I'm not sure which one I like better. On one hand the design on the right has unique massing, but looks kind of awkward.

Image7.jpg
 

Attachments

  • Image7.jpg
    Image7.jpg
    165.7 KB · Views: 826
Last edited:
Agreed. I think OVER ALL, I'd slightly prefer the one on the right over the one on the left. Left one seems too bland for me. A little more colour variation and that could easily be solved. The one on the right is most definitely more unique, and indeed a tad bit awkward ... but it would most certainly be an addition to our skyline that stands out, rather than the one on the left that feels much more discreet, happy to fade into the maze of other similarly shaped and designed towers around it.

I guess, not that either of these can compare to Telus Sky, it's a decision of whether you want to add yet another "cowboy," or if its time we started getting an amassing of "cowgirls" instead.

It'll be a solid addition regardless.
 
Im pretty sure its the left one (unfortunately?), if what I remember reading earlier is still the case.
Also, is it still actually 50 stories? I remember some discussion about whether it was 50 or something closer to 30 ... but the page still does say 50.
If it were the design on the right I'd be all for a 50 storey, ~500-600ft tower. I'm indifferent for the design on the left tho.

I think it'll be a nice addition, nearly a thousand units added to the east Beltline / VP area is nice.
It also fills up another hideous parking lot and plot of derelict buildings, which never hurts.
Quick reminder as to what this is replacing:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@51.0410...4!1sYPKuAGvTBh2nW3T7HCFt6A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

So it definitely could be a lot worse. The location is great, it's near transit ... perhaps that'll keep some cars off the road.
 
Last edited:
It’s the left one getting built.
 
Hi All,
I Know the Dvlpr of the Curtis Dvlpmt has the Site Over at 9/11 S W. They Have Started Construction on that Site. Question? Have they Started any Work on the
12/Mcleod Tr, Site Yet: Just Wondering.
Tnx.,
Operater.
 
This is a great addition. Not because it is great on its own but this combined with Underwood, taking away some holes. My preference is the one on the left actually. I like the brutalist throwback although could go for more podium variety / height.
 
It's quite a good project. My only concern is the ground-floor treatment. The proposal includes the addition of a drop-off zone of the slip lane on Macleod northbound. On the surface this makes sense, but overall it makes the pedestrian network weirder and less direct. Minor inconvenience to be sure, but one that will remain there forever. I would have preferred to shrink Macleod from 4 lanes (over-built for 22 hours a day and detrimental to the living experience of the area for all 24 hours) to 3 lanes here and give the extra lane to a drop-off zone, pedestrian bump-outs etc. Perhaps out of scope for this single developer, but the City's pro-single vehicle capacity agenda/status-quo isn't challenged here, and I would argue a booming urban residential core is exactly the place to challenge it.

The other thing that continues with this development is that weird flood-zone treatment of Victoria Park with steps up to retail. I understand the logic, but surely other flood-prone cities have found a more nuanced approach that doesn't help kill the ground floor retail vibrancy by raising it 3-5 steps above the street for a 1:100 year event? Between the negative effects of the over-built Macleod arterials and raised retail, the Victoria Park corridor will always struggle to become a major vibrant urban corridor IMO.

Minor issues aside, an excellent project and a great addition. Especially in time with the Greenline and Vic Park plans.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top