News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 10K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 42K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 6K     0 

I walked by the project today. Basement level looks like it's exclusively for mechanical, storage, etc.

ZERO underground parking here, in my opinion.
 
archited said:
I suspect (and time will tell) that it will lead to a significant amount of tenant turnover as individual fortunes change and they progress in a positive direction. Operational maintenance of properties will then run sky-high if that turns out to be true.
Click to expand...
Two LRT stops on different lines, and countless major bus routes will exist with a 5 minute walk of the front door. Tenant turnover is already quite high in rentals (around 30%).

You and I see mostly eye to eye regarding the preference for concrete construction, but I can see why wood framed construction is the choice of you're going with no u/g parking. I really think this building will work out.

I hope Autograph provides a more upscale version of this near Alex Decoteau Stop. I do agree that atleast limited parking is needed once a certain price point is reached.

I'll also mention that the footings are far more substantial in person than the pictures indicate.
 
^ Autograph is noted for engaging high-end architectural offices whereas others not so much. I have nothing against mid-rises if they are done with quality and strong design aesthetics in mind. We'll see how this works out with the Lily pads and the lotus ponds -- I am not hopeful!
 
Barnaby said:
Two LRT stops on different lines, and countless major bus routes will exist with a 5 minute walk of the front door. Tenant turnover is already quite high in rentals (around 30%).
Click to expand...
I've seen brand new concrete high-rise buildings in another market with over 100% annual turnover, because of foreign short-term tenants that were only in town for ESL purposes.

Turnovers can be costly especially in older buildings, but when you have foreigners breaking 12-month leases in a new build you can build up quite a reserve from the deposits surrendered. 😳
 
Last edited:
^ yes those are in cities like New York and London and to a lesser extent Toronto and Vancouver in Canada. There is no reason to see them in Edmonton. I don't think that you can legally keep "deposits" when a lease is broken, maybe a one month rental; that fund however creates a logistical nightmare for a developer adding "handyman" costs, rental promotions, and periods of no unit income to the equation (especially if we are talking about a substandard building to begin with,
 
Barnaby said:
Two LRT stops on different lines, and countless major bus routes will exist with a 5 minute walk of the front door. Tenant turnover is already quite high in rentals (around 30%).

You and I see mostly eye to eye regarding the preference for concrete construction, but I can see why wood framed construction is the choice of you're going with no u/g parking. I really think this building will work out.

I hope Autograph provides a more upscale version of this near Alex Decoteau Stop. I do agree that atleast limited parking is needed once a certain price point is reached.

I'll also mention that the footings are far more substantial in person than the pictures indicate.
Click to expand...
Of course there will be turnover, but the location is good, so if the price is right and the building well managed, enough people will stay particularly those that are comfortable without a car focused lifestyle which is possible here.
 
IMG_20250425_163908985_HDR.jpg
IMG_20250425_163833758_HDR.jpg
 
Someone has to take the plunge. If we want a more pedestrian focused downtown and core, we're going to need proof that parking-free developments are possible and that a car-free or car-lite lifestyle is attractive.

Wishing the best of luck with Westrich on this one. I think it'll do well with students and new immigrants and if the price point is lower because of no on-site parking then that'll be a plus for some.
 
^ A couple of points. Yes, it would be a nice experience as a pedestrian realm but not so much if the streets become lined with parked cars that normally would have gone to unseen underground parkades -- especially on a potential ceremonial route like Capital Boulevard... also if the construction savings were actually reflected in reduced rental pricing of units which is yet to be seen (if the savings land in the developer's pockets then not so much). The design could have been a lot more imaginative -- to me this looks like discount architecture. And a lot more thought could have gone into specific design solutions for retail and hospitality -- this was a "missed opportunity" for creating village life along Capital Blvd. -- especially considering the vitality wanted for extended campus life -- if it doesn't get built now, then when? If this were compared to a game of darts, then Westrich didn't even hit the board let alone come near the bulls-eye.
 
archited said:
^ A couple of points. Yes, it would be a nice experience as a pedestrian realm but not so much if the streets become lined with parked cars that normally would have gone to unseen underground parkades -- especially on a potential ceremonial route like Capital Boulevard... also if the construction savings were actually reflected in reduced rental pricing of units which is yet to be seen (if the savings land in the developer's pockets then not so much). The design could have been a lot more imaginative -- to me this looks like discount architecture. And a lot more thought could have gone into specific design solutions for retail and hospitality -- this was a "missed opportunity" for creating village life along Capital Blvd. -- especially considering the vitality wanted for extended campus life -- if it doesn't get built now, then when? If this were compared to a game of darts, then Westrich didn't even hit the board let alone come near the bulls-eye.
Click to expand...
During the day (9PM M-S, 5PM Sun) that stretch is max 2-hour parking, and paid, so I don't imagine it will be any more packed than it is now. Overnight it may be more full, but the parking limitations during a lot of the day will definitely hamper a resident's ability to use it as their main parking space if they have a car. Unless they want to move their vehicle twice after they get home at 5PM every single day, and pay Avg $96/mo in EPark for that "privilege." Plus, there's only 18 stalls available in the entire block of Jasper Ave - 102 Ave along Capital Blvd (that includes both sides of the street)
 
^ I hear you... but if that were the hurdle and I had a car I would simply pick another street to park on and the same problem would then persist. Of course this is all subjective because I would exercise a ton of other options before ever considering living in that complex. Thinking back to my UofA days when I lived in a two-storey walkup on 119th Street a couple of blocks north of Jasper (for a short miserable while) I absolutely hated to go "home" except to sleep. I spent most of my time at SUB in the album listening area, or playing gnip-gnop, or hanging out at the Rutherford Library, or enjoying whatever was going on at "Room at the Top" or going to the club in the basement of Campus Tower (112th Street and 87th Avenue) -- anything other!
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top