+- Waterloo Region Connected (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com)
+-- Forum: Land Development and Real Estate (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Urban Areas (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Thread: Station Park | 18, 28, 36, 40, 50 fl | U/C (/showthread.php?tid=38)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
RE: Station Park | 18, 28, 36, 40, 44 fl | U/C - CP42 - 05-17-2022
Also noticed that some amenities that were said would be in Phase 1 (Union Towers) look like they will now be in Phase 2 Tower D instead, which is a little disappointing if true...
Those include the games room, music room, outdoor fireplaces and muskoka chairs.
![[Image: KidpsH0.png]](https://i.imgur.com/KidpsH0.png)
RE: Station Park | 18, 28, 36, 40, 44 fl | U/C - tomh009 - 05-17-2022
Tower D residents need to go to another tower to use a fitness room?
RE: Station Park | 18, 28, 36, 40, 44 fl | U/C - CP42 - 05-17-2022
(05-17-2022, 04:39 PM)tomh009 Wrote: Tower D residents need to go to another tower to use a fitness room?
I imagine they'd all be located in the podium, just perhaps under one of the other towers.
They are likely building Tower C first, so this makes sense to put it in there.
RE: Station Park | 18, 28, 36, 40, 44 fl | U/C - taylortbb - 05-17-2022
(05-17-2022, 04:39 PM)tomh009 Wrote: Tower D residents need to go to another tower to use a fitness room?
Towers C and D share a podium, so it's effectively in the same building.
RE: Station Park | 18, 28, 36, 40, 44 fl | U/C - tomh009 - 05-17-2022
Ahh, OK.
RE: Station Park | 18, 28, 36, 40, 44 fl | U/C - ac3r - 05-18-2022
Here's a throwback. I have to say I'm glad the project evolved from what it was originally proposed to be! This doesn't look as a nice as the final architectural choices they went with.
(Edit: Oops, just realized these were still on page 1...I thought the original renders all vanished since it was common to use TinyPic here and all those links died.)
![[Image: jmAANXr.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/jmAANXr.jpg)
RE: Station Park | 18, 28, 36, 40, 44 fl | U/C - CP42 - 05-18-2022
(05-18-2022, 11:36 AM)ac3r Wrote: Here's a throwback. I have to say I'm glad the project evolved from what it was originally proposed to be! This doesn't look as a nice as the final architectural choices they went with.
Curious to hear your thoughts on them switching from Kirkor to Turner Fleischer?
RE: Station Park | 18, 28, 36, 40, 44 fl | U/C - ac3r - 05-18-2022
It'd be the other way around. Kirkor designed the current project. I don't think they do amazing work by any measure, but they've done an okay job here. We'll have to see how the remaining 3 towers look. I'd take their work over any of the local architecture firms we have in Waterloo Region that's for sure.
RE: Station Park | 18, 28, 36, 40, 44 fl | U/C - CP42 - 05-18-2022
(05-18-2022, 06:03 PM)ac3r Wrote: It'd be the other way around. Kirkor designed the current project. I don't think they do amazing work by any measure, but they've done an okay job here. We'll have to see how the remaining 3 towers look. I'd take their work over any of the local architecture firms we have in Waterloo Region that's for sure.
Sorry - was referencing the materials I posted for the next phase on the previous page, which shows Turner Fleischer instead of Kirkor on their list of partners.
RE: Station Park | 18, 28, 36, 40, 44 fl | U/C - ac3r - 05-18-2022
Oh, I didn't notice that. I don't think that means the architect of the next phases has been changed. Kirkor already signed off on all the architectural plans that were submitted and have their OAA seal signed on all of them so it would be odd for VanMar to hire an entirely new company to redesign the next 2 towers (especially because that would cost a lot of money and months of time). Maybe Turner Fleischer was hired to do the interior design or landscape architecture of the amenity spaces? Or less likely...maybe the brochure just has incorrect info.
RE: Station Park | 18, 28, 36, 40, 44 fl | U/C - CP42 - 05-18-2022
A bit of landscaping work has begun (maybe because of strikes happening in other trades?)
![[Image: tJgUEpi.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/tJgUEpi.jpg)
![[Image: HOt6dlJ.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/HOt6dlJ.jpg)
![[Image: Eym4QCL.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/Eym4QCL.jpg)
Also some other perspectives of the buildings:
![[Image: InXyIOU.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/InXyIOU.jpg)
![[Image: 1qp5Vbc.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/1qp5Vbc.jpg)
![[Image: MqZ3DcP.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/MqZ3DcP.jpg)
RE: Station Park | 18, 28, 36, 40, 44 fl | U/C - nms - 05-18-2022
I'm surprised that the alternating zig zag pattern in the stone passed any kind of accessibility test. Any visually impaired person would be constantly searching for steps as they walk across it.
RE: Station Park | 18, 28, 36, 40, 44 fl | U/C - ac3r - 05-18-2022
Yeah those bricks for the sidewalks are ugly. They create a bit of an optical illusion or whatever.
RE: Station Park | 18, 28, 36, 40, 44 fl | U/C - tomh009 - 05-19-2022
(05-18-2022, 11:36 AM)ac3r Wrote: (Edit: Oops, just realized these were still on page 1...I thought the original renders all vanished since it was common to use TinyPic here and all those links died.)
You're not going to catch Spokes using TinyPic.
RE: Station Park | 18, 28, 36, 40, 44 fl | U/C - Spokes - 05-20-2022
Me? Never!