The Hat Elbow River | 177.99m | 56s | Cidex Group | NORR

So they've redesigned the river side of the podium... but not nearly enough to make it acceptable, I'm afraid. At least they have included landscaping a promenade between the two sides of Macleod Trail. That'll breathe life into a currently... unbreathable area.

hat-elbow-rover-gallery-6-1920x1080.jpg

hat-elbow-rover-gallery-9-1920x1080.jpg

hat-elbow-rover-gallery-1-1920x1080.jpg
hat-elbow-rover-gallery-5-1920x1080.jpg




I'd actually like the towers if the podium wasn't so oppressive/heinous. Ugh.
 
Ubran Outdoorsman said:
What's the deal with the above grade parking garage? Too expensive to go underground next to the river? I get the sense that the parking garage is what really drives the monolithic podium design.
Click to expand...
It's all about cost. Digging a deep parkade there will be very expensive beside the river (and just expensive in general) and it makes sense to put it above grade in many cases. Plus, the deeper you go, the more water has to be removed from the parkade for the life of the building.
 
OMG the grey on the podium is similar to the finishing on the West Village podium. Please, not again! If they replace it with grey brick, I'd be more accepting of the project.
 
I dont think the level of disgust would be there if Cidex buildings were in the middle of Beltine, using up parking lots and evening out density in some needed areas. But all of their buildings are in paramount areas and every side of downtown. There is no escaping, we are being trapped in by Cidex.
 
I still can't believe the massing on this one made it through. 3 parallel towers a few metres apart stretching 40-storeys into the air (on top of a 10-storey solid block long parking podium) angle. Two blocks to the north will be in permanent shade for the the next 100 years thanks to these towers, with January shadows stretching to Downtown.

It's a good example of the weirdness of our planning process and rules. City Council has debated 1m height variance on a 4 storey building in a neighbourhood of 3 storey buildings for hours because of perceived shadowing. In the Beltline with unlimited heights we just throw the book away and assume taller = good. We usually miss on the other side (not allowing enough density), this would be the opposite case (too much density without design).

For a fun comparison, here's a snip from the Rivers District Master Plan. Funny they didn't apply the same angular approach to density in the north-south or these towers would be half as tall. Planning logic only works west to east, not north to south apparently.
1609884286194.png
 
CBBarnett said:
It's a good example of the weirdness of our planning process and rules. City Council has debated 1m height variance on a 4 storey building in a neighbourhood of 3 storey buildings for hours because of perceived shadowing. In the Beltline with unlimited heights we just throw the book away and assume taller = good. We usually miss on the other side (not allowing enough density), this would be the opposite case (too much density without design).
Click to expand...

I believe it is more than a weirdness but a real lack of proper guidelines. I find it very frustrating to what the city planning commission loses their minds over and what they turn a blind eye to.
A great example of this was "The Royal" which had to go back to the drawing board numerous times over a hand full of parking spots. I don't think the time and money the city tied up was worth the hill to die on.

Disraeli said:
Does Cidex have unlimited money or something? They are flooding the rental market with dog shit designs
Click to expand...

Cidex does have very deep pockets with developments in Vancouver and pockets of the US, all of which have better than average markets right now. I guess they can leverage these projects with the capital gained from the other markets, though I can't see this one starting anytime soon (or at least I hope not).
 
God I hate above grade parking in towers! It’s one thing to have above grade parking if it’s not geotechnical possibly (or prohibitively expensive) to burry, or because a building is next to a highway or freight rail corridor and the lower levels can’t be used for units due to noise, but I doubt this is the case here. Given this developer’s M.O., this is the developer maximizing profits while gifting the City another podium with massing that can only be described as grotesque!
 
adamyyc said:
God I hate above grade parking in towers! It’s one thing to have above grade parking if it’s not geotechnical possibly (or prohibitively expensive) to burry, or because a building is next to a highway or freight rail corridor and the lower levels can’t be used for units due to noise, but I doubt this is the case here. Given this developer’s M.O., this is the developer maximizing profits while gifting the City another podium with massing that can only be described as grotesque!
Click to expand...

You would hate Atlanta 😆

atlantaparking4.PNG
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top