Edmonton Construction 11 (November 2011) - Page 92

MalcolmTucker · #**1821** Posted **Mar 7, 2012, 6:58 PM**

The amount of public investment in the East Village in Calgary is much larger than what will / has happened in thed Quarters iirc. When you build $250 million+ of infrastructure you're bound to have some interest pop up.

As for design quality (of course subjective) in Edmonton, I think it must come down to construction cost. Even Calgary's newer low end projects (within the urban core) seen to be a generation or two ahead of the ones here now.

s211 · #**1822** Posted **Mar 7, 2012, 6:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jasper and one o nin

The part I really do not like about the corner 1 rendering...... The three letters in the bottom right corner. {:-)

I see that monkey's still not graduated from remedial architectural school.

s211 · #**1823** Posted **Mar 7, 2012, 7:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by malcolmtucker

even calgary's newer low end projects (within the urban core) seen to be a generation or two ahead of the ones here now.

qft.

Coldrsx · #**1824** Posted **Mar 7, 2012, 7:04 PM**

^yes and no.

Century Park, Pearl, Ultima are much improved over the last iteration of projects. I suspect we will see some pretty kick ass arch with the arena district hotel/condo etc. Quarters is shaping up nicely.

The one area though that we really need to get going in the UW. It desperately needs to be filled in.

tony0911 · #**1825** Posted **Mar 7, 2012, 7:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ue

Tony, I realize that not every building need be to the caliber of Pixel in Bridgeland. If you look on the Calgary Construction Page, there are some uninteresting and ugly looking projects. However, they are mitigated by the fact that there are stuff to the quality of Ultima, the Pearl, and Cecil Place as well as stuff to the quality of AGA, this Dub Hotel, and even higher quality. If Corner 1 were not on a major intersection, I probably wouldn't have the same issues.

So it's ok to build sub par buildings as long as they are not at major intersections then? Keeping in mind it is 2012 not 1980. So then you must think that Mayfair is a well done building on what I would consider a much more critical intersection than the Quarters.

ue · #**1826** Posted **Mar 7, 2012, 7:13 PM**

@ Cold: Yeah, Ultima et al are nice as I mentioned, but if it were built in Calgary I'd put it between mid and upper quality only, meaning there is still better stuff to be had in Calgary. I agree with others, Edmonton seems to be getting what Calgary was in 2000-2007. Not sure what construction costs Malcolm is talking about, though. I would assume they're pretty much identical between the two cities with similar climate.

@ Tony: No. 102 Ave and 104 St isn't a major intersection but I still don't want Icon III and IV. However, it is unrealistic to have every single new project in a city to beyond high quality. These projects also tend to be more affordable and get off the ground sooner. So with that, I would rather them be built in less prominent locations. If corner 1 were on 95 St and 103A Ave, I'd be less worried. As for Mayfair, not quite as good as expected, but the North building will make or break this project. It could turn out nice.

Jasper and one o nin · #**1827** Posted **Mar 7, 2012, 7:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by s211

I see that monkey's still not graduated from remedial architectural school.

Now now, lets not be mean

. GMH is actually not that bad. What I have a problem with, is that they undercut most of the more notable firms in town by a lot and end up getting some fairly significant projects that they really should not be doing.
They're trying to play in the big kid's sandbox. Except they are pissing all over the sand so nobody else can play.

Coldrsx · #**1828** Posted **Mar 7, 2012, 7:16 PM**

'Not sure what construction costs Malcolm is talking about, though. I would assume they're pretty much identical between the two cities with similar climate.'

Pretty close, but Calgary has considerably more glazing contractors and a factory even.

Coldrsx · #**1829** Posted **Mar 7, 2012, 7:18 PM**

I noticed 2 things last night:

1. Coast on 105st has 6 large colorful images of Edmonton/downtown/skyline on the parkade facing 105st now. Looks much better than looking into a mesh fence.

2. The TEN condo has a crazy roof element now. Rooftop patio?

tony0911 · #**1830** Posted **Mar 7, 2012, 7:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ue

@ Cold: Yeah, Ultima et al are nice as I mentioned, but if it were built in Calgary I'd put it between mid and upper quality only, meaning there is still better stuff to be had in Calgary. I agree with others, Edmonton seems to be getting what Calgary was in 2000-2007. Not sure what construction costs Malcolm is talking about, though. I would assume they're pretty much identical between the two cities with similar climate.

@ Tony: No. 102 Ave and 104 St isn't a major intersection but I still don't want Icon III and IV. However, it is unrealistic to have every single new project in a city to beyond high quality. These projects also tend to be more affordable and get off the ground sooner. So with that, I would rather them be built in less prominent locations. If corner 1 were on 95 St and 103A Ave, I'd be less worried. As for Mayfair, not quite as good as expected, but the North building will make or break this project. It could turn out nice.

I have never said every project has to be Beyond high quality, however if 80 percent or so were at the High quality level I would be ecstatic. Also, putting a little thought, a little more simplicity, and a different colour other than red and beige into the exteriors would go along way towards increasing the perception of what these projects look like. Perhaps if we had better designed projects we would have more interest from purchasers.

CMD UW · #**1831** Posted **Mar 7, 2012, 7:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BLACK STAR

Have you seen renderings.

Why the f*ck are we even commenting on something we haven't even seen yet??!??

240glt · #**1832** Posted **Mar 7, 2012, 7:45 PM**

Let's leave the trolling and hysteria over at C2E please

The Hilton looks spectacular. Even Corner1 looks promising, given the wasteland that the area is now. We really need to extend the Heritage trail all the way to east Jasper

ue · #**1833** Posted **Mar 7, 2012, 7:46 PM**

I think we need what rapid business was talking about on C2E, more outside influence on Edmonton urban development. Not to put down some of the great local talent Edmonton has (Dub, John Day, ATB), but it would really give the big players such as BKA, BCM, et al a nudge to produce something better than what was decent 6 or 12 years ago.

Edit: What trolling? Is it because I brought up the Calgary you love to hate? I just think Calgary is the best point of comparison for Edmonton...what with similar economic prospects, climate, location, size, urban fabric. I agree the Hilton looks quite good.

Coldrsx · #**1834** Posted **Mar 7, 2012, 7:49 PM**

To be frank, we need more competition in the concrete high-rise market to force innovation, efficiency and price competition.

We need outside developers with proven track records as seen in tor/van and now even Calgary to enter our market to drive considerable change.

Black Star · #**1835** Posted **Mar 7, 2012, 7:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CMD UW

Why the f*ck are we even commenting on something we haven't even seen yet??!??

Lol...He brought it up. I asked a question!

feepa · #**1836** Posted **Mar 7, 2012, 7:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

'Not sure what construction costs Malcolm is talking about, though. I would assume they're pretty much identical between the two cities with similar climate.'

Pretty close, but Calgary has considerably more glazing contractors and a factory even.

Calgary labour market doesn't have to compete (as much) with labour rates of major industrial projects in the ECR and in Fort McMoney.

feepa · #**1837** Posted **Mar 7, 2012, 8:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ue

Edit: What trolling? Is it because I brought up the Calgary you love to hate? I just think Calgary is the best point of comparison for Edmonton...what with similar economic prospects, climate, location, size, urban fabric. I agree the Hilton looks quite good.

Why only Calgary? There are plenty of other mid-west cities similar to Edmonton. Edmonton beats the pants of the majority of them. Constantly comparing to only Calgary is sad

240glt · #**1838** Posted **Mar 7, 2012, 8:03 PM**

^ Agreed. And no UE I don't hate Calgary, I just lived there for four years prirot to moving to Edmonton and don't think it's the king shit that some here do.... and the moaning about glass condo towers is getting sooooooooo old. There are so many ways that Edmonton is a great city, and the yardstick some of you use to judge is pretty short!! I guess "trolling" was a bit harsh... at least Tony's being civil over here

^^ You've got no idea how hard it is to compete with industry for staff in this town. There's a reason we are the hottest labor market in the country, probably North America

ue · #**1839** Posted **Mar 7, 2012, 8:05 PM**

What other cities? In the U.S.? Therein lies different laws, economies, and culture. Not to mention, there aren't any U.S. cities with 750K-1.5M that have a similar geography, climate, and urban fabric to Edmonton (maybe SLC?). Same thing for comparisons to Australian, New Zealand, and European cities. In Canada, the only other cities really worth comparing to are Ottawa and Winnipeg. However, Ottawa is much older, has a different economy, is in a different place culturally (bilingual). Winnipeg is a good comparison, but they are smaller. If you want a Winnipeg comparison...look at their Alt Hotel, the CMHR, Forks, Esplanade Riel, Red River College. While comparisons to other cities smaller and larger and in different climates/geographies are fine, places like Calgary provide the best point of comparison because they show what is realistic for Edmonton to achieve as well. Also, I don't just compare to Calgary.

240, I don't think Calgary is king shit, but it is a good city for comparing Edmonton to and like it or not, they do a good amount of things much better than Edmonton.

240glt · #**1840** Posted **Mar 7, 2012, 8:10 PM**

^ That's your perogative. I see the comparison as silly... cities are always going to have their stong and weak points. Looking south like a bunch of forlorn cattle behind a barbed wire fence is dumb. Feepa's right. There's much better cities to look to for guidance.

I could go back to Cowtown (or Vancouver for that matter) tomorrow if I wanted to. For me, Edmonton is where I want to be at this stage of my life, and this city offers me everything I want & need. In fact, even more. I've made it what I want out of a city. Seems like a lot of Edmontonians have a problem doing things for themselves.