[Urb]

Nah, RNDSQR is nailing it more than any other developer.
A) At procuring good architects
B) Insisting on high level design from the design team
C) Executing the design as best possible

Have there been a few situations that didn't come out as rendered? Sure, but they've set the bar high from the get go.

Even if all of these were shy of the mark, they are all worthy of multiplying.
https://www.rndsqr.ca/projects

C is where the issue is. They are starting to get a reputation for overpromising and underdelivering. Fortunately this is a rental building. I would be furious if I bought a condo in this building and RNDSQR went the cheap and cheerful route on me.

 

[Beltline_B]

We'll need to see how Courtyard 33 turns out before we can even make a judgement on it. So far it's on track IMO. The courtyard entrance looks a bit smaller than in the rendering, but changes like that are normal for all developments. For me it'll be the material on the outside of the building, and how it all looks once it is fully done..

 

[Mountain Man]

Agreed, not enough up yet to judge the finished product.

 

[UrbanWarrior]

Yeah sorry I was drunk.

 

[potatopizzafan]

 

[gsunnyg]

Honestly, worst case scenario I can see this project turning out to be "good" if not "excellent." If this is 80% of what the renderings suggested, it's still a solid win for the area. Better than some other companies out here that are showing one thing and building something else.

 

[potatopizzafan]

agreed, the rendering is pretty ambitious, and realistically it could never look exactly like the rendering without incurring massive costs (thin, non structural floor thickness, large cantilever over the courtyard stairs, floor to ceiling/wall to wall glass).

Exterior materials will determine if it is good or great in my opinion

 

[1875]

the top two floors make it look less like a cube, but it still looks like a cube, unlike the render.

 

[MichaelS]

agreed, the rendering is pretty ambitious, and realistically it could never look exactly like the rendering without incurring massive costs (thin, non structural floor thickness, large cantilever over the courtyard stairs, floor to ceiling/wall to wall glass).

Exterior materials will determine if it is good or great in my opinion

Then why put out renderings like that? Serious question. I fear that the Inglewood RNDSQR Block project will suffer the same fate.

 

[DiscoStu]

The problem I see with RNDRSQ is the they are trying to do high design at relatively low prices. I admire them for being so design-forward and bringing beautiful things to the masses, but somewhere along the way there is probably a disconnect between the vision and the construction costs to bring that vision to life.

I wouldn't be surprised if at some point they'll either raise their prices to live up to their design goals, or revert to more standard designs seen elsewhere in the industry. I'm hoping for the former.

 

[haltcatchfire]

The problem I see with RNDRSQ is the they are trying to do high design at relatively low prices. I admire them for being so design-forward and bringing beautiful things to the masses, but somewhere along the way there is probably a disconnect between the vision and the construction costs to bring that vision to life.

I wouldn't be surprised if at some point they'll either raise their prices to live up to their design goals, or revert to more standard designs seen elsewhere in the industry. I'm hoping for the former.

Parts of the problem lay further down the line. 97% of Calgary buyers can't interpret the relationship between full execution of good design and it's associated cost. There's only so much of a market out there for that discerning clientele. They also don't have far to go competition wise. There aren't a lot of equivalent or better projects at risk of garnering buyers attention. Until the baseline is raised they're already performing better than the majority. At least starting with high level architecture and value engineering it down still results in a better product than a lot of the developments that begin with generic simplistic architecture.

The design aesthetic itself RNDSQR moves forward with on their projects is at least quality and current. Unlike, for example the generic insignificant eraless design we're getting from SNORR at The Beverly in Mission.

 

[DiscoStu]

Yeah at the end of the day the end product is of a much higher design than you're getting from the competition, so they are ahead. But there is still a disconnect between what they are marketing/striving for, and what they end up with.

To me RNDSRQ projects always look great in renderings and from farther back, but I'm not sure I'd want to own one long-term, as there are clearly some corners cut in terms of finishings to hit a price point. But honestly, that's an issue with most developments these days, so at least they are still ahead in terms of aesthetics. I feel like quality in general has taken a turn for the worse, regardless of price point.

 

[Chinook Arch]

Then why put out renderings like that? Serious question. I fear that the Inglewood RNDSQR Block project will suffer the same fate.

The simple answer is to make the rendering look as nice as possible when it's going to be a condo (like Courtyard was originally), but not make it too different from the final product, as I'm sure there would be lawsuits if the rendering was totally different.

Looking at Grow, I think it'll look close to the renderings once the cedar ages to gray. RNDSQR's smaller projects generally turn out like the renderings. RNDSQR Block is a big project though. There's more chance of what I call 'render drift'

 

[BKha]

For myself, a lot of how it turns out will depend on the exterior material. If it's similar paneling to what M2 used, I'll be happy. If it's gray aluminum paneling, it's another story.

 

[October]

Im holding out on judgement until they have a substantial amount of cladding up, the small paneling around the doors isn't enough for me to interpret whether or not I like it.