Saskatoon | Baydo Towers | ??m - ??m | 25-25 Floors | U/C

[phone]

Originally Posted by SaskScraper

I'm shocked and appalled that commie blocks are still being built in this day and age.
Porthole sized windows and institutional brown and blue looks straight out of the 1950's Stalingrad.
I'm not sure which building looks worse, Baydo tower number 1 or stubby number...uh huh 'tower' number 2.

International-style glass towers might be desirable from a purely aesthetic point of view (conventionally speaking), but I would bet that the Baydo Towers will be far more energy efficient in a place with such a variable climate as Saskatoon. Potential issues regarding materials quality aside, that is.... I would further hazard to say that speaking purely in the Saskatoon context, 25 stories would qualify a building as tower.

[905er]

oh how perfect.. they'll blend right in with their neighbours. seriously, it's 2020... that's the best design they could come up with?

[phone]

Originally Posted by 905er

oh how perfect.. they'll blend right in with their neighbours. seriously, it's 2020... that's the best design they could come up with?

It's cheap, and they probably could have done more with their money design-wise, but it helps build a critical mass of people downtown which will hopefully serve as a catalyst for nicer looking development. Speaking from a purely utilitarian perspective this project checks off most of the boxes (no pun intended), with respect to density, streetfront interaction, and in Saskatoon, the all important parking.

[SaskScraper]

Originally Posted by phone

International-style glass towers might be desirable from a purely aesthetic point of view (conventionally speaking), but I would bet that the Baydo Towers will be far more energy efficient in a place with such a variable climate as Saskatoon. Potential issues regarding materials quality aside, that is.... I would further hazard to say that speaking purely in the Saskatoon context, 25 stories would qualify a building as tower.

I bet they would be more energy efficient yet again if there were no windows at all.

Anything that is broad or thick set when it does not have to be qualifies as stubby or stubbed.
Also stubbing a cigarette automatically makes it shorter by default, makes cigarette safe but ugly too, yet another good analogy to the Baydo project. No one will ever call these buildings sexy (& slender).

[alt_center]

Originally Posted by phone

It's cheap, and they probably could have done more with their money design-wise, but it helps build a critical mass of people downtown which will hopefully serve as a catalyst for nicer looking development. Speaking from a purely utilitarian perspective this project checks off most of the boxes (no pun intended), with respect to density, streetfront interaction, and in Saskatoon, the all important parking.

While I agree with you, I do believe that when a developer proposes a behemoth that will alter the skyline for the next 100 years, they have an obligation to the community to make an effort re. aesthetics (i.e., no commie blocks!). It does not have to be a sleek glass tower but clearly this proposal is the result of doing the absolute minimum. It reeks of cheap! I personally think it could be improved greatly at little extra cost.

Like I said in a previous post, if we settle for mediocrity then we deserve mediocrity.

I for one do plan to contact city council to express my opinions even though I know this ship has almost certainly (unfortunately) sailed.

[phone]

Originally Posted by SaskScraper

I bet they would be more energy efficient yet again if there were no windows at all.

Anything that is broad or thick set when it does not have to be qualifies as stubby or stubbed.
Also stubbing a cigarette automatically makes it shorter by default, makes cigarette safe but ugly too, yet another good analogy to the Baydo project. No one will ever call these buildings sexy (& slender).

I just think that sheer glass, while having a place, doesn't really make a whole lot of sense for every building in this climate. Maybe it makes me unpopular but my view is that energy efficiency is a desirable aspect when considering architecture, and that aesthetic concerns, while important, do not necessarily carry the day every time. It should also go without saying that buildings need windows. I also don't think that every building needs to be AON Tower skinny in order to be meritous.

[phone]

Originally Posted by alt_center

While I agree with you, I do believe that when a developer proposes a behemoth that will alter the skyline for the next 100 years, they have an obligation to the community to make an effort re. aesthetics (i.e., no commie blocks!). It does not have to be a sleek glass tower but clearly this proposal is the result of doing the absolute minimum. It reeks of cheap! I personally think it could be improved greatly at little extra cost.

Like I said in a previous post, if we settle for mediocrity then we deserve mediocrity.

I for one do plan to contact city council to express my opinions even though I know this ship has almost certainly (unfortunately) sailed.

I agree with you, but in my view the aesthetic drawback is not sufficient to tip the scales to this being an undesirable project. That said I sincerely hope that the success of their current projects motivates Baydo to risk investing more into nicer looking architecture for their future projects.

[SaskScraper]

Originally Posted by alt_center

While I agree with you, I do believe that when a developer proposes a behemoth that will alter the skyline for the next 100 years, they have an obligation to the community to make an effort re. aesthetics (i.e., no commie blocks!). It does not have to be a sleek glass tower but clearly this proposal is the result of doing the absolute minimum. It reeks of cheap! I personally think it could be improved greatly at little extra cost.

Like I said in a previous post, if we settle for mediocrity then we deserve mediocrity.

I for one do plan to contact city council to express my opinions even though I know this ship has almost certainly (unfortunately) sailed.

I agree on all points, mediocrity breeds like cockroaches, Saskatoon deserves better than an infestation such as this, which these buildings probably eventually will... literally!.

I plan to contact city council as well.

[YXE]

Folks, I hear you all with the complaints. And this project warrants *some* level of criticism, I agree. But this is City Park we are talking about. And all this talk about how with "a little more effort" or "changes that wouldn't result in higher costs" are illegitimate. The only reason this project can and should proceed as planned (i.e. two 25 story towers) is because of the level quality.

This is Saskatoon, guys. I mean that with no disrespect; I'm from the city and am just as passionate about it's future as you all are. But we must be more realistic about this development and others like it. This is the largest residential project in the history of Saskatoon which happens to be taking place during the worst economic period in a very long time. Let's take it!!

On a separate note, I'd love to see a rendering of the revised skyline coming down the bridge towards downtown.

[phone]

Originally Posted by YXE

Folks, I hear you all with the complaints. And this project warrants *some* level of criticism, I agree. But this is City Park we are talking about. And all this talk about how with "a little more effort" or "changes that wouldn't result in higher costs" are illegitimate. The only reason this project can and should proceed as planned (i.e. two 25 story towers) is because of the level quality.

This is Saskatoon, guys. I mean that with no disrespect; I'm from the city and am just as passionate about it's future as you all are. But we must be more realistic about this development and others like it. This is the largest residential project in the history of Saskatoon which happens to be taking place during the worst economic period in a very long time. Let's take it!!

On a separate note, I'd love to see a rendering of the revised skyline coming down the bridge towards downtown.

Agreed. While we should be wary of uncritically accepting mediocrity, we also need to be realistic about what Saskatoon is and where it is in its overall development. This is still a very young city and we have a long way to go. Incrementally we are approaching the point where we can be more choosy about what gets built. However right now we simply do not have that unqualified luxury. Our city centre has more vacant land than developers prepared to build on it. Maybe once we add another couple hundred thousand to our population we can revisit this issue but for now I'm just happy to have another spate of development in the city centre, which, let's remember, has seen its share of beautiful buildings built recently too. This all said I don't think we shouldn't strive for something more than mediocrity (we should), but by the same token we might be better served by being happy that investors see a future in building up our (still small) city. Pragmaticism isn't the same as advocating for mediocrity.

[NotToScale]

I agree with a lot of the pros and cons of this project. Not the highest quality for sure, i'm not a fan of it, but it offers a lot of amenities to the building residence and are purpose built towers for RENT. You don't see many of those at this scale happen in Saskatoon. I think its important to have both rental and condo towers. Gives people at different market levels options to downtown living. So yes, not the best at all, but it adds some density and pushes for more development downtown as more people begin to live and work there.

And as a side note, I don't think/hope its not stucco siding. Looks like panels to me. But these are just renders I know.

[The Bess]

905er 905er is online now
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Mississauga/Brampton
Posts: 380
oh how perfect.. they'll blend right in with their neighbours. seriously, it's 2020... that's the best design they could come up with?

Hey didn't I just see your name in the Regina construction thread with Regina as your location?? did you switch cities lol

[The Bess]

sorry you were just bashing Regina so nothing happening in Brampton ??

[Marksman]

Unsure if I'm the only one who feels this way, but I feel that they should have planned to stack those complexes on top of each other and create one tall tower. It's about time Saskatoon cracks the 100 meter mark. I understand there are regulated height limitations in place, although I feel like it's time to move forward, reconsider those guidelines, and allow for substantial and progressive growth opposed to recreation of adjacent apartment complexes completed 40 years ago. Not to mention the view from the top apartments would be outstanding. Are there other factors that I am missing? (such as disproportions, shade, community feel, etc.). Although, I am happy to see Saskatoon continue to build upwards downtown and am hopeful this continues to snowball into a continued trend of modern, metropolitan living downtown.

[YXE]

I suspect we’ll top 100m or come close to it on the upcoming River Landing Parcel with something mixed use. One floor with street presence for a restaurant etc. Maybe some office floors/hotel, with condos on top. Toronto, where I currently live, is full on these mixed-use towers comprising of all the aforementioned.

[casper]

Originally Posted by YXE

Folks, I hear you all with the complaints. And this project warrants *some* level of criticism, I agree. But this is City Park we are talking about. And all this talk about how with "a little more effort" or "changes that wouldn't result in higher costs" are illegitimate. The only reason this project can and should proceed as planned (i.e. two 25 story towers) is because of the level quality.

This is Saskatoon, guys. I mean that with no disrespect; I'm from the city and am just as passionate about it's future as you all are. But we must be more realistic about this development and others like it. This is the largest residential project in the history of Saskatoon which happens to be taking place during the worst economic period in a very long time. Let's take it!!

On a separate note, I'd love to see a rendering of the revised skyline coming down the bridge towards downtown.

I lived for about 6 years in City Park (one of the boardwalk rentals). This is a great addition to that neighborhood. It was lacking restaurants and retail. This introduces some of that.

Being City Park and not the CBD I don't think every building needs to be a architectural landmark. This is a lot of rentals being added across the street from downtown. It is no worse that nearly every other mid-market rental in City Park. Its impact on the skyline will be nearly nill, this is going to blocked by towers in every direction.

With global warming the energy efficiency should be a focus. No need for all glass in this location.

[Ricopedra]

edited

[Ricopedra]

edited

[Ricopedra]

edited

[alt_center]

I think these buildings will be very prominent, especially when viewed entering downtown via University Bridge.

I am not saying these building need to be architectural landmarks; by definition they will be landmarks. Given the choice of "this or nothing" (a false choice BTW) then I say build them. But these will be commie blocks, no doubt about it.

I'll go further... IMHO these are---by far---the ugliest tall buildings proposed or built anywhere in Canada in the last decade (based on browsing this forum); but hey, it's Saskatoon, and City Park to boot!

This concludes my postings re. the architectural merits of these buildings. I've made my position clear (as it it counts for anything haha). Hundreds of people living there should invigorate the neighbourhood. Build away!!