, making it third biggest city in Europe, after London and Paris.



I'll try to find some promo pics to illustrate what I mean. :D
 
Which ones are you referring to?

Pretty much all of them in this thread, actually. While a glass skyscraper here and there is cool, it must be done to work with the existing architecture of the city. To me, it seems that these glass skyscrapers are nothing of the sort; they are bland, unimaginitive monstrosities which fill an entire district of a city. I suppose it makes sense that the office towers should be as faceless as the corporations which dwell within them, but with all the materials available to builders, why fixate on glass?

I think it would be equally bad to do something so off-the-wall that it is designed solely to make an "artistic" statement (Freedom Tower, for example, is hideous; funny angles, awkward spires, and no relation to New York's older, much more charming buildings). But at least these make a skyline identifyable.
 
i think they look fanstatic
 
Pretty much all of them in this thread, actually. While a glass skyscraper here and there is cool, it must be done to work with the existing architecture of the city. To me, it seems that these glass skyscrapers are nothing of the sort; they are bland, unimaginitive monstrosities which fill an entire district of a city. I suppose it makes sense that the office towers should be as faceless as the corporations which dwell within them, but with all the materials available to builders, why fixate on glass?

I think it would be equally bad to do something so off-the-wall that it is designed solely to make an "artistic" statement (Freedom Tower, for example, is hideous; funny angles, awkward spires, and no relation to New York's older, much more charming buildings). But at least these make a skyline identifyable.

Well then what is your idea of a beautiful skyscraper?
 
Well then what is your idea of a beautiful skyscraper?

I'm partial to Atlanta's, obviously, but I think there's a good mix of 'em here.

1992's Bank of America Plaza is the tallest building in the US outside of NYC and Chicago, it has a pyramidal top of steel and 23k gold leaf:
Spoiler :
249px-Bank_of_America_Plaza_from_North_Ave_near_old_Wacovia_Building_garage.JPG


1976's Westin Peachtree Plaza Hotel is a glass skyscraper, but it's very simple. I imagine before most of the skyline was built, though, I would have thought much less of it:
Spoiler :
450px-Westin_Peachtree_Plaza_1.jpg


1992's SunTrust Plaza is also glass, but compare the shape to the Bank of America Plaza:
Spoiler :
450px-SunTrust_Plaza_1.jpg


1990's 191 Peachtree Tower has some color and character to it; the facade is Rosa Dante granite, and it has the look of not knowing whether it wants to be one tower or two:
Spoiler :
450px-191ptree.JPG


1987's One Atlantic Center also uses pink granite and a gold top; notice the similar shape of the tower and the buildings near it. I like how they kinda match...:
Spoiler :
450px-4_One_Atlantic_Center.jpg


1990's Promenade II is one of those glass buildings that I didn't care for, but has started to grow on me. Two identical ones were planned which were (thankfully!) never built:
Spoiler :
450px-Autumn_Atlanta_1_028.jpg


Apparently the real estate market in Atlanta had a bit of a collapse in the early 1990's, just after many of these skyscrapers were built.

We do have some ugly glass ones here (which I didn't post), but I think Atlanta's skyline is one of the nicer ones.

For other cities, I do like the mix of new and old in New York, I think the Chrysler and Empire State towers have a great deal of character, for example.
 
You don't think this one blends well with the rest? Because when I saw it my first thought was that it blended perfectly.

That one, actually, was the one that most jumped out at me as being cool. It's traditional in not having crazy angles or curves, but decidedly modern in design. It uses glass, but it certainly isn't just glass...

Yeah, that one's nice.
 
Back
Top Bottom