HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #6141  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2012, 12:33 PM
vanman's Avatar
vanman vanman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,487
^Yeah that's right. And that really — pawn shop.
     
     
  #6142  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2012, 2:34 PM
Chadillaccc's Avatar
Chadillaccc Chadillaccc is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 22,842
It's so funny because the current Edmonds Village is quite nice and in my opinion was very well done and feels welcoming, then RIGHT next door you have this terrible parking lot with this terrible run down pawn shop and Value village. My ex loved that value village though especially around halloween
     
     
  #6143  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2012, 3:33 PM
LeftCoaster's Avatar
LeftCoaster LeftCoaster is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 13,169
Wow very nice.

I'm getting a little sick of the boxes like the one seen at the top of the tower on the right, but on the whole that's a great looking development.
     
     
  #6144  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2012, 3:49 PM
Chadillaccc's Avatar
Chadillaccc Chadillaccc is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 22,842
and the good thing about Burnaby is they don't have the UDP to screw everything up! Hopefully it will get built as designed like most Burnaby projects
     
     
  #6145  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2012, 5:13 PM
Martin Mtl's Avatar
Martin Mtl Martin Mtl is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 9,075
The crane is up for this one in Old Montreal.



     
     
  #6146  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2012, 9:29 PM
Robertpuant Robertpuant is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 841
^^^ I'm glad this one is starting! It's been on ice for quite some time now.


It's too early to confirmed any of this info, but those are the last info mentioned in a 4-5 pages Lapresse issue on Montreal's real estate.



Le V went from 40 (136m) to 44 stories (138m).




Le Roccabella is now mentioned to be 40 stories and 147m.




TOM condos is still 40 stories, but we now know it'll be 122m.




Icone at 40 stories is said to be 145m tall.

     
     
  #6147  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2012, 9:37 PM
Chadillaccc's Avatar
Chadillaccc Chadillaccc is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 22,842
Eeeek I love all of them! Especially the height increases and Icone! So pretty!
     
     
  #6148  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2012, 10:19 PM
O-tacular's Avatar
O-tacular O-tacular is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 26,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Architect View Post
I don't know if this has been posted, but the Church of Scientology is finally fixing up their building at 696 Yonge Street, which has looked like it belongs in New Jersey (and not the nice part) for years. They've already moved to another location for the reno.

Here's what it looks like now (the ugly taller building that says "SCIENTOLOGY" on it):
https://maps.google.ca/maps?q=696+Yonge+Street,+Toronto

And here's what the new face will look like:



It's not incredible, but especially compared to the current building I very much welcome the splash of colour.
They should make the new face of the building a giant, baby eating image of Tom Cruise.
     
     
  #6149  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2012, 10:21 PM
O-tacular's Avatar
O-tacular O-tacular is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 26,321
Nice to see Montreal getting some decent proposals. Icone looks really cool. TOM also looks interesting. Not a huge fan of Le V though.
     
     
  #6150  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2012, 12:23 AM
MTLskyline's Avatar
MTLskyline MTLskyline is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,258
I don't get why people like TOM. I find it horrible.
     
     
  #6151  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2012, 12:30 AM
Rico Rommheim's Avatar
Rico Rommheim Rico Rommheim is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 13,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTLskyline View Post
I don't get why people like TOM. I find it horrible
Because its tall.
     
     
  #6152  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2012, 12:39 AM
Chadillaccc's Avatar
Chadillaccc Chadillaccc is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 22,842
I just like it because it looks cool with all the bends, but yet the lines are so clean. I dunno. Also I like darker coloured towers.
     
     
  #6153  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2012, 1:14 AM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is online now
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 36,348
Just for the record: I am horrified by that Hilton proposal and will be ashamed if it is built here. It should be by an airport in Tallahassee, not in downtown St. John's. It is a hideous fast food auto parts dealer warehouse industrial park eyesore. Zero elegance. No beauty. Cheap, tacky... Yuck.
     
     
  #6154  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2012, 1:25 AM
Marty_Mcfly's Avatar
Marty_Mcfly Marty_Mcfly is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,642
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newfoundlander View Post
Just for the record: I am horrified by that Hilton proposal and will be ashamed if it is built here. It should be by an airport in Tallahassee, not in downtown St. John's. It is a hideous fast food auto parts dealer warehouse industrial park eyesore. Zero elegance. No beauty. Cheap, tacky... Yuck.
If anyone from Tallahassee actually sees what you've been writing about them I can't protect you from what they may do

If we're stuck between the two designs I'll probably float with the older one just because it looks cleaner, though I like the street-level of the new design. I know asking for re-design number three would probably be project homicide though.
     
     
  #6155  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2012, 1:37 AM
Martin Mtl's Avatar
Martin Mtl Martin Mtl is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 9,075
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim View Post
Because its tall.
Yet it wont register much in the skyline. It's really a filler.
     
     
  #6156  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2012, 3:28 AM
thmx
 
Posts: n/a
Content removed
     
     
  #6157  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2012, 4:24 AM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 36,019
It is really up to cities to create development approval processes that can weed out these bad designs. The fact is that, if they are pushed, even large chains will build better buildings. At the end of the day, I don't think better architecture has much of an impact on their bottom line, but they will cut what costs they can. As a result the cities that approve indiscriminately get terrible, generic buildings.

Atlantic Canada in particular is far behind the times in terms of architecture and city planning. One common problem in the region is that people think they want developers to recreate heritage buildings. Unfortunately it's normally prohibitively expensive to recreate those buildings, so cheap knock-offs are built instead. People think they are getting Victorian brick and stone buildings but they are getting veneer, precast panels, and press-on plastic and foam components. Invariably the proportions of the buildings are also hideously warped as developers try to stuff in extra space, garage doors, etc. In the end it's not worth it at all.

Hopefully St. John's will get it together quickly enough that some decent buildings will come out of this cycle of construction.
     
     
  #6158  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2012, 4:56 AM
Marty_Mcfly's Avatar
Marty_Mcfly Marty_Mcfly is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,642
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
Hopefully St. John's will get it together quickly enough that some decent buildings will come out of this cycle of construction.
Eventually the heritage committee will try and have all new office buildings built using old clapboards and driftwood. Developers will always be held by the throat by these cold-on-development heritage types who shudder at the thought of any type of design that doesn't mirror jellybean row. And of course also by those people who feel that the view of the harbour is their god given right. Even those near Springdale whos view is the Oceanex terminal, industrial dock, and sewer treatment plant.
     
     
  #6159  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2012, 1:53 PM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is online now
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 36,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
Hopefully St. John's will get it together quickly enough that some decent buildings will come out of this cycle of construction.
Fingers crossed.

We nailed it with Fortis Place, the Henry-Bell Condo Complex, and 351 but, beyond that, our new buildings are in 7/10 territory at best, in my opinion.

I'd like us to elevate the standard a little more.

And this Hilton proposal is a monstrous leap backwards. It's not intended to be one of our landmark buildings, but because of its height, it will be. So this design is unacceptable.
     
     
  #6160  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2012, 2:04 PM
PoscStudent's Avatar
PoscStudent PoscStudent is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,817
The new building with Henry Bell is a complete monstrosity.
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Closed Thread

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:47 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.