If You Could Build ONE Highrise Downtown....

bigcitydude · #1 Posted **Nov 15, 2009, 5:57 AM**

....what would it look like (feel free to show a photo to give a rough idea, office or condo, doesn't matter), and how high would you go? (height restrictions still in place?)

oiler-dude · #2 Posted **Nov 15, 2009, 6:42 PM**

For me, it would be a smaller scale of something like the Shanghai World Financial Center.

Landing Page: http://vincentloy.wordpress.com/2008...-in-year-2008/

Xelebes · #3 Posted **Nov 15, 2009, 8:02 PM**

Help us out a bit, where would you put it?

bigcitydude · #4 Posted **Nov 15, 2009, 10:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xelebes

Help us out a bit, where would you put it?

mmmmm.... i guess i would put one around 101st. and 105th ave., and try to have it around 40+ stories. it might compliment a new arena and the new Epcor building.

bigcitydude · #5 Posted **Nov 15, 2009, 10:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by oiler-dude

For me, it would be a smaller scale of something like the Shanghai World Financial Center.

Landing Page: http://vincentloy.wordpress.com/2008...-in-year-2008/

wowee....THAT would look fantastic, IMO!!

oiler-dude · #6 Posted **Nov 15, 2009, 10:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xelebes

Help us out a bit, where would you put it?

To be honest, any vacant lot downtown.

Staples site, Greyhound as part of arena development, Ironwood site, etc. I just want more of this kind of stuff in Edmonton.

bigcitydude · #7 Posted **Nov 16, 2009, 12:21 AM**

and as bad as some here dislike the look of the Icons, it sure is nice to see a couple more tall highrises complimenting our downtown, although if you look at them from Kingsway Mall, they don't look so impressive. but they do fill in a blank spot in the skyline.

feepa · #8 Posted **Nov 16, 2009, 1:00 AM**

^ typical Edmontonian, excusing mediocrity because it fills a void/need. A void that could be filled so much better. I swear, if some had their way, buildings here would only be built out of utilitarian fashion.

bigcitydude · #9 Posted **Nov 16, 2009, 2:17 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by feepa

^ typical Edmontonian, excusing mediocrity because it fills a void/need. A void that could be filled so much better. I swear, if some had their way, buildings here would only be built out of utilitarian fashion.

LOL---there are certain vantage points that are better than others when it comes to Edmonton's skyline. the view from NAIT isn't as good as the view coming into the city from the east for example. i'm sure we are all more enriched having read your opinions. let's see what the Icons look like when they are done before we judge shall we?

mick · #10 Posted **Nov 16, 2009, 2:57 AM**

You'll note Icon 1 is finished, and given the lack of design attention paid to three sides of the building, and the lack of coherent integration, I think it is due critism. For such a prominent location, it's disapointing. Ask whether such a design would be accepted on a similarly prominent lot in Tor, Van, Cal, or Mont; I doubt it.

bigcitydude · #11 Posted **Nov 16, 2009, 3:22 AM**

i'm curious mick, show me a picture of what YOU think they should have looked like.

Kevin_foster · #12 Posted **Nov 16, 2009, 4:21 AM**

^ I'll put words in his mouth! Here's a start!

(source: http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com)

And, and cold has pointed out ( I think it was him), equally as awesome for the BP lands

If you brought the first tower closer to the street, and got rid of the plaza, this woulda worked on 104th!

Xelebes · #13 Posted **Nov 16, 2009, 4:32 AM**

Source of image, Kevin?

bigcitydude · #14 Posted **Nov 16, 2009, 4:58 AM**

i don't dislike those Kevin, but more square buildings? i like the fact that the Icons aren't square!

ue · #15 Posted **Nov 16, 2009, 5:12 AM**

^I think the materials, patterns, and colors make more a difference than the basic shape. As noted in this thread, square buildings can look nice!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by feepa

^ typical Edmontonian, excusing mediocrity because it fills a void/need. A void that could be filled so much better. I swear, if some had their way, buildings here would only be built out of utilitarian fashion.

Fantastically said! It goes right down to the basic idea that it could have been so much better. I find it sad that 104 st is supposed to be a coming around little urban strip in our downtown that is trendy/happening...then we get those things accenting or perhaps anchoring it...would not happen in such a place in other cities similar in size or slightly larger than Edmonton.

240glt · #16 Posted **Nov 16, 2009, 5:18 AM**

If I could will one tower to be built downtown, it would be the 40 story that should have been built on top of the new BMO building. Same glass & stone as the podium. I think that would have been impressive.

Kevin_foster · #17 Posted **Nov 16, 2009, 3:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xelebes

Source of image, Kevin?

Oopsies. Fixed

mick · #18 Posted **Nov 16, 2009, 3:48 PM**

I'll post some examples tonight, but Id take Kevin's example everyday.

Coldrsx · #19 Posted **Nov 16, 2009, 5:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin_foster

^ I'll put words in his mouth! Here's a start!

(source: http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com)

And, and cold has pointed out ( I think it was him), equally as awesome for the BP lands

If you brought the first tower closer to the street, and got rid of the plaza, this woulda worked on 104th!

yup... that was me and this would be very much 'if i could'... but if i was only limited to one building, this would be what i would build on the commonwealth lands.

(http://theblackcommenter.files.wordp...ysler-bldg.jpg)

noodlenoodle · #20 Posted **Nov 16, 2009, 5:07 PM**

Pffft. Where's the curtain wall Cold? Pshaw.