[St. John's] The Official Project Thread - Page 55

PoscStudent · #**1081** Posted **Mar 24, 2010, 2:31 AM**

^ I think the smaller panels of glass really finishes off the design, it looks greeat.

MalcolmTucker · #**1082** Posted **Mar 24, 2010, 2:41 AM**

The podium is

Tower is not incredibly bad, could be improved by articulating the glass pattern into build form. Cantilever out a side of the tower. But still this building is a camel (to be sure it is a bit of an improvement over the Fortis proposal, but considering how weak the proposal is...)

Architype · #**1083** Posted **Mar 24, 2010, 2:42 AM**

Now I actually wish that this was the real proposal seeing as everyone (well maybe not everyone) likes it; and not because I drew it, but because it is the type of design which could come out as rather iconic.

I spoke too soon. lol

^ The podium, yes that needs work. What's a camel ?

BTW I cut out the top left section to help preserve the view (in theory). As for cantilevering, where it comes up from the podium would'nt be visible from the street. It would be set back quite a bit. The other side could be different.

MalcolmTucker · #**1084** Posted **Mar 24, 2010, 2:49 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Architype

Now I actually wish that this was the real proposal seeing as everyone (well maybe not everyone) likes it; and not because I drew it, but because it is the type of design which could come out as rather iconic.

^ The podium, yes that needs work. What's a camel ?

A horse designed by committee.

Architype · #**1085** Posted **Mar 24, 2010, 2:55 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sir.Humphrey.Appleby

A horse designed by committee.

LOL - that's sort of what it is. The podium is heritage building facades with one or two stories with balconies recessed on top, and a new formal entrance with tall semi-classical columns. (I might have somewhat unusual taste).

Marty_Mcfly · #**1086** Posted **Mar 24, 2010, 3:04 AM**

I have to say Architype, I love your latest design for the Fortis tower. That's something I'd love to have built in our downtown. It makes me wonder why the developers at Fortis couldn't be as imaginative as this.

Architype · #**1087** Posted **Mar 24, 2010, 3:07 AM**

Here's another one, this one more grandiose, completely inappropriate, maybe?

Again, this one just for fun.
But seriously, many cities in th U.S. do have buildings of siimilar style.

PoscStudent · #**1088** Posted **Mar 24, 2010, 3:36 AM**

^ This one looks good as well but it is to over the top for the area, it doesn't fit in with the existing Fortis building or the TD buildings at all. Some people would probably appreciate this style better but I prefer your other design better.

Architype · #**1089** Posted **Mar 24, 2010, 4:22 AM**

Yes it's over the top, an exercise in drawing & futility.
Something much more toned down might be ok though.
But then, who says the Fortis and TD actually fit in to begin with, most people think they don't.

jeddy1989 · #**1090** Posted **Mar 24, 2010, 4:46 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Architype

Yes it's over the top, an exercise in drawing & futility.
Something much more toned down might be ok though.
But then, who says the Fortis and TD actually fit in to begin with, most people think they don't.

you have a point ... however this type of grandure with a historic flare to it doesnt fit in on top of the other historic buildings ... its like it'd need its own area not in the quiant small scale historic buildings ... it would fit in more near other buildings like if it had a place near the anglican cathedral and the court house ... that type of area ... but not there ... the other ones look like they fit better because they are modern ontop of historic ,,, not modern mixed into a historic frame .. cuz the modern fits in and improves the look of the already "modern" and larger scale buildings however a historic shell like taht is way out of scale with the other historic properties... its like it doesnt fit in with the modern nor the historic in that particular location..... love the concept tho but not for there

PoscStudent · #**1091** Posted **Mar 24, 2010, 2:49 PM**

^ An area I would like to see developed is the church parking lot in between Long's Hill ad Harvey road, Im not sure what church it is.

I thought the lot would be a great spot for a parking garage and some office space on Harvey Road, possibly looking like row houses, but if something were built it would need to fit in with the church and your latest design could probably do that Architype.

PoscStudent · #**1092** Posted **Mar 24, 2010, 6:46 PM**

I was down on the east end of downtown today and the area is starting to look really good. The of exterior of The Narrows Condominiums is nearly finished, I dont no how far along they are on the inside though. The condo looks better then the picture I think. Excavation where the the Harbourside Condo is going seems to have started. Although I never saw what was happening with the Fort William Station Condominium, work on that development has been going on a while so it should be close to being done.

I went down that way to go to the Fort William ("Aliant") Building, which is also getting alot of renovations done in preperation of Johnson Insurance moving in there. Johnson Indurance is going to be taking up alot of the building and is actually creating new office space on the first floor. Aliant will be moving out of the building according to the security guard, which is who filled me in on the information.

niccanning · #**1093** Posted **Mar 24, 2010, 10:51 PM**

Woah! What's on the go with the Fort William Building? Are they doing renovations on the outside. As it is the place looks like a jail in my opinion.

niccanning · #**1094** Posted **Mar 25, 2010, 12:49 AM**

Actually I just found this

"In total, Johnson will lease approximately 80,000 square feet with options for more space should additional be required. The company plans to revitalize space in this signature building with the expertise of St. John's based architect, Ron Fougere."
- from http://www.johnson.ca/root/about/new...ng_update.jspx

Does anything know anything about Ron Fougere?

HomeInMyShoes · #**1095** Posted **Mar 25, 2010, 11:30 AM**

^Almost nil. I haven't been able to find a web-site that I can find through searching the Web. Found the architect's e-mail, but the seemingly domain specific email address does not match with any existing web-site that I can find. Got an address, but on Google Streetview, there's no sign out front of the building even suggesting that an architecture firm is there.

nl_eng · #**1096** Posted **Mar 25, 2010, 6:21 PM**

Fougere is the architect for the Confederation Building window replacement project as far as I know. Beyond that, I know he's been associated with John Hearn in a joint venture, but in terms of specific projects, I don't know which ones.

Architype · #**1097** Posted **Mar 27, 2010, 7:59 PM**

There was an article a while ago where a city councillor identified a need for a downtown public library. (Sorry, the link is now gone). I am wondering if they have ever considered the possibility of this being provided as a density bonus. Things like this, including public library branches, can be considered amenities and have been providied as density bonuses in other cities. I don't know how much space is needed, but it might work in a development such as the proposed Fortis one.

Here is a link which gives some insight into how vancouver has benefited from density bonuses, I think some of these principles could be applied to St. John's, or any city with development, at some point, now or in the future:
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/wuf/hi....esentation.pdf

Architype · #**1098** Posted **Mar 27, 2010, 8:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by niccanning

Woah! What's on the go with the Fort William Building? Are they doing renovations on the outside. As it is the place looks like a jail in my opinion.

I don't know much about that, but I always thought it was an interesting building. It seems unique and certainly not typical design, but maybe not ideal as an office building (mostly brick with not much window area) with more corners than you can count. I wonder who designed it back in the 70's; they put a lot of work into it which you would not likely see today because of costs.

Info on the Fort William Building

ConundrumNL · #**1099** Posted **Mar 27, 2010, 9:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by PoscStudent

^ Exactly it needs more significance then just being "old", which most houses really aren't.

I liked the point I saw brought up somewhere else, someone asked how upset would people be if the government decided to tear down the Waterford Hospital, which is one of the oldest buildings in the city? I don't believe the hospital is designated in the the heritage district.

Same goes for the Pen, sections of that were built in the late 1800's. I can't tell from the map if it's in a heritage area.

nl_eng · #**1100** Posted **Mar 27, 2010, 9:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ConundrumNL

Same goes for the Pen, sections of that were built in the late 1800's. I can't tell from the map if it's in a heritage area.

I'm not sure if it lies within the heritage area either, but since it is a provincial building/property, regardless of whether it lies within the area or not, it is exempt from City regulations. The Province may merely choose to humour the City's process by granting land use assessments and public meetings for any development/redevelopment on its property - in the end, none of it binds the Crown.

Needless to say, if the Provincial Government wants to build a 15 storey square glass-clad office tower (for example) in the middle of the heritage area on Crown property, the City and the residents are out of luck!

P.S. And that includes if the Province wants to tear down "historic" structures on its land for redevelopment!