Edmonton Construction 13 (November 2015)

[kcantor]

even more shameless self promotion for the brighton block:

http://edmontonjournal.com/business/comm...xibility-to-save-historic-brighton-block

[MichaelC]

Back from the dead? Coliseum pitches to get one final review
http://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-ne...sks-public-not-architects-for-more-input

[Black Star]

Originally Posted by kcantor

even more shameless self promotion for the brighton block:

http://edmontonjournal.com/business/comm...xibility-to-save-historic-brighton-block

Great job....

[Coldrsx]

@ianoyeg

[s211]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Jasper 108st pre-application:

-120-150m
-~1050 residential units with a diverse variety of units
- active commercial frontages
- pedestrian links to the forthcoming central park


Pre-application notice

My Gawd, but that thunderous clunker on the corner of the development makes negative one million percent sense.

🞵🞵🞵🞵 like that gives mixed-use a bad name.

[Black Star]

Originally Posted by s211

My Gawd, but that thunderous clunker on the corner of the development makes negative one million percent sense.

🞵🞵🞵🞵 like that gives mixed-use a bad name.

Not a fan of this sub par design as well.

At least try to envelope this around both towers.

Looks like a stranded block of cheese.

[kcantor]

^
^^
i guess some people don’t understand “FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY - SUBJECT TO CHANGE”.

[s211]

Originally Posted by kcantor

^
^^
i guess some people don’t understand “FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY - SUBJECT TO CHANGE”.

We're not idiots, Ken. (Are you actually defending them?)

The real question about understanding here is how anyone would put forward something surefire-built to raise the ire of pretty much anyone with at least a minimum understanding of what might have well been a stack of poop emojis on the corner of the site. (That's not a swipe at you, BTW.)

[kcantor]

Originally Posted by s211

We're not idiots, Ken. (Are you actually defending them?)

The real question about understanding here is how anyone would put forward something surefire-built to raise the ire of pretty much anyone with at least a minimum understanding of what might have well been a stack of poop emojis on the corner of the site. (That's not a swipe at you, BTW.)

who am i to try and argue that a preliminary massing sketch of a corner podium with no setbacks if actually executed could ever contribute to a vibrant urban corner...

https://flic.kr/p/26UD97B

[EdmTrekker]

Originally Posted by kcantor

who am i to try and argue that a preliminary massing sketch of a corner podium with no setbacks if actually executed could ever contribute to a vibrant urban corner...

https://flic.kr/p/26UD97B

This project is no Rockefeller Center unless your thinking there is an opera house squirrelled away in that massing sketch.

[kcantor]

Originally Posted by EdmTrekker

This project is no Rockefeller Center unless your thinking there is an opera house squirrelled away in that massing sketch.

my only point here is that no one yet knows what’s going to be in that space or how much of it is eventually going to be enclosed or how of it is going to be integrated with or separated from what’s adjacent to it or how much if it might be public or how any of it will treated architecturally.

it’s nothing but an electronic copy of a proposed massing model for zoning purposes.

could i hate what gets proposed within it when the time comes?

could you become quite enamoured with it?

damned if i know at this point and i don’t think anyone else does either.

[s211]

Originally Posted by kcantor

my only point here is that no one yet knows what’s going to be in that space or how much of it is eventually going to be enclosed or how of it is going to be integrated with or separated from what’s adjacent to it or how much if it might be public or how any of it will treated architecturally.

I don't have to know what's proposed for the corner to know that, in and of itself, the massing is hackneyed and brutish, and not in the good brutalism way.

Trying not to be disrespectful, but if this got a passing grade, then I'd have to think that the UDP is either tone-deaf or incestuous. Sorry, but when a massing design is this clearly off-the-mark, it's hard not to go to town on it.

To think that anyone associated with this project thought that this massing was "good enough" to commence discussions with the city, well that screams volumes, and at the kind of volume that drives sane people away.

[kcantor]

Originally Posted by s211

I don't have to know what's proposed for the corner to know that, in and of itself, the massing is hackneyed and brutish, and not in the good brutalism way.

Trying not to be disrespectful, but if this got a passing grade, then I'd have to think that the UDP is either tone-deaf or incestuous. Sorry, but when a massing design is this clearly off-the-mark, it's hard not to go to town on it.

To think that anyone associated with this project thought that this massing was "good enough" to commence discussions with the city, well that screams volumes, and at the kind of volume that drives sane people away.

or maybe it screams volumes at the process and how adversarial it can be, particularly at the public consultation level, where it’s more like a game of poker than a consultative charrette which means starting at “m” to get to “e” because if you start at “f” you’ll be lucky to get to “c”?

[EdmTrekker]

Originally Posted by kcantor

or maybe it screams volumes at the process and how adversarial it can be, particularly at the public consultation level, where it’s more like a game of poker than a consultative charrette which means starting at “m” to get to “e” because if you start at “f” you’ll be lucky to get to “c”?

So much of Edmonton's development is based on that logic. Unfortunately we get a lot of xyz rather than abc - and the 🞵🞵🞵🞵 in middle is simply "there".

[s211]

Originally Posted by kcantor

or maybe it screams volumes at the process and how adversarial it can be, particularly at the public consultation level, where it’s more like a game of poker than a consultative charrette which means starting at “m” to get to “e” because if you start at “f” you’ll be lucky to get to “c”?

No, it screams volumes that there are market participants that set the bar so low that they can't even see/comprehend what it means to set the bar high. Frankly, they're wasting time with the system when they come out with something so dismal to begin with.

[Coldrsx]

Precedent folks, precedent.

[EdmTrekker]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Precedent folks, precedent.

That’s like saying anything is good enough for Edmonton. Precedent has given Edmonton a hampster wheel and not much more. Take a hatchet to the City development process and use it to cut some of deadwood as well.

[Coldrsx]

@ianoyeg

[Coldrsx]

Public engagement session - Langham 104st/100ave Towers

June 26 - 6pm - First Presbyterian Church - 10025-105st

-2 towers - 49 (145m) and 64 (170m)
-At grade commercial
-Up to 700 dwellings
-UG parking

[s211]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Precedent folks, precedent.

I don't understand what you're trying to say here.