[St. John's] The Official Project Thread

[Architype]

Originally Posted by PoscStudent

351 still seems so short.

Because the building has mostly horizontal lines, it looks even shorter and bulkier, like horizontal stripes on an overweight person. They should put some flagpoles on top, that would look good.

[SignalHillHiker]

March 13, 2013

An update on our two biggest projects currently U/C.

Fortis Place:



351:



TD Place:

[SignalHillHiker]

[Townie709]

Looking good! The Fortis-TD corner will look fantastic once both the TD and Fortis Building reclads are complete. The glass section on TD place looks fantastic at night! (Now if only they could just slap on a few more beige panels and remove the damn red brick, all would be well.)

I will agree that 351 looks stubby from the side angle. Though, you can't expect the first office building here in 25 years to be monstrously tall! While I think a few more stories would have overall made the building look much better, I still love it. I like Architype's idea of a flagpole! That could give it a "false" sense of height that could reduce the stubby effect. Another reason I think it looks stubby is the angle of the picture. Looking down on something from above generally makes it look shorter. (Edit: you'll notice in the pictures signal took from the south side of the harbour, 351 looks much taller because it is looking directly at it, as well as on the "skinny" side of it.) From street level, I find 351 looks boxy, but not overwhelmingly stubby. I think the overall view of the building will be made much better when the decorative elements are installed on the parking garage portion. This will make both parts of the building, garage and offices, blend it into one building rather than two distinct structures.

Great shots, as always, Signal

[SignalHillHiker]

I love 351 from Water Street.

I'm not thrilled about the parkade... but I do like how it seems taller and narrower when you're looking right up at it.

And it's wonderful that its in an already very-walkable part of town. Fortis won't get the same street-level love for a long time...

[Arrakis]

Do you guys think that once many more office towers are built downtown at the maximum height limit that they will all start to look weird because everything is the same height. As if they were all chopped off at some point. Just a thought. I think its the difference heights of buildings that give cities their distinctive skyline and uniqueness. I agree that both Fortis and 351 are nice looking buildings but as they are both near completion I can't help but feel they should be taller also.

[SignalHillHiker]

I don't think it's a risk for us because of the hills. They all appear to be slightly different heights - but there's not a significant amount of variation, you're right.

[Marty_Mcfly]

Originally Posted by Arrakis

Do you guys think that once many more office towers are built downtown at the maximum height limit that they will all start to look weird because everything is the same height. As if they were all chopped off at some point. Just a thought. I think its the difference heights of buildings that give cities their distinctive skyline and uniqueness. I agree that both Fortis and 351 are nice looking buildings but as they are both near completion I can't help but feel they should be taller also.

I actually think it looks weird now, especially the run of buildings from Cabot Place across to the two Delta buildings. The Hilton and Deacon buildings will help mix up the skyline a little, but I agree that having a few taller buildings would make the skyline look less flat.

[statbass]

Originally Posted by Arrakis

Do you guys think that once many more office towers are built downtown at the maximum height limit that they will all start to look weird because everything is the same height. As if they were all chopped off at some point. Just a thought. I think its the difference heights of buildings that give cities their distinctive skyline and uniqueness. I agree that both Fortis and 351 are nice looking buildings but as they are both near completion I can't help but feel they should be taller also.

I can assure you that pretty much everyone on this forum feels the same way. Height variation is much needed to give the DT skyline a 'completeness' look.

[Horsell]

Originally Posted by Townie709

...I will agree that 351 looks stubby from the side angle. Though, you can't expect the first office building here in 25 years to be monstrously tall! While I think a few more stories would have overall made the building look much better, I still love it. .... From street level, I find 351 looks boxy, but not overwhelmingly stubby.

While I have always been in favor of 351 I am a little disappointed in how it is turning out. Yes, as parking garages go this one does have some aesthetic features (color, texture) and yes, the glass finish of the tower is appealing too, however I agree with other posters that it looks "stumpy", like that old Christmas tree that you cut the top off of to fit the room. I wonder if some day it might be possible to add a few more floors that could be set back more to break up the straight facade.

When the city meddled in the design to get the extra levels of parking (for which we the tax payers are on the hook for $10 mil) it threw off the proportions of the tower to the garage, thus making it look like one box stacked on another. (Note: to those of you hoping for a hotel on top of Atlantic Place or its garage, be careful what you wish for)

[Architype]

I think the tower would be at it's ideal height if it were twice as tall as the podium (parking garage) height, that's applying an adaptation of the rule of thirds to the height, which assumes that things look better divided into three equal parts.

[SignalHillHiker]

Completely agree.

[PoscStudent]

If the parking garage along the back was all glass it'd make it look a lot taller.

[niccanning]

‏@NLHistoricTrust: On March 20 from 7-9pm @TheRooms_NL will hold an information session on improvements to their grounds and how they will enhance the area.

Read this on Twitter. Off topic, but I wonder if the Rooms with ever uncover the Fort Townshend ruins. I did read at some point that there's quite a bit under the parking lot, but it expensive to excavate.

[SignalHillHiker]

That'd be awesome.

[Horsell]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

I don't think it's a risk for us because of the hills. They all appear to be slightly different heights - but there's not a significant amount of variation, you're right.

I agree with Signal's assertion about the natural slope of the land helping to break up the "flat" skyline but even at that, if everyone is limited to "x" meters (is it 45?), there still won't be the degree of variation that could be achieved with a little more creative development of the regulations.

I don't profess to be a planner or an architect but I think a lot more can be done to define different height restrictions based on location or type of building, or footprint or view plane or angles or any number of things.

For example, individual parcels of land could have slightly different requirements. There could be more trade-offs between footprint vs height. Take 351 as an example, instead of one 6 story office "box", what if the regulation could have been defined to allow two towers, each with a smaller footprint but allow one to be 6 and the other 10 or 12, thus breaking it up.

I realize that there are cost efficiencies in one simple box but if the city could work with developers and architects to compromise on things I think we would all be better off.

[SignalHillHiker]

I wish we would build midrises that looked a little taller.

So many of the buildings proposed for larger cities would look just as gorgeous at 50-100m in height. They don't all have to be so boxy.

Fortis Place is really our first non-box, and even that's accomplished with aesthetics as opposed to a genuinely taller, more slender design.

[jeddy1989]

Rome wasn't built in a day boys, give it time .. remember these are the very first we've had in 25 years and it all came after the horrible thing that happened with the original Fortis proposal... they are not going to just jump into things looking tall and slender when they are afraid they just wont get approved or be shunned out of the city lol. the water is getting warmer and remember when these buildings were proposed, the Fortis fiasco was very very very fresh in people's minds (that's probably the only reason why 351 was rushed through). Even recently they wanted the Hilton to look shorter .. so all these messages are being heard by developers who just want to give their projects the best shot they can at seeing the light of day. Now with us having a voice and the water starting to warm up to development AND 16 story buildings being approved .. it will get better

[SignalHillHiker]

Fingers crossed.

I would, however, still consider the failed Fortis proposal to be VERY boxy.

[jeddy1989]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

Fingers crossed.

I would, however, still consider the failed Fortis proposal to be VERY boxy.

Exactly but the whole fiasco put a bad taste in everyone's mouth when it comes to development, same sort of effect as AP (albeit to a much smaller extent)

personally if they proposed that today even in the west end Dt I'd say that I support it in principle but it would HAVE to be redesigned much like the Hilton situation