1287 replies to this topic

[D.L.]

Thanks for the coverage JC! :-)

[G-Man]

Overall this seems like a well thought out project. I have two concerns.

1. The West face setbacks under the buildings seem to large. I don't mind how far back it is from the street but the columns and overhang in combination with the large set back concern me. I would also lose that werid triangular planter and just leave it open.

2. There is no connection to the plaza at the Rotherham. This could a good spot if it had flow from this building this should be discussed with the other property owners.

[VicHockeyFan]

Excellent work, JC, thanks for the thorough coverage.

Is there demand for office space right now, or in the near future? How does this affect Gateway Green?

[Jacques Cadé]

Excellent work, JC, thanks for the thorough coverage.

Is there demand for office space right now, or in the near future? How does this affect Gateway Green?

VHF, I'm happy to provide the scoop, thanks to your tip about the meeting.

Some people questioned the need for office space instead of residential, but Jawl and D'Ambrosio said their strength is in premium office development (Selkirk, Atrium), and residential is sufficiently covered by other projects (Juliet, Union, Janion, etc.). D'Ambrosio also noted that Vancouver overbuilt its residential and underbuilt its office space, so that many downtown Vancouver residents now have to commute to jobs in other parts of the city. 1501 Douglas aims to keep office jobs in downtown Victoria.

No idea how this affects Gateway Green.

[G-Man]

Well I think that the need is likely there for good quality office both the Atrium and the old BC Ferries block on Fort have pretty much filled up and a lot of that has been with private enterprise rather than government.

[jonny]

The right concept, although the design is bland IMO. It looks like a boxy Atrium.

First, I feel like downtown needs some colour other than grey, white and brick.

Second, this is a major site, and Victoria is running out of Douglas/Blanshard street sites to build landmark buildings. I was hoping for something ultra modern or glassy, or perhaps something in the likeness of the black tower posted above that would have been more of a statement building.

Don't get me wrong. Jawl will build it and it will be a very good development, but it leaves me wanting more. It's a very safe proposal, which may very well be by design.

[Nparker]

I agree with what most have said here, especially G-man's comment regarding the Rotherham Plaza. I realize that it is a completely separate property but I am not sure this block requires another plaza between the 2 new buildings, but then does nothing to engage the existing plaza. I'd rather see the new internal plaza nixed in favour of engaging the existing space behind the Rotherham. Developed properly that plaza could be a mini-Rockefeller Centre type space (I know I am a dreamer).

I also feel the Douglas Street set back is too much. As G-man says lose the street side planter and pull the entire structure westward by a couple of metres. Too much setback will just give us another Conference Centre retail dead zone.

[G-Man]

^ I think that they cannot come any closer to Douglas due to the tower protection zone for the clock tower. This is indeed why the property goes in like that. That said the further columned setback is worrisome.

[Kach]

I agree with what most have said here, especially G-man's comment regarding the Rotherham Plaza. I realize that it is a completely separate property but I am not sure this block requires another plaza between the 2 new buildings, but then does nothing to engage the existing plaza. I'd rather see the new internal plaza nixed in favour of engaging the existing space behind the Rotherham. Developed properly that plaza could be a mini-Rockefeller Centre type space (I know I am a dreamer).

Heck, let's dream. I nice cascading water feature from a new slightly elevated plaza to the existing one would be pretty cool.

[ZGsta]

Oh god, is that a ground floor overhang setback with columns?

[jonny]

Oh god, is that a ground floor overhang setback with columns?

Personally, that part of the design doesn't concern me. Overhangs have worked out very well at the Atrium.

[aastra]

I'm not crazy about it. Never mind the issues around having three plaza spaces on one small block... the overall design is quite bland, isn't it? We made comparisons between the Atrium/800 Yates and the Minneapolis library but I'd say this building resembles Minneapolis even more so. There's already that bland office block on the other side of Pandora. How much is too much? I really like the rotunda and the framing of City Hall through the windows but I'm not digging the overall esthetic or the Douglas Street setbacks, pillars, and plaza.

I don't know... why does the Douglas Street frontage need this sort of reinventing? I can get behind the transformation of a really undefined Blanshard Street sidewalk between Yates and Johnson because that stretch really needed an identity. It was just a bunch of nothing for so many years. I can get behind the reinventing of a similarly undefined stretch along Pandora on the south side of this block. But when you're doing that sort of re-imagining along Douglas it just rubs me the wrong way.

The early 1980s office block across Pandora also re-imagined Douglas by introducing those sunken commercial units, a crazy big setback, and so forth... and the re-imagining sucked. Why do we need to revisit how buildings should relate to the Douglas Street sidewalk in the first place? We already know how buildings should relate to the Douglas Street sidewalk. There's no shortage of successful examples. These very sites at Douglas & Pandora were once successful examples themselves. The fundamentals work along Douglas. Contrarian stuff tends not to work. Why are Victorians always working so hard to undo Douglas Street?

That's my two cents. Maybe I'm crazy and this sort of thing is the future of the pedestrian experience downtown. But the existing bank building with its large setback and little plaza on the corner probably also seemed like the future when it was new. The stuffy old BC Electric Building was gone and the corner had been opened up. And yet the open corner/plaza was ultimately a failure and ended up getting the de-plazafication treatment, right? Because the plaza format was actually a negative? Come to think of it, that new bank building & plaza may have been the very first step in Douglas Street's 180-degree turn away from the traditional/successful urban format. Centennial Square, the CIBC building's podium, and the Campbell Building's replacement at Fort and Douglas would pile it on.

Re: plazas, having one in the middle along Pandora seems like a good spot to me (assuming that the crappy old sunken plaza's days are numbered, which is a big assumption). No doubt the gap would also benefit Corazon's views. But having a plaza on the Douglas corner, and another plaza in the middle of the block along Pandora, and also the crappy old sunken plaza... it just seems bananas. Centennial Square is right across the frickin' street. More is not always more and especially so when we're talking about plazas!!

I'll end by saying the lowrise has more appeal for me than the tower. There's nothing distinctive about the taller building, in that image at least.

 

Edit looking back in 2018: It would seem that many of my worries were unjustified. I'm becoming a fan of these new office blocks by Jawl and co.

Edited by aastra, 30 April 2018 - 03:45 PM.

[jonny]

The six floor building looks like it belongs at UVic, not downtown.

[aastra]

I was actually going to use the word "campus" because that's the feel that I'm getting from it. With 800 Yates they proved that overhangs, setbacks, planters and such can be made to work, depending on how they're handled. But my first impression with this one is that they're going overboard. It seems less urban than 800 Yates and yet it should seem more urban because it's facing Douglas Street.

[amor de cosmos]

I thought good plazas had more of an enclosed feel to them. The corner on the douglas st side doesn't seem so much like a plaza as just a big setback, or open space for its own sake. I also think there should be more of a connection to the rotherham plaza. In this shot it looks more like there's a wall separating the two:



Obviously better than what's there now since it looks like there's a restaurant or something there, but I wonder if more could be done on that side.

re: the generally conservative look, hear what richard rogers (lloyd's, pompidou, leadenhall buildings) has to say about that:

http://vimeo.com/71563906

[Jacques Cadé]

High-res renderings of the development — actually called 1515 Douglas — have been uploaded to http://bit.ly/198v1aa

[Nparker]

Having reviewed all the renderings now, I really find that the Douglas Street facade is all wrong (although I like the rotunda). I am also more convinced than ever that this project really needs to engage with the Rotherham Plaza, not build even more of a wall to close separate the two. A good first attempt, but let's see if a more urban, less-Uvic feel can be developed along Douglas Street. There has to be some way to create a street wall here that meets the guidelines of protecting the City Hall clock tower that doesn't involve massive setbacks and a series of monstrous plazas sucking the life out of a busy pedestrian thoroughfare.

Thanks J.C. for the hi-res images.

[aastra]

Okay, that corner plaza with that massive setback is just crazy. The building is sooooo far from the street! When those trees have leaves you'd hardly be able to tell that there's a building back there at all. It's just not right. It's not Douglas Street. We're talking about a 6-story commercial building, downtown Victoria's bread and butter. I just can't understand why such a familiar format would suddenly require such a massive buffer between itself and the sidewalk.

I agree with the idea that the entire thing should be moved west by a fair bit. You'd still have quite a large space at the corner, if that's something that somebody at some level wants to see there.

Also, is the tower wider in the upper section than it is in the lower section?* I've never been a fan of that. I'm actually surprised that such a thing would ever be proposed in Victoria. I thought Victoria's skyline was supposed to be about domes and spires and the steep peaks of the Empress Hotel, etc.?

*No, the upper section is just shifted over so as not to line up exactly with the lower section. I suppose that's better/more interesting than a tower that gets wider as it gets taller.

The rotunda really would be terrific, however.

 

Edit looking back in 2018: These articulation aspects that I was worried about seem to have worked out well.

Edited by aastra, 30 April 2018 - 03:47 PM.

[jwreal]

High-res renderings of the development — actually called 1515 Douglas — have been uploaded to http://bit.ly/198v1aa

The dropbox is empty.

[Urbanistco]

This project, similar to the Atrium, utilizes the Cava de' Tirreni portico retail frontage. D'Ambrosio is Italian after all. One could argue it breaks up the sidewalk experience with a drip line in the rain and like many other comments, outside space enclosure is not factored in, rather the focused on interior enclosure. That said, Victoria is full of unfulfilled glitzy projects, at least we know this has a high probability of getting built which makes it better then any glamorous failed project. It's better then what is there now so I personally welcome this project from a good development team.