What do you think of this project?

  • I like it a lot

    Votes: 7 28.0%

  • I like it

    Votes: 14 56.0%

  • I neither like nor dislike it

    Votes: 4 16.0%

  • I dislike it

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • I dislike it a lot

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    25
Valveman said:
I'm confused, are you saying Westrich is "one of the worst offenders" due to the 106 Street site ? (this is the thread you posted this on)

For one thing, that photo primarily shows an unrelated site - is the CofE (waiting to start the Whse District Park) one of the worst offenders ?

And, AFAIK, the WP 106 Street site has been looking like that long before WP was proposing development there...
Click to expand...
I think that he's referring to the site itself being one of the biggest eyesores in Edmonton. But again, I don't speak Ian, so don't quote me on that
 
Valveman said:
I'm confused, are you saying Westrich is "one of the worst offenders" due to the 106 Street site ? (this is the thread you posted this on)

For one thing, that photo primarily shows an unrelated site - is the CofE (waiting to start the Whse District Park) one of the worst offenders ?

And, AFAIK, the WP 106 Street site has been looking like that long before WP was proposing development there...
Click to expand...
The photo was in reference to the lot to which a proposal has been presented. Said lot is 'one of the worst offenders'. The lot in the foreground ain't much better.
 
IanO said:
The photo was in reference to the lot to which a proposal has been presented. Said lot is 'one of the worst offenders'. The lot in the foreground ain't much better.
Click to expand...
Worst offenders how so? As in becoming a DP, earns rezoning, then gets flipped?
 
Me loves me some skinny towers. This is destined to become Edmonton's Third tallest tower after the Ice District Marriott and Westrich Pacific is just the company to get the job done. 106th Street will give 104th a run for its money from "interesting street" perspective.
 
Greenspace said:
Denied 13-0. DECL sent in a letter of concern regarding the extension of the sunset clause, but more so the request for non-accessory parking.
Click to expand...
Just to clarify: They heeded to the request of the Westrich rep, because they wanted to lower the sunset clause to 7 years and remove the allowance for parking (but allow other uses like an events space, market, etc). The rep asked that instead of accepting it as amended, they defer it to administration so that they and Westrich can work on an alternative use for the site. All the councillors expressed a strong desire to work with Westrich so that they can succeed here, and said that they do like the building they eventually want to construct.
 
Greenspace said:
^Yes to all that detail I left out. Which all occurred after we raised concerns. And to be clear, DECL doesn't have any concerns over the design of the building itself and would love to see it built asap.
Click to expand...
Are you involved with the project? I gotta say, I absolutely love this and I really hope it gets built! I'm glad that you folks are willing to try and find another use for the land, and I wish you the best of luck with everything!
 
One thing that the City has to work on is streamlining its approval process so that it does not cost so much in terms of time expenditure. I have said this before, but the City should be less proactive in terms of setting design concepts in place and more reactive to actual proposals coming its way. There has to be a better appreciation for the "time is money" axiom.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top