605 replies to this topic

[Vin]

But then again, it does much more than any modern building has yet done in the old town/inner harbour area. It does much more than the lame 1990s faux-heritage reno it replaced, and it does much more than the Harbour Square complex right next door.

 

Instead of nursing that established Victorian attitude of eternal dissatisfaction, why not dare to break the pattern and ask ourselves: What exactly is our standard? What are we comparing against? Why do we place such a heavy burden on each singular small project? And what do we gain by supposing Victoria's built form is so incomparably challenging and undefinable that any new development must inevitably be inadequate and disappointing?

 

All we really need to do is open our eyes and take an honest look at what's there now and what was there in the past.

 

I do agree with you that the Harbour Square is one of the worst buildings to be built in the heritage district. Others include the few parkades that serve as eye sores all around town.

[Nparker]

Any updates on this project?

[Hotel Mike]

Does anyone know why there is no work being done on the Northern Junk property? I thought they had all their approvals.

[Nparker]

If the developer waits long enough, the stability of the existing structures will be so poor they won't be salvageable and the project can proceed without the expense of their restoration.

[aastra]

But then you're back to square one all over again (all over again).

[Nparker]

It would take about 5 minutes for even a second-rate architect to re-envision this project without the heritage structures. Throw in a few bus passes and promise no parking and the current council will rubber stamp the changes. Heritage preservation isn't important through the "climate change lens".