Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 301 to 393 of 393

Thread: Bonnie Doon Shopping Centre | Discussion

  1. #301
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Strathearn, Edmonton
    Posts
    4,324

    Default

    It would be a great addition and use of that land imo. Hopefully it doesn't go full Strathearn.

  2. #302
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Strathcona - Mill Creek
    Posts
    5,452

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by S3RI3S View Post
    Earth mound. lol.
    You laugh, but a little mound like that will become a small sliding hill in the winter for small kids.

    Man, this proposal looks excellent.
    They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

  3. #303

    Default

    A five minute ride on the LRT, when it goes through, will take them to the ski hill with a much better view and steeper decline.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  4. #304

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gord Lacey View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by S3RI3S View Post
    Earth mound. lol.
    You laugh, but a little mound like that will become a small sliding hill in the winter for small kids.

    Man, this proposal looks excellent.
    Its not the hill i find hilarious. Its the fact they have to highlight it. Whats next ? KENTUCKY blue grass!

  5. #305
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Strathcona - Mill Creek
    Posts
    5,452

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    A five minute ride on the LRT, when it goes through, will take them to the ski hill with a much better view and steeper decline.
    The little kids who would go sliding down a hill this size would be to small for Connors hill. Little kids (2-5) don't need much to be entertained.
    They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

  6. #306

    Default

    #22, Dancing Shows???

    Really, how many times will that happen? They have more area to do that right now but I guess snow puts a damper on that.
    It is a transit zone, don't expect people to have flash mobs while they wait for the LRT.



    Overall I like the plan but will it become a Century Park, full of ambition but a tough sell to actually find enough demand for commercial, office and residential space. We have so many competing projects like Blatchford, Old Fort Road, Northlands site, Century Park, Strathern, Muttart lands, the old Muttart townhouses just north of the BDTC, the Quarters, West Block Glenora, the downtown core, and all the residential developments in the suburbs. All during a depressed economy.

    Will Edmonton's massive bet on Transit Oriented Development pay off?
    https://edmontonjournal.com/opinion/...opment-pay-off
    2of7) It’s too easy to get around the city by car and we have relatively cheap downtown parking. Unlike jammed Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary, where TOD has taken off, it’s more convenient to drive here.

    “We haven’t had a lot of areas where it is quicker to get on transit than it is to get in my car and drive,” says developer George Cantalini of Beaverbrook, who is building the new West Block Glenora TOD.
    City's transit-oriented development dreams are mere fantasy
    https://edmontonsun.com/opinion/colu...e-mere-fantasy
    Along the new southeast Valley Line (which the west end line will be a continuation of), the city was certain there would be plenty of high-density TOD (transit-oriented development) at Bonnie Doon, Holyrood, Strathearn and the Quarters.

    But the Quarters is empty. The developers of Strathearn Heights claim they need at least $13 million from the city to proceed with streetscaping. And in November, council sent Holyrood Gardens back to administration for reconsideration because its towers are too high for a residential neighbourhood.

    Yet let’s say all of those get going, their construction would limit demand for TOD out to the west (even if interest for high-density living in the west end could be generated in the first place).
    Are they going to ask for tax breaks or a CRL?

    What is the prospect of a full completion of the project? 2025? 2040? 2060?
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 12-10-2018 at 07:48 AM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  7. #307
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,864

    Default

    The black numbers in the buildings - are those the story counts? If so, wow.
    8 buildings 30 stories or higher.
    16 building in total 25 stories or higher.

  8. #308

    Default

    It's relatively the south-east central core of the city, so I can't help but think that we have a 2 for 1 affect here; not only will this revive Bonny Doon district, but it is so close to downtown that it should affect it as well. This is one step closer to getting the mass to use the convention area and build up from there as well. I hope it works out.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  9. #309
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    141

    Default

    If this + Holyrood Gardens + Starthern Heights all get built, I think I'm going to have to pray for some serious forgiveness for being so skeptical of the Valley Line's design.
    Last edited by Aaron_Lloyd; 12-10-2018 at 05:42 PM.

  10. #310

    Default

    Hopefully the city addresses major concerns over public/private space and interaction / activation, as well as appropriately integrating the new plan and buildings, storefronts with the public street and LRT. Zoning will have to tie that. Pretty pictures could turn the street and edges of this project cold, or internalize all activity, activity on private streets and sidewalks instead of the public streets. Lots of urban design considerations / concerns.
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  11. #311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron_Lloyd View Post
    If this + Holyrood Gardens + Starthern Heights all get built, I think I'm going to have to pray for some serious forgiveness for being so skeptical of the Valley Line's design.
    We have a lot of half built projects that are not completed such as Old Fort Road and Century Park. Lots of promises but not the synergy we need. The only major project that really came together was Railtown. I like the Molson lands as they come along.

    I hope that the Strathern and Bonnie Doon projects don't get half built. Would be a real shame.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  12. #312

    Default

    We're talking over a duration here. Don't kid yourself that this is a 5 year project. In 30 years time is when you'll notice the gradual change. As long as there is a solid foundation to work with that leave room for flexible modification down the line, we are in good position.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  13. #313
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    31,493
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  14. #314
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    47,264

    Default

    A bit much no?
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  15. #315
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    31,493

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    A bit much no?
    NO
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  16. #316
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,048

    Default

    That looks interesting but I'm definitely not going to hold my breath to see this happen. That type of development is easily a 20 year timeline at least and we all know how much things can change in that kind of time frame.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  17. #317
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Oliver
    Posts
    319

    Default

    Seems similar to Century Park in scope. However this seems like a much more desirable location, especially with proximity to downtown and the UofA. I'd agree with Edmcowboy11 and assume something crazy like a 50 year time span for so many towers though.

  18. #318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    A bit much no?
    I agree with you IanO. The build form is too drastic, especially on the south end were across the street are single storey homes. Where is the transitional heights and setbacks usually necessary on a DC2.
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 13-10-2018 at 01:19 PM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  19. #319

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    A bit much no?
    I agree with you IanO. The build form is too drastic, especially on the south end were across the street are single storey homes. Where is the transitional heights and setbacks usually necessary on a DC2.
    That's not what he means. He means that towers of that size belong downtown and only downtown. Can't have any competition from the boonies, don't ya know?

  20. #320

    Default

    Don't be so harsh. You are putting words in his mouth rather than asking.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  21. #321

    Default

    The words have come out of his mouth often enough.

    "As goes downtown, so goes the rest of the city" - IanO. Translation "Concentrate on downtown and you don't need to worry about the rest of the city"
    Last edited by kkozoriz; 13-10-2018 at 01:34 PM.

  22. #322
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    47,264

    Default

    I am 100% supportive of this redevelopment and intensification for central Edmonton needs more density and population, but looking at it vis a vis other similar projects this seems heavy.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  23. #323

    Default

    Drop the two towers on the south end and reduce the massing on the NW corner and I would support it.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  24. #324

    Default

    The south end is perfectly suited for towers, being on the busy corner and fronting on Whyte.

  25. #325

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    I am 100% supportive of this redevelopment and intensification for central Edmonton needs more density and population, but looking at it vis a vis other similar projects this seems heavy.
    IanO - English translation "I'm afraid that it will provide an alternative for people that might have considered moving downtown"

  26. #326
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    47,264

    Default

    Give it a rest.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  27. #327

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    The south end is perfectly suited for towers, being on the busy corner and fronting on Whyte.
    Look across the street. Single family homes. If the developers bought those homes and built some transitional medium density housing, then fine.

    But the water it is proposed with little setbacks and tall towers it is not proportionate to the neighbourhood, violates zoning guidelines and you know it.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  28. #328
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    31,493

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    I am 100% supportive of this redevelopment and intensification for central Edmonton needs more density and population, but looking at it vis a vis other similar projects this seems heavy.
    For years we have bemoaned the lack of TOD development in Edmonton. Now that there are plans for one, you think it's too heavy?
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  29. #329

    Default

    Across the street. Across a busy street. And the people living there have dealt with a mall on this location, along with all the traffic that comes with it for 50 years. And the LRT is coming.

    At some point, those houses will disappear and be replaced by multi story buildings. But let's cut the legs out from a major redevelopment just because of a handful of houses.

  30. #330
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    47,264

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    I am 100% supportive of this redevelopment and intensification for central Edmonton needs more density and population, but looking at it vis a vis other similar projects this seems heavy.
    For years we have bemoaned the lack of TOD development in Edmonton. Now that there are plans for one, you think it's too heavy?
    I am a TOD supporter, but that is a ton of density/tower #s relative to its initial planning/design and in my opinion a few too many.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  31. #331

    Default

    The mall currently is set back about 200 feet ofrom the east and south sides and a single storey. Give you head a shake. It is not at all the same.

    They are asking as much as possible but that means they don't get everything they want to propose.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  32. #332

    Default

    OK, right. Let's just build on the mall footprint then and leave the aces of parking. And to make IanO happy, we'll reduce the size of the towers while we're at it.

    There's that's much better.

    This project is on a major thoroughfare, on an LRT line and at a busy intersection. What better place for some density?

  33. #333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Give it a rest.

    Seems that you’ve achieved unhealthy fixation status in the minds of some fans.

  34. #334

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    OK, right. Let's just build on the mall footprint then and leave the aces of parking. And to make IanO happy, we'll reduce the size of the towers while we're at it.

    There's that's much better.

    This project is on a major thoroughfare, on an LRT line and at a busy intersection. What better place for some density?
    That's not what I said at all. Reread my posts.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  35. #335
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton Downtown Core
    Posts
    4,888

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron_Lloyd View Post
    If this + Holyrood Gardens + Starthern Heights all get built, I think I'm going to have to pray for some serious forgiveness for being so skeptical of the Valley Line's design.
    We have a lot of half built projects that are not completed such as Old Fort Road and Century Park. Lots of promises but not the synergy we need. The only major project that really came together was Railtown. I like the Molson lands as they come along.

    I hope that the Strathern and Bonnie Doon projects don't get half built. Would be a real shame.
    This project is being developed by Morguard .... not a small Alberta company.

  36. #336

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    OK, right. Let's just build on the mall footprint then and leave the aces of parking. And to make IanO happy, we'll reduce the size of the towers while we're at it.

    There's that's much better.

    This project is on a major thoroughfare, on an LRT line and at a busy intersection. What better place for some density?
    That's not what I said at all. Reread my posts.
    I know what you said. You're the one that siad the people are used to having the buildings 200 feet from the road. Would 100 be better? 50? A foot and a half?

    The intersection is going to change if nor no other reason that the LRT will be right there. Build this as shown and let the people sell their houses for a big markup when the demand comes.

  37. #337

    Default

    Not only I part out of context. I already said that I had no problem with the mall nearer the street but I had issues with the two Towers right on Whyte Ave.
    Drop the two towers on the south end and reduce the massing on the NW corner and I would support it.
    You then went ape **** and said that people across the street were used to the mall there for 50 years and basically stated that it was not a significant change. Well everyone can see the huge change. All I suggest is appropriate zoning guidelines be followed that require a progressive built form, not RF1 homes across the street from 30 story apartments only 100 feet away or less.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  38. #338

    Default

    From that render, it is overwhelming its neighbors. If the strategy is a mini downtown then it works; but, if it is an extension to the neighborhood, I would say reduce the towers by 1/3 for a better balance. The current form is like a carved rectangle block, so there is quite a bit of sun blockage for quite a big area. Even if this was a go, it won't be feasible for, minimum, 30 years. This whole form resemble a university institition/ downtown not a neigborhood
    Last edited by ctzn-Ed; 13-10-2018 at 06:41 PM.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  39. #339

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Not only I part out of context. I already said that I had no problem with the mall nearer the street but I had issues with the two Towers right on Whyte Ave.
    Drop the two towers on the south end and reduce the massing on the NW corner and I would support it.
    You then went ape **** and said that people across the street were used to the mall there for 50 years and basically stated that it was not a significant change. Well everyone can see the huge change. All I suggest is appropriate zoning guidelines be followed that require a progressive built form, not RF1 homes across the street from 30 story apartments only 100 feet away or less.
    Yes, it's right across the street. same as happened to the people to the west of WEM across 178 street. I lived in the area when they built phase 3. People complained. People got over it. Those that didn't get over it, moved.

    Whyte ave and 83 street are exactly the place that the towers should go. "Oh dear! Development! Make it stop!" If they can put up with all the traffic on Whyte for decades, they can get used to a couple of towers across the street. If not, there's lots of houses for sale across the city. Heck, they could end up moving into one of the towers. Then they can complain about all the wasted space the houses across the street take up.

  40. #340

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    From that render, it is overwhelming its neighbors. If the strategy is a mini downtown then it works; but, if it is an extension to the neighborhood, I would say reduce the towers by 1/3 for a better balance. The current form is like a carved rectangle block, so there is quite a bit of sun blockage for quite a big area. Even if this was a go, it won't be feasible for, minimum, 30 years. This whole form resemble a university institition/ downtown not a neigborhood
    The sun comes from the south, always. The blockage would primarily be on this development itself except for early in the morning and late in the evening.

  41. #341

    Default

    Thank you for that, but you are wrong. The sun comes from the east where it rise and set to the west in general terms. It points from the south elevation. Where do you suppose the area will be affect most up until 11:00 -12 pm ?
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  42. #342

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Not only I part out of context. I already said that I had no problem with the mall nearer the street but I had issues with the two Towers right on Whyte Ave.
    Drop the two towers on the south end and reduce the massing on the NW corner and I would support it.
    You then went ape **** and said that people across the street were used to the mall there for 50 years and basically stated that it was not a significant change. Well everyone can see the huge change. All I suggest is appropriate zoning guidelines be followed that require a progressive built form, not RF1 homes across the street from 30 story apartments only 100 feet away or less.
    Yes, it's right across the street. same as happened to the people to the west of WEM across 178 street. I lived in the area when they built phase 3. People complained. People got over it. Those that didn't get over it, moved.

    Whyte ave and 83 street are exactly the place that the towers should go. "Oh dear! Development! Make it stop!" If they can put up with all the traffic on Whyte for decades, they can get used to a couple of towers across the street. If not, there's lots of houses for sale across the city. Heck, they could end up moving into one of the towers. Then they can complain about all the wasted space the houses across the street take up.

    Show me where on the entire WEM site, where a 30 storey building sits within 100 feet directly across the road from single family homes. You can't. PERIOD.

    In fact the WEM parking lot is one of the largest in the world and the tallest building is the single hotel. You cannot compare WEM to BD. What I proposed was a reasonable site specific setback and reduction of only about 10 to 15% of the proposal. Quit getting all worked up over a simple suggestion and throwing bad comparisons into your weak arguments.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  43. #343
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,864

    Default

    I live 6 blocks away. Don't have a problem with what's proposed, I think it's great. If this location is not suitable for a TOD of this size, then there is no location in the city that is. Probably 75% of the SFH within a block or two of this development are rentals. If they were to put what's approved for Holyrood Gardens in the rendering above, it probably wouldn't look like 'a bit much'. The towers on teh south and north end could probably get knocked down a few stories, but other than that, let's go!

  44. #344

    Default

    I lived for 12 years just 6 blocks to the south as well in Avonmore. I think it is well overdue. Just getting the proportions right is important.
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 13-10-2018 at 11:46 PM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  45. #345

    Default

    ^^nobleea for the win. It's my most frequent destination, transit oriented or otherwise. Giddy-up I say.

  46. #346

    Default

    BD development has a chance to be good. As soon as the Valley Line was announced you knew the Dooner was primed. Holyrood Gardens is going to be a nightmare of disappointments, failed expectations and what-could-have-beens. Strathearn Heights is likely getting sold and guess who's going for the trifecta of Valley Line TOD's? The BD plans are a glimmer of hope.

  47. #347
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    371

    Default

    The homes across 82 Ave will eventually redevelop into 3-4 story residential and mixed-use just like the stuff immediately west.

  48. #348

    Default

    Or the house could be leveled and a muddy gravel parking lot lingers for years? Just look at Century Park's gravel lot right beside the LRT station. Where are all those towers that were promised to be built with this exemplary TOD/urban village? All it became is a parking lot for people who live in the suburbs and outside of Edmonton

    Cars and mud as far as the eye can see. Hoiw is the tax windfall coming? Tell me this isn't so?

    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  49. #349

    Default

    That would be true if the muddy parking lot at Bonnie Doon were part of the redevelopment parcel. Yet EPRT seems to think that if the towers are built the standard distance from the roadway, as proposed, all the houses across the street will suddenly turn into a muddy field. Best not do anything because things might take time to build a large project.

    BTW, how's that Ultra PRT project in Amritsar, India doing? Got any ridership numbers for the world's first, urban PRT system?

  50. #350

    Default

    Why don't you debate the subject rather than the attempted character assassination?

    Ask yourself, why did Century Park not get built out during a hyper economy?
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  51. #351
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Windermere
    Posts
    2,012

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Or the house could be leveled and a muddy gravel parking lot lingers for years? Just look at Century Park's gravel lot right beside the LRT station. Where are all those towers that were promised to be built with this exemplary TOD/urban village? All it became is a parking lot for people who live in the suburbs and outside of Edmonton

    Cars and mud as far as the eye can see. Hoiw is the tax windfall coming? Tell me this isn't so?

    That parking lot is gone, and there is a tower being built as we speak.

  52. #352

    Default

    Century Park started with huge fanfare but was slow in coming and it will take many years until it is built out and completed. With so many projects on the go, how many condo towers city wide are sustainable and in demand?

    .
    My original point is that I like the project but I have issues with the two 30 storey towers at the south edge and the massing at the NW corner. Otherwise I am fine and glad to get rid of the expansive parking lots.

    One poster sees my general approval of the development with a few issues as some negative response and claims I am throwing out the baby and the entire project out with the bath water. He must work for the developers...
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 14-10-2018 at 01:42 PM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  53. #353

    Default

    Nope, no connection whatsoever with the developer. Just don't see why having the towers in the same position they would be in any other location is such a problem. The people across the street? Sure, they'll lose the wonderful view of the parking lots but it's not like they're going to have shadows cast on them. Maybe we should start with some 5 story towers instead. Then, if the neighbours don't object, we can kick the subsequent ones up by 5 stories until we hear the howls of outrage. Then, just knock 5 storeys off them and not let anything go higher.

    There's plenty of towers that are about the same height and setback and somehow people manage to get used to them. And, as these things go, the land to the south will eventually get redeveloped as well.

  54. #354
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,872

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Ask yourself, why did Century Park not get built out during a hyper economy?
    Huh? The first two phases were built during the tail end of the boom starting in late 2006, but the second phase was finished if memory serves in early 2009 right after the financial crisis. I was told that several dozen purchasers walked away from deposits on the second phase. There was a mini-boom in Alberta leading up to 2014, but nothing like the 00's.

    But primarily the reason the project stalled for 10 years is that there was a falling out between Westbank and Procura with the latter buying the former out. And then Procura spent the better part of a decade plan and spec tendering and re-tendering and re-designing and design-building and design-assisting and then back to plan and spec tendering because George works in mysterious ways. I am not exaggerating when I say that the project was put out for tender/bid at least 6-8 times in those years. It was a running joke in the construction industry. Every now and again I'd get a call from yet another GC from even further away asking for a budget or tender on the project, and I'd have to inform them they were wasting their time. My favorite was when PCL called and said they were going to build it with this ridiculous top-down construction method that George had been demanding to meet with the Mayor about (true story; Iveson's staff told Procura they didn't care what method he used to build and that it has nothing to do with the Mayor). They were shocked that it would be far more costly mechanically, because the vast majority of mechanical in an apartment highrise goes vertically down through the building and collects in the parkade. Not like a commercial building where most mechanical is distributed horizontally on each floor from a central shaft. So therefore there was only downsides for mechanical with that top-down method. It was a silly conversation.

    The lack of further development at Century Park is mostly due to things behind the scenes that few or none of you would be aware of, not the obvious things like design, sales, the economy etc. Not to say that those things weren't also factors, but they're way down the list.
    Last edited by Marcel Petrin; 14-10-2018 at 10:03 PM.

  55. #355

    Default

    Thank you Marcel for a well articulated and knowledgeable answer. Far better that KK's Chicken Little rhetoric.

    We all understand that developers, builders and other players can get into internal fights especially during a downturn economy. It is true that lts of people sold off their units in 2008 because several were speculating on the condo market. I knew someone that bought two units, one for his daughter that ended up taking a job in BC and left town before it was completed and the second was an investment he wanted to flip. Thousands of oil related jobs dried up and people left town which killed the market. If there were a thousand prospective buyers, I think that Westbank, Procura and PCL would have quickly resolved the issues and got back to building. The end result is that for 8 years, things stalled. That is not the public's fault.

    You and I both know that many other TOD's have similar issues and worse. Strathearn has been mired in controversy and opposing camps for more than a decade. Old Fort Road is a COE fiscal nightmare. They promised that the net cost of the entire project (not including the Fort Road widening) was going to be $345,000! That was before the costs rose by more than 1,000% and then they had to build a $6,000,000 wall. Only one project is under construction and that was heavily subsidized by various levels of government that also is a negative on the balance sheet.

    Generally I believe that much less will be built than proposed for the BD site. In my view, this is a bait and switch tactic. Propose the most aggressive TOD in the city along the expensive Millwoods streetcar and get the COE to agree to anything. That is the bait. Once approved, drop the things that the developer never intended to build and play the game.

    Where have we seen this tactic before? Maybe my reference in post #48 in 2009? http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/showt...Proposed/page2, that was originally from IanO's original 2007 thread, http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/showt...fool-a-council


    HOW TO FOOL CITY COUNCIL AND THE PUBLIC: EDMONTON'S EATON CENTRE by Christopher Leo

    excerpt:
    Triple Five's approach to dealings with the city was the time-honoured bait-and-switch tactic. It involved making an irresistible offer to obtain a massive commitment and then using local politicians' commitment to keep them on-side, even as the more attractive features of the original offer were withdrawn, and its price increased. The key decisions concerning the Eaton Centre development were taken during two rounds of negotiations, the first taking place in 1980 and the second in 1985-86.


    Full analysis
    https://christopherleo.com/tag/fool-city-council/

    In the 1980 negotiations, Triple Five Corporation, in partnership with T Eaton Co Ltd of Toronto, announced plans for a massive, $500 m residential and commercial development consisting of an Eaton’s department store, a 31,500-square-metre shopping mall, three office towers of 39 to 40 storeys and two residential towers of 51 and 52 storeys, with 1,236 one- and two-bedroom rental or condominium units.The development, taking in most of two square blocks of prime downtown land, would boast a roof-top restaurant and gardens and the residential part of the development would include a recreation centre with a gymnasium, swimming pool, exercise room, handball and squash courts and a social room. The Eaton’s store was to be the second largest in western Canada, after the downtown Vancouver store.
    For Edmonton City Council, the attractions were virtually irresistible: a massive boost to the economy of the inner city, including both commercial and retail elements, together with a formidable increase in housing to help rally the eroding inner city housing sector. A development agreement was signed on October 8th.

    The bait was in place. Next came the switch. In December, Nader Ghermezian, managing director of Triple Five, appeared at a council meeting to demand a re-opening of the agreement and the addition of a series of concessions. He warned that if the concessions were not forthcoming that day, the entire project would be cancelled. He had a letter from a solicitor for the Triple Five Partner, T. Eaton, which was said to confirm the urgency of the need for concessions, but which only Mayor Cecil J. Purves and two councillors were allowed to see.
    Among the demands were cancellation of a redevelopment levy that the developer was to pay, and of the plans for a roof top restaurant, agreement by the city to fund sidewalks and setbacks for the project and to relieve the developer of the costs of leaseholds covering encroachments upon city property. Estimates of the cost of these concessions ranged from $5 m to $15 m. City council, galvanized by the impending collapse of such a large project, agreed to the concessions.
    Enquiries by journalists later established that the letter from an Eaton’s lawyer had been a formality, designed to protect Eaton’s position in case of a break-down in negotiations, and had not been intended as a sign of Eaton’s dissatisfaction with the terms they had received, terms with which they in fact declared themselves satisfied. But the unkindest cut was yet to come. Nine months later, Eaton backed out of the deal despite the concessions, still denying it had sought them. In other words, the city had granted concessions, which it remained obligated to deliver, even as the rationale for them became moot.
    With Eaton out of the picture, the development ground to a halt, but in time the bait and switch resumed. In 1983, a promised revival of Eaton Centre failed to materialize once an expansion of the West Edmonton Mall had been secured. In 1985, once again the project reappeared. Eaton declared it could proceed if the city offered further concessions and the negotiations resumed. In the course of those negotiations, the project changed substantially, first becoming grander in the “bait” phase of the negotiations and then contracting again in the “switch” phase, as final agreement neared.

    https://christopherleo.com/2007/01/0...-city-council/

    http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/showt...ntasy-Proposed
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  56. #356

    Default

    You bring up Eaton's center with every single large development, just like you bring up 23rd avenue with every single LRT or road construction project. If anything, you're predictable

  57. #357

    Default

    Yes, I bring up every two years or so when it is relevant. My bad. You have a great memory, just like an elephant. You must be proud.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  58. #358
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Strathearn, Edmonton
    Posts
    4,324

    Default

    "Strathearn has been mired in controversy and opposing camps for more than a decade."

    No, that isn't accurate at all. Strathearn, much like Century Park, is sitting in the hands of the property owner waiting on them. It has all the approvals it needs to go ahead provided there isn't a drastic change that requires additional rezoning.

  59. #359

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Yes, I bring up every two years or so when it is relevant. My bad. You have a great memory, just like an elephant. You must be proud.
    Man, my memory must be making stuff up, because its a lot more than every 2 years.

  60. #360

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Yes, I bring up every two years or so when it is relevant. My bad. You have a great memory, just like an elephant. You must be proud.
    Man, my memory must be making stuff up, because its a lot more than every 2 years.
    You are right, a lot more, maybe every 3 years. LOL

    What is your problem anyway? I have been in support of this project. I just have some concern that the massing is a bit much on the NW corner and the scale and setback of the two south 30 storey towers. That is 60 storeys out of 540 storeys in this development, or about 12% less. Where have I been against this project?
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 15-10-2018 at 09:35 AM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  61. #361
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,864

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Generally I believe that much less will be built than proposed for the BD site. In my view, this is a bait and switch tactic. Propose the most aggressive TOD in the city along the expensive Millwoods streetcar and get the COE to agree to anything. That is the bait. Once approved, drop the things that the developer never intended to build and play the game.
    Who cares? Even if 1/5th of what's proposed gets built, that still a massive win. Currently BD is a black hole, economically and in terms of approachability. A well kept, clean, and safe one, but still a black hole. If we only get 4 towers in the 15-20 range and a smattering of office and retail that would still be a thousand times better than what's ever been accomplished TOD-wise in Edmonton.

    Morguard's previous work in other centers has shown to be well designed and finished. I'm sure they'll keep the trend, which is far more important to me than any sledding hills and dancing parks.

    Maybe this will put some pressure on Regency to de-red-stucco-ify their Holyrood development in order to compete.

  62. #362

    Default

    I would like 89% built. Why settle for 20%?
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  63. #363
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,864

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    I would like 89% built. Why settle for 20%?
    Nobody's settling. It's just not a bait and switch.
    Morguard's going to propose something that is economical, that can sell, and that council and the neighbourhood will accept without a massive, prolonged fight. The city would get excited over something 1/4 the size, so they're not more likely to approve something of this scale just because it vindicates their TOD concept. I see no benefit of doing a bait and switch from Morguard's side, so why would they? They don't stand to gain anything.

  64. #364
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,872

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT
    I think that Westbank, Procura and PCL would have quickly resolved the issues and got back to building.


    To be clear, PCL was not involved in the original phases. Procura/Westbank started up their own construction management company to build the first two residential phases. PCL was one of the GC/CM's that were asked to waste their time on various pipe dreams in the intervening period, along with every other GC/CM in Western Canada.

    Quote Originally Posted by DanC
    No, that isn't accurate at all. Strathearn, much like Century Park, is sitting in the hands of the property owner waiting on them. It has all the approvals it needs to go ahead provided there isn't a drastic change that requires additional rezoning.


    Yeah, primarily that's a matter of the owners making the decision to jump in. They're pretty hesitant. And I believe that Nearctic is involved in some capacity as well, and they recently had an executive killed in an accident. That could well be holding this up, as well as a couple others.

    But ultimately PRT's point that somehow all TOD's suffer from the same problems is totally inaccurate. Each TOD has it's own issues as to why it's struggled, unfortunately. There's some commonalities, but the primary reasons are different for each. And none of them, really, are a "bait and switch".

  65. #365

    Default

    I have never said that all TOD's suffer the same fate as Century Park. I was just using it as one example. I also used the Triple Five example as a cautionary example especially when the COE wants TOD's along the LRT routes. Don't kid yourself that developers don't know that they will only get part of what they want in a DC2, so it is better to ask for more, and settle on what you originally intended. We can't believe in pink unicorns and purple elephants. I highly doubt that they can sell 540 floors of development. You have tried selling a used car and ask more than what you intended to get, don't you???

    Let's be clear, I support the proposal with a few caveats to be a better fit into the community and existing zoning. With all the other TOD's and residential DT projects plus the ever expanding suburban landscape, there is a great difficulty in finding demand supporting such a huge development in these tough economic times. But lets be cautious in rubber stamping all that a developer proposes including little mounds and outdoor dance areas for unicorns. I just wish that the COE was a smarter COE. We missed a golden opportunity to restrict all development outside the AHD ring-road and install a 2km wide greenbelt that would have limited Edmonton's sprawl and would have enhanced urban brownfield developments such as BD and made these projects more viable by increasing demand and changing the attitudes of buyers while reducing the huge costs of building infrastructure beyond the AHD.

    I don't see anything bad in what my opinions are and my reasonable goals for a smarter Edmonton.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  66. #366

    Default

    540 floors over ~15 to 20 years. It's not like they're going to build all of these in 3-4 years.

  67. #367

    Default

    Did I give a timeline? No.

    Why are you getting so upset??? You are normally a reasonable debater.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  68. #368

    Default

    I'm not upset. I'm simply pointing out that this is a long, long term project. Saying that they can't sell 540 floors of condos ignores the time that this project will take.

    Also, not all of those 540 floors will be residential. There will also be retail, office, professional, etc.

  69. #369

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    540 floors over ~15 to 20 years. It's not like they're going to build all of these in 3-4 years.
    Realistically, it will be more like 50 yewrs imo.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  70. #370
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,864

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    540 floors over ~15 to 20 years. It's not like they're going to build all of these in 3-4 years.
    Realistically, it will be more like 50 yewrs imo.
    Bonnie doon mall isn't even 50 years old in it's current form I think.
    It will be much less than 50 years. I can see 15 years, maybe a bit longer.

  71. #371

    Default

    15 years would be incredibly optimistic. It will be a couple years before they have designs and approval ready to build anything, and then it would require that this one development build as much as all our downtown/oliver developers have combined for the past 15 years.

    I think we'll see action soon-ish but with 3 years of approvals and then building one tower/midrise per year that's 25 years... and I think that's pretty ambitious.
    There can only be one.

  72. #372
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,057

    Default

    this one looks easy to support from a planning perspective. from an architectural perspective, what is likely - hopefully - only placemaking is harder to support. with the exception of the two 45 degree skewed towers there doesn’t seem to be any ground floor presence or sense of identity or arrival for any of the towers. they just seem plopped on top of the podium elements and rendered with some night time sparkle to look pretty. i’ll be more interested in seeing some real design added to what seems conceptual massing at this stage (not a bad thing as that is the stage this is at).
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  73. #373

    Default

    Exactly. The proof will be in the final design but I have no problems with the massings we've seen.

  74. #374
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,057

    Default

    you do know that this is likely to phased vertically as well as horizontally when it comes to actually executing it?
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  75. #375

    Default

    Of course.

    I'd like to see it start on Whyte, close to the LRT. Next phase would be north along 83rd. Then fill in the rest. It probably won't go ing quite so orderly though.

  76. #376

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    15 years would be incredibly optimistic. It will be a couple years before they have designs and approval ready to build anything, and then it would require that this one development build as much as all our downtown/oliver developers have combined for the past 15 years.

    I think we'll see action soon-ish but with 3 years of approvals and then building one tower/midrise per year that's 25 years... and I think that's pretty ambitious.
    There's the same amount of towers shown here that have been built in Downtown over the last 25 years. I find it incredibly optimistic, given all the other redevelopment plans around the City. Realistically maybe only need about half as many towers.
    www.decl.org

  77. #377

    Default

    To be fair there's not much difference between towers built downtown in the past 25 years vs the past 15. Just the 3 grand Central Manor towers on the far side of 109st, and Legacy, isn't it?
    There can only be one.

  78. #378

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    15 years would be incredibly optimistic. It will be a couple years before they have designs and approval ready to build anything, and then it would require that this one development build as much as all our downtown/oliver developers have combined for the past 15 years.

    I think we'll see action soon-ish but with 3 years of approvals and then building one tower/midrise per year that's 25 years... and I think that's pretty ambitious.
    There's the same amount of towers shown here that have been built in Downtown over the last 25 years. I find it incredibly optimistic, given all the other redevelopment plans around the City. Realistically maybe only need about half as many towers.
    This is the reason why I think 50 years to built out is more realistic
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  79. #379
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,397

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nobleea View Post
    Bonnie doon mall isn't even 50 years old in it's current form I think.
    It will be much less than 50 years. I can see 15 years, maybe a bit longer.
    Back in the early 80s they had carpeted halls. There was a SuperValu (I think) roughly where Safeway was, last major renovation I can remember.
    If you go to Tony Roma's they have some pictures of the mall from when it was an outdoor strip mall in the 50s.

  80. #380
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    4,054

    Default



    The best was Ernie's Snake Pit Lounge in the basement.

    Now Top_Dawg sees the second and third generation of Snake Pit burnouts at Bonnie's.

  81. #381

    Default

    Bonnie Kowloon!
    www.decl.org

  82. #382

    Default

    Mammoth development could add thousands of homes to Bonnie Doon neighbourhood
    A proposed development for Edmonton's Bonnie Doon neighbourhood could bring thousands of new homes and people to the area.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/edmonton-bonnie-doon-mall-development-1.4867841

    Shared from the CBC News App for iPhone
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 18-10-2018 at 10:26 AM.

  83. #383

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    15 years would be incredibly optimistic. It will be a couple years before they have designs and approval ready to build anything, and then it would require that this one development build as much as all our downtown/oliver developers have combined for the past 15 years.

    I think we'll see action soon-ish but with 3 years of approvals and then building one tower/midrise per year that's 25 years... and I think that's pretty ambitious.
    I believe their time line is 30+ years. Safeway has at least that long on their lease.
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 18-10-2018 at 10:38 AM.

  84. #384

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DanC View Post
    "Strathearn has been mired in controversy and opposing camps for more than a decade."

    No, that isn't accurate at all. Strathearn, much like Century Park, is sitting in the hands of the property owner waiting on them. It has all the approvals it needs to go ahead provided there isn't a drastic change that requires additional rezoning.
    Strathearn wants the city to buy private roads, it’s not a fair comparison as the owners of Bonnie Doone are not asking for such a thing to occure.

  85. #385

  86. #386
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,864

    Default

    https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canad...id=mailsignout

    This sentence could be taken two ways:
    "The city is reviewing the rezoning application for the mammoth project, which could take up to 30 years to complete."

    I know the city drags its feet a lot on meetings and reviews and consultations, but 30 years to approve the rezoning application seems a bit long.

  87. #387
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    7,382

    Default

    Hmmm. Maybe a bit but not by much. lol

  88. #388

    Default

    They're not showing one amenity, they're showing every conceivable one that exists. It's very unrealistic. Once the rezoning is complete, 30 year time horizon, none of the amenities they've included will matter in terms of what actually gets built..
    www.decl.org

  89. #389

    Default

    Agreed
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  90. #390
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,057

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    They're not showing one amenity, they're showing every conceivable one that exists. It's very unrealistic. Once the rezoning is complete, 30 year time horizon, none of the amenities they've included will matter in terms of what actually gets built..
    what was unreported here is that the application was made 140 years ago - it just took this long to agree on the relaxations, equivalencies, fees and cash in lieu l:

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45906155

    The Sagrada Familia basilica in Barcelona, one of Spain's most famous tourist sites, has agreed to pay $41m (£31m) to the city authorities after going without a building permit for more than 130 years.

    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  91. #391

    Default

    ^Haha nice.
    www.decl.org

  92. #392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    They're not showing one amenity, they're showing every conceivable one that exists. It's very unrealistic. Once the rezoning is complete, 30 year time horizon, none of the amenities they've included will matter in terms of what actually gets built..
    So much like century park then... i feel im repeating myself, again

  93. #393
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,048

    Default

    Well I would love to see this built out, unfortunately I've see projects like this come and go. If it happens then great but again I wont be holding my breath.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •