641 replies to this topic

[Rob Randall]

The problem with varying the heights and introducing different architecture is the building starts to lose its modernist essense and starts looking like a phoney heritage pastiche. It really has to be done well or it looks like a cheap Tuscany Village.

[Mike K.]

The building is responding to what the market wants, and what it wants, considering our quickly escalating real-estate prices, are units that are affordable to an average earner in Victoria. Le Fevre could build something wildly different, but he'd also be pricing out a lot of the folks that want to live in that neighbourhood and want that real-estate.

[johnk]

....It really has to be done well or it looks like a cheap Tuscany Village.

You mean the one on McKenzie is the expensive Tuscany Village? Yikes!

[Rob Randall]

The building is responding to what the market wants, and what it wants, considering our quickly escalating real-estate prices, are units that are affordable to an average earner in Victoria. Le Fevre could build something wildly different, but he'd also be pricing out a lot of the folks that want to live in that neighbourhood and want that real-estate.

  

That's a tired excuse and I don't believe it, either. I don't think we've suggested anything that would drastically affect the price point.

You mean the one on McKenzie is the expensive Tuscany Village? Yikes!

I knew someone was going to nail me for that.

[Nparker]

  That's a tired excuse and I don't believe it, either. I don't think we've suggested anything that would drastically affect the price point...

Agreed. Minor roof line and facade articulations/surface finishes would have a negligible effect on the overall cost.

[Mike K.]

The steel tiles will not all age the same and not every tile will be the same colour. We need to wait for actual artists renderings before jumping to conclusions.

Is articulation a good thing, though? I'm not sure that it is.

[sdwright.vic]

I feel it looks more project than penitentiary.

[Mike K.]

One minute we're asking for zero setbacks, so we get zero setbacks – which means no balconies – but the next minute that's not good enough because there are no balconies, no variation in height, no this or no that.

 

We haven't seen the final design just yet. The renderings supplied are the lowest grade of visual that developers put out and its intended purpose is to show something other than a sketch and to help envision the massing, not the final design qualities.

[aastra]

I have to say, that image of the inner courtyard really doesn't look like a low-grade visual to my eye. But maybe you're right. You've been right before. I remember one time back on SSP.*

 

Minimal setbacks should be a given in this location. Why are you even talking about that? You can still have inset balconies or partially inset balconies or even some protruding balconies on the sides facing the inner space or facing that open corner space. Having some balconies here and there can really help lend a building some life. A complete absence of balconies can end up seeming really cold and institutional. But if they're planning on having a big common space on the roof then maybe they're thinking they can get away without having any balconies on the units.

 

If the two main buildings do not end up being identical then that's great. But if the two main buildings do end up being identical then I'm pretty sure it would be the very first multi-building project in the old town that repeats the exact same design facing two different streets. Same height, too. I hope you enjoyed the building that we just passed because around the corner we'll see another one just like it. Do we have this sort of thing anywhere else? The Union doesn't look exactly the same on Fisgard as on Pandora, which is good. And for all of the grief that I give Centennial Square, I have to admit that even Centennial Square's buildings weren't repeats.

 

Throw us a bone and break up that long monotonous frontage, and also differentiate the two main buildings a bit. That's all I'm really asking for here. Can't wait to see the better images.

 

*Just razzing. Lighten up.

Edited by aastra, 03 March 2017 - 10:22 AM.

[Nparker]

...Throw us a bone and break up that long monotonous frontage, and also differentiate the two main buildings a bit. That's all I'm really asking for here...

This.

[VicHockeyFan]

I have to say, that image of the inner courtyard really doesn't look like a low-grade visual to my eye. But maybe you're right. You've been right before. I remember one time back on SSP.*

 

 

 

I was also elected president of SSP once.  A few weeks before my ouster on trumped-up charges in 2006.  It's rough over there.

[Mike K.]

If the two main buildings do not end up being identical then that's great. But if the two main buildings do end up being identical then I'm pretty sure it would be the very first multi-building project in the old town that repeats the exact same design facing two different streets. 

 

To the average passerby the Union looks identical on both Fisgard and Pandora. The differences are only something an architecture geek would zero in on.

 

People don't like inset balconies, they're dark, clammy and not a great use of space that could otherwise extend a living room by an additional four or five feet.

 

I dunno, I'm just not so down on this design. We need variety, which means projects like this will come around and they have their place in the fabric of the downtown and Old Town areas. 

[nagel]

^ To be clear though, you haven't really criticized any designs on this forum.  The closest you came was about the Kunju that not every project can be a winner.

 

I think most of the comments here are suggesting that relatively minor changes are needed to break up a significant wall of monotony.  They don't need to reinvent it entirely.

[Bingo]

  A complete absence of balconies can end up seeming really cold and institutional.

 

Exactly!  We need more juliet balconies for all the lonely romeos to pine away under.

[aastra]

 

To the average passerby the Union looks identical on both Fisgard and Pandora.

 

Hey, to the average passerby the Falls looks the same as Harbour Towers. But when you make that point it sounds like you're agreeing with me about the potential issues here. If buildings that aren't identical can end up blurring in the eyes of your average bozo then how about buildings that actually are identical? There must be more likelihood in that case, you think?

 

 

People don't like inset balconies...

 

Sort of like how people don't like highrises?

[aastra]

 

...in the eyes of your average bozo...

 

Which reminds me, we need more average bozos on this board. The conversation on VV tends to be dominated by very exceptional bozos.

[jonny]

^ To be clear though, you haven't really criticized any designs on this forum. The closest you came was about the Kunju that not every project can be a winner.

I think most of the comments here are suggesting that relatively minor changes are needed to break up a significant wall of monotony. They don't need to reinvent it entirely.

Exactly. The suggestion of throwing in more brick may even result in lower costs to the developer than enveloping the entire building in this fancy iron cladding stuff.

[aastra]

 

We need variety, which means projects like this will come around and they have their place in the fabric of the downtown and Old Town areas.

 

For sure, you want variety. But you also don't want a big misstep re: the development of one of the key "design district" properties. Anyway, the prevailing concern here seems to be the lack of variation within the project itself.

 

This is a very large project for the old town. We should expect people to be scrutinizing it, because one way or another it's going to have impact. If it doesn't land well I could see it setting the wrong tone going forward. Lest we forget, it took a very long time to get from Mermaid Wharf to the Union and the Janion. Every development should keep things forging ahead. You don't want the engine to lose its momentum. You don't want the train to go off the tracks.*

 

*iron references

[Nparker]

...If it doesn't land well I could see it setting the wrong tone going forward...

One need look no further than the Songhees to see how initial design mis-steps can lead to decades of questionable architecture and an overall soulless development.

[Mixed365]

One need look no further than the Songhees to see how initial design mis-steps can lead to decades of questionable architecture and an overall soulless development.

 

Now this was a little rough.