[Platinum107]

Main floor is great. That’s it. I’m not sure why a blue fire escape is so exciting, when the rest of the building looks worse than the suburban crap we complain about. Although, as another poster has mentioned, it could be that it looks much better in person.

My comments are based on the limited photos here showing close ups of various elements. And based on the close ups, I don’t understand how it’s any different from regency’s hollyrood or that weird one behind brewery. Thank god this one at least kept the colours simple and nailed the main floor.

View attachment 716387

Not perfect buildings, just examples of some of the elements I like:
View attachment 716388View attachment 716389View attachment 716390View attachment 716391View attachment 716392View attachment 716393View attachment 716394View attachment 716395View attachment 716396View attachment 716397

Okay I kinda see where you're coming from. They definitely look better in person, and these buildings do have relatively simple designs when compared with the great examples you shared here. With that said, I guess these buildings have achieved something that, while not world class, has been pretty rarely seen here in Edmonton: a level of elegant minimalism.

Our development industry believes (for some reason) that slapping random sidings of various non-matching colours and textures somehow masks cheap mid-rise development, when all it does is exemplify it. Having buildings that just stick with one colour and a couple of accents is pretty rare to see here lol, and I hope developers here do take cues from these two projects.

 

[MattPT]

But that’s what’s so frustrating… why is the bar soooooo low. This should be an inoffensive well done little filler project that doesn’t deserve mentioning. Not the pinnacle…

Agreed. I cannot even wrap my mind around the comment comparing these simple beauties to Regency's 121 monstrosity.

And that’s why we will never see better. Because people don’t see it.

 

[Gus Haynes]

Go see it in person, dude.

 

[positive1]

Some of the comments here do not match up with reality. People are weird But, like, that's just my opinion, man.

 

[inclusion]

Some of the comments here do not match up with reality. People are weird But, like, that's just my opinion, man.

What reality is that? Where someone has a different opinion than you do and is simply voicing it? I'm not sure why that is weird. I agree with Matt on this one - while the design is simple, the windows are small and its not great other than the ground floor. Reminds me of another proposal that almost everyone on this forum lost their minds over.

 

[thommyjo]

Go see it in person, dude.

As someone who bikes 102ave all the time, I’ve had multiple friends comment on how ugly these buildings look as they approach.

Most think the courtyards are cool and like the coffee shop and such. But the black stucco in the sunlight looks sooooo cheap and bad.

These projects are overall wins, podiums are stellar. But anyone defending the exterior (upper 82%) of these buildings needs to reconsider imo. Again, Hat at 122 gives us an easy comparison that shows just how cheap Autograph’s projects feel.

 

[constance_chlore]

I don't get it. I think the black stucco in the sunlight looks... fine? I dunno, I see a lot of buildings that look kind of like this while traveling and I just think it's a very normal way for a building to look.

If there's one thing that bugs me a bit, it's that the lines where the panels are joined (terminology? I'm not a construction person, clearly) sometimes look a bit wonky and just a little too visible.

 

[Tropical]

I don't get it. I think the black stucco in the sunlight looks... fine? I dunno, I see a lot of buildings that look kind of like this while traveling and I just think it's a very normal way for a building to look.

If there's one thing that bugs me a bit, it's that the lines where the panels are joined (terminology? I'm not a construction person, clearly) sometimes look a bit wonky and just a little too visible.

I completely agree with you.

 

[_urbanite]

I don't get it. I think the black stucco in the sunlight looks... fine? I dunno, I see a lot of buildings that look kind of like this while traveling and I just think it's a very normal way for a building to look.

If there's one thing that bugs me a bit, it's that the lines where the panels are joined (terminology? I'm not a construction person, clearly) sometimes look a bit wonky and just a little too visible.

For reference, this is what it looks like in the sun. I think the matte black looks a bit dull in the sunlight, and cheapens the look of the building a bit IMO.

Here's a reminder of what this corner looked like about 10 years ago.

Pretty blah compared to now

 

[archited]

If there's one thing that bugs me a bit, it's that the lines where the panels are joined (terminology? I'm not a construction person, clearly)

There are two potentials for the "lines" that you refer to. 1. Expansion joints that allow for structural movement of building systems and 2. control joints which allow for "control" of shrinkage lines within cement plaster (stucco)... I suspect that you were witnessing the latter.

 

[thommyjo]

View attachment 716651

For reference, this is what it looks like in the sun. I think the matte black looks a bit dull in the sunlight, and cheapens the look of the building a bit IMO.

Here's a reminder of what this corner looked like about 10 years ago.

View attachment 716652

Pretty blah compared to now

View attachment 716654

Dull and stale is 100% it.

And it’s a huge improvement in many ways. But a classic “good enough for Edmonton” vibe.

Hat 122 for reference that I keep saying I wish the mercury was more similar to. I think it’s hard to argue this isn’t significantly nicer.

 

[Glenco]

^So are the rents.

 

[MattPT]

Go see it in person, dude.

Will do… but in like 9 or 10 months lol (I’m a couple flights away).

But I repeat. I don’t think this is a bad building. I just don’t think this is what we should be aiming for.

To put it more clearly. Let’s say some random guy walks up to you in the street and says, “hi, I’m from the world architectural society. Please point me in the direction of your city’s best building so I can enter your city into the sweepstakes for best building in the world.” Would you choose this fucking building??

This is a very exaggerated example…but maybe it will get my point across. Is this building a win…absolutely. Is this building something we should emulate…absolutely not.

 

[Romanov]

Why not emulate it? We can't expect all privately funded apartment projects to win architectural awards, but we can expect them to make improvements in community vibrancy. In that vein, its more about users than aesthetics.

An intern at work was part of a UBC contingent that flew into Edmonton ahead of a case competition. The comments back were not that Edmonton was ugly or lacking in Architecture. The comments back were that the streets were dead, not alot of people walking around. More developments like these at nodes and along corridors (as defined in the City Plan) please.

 

[David A]

Why not emulate it? We can't expect all privately funded apartment projects to win architectural awards, but we can expect them to make improvements in community vibrancy. In that vein, its more about users than aesthetics.

An intern at work was part of a UBC contingent that flew into Edmonton ahead of a case competition. The comments back were not that Edmonton was ugly or lacking in Architecture. The comments back were that the streets were dead, not alot of people walking around. More developments like these at nodes and along corridors (as defined in the City Plan) please.

Interesting feedback, dead streets lead to more empty store front spaces which are less attractive than filled ones and empty lots where there could be commercial or other buildings. Our biggest problem isn't the buildings.