[thommyjo]

 

[archited]

Other Edmonton developers would do well to connect with a company like NORR Architects (the designer of this and other Rohit projects -- https://norr.com/portfolio/?term=residential) to up their game -- spend the extra dime!

 

[_urbanite]

I will say that I do like what Rohit is doing here, as well as what they did with their Old Strathcona development Muse Off Whyte

One of the better wood-framed rental buildings developers at the moment

 

[MattPT]

Rohit really has discovered the magic!

So this bland stick frame box passes the test but lotus park is something horrific to you? Is your neck sore from the whiplash?

 

[archited]

^ Yes it is -- from the extreme effort to turn away from the horror of it (the lotus has lost its bloom). I could give you a dozen reasons from an aesthetic perspective alone and another dozen from a community functioning standpoint.

 

[johnnyboy]

I could give you a dozen reasons from an aesthetic perspective alone and another dozen from a community functioning standpoint.

Let's hear the two dozen then.

 

[MattPT]

I’ll head over to the lotus park thread now! I look forward to hearing how adding a building in a sea of parking lots, beside a bike lane and two train lines is bad from a community functioning standpoint.

 

[archited]

^ I am not saying that it is "bad" as in the devil made me do it bad; I am just saying that it could have been a whole helluvalot better. Let me reverse the question -- would you like to see this project repeated all over the lots that you have circled? Wouldn't that be a fascinating City? Incidentally you have circled NorQuest land that already has a Real Architectural project planned for those areas. It is one thing to Hate surface parking lots; it is entirely another thing to be in Love with poorly designed and poorly community-functioning Architectural Projects -- do you see the difference?

 

[constance_chlore]

I'm not co-signing all of archited's comments or saying "Lotus/Lilac Park bad!" I'm sure those buildings will turn out decent-looking. But there is quite a difference between them and Stadium Yards. The impressive thing about Stadium Yards is that they took an area that had a fairly bad rap and made it desirable. The buildings are not stunning, but they're better than many people would have expected from the area.

Lotus and Lilac Park will probably do decently well and will surely serve a function for students at MacEwan and Norquest or early-career professionals. But they are going up across from the Parks and the new warehouse park, and I don't think it's unreasonable for people to wish that something more ambitious (not necessarily in terms of height—just design) was being built there. Let's hope the new Westrich project on 106 St is better.

 

[Barnaby]

Rohit is doing a good job of building the demand for future CRUs via a mostly housing first plan. They will control the retail immediately next to the LRT station, and the customer base will exist day one.

The City would be wise to extend a land offering to Rohit for the west side of the tracks, starting with the southern lot.

 

[Gronk!]

 

[buildings]

amazing what decent windows can do for a project.

 

[whattheheck]

^1000000% agree! The city should mandate minimum window sizes for condo/ apartment construction. Use Rohit's Stadium Yards as the base example!

At the same time, I do like the elegance of The Parks and how the windows line up there.

 

[husky]

amazing what decent windows can do for a project.

I've even noticed this on new build single family houses. Some builders are using larger windows and it makes the house stand out so much more.

 

[Offworld]

^1000000% agree! The city should mandate minimum window sizes for condo/ apartment construction. Use Rohit's Stadium Yards as the base example!

Isn't the building code going the other way? Was that a topic some time ago?