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

What do you think of this project?

  • Total voters
    65
Exactly what I expected from this company. How I wish another company would embrace 104st as much as Langham has.

As usual, of course this is better than the parking lot its replacing and adds more residents DT, that's all great. I just want better design, which is likely possible without much extra cost (I say while not being in the industry, of course 😅)
 
dunno said:
Were we really expecting better from the people that brought us such architectural masterpieces as the Icons and Foxes?


I know this website rewards posts that look at things glass-half-full, but how do you know this? It's unclear how affordable these rentals will be as far as I'm aware and if it's keeping with market averages or even higher, then it's not going to do much to keep things (relatively affordable) with our growth rates. And regardless of affordability, do you know that the future residents of the Falcon Towers actually don't care that their building is ugly so long as it's functional? While I'm sure a functional unit is a top priority for future tenants, I doubt many would turn their nose up at having a beautiful building to call home. How do we know those who wind up in Falcon wouldn't go for something else if there was a broader range of options in nicer looking buildings? Langham's advertising for Falcon emphasizes its architectural quality and its renderings purposefully obfuscate the cheap punched windows look by keeping it behind rendered shimmery balconies. So they're clearly trying to attract a certain discerning clientele.
Click to expand...

Eh. I'm not really too worried about brownie points on some message board. I typically stick to my opinions and convictions whether they are 'glass half full" or not. My sentiments come from having talking to my renters over the past 9 years. I'm interested in what's important to them in housing because that in turn will tell me if my unit is the right fit for them. My experience has been that most people who aren't sinking money into their own equity are primarily focused on "bang for your buck" solutions to housing - that it's nice to have nice, but they're more focused on building savings to buy a house, budgeting for the school year, or looking for a place with decent transit connections because they don't have a vehicle. Never have I heard a complaint about my building's stucco exterior or punched windows or funky ass design.

Will housing costs stay affordable in Edmonton? Not sure, I don't have a crystal ball. If I did I might not be selling my place; but when it comes to the bottom line, having towers that are built reasonably economically whilst maintaining modern aestehtics DOES seem to walk in line with what most of my tenants have said they want. If you don't build what people want, they aren't gonna move into your community and they'll stick to the even cheaper 'burbs.

As for the marketing comments, my opinion of Langham kinda ranges on that one. Architecturally speaking they've got an okay track record. Interior design in their towers has always been nice but functional, but there are a couple of older examples in their portfolio where HVAC, mechanical, and other issues have been a problem - namely the times they went crazy sub-contracting. But I also would never expect a company downplay the marketing of their items. That's just the way she goes in sales.
 
Last edited:
Also, I suppose the reason I'm scratching my head about the opinions on this building is because I've lived in quite a few cities and think this tower looks alot like what you see being built in Surrey, New West, and Burnaby - whilst also being pretty damn well insulated based off what I've been seeing in the photos.

She's like the Honda Accord of our skyline. 😆
 
dunno said:
While I'm sure a functional unit is a top priority for future tenants, I doubt many would turn their nose up at having a beautiful building to call home. How do we know those who wind up in Falcon wouldn't go for something else if there was a broader range of options in nicer looking buildings? Langham's advertising for Falcon emphasizes its architectural quality and its renderings purposefully obfuscate the cheap punched windows look by keeping it behind rendered shimmery balconies. So they're clearly trying to attract a certain discerning clientele.
Click to expand...

I'd wager renters are less concerned with exterior aesthetic as a condo buyer, so have to wonder if when the decision was made to turn this project into purpose built rentals that the care for design went out the window.
 
Stevey_G said:
Also, I suppose the reason I'm scratching my head about the opinions on this building is because I've lived in quite a few cities and think this tower looks alot like what you see being built in Surrey, New West, and Burnaby - whilst also being pretty damn well insulated based off what I've been seeing in the photos.

She's like the Honda Accord of our skyline. 😆
Click to expand...
Honda Accord? Those are expensive compared to Ford's equivalent which is what the outcome here is.
 
ChazYEG said:
She's more like the Dodge Caravan of our skyline: serves a purpose, it'll probably be very efficient doing it, but it'll never be the belle of the ball.
Click to expand...
It's definitely not a premium product with the punched windows, exterior finish, cheap railings which make it look like it was build in the mid 90's. And it's not yet finished. Interiors must have been VE to death. Clearly constructed to appeal to what may be an influx of lower income arrivals into downtown given the massive population growth in our Edmonton.
 
^pretty sure renters don't give one fig about those things. have to ask though, how do you know "Interiors must have been VE to death", have you had a tour?
 
EdmTrekker said:
It's definitely not a premium product with the punched windows, exterior finish, cheap railings which make it look like it was build in the mid 90's. And it's not yet finished. Interiors must have been VE to death. Clearly constructed to appeal to what may be an influx of lower income arrivals into downtown given the massive population growth in our Edmonton.
Click to expand...
Puch windows are fine with me. This developer enjoys the white color exterior which is also fine. That said, this type of choices are better fitted for a seafront area where the ocean blue/green water offsets it's simplicity. In a winter city, white can be used, but we need better execution with accessories. One example as I mentioned before is to contrast the white exterior with colorful trims with the panels. Langham is very weak with visions or small details.
 
Clearshades said:
Puch windows are fine with me. This developer enjoys the white color exterior which is also fine. That said, this type of choices are better fitted for a seafront area where the ocean blue/green water offsets it's simplicity. In a winter city, white can be used, but we need better execution with accessories. One example as I mentioned before is to contrast the white exterior with colorful trims with the panels. Langham is very weak with visions or small details.
Click to expand...
I feel overall the development is suitable for the location. It isn't Ice District and does not have a River Valley View. It is nice, but not premium.

However, I do agree about overdoing white, you are exactly right. We are not an Aegean Island, hot with the sun beating down for much of the year, and even they have the good sense to have a few tasteful pops of blue.
 
Basically what I was hoping for was something similar to the building this was trying to knock off…
IMG_0067.jpeg
Post in thread 'Toronto | One Bloor East | 257.24m | 76s | Great Gulf | Hariri Pontarini'
https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threa...reat-gulf-hariri-pontarini.10109/post-2009560
 
If they gave enough thoughts, a similarly outcome would have been met. On a former community site C2E, I gave the input of applying all windows for the top half of each floor with panels for the bottom half then white frost glazing for the balconies. That concept would have matched most of this affect. Naturally, it won't outshone what you showed.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top