Edmonton Construction 13 (November 2015) - Page 263

s4.audios · #**5241** Posted **Nov 7, 2016, 8:03 PM**

Make it all red brick, give it a better crown moulding. It can look like an old warehouse building.

To make it more contemporary, make it all grey brick. Edit, this would match better with the rentals also.

ue · #**5242** Posted **Nov 7, 2016, 8:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daveography

I've been trying to find out for a while. They've been very quiet, though, it seems.

Also, I guess it was inevitable that this would draw the attention of the footbridge brigade, who emailed me yesterday. Oh joy.

Oh no...

Well, although I like the design of Strathearn Heights (even though it's almost a decade old now), I do think Bonnie Doon is more ideally situated for a TOD, and so if there is hypothetical interest in developing a TOD there now, I think it'd be a boon to the area (with good design).

s4.audios · #**5243** Posted **Nov 7, 2016, 9:00 PM**

I've seen brochures a couple years back advertising the Strathern Heights project for sale.

Airboy · #**5244** Posted **Nov 7, 2016, 9:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcc16

Omg...came across this too... http://cwedm.com/properties/details/?id=44194-2

Well, hopefully it's better in person...

Already up, Cladding is just starting.

Its part of the Vibe project.

mcc16 · #**5245** Posted **Nov 7, 2016, 11:24 PM**

I know, I've been curious to see how it looks and have been hinting that someone should take a picture of both vibe and this corner commercial building. I was so excited and bought in vibe...then they switched to damn rental...

My first impression of the corner building is that it's very "107th ave". And I just mean that all the reno'd or new builds on this street are very...ok... This building coulda shoulda woulda changed that a bit...

GreenSPACE · #**5246** Posted **Nov 8, 2016, 10:48 PM**

Reminder, tonight:

River Crossing Heritage Interpretive Plan Public Engagement

Open House
Tuesday November 8, 5-8pm

Downtown Edmonton Community League
10042 - 103 Street NW, Edmonton AB

Join us at the River Crossing Open House on November 8! The open house will be an opportunity for citizens to learn more about the direction the Heritage Interpretive Plan development is taking, as well as to provide any additional insight into what is important about the area and how to reflect the area's layered history in the future. Citizens will be able to respond to themes that have emerged from research and engagement to date.

Light refreshments will be provided.

https://www.edmonton.ca/projects_plans/c...est_rossdale/public-engagement71864.aspx

WhipperSnapper · #**5247** Posted **Nov 9, 2016, 4:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black Star

Sorry...this statement I have never heard before. Please explain what you mean.

Any and all brick can be restored...its not a matter of if it can. But if the finances are there.

Where did you here all brick can be restored. Next you'll say all concrete can be restored. A brick facade can be easily rebuilt by replacing damage brick. (costs notwithstanding)

The siding is hideous.

Hallsy's Toupee · #**5248** Posted **Nov 9, 2016, 6:15 PM**

Edmonton developer seeks to turn Frank Oliver Park into residential tower
The Downtown Edmonton Community League would like the park to stay the same
http://www.metronews.ca/news/edmonton/20...-oliver-park-into-residential-tower.html

Quote:

One of downtown Edmonton’s few green spaces may become a residential tower, smack dab in front of the historic Hotel MacDonald.

On Tuesday, ProCura’s CEO and president George Schluessel told Metro the company is looking to rezone the parkspace in early 2017 for a multi-residential building.

“It’s a great thing,” said Schluessel regarding the development. “It’s a good location to develop on.”

But Chris Buyze, president of the Downtown Edmonton Community League, said he’d like to see the park stay the same.

“We would be concerned about losing that, not just for the downtown residents, but for the city as a whole,” he said. “It’s a fairly significant green space in the downtown and it’s right in front of our most iconic buildings.”

ProCura has fenced off the park to the public for environmental testing, a normal development practice.

Grant Pearsell, the director of parks and biodiversity with city planning, said ProCura would have to apply for a development permit, which would be checked in accordance with its zoning.

Regarding rezoning, he said there would be public meetings beforehand and then the project would go to council for approval.

“We do think it’s great the public has access to this site. It does provide a great amenity,” he said. “We are actively seeking new sites in the downtown area and developing new parks.”

The park has always been owned privately. Fairmont, which owns the hotel, sold the park to ProCura in 2009. A future development sign has also been spotted on the park.

Buyze said he hopes the city will do what it can to preserve the space.
“I think in terms of the amount of green space downtown and the expectations of Edmontonians, that the city would work to try to preserve this green space if they could,” he said.

The city should just bite the bullet and buy the land with CRL funds.

noodlenoodle · #**5249** Posted **Nov 9, 2016, 6:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hallsy's Toupee

The city should just bite the bullet and buy the land with CRL funds.

Hell no.

Given the proximity to the "Stairway to Nowhere" & the river valley as a whole, along with the need to encourage as much development inside the CRL bounds in order to make it work I can't really see a reason to keep this not-really-a-park.

Buying it with CRL money would be ridiculously counterproductive. We're supposed to be encouraging development inside the CRL bounds to pay off the Arena, not diverting funds earmarked for debt repayment to hamstring the sort of increased development that the CRL requires to make it work.

s4.audios · #**5250** Posted **Nov 9, 2016, 6:32 PM**

I really do not care about that park myself, build one elsewhere. The tower looks great, it would be nice but how well would residential work on that corner? I can't see this selling.

noodlenoodle · #**5251** Posted **Nov 9, 2016, 6:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by s4.audios

I really do not care about that park myself, build one elsewhere. The tower looks great, it would be nice but how well would residential work on that corner? I can't see this selling.

There's residential right next to the not-a-park as-is. I can't see there being an issue with more residential on the same block.

Hallsy's Toupee · #**5252** Posted **Nov 9, 2016, 7:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by s4.audios

I really do not care about that park myself, build one elsewhere. The tower looks great, it would be nice but how well would residential work on that corner? I can't see this selling.

The problem I have with a tower at this location is that it will obscure the view of one of our architectural gems (Hotel Mac) from our main street. Also don't want that grand front entrance of the Hotel Mac blocked off by a tower.

s4.audios · #**5253** Posted **Nov 9, 2016, 8:00 PM**

Oh interesting, I didn't know that Macdonald Estates is residential, didn't really ever notice that building in general..

McBoo · #**5254** Posted **Nov 9, 2016, 8:50 PM**

Procura hemmed and hawed about this long ago. Most folks thought what they really wanted was a land swap with the CoE.

Pretty small plot to do anything substantive I'd (very humbly) think.

That,and getting in and out of a parkade (if that is planned) at Jasper & 100 Street would be a horror story.

CMD UW · #**5255** Posted **Nov 9, 2016, 9:19 PM**

Personally, I don't see Procura moving on this any time soon. Sorry, I just don't.

rapid_business · #**5256** Posted **Nov 9, 2016, 9:54 PM**

I wqould agree. And McBoo, you are probably right. This is Procura likely attempting to flex some muscle in order to get the City to do a landswap or purchase it at an inflated value (read: over market).

noodlenoodle · #**5257** Posted **Nov 9, 2016, 10:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hallsy's Toupee

The problem I have with a tower at this location is that it will obscure the view of one of our architectural gems (Hotel Mac) from our main street. Also don't want that grand front entrance of the Hotel Mac blocked off by a tower.

Evidently the owners of the Mac don't share your sentiment, since they're the ones that sold off the park to the developer in the first place.

kcantor · #**5258** Posted **Nov 10, 2016, 12:20 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by noodlenoodle

Evidently the owners of the Mac don't share your sentiment, since they're the ones that sold off the park to the developer in the first place.

i think that would have been "at least" one owner back (although i stand to be corrected) and it may even have been during the decade that the hotel itself was shuttered and potentially never reopening. i'm not sure the sentiment would be the same today...

Hallsy's Toupee · #**5259** Posted **Nov 10, 2016, 2:49 AM**

The provincial government is considering a redevelopment of the legislature annex.

Tearing the building down isn’t off the table.

noodlenoodle · #**5260** Posted **Nov 10, 2016, 2:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcantor

i think that would have been "at least" one owner back (although i stand to be corrected) and it may even have been during the decade that the hotel itself was shuttered and potentially never reopening. i'm not sure the sentiment would be the same today...

From the article:

Quote:

The park has always been owned privately. Fairmont, which owns the hotel, sold the park to ProCura in 2009. A future development sign has also been spotted on the park.

While there's been some changes in Fairmont's ownership & structure, Fairmont itself had owned & operated the hotel for years years before they sold off the parcel.