Canadian City Proposals

[WhipperSnapper]

The Jarvis hotel is just gross.

I'm not liking the Allied proposal. It takes three properties (including a couple older converted warehouses and combines them all as one with a bland glass addition.

Oh, Edmonton. That massing model is about as exciting as Burnaby or Mississauga with towers plopped on huge block podiums.

[TorontoDrew]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

I'm not liking the Allied proposal. It takes three properties (including a couple older converted warehouses and combines them all as one with a bland glass addition.

.

It actually just takes 2, removes a small one and builds a third to match the eastern two in scale.

[Coldrsx]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Oh, Edmonton. That massing model is about as exciting as Burnaby or Mississauga with towers plopped on huge block podiums.

Hence massing model. Master planned, ie. one owner/designer, will likely mean something close to CityPlace or False Creek versus Yaletown or Queen West. We all know that.

[niwell]

I believe the Adelaide proposal essentially retains the 2 warehouse structures as is? The glass box needs work but I'm generally a fan of the concept as a way to add office space without demolishing existing buildings. Of course I'm willing to overlook a lot of things when it comes to both new office space and historical preservation...

[ssiguy]

I agree with WhipperSnapper..............the Jarvis proposal is nauseating.

[FrankieFlowerpot]

Originally Posted by niwell

I believe the Adelaide proposal essentially retains the 2 warehouse structures as is? The glass box needs work but I'm generally a fan of the concept as a way to add office space without demolishing existing buildings. Of course I'm willing to overlook a lot of things when it comes to both new office space and historical preservation...

There's a 3rd smaller one

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Hence massing model. Master planned, ie. one owner/designer, will likely mean something close to CityPlace or False Creek versus Yaletown or Queen West. We all know that.

How defensively cute (as if Queen West was remotely implied). More like M City; a dated supersized version of 1990s high density planning. (i.e. Cityplace)

[TorontoDrew]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

I agree with WhipperSnapper..............the Jarvis proposal is nauseating.

Jarvis is home of insulting achitecture. That tower might fit right in. I'll be less upset with that one going up over that glass blob on top of heritage warehouses.


This is worth saving.
[IMG]Angry face (with a few gold teeth) by Barbara Fletcher, on Flickr[/IMG]


And this one looks great without the Globe and Mail plonked on top.
[IMG]Adelaide & Spadina by Chris Smart, on Flickr[/IMG]

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by niwell

I believe the Adelaide proposal essentially retains the 2 warehouse structures as is? The glass box needs work but I'm generally a fan of the concept as a way to add office space without demolishing existing buildings. Of course I'm willing to overlook a lot of things when it comes to both new office space and historical preservation...

You're still significantly altering the individual look of the warehouses by putting a shared glass addition on top. Allied got to where they are by creating boutique office buildings out of these old warehouses. It's unfortunate to see them shifting more and more away from that. I would prefer something like what they did at 180 John for each warehouse.

[suburbanite]

There's not many unrenovated warehouse buildings left. They're now pursuing the only real cost-effect way to add supply while preserving heritage, which is glass on top of existing brick and beam. I love it when it's done right, like their head office at QRC West, but it's going to get stale very quickly if every building adds a glass slab on top.

[TorontoDrew]

I do wonder how well the brick will match on that addition. The cornice should help make a break to allow for any noticeable difference to look alright though. I think they did a good job with 362 Richmond where even though they built over to warehouse structures it doesn't just feel like a lazy glass box has come to rest on an old structure.

[WhipperSnapper]

The expected shift from smaller tenants to medium and even large tenants. I know there are few unrenovated warehouse buildings left.

[Coldrsx]

A wee infill on a narrow lot.

(DC2) SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PROVISION
1. General Purpose
To establish a Site Specific Development Control Provision to accommodate a medium density mixed use development that is compatible in use and scale with the surrounding area and contributes to a pedestrian friendly streetscape.
2. Area of Application
This Provision shall apply to Lot 1 & 2, Block 75, Plan I8, located on the northeast corner of 99 Street NW and 83 Avenue NW, as shown on Schedule “A” of the Bylaw, adopting this Provision, Strathcona.









www.edmonton.ca july 10th

[240glt]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

How defensively cute (as if Queen West was remotely implied). More like M City; a dated supersized version of 1990s high density planning. (i.e. Cityplace)

Edmonton struggles with amateur developers, granted Katz/ One are well into their first series of projects which is good, the quality of development both within the arena/ ice district and in other recent projects suggests that develpers in this city have a long ways to go before they're developing the same level of quality project as other cities. We're seeing the quality of work by local consultants is on the decline as well.

This has been a huge problem in Edmonton for a long time, from small scale infill all the way up to major infrastructure. They really struggle to get it right up here

[Black Star]

Originally Posted by 240glt

Edmonton struggles with amateur developers, granted Katz/ One are well into their first series of projects which is good, the quality of development both within the arena/ ice district and in other recent projects suggests that develpers in this city have a long ways to go before they're developing the same level of quality project as other cities. We're seeing the quality of work by local consultants is on the decline as well.

This has been a huge problem in Edmonton for a long time, from small scale infill all the way up to major infrastructure. They really struggle to get it right up here

Jesus Christ...Nothing makes you happy man lol.

All this just sucks eh!

From Hilman SSP

DDb2axmVwAAcP3v (1) by BLACK STAR III, on Flickr

[WhipperSnapper]

It's just a mediocre master plan proposed so far. Toronto produces more than its far share of mediocrity too. There's one for Queens Quay East. It's so dense a plus 15 network is proposed to supplement the under capacity street sidewalks. The One is in Toronto too proposing an oversized, boring mixed use development that blows up a whole block in an established older area that has seen the better infill in the city.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by Black Star

Jesus Christ...Nothing makes you happy man lol.

All this just sucks eh!

DDb2axmVwAAcP3v (1) by BLACK STAR III, on Flickr

Is it the height? Is it the architecture? Is it the urban form,etc.? Only thing that truly impresses is the height. The rest is a B- to C+.

[O-tacular]

I think Edmonton's come a long way. I'm actually jealous of the amount of proposals they have lately and the height. If they build a supertall I will actually be envious. Overall it still does have some room for improvement on design though. I like the new arena and the district is promising but Stantec is kinda boring. I prefer the Delta.

[Skyisnolimit]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

A wee infill on a narrow lot.

(DC2) SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PROVISION
1. General Purpose
To establish a Site Specific Development Control Provision to accommodate a medium density mixed use development that is compatible in use and scale with the surrounding area and contributes to a pedestrian friendly streetscape.
2. Area of Application
This Provision shall apply to Lot 1 & 2, Block 75, Plan I8, located on the northeast corner of 99 Street NW and 83 Avenue NW, as shown on Schedule “A” of the Bylaw, adopting this Provision, Strathcona.









www.edmonton.ca july 10th

Why even bother with these ? What's next a 3 story walkup .

[koops65]

I have commented on this years ago... the Proposals thread needs to split into 2 different threads: Highrise / Lowrise

That way 6 storey proposals aren't next to 56 storey proposals...