Stampede Station | 270m | 69s | Truman | NORR

Albertasaurus said:
I think they may require a land use amendment to achieve the desired FAR (correct me if I'm wrong) which automatically would open the door to some level of engagement. I don't expect there will be any concerns but there might be a slight chance of some Sasso/Vetro residents being upset at losing their views; of course, it's a given that highrises will go there someday, whether they are 60+ storeys or 35 storeys won't make a difference in the long run.
Click to expand...
Centre city districts from the land use bylaw:

"Bonus Area H
35P2019
1201.3
In accordance with the bonus provisions contained in this Division, the floor area ratio for Bonus Area H may be increased to a maximum of:
a
8.0; or
b
12.0, where the additional floor area ratio above 8.0 may only consist of units or Hotel guest rooms or both."
Screenshot_20250703_115028_Chrome.jpg
 
CBBarnett said:
Far, far, far more likely to disrupt this project than engagement feedback is changing economic conditions and unexpected cost increases. It's huge, luxury and based all assumptions of demand for high-spending travel and tourism. Years of construction leave it vulnerable for longer for a global recession, a financial crunch etc. which are way bigger risks than approvals on whether this happens or not IMO.

To be clear, the tourism trends are all positive right now - but those of us who have been around a while will remember charts that "always" point up can sometimes (unexpectedly) point aggressively down too.

Hopefully they can pull it off!
Click to expand...
That's my feelings as well. The cost of huge project can change, as we've seen with other projects.

One thing Gondek mentioned yesterday was that Calgary was short about 4500 hotel rooms. I don't know where that number comes from or the type of rooms we are short on, but tourism/hotel business does seem to be on the rise. 7 downtown hotels built in 7 years is a good sign, hope that tend continues.
 
Surrealplaces said:
That's my feelings as well. The cost of huge project can change, as we've seen with other projects.

One thing Gondek mentioned yesterday was that Calgary was short about 4500 hotel rooms. I don't know where that number comes from or the type of rooms we are short on, but tourism/hotel business does seem to be on the rise. 7 downtown hotels built in 7 years is a good sign, hope that tend continues.
Click to expand...
I was wondering about this, and had a look at 2021 Census employment information:
1751566573123.png

We're not wildly below our peers in the West (weird that the West seems to have a higher base rate, where Calgary, Edmonton and Winnipeg are at similar rates to Halifax and Québec, which seem like more tourist-driven than others in the east). For interest, Kelowna and St Catherine's-Niagara are both above 10, and Canmore is at 35.

In a way, it's in the interest of the City to have a glut of hotel rooms, because cheap accommodations can lure visitors who will spend money on restaurants, etc. (even if it's not in the interest of the hotel owners themselves).
 
Surrealplaces said:
That's my feelings as well. The cost of huge project can change, as we've seen with other projects.

One thing Gondek mentioned yesterday was that Calgary was short about 4500 hotel rooms. I don't know where that number comes from or the type of rooms we are short on, but tourism/hotel business does seem to be on the rise. 7 downtown hotels built in 7 years is a good sign, hope that tend continues.
Click to expand...
Very unclear which U/C project the 4500 includes. I do think we need some higher end hotels. The main hotel brands (Hyatt Regency/Marriott/Delta) are all pretty dated. And the new ones are mostly a tier below (Hilton Garden Inn, Hampton Inn, etc.). The buildings are huge, but the room count is actually pretty low. I imagine they can fill these hotels pretty regularly with visiting NHL teams, concerts, business people, government officials, etc.
 
I would guess the number probably includes all segments, but there's no question that some luxury brands are needed. Like you pointed out, it's been a while since some higher end hotels have been built, though the Dorian falls into the upper scale type (Autograph), but not luxury. I'm not sure where the Residence Inn falls. Not luxury for sure, but maybe upper level?
I don't recall where I saw it, but I remember seeing that numbers for Calgary/Banff tourism have been rising faster than other markets for the past few years.
 
Surrealplaces said:
I would guess the number probably includes all segments, but there's no question that some luxury brands are needed. Like you pointed out, it's been a while since some higher end hotels have been built, though the Dorian falls into the upper scale type (Autograph), but not luxury. I'm not sure where the Residence Inn falls. Not luxury for sure, but maybe upper level?
I don't recall where I saw it, but I remember seeing that numbers for Calgary/Banff tourism have been rising faster than other markets for the past few years.
Click to expand...
Dorian is an Autograph, but its location isn't great for BMO Centre/Scotia Place. Residence Inn is a long stay hotel (full kitchen, many suites), and is a slightly different target market than these ones. The Calgary downtown one is in a nice building, but most of them are like the one by the airport and Seton.
 
Roaring Flames said:
From the CBC interview with the CEO of Truman, apparently the 4,500 number comes from the amount of visitors that are forced to use hotels outside of the city because of lack of vacancy
Click to expand...
How many of these people don't want to pay downtown hotel rates? The number is probably inflated to advocate for new hotel construction downtown. It's not like people aren't visiting Calgary because they can't find a place to stay.
 
kora said:
How many of these people don't want to pay downtown hotel rates? The number is probably inflated to advocate for new hotel construction downtown. It's not like people aren't visiting Calgary because they can't find a place to stay.
Click to expand...
I thought the lack of hotel rooms prevents the city from hosting larger scale events that require minimum number of rooms?
 
It's in the mayor's best interest to have 4500 more hotel rooms built in short order. I would guess the industry would have a very different opinion. It's more likely these three proposed hotels openings will cause other hotels to rebrand or close than just adding more high end rooms to the supply.

It's also in Truman's best interest to sell hotel rooms in short supply as this looks higher than the max 12 FAR.

These twins are actually shifting the balance in the skyline and not in a good way.
 
Last edited:
maestro said:
It's in the mayor's best interest to have 4500 more hotel rooms built in short order. I would guess the industry would have a very different opinion. It's more likely these three proposed hotels openings will cause other hotels to rebrand or close than just adding more high end rooms to the supply.

It's also in Truman's best interest to sell hotel rooms in short supply as this looks higher than the max 12 FAR.

These twins are actually shifting the balance in the skyline and not in a good way.
Click to expand...
Honestly, as long as Cidex redesigns the podium on their Elbow River site, then their three towers will serve as a good drop-off in the skyline looking out from the East. Looking south from Macleod....well, you just gotta accept most of the Downtown core will eventually become hidden as more proposals above 150m get built in the beltline. I can't think of a skyline that's perfectly balanced on all four sides. However, I do think that if Cidex lowers its height on their 3 tower proposal, then these 2 towers would look oddly out of place.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top