14 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

The Trendwest eyesore on the harbour (to the west of the Coast hotel on the harbour) has been painted a dark beige. The original colour scheme had cream coloured walls and light grey details.

Even though it's a new building, it's remeniscent of a 1970's hotel, new paint scheme or not.

[Koru]

The Trendwest eyesore on the harbour (to the west of the Coast hotel on the harbour) has been painted a dark beige. The original colour scheme had cream coloured walls and light grey details.

Even though it's a new building, it's remeniscent of a 1970's hotel, new paint scheme or not.

WHAT?! no way! Come on Mike I thought it was an architectual GEM in the sea of brick... - It truly is an awful building, the empty lot that sat there was more attractive. What I don't understand is how the community Association in James Bay allowed that to go through...but had such fierce opposition to the old proposal for the parking lot across from Orchard House or Crystalview?!?!

[Mike K.]

Councillors who oppose virtually all other projects rooted for Trendwest.

[aastra]

What's not to like? It's not very tall and it has a big split down the middle to let sunlight and fresh air through.

Sounds great.

[concorde]

It was built by Bruno Wall (of Vancouver's Wall Centre fame) and the same architect (Busby) that designed Wall Centre, which won many award's. I can't understand how such a great team designed such an ugly building.

btw, it was completed in January 2003, not 2001 as you note in the heading.

[Rob Randall]

The JBNEA were more concerned that there would be no job-creating light industrial uses on the Trendwest site like at Fisherman's Wharf and Shoal Point.

The increased density was a trade-off for public waterfront access.

[Barra]

WHAT?! no way! Come on Mike I thought it was an architectual GEM in the sea of brick... - It truly is an awful building, the empty lot that sat there was more attractive. What I don't understand is how the community Association in James Bay allowed that to go through...but had such fierce opposition to the old proposal for the parking lot across from Orchard House or Crystalview?!?!

Everyone in James Bay hates the Trendwest building. The outside lighting was originally so bright that John Boehme, who lives across the street, mounted a huge halogen strobe light and pointed it at the building. I contacted the architect and the city about this travesty (I was altering my driving and walking routes through the 'hood in order to avoid seeing it) and was told that the Building Code requires a light outside every entrance - since all the living units open to outside walkways rather than interior hallways. In response to myriad complaints, the developer installed a different light fixture, which mitigated the problem somewhat.

So - how did this happen? Some time prior to the developer taking on the property, a proposal was put forward that would have two towers with a substantial opening between them, allowing for harbour views. This was a requirement by the Planning Department. The public hearing took place during the summer, when many residents were away, and we were all caught by surprise by this. I think that initially the middle building was supposed to have a low profile, still allowing views, but what we have now is an atrocity!

Fraser McColl (well known and responsible local developer) takes grade one classes on a field trip through the city to teach them about urban design. He takes them to this site so that they can identify for themselves what is wrong with it.............

[Rob Randall]

^I heard McColl does that! I'm sure he takes the kids over to The Reef for the flip side!

^John Boehme is a local artist who does very interesting stuff.

[Caramia]

That was a great piece of history there Barra. I think the grade one field trips sound awesome too! Good for Fraser McColl!

[G-Man]

Everyone in James Bay hates the Trendwest building. The outside lighting was originally so bright that John Boehme, who lives across the street, mounted a huge halogen strobe light and pointed it at the building. I contacted the architect and the city about this travesty (I was altering my driving and walking routes through the 'hood in order to avoid seeing it) and was told that the Building Code requires a light outside every entrance - since all the living units open to outside walkways rather than interior hallways. In response to myriad complaints, the developer installed a different light fixture, which mitigated the problem somewhat.

So - how did this happen? Some time prior to the developer taking on the property, a proposal was put forward that would have two towers with a substantial opening between them, allowing for harbour views. This was a requirement by the Planning Department. The public hearing took place during the summer, when many residents were away, and we were all caught by surprise by this. I think that initially the middle building was supposed to have a low profile, still allowing views, but what we have now is an atrocity!

Fraser McColl (well known and responsible local developer) takes grade one classes on a field trip through the city to teach them about urban design. He takes them to this site so that they can identify for themselves what is wrong with it.............

The height and form of the building is not what makes the building ugly. It is the cheap finishing and exterior design.

[concorde]

I think if you replaced the hardiplank with brick it wouldn't look that bad at all. Mind you I am not crazy about the exterior walkways either.

The units themselves are nice. Most are 2 bedroom, 2 baths with a full kitchen, fire place, washer/dryer. Not bad for a hotel.

[aastra]

The height and form of the building is not what makes the building ugly. It is the cheap finishing and exterior design.

It's cheap, it's bland, it's got those Songhees-style walkways which should not be permitted anywhere in Victoria...

Heck, I'd say it's even too short.

The building is simply not worthy of its location.

[Barra]

It's cheap, it's bland, it's got those Songhees-style walkways which should not be permitted anywhere in Victoria...

Heck, I'd say it's even too short.

The building is simply not worthy of its location.

I agree with all of you. The ironic part is that the people who stay there get to enjoy fantastic views of our city - but don't have to look at the building themselves, because they are inside of it!

From my discussions with city planners, they are somewhat embarrassed that this got past them.

[Koru]

I tend to agree with concorde, removal of the hardi-plank and a brick facade would be a LOT better for a building that really is an eyesore. It is unforunate circumstance with the outdoor walkways, but something we shall have to live with. The whole site is really unfortunate, it was the last piece of the south shore of the harbour available for development, it should have been a show piece of architectual brilliance and west coast life, not a 60/70's era hotel that I prefer to turn my head away from when I drive/walk by!!

[Mike K.]

btw, it was completed in January 2003, not 2001 as you note in the heading.
Edit/Delete Message Reply With Quote Multi-Quote This Message Quick reply to this message

Thanks!