Edmonton Construction 11 (November 2011) - Page 220

Channing · #**4381** Posted **Sep 10, 2012, 4:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by itom 987

If there is anything good about First and Jasper it is the fact that the ugly concrete wall facing Jasper Ave. has been removed. Aside from that, what a waste.

Until it goes back up after new supports are installed.

kcantor · #**4382** Posted **Sep 10, 2012, 4:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Channing

Until it goes back up after new supports are installed.

i think he was talking about the 10 storey blank east wall of the old bank of montreal building, not the concrete spandrel panels of the old epcor centre. not that there were too many attractive urban edges for this corner of first and jasper at any level (although i will be the first to admit that with a bit of creativity perhaps there could/should have been)...

240glt · #**4383** Posted **Sep 10, 2012, 4:36 PM**

(although i will be the first to admit that with a bit of creativity perhaps there could/should have been)...

.... and money.... lots of it. You forgot that part.

oiler-dude · #**4384** Posted **Sep 10, 2012, 4:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Channing

Until it goes back up after new supports are installed.

Yup. An already underwhelming project went from this:

(http://www.firstandjasper.com/image-gallery/)

To this:

(http://www.williamsengineering.com/Newroom/WECWillOccupyFirstAndJasperBuildingInEdmonton)

CMD UW · #**4385** Posted **Sep 10, 2012, 4:51 PM**

^I like the second version, other than removing the vertical band up the north facade of the tower.

kcantor · #**4386** Posted **Sep 10, 2012, 5:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 240glt

(although i will be the first to admit that with a bit of creativity perhaps there could/should have been)...

.... and money.... lots of it. You forgot that part.

i didn't forget it...

and i'm one of those that said it's too bad we couldn't have achieved something like this in lieu of what is or what will be there if it couldn't be "saved":

it's just that the argument for taking it down "because of the costs involved in cleaning up the original structure" (and i'm familiar with them because i put some of them forward) in order to renovate was probably more than somewhat negated by the chosen form of demolition that had all of that cleanup and more take place anyway either prior to or as part of the demolition.

240glt · #**4387** Posted **Sep 10, 2012, 6:07 PM**

^ For me, the jury is still out on the addition... The angles and pre-cast look a little awkward, so with that I will agree that it perhaps could have been done better

As for the old BMO, I too was involved in some assessments of what it would take to revitalize the building, and I'll insist that unless some philanthropist were to purchase the building and do the necessary work (which would have been great!) The building was doomed to the fate that has been realized, or worse, it could have sat there for another 25 years.

kcantor · #**4388** Posted **Sep 10, 2012, 6:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 240glt

^ For me, the jury is still out on the addition... The angles and pre-cast look a little awkward, so with that I will agree that it perhaps could have been done better

As for the old BMO, I too was involved in some assessments of what it would take to revitalize the building, and I'll insist that unless some philanthropist were to purchase the building and do the necessary work (which would have been great!) The building was doomed to the fate that has been realized, or worse, it could have sat there for another 25 years.

one of us may be singing a bit off-key - more than likely me in that analogy - but other than that we're pretty much singing from the same song sheets on this one including where the jury is at the moment.

it's just that i do think in hindsight (which is always 20/20) you might be discounting creativity as requiring philanthropy more than might actually have been needed given what was spent on the demo anyway. and no, i would not have been happy living with the previous status quo for another 25 years simply to be proven right or wrong on either side of that one.

Keats82 · #**4389** Posted **Sep 11, 2012, 1:02 AM**

I DARE a developer to actually commit with it's green roof for once. Oh Manulife, you will never have any friends...

kcantor · #**4390** Posted **Sep 11, 2012, 1:21 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keats82

I DARE a developer to actually commit with it's green roof for once. Oh Manulife, you will never have any friends...

although to be fair - and accurate - what you really want is to see more living roofs as not all "green roofs" are living. most green roofs earn their designation through their reflectivity, not their use of living material.

itom 987 · #**4391** Posted **Sep 11, 2012, 3:28 AM**

The second picture that Ken posted is what I meant.

They put a backhoe on the roof of the building during demolition. BMO was built to last, there were so many neat things they could have done with it.

The first rendering looks far better than the second one which looks like a cave.

Perhaps they will install a bunch of bats for artwork.

Clearshades · #**4392** Posted **Sep 11, 2012, 4:00 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by cdnklc

i didn't forget it...

and i'm one of those that said it's too bad we couldn't have achieved something like this in lieu of what is or what will be there if it couldn't be "saved":

it's just that the argument for taking it down "because of the costs involved in cleaning up the original structure" (and i'm familiar with them because i put some of them forward) in order to renovate was probably more than somewhat negated by the chosen form of demolition that had all of that cleanup and more take place anyway either prior to or as part of the demolition.

That looks no better than what we are getting.

I prefer the first rendering for the fact it incorporated some warmth to that. the second one is too cold. The design concept of the addition is quite nice but failed in terms of material selection. in this instance, it's like a woman wearing a very simple dress (the tower), so she needs to accent some boldness and color ( the podium).

Jasper and one o nin · #**4393** Posted **Sep 11, 2012, 2:03 PM**

I think no matter what the design, it's certainly not going to please everyone on this thread. The complex, I believe, is pretty much fully leased. Jacobs Engineering taking the bulk of the tower (top 8 floors), APEGA 3 floors, Feds 4 floors, and Williams Engineering the second floor in the podium. And the tower will be named JACOBS.

Channing · #**4394** Posted **Sep 11, 2012, 3:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keats82

I DARE a developer to actually commit with it's green roof for once. Oh Manulife, you will never have any friends...

Like the current Williams Engineering building:

CMD UW · #**4395** Posted **Sep 11, 2012, 5:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keats82

I DARE a developer to actually commit with it's green roof for once. Oh Manulife, you will never have any friends...

Stantec's expansion building has a 'green roof'. It's been there since 2005 or so.

CMD UW · #**4396** Posted **Sep 11, 2012, 5:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clearshades

That looks no better than what we are getting.

I prefer the first rendering for the fact it incorporated some warmth to that. the second one is too cold. The design concept of the addition is quite nice but failed in terms of material selection. in this instance, it's like a woman wearing a very simple dress (the tower), so she needs to accent some boldness and color ( the podium).

The difference between the first and second renderings is that the first one is brighter and has more 'going on' wrt to landscaping and people. From a design perspective I like the second rendering.

Xelebes · #**4397** Posted **Sep 11, 2012, 6:59 PM**

Company fined ten grand for apartment fire on 92nd Street and 105th Avenue last year.

Bringing this up now because we were discussing that fire here last year.

240glt · #**4398** Posted **Sep 11, 2012, 7:14 PM**

^ that was a huge fire. The building has now been restored and people are living there again.

Coldrsx · #**4399** Posted **Sep 12, 2012, 1:53 AM**

Zzz semi awake in toronto. Good to hear about movement on fox, encore, city museum etc.

First and Jasper second version better, but still leaves me wanting more.

240 - been following EFCL email on it, but will get back into it tomo.

Clearshades · #**4400** Posted **Sep 12, 2012, 6:31 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CMD UW

The difference between the first and second renderings is that the first one is brighter and has more 'going on' wrt to landscaping and people. From a design perspective I like the second rendering.

They're are the same design; just proposed different articulation to the facade. One with bare face; the other with make up on.