1740 replies to this topic

[Nparker]

...there's no getting around the sticky fact that the refined lowrise concept was very fine and also very short. If something large/tall/ugly ends up on this site then the blame falls squarely on the city's broken processes.

I don't think there have been any beneficial refinements since the proposal back in 2012 (which I think was this one)

[Bingo]

The more I think about it, I say don't build anything else on this site and just turn the Junk building into a museum.

We have just spent a bunch of money on a bridge and I think we need to see how the sight lines look as the tourists head north on Wharf.

Can't you just hear the tourists?  "Oh look dear... isn't that a lovely bridge, lets stop at that little old building over there and have a picnic.* "

* looking forward to aastra's take on this.

 

[Nparker]

The more I think about it, I say don't build anything else on this site and just turn the Junk building into a museum...

* looking forward to aastra's take on this.

I won't make you wait for aastra.

WTF????

[aastra]

aastra would say Victorians really need to get over this notion that nothing is better than something. Too many people still regard void creation and void preservation as the noblest objectives of urban redevelopment. Elimination and erasure.

 

Voids and null spaces are not interesting. They never will be interesting. There's nothing to explore. For a change of pace, try restoration and enhancement and elaboration instead. Knit the urban fabric back together. Water it and grow it instead of always trying to pare it back.

[aastra]

If Bingo were to ask Victorians what he should do with his famous mane of long hair, the options would surely be:

 

a) cut it short, or

b) cut it very short, or

c) shave it off completely.

 

And the justification for getting rid of his hair would be to create great views of his bald head. That and Bingo's brother in Vancouver also has a famous mane of long hair, so...

[Bingo]

The thing is we need to put our tourist hat on over our long hair and imagine Wharf street for the very first time. What do you see now and how could it be improved from a tourist standpoint.

Tourists want to be able to touch the bridge and feels it's pulse, it's heartbeat, the meshing and grinding of the clockwork gears and they need the silence of the open spaces and nulls and voids of the grassland and the expanse of the pavement. Putting some awful looking building next to the junk buildings will be in the way and rob the tourist of that experience. My touristy brother in Vancouver supports this point of view completely.

[Daveyboy]

^^

Are we really building the bridge for the tourists?  In my mind, they are pretty far down the list of reasons for the new bridge.  We need to finish that area in such a way that residents are offered an enhanced experience along Wharf, along with a safe and smooth entrance to the downtown core.  It is anything but at this point in time as the old building site is nothing more than an eyesore and a seedy and intimidating area to walk past.

[Nparker]

Are we really building the bridge for the tourists?  In my mind, they are pretty far down the list of reasons for the new bridge...

I am assuming Bingo is attempting to be funny with his "The bridge is for tourists" posts; but you know what happens when you assume.

[Lou_76]

Knock down the old buildings and turn the whole space into a park! 

[DavidSchell]

70 story tower would  be perfect for this spot! ... I am kidding, but at that same time thinking wow what a landmark!

[Nparker]

Knock down the old buildings and turn the whole space into a park! 

Because if there's one thing that section of town really needs is an extension to Reeson Park; the beloved gathering space for people who have completely abandoned all hope of a better life - now with a fancy new path to nowhere!

Edited by Nparker, 16 December 2017 - 08:01 PM.

[dasmo]

Leave the tourist oriented sh*t to Vegas... uhg. This is NOT a spot for a park either. Not the right Feng Shui. It collects a lot of negative energy as a park.... put some great architecture here please. Since you are being forced to keep those rubble walls might as well make it something special.

[Daveyboy]

It's pretty sad that we have reached the point where we have total reluctance to add any parks in the downtown area simply because we know that it will turn into homeless space.  This is a combination of what we have witnessed with our current council, activists and law unenforcement.  The last few years have had a profoundly negative effect on most people's perceptions on public space and parks.

[VicHockeyFan]

^ and there is no sign of that changing. We have started two safe injection sites just a few hundred feet from one another. Do we exiectvtyst to be good for the neighbourhood.

[G-Man]

It's pretty sad that we have reached the point where we have total reluctance to add any parks in the downtown area simply because we know that it will turn into homeless space. This is a combination of what we have witnessed with our current council, activists and law unenforcement. The last few years have had a profoundly negative effect on most people's perceptions on public space and parks.

I don't think that is true. Sometimes there are just too many parks. This area doesn't need another park because there are already lots nearby. Parks are only a benefit when there is enough people to use them. We would need a lot more people living downtown before we need to add another park to the area. I mean there is the whole area by Songhees, Reeson Park all the area around the eternal parking lots. Market Square, Centennial Square probably more if I thought about it.

[dasmo]

A park that is over a hill, hidden from general views, close to the bridge, not central is not the spot for a park. The path yes, but the park space is but a few more meters on and in a much better location. I would say fill that slope in with another crowd sourced hotel.

[Nparker]

Does 7.5 years of back-and-forth with the CoV and no activity on the site seem like an expedient development approval process?

[lanforod]

5 years of that is 'with applicant', so it's hard to fault the city completely.

[Nparker]

5 years of that is 'with applicant', so it's hard to fault the city completely.

If the city had approved the 2012 design (as they should have) it would never have had to go back to the developer for endless and time-consuming revisions.

[G-Man]

Yup the 2012 design was by far the best. I remember that well at the city meeting. Have a project that meets every single one of the Heritage design guidelines and yet sent back mostly on the word of Councillor Madoff. And the heritage buildings that were to be saved get another decade or rot in them.