1740 replies to this topic

[Rob Randall]

24.83 m is the average height for you trainspotters.

 

I never liked how the old design had that leg that enclosed the old NJ buildings. And the new design is more contemporary. 

 

The first post in this thread was April 16, 2010, eight years ago.

[jstovell]

Unanimous support at ADP.  Here is the slide show:

 

https://www.dropbox....deShow.pdf?dl=0

 

Next step is Heritage Advisory Panel - May 8th.

[jstovell]

And some details on the Pavillion:

 

https://www.dropbox....RAMS 2.pdf?dl=0

[MarkoJ]

Unanimous support at ADP.  Here is the slide show:

 

https://www.dropbox....deShow.pdf?dl=0

 

Next step is Heritage Advisory Panel - May 8th.

 

Can't believe the number of past iterations listed in one of the slides

 

Some interesting floor plans in there. A lot of the kitchens on the two-bed units are buried really far back in the unit and with a long and narrow dining/living in front not sure if the spectacular views/south exposure will me maximized. The two bedrooms flanking the living room are eating 20' of the 30' of unit frontage.

 

I do like the exterior...hopefully we can see some shovels in the ground sooner than later.

Edited by MarkoJ, 28 April 2018 - 06:12 PM.

[sdwright.vic]

Not feeling the light well in the centre...

[lanforod]

That 3 bedroom unit on the end is pretty sweet (707, J).

 

I can't figure out the unit C ones that look like they have a micro bachelor inside of a full condo?

[Jackerbie]

That 3 bedroom unit on the end is pretty sweet (707, J).

I can't figure out the unit C ones that look like they have a micro bachelor inside of a full condo?

Could be a lock-off suite. I believe that Customs House has a couple units with suites, too.

[zoomer]

I have been extremely critical of previous attempts here, and at first glance this one as well. However after looking through the detailed proposal/rendering I now think this is a pretty darn good development. Light well is necessary because the proposal now takes into views of and around the building even though that has negatively impacted views from within. The waterfront side now is not a solid mass (although I would have preferred some u-shaped cutouts on the top half) - I like the matching height elements that compliment the Northern Junk buildings and the material looks to be of high quality. Nice mix of modern, warehouse and historical elements. I hope the pavilion rooftop is a cafe/restaurant for all, but it’s not the warmest spot in the city.

[Brantastic]

I have been extremely critical of previous attempts here, and at first glance this one as well. However after looking through the detailed proposal/rendering I now think this is a pretty darn good development. Light well is necessary because the proposal now takes into views of and around the building even though that has negatively impacted views from within. The waterfront side now is not a solid mass (although I would have preferred some u-shaped cutouts on the top half) - I like the matching height elements that compliment the Northern Junk buildings and the material looks to be of high quality. Nice mix of modern, warehouse and historical elements. I hope the pavilion rooftop is a cafe/restaurant for all, but it’s not the warmest spot in the city.

 

I agree, and think this is my favourite proposal so far, although I liked the 2012 proposal a lot. I love the pavilion, pedestrian realm, general design and flatiron appearance. I just can't say I like the view of the building from looking north from wharf street. It's quite a massive, wide wall that overwhelms the Northern Junk buildings (ugly buildings anyways IMO, but they look weird together). It's an interesting, layered wall, but still a wall nonetheless. I wish there was a bit more height variation involved, but I'll settle for this one.

[RFS]

If I push the fantastic slim tower proposal out of my memory this one isn't bad. Could be worse

[Brantastic]

If I push the fantastic slim tower proposal out of my memory this one isn't bad. Could be worse

The tower would have been cool, especially considering the Janion and proposed Pearl Residences are all in the 7-8 story range, and Mermaid's Wharf is around... 6 stories? Might look rather flat with the other waterfront developments. I would have preferred them cut down on that big wall looming over the Northern Junk buildings in favor of a taller portion facing the JSB. Oh well.

[Nparker]

The tower would have been cool, especially considering the Janion and proposed Pearl Residences are all in the 7-8 story range, and Mermaid's Wharf is around... 6 stories? Might look rather flat .

Flat is the preferred vision for Victoria "skyline".

[dasmo]

This is the best overall concept. It does make for a better relationship to those two junky buildings. It’s got some more interesting and different site lines. I think the green roof patio building looks interesting too. It feels more accessible and public which is important for this location. Thumbs up! GET IT DONE!

[Mike K.]

Yup, I don't mind this design, either. Let's just get this through and get on with it.

[MarkoJ]

 Let's just get this through and get on with it.

 

+1

[jonny]

Let's just get this through and get on with it.

 

Yup. There's really no reason to not support this proposal. 

[Rob Randall]

City Hall Planning Department employees will one day reminisce about when this project in one form or another sat on a corner of their desk for most of their career.

[Nparker]

...There's really no reason to not support this proposal. 

Other than it's not nearly as nice as the 2012 design or the tower proposal, but after 8+ years I don't even really care anymore.

[aastra]

Exhaustive scrutiny I can understand. Exhausting scrutiny is something different: partly you end up not caring and partly you wonder if there's even any point in caring since the process seems to be so senseless.

 

Consider:
We're supposed to believe the height of the (short) early proposals was an issue, and yet here we are in 2018 settling on something taller. High fives all around. It's ludicrous.

 

Consider:

We're supposed to believe appropriateness of design for the old town setting was an issue, and yet here were are in 2018 settling on a design that bets heavily on a particular cladding that doesn't seem to have any precedent in the old town. It might work out very well, don't get me wrong. But where's the sense in being so hyper-cautious for so many years if you're only going to toss that caution to the wind now?

 

I think the relationship between the new construction and the old buildings is not very good in this version (the old buildings are just standing aside and looking very un-integrated to my eye), but otherwise the overall project seems to be pretty good, half-decently interesting and unique, etc.

[Jackerbie]

Unanimous support at ADP.  Here is the slide show:

 

https://www.dropbox....deShow.pdf?dl=0

 

Next step is Heritage Advisory Panel - May 8th.

 

Minutes are up from the ADP meeting, online here: https://www.victoria...il 25, 2018.pdf

 

Note that ADP requested changes to the material, so we may be seeing more tweaks