Even though it looks kind of 80's like, I'm finding the red brick very refreshing for EV. Love the office building.
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||
East Village Courtyard | 108m | 33s | Gibbs Gage
- Thread starter Surrealplaces
- Start date
gsunnyg
Senior Member
Looks nice but what are the chances of any of it going forward anytime soon particularly the office building given the market conditions? Kind of a tease.
1875
Senior Member
get’r done!
Cowtown
Senior Member
Yeah, the office portion is a tough sell, but at least it's not a large building and can maybe get a medium sized tenant. Someone looking for brand new space in a funky part of town. If the residential is rental, it could go ahead.
UrbanWarrior
Senior Member
Oh my god.
gsunnyg
Senior Member
maestro
Senior Member
What if they don't fill up? Is that still better than nothing at all? Ask the average Torontonian or Vancouverite if commoditizing real estate has improved their lives. I just recently read food banks have seen a dramatic uptick in young, educated and, employed visitors drowning in high debt, high taxes and, high living costs.
Please stop spamming the forums with the real estate's board propaganda. Developers have scaled down. They haven't stopped building. There is plenty to discuss.
MichaelS
Senior Member
This one is going to Planning Commission next week. The report is here:
If you want to know why a 2015 application is only getting to CPC now, there is an explanation for it (looks like administration was anticipating this question from commission members)
A comprehensive site DP, planning for 3 residential towers, and one office tower (office in the NW Corner of the block). The DP drawings are here, only rendering is the same as the one on the previous page, however there are some elevations:
If you want to know why a 2015 application is only getting to CPC now, there is an explanation for it (looks like administration was anticipating this question from commission members)
A comprehensive site DP, planning for 3 residential towers, and one office tower (office in the NW Corner of the block). The DP drawings are here, only rendering is the same as the one on the previous page, however there are some elevations:
Platopos
Active Member
If those are the colors they're going to use, that's going to be a very lackluster tower portion, especially by East Village standards. The whole tower design looks quite bland, even though I'm sure everyone would be happy to see that parking lot filled in.
Urb
Active Member
Agreed - the office building is interesting, but the residential towers look pretty banal.
The Familia
Senior Member
East Village started out with a bang with some top notch residential buildings in the first wave (First and Evolution). They slipped a bit with wave two but still came up with some above average buildings (N2, Ink, Verve). This latest phase has been a bit of a bummer with Arris (decent tower, terrible podium) and the stinker known as The Hat. The office building in this new development looks good but the towers are gross.
outoftheice
Active Member
Happy that we are at least seeing the parcel subdivided so that there will an interior courtyard instead of a mega-block podium like we are used to seeing in Calgary. The inclusion of a large fountain in the middle of the courtyard is nice too as I feel Calgary doesn't have nearly enough public fountains. Also happy to see retail space fronting Celebration Square as that's definitely a bit of a dead-zone. Agreed that the architecture is very bland. Anyone know much about the developer? Can we anticipate these to be rentals or condos?
Cowtown
Senior Member
The towers are bland, but I'm happy to see a couple of empty lots filled, whether bland or not. East Village along the river is great, but the large gap of parking lots in the center is holding back East Village from feeling more like a complete neighborhood.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
675 units, an alley that may end up being nice walking on, about as central as you can get. As long as the materials along the bottom two floors are reasonable, it's a big win for a lot that has been vacant since the 1970s. Perhaps it's only flaw is the scale makes it sensitive to market conditions so the risk of a decade- plus drawn out development process is possible - it's already been at least 5 years somehow apparently.
This is minor and not a valid critique except for those with OCD: The one thing I don't get on the floor plans is the weird angles of almost every wall. It's kind of like someone told them they needed more "articulation" or some other esoteric phrase and they shrugged and decided to set almost every angle off by like 5 degrees for some reason.
I am not an architect so this could be wrong. My guess is this is some sort of play to make the building more "visually interesting" or "breaks up a massing" type thing. Fair. But I can't help but thing of all the square furniture that will barely not fit in the angled nooks, and all the extra snow clearing required by hand because a plow couldn't just zip by in a straight line once and be done.
It's a bit like how buildings leave random cut-ins or vacant spaces on the ground floor to satisfy some lot coverage, setback or permeable surface rule, but then 30 years later after decades of operating costs for clearing out garbage that collects periodically in the pointless space, the owners just fence it off defeating the whole decades-long exercise.
Overall I strongly approve of this one. Just another one where it's the details that matter
This is minor and not a valid critique except for those with OCD: The one thing I don't get on the floor plans is the weird angles of almost every wall. It's kind of like someone told them they needed more "articulation" or some other esoteric phrase and they shrugged and decided to set almost every angle off by like 5 degrees for some reason.
I am not an architect so this could be wrong. My guess is this is some sort of play to make the building more "visually interesting" or "breaks up a massing" type thing. Fair. But I can't help but thing of all the square furniture that will barely not fit in the angled nooks, and all the extra snow clearing required by hand because a plow couldn't just zip by in a straight line once and be done.
It's a bit like how buildings leave random cut-ins or vacant spaces on the ground floor to satisfy some lot coverage, setback or permeable surface rule, but then 30 years later after decades of operating costs for clearing out garbage that collects periodically in the pointless space, the owners just fence it off defeating the whole decades-long exercise.
Overall I strongly approve of this one. Just another one where it's the details that matter
UrbanWarrior
Senior Member
Not crazy about the buildings. Love the courtyard though.