[Downtown Victoria] Ballantyne Building Office Tower | 9-storeys | Canceled in 2007
#21
Posted 10 July 2007 - 10:31 AM
Regarding vehicle access off of Douglas, there's already that little lane between the church and the shops, right? Once again I'm wondering why they couldn't have a dedicated entrance ramp on one street and a dedicated exit ramp on the other street. I'd much prefer such an arrangement because you'd have two small, widely separated parking gates instead of one big one.
#22
Posted 10 July 2007 - 11:22 AM
As for separate one-lane parking entrance/exits, I don't recall ever seeing such a beast. Are they allowed to do something like that?
-City of Victoria website, 2009
#23
Posted 10 July 2007 - 11:56 AM
As for the Mish mash of styles. I think you can come up with something sympathetic think about the Sussex building. Anyways I think you keep the Ballantyne as is in that it would reamain storefronts. There is plenty of room on Courtenay for both the office entrance and the parking entrance. The Kirk Hall property is quite large it just usually goes unnoticed.
No one has mentioned that we will be losing the performance space. It isn't used too much but there certainly isn't anything else in this area similar to it.
#24
Posted 10 July 2007 - 12:07 PM
The library lanes are double wide, though aren't they?
-City of Victoria website, 2009
#25
Posted 10 July 2007 - 12:32 PM
Anyway, parkades do do it so I'm sure an office building can do it. Remember how the Johnson Street parkade used to have an entrance but no exit on the Pandora side?
#26
Posted 10 July 2007 - 12:39 PM
-City of Victoria website, 2009
#27
Posted 10 July 2007 - 04:58 PM
#28
Posted 10 July 2007 - 08:29 PM
^There's a full elementary-school-size gymnasium in there. It's funny how such a huge space can be totally invisible in Old Town.
Yup. I only know it's there because I vote.
#29
Posted 11 July 2007 - 09:11 AM
#30
Posted 11 July 2007 - 07:04 PM
#31
Posted 11 July 2007 - 07:05 PM
#32
Posted 11 July 2007 - 07:08 PM
Can't say I'd be a fan of something like this:
Maybe this? Whenever modern buildings are inserted in close proximity to historic ones, I think the modern should be daring/striking modern as versus safe/bland modern. We don't want the commercial equivalent of a Y-lot condo tower on this site. There's some very flavourless, dry stuff around there as it is, what with the parkade, the large office block across the street, the smaller office block across Douglas from the church itself, and (how could I forget?) Nootka Court.
#33
Posted 11 July 2007 - 10:26 PM
Can't say I'd be a fan of something like this:
That would make me reach for my revolver.
Like I said upthread. I dont care if it's one or twenty-two stories of ugly, I'll oppose it.
Knowing that it's Westbank makes me a bit more comfortable however. I've yet to see an example of an ugly building by Westbank.....
#34
Posted 11 July 2007 - 11:03 PM
Westbank does good work, but James Cheng has been their go-to architect. There's no guarantee Cheng will be involved with this project.
-City of Victoria website, 2009
#35
Posted 21 July 2007 - 10:10 AM
Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.
#36
Posted 22 July 2007 - 08:29 PM
Good old editors at the T-C, calling it "buildings," when it's just one building. Well, who (at our biggest daily) cares about reality, anyway?Downtown buildings not worth saving
Times Colonist
Published: Sunday, July 22, 2007
OK, call me an architectural philistine. But somebody has to say it: that mini-strip mall beside St. Andrew's Church downtown has to go. John di Castri's buildings, heritage or not, are ugly.
My first exposure to di Castri's work was the University of Victoria Student Union Building, before it had add-ons. I didn't know whether to laugh or cry.
[...]
© Times Colonist (Victoria) 2007
#37
Posted 23 July 2007 - 10:37 AM
I'm pretty much on board with her re: the strip mall comment. The problem I have with buildings like this one is that they were part of a larger misguided effort to suburbanize downtown Victoria, and to dilute its urban feel. It may be a fairly funky and interesting little building, but it never should have been built in the first place. It doesn't belong there, so I won't be sorry to see it go.
Unless, of course, the replacement is an even worse fit.
#38
Posted 23 July 2007 - 11:22 AM
-City of Victoria website, 2009
#39
Posted 04 November 2007 - 07:22 PM
Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.
#40
Posted 28 November 2007 - 04:26 PM
The church is developing a new tower proposal on the Kirk Hall site. They would share a parking entrance on Courtney Street.
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