Tower 101 | 175m | 50s | Regency Developments | DER + Associates

What do you think of this project?

  • Total voters
    50
supaflyryguy said:
Calgary has nearly 30% vacancy rate. It's wild that anyone is considering building new, unless that inventory is just so shitty that companies are desperately fleeing to quality.
Click to expand...
A lot of their inventory is Class A. I honestly think this project there is not gonna go forward in its current form at all. They might end up with either one tall tower that has a hotel and then some office or residential, or two shorter towers. But I definitely can't see it going forward like that. For the foreseeable future, I think Stantec's title is safe.

Anyways... back to this empty lot...



Offworld said:
I'm not for tall, for tall's sake. I'm saying that anything like a mid-rise would get swallowed by its surroundings and feel claustrophobic. As a residential site, that'd be oppressive.
Click to expand...

I feel like it would really depend on how the units are set up, and how the building itself is positioned. Because under the height argument alone, only the units that are higher than the surrounding buildings would not feel claustrophobic, unless the ones below are designed not to feel so. And if they can design lower floors on a tall building to still feel good, that means amid-rise, or a shorter high-rise could still feel good the same way.
 
ChazYEG said:
Honestly, I have been following Calgary threads talking about these towers and some of the talks are sounding a lot like our Aldritt Tower conversations went here. I will honestly be surprised if they go ahead in their current form.
Click to expand...
What, we are not the only place where grandiose projects are proposed and don't go ahead!?
 
Gronk! said:
Enough pussyfooting! It's the Delta Hotel, right? They want to relocate from the dumpster fire known as ECC.
Click to expand...
And that would be the first step toward a proper demolition of the entire ECC West project. That is the ONLY way to go. All that adaptive re-use claptrap talk is just a set of handcuffs. Wipe the slate clean.
 
I fear the risk is we could end up just replacing one vacant lot with another or end up with two instead of just one in yet another attempt to wipe the slate clean.

If we should have learned anything from this debacle and various others in the past, it is we are too quick here to tear down things based on pie in the sky proposals that do not go ahead.
 
Romanov said:
Here's hoping that whoever takes this on is ambitious and well capitalized. The caveat being that the current owners actually have to sell at a reasonable rate and the City is especially accommodating of construction at this constrained site.
Click to expand...
Here's hoping, though I doubt the current owner really intends to sell; this is just a stunt to look good on advice from their lawyer's PR campaign. I hate to be a downer, but I suspect that any serious offers would be reasonable, and yet those reasonable offers will be refused...

My expectations are tempered for the time being, but it's nice to see the buzz in this thread lately. Lots of great ideas here. That's part of what makes Edmonton interesting and unique - it's a city that's always been full of potential. The resulting inspiration from this constant state of possibility is endlessly appealing.
 
Last edited:
.crystalised. said:
Here's hoping, though I doubt the current owner really intends to sell; this is just a stunt to look good on advice from their lawyer's PR campaign. I hate to be a downer, but I suspect that any serious offers would be reasonable, and yet those reasonable offers will be refused...

My expectations are tempered for the time being, but it's nice to see the buzz in this thread lately. Lots of great ideas here. That's part of what makes Edmonton interesting and unique - it's a city that's always been full of potential. The resulting inspiration from this constant state of possibility is endlessly appealing.
Click to expand...
Perhaps, but surely someone who has some vision and more resources can afford the price. It does not seem that high.

Potential is like an undeveloped lot in a high profile location, it is great but something needs to happen with it eventually to be realized otherwise it is not worth a lot.
 
David A said:
I fear the risk is we could end up just replacing one vacant lot with another or end up with two instead of just one in yet another attempt to wipe the slate clean.

If we should have learned anything from this debacle and various others in the past, it is we are too quick here to tear down things based on pie in the sky proposals that do not go ahead.
Click to expand...
Pie in the sky were the plans to re-use City Centre in the first place.
 
.crystalised. said:
Here's hoping, though I doubt the current owner really intends to sell; this is just a stunt to look good on advice from their lawyer's PR campaign. I hate to be a downer, but I suspect that any serious offers would be reasonable, and yet those reasonable offers will be refused...

My expectations are tempered for the time being, but it's nice to see the buzz in this thread lately. Lots of great ideas here. That's part of what makes Edmonton interesting and unique - it's a city that's always been full of potential. The resulting inspiration from this constant state of possibility is endlessly appealing.
Click to expand...
This lot is doing nothing to improve his reputation. I honestly don't know why he even wants to keep it (or why he's in the development business in the first place, since he doesn't seem particularly good at it).
 
TagYEG said:
Something similar to Mackenzie Tower/Alt Hotel, that was proposed on 104 ST, but make its height somewhere between Manulife and Legends would be my ideal fit. It would have to be rentals, as per the market.
Click to expand...
Montreal has several hotels set up like this now. I don't see why it wouldn't work here.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top