Jump to content

      













PROPOSED
Duck's Building
Use: condo
Address: 1314-1324 Broad Street
Municipality: Victoria
Region: Downtown Victoria
Storeys: 7
Condo units: 108 (studio/bachelor, 1BR, 2BR)
Sales status: in planning
The seven-storey historic Duck's Building development is comprised of 108-units of condominium residences and ... (view full profile)
Learn more about Duck's Building on Citified.ca
Photo

[Downtown Victoria] Duck's Block | renovation, redevelopment | Proposed


  • Please log in to reply
162 replies to this topic

#81 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,213 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 14 December 2017 - 12:10 PM

The "UVic" wing is a bit matchy-matchy now, but I can understand the pressure to keep things "historic" in this location. Overall, I think this is a very nice project that will bring much needed life to this section of downtown.

 

It's too matchy-matchy in my opinion. I like the changes to the other two buildings, particularly the glazing on the Ducks addition, but a more modern UVic building would have been nice. Would it have made it through Council is another question, and unfortunately the most important question that the developer has to ask.


  • Nparker likes this

#82 amor de cosmos

amor de cosmos

    BUILD

  • Member
  • 4,701 posts

Posted 14 December 2017 - 12:37 PM

it looks like there will be an atrium in the middle of the old building they're keeping. has that always been there? I've never noticed one.

#83 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,213 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 14 December 2017 - 02:05 PM

it looks like there will be an atrium in the middle of the old building they're keeping. has that always been there? I've never noticed one.

 

New feature I think, as it is located where Saint Franks and the stairs up to Velvet are currently. That said, the atrium makes no sense to me. The only way to access it is from the CRU, so what exactly will the residents with windows facing into the atrium be looking down at? Seems like a wasted space, right now.



#84 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,213 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 07 March 2018 - 12:40 PM

Chard has been busy on this one! Two more revisions since December, on Feb 27 and March 6. Most recent change rendering is below, which has basically the same massing as previous iterations but revised materials/design/windows/etc.

 

Capture.PNG


  • Mike K. and Nparker like this

#85 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,100 posts

Posted 07 March 2018 - 12:46 PM

I think the one change I'd maybe like to see would be the stepping back of both of the top 2 floors of the new buildings allowing the Ducks building to stand out more.



#86 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 14,639 posts

Posted 07 March 2018 - 12:51 PM

Methinks the main thing is that the two ends shouldn't suggest one singular large development engulfing the old building in the middle. Along the ground floor I'd say this consideration is crucially relevant. You want three distinct ground floors. But above the ground level I think it's important as well. It looks like the windows will be different, but how about the style and colour of the brickwork? (or other cladding, if not brick)



#87 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,100 posts

Posted 07 March 2018 - 02:15 PM

...It looks like the windows will be different, but how about the style and colour of the brickwork? (or other cladding, if not brick)

The above renderings still look quite preliminary, so I imagine there is an opportunity to make adjustments to the cladding materials. I agree the new structures aside the Duck's building should display a greater variation in finishing details.



#88 Baro

Baro
  • Member
  • 4,317 posts

Posted 07 March 2018 - 02:17 PM

The designs are on the right track and I love this sort of density.  6 floors, no setbacks, perfect.


  • Nparker and jonny like this
"beats greezy have baked donut-dough"

#89 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,100 posts

Posted 07 March 2018 - 02:18 PM

...6 floors, no setbacks, perfect.

You're OK with the upper level setback I presume.



#90 Baro

Baro
  • Member
  • 4,317 posts

Posted 07 March 2018 - 02:27 PM

Yeah I mean no setback from the street.  I like the height of the corner building but the one next to the gallery on the left could use more of a setback after the 5th floor to more match the profile of the duck building, eliminate the feeling of it being boxed in on both sides.  Make the 6th floor set back maybe 6' with some nice decks, and the 7th floor set back a bit more to not be noticable from the street.

 

Will look better when/if the (I believe uvic owned) gallery on the corner is also developed into something with a similar massing.  I'd love to see more of old-town have its non-heritage and underbuilt buildings all replaced with buildings like these.  4-5 stories with no setback to form a nice traditional street-wall using actual quality traditional materials like brick and stone along with the proper attention to scale and retail frontage,  then a setback after the 4-5th floor and a couple more stories in a more contemporary style.


  • Nparker likes this
"beats greezy have baked donut-dough"

#91 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,213 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 04 June 2018 - 11:36 AM

This proposal went to a couple committees recently. 

 

Advisory Heritage Panel gave it a unanimous thumbs down on March 13: http://www.victoria....Mar 13 2018.pdf

 

Advisory Design Panel gave it a unanimous thumbs up on March 28: http://www.victoria....ch 28, 2018.pdf

 

The Dev Tracker folder was updated today to "Staff review of revised plans," so we may see some tweaks to the Feb 27 plans.



#92 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,100 posts

Posted 04 June 2018 - 12:15 PM

This proposal went to a couple committees recently. 

 

Advisory Heritage Panel gave it a unanimous thumbs down on March ...

Why is the Advisory Heritage Panel asking questions like these:

  • The proposal is dependent on transient zoning. How will you overcome the City’s new rules that do not allow new short-term rentals downtown? 
  • The proposal does not meet the Official Community Plan requirement to increase residential availability in the downtown core. 

How are these heritage related matters?

 

The AHP does make one good point "A more contemporary design is preferable; there is no need to mimic historic buildings", but if the developer responds to this concern what's to prevent the ADP from "Ironworks-ing" the plan into something dreadful?



#93 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 2,132 posts

Posted 20 June 2018 - 12:51 PM

An application for a Heritage Alteration Permit has been submitted with the city in conjunction with this project.
  • Nparker likes this

#94 Kungsberg

Kungsberg
  • Member
  • 312 posts

Posted 03 July 2018 - 07:56 AM

Article in the TC this morning 

http://www.timescolo...ria-councillor-

 

Attached Images

  • duck bldg.jpg


#95 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,213 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 03 July 2018 - 08:05 AM

^ From the TC article above:

“It looks to me like a facade enveloped by new construction,” Madoff said. “There’s nothing wrong with new construction, but what they are proposing is nothing very new or exciting for Old Town.”

 

And from the minutes of the Heritage Advisory Panel:

A more contemporary design is preferable; there is no need to mimic historic buildings

via http://www.victoria....Mar 13 2018.pdf



#96 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 48,718 posts

Posted 03 July 2018 - 08:15 AM

It’s tough to see projects trudged through the system like this. It was only a short time ago that officialdom was insisting projects within Old Town maintain an Old Town vibe. Now they’re not?

And look at Era where a heritage facade was retained but enveloped by a 15-storey building. It looks good and adds variety.
  • Greg and jonny like this

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#97 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,100 posts

Posted 03 July 2018 - 08:16 AM

So Pam would be delighted with an ultra-contemporary design surrounding the Ducks block?



#98 AllseeingEye

AllseeingEye

    AllSeeingEye

  • Member
  • 3,864 posts
  • LocationGorge

Posted 03 July 2018 - 08:44 AM

FFS. Just. Retire. Already. Pam Madoff - the penultimate poster child for strict term limits......


  • LJ likes this

#99 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 2,213 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 03 July 2018 - 08:45 AM

And look at Era where a heritage facade was retained but enveloped by a 15-storey building. It looks good and adds variety.

 

I think that's the big issue here. The heritage buildings being restored are already so big that any addition seems like an afterthought. Two stepped back storeys and new windows does not a significant project make.



#100 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 14,639 posts

Posted 03 July 2018 - 08:51 AM

My main beefs would be the same plain brick pillars on the ground level of both new parts, and the similarity of each modern wing to the other. They're not identical, I get it, but they're still quite similar. Why not some juliet balconies on the left one, or some cast iron columns on the ground? Not to look more faux historic, but simply to look better. The left section in particular seems like it's trying hard to not be interesting. I think it could work if the style of the left section was a complete departure. Glass box or something (not a spandrel box, however).

 

I also still wonder if the cladding on the two sections shouldn't be different. To suggest that old town granularity that we've talked about, rather than looking like a modern building has engulfed the old building in the middle.



You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users