Same architect as the Bowness project:
1658276291785.png

ATTAINABLE HOMES BOWNESS — HINDLE ARCHITECTS

www.hindle-architects.com www.hindle-architects.com
 
At first glance, I didn't like this one, but each time I look at it it seems to grow on me....mainly because it's unique. I think it would look better in a place like Inglewood, than right downtown, but at least it's different.

Depending on the material though, it could really go either way. Plain old flat hardy board on something this scale.... 👎 White paneling with the grooves as shown in the rendering could look pretty cool.
 
ByeByeBaby said:
It's literally next door to The McLeod at RiverWest, 27 stories and kitty corner to Calgary Place, 36 stories. It's the same size site as Vista West (10th St / 8th Ave), which is 21 stories, 111 suites plus a little office and ground floor retail, or as a better comparison more recently 6th and Tenth, which is 31 stories, 224 units.

Fundamentally, it's out of scale to the community; it should be three times the height. Drop some of these in Montgomery, West Hillhurst, Capitol Hill, Ramsay; places that need starter density. Build downtown buildings in the downtown.
Click to expand...
This.
 
ByeByeBaby said:
It's literally next door to The McLeod at RiverWest, 27 stories and kitty corner to Calgary Place, 36 stories. It's the same size site as Vista West (10th St / 8th Ave), which is 21 stories, 111 suites plus a little office and ground floor retail, or as a better comparison more recently 6th and Tenth, which is 31 stories, 224 units.

Fundamentally, it's out of scale to the community; it should be three times the height. Drop some of these in Montgomery, West Hillhurst, Capitol Hill, Ramsay; places that need starter density. Build downtown buildings in the downtown.
Click to expand...
I get what you are saying, but apart from pure height I respectfully disagree. Half the area is parking lots or buildings or podiums lower than this. It's about the height of the podium for the Avenue tower. I think the design is tasteful and appropriate for the context - 25m tall, full lot coverage, and sidewalk fronting instead of driveway or carport fronting. In these ways it's is actually more appropriate for the city centre than several taller, car-oriented, or out of scale buildings nearby (like West Village Towers).

Could the site be fine with a higher building? Of course - but it doesn't need it. It's still a very urban building and adds to the diversity of designs in the area.

Fully agree we should be seeing something like this design in many, many more areas of the city (reasonable density, full lot coverage, human scale, pedestrian-focused).
 
Last edited:
I just walked passed the empty lot today and I tried to imagine this building. I was trying so hard to kid myself to think this would look good. T'was impossible.
Not only would this building be out of place, but it would take away from a lot of the beautiful staggering architecture in that area. This really would just look like a blocky industrial piece of crap in a nice downtown area. It would be an embarrassment to show a visitor that street.

Since they were given a tiny budget to work with (the bare minimum), I doubt the architects even like their own design and are probably hoping it gets declined so that they'll get an increased budget. That's my guess.
I'm in support of attainable homes building there but I would tell them to come up with a much better design. If they can't due to their limited finances and their company mission, then unfortunately they should sell the property to someone who can. There's other ways to bring affordable living to downtown/core than simultaneously ruining the beauty and desirability of downtown.
 
Last edited:
CBBarnett said:
I get what you are saying, but apart from pure height I respectfully disagree. Half the area is parking lots or buildings or podiums lower than this. It's about the height of the podium for the Avenue tower. I think the design is tasteful and appropriate for the context - 25m tall, full lot coverage, and sidewalk fronting instead of driveway or carport fronting is actually more appropriate for the city centre that something taller, car-oriented, or out of scale the other way (like West Village Towers).

Could the site be fine with a higher building? Of course - but it doesn't need it. It's still a very urban building and adds to the diversity of designs in the area.

Fully agree we should be seeing something like this design in many, many more areas of the city (reasonable density, full lot coverage, human scale, pedestrian-focused).
Click to expand...
I'm with you on this.

Contextual scale is only important when the application is taller than it's neighbors.

Going from gravel lot to affordable housing in an amenity rich, transit oriented location is a grand slam.

Also don't mind the design - will look unique an interesting in the context, given the simplicity/cost effectiveness of the form
 
I think the building is pretty unique and fixes the problem of adding density near transit in downtown. Hopefully they are open to tweaking the design to maybe make it feel like it belongs to the general aesthetic of the area more. Tbh I don't mind having a weird looking building that sticks out a bit here and there. Makes it a little bit less cookie cutter downtown
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top