Falcon Towers | 170m | 44s | Langham Developments | Arc Studio

What do you think of this project?

  • Total voters
    65
Honestly this would not be an issue if this tower was less than 140 metres tall. The height makes it stand out and it is a very mid looking building at best. But I agree with @SMayo, the aesthetics are a small price to pay for what the tower can bring in the form of new residents and vibrancy to the area. As the area starts to fill out though and we see more and more towers reaching this height or higher it won't stand out as much anymore and will just look like another tower on the skyline. So overall I don't think it's a huge deal.
 
erudyk_29 said:
Honestly this would not be an issue if this tower was less than 140 metres tall. The height makes it stand out and it is a very mid looking building at best. But I agree with @SMayo, the aesthetics are a small price to pay for what the tower can bring in the form of new residents and vibrancy to the area. As the area starts to fill out though and we see more and more towers reaching this height or higher it won't stand out as much anymore and will just look like another tower on the skyline. So overall I don't think it's a huge deal.
Click to expand...
But it will be under 140m.

This one tower will probably be around 100m and the second one around 120m. The heights listed on the top are from before it was reduced.
 
Height is really not the issues, it's the floorplate of each tower is MASSIVE compared to most buildings. The site is very large but the tower floorplates are like office towers, not your typical slim residential tower.
 
Of all the towers under construction in Edmonton, this is one of them.

20231031_084650.jpg
20231031_084648.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 20231031_084645.jpg
    20231031_084645.jpg
    266.7 KB · Views: 60
ChazYEG said:
But it will be under 140m.

This one tower will probably be around 100m and the second one around 120m. The heights listed on the top are from before it was reduced.
Click to expand...
Oops, guess I missed that. I don't understand what the big deal about the looks is then, it's not going to affect the skyline that much, and it's not like it's a legitimately ugly building, just bland and uninteresting. I think the idea that every building has to be some unique and modern glass walled tower is counter to the development of more housing in the core. It's simply more expensive to make everything look totally futuristic. That would drive up housing prices and slow down development.

I agree though the marquee, towers that are tall and will stand out on the skyline should look somewhat interesting.
 
Look at the most important elevation to our city, the southside. This paradigm is a concrete jungle with a future faux concrete sprout. Yeah! It will be visible for decades.
 
We are in the midst of a housing crisis, we should all be happy to be getting any development at all. It would be nice if it looked a bit better but in the end the fact that there are two new towers going up downtown, providing a greater supply of urban living trumps having a below average looking building on the skyline. Maintaining affordability and increasing housing supply is far more important than architectural design.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top