The elegance of this building it great. From multiple angles. This tower will age gracefully. The city should work with the developer to see what can be done to get the second tower going. (outside of blatant taxpayer subsidies)

The St. Alberts and Sherwood Parks, Stony Plains. It's not just an Edmonton thing. It's a North American thing. Satellite communities adjacent to a big city always flex how much better they are. But the reality is, those municipalties only thrive because of their proximity to the city they...

It should have been elevated over the entirety of 104th. And please spare me the tired arguments about the 'urban realm' or costs. Elevated over 104th (especially at what will forever now be the gong show at 109 st) would have looked quite urban. It seems to work in Vancouver. As for costs -...

This building is fuuuuugggly! Seriously, why can't (won't?) we build better in this city. I truly believe Edmonton is not seen as a place that it 'home' - but rather, a place to extract revenue from, make it rich and move - leaving us citizens with this crap! Where is the design committee?!

The shift to public transit will never work in the suburbs. It's all about the built form. And, as it stands, despite all the talk about over multiple years, city hall keeps approving suburb after suburb that's not designed to be transit-friendly. I mean, my goodness, to get to a local retail...

^Heaven forbid that vehicles, including delivery and service vehicles, emergency vehicles, maintenance vehicles, ride shares/ taxis etc be also be able to get to where they need to go. The irrationality here is head shaking.

Can anyone explain the city's love for salmon-coloured concrete? It's such a drab, pukey colour. Not just for the Valley Line. The 23rd ave retaining walls are sickly. Blah.

^But, it's the most Edmonton thing you can do... This city itself is often its own worst enemy.

It should be noted, the irony of the situation that - despite efforts since the Mandel led council to kick start development in the Quarters, that there's been essentially zero private sector interest. So much so, that the city has to bribe (pay off?) developers to build in the area. And when...

I blame all the ugly infill on the city and its policies. In the rush to densify - there has been little thought to aesthetics. The policies should have included minimums when it comes to materials used, window sizing and placement etc etc.

^Who is the developer? There must be a contact to send a critical email to (cc'd with the area councillor) That's absolutely appalling. My god, why does this happen in a city of a million people with a relatively strong economy? The most Edmonton thing you could do, one posits. edit, found...

^I am concerned. This initial tease does not look good. Also, that stucco wall on the Icon 2 tower is an abomination. Who ever ok'd that should be tarred and feathered and laughed at until the end of time.

^What a great thing to see. If executed right, this will be THE place to be; showcasing the best of what Edmonton can be (If we just allow ourselves to have (and maintain) nice things)

The sense of entitlement among cyclists like the above is eye-rolling and gives a bad name to all the other cyclists who are not complaining and keeping calm and carrying on. Construction happens. Detours happen. Pedestrians, transit, etc etc. My goodness. The work has to be done.

^Ah, so a stop that's a de facto shelter (because there is really nothing around it) is ok because you 'used quarters a lot'. cool.