Victoria Construction - #7 - Page 120

Vin · #**2381** Posted **Jun 22, 2020, 1:50 AM**

Man, the Yates on Yates and Vivid towers are the ugliest twin towers ever conceived by men. The designer and the approving team ought to be shot (figure of speech of course)! But yeah, Victoria is inundated by some ugly buildings, namely those flats behind the Legislature Building, View Towers, and last but not least, the Tapestry, especially when contrasting with the grand dame Empress. Whatever were people thinking?! I mean, I really cannot imagine ways of making these buildings any uglier.

Some newer structures are pretty nice to look at, but unfortunately they will be overshadowed by the newer monstrosities.

For a while I thought Victoria was once again threading on the right path to becoming an elegant city it was designed for, but the recent developments have made me think otherwise.

aastra · #**2382** Posted **Jun 22, 2020, 3:49 PM**

*BEGIN RANT*

100% of the blame falls on the CoV's design advice and approval processes (including, of course, city council). For the past ~30 years they've been working overtime to blandify every proposal. It's no accident, it's the program. Check the original concept for Sussex Place back in the early 1990s.

There have actually been calls for more spandrel on recent projects. And despite efforts to micro-manage the most trivial architectural aspects, somehow the most obvious things always get overlooked, like this sudden overuse of bland panel cladding on very prominent buildings (or the longstanding issue whereby topmost levels often just terminate abruptly thanks to the height-restriction laser: no culmination, no completion, no resolution of the design).

The new retirement residence is a textbook case. Compare what ended up being built with the first art gallery tower concept. And the funny thing is, all along the criticism was that a highrise was inappropriate for the site. And yet a very conventional highrise ends up being the perfect solution? Even the hyper-critical neighbourhood groups were thrilled with the retirement residence, but they hated the art gallery project.

Also, it seems like Victoria suddenly has the strictest rules in the country re: the amount of glazing allowed on new buildings? You know, because you'd expect the city with the least severe weather extremes to require new buildings to have minimal glazing for environmental reasons. Every other city in Canada still allows sweeping curtainwall windows, even though those cities also need the heat to be cranked for months during the winter and the AC to be cranked for weeks during the summer.

There's a terrific small-footprint junior highrise proposal on Fort Street that's getting nudged in the wrong direction. Apparently city staff think the footprint is too small and they're recommending lot consolidation. On Fort Street. They're actually calling for larger-footprint developments on Fort Street. This is the advice for the unique neighbourhood-style street that runs through the heart of downtown.

Let's not even mention Northern Junk, and the succession of wide-ranging proposals over the past 10 years that have been everything from okay to excellent... but the one thing they had in common was that they were all unacceptable. The developer expressed his frustration very clearly in the recent news item about the latest debacle.

What are we supposed to conclude? It seems like the design advice is generic and has nothing to do with Victoria's context.

*END RANT*

aastra · #**2383** Posted **Jun 22, 2020, 4:18 PM**

Here's the most recent chapter of the Northern Junk saga. Remember, this is the same city that has been crying bloody murder about the "housing crisis" for the past ~70 years, and this is the same city that cares so, so much about heritage and preserving old buildings:

Quote:

...councillors referred the development back to city staff for further refinements.

Reliance president Jon Stovell, who has been trying to develop the site for 10 years, expressed surprise and frustration at yet another rejection.

“It’s just unbearable,” he said. “I just don’t understand how anybody can think that it’s a good outcome to have buildings sitting vacant for 40 years on the waterfront of downtown Victoria. It’s just really almost beyond comprehension.”

from Times-Colonist...

There's an admission in that article that pressures and constraints require developers to build up. Great point, except... the current proposal is five frickin' stories! Victorians in 1895 wouldn't have considered five stories to be tall in the old town. This is what I mean when I say context seems to be irrelevant. We hear warnings about the dangers of building up, as if somebody had been proposing a skyscraper or something. How can you build shorter than five stories? Four stories? Three stories? What difference would it make? Buildings of that height are short neighbourhood-sized buildings any way you slice them.

It's like running the gauntlet when your development proposal comes up against the design panel, heritage panel, & city council. You won't escape the beating, even if you miraculously squeak past one or two of them. And the more unique & interesting your proposal is, the more likely they'll pounce on it.

aastra · #**2384** Posted **Jun 22, 2020, 5:10 PM**

Regarding the panel cladding thing, it looks like the firehall project is yet another big project to come that will be going all-in with it. And no balconies to break it up, either.

But I'll offer some counterpoints to my negativity. The podiums of Chard's new buildings on Yates/Johnson are looking pretty good to my eye. IronWorks is unique (I hope it remains unique and the rust cladding doesn't become a trend now in the old town... I've seen it getting overused on houses already). I'm still excited about the Customs House. As for condo towers, I like Legato's small footprint and the finish to the top level, I like how 989 Johnson is much better than I was expecting and does something different re: the articulation of the podium levels, and I'm pleased with HP1 from most angles (nobody can say it lacks a finish to the top of it). And I still think Jukebox used panels the right way: they're striking rather than bland, and the building design itself isn't conventional.

The downtown Chrysler dealership redevelopment looks like it will have spandrel and panels aplenty but still seems like it will be decent:

Vin · #**2385** Posted **Jun 22, 2020, 6:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by aastra

*BEGIN RANT*

100% of the blame falls on the CoV's design advice and approval processes (including, of course, city council). For the past ~30 years they've been working overtime to blandify every proposal. It's no accident, it's the program. Check the original concept for Sussex Place back in the early 1990s.

There have actually been calls for more spandrel on recent projects. And despite efforts to micro-manage the most trivial architectural aspects, somehow the most obvious things always get overlooked, like this sudden overuse of bland panel cladding on very prominent buildings (or the longstanding issue whereby topmost levels often just terminate abruptly thanks to the height-restriction laser: no culmination, no completion, no resolution of the design).

The new retirement residence is a textbook case. Compare what ended up being built with the first art gallery tower concept. And the funny thing is, all along the criticism was that a highrise was inappropriate for the site. And yet a very conventional highrise ends up being the perfect solution? Even the hyper-critical neighbourhood groups were thrilled with the retirement residence, but they hated the art gallery project.

Also, it seems like Victoria suddenly has the strictest rules in the country re: the amount of glazing allowed on new buildings? You know, because you'd expect the city with the least severe weather extremes to require new buildings to have minimal glazing for environmental reasons. Every other city in Canada still allows sweeping curtainwall windows, even though those cities also need the heat to be cranked for months during the winter and the AC to be cranked for weeks during the summer.

There's a terrific small-footprint junior highrise proposal on Fort Street that's getting nudged in the wrong direction. Apparently city staff think the footprint is too small and they're recommending lot consolidation. On Fort Street. They're actually calling for larger-footprint developments on Fort Street. This is the advice for the unique neighbourhood-style street that runs through the heart of downtown.

Let's not even mention Northern Junk, and the succession of wide-ranging proposals over the past 10 years that have been everything from okay to excellent... but the one thing they had in common was that they were all unacceptable. The developer expressed his frustration very clearly in the recent news item about the latest debacle.

What are we supposed to conclude? It seems like the design advice is generic and has nothing to do with Victoria's context.

*END RANT*

Victorians should vote you in as the building approval chair, seriously. I don't know what it is, but the British administrators and designers of Victoria did a wonderful job creating a really nice city to start. They had the whole world of experience in Europe: being influenced by all the beautiful architecture there. Take Francis Rattenbury for example: a Brit immigrant from Leeds in his mid-20s designed two of the most iconic and beautiful buildings in Western Canada. The current City administrators, planners and designers are totally not up to the mark, and that explains why the City is getting uglier, starting from the creation of Commie blocks in the 50s, to the BC Royal Museum building and now the very ugly retirement home beside it.

The Great Scaper · #**2386** Posted **Jun 23, 2020, 1:22 AM**

I don't understand why such unattractive buildings are getting approved. It's awful.

I posted a comment and pictures on the group "You know you are from Victoria When" on Facebook of the old Westbank proposal

Crystal View photos, Victoria B.C. Art Gallery Proposal by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

And this picture

The Tapestry by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

And Facebook sent me a message saying they erased my post.

Also I just read this on Check 6 news. This is just crazy.

https://www.cheknews.ca/victoria-cit...street-677573/

The Great Scaper · #**2387** Posted **Jun 25, 2020, 4:58 AM**

Sorry it took so long to repost my photos.

Some of these aren't that great. Especially the ones taken from Mount Doug and Metchosin. Either way I thought I would share them on here. I hope everyone is doing well during this time. Crazy times we live in.

Victoria B.C. Canada skyline by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

Vic West After completion year 2020 by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

Victoria B.C. Canada skyline by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

Downtown Victoria B.C. Canada by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

Victoria B.C. Canada skyline by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

Victoria B.C. Canada by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

Victoria B.C. Canada skyline by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

Victoria B.C. Canada by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

Victoria B.C. Canada skyline by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

Downtown Victoria B.C. Canada by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

Max zoom Downtown Victoria B.C. Canada by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

Downtown Victoria B.C. Canada by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

Victoria B.C. Canada by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

Downtown Victoria B.C. Canada by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

High Rises in Victoria B.C. Canada by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

svlt · #**2388** Posted **Jun 25, 2020, 5:38 PM**

Fantastic shots! Thanks for sharing.

Phil McAvity · #**2389** Posted **Jun 28, 2020, 9:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vin

Man, the Yates on Yates and Vivid towers are the ugliest twin towers ever conceived by men.

I remember a certain forumer here saying the same thing about Uptown before it was finished years ago, yet in spite of the fact 8 years later the whole thing still isn't finished, so far it's pretty nice so wait until they're done before passing judgment

Quote:

Originally Posted by aastra

*BEGIN RANT*

100% of the blame falls on the CoV's design advice and approval processes (including, of course, city council). For the past ~30 years they've been working overtime to blandify every proposal. It's no accident, it's the program. Check the original concept for Sussex Place back in the early 1990s.

There have actually been calls for more spandrel on recent projects. And despite efforts to micro-manage the most trivial architectural aspects, somehow the most obvious things always get overlooked, like this sudden overuse of bland panel cladding on very prominent buildings (or the longstanding issue whereby topmost levels often just terminate abruptly thanks to the height-restriction laser: no culmination, no completion, no resolution of the design).

The new retirement residence is a textbook case. Compare what ended up being built with the first art gallery tower concept. And the funny thing is, all along the criticism was that a highrise was inappropriate for the site. And yet a very conventional highrise ends up being the perfect solution? Even the hyper-critical neighbourhood groups were thrilled with the retirement residence, but they hated the art gallery project.

Also, it seems like Victoria suddenly has the strictest rules in the country re: the amount of glazing allowed on new buildings? You know, because you'd expect the city with the least severe weather extremes to require new buildings to have minimal glazing for environmental reasons. Every other city in Canada still allows sweeping curtainwall windows, even though those cities also need the heat to be cranked for months during the winter and the AC to be cranked for weeks during the summer.

There's a terrific small-footprint junior highrise proposal on Fort Street that's getting nudged in the wrong direction. Apparently city staff think the footprint is too small and they're recommending lot consolidation. On Fort Street. They're actually calling for larger-footprint developments on Fort Street. This is the advice for the unique neighbourhood-style street that runs through the heart of downtown.

Let's not even mention Northern Junk, and the succession of wide-ranging proposals over the past 10 years that have been everything from okay to excellent... but the one thing they had in common was that they were all unacceptable. The developer expressed his frustration very clearly in the recent news item about the latest debacle.

What are we supposed to conclude? It seems like the design advice is generic and has nothing to do with Victoria's context.

*END RANT*

After that big rant you didn't make the final, logical connection which is, that there's too much government. Government tends to be wasteful, expensive and inefficient and local government is no different. Why any proposal has to go through not one, not two but three little committees is ridiculous but I guess that way the city can justify their bloated budgets

Jarrod · #**2390** Posted **Jun 30, 2020, 12:03 AM**

Wow, Victoria sure has changed since the last time I was there (2008ish?)
I'll have to make a visit the next time at my parents up-island.

Great pictures.

The Great Scaper · #**2391** Posted **Jun 30, 2020, 4:15 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jarrod

Wow, Victoria sure has changed since the last time I was there (2008ish?)
I'll have to make a visit the next time at my parents up-island.

Great pictures.

Hey Jarrod. It's so nice to hear from you. I hope you are doing well in Edmonton. Time goes by so quickly it's crazy.

Vin · #**2392** Posted **Jul 2, 2020, 3:46 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Great Scaper

I don't understand why such unattractive buildings are getting approved. It's awful.

I posted a comment and pictures on the group "You know you are from Victoria When" on Facebook of the old Westbank proposal

Crystal View photos, Victoria B.C. Art Gallery Proposal by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

And this picture

The Tapestry by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

And Facebook sent me a message saying they erased my post.

Also I just read this on Check 6 news. This is just crazy.

https://www.cheknews.ca/victoria-cit...street-677573/

Nobody can dispute this observation. It is clearly night and day comparison.

Happy Canada Day everyone.

The Great Scaper · #**2393** Posted **Jul 17, 2020, 1:58 AM**

I was at the dump today and there was a guy beside me wearing a hudson walk t shirt. I said "That's an awesome shirt" He said yeah I built that building. I asked him "I have a weird question for you." "Can I take a picture of your shirt?" The guy was so proud of his t shirt. It was really funny. So I took a picture with my cell phone.

The front of his shirt

Hudson walk t shirt by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

The back of his shirt

hudson walk t shirt by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

Vin · #**2394** Posted **Jul 17, 2020, 7:32 PM**

Lol, great story. If I were a builder for buildings like View Towers, Vivid on Yates or Tapestry, I would shy away from wearing the building's T-shirt if I don't want projectiles flying my way: just saying.

The Great Scaper · #**2395** Posted **Jul 19, 2020, 4:47 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vin

Lol, great story. If I were a builder for buildings like View Towers, Vivid on Yates or Tapestry, I would shy away from wearing the building's T-shirt if I don't want projectiles flying my way: just saying.

That's funny.

The Lord works in mysterious ways. I have never seen a Hudson Walk t shirt before but I have seen 2 in two days. I posted yesterday a guy at the dump who was wearing a Hudson Walk 2 t shirt. Tonight I was going into Thrifty Foods and a guy came out wearing a Hudson Walk 1 t shirt. I said to this guy “can I ask you a weird question?” “Can I take a picture of your t shirt?” The guy said no man! I said “no worries. It’s a really cool t shirt” then the guy said “I am being a dick” “You can take a picture” then he said "It's not every day you see a t shirt with a landmark building on it" . Anyways I had to post this tonight. 😀

hudson 1 t shirt by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

aastra · #**2396** Posted **Jul 19, 2020, 7:47 PM**

This is crazy, but as I'm reading this I'm wearing a shirt that has a picture of View Towers on it.

Vin · #**2397** Posted **Jul 20, 2020, 6:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by aastra

This is crazy, but as I'm reading this I'm wearing a shirt that has a picture of View Towers on it.

Watch it there, you got a bull's eye painted right on your T-shirt

The Great Scaper · #**2398** Posted **Jul 22, 2020, 4:12 AM**

Aastra I want a View Tower's t shirt now.

I took this photo in the beginning of July. Thought it was kind of a cool picture. It's a shame they don't build high rises in James Bay anymore.

Condo's by the Lake by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

Vin · #**2399** Posted **Jul 24, 2020, 8:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Great Scaper

Aastra I want a View Tower's t shirt now.

I took this photo in the beginning of July. Thought it was kind of a cool picture. It's a shame they don't build high rises in James Bay anymore.

Condo's by the Lake by thegreatscaper, on Flickr

Call me old school, but not a fan of those high rises at James Bay neighbourhood. They should have built more retro-style terrace buildings that would fit the character of the area back in the 60s. Such buildings would also enhance the looks from Beacon Hill park.

Example in Toronto:

https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Dav...2!4d-79.409706

Or London,UK:

https://www.google.ca/maps/@51.52389...7i16384!8i8192

aastra · #**2400** Posted **Jul 25, 2020, 6:58 PM**

Merrick-style buildings like Shoal Point or Swallow's Landing or the north side of Aria would have looked beautiful facing into the park.