[Moncton] The Three Sisters - 20 Record Street | 3x58m | 3x15s | Under Construction

[MonctonRad]

If you look carefully at this site plan, you can see what constitutes the three phases of this project.



Phase 1 - will include 2/3rds of the overall podium of this development as well as the northernmost tower.
Phase 2 - will include the middle tower, built on top of the preexisting podium.
Phase 3 - will include the remaining podium and the southernmost tower.

[jonny golden]

One of the things I like about the design is the 3 storey podium. Since it's a 15 floor building, a large podium will look a lot better than had they only gone with one floor. It's a game changer for the neighbourhood, and hopefully it will spur more development in the area.

[Photo1]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Here's a larger version of the initial render:

My god that phase 1 building being at an angle like that really messes with my OCD...

[jonny golden]

I wonder what the logic was behind going with mostly 1 bedroom units? Are they targeting older couples whose children are grown and now on their own? I know Lafford caters to the retired demographic in his other properties.

[BlackYear]

Playing with Google Earth and PaintShop.

[MonctonRad]

Wow, great stuff. You're very skilled at this.

[MonctonRad]

With the approval and imminent construction of Lafford's 20 Record Street project, the impetus for future development in downtown Moncton south of Main Street will fall almost exclusively upon Ashford.

This image from a CBC article two years ago shows the extent of Ashford's land holdings in the area:



The area shaded in red is exclusively owned by Ashford. The area shaded in yellow is owned by companies linked to the Ashford group. This encompasses virtually all of the land between Blue Cross and the Lafford development.

Now, the city wants to reestablish the street grid south of Main Street. I would say that Ashford must be in deep discussions with city planning regarding what they want for this area of the city. An important part of this will be the next phase of Downing Street, which is likely where we will see the next major development in this area. Once this is complete, the new street grid will need to be developed, but in order to see this happening, surface parking will have to be displaced, therefore I expect a large parking structure to be built sometime in the next 5-7 years or so. Once the street grid is reestablished, then the remainder of the land will be primed for development.

Some of this will no doubt happen concurrent with the Lafford project. The rest may not happen for some time later, but this section of Moncton should be entirely different by 2030-35.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by BlackYear

Playing with Google Earth and PaintShop

It's so disappointly suburban and stubby and poorly laid out. Variation in height and scale in the three buildings would go such a long way to making this seem like more than just a tech park build transplanted into what should be an urban area.

[Sunnybrae]

So out of curiosity, what would people on this forum prefer, this current development or one 45 story tower?

[905er]

Originally Posted by BlackYear

Playing with Google Earth and PaintShop.

Great work on this!!..

Too bad it wasn't 2 taller towers instead of 3 shorter ones, but nevertheless some welcome development and more density for Moncton. Now we just need to fill some of those parking lots between these towers and the downtown core.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by JHikka

It's so disappointly suburban and stubby and poorly laid out. Variation in height and scale in the three buildings would go such a long way to making this seem like more than just a tech park build transplanted into what should be an urban area.

Once additional towers are built nearby, the sameness of these three buildings will be muted, and people will not notice as much.

This is still a historic development for this part of the city and presages the end of the blight of surface parking in the downtown core.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Once additional towers are built nearby, the sameness of these three buildings will be muted, and people will not notice as much.

What makes you think additional towers, when and if they do eventually happen, won't be the same sort of lazy design and implementation?

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

This is still a historic development for this part of the city and presages the end of the blight of surface parking in the downtown core.

Sure, I just think it can be done much better, and assume that people will look back on this development as a missed opportunity if indeed it is surrounded by better development eventually.

Originally Posted by Sunnybrae

So out of curiosity, what would people on this forum prefer, this current development or one 45 story tower?

A 45-story build would be even more inappropriate than three 15s. No skyline looks good when one building totally dominates, and even city skylines like Edmonton currently look lopsided when one building stands out so prominently amongst everything else.

Something like 18, 15, 12 would be far better for this plot of land, particularly if they each abutted one street individually, with the wrapped podium connecting the three along the three streetfronts to maximize streetfront retail and pedestrian activation.. Ideally they'd be layered so the shorter build would be nearer to the river to maximize the step effect that's pretty common near most waterfronts in the world to increase the number of people with views, but alas...

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Something like 18, 15, 12 would be far better for this plot of land, particularly if they each abutted one street individually, with the wrapped podium connecting the three along the three streetfronts to maximize streetfront retail and pedestrian activation.. Ideally they'd be layered so the shorter build would be nearer to the river to maximize the step effect that's pretty common near most waterfronts in the world to increase the number of people with views, but alas...

I generally agree with these points, but it is important to get things going in terms of major development south of Main Street. This is a quality project and is a good start. The Ashford lands south of Assumption Place and facing Downing Street require much more care in terms of planning, and should be held to a higher standard. This is where the focus should be in terms of demanding thoughtful integration into the surrounding streetscape.

BTW, while you're here, would you like to change the header of this thread to "Approved" rather than "Proposed"? In some ways you could even go as far as "Under construction" since there are already pieces of the tower crane lying on the ground.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

I generally agree with these points, but it is important to get things going in terms of major development south of Main Street. This is a quality project and is a good start.

I guess we'll just have to disagree on this point, then. I don't think it's anything that wouldn't look out of place on Mountain or north of the TCH. To me it doesn't scream urban, historic, groundbreaking, or any of these other buzzwords, but perhaps i'm just expecting too much.

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

The Ashford lands south of Assumption Place and facing Downing Street require much more care in terms of planning, and should be held to a higher standard. This is where the focus should be in terms of demanding thoughtful integration into the surrounding streetscape.

As long as we don't fall over ourselves as soon as the plans are released and immediately accept anything as being better than the status quo. If you find yourself with what should be a downtown core lined with suburban-level developments then you probably don't have much of a downtown core. This entire surface parking area has such tremendous potential and so far it's been a miss without changes or improvements. Just because something is tall doesn't mean it's good, and just because there's three of them doesn't make it better.

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

BTW, while you're here, would you like to change the header of this thread to "Approved" rather than "Proposed"? In some ways you could even go as far as "Under construction" since there are already pieces of the tower crane lying on the ground.

Excited, are we?

[PEI highway guy]

BTW, while you're here, would you like to change the header of this thread to "Approved" rather than "Proposed"? In some ways you could even go as far as "Under construction" since there are already pieces of the tower crane lying on the ground. [/QUOTE]

I am splitting hairs here and I AM NOT trying to be a smart ass, Technically this project is not approved until the new council approves it. Can they even get a building permit before council approval?

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by PEI highway guy

I am splitting hairs here and I AM NOT trying to be a smart ass, Technically this project is not approved until the new council approves it. Can they even get a building permit before council approval?

Rubber stamp.

I suppose one of the new councillors might try to get uppity, but I can't imagine council-as-a-whole not supporting this project fully.

[Monctoncore]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Rubber stamp.

I suppose one of the new councillors might try to get uppity, but I can't imagine council-as-a-whole not supporting this project fully.

I agree MonctonRad, I don’t see any fuss from any of the new councillors, they all seem to be pro development. Daniel Bourgeois is one of the “new councillors” though he has been on council before and though he is a bit of a conservative when it comes to the city spending, he has a decent past record of voting on new developments in the city. The rest of the new councillors all seem to be similar in wanting to see growth for the city.

[OUIR@random]

Originally Posted by JHikka

A 45-story build would be even more inappropriate than three 15s. No skyline looks good when one building totally dominates, and even city skylines like Edmonton currently look lopsided when one building stands out so prominently amongst everything else.

The Edmonton skyline looks perfectly fine...

What are you talking about? Some of the most beautiful skyscraper skylines in the world are landmarked by anchor skyscrapers. Chicago, Hong Kong, just to name those 2 off the top of my head. Yes, they have incredible built density in both cases, but Edmonton is not too shabby if uncomparable to those 2...

[OliverD]

Originally Posted by OUIR@random

The Edmonton skyline looks perfectly fine...

What are you talking about? Some of the most beautiful skyscraper skylines in the world are landmarked by anchor skyscrapers. Chicago, Hong Kong, just to name those 2 off the top of my head. Yes, they have incredible built density in both cases, but Edmonton is not too shabby if uncomparable to those 2...

Chicago's skyline may be anchored by the Sears Tower (or whatever it's called now) but in terms of height it's not dramatically different than some of its other towers.

[homebody]

[QUOTE=JHikka




Excited, are we? [/QUOTE]


I would say. The city is finally going to get a skyline lol.