What do you think of this project?

  • Total voters
    53
^^ David that misses the vitality created by 1. the ICE District and 2. the Educational sector vis-a-vis MacEwan University, Norquest College and the UofA downtown campus -- all 3 are trying to grow their individual efforts re R&D. The downtown is growing organically and I don't see a rationale for focusing on the Office Sector with the transition happening worldwide on reducing corporate footprints on the white collar side of the equation. Sports & Entertainment and Education & Research are filling in the void just nicely. Downtown also has the benefit of the presence of all three levels of Government -- Municipal, Provincial and Federal. The seed is there; we just need to support those growth factors that are already in place.
 
archited said:
^^ David that misses the vitality created by 1. the ICE District and 2. the Educational sector vis-a-vis MacEwan University, Norquest College and the UofA downtown campus -- all 3 are trying to grow their individual efforts re R&D. The downtown is growing organically and I don't see a rationale for focusing on the Office Sector with the transition happening worldwide on reducing corporate footprints on the white collar side of the equation. Sports & Entertainment and Education & Research are filling in the void just nicely. Downtown also has the benefit of the presence of all three levels of Government -- Municipal, Provincial and Federal. The seed is there; we just need to support those growth factors that are already in place.
Click to expand...
disagree. Everything you’ve mentioned is driving temporary visits to downtown. Nothing building downtown culture. More importantly, nothing building brand recognition outside of edmonton. I completely AGREE that these things are great for Edmonton, but are missing the point why we are not going to have any legacy prime lot projects any time soon.
 
There are many factors affecting office growth -- of course the biggest is the remote work thing. But there is also AI which will put a downward pressure on hires in many office career fields. Computerization alone has decreased the needs for hires -- many tasks that used to require warm bodies can now be handled by one person instead of needing 3 or 4. The office matrix as it applies to downtown growth is likely going to be limited to single person or small groups of professionals -- doctors (especially specialists), dentists, lawyers, realtors, architects and engineers.

I don't see much residential rising to the status of "legacy" buildings anymore with very few exceptions -- the Parks, Qualico's build-out, ICE II are the most notable. I know I get flak for repeatedly saying so, but there is a rush by some developers to build downtown as cheap as possible -- maximum profits:minimum effort.

Mixed use is going to be the biggest potential for legacy projects in the fields that you have mentioned -- again the Parks, Qualico, and ICE II. That said there seems to be a convergence on a developmental attitude to avoid the "mixed part" of mixed use and to build crap with the call signal "what a good boy am I"

Otherwise the Legacy Potential rests on Arts and Entertainment Projects, Sports Edifices, and Post-Secondary Schools -- these are the types of buildings we should be heralding for downtown -- so far the architecture in these areas has been above par.
 
I agree mixed use is the most likely type of project for this site. It is frustrating nothing is happening here in such a prominent site while other several things have been built in other nearby areas of downtown.

Perhaps mixed use is more complicated to put together and that is part of the reason for the delay here. I suspect the current owner is not up to it.

There are various issues related to downtown that may be a factor, but I don't think this hinges on whether some large developer from elsewhere is interested in i,t or our city, or not.
 
ChazYEG said:
I could waste time debunking every single one of these points, but nothing propagates in the vaccum.
Click to expand...
1744959210422.png
 
ADob said:
I just got a call from the city's development compliance department and they told me they are basically keeping tabs on this property. the owner/parking company have been told to shut the parking lot down but the city doesn't have the resources to check for compliance more than once a week so if any of you see cars parking there, please either call 311 or email developmentcompliance@edmonton.ca. as an aside, i was also told they'd just had a meeting about the BMO/Regency site. No actions have been taken as of yet (that he was able to share) but at least it's on the city's radar.
Click to expand...

Uhm...actions need to be taken care of NOW!
 
Agreed and I did let him know that many people are quite disgusted with it. I don't think he was at all surprised. But I think the key takeaway is - keep pressure on the council and on 311. I haven't heard back from Anne Stevenson (shocking, I know) but I'm glad to be one more person to poke her about the topic.
 
An absolute embarrassment. There needs to be some sort of change to policies to not allow for demolition without a guarantee of building within X months / years or something. Back-of-napkin stuff, I'm sure there are intricacies and issues for any sort of policy like that, I'm just tired of prominent lots getting demolished then left to sit and rot. :mad:
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top