HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces > St. John's

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2012, 12:22 PM
jeddy1989's Avatar
jeddy1989 jeddy1989 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: St. John's, NL
Posts: 2,652
In all seriousness

the old design looks fine! a little bit of tweaking like with retail on the bottom or something and thats fine ..

in all honesty the old design looks nicer than many of their other hotels across the country

In reality it is just a highrise filler.. doesnt have to be landmark


They must be looking across the road at Fortis place and 351 water in the distance saying WTF st. john's!? ... wt..f ... thise look tall AND modern hahaha and it seems like they are under the impression that it has to look small and historic :S .. we should be attending these mettings like they had with the public ... we should be forming a group like happy city but to promote urbanism! and the board of trade would love us
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2012, 12:25 PM
J_Murphy's Avatar
J_Murphy J_Murphy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: St. John's, NL
Posts: 1,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Townie709 View Post
I have no clue how that's even legal (all that blank space). I too am wondering if this is all just a stunt to get the original approved. I'm definitely liking the original much better now.

They need to wait for the updated municipal plan. The might actual be able to propose something modern and something with windows because Sally McNeil up the road is too cheap to buy a curtain.


I have to agree with you about this just being a stunt so that people will end up saying "I like the old one better" and they can proceed with their original plan. Also, how is this even allowed with so much blank space?

I hate to oppose developments but I just cannot force myself to say I like this new proposal. In my opinion, there is no need to put a "heritage" structure in this location, especially for a hotel. It is right next to the delta, which is no way heritage looking, and fortis will be right across the street. Again, not heritage. Keep the heritage looking buildings for Water and Duckworth. This is where a modern looking building belongs (i.e., original proposal).

I will stand by my opinion of people downtown that will complain. If you don't like to look at buildings, worried about losing your view, worried about lack of privacy and about noise, than you don't live downtown. Plain and simple. If you want and expect all said things, move around the bay.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2012, 12:33 PM
PoscStudent's Avatar
PoscStudent PoscStudent is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: St. John's
Posts: 3,615
One thing I would like to see done with the old proposal is for that panel like thing where their name is to be either covered in the rock that is along the bottom or to use wood like on Fortis.

We should start emailing council to tell them that the old design should be tweaked and that they should not approve the faux heritage design.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2012, 12:38 PM
statbass statbass is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: St. John's
Posts: 1,326
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeddy1989 View Post
Here's the back we've been talking about .. you better sit down signal ...

the building in all it's "glory"

Ouch! At least put some windows on the blank wall to make it somewhat aesthetically pleasing. Putting windows on part of the back wall - that just boggles my mind!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2012, 1:03 PM
Copes's Avatar
Copes Copes is offline
Millennial Ascendancy
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: St. John's, NL
Posts: 1,086
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeddy1989 View Post

They must be looking across the road at Fortis place and 351 water in the distance saying WTF st. john's!? ... wt..f ... thise look tall AND modern hahaha and it seems like they are under the impression that it has to look small and historic :S .. we should be attending these mettings like they had with the public ... we should be forming a group like happy city but to promote urbanism! and the board of trade would love us
Yep, you're absolutely correct. Jeddy, if you ever want to hit up a public meeting, all you've gotta do is fire me a PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2012, 2:05 PM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is offline
I ♣ Baby Seals
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: See post below...
Posts: 24,027
Disgusting. Absolutely shameful.
__________________
Note to self: "The plural of anecdote is not evidence."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2012, 6:54 PM
crackiedog crackiedog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 82
From a cbc website article I read, Ron Fougere is the architect for the original design. I assume he is involved in the new design as well. It might be a good idea to email him with our concerns. Here is his email address I obtained from the Newfoundland Architect Association website.

Ron Fougere Associates Limited
2-F Bates Hill
St. John's, NL, A1C 4B4
Canada
Tel: (709) 739 - 8202
Fax: (709) 722 - 8202
Email: ron@ronfougere.ca
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2012, 8:42 PM
Townie709's Avatar
Townie709 Townie709 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland
Posts: 1,772


Makes sense. they also designed Deacon. That explains the two levels of glass on the roof. Deacon makes the glass levels look attractive and classy, while on this it looks cheap and poor. This firm can do better!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2012, 10:02 PM
Architype's Avatar
Architype Architype is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Pacific Canada
Posts: 6,531
Quote:
Originally Posted by statbass View Post
Ouch! At least put some windows on the blank wall to make it somewhat aesthetically pleasing. Putting windows on part of the back wall - that just boggles my mind!
Regarding some of the comments here, they could put a "lovely" mural of the Narrows or something on that wall, or they could just "paint" on some windows. (. . . ok, sarcasm) Any wall without windows would not contain rooms, they would have to face the other way. A blank wall would indicate something else is behind it like stairwells, elevators, etc., either way it's not a great design feature.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2012, 11:01 PM
J_Murphy's Avatar
J_Murphy J_Murphy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: St. John's, NL
Posts: 1,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Architype View Post
Regarding some of the comments here, they could put a "lovely" mural of the Narrows or something on that wall, or they could just "paint" on some windows. (. . . ok, sarcasm) Any wall without windows would not contain rooms, they would have to face the other way. A blank wall would indicate something else is behind it like stairwells, elevators, etc., either way it's not a great design feature.
Maybe they can buy the old circa 1950s water-skiing mural that the battery used to have on display.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Jan 5, 2013, 7:55 PM
Townie709's Avatar
Townie709 Townie709 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland
Posts: 1,772
News on the Hilton! I e-mailed the developer regarding our concerns for the new design. Even the developer does not like the new design and thinks the first one is better, haha! This is what he sent me:

Quote:
Matt, I agree with all of your comments below.
The elevation design was revised, to appease some councillors' comments on
"heritage". The design will be developed as we go forward. I even agree
that the first design was better!

The removal of windows facing the residences in the back was in response to
the concerns of the neighbours. The facade will be designed so that it does
NOT look like a blank wall
.
At this stage, our main concern is to complete the rezoning. Then we shall
embark on detailed design.

Hope you will attend and speak up at the Public Hearing that should be
announced soon.
Happy New Year!
Vahe
So there is hope for this project after all! It seems like this is just a concept and a detailed design will be created after the land is re-zoned. Also there will be a public hearing announced soon so we'll have to stay tuned
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Jan 5, 2013, 8:01 PM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is offline
I ♣ Baby Seals
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: See post below...
Posts: 24,027
Brilliant. Thank you, Townie!!!
__________________
Note to self: "The plural of anecdote is not evidence."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Jan 5, 2013, 8:03 PM
jeddy1989's Avatar
jeddy1989 jeddy1989 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: St. John's, NL
Posts: 2,652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Townie709 View Post
News on the Hilton! I e-mailed the developer regarding our concerns for the new design. Even the developer does not like the new design and thinks the first one is better, haha! This is what he sent me:



So there is hope for this project after all! It seems like this is just a concept and a detailed design will be created after the land is re-zoned. Also there will be a public hearing announced soon so we'll have to stay tuned
I'm posting this in the steel toe boot thread!! seems like our first mission!!
__________________
-Where Once They Stood-
-We Stand-
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Jan 6, 2013, 12:31 AM
statbass statbass is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: St. John's
Posts: 1,326
Quote:
Originally Posted by Townie709 View Post
News on the Hilton! I e-mailed the developer regarding our concerns for the new design. Even the developer does not like the new design and thinks the first one is better, haha! This is what he sent me:



So there is hope for this project after all! It seems like this is just a concept and a detailed design will be created after the land is re-zoned. Also there will be a public hearing announced soon so we'll have to stay tuned
Awesome, that's great to hear! I suspect we will see a few more changes and hopefully this will: a) improve the design and b) get approved. Onward and upward!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Jan 6, 2013, 12:47 AM
Townie709's Avatar
Townie709 Townie709 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland
Posts: 1,772
This will get approved without a doubt as long as some of our rumoured bigger developments are proposed. This will draw virtually no attention compared to other projects on the radar. It will be ushered along through the processes like 351 was during the Fortis proposal fiasco.

Edit: I don't know why there was an angry face as the title of this post. It's not an angry post. Must have been an accident. Oh well, edited!

Last edited by Townie709; Jan 6, 2013 at 2:15 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Jan 6, 2013, 1:57 AM
Marty_Mcfly's Avatar
Marty_Mcfly Marty_Mcfly is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: St. John's, NL
Posts: 3,030
great news guys! I hope the developer can work with the council and public to perfect this design, there's a long way to go but at least they acknowledge some of our concerns
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Jan 6, 2013, 7:20 AM
Architype's Avatar
Architype Architype is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Pacific Canada
Posts: 6,531
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marty_Mcfly View Post
great news guys! I hope the developer can work with the council and public to perfect this design, there's a long way to go but at least they acknowledge some of our concerns
Yes I certainly hope so, something in between the two would be more acceptable.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Jan 6, 2013, 3:05 PM
PoscStudent's Avatar
PoscStudent PoscStudent is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: St. John's
Posts: 3,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Townie709 View Post
Edit: I don't know why there was an angry face as the title of this post. It's not an angry post. Must have been an accident. Oh well, edited!
I've had a couple of those recently.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Jan 6, 2013, 3:19 PM
jeddy1989's Avatar
jeddy1989 jeddy1989 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: St. John's, NL
Posts: 2,652
Maybe we should come up with some ideas, we can suggest them to the developer. What do you think they could have done?
__________________
-Where Once They Stood-
-We Stand-
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Jan 6, 2013, 3:20 PM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is offline
I ♣ Baby Seals
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: See post below...
Posts: 24,027
Made it attractive.
__________________
Note to self: "The plural of anecdote is not evidence."
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

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

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces > St. John's
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:47 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.