[Downtown Victoria] 930 Fort Street | Condos, commercial | 12-storeys | Proposed

There's a market for Customs House in Customs House's location, with its size of suites and its location. Did I also mention location?

Have you guys seen what Edmonton is building for residential highrises? You really ought to if you think Victoria's buildings are lacklustre or boring.

There's a market for them, but there it limited appetite from the public for more non-Victorian-owned vacation homes at the moment. If we ever catch up on the housing shortage I think we'd see some more attractive buildings.

Edited by TallGuy, 08 November 2017 - 10:14 AM.

 

We’re conflating 30-storey towers in Kelowna with 17-storey towers in Victoria,

Dude, what about the next Bayview tower or the Hudson tower? You're saying those also wouldn't be tall enough? I could show you 200 towers easy from all over Canada that have interesting shapes at those heights or less (often much less).

Summary: interesting shapes and forms are evident in Victoria in all sorts of shorter buildings. But interesting shapes and forms aren't evident in Victoria in taller buildings.

The funny thing is, if Aria had been built as highrise towers as originally planned then you'd have two curved towers right there in the heart of downtown and we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Ditto for the rejected glassy curved tower beside the Capitol 6.

 

Shutters and Aria were also built on huge lots where executing a curve is far more feasible....

Dude, double the height of the smaller building at Shutters or the building right on the Selkirk waterfront. Done.

Edited by aastra, 08 November 2017 - 11:42 AM.

Just to clarify, we're not talking about wackadoodle stuff, weird for the sake of weird or anything like that. Just some interesting curves and angles.

...Summary: interesting shapes and forms are evident in Victoria in all sorts of shorter buildings. But interesting shapes and forms aren't evident in Victoria in taller buildings..

This. 

The Reef was originally planned to be ~twice as tall as it ended up being, isn't that right? My memory is hazy on that point. (I'm too full of exacting details from "Only in Victoria, you say?" by Ed Gould.)

The Reef was originally planned to be twice as tall as it ended up being...

Really? That would have been very cool.

...Anyways, we need to relax a little bit...

I won't "relax" until something truly interesting - over 4 floors in height - gets built that isn't just the tarting up of the accepted rectilinear form. Something literally outside the "box"

I could have sworn that it was Mike K. himself who used to gripe about the Reef getting chopped down from the original concept. Am I mixing up projects?

I won't "relax" until something truly interesting - over 4 floors in height - gets built that isn't just the tarting up of the accepted rectilinear form. Something literally outside the "box"

OK, now you're just whining. We have plenty of "truly interesting" buildings that are over 4 floors in height. 

FYI: the original proposal for the Reef site was 10 stories.

 

Controversial building clears zoning hurdle
Malcolm Curtis, Times-Colonist
March 2, 2002
 

The James Bay Neighbourhood Environment Association narrowly approved the project. But Tim Van Alstine, association chairman, said there were a lot of mixed feelings.
 

While the developers are respected for trying to do "progressive things," there is a lingering concern that space for light industry near the harbour will dwindle even further, he said.
 

The Reef is across the road from Shoal Point, another controversial development still under construction, that rises 13 storeys at its highest point. "When (council) approved Shoal Point they changed the whole land-use context for James Bay," said Van Alstine.
 

Van Alstine, meanwhile, is skeptical that The Reef will actually attract many live-work businesses, noting the developers will offer the units for that use for a year and if there is no uptake from buyers the units will revert to residential.

McColl, who originally proposed a 10-storey building for the site two years ago, disagrees.
 

"We really think there's a genuine need for this," he said. With the imminent layoff of hundreds of provincial government workers, he believes many of them will be looking at opportunities to set up businesses.

Edited by aastra, 08 November 2017 - 01:34 PM.

...We have plenty of "truly interesting" buildings that are over 4 floors in height. 

With the exception of the previously mentioned Shutters & Aria, which tall buildings from the past decade in the CoV do not employ a variation on the 90-degree angle box form?

Now the bar is tall? Two posts ago you said 4 floors. In your previous post you said "truly interesting", now you've change the goalposts to curved buildings? 99% of buildings are made up of right angles. 

Anyway, to answer your question, off the top of my head I can think of the Atrium, Save on Foods Memorial Centre, Janion, Juliet and several buildings at Selkirk that are "truly interesting" by your odd definition. 

So by your definition, are the Falls, Promontory, Marriott, Astoria, Era and Corazon not "truly interesting"? 

Now the bar is tall? Two posts ago you said 4 floors. In your previous post you said "truly interesting", now you've change the goalposts to curved buildings? 99% of buildings are made up of right angles...

I suppose I could have been more exact when I said over 4 floors, but I would have thought from my previous posts that was understood

Nparker, on 07 Nov 2017 - 4:37 PM, said:

I'd really like to see someone successfully propose and build something that wasn't basically a 4-cornered vertical or horizontal box. A 20-storey curved wall or even a facade with a significant 45 degree angle would be amazing.

Also if you read back further (in numerous threads) I have mentioned my desire to see something other than 90 degree buildings. So that's hardly new information either.

.. are the Falls, Promontory, Marriott, Astoria, Era and Corazon not "truly interesting" 

While they are tall (at least by CoV standards), and they are not unattractive, there is nothing inherently unique or interesting about them by contemporary architectural construction. Bonus points to the Falls for offering some variation in height. Since you mention the Astoria, how cool would it have been if the south facing facade of the tower had continued the same curve as the podium?

Now all of this being said, I will take just about any building constructed in downtown Victoria in the past 15 years over the pure dreck that is much of the pre-Shutters era at the Songhees.

The Falls proves that a modern apartment building doesn't need to have either curves or sharp angles in order to stand out.

Generally speaking curved facades are problematic for residents. They simply don’t function well and finding furniture to fit along the panes can be a real problem.

A First Wold problem, to be sure.  

Parc Residences has a curved roof.

Generally speaking curved facades are problematic for residents. They simply don’t function well and finding furniture to fit along the panes can be a real problem.

Convex doors can be problematic as well.

I could have sworn that it was Mike K. himself who used to gripe about the Reef getting chopped down from the original concept. Am I mixing up projects?