1697 replies to this topic

[Nparker]

...Councillor Loveday seemed to think there was opposition waiting in the wings...

This is Victoria. You don't exactly have to be Nostradamus to prognosticate opposition to ANY development proposal in this city.

[2F2R]

Gooan ...

[AllseeingEye]

Coun. Pam Madoff worried about the effect on the skyline of having several buildings of similar heights. - See more at: http://www.timescolo...h.6FA3YMRL.dpuf

 

....what a hypocrite: for years and years and years she and others fought tooth and nail to ensure building heights in d/t Victoria remained at that ridiculous 12-14 storey maximum, resulting in the situation we see today: with only a few notable exceptions downtown is exactly that - a contiguous wall of mostly 10-14 story structures resulting in what I call the 'Berlin Wall West'. All that's missing is the barbed wire and guard towers.

 

Why is it that she now suddenly wakes up to the fact that that is far from desirable or remotely aesthetically interesting? So....dull, safe and boring "good" for downtown Victoria but baaaaad for Vic West? Ok then I expect to see her support for not only the 20-floor maximum at Dockside but moreover leading the charge for even higher buildings @ DG to ensure it avoids the pox of "having several buildings of similar heights".....

Edited by AllseeingEye, 13 November 2016 - 10:37 AM.

[sebberry]

....what a hypocrite: for years and years and years she and others fought tooth and nail to ensure building heights in d/t Victoria remained at that ridiculous 12-14 storey maximum, resulting in the situation we see today: with only a few notable exceptions downtown is exactly that - a contiguous wall of mostly 10-14 story structures resulting in what I call the 'Berlin Wall West'. All that's missing is the barbed wire and guard towers.

 
You just can't make this stuff up.

[Nparker]

I am willing to bet that every incumbent (with perhaps the exception of the mayor) who runs in 2018 will get re-elected. Bad voting choices are not just the purview of Americans.

[2F2R]

I am willing to bet that every incumbent (with perhaps the exception of the mayor) who runs in 2018 will get re-elected. Bad voting choices are not just the purview of Americans.

And our chooses seem to be as limited ... where are some fresh young visionaries looking to forward us, not stall us ... ...

[aastra]

You want lots of variety in height, styles, materials, etc. That's what makes an interesting city. And that's why a hard height restriction is so silly, because it inadvertently encourages developers to build to the exact same height. If the heights are the same and the styles are the same then you end up with stuff like that cluster of old apartment blocks in the heart of James Bay. Bland! Stagger the heights! How many times have we said this? Crikey, look at the Songhees from Fisherman's Wharf and tell me it doesn't look 1000x better after Shutters and Promontory mixed things up, not just in the height/massing department but also the style department. (That's why I'm a bit worried about Encore resembling Promontory too much, because the sameness could end up diminishing Promontory.)

 

Suffice it to say, variation makes individual buildings stand out. Even a very ordinary building will gain some distinction if it's the only one of its type in the vicinity.

[aastra]

 

...I expect to see her support for not only the 20-floor maximum at Dockside but moreover leading the charge for even higher buildings...

 

Something tells me her worry about having several buildings of identical heights is only applicable to any new buildings that would be taller than the existing buildings. In other words, the fact that two "Balance" buildings are exactly the same height as each other and also the same height as Parc Residences across the street is nothing to worry about. The existing buildings demonstrate good similar heights.

 

Wait a minute... if those existing buildings are all the same height, then a few significantly taller (or shorter) buildings would = some much needed variety, and not "a skyline of several buildings of similar heights", you think?

 

Also, we should give Lisa Helps a point:

 

 

Mayor Lisa Helps did not share Madoff’s worries, saying that the buildings would be differentiated through design.

Edited by aastra, 14 November 2016 - 12:07 PM.

[aastra]

 

...property owner Vancity credit union will invite third-party developers to build their own projects on individual lots.

 

So basically they're going to have "Dockside Green by Concert" and "Dockside Green by Chard" etc. on the remaining parcels? That's the plan? It would be funny if Westbank ends up building something there.

Edited by aastra, 14 November 2016 - 12:10 PM.

[Nparker]

Height restrictions, for the most part, force developers to build as tall as possible in order to see a return on their investment. I am fully accepting of allowing market forces dictate how tall buildings should be. Let city guidelines influence other facets like street interaction, exterior finishes, and retaining views as much as possible.

Edited by Nparker, 14 November 2016 - 12:12 PM.

[aastra]

At Dockside Green I just can't see any justification for stiff height restrictions.

[laconic]

You want lots of variety in height, styles, materials, etc. That's what makes an interesting city. And that's why a hard height restriction is so silly, because it inadvertently encourages developers to build to the exact same height. If the heights are the same and the styles are the same then you end up with stuff like that cluster of old apartment blocks in the heart of James Bay. Bland! Stagger the heights! How many times have we said this? Crikey, look at the Songhees from Fisherman's Wharf and tell me it doesn't look 1000x better after Shutters and Promontory mixed things up, not just in the height/massing department but also the style department. (That's why I'm a bit worried about Encore resembling Promontory too much, because the sameness could end up diminishing Promontory.)

 

Suffice it to say, variation makes individual buildings stand out. Even a very ordinary building will gain some distinction if it's the only one of its type in the vicinity.

 

A bit of allegory... I understand that when Promontory was built council was worried the original design would be just concrete and glass and thus look too different from Bayview. They asked that brick be added to the exterior as a nod to Bayview.

 

A bit of fact.... on the south side of Promontory the brick is shaped like an inverted Christmas tree (is it politically correct to say that?). After the slab was poured workers built a form and made a 22 inch cement pony wall along the exterior to support the brick. On the 19th floor the brick runs across most of the building, so on the inside, rather than having floor to ceiling windows all the way along, almost all the windows are smaller in height.

 

In other words, just for exterior architectural aesthetics the developer had to pay workers to make the interior view worse.

[Nparker]

...In other words, just for exterior architectural aesthetics the developer had to pay workers to make the interior view worse.

I don't think it's unreasonable to ask some concessions (within reason) on the interior of a building in order to create a pleasing exterior. Architecture is the most public of all the arts, and we see it whether we want to or not. I often feel as though too little emphasis is put on the outward appearance of new architecture, especially in a city whose greatest concern always seems to be building height.

[laconic]

I don't think it's unreasonable to ask some concessions (within reason) on the interior of a building in order to create a pleasing exterior. Architecture is the most public of all the arts, and we see it whether we want to or not. I often feel as though too little emphasis is put on the outward appearance of new architecture, especially in a city whose greatest concern always seems to be building height.

 

The context of the discussion was making buildings architecturally interesting by making them different rather than the same. Would Promontory be better if it didn't have the brick, making it different from Bayview, or is it better having the brick to make it more like Bayview? The two buildings intentionally have the same design.

 

In relation to Dockside, Helps pointed out that while everyone was concerned about height, she felt the buildings would be differentiated more by design. That's not what happened at Bayview/Promontory

[Nparker]

The context of the discussion was making buildings architecturally interesting by making them different rather than the same. Would Promontory be better if it didn't have the brick, making it different from Bayview, or is it better having the brick to make it more like Bayview? The two buildings intentionally have the same design...

In the case of 3 buildings separated by some distance in the same community, I think the use of the brickwork helps tie them together visually. Could this have been done differently? Presumably yes. Were the interior spaces "negatively" affected by the exterior design choices? That's entirely subjective. My personal opinion is that 3 (major) Bayview towers are sufficiently different as to not be monotonous. That being said, I think going in a radically different direction from Bayview with the towers at the Roundhouse (should they ever get built) would be wise. Ideally, the only brick used here would be in landscape features and on the original roundhouse buildings themselves. Perhaps let the towers be influenced in shape by the older buildings on the site (i.e. round) but in no way should they visually look like tall versions of the original structures.

[aastra]

 

Would Promontory be better if it didn't have the brick, making it different from Bayview, or is it better having the brick to make it more like Bayview? The two buildings intentionally have the same design.

 

I'd say this trio of Bayview buildings is an example of how even an attractive design can be diminished by repetition. They got away with it with the first two buildings because those buildings were so different in their height and proportions (a widescraper versus a tower). So they end up being two buildings from the same family, but not twins. But methinks having another tower very similar to Promontory might end up being too much of the same good thing. Two's company but three's a crowd. Having three different heights will mitigate the issue to some degree, as will the fact that these are high-quality buildings, but any way you slice it you're still going to have two very similar looking towers and three very similar looking buildings. I think I would have preferred the cladding of Encore to be something altogether different. Different material, different colour scheme.

 

We should note that many people think buildings SHOULD be duplicated in this manner when they're part of the same project. They think it looks organized or proper or some such thing, and maybe also that it suggests some sort of neighbourhood cohesion. I tend to disagree. The Belmont Building is a beauty but I wouldn't want three of them together.

 

 

I think going in a radically different direction from Bayview with the towers at the Roundhouse (should they ever get built) would be wise. Ideally, the only brick used here would be in landscape features and on the original roundhouse buildings themselves.

 

Exactly right. This is crucial. Put it on a T-shirt.

[Bingo]

 T-Shirt  

 

 "A Few Bricks Short of a Full Building"

[jonny]

I'd say this trio of Bayview buildings is an example of how even an attractive design can be diminished by repetition. They got away with it with the first two buildings because those buildings were so different in their height and proportions (a widescraper versus a tower). So they end up being two buildings from the same family, but not twins. But methinks having another tower very similar to Promontory might end up being too much of the same good thing. Two's company but three's a crowd. Having three different heights will mitigate the issue to some degree, as will the fact that these are high-quality buildings, but any way you slice it you're still going to have two very similar looking towers and three very similar looking buildings. I think I would have preferred the cladding of Encore to be something altogether different. Different material, different colour scheme.

 

We should note that many people think buildings SHOULD be duplicated in this manner when they're part of the same project. They think it looks organized or proper or some such thing, and maybe also that it suggests some sort of neighbourhood cohesion. I tend to disagree. The Belmont Building is a beauty but I wouldn't want three of them together.

 

 

Exactly right. This is crucial. Put it on a T-shirt.

 

I think Bayview and Promontory look good together. Time will tell if the 3rd building is too much of the same thing or not. I think any more buildings that height in that vicinity will likely be overkill. It'd be like the attack of the Vancouver seafoam green condo, except with a bunch of red brick accenting thrown in. 

[aastra]

Another angle (literally) on the skyline of Dockside Green and Vic West. So I ask, which format/massing is underrepresented in this pic? If we're really sincere when we say we're worried about having too many buildings of the same height, then the remedy would seem to be obvious.

 

[Nparker]

Of course, that photo will only convince certain anti-height types that we need more 2-storey townhouses.