800 replies to this topic

[Johnathon S]

Fantastic! Looks like a good scale for this spot. More apartments is good especially well done ones!

The plan would be to have appartments of condo quality, further we anticapte the ceiling height in the old building to be above 10 feet on some floors, up to possibly 15-16 in some units, allowing us to contemplate putting in lofts. Our other projcet at 595 pandora, which will have around 50 appartment units of condo quality, ie hardwood floors, granite countertops, and gas ranges and fireplaces in some units.

[D.L.]

Why are some so positive on this design change? The design has been reduced to a filler-building design not worthy of such a prominent location.

 

Remember, here is the first design.

 

[Nparker]

And this...

[Mike K.]

I'm hearing from some heritage folk that the previous designs were much better.

Jonathan, what brought about the design changes?

[Johnathon S]

I'm hearing from some heritage folk that the previous designs were much better.

Jonathan, what brought about the design changes?

In working with the various stakeholders in our downtown core, our design needed to respond to the existing urban context of our historic location, and still maintian the contemporary values that are reflective of the time in which the new building was designed.

[sebberry]

I have to say the first rendering showed a building that was more interesting to look at. 

 

The new one's had its hat chopped off and looks quite bland when entering the harbour.

 

The "stakeholders" don't happen to be neighbourhood associations or heritage groups, do they?

[dasmo]

In this case less distinctive is better. The previous design was fugly! This one is understated but could do well in good materials it will nestle in just fine. Digging what little retail that is there now out of the underground will be a huge plus in this spot! I got no complaints. Do it sooner than latter and move on to the next that needs it....

[Hotel Mike]

The first design was much nicer.

[Baro]

First design was wayyyy better,  this is going to be Sussex all over again.

[Mixed365]

I would guess that the original rendering had issues as it was overshadowing the Belmont. 

Again, just a guess.

[Mike K.]

That was probably the sticking point. New architecture shall never under any circumstance impede on the status of something old.

In Victoria, modern architecture isn't given the opportunity to become heritage of the future. In 100 years we'll have realized this of course and look back at it just like we look back in shame at the Boomer generation's rampant disregard for the heritage they destroyed and the remnants of which they now hold to such high esteem while obstructing modern architecture.

Go figure, hey? That generation razed half the city and now holds development hostage.

[Mixed365]

...modern architecture isn't given the opportunity to become heritage of the future. In 100 years we'll have realized this of course...

Very interesting point, I've never thought about that. 

[dasmo]

The first design was far from a modern architecture masterpiece. I would support one of those 100%. I think that was the problem with the first design. Not modern enough. Not enough contrast. Not enough juxtaposition. So I would rather have the more understated design.

[Bingo]

. In 100 years we'll have realized this of course and look back at it just like we look back in shame at the Boomer generation's rampant disregard for the heritage they destroyed and the remnants of which they now hold to such high esteem while obstructing modern architecture.

Go figure, hey? That generation razed half the city and now holds development hostage.

 

Destroyed like this one was as it sat on the same corner as the new proposal on this thread.

 

post #2 here;  http://vibrantvictor...ng-gone-greats/

 

 

 

[dasmo]

Now that is a shame... Cool looking building. This is why there is an antidevelopment bent in this town. Buildings like that being torn down...

[2F2R]

I totally agree all heritage buildings should be saved, especially everything between Douglas and Wharf. Some of those are desperate for a make-over however, like the corner of Yates and Douglas. I get frustrated when the antidevelopment movement shows itself where empty lots or boarded up motels are concerned. We need some taller modern buildings ...   

[Mixed365]

I totally agree all heritage buildings should be saved, especially everything between Douglas and Wharf. Some of those are desperate for a make-over however, like the corner of Yates and Douglas. I get frustrated when the antidevelopment movement shows itself where empty lots or boarded up motels are concerned. We need some taller modern buildings ...   

I agree. I also love the juxtaposition of a contemporary structure with one that has heritage status. To me, it shows progress with a respect for the past. 

[Bingo]

[MarkoJ]

The first design was much nicer.

 

+1

[Urbanistco]

I'm very curious to see if/how this project moves forward. Building was purchased in 2013, at a premium no doubt. Victoria will take 75% of land lift. Now you need to renovate/build. 

 

Not trying to be skeptical, I'd rather they put a massive, beautiful showcase building there but I'm struggling to reconcile the economics of the current proposal.