[Munanyo]

I'm really excited for the Warehouse District to start construction and be completed in a timely matter. No matter what we get, it will be leaps and bounds better then the sad and rundown sea of lots there now. However, I have a feeling this project might be a bit of a let down in terms of what it could and should be.....we will see.

 

[Avenuer]

I'm really excited for the Warehouse District to start construction and be completed in a timely matter. No matter what we get, it will be leaps and bounds better then the sad and rundown sea of lots there now. However, I have a feeling this project might be a bit of a let down in terms of what it could and should be.....we will see.

I feel people are putting unrealistic expectations on this park - it can’t be everything for everyone, there are limits. Can it be well-designed? Of course, but it can’t contain everything everyone wants.

 

[archited]

It could just be better designed.

 

[Stevey_G]

It could just be better designed.

If anything, the way, the survey was directing people towards the answers that they want, it shows that the city has no intention of improving on sent design.

 

[archited]

Amen to that @Stevey_G! Those insidious public interface questionnaires are simply ass-covering exercises for the City Administration (i.e. "well that's what the people wanted")

 

[IanO]

Asking for a friend...WWArchiD?

 

[archited]

I would hire competent outside design firms that assessed all design input factors without input from City Planning or other City agencies other than existing site specs and social parameters. Ian, the way this was put together was -- at the outset -- a competition of design teams, but shortly after 3 teams had been named as finalists the City put the Kibosh on the whole competition idea without even giving the competitors a chance to submit concepts. Instead some genius (hyperbole) at the City decided to cancel the competition and handle the main design parameters internally -- the exceptional talents at the City then essentially laid down rules for the park -- the main one being an extensive amount of open green space (like, and as you so aptly stated in previous posts, there aren't enough of those in Edmonton already). Instead through (mainly) internal mechanisms the City came up with two varying concepts -- one called "formal" and the other "organic" and asked the public which one they preferred (akin to would you like a Ford or a Chevrolet with no room to say "neither", thank-you). Has the City not proved its capabilities over and over -- once in a blue moon they get it right (the Columbia Ave. concept), but mostly it is bumbling ineptness. Now I put the question back to you WW'OD?

 

[IanO]

I'd forgo public consultation, remove the COE from the process and helicopter in Emery Barnes from Yaletown, build it in 3 months and would have had it serving the great folks of Downtown Edmonton and beyond a year ago to help turn the tide of perceptions and improve the amenities for those holding out. Sure there would be some tree/indigenous planting changes and minor tweaks, but it's got everything the upcoming one has, is welcoming, well designed and well used.

 

[thommyjo]

I'd forgo public consultation, remove the COE from the process and helicopter in Emery Barnes from Yaletown, build it in 3 months and would have had it serving the great folks of Downtown Edmonton and beyond a year ago to help turn the tide of perceptions and improve the amenities for those holding out. Sure there would be some tree/indigenous planting changes and minor tweaks, but it's got everything the upcoming one has, is welcoming, well designed and well used.

Literally was here last week. One of the best parks in a downtown I’ve ever seen.

I get that copy/paste isn’t respected a ton in architecture and design circles. But I do wonder sometimes why we don’t take what’s a home run elsewhere and just make it happen. Give us VR walk throughs of 5 great urban parks in other cities and have citizens vote. Then make small tweaks for local vegetation and needs, then make it happen. Reinventing the wheel is so wasteful.

 

[IanO]

Please do not share this suggestion with my consultant friends

 

[David A]

Literally was here last week. One of the best parks in a downtown I’ve ever seen.

I get that copy/paste isn’t respected a ton in architecture and design circles. But I do wonder sometimes why we don’t take what’s a home run elsewhere and just make it happen. Give us VR walk throughs of 5 great urban parks in other cities and have citizens vote. Then make small tweaks for local vegetation and needs, then make it happen. Reinventing the wheel is so wasteful.

I'm not in the profession, but I suppose one does not want to be too obvious. So instead one could say it was an inspiration or provided ideas, rather than cut and paste.

Of course we would need to make some tweeks or changes to account differences between locations and needs anyways, but this seems like a good idea start with and it would save a lot of time an money rather than reinventing everything.

 

[kcantor]

Literally was here last week. One of the best parks in a downtown I’ve ever seen.

I get that copy/paste isn’t respected a ton in architecture and design circles. But I do wonder sometimes why we don’t take what’s a home run elsewhere and just make it happen. Give us VR walk throughs of 5 great urban parks in other cities and have citizens vote. Then make small tweaks for local vegetation and needs, then make it happen. Reinventing the wheel is so wasteful.

because we have this strange fixation on "made in edmonton" solutions as if the problems we're addressing are unique to edmonton.

and when we do go elsewhere (ie blatchford) we water it down with made in edmonton amendments that simply increase costs and time while returning things to a level of mediocrity that doesn't show up the mediocrity we put up with elsewhere.

 

[Munanyo]

I feel people are putting unrealistic expectations on this park - it can’t be everything for everyone, there are limits. Can it be well-designed? Of course, but it can’t contain everything everyone wants.

Agree with that. I'm not asking for this to be some revolutionary park that should garner international attention here. But just copying a successful design like the park in Vancouver that Ian posted, making some minor tweaks and adjustments, would save considerable time and debate on how to make this "successful".

 

[CaptainBL]

Agree with that. I'm not asking for this to be some revolutionary park that should garner international attention here. But just copying a successful design like the park in Vancouver that Ian posted, making some minor tweaks and adjustments, would save considerable time and debate on how to make this "successful".

Smartest people in the room syndrome with city admin and council.

 

[David A]

Smartest people in the room syndrome with city admin and council.

The administration people in particular need to justify their existence and budgets , also with more money comes more prestige or power. While I don't think it is right, I get their motivation.

What I don't get is why council goes along with this. Do they not realize that at this point the public's frustration with missed deadlines and failed projects is close to boiling over? Their political future is at stake whether they are smart enough to realize it yet or not. They would be wise not to dither here, do something good and bring it in under budget. They really badly need a win, not more delays and expensive failures.