[Clearshades]

Once the first tower is no longer in critical need of the crane usage is when tower 2 will most likely commence. Two cranes would be required to construct two towers simultaneously., But , the way the current crane is situated, that looks not to be the case. Also, this plot is slightly tight for two cranes but not impossible.

 

[IanO]

Crane radius and construction logistics are real considerations, but often times it is more related to financing.

 

[Jack Harris]

Omega was nearing top out, Omega 2 was in the works (104st/98ave - SDAB killed it due to 'height') and Icon was not even germinating at the time...

Think someone mentioned earlier in the thread we could possibly see the second tower start sometime in early 2024

 

[bodsbods9090]

Your educated guess is correct... likely start = winter/spring 2005

Where's Doc Brown when you need him????

 

[IanO]

Think someone mentioned earlier in the thread we could possibly see the second tower start sometime in early 2024

Very possibly. Look at Icon I/II and Falcon I/II. Both began before the other was completed and so it is likely, but given that these are a different product, without pre-sale requirements, who knows.

 

[Clearshades]

I wouldn't want Omega 2 at this point although I would be joyous if the lot is developed.

 

[Garneau2Go]

Honestly, it won't look like an architectural marvel but I think It'll look fine

 

[Clearshades]

Yes it will be fine. I just hope they imitate the panels' portion as they do the glazing portion meaning the the tracks for the panels has to match the mullions of the glass side. How the mullions are orchestrated, the tracks for the panels has to mirror.

 

[SMayo]

It may not turn out great but it's definitely going to be better than a surface parking lot.

 

[IanO]

^that was a joke, right?

 

[IanO]

I wouldn't want Omega 2 at this point although I would be joyous if the lot is developed.

Why? It was sleeker, taller, had a townhouse podium and even a corner CRU for what was hoping to be a local coffee shop for that area.

 

[Clearshades]

That design and look are old. The spot could desperately need a Westridge style development. The area is too heavily concentrated with concrete or substitutes that resemble concrete.

 

[IanO]

Most plans from 15yrs ago do...

 

[Clearshades]

Yes, 15 years ago... was when it should have been built. Let's update to 2023 where we currently are...

 

[IanO]

It was refused by the development authority and appealed at SDAB and lost because of the perceived negative impact due to its height, traffic and shadow... yup.

I reckon that it would still fit in quite well and with a slight update be welcomed.

Anyways, enough Langham history.