Munro | 26m | 7s | Calgary Co-op | NORR

Joborule said:
Agreed. This proposal is leaving a lot on the table for Co-op. This could be so much better, and they would gain more out of it. Short changing themselves with this basic AF design.
Click to expand...
Agreed. It's as if someone told them, 'hey you can leverage your property and make a few extra bucks' I actually understand why co-op would think this way, as they aren't developers. I hope that the city pushes for improvement. Druh is the councilor and she has already been pushing people to be more engaged.
 
The reviews of the Co-op developments are a little too bleak. Yeah they're not blowing minds, but I'm pretty sure that's not what Co-op of all things is setting out to do. I think they're generally being held to an unjustifiably high standard compared to others.
 
Oddball said:
The reviews of the Co-op developments are a little too bleak. Yeah they're not blowing minds, but I'm pretty sure that's not what Co-op of all things is setting out to do. I think they're generally being held to an unjustifiably high standard compared to others.
Click to expand...
I agree totally that Co-op isn't about developing, and that they wouldn't be overly concerned about the design. To be honest, I don't blame Co-op and wouldn't expect them to suddenly become a leader in mixed use development. The fact that as a private business, they are trying to leverage the land for mixed use development is already good on their part good, and a step in the right direction.

Where the role of the city could comes in, is to push for good design fundamentals. The city can't make every development an architectural marvel, but they can do things like push to change the amount of wall facing 16th ave, or push to change the articulation so there are residential suites facing 16th ave. Marquis on 16th managed to do it, and the proposal across the street from Co-op also does it.

From Gravity arch. This is proposed for across the street.
PALECO_FINAL_FOG+BW.jpg
 

Attachments

  • PALECO_FINAL_FOG+BW.jpg
    PALECO_FINAL_FOG+BW.jpg
    955.2 KB · Views: 766
Oddball said:
The reviews of the Co-op developments are a little too bleak. Yeah they're not blowing minds, but I'm pretty sure that's not what Co-op of all things is setting out to do. I think they're generally being held to an unjustifiably high standard compared to others.
Click to expand...

I'm coming over from urbantoronto where this development would be ripped to shreds. There people go out of their way to point out all the deficiencies while here it's all about propping up proposals. I'm not implying one is better than the other. It's just fascinating.
 
maestro said:
I'm coming over from urbantoronto where this development would be ripped to shreds. There people go out of their way to point out all the deficiencies while here it's all about propping up proposals. I'm not implying one is better than the other. It's just fascinating.
Click to expand...

It's an understandable dichotomy. I'm not opposed to being critical either. I just think the Co-op proposals have been particularly run through the wringer.
 
maestro said:
I'm coming over from urbantoronto where this development would be ripped to shreds. There people go out of their way to point out all the deficiencies while here it's all about propping up proposals. I'm not implying one is better than the other. It's just fascinating.
Click to expand...

As an immigrant from UrbanToronto myself, I would only add that this development (which is terrible and inexcusable and deserves all of the criticism it's getting and more) is being developed an a street that is roughly the equivalent of Kennedy Road in Scarborough. So I do understand the "it's better than what's there" attitude. We're grading on a curve. Still no excuse for this development on 16 Ave OR Kennedy Road.

While we're on the topic of Toronto, that city offers plenty of examples of how not to build urban grocery stores (exhibit A, exhibit B, exhibit C) as well as how to properly build urban grocery stores (exhibit D).
 
Exhibit D is also butt ugly. Exhibit B looks fine for its age. The grocer is on the second floor with smaller retail units on the main floor with street entrances. The only criticism is the pointless step up to those street entrances.
 
I like the layout and scale of Exhibit D, just not crazy about the materials. Exhibit D is the most street/pedestrian friendly which is what I would care about most.
 
 
Oddball said:
The reviews of the Co-op developments are a little too bleak. Yeah they're not blowing minds, but I'm pretty sure that's not what Co-op of all things is setting out to do. I think they're generally being held to an unjustifiably high standard compared to others.
Click to expand...

Apparently the open house went well. No complaints from the community so it sounds like this one is going to move forward. Quarry Bay Investments is the co-developer in all these co-op sites.
 
LMFAO! Jesus! This. This is the project that communities in Calgary are chill with. Good lord, that makes me both sad and extremely perplexed.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top