Canadian 001
Active Member
Based on the Photos above: The Crane has Arrived
|
|
|
Lotus Park | 20.2m | 6s | Westrich Pacific | J+S Architect
- Thread starter Avenuer
- Start date
_urbanite
Senior Member
Ted, I really appreciate your insights and the knowledge you share about architecture and development here, but the constant trashing of Westrich developments, and the personal attacks on others when they call you out on it, is really starting to get to be too much. I don't want to have to use the "ignore" button on you, but I will have to if you keep it up. Why not use that ignore feature yourself on those who are bothering you? Again, I appreciate everything else you contribute to these forums. Let's keep things civil here
Stevey_G
Active Member
It's definitely better than what was there before and will serve to bring in a couple hundred people to the area. But I gotta admit it IS a bit suburban for a downtown core. I have no objections to low-rise developments, in fact I think they serve to provide some human scale to other downtowns like Victoria. That said, considering this is the capital blvd, we should be expecting mixed use elements, even just a single small bay, as well is incorporating some design elements that bring warehouse character to the community.
Regarding the lack of parking? Kinda makes sense for this development imo. These units are targetting U of A, Gmac, and Norquest students as the primary tenancy demographic and will serve as a solid home to foreign students specifically who have no use for a vehicle and whatnot. There's room in the marketplace for that, but the integration into the community could have been definitely done better.
Overall, I'm generally happy to see more people in the area, and I hope the units provide a cost-competitive option for starving students.
Regarding the lack of parking? Kinda makes sense for this development imo. These units are targetting U of A, Gmac, and Norquest students as the primary tenancy demographic and will serve as a solid home to foreign students specifically who have no use for a vehicle and whatnot. There's room in the marketplace for that, but the integration into the community could have been definitely done better.
Overall, I'm generally happy to see more people in the area, and I hope the units provide a cost-competitive option for starving students.
crisp
Active Member
I disagree, let the market depict what gets built. This is Edmonton, it's not Victoria but neither is it Toronto. There is plenty of space down Capital blvd for more CRUs. I used to care about height and mixed-use and all that as well, but now I'm ok with just more density and filling up spaces in general.
If we demand and only accept highrises in the downtown core, or let's just say WH district, we're just going to continue getting a bunch of never-built Massey Fergusons. There's plenty of space for highrises when the demand comes along.
If we demand and only accept highrises in the downtown core, or let's just say WH district, we're just going to continue getting a bunch of never-built Massey Fergusons. There's plenty of space for highrises when the demand comes along.
buildings
Active Member
^^but is it for students? I've not seen an indication of that. If it is, do the floorplans reflect that, i.e. 2 (or more) equal sized bedrooms and 2 bathrooms? My own condo has one ridiculously large primary suite and one small secondary bedroom; definitely not an even-steven situation. Stranger still is that this project isn't even on either Westrich's or J&S Architect's web sites.
Last edited:
Stevey_G
Active Member
I don't disagree here for sure. But we should bear in mind experiences in other markets when planning our own. Though a bit different, look at all the small units being built by investment driven mentality in Toronto which now are sitting and not selling and people are stuck with underwater assets. The same goes for rentals as well. You need to build with things people want in mind. And being an automobile-centric city, I will say there IS a chance that these units will struggle to compete with other units in the area which are larger, have parking, and are cheaper on the monthly.
Again not complaining, it's an improvement on what was there, but the developer should exercise caution building "nothing but living space" homes especially in a market with a relatively large amount of rental inventory. Gotta compete, and give your building competing elements.
Stevey_G
Active Member
I think it is, students often rent then sublet the second bedroom. And a 2nd bathroom and kinda the standard now. I used to hate when I'd chow down my curry rice from Khazana and have a 5-alarm emergency banging at the bathroom door while my roommate was rocking the bath salts and bubble baths.
Markyeg
Active Member
Not completely relevant, but Cidex has lots of work on the go right now that doesn’t appear on their website as well (Hat @ St Albert, Nolan Hill twin towers in Calgary).
David A
Senior Member
Yes, this lot was an old industrial building with no one living here before. While this location is decent, it doesn't have a spectacular view and is not close enough to the core to merit a high rise.
It is not as if there are no other lots remaining to build those on downtown. So the best thing to do is add more residential to the area and not wait maybe 30 years for the perfect high rise for this site.
Offworld
Active Member
archited
Senior Member
^ in respect for a general consensus I am staying mum (for now 
).
).
IanO
Superstar
Crane up!
northlands
Senior Member
crisp
Active Member
Any Toronto investor who got stuck with those assets should have understood that high-reward opportunities come with equally high-risk outcomes.
If the units be truly small and no parking, then the rental price should reflect it. And since it's all rental, good luck and good on Westrich for taking on the risk themselves to test out the market.
Offworld
Active Member
Oh man, the predominating colour palette there. So much greige and salmon (hard to adequately describe the latter colour to my eyes).
