The Ugly Canada Thread - Page 110

O-tacular · #**2181** Posted **Jun 25, 2015, 1:15 PM**

Though not Waterloo caliber here's a little extra on our ugliest condo in recent memory: Live on the Park. People in the Calgary forum were talking about condo unit layouts and how some condos create useless extra square footage to up the price of units. Here's from that conversation:

Quote:

Originally Posted by geotag277

Nearly 1000 square feet of pure tetris!

So in addition to living in this blue monstrosity which took something like 4 years past the promised delivery date, you can own a puzzle piece for a unit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Surrealplaces

Live on Park by Construction Mania, on Flickr

O-tacular · #**2182** Posted **Jun 25, 2015, 1:26 PM**

And another funny detail from that horror show of a building.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockyview

Looks like the intercom for buzzing residents. It just me or this thing in such an odd location that it kinda sticks out like a sore thumb? It is literally just right off the sidewalk.

Last week they removed the few pieces of blue glass installed where the tape is. Just a guess, but I think this will be covered with black glass instead of the blue to match the trim on each side.

1overcosc · #**2183** Posted **Jun 25, 2015, 2:48 PM**

Horrible layout in that 1000 square footer.

The trend of using square footage as an absolute measurement of size & space is horrible. Layout matters way more. I've seen 500 square foot places that feel absolutely roomy and 900 square foot places that are cramped as hell. My Ottawa apartment is a 240 square foot bachelor, yet I still find it comfortable enough because it's set up as one big square which makes it feel open and bigger.

Then again if this trend of basing pricing on square footage lets me get a cheap place with a good layout, I'm not complaining

hipster duck · #**2184** Posted **Jun 25, 2015, 5:42 PM**

^Agreed. There are some horrible layouts in new buildings. In the photo O-tacular posted, the layout immediately above the one that was shown looks to be even worse.

Say what you want about those 1960s-1970s era slabs, but the very formulaic boxy design of them made for predictable, useful interiors.

Since Vancouver is a very planning-driven city focused on aesthetics and form, the interiors of a lot of condo towers are compromised. I had a friend who lived in the gorgeous Woodwards tower. However, given the diamond shape of the building, his unit was shaped like a boomerang and organized as a series of interconnected rooms. Horrible design.

esquire · #**2185** Posted **Jun 25, 2015, 6:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by hipster duck

^Agreed. There are some horrible layouts in new buildings. In the photo O-tacular posted, the layout immediately above the one that was shown looks to be even worse.

Say what you want about those 1960s-1970s era slabs, but the very formulaic boxy design of them made for predictable, useful interiors.

Since Vancouver is a very planning-driven city focused on aesthetics and form, the interiors of a lot of condo towers are compromised. I had a friend who lived in the gorgeous Woodwards tower. However, given the diamond shape of the building, his unit was shaped like a boomerang and organized as a series of interconnected rooms. Horrible design.

I don't think Live on the Park's layout is really that bad... I'd be happy with that suite. Personally, I don't mind a few nooks and crannies as opposed to a simple rectangle ("open concept" in realtor vernacular). To me a place feels small when you can see almost every inch of it standing in one place... that suite feels like it has different distinct parts. You could have two roommates living in there, for example, without feeling like they're in each other's faces 100% of the time.

1overcosc · #**2186** Posted **Jun 25, 2015, 6:45 PM**

I've noticed in my years of apartment hunting that the commie block slabs may be ugly but they have really well designed interiors. My building in Ottawa was built in 1958 atop a lot that previously housed an Edwardian-era mansion (many such mansions exist/existed in my area of Ottawa due to its past legacy as the main neighbourhood for the higher-end bureaucrats prior to WW2--most that survived have been repurposed as embassies or NGO HQs).

I've seen plenty of units with very low square footages (sub 500 square feet) in old buildings that look like very liveable spaces.. have not seen a single one in a newer building.

esquire · #**2187** Posted **Jun 25, 2015, 7:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

I've noticed in my years of apartment hunting that the commie block slabs may be ugly but they have really well designed interiors. My building in Ottawa was built in 1958 atop a lot that previously housed an Edwardian-era mansion (many such mansions exist/existed in my area of Ottawa due to its past legacy as the main neighbourhood for the higher-end bureaucrats prior to WW2--most that survived have been repurposed as embassies or NGO HQs).

I've seen plenty of units with very low square footages (sub 500 square feet) in old buildings that look like very liveable spaces.. have not seen a single one in a newer building.

I agree completely. When my wife is watching HGTV shows, the people being featured, whether they're house-hunting or renovating, always utter the mantra of "open concept...open concept...open concept" but I don't think it's necessarily better that way.

kwoldtimer · #**2188** Posted **Jun 25, 2015, 7:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

Looks like Canada's version of Lady Liberty, except smaller.. and in the middle of nowhere.

Why would it be built in Cape Breton btw?

One of the mysteries.

WhipperSnapper · #**2189** Posted **Jun 25, 2015, 7:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire

I don't think Live on the Park's layout is really that bad... I'd be happy with that suite. Personally, I don't mind a few nooks and crannies as opposed to a simple rectangle ("open concept" in realtor vernacular). To me a place feels small when you can see almost every inch of it standing in one place... that suite feels like it has different distinct parts. You could have two roommates living in there, for example, without feeling like they're in each other's faces 100% of the time.

No. The layout is AWFUL. The closet is no where near the front door. The dining room is no where near the crammed in kitchen and the second bathroom is clear across the whole apartment from the seating area and 2nd bedroom. Two roommates would trip over each other constantly. They'd lose their voices buy saying pardon me one too many times.

O-tacular · #**2190** Posted **Jun 25, 2015, 8:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

No. The layout is AWFUL. The closet is no where near the front door. The dining room is no where near the crammed in kitchen and the second bathroom is clear across the whole apartment from the seating area and 2nd bedroom. Two roommates would trip over each other constantly. They'd lose their voices buy saying pardon me one too many times.

To say nothing about the fridge having to open in the narrow entrance corridor. Essentially you are paying extra for a long hallway. I seem to recall some of Brad Lamb's recent units here offering similar uselessly long halls.

Also you'd get smacked in the face anytime the front door opens and you are editing the full bathroom at the front.

Edit: Am I the only one who thinks it would make way more sense to have the living room where they have the attached master on suite? That way you could leave it open and avoid that stupid wall.

O-tacular · #**2191** Posted **Jun 27, 2015, 1:28 AM**

Some new commie blocks being proposed for Calgary's Westbrook Village TOD site. These are the first towers proposed for the area as part of the new TOD zoning above the underground lrt station. What a disappointment.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Surrealplaces

A few Friday afternoon renderings to kick off the weekend. This is the 501 unit proposal for Westbrook.

Rico Rommheim · #**2192** Posted **Jun 27, 2015, 1:03 PM**

The corner of St-Antoine and De la Montagne, on the southern flank of downtown Montreal. The Bell Centre's hideous southern facade, abandonned buildings, empty lots and a railway viaduct.

by nephersir7 on mtlurb

Screen Shot 2015-06-27 at 9.04.37 AM by Rommheim, on Flickr

O-tacular · #**2193** Posted **Jun 27, 2015, 3:19 PM**

Do those tracks actually go through the Bell Centre?

Rico Rommheim · #**2194** Posted **Jun 27, 2015, 3:48 PM**

Nope. These tracks used to go to CP's Windsor station but since they built the bell centre all tracks stop at the joke station Lucien L'Allier.
An embarrassingly undersized downtown terminus.

SkahHigh · #**2195** Posted **Jun 27, 2015, 4:22 PM**

Lucien-L'Allier's tracks will be covered with the PPU des Gares I believe (and hope). And all that wasteland south of the Bell Centre will be developed in 10 years with Cadillac Fairview's proposals.

Darkoshvilli · #**2196** Posted **Jun 27, 2015, 4:25 PM**

You'd think they'd try and make the home of the most storied franchise in hockey not look like a factory. You'd think.

Rico Rommheim · #**2197** Posted **Jun 27, 2015, 6:26 PM**

Yep. The bell Centre is a complete fuck up. From its hideous outside aesthetic, to its cramped interior hallways,and the fact that building it there, on Windsor Station's trackage, was completely unnecessary. But really, it truly is an uncomfortable building.

My hope is that one day they completely re-clad the exterior with some nice charcoal black brick, you know, devoid of metal panels and shit.

SkahHigh · #**2198** Posted **Jun 27, 2015, 7:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim

Yep. The bell Centre is a complete fuck up. From its hideous outside aesthetic, to its cramped interior hallways,and the fact that building it there, on Windsor Station's trackage, was completely unnecessary. But really, it truly is an uncomfortable building.

My hope is that one day they completely re-clad the exterior with some nice charcoal black brick, you know, devoid of metal panels and shit.

The north and east facades are OK but the south and west ones are a disgrace. Luckily, the south side isn't the one facing Downtown...

And I will never get over the fact that they built this over the Windsor Station tracks instead of the (still empty) lot just south of Saint-Antoine. What a lack of vision.

O-tacular · #**2199** Posted **Jun 27, 2015, 7:15 PM**

To me Bell Centre isn't that bad. Haven't been inside though so I can only comment on the extrerior. Location is a little weird though on top of the tracks like that. That station is bizarre. How do passengers even disembark?

matthew6 · #**2200** Posted **Jun 27, 2015, 7:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim

Yep. The bell Centre is a complete fuck up. From its hideous outside aesthetic, to its cramped interior hallways,and the fact that building it there, on Windsor Station's trackage, was completely unnecessary. But really, it truly is an uncomfortable building.

My hope is that one day they completely re-clad the exterior with some nice charcoal black brick, you know, devoid of metal panels and shit.

Well the Montreal forum wasn't much of a looker but at least it was on a street that had pedestrian activity .... Something the Bell Center will never have even when the area is further 'developed'