Hey Guest,
Welcome, Join our awesome community where you can discuss on various topics
or Create an Account


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Virerra Village | ?m | 35fl, 33fl, 29fl, 29fl | Proposed
#31
(05-30-2017, 03:34 AM)Canard Wrote: The rendering above is neat, but now made impossible with the positioning of the TPSS.

Impossible? Couldn't the TPSS be (a) moved, (b) enclosed, or © buried, if development was desired?
Reply
#32
(05-30-2017, 08:55 AM)timc Wrote:
(05-30-2017, 03:34 AM)Canard Wrote: The rendering above is neat, but now made impossible with the positioning of the TPSS.

Impossible? Couldn't the TPSS be (a) moved, (b) enclosed, or © buried, if development was desired?

All it takes is time and money!  And I expect the TPSS move would be relatively inexpensive when compared to the overall development cost.
Reply
#33
(05-29-2017, 02:36 PM)GtwoK Wrote: Is the large amount of space between each tower a valid complaint or am I just being picky? Also: that's a REALLY ambitious amount of retail. Looks like EACH tower is supposed to have 6 or 7 stores? We'll see about that...

I think it's valid.  Why not make it one continuous podium?  Unless there's a reason they want people to get between them.  But if there is, I'm not seeing it.

None the less, very cool project.  Love seeing the effect that LRT is having.  No denying the positive effects.  

Having some commercial in the podiums would be a nice addition too.  Not sure if that's been planned.
Reply
#34
(05-30-2017, 09:06 AM)Spokes Wrote:
(05-29-2017, 02:36 PM)GtwoK Wrote: Is the large amount of space between each tower a valid complaint or am I just being picky? Also: that's a REALLY ambitious amount of retail. Looks like EACH tower is supposed to have 6 or 7 stores? We'll see about that...

I think it's valid.  Why not make it one continuous podium?  Unless there's a reason they want people to get between them.  But if there is, I'm not seeing it.

None the less, very cool project.  Love seeing the effect that LRT is having.  No denying the positive effects.  

Having some commercial in the podiums would be a nice addition too.  Not sure if that's been planned.

A continuous podium would be way too long, but I agree that the gaps are too many and too wide. They really need to improve on the tower design, but the massing/articulation of the podiums is ok.
Reply
#35
Looking at the views from the rear, it looks like there are a number of access points to the parking below
Reply
#36
(05-30-2017, 09:06 AM)Spokes Wrote:
(05-29-2017, 02:36 PM)GtwoK Wrote: Is the large amount of space between each tower a valid complaint or am I just being picky? Also: that's a REALLY ambitious amount of retail. Looks like EACH tower is supposed to have 6 or 7 stores? We'll see about that...

I think it's valid.  Why not make it one continuous podium?  Unless there's a reason they want people to get between them.  But if there is, I'm not seeing it.

Personally I like the street-level space between the podiums, especially if they do some decent landscaping there.
Reply
#37
(05-30-2017, 09:06 AM)Spokes Wrote: I think it's valid.  Why not make it one continuous podium?  Unless there's a reason they want people to get between them.  But if there is, I'm not seeing it.

There's now several examples of contiguous podiums in Northdale, with arched entryways. E.g. Icon.
Reply
#38
My current concern with the podium design is that those gaps will be very wind-swept.  The prevailing winds will be coming in from the west, and forced up past the parking garage and between the towers.  

Paradoxically, windsweptness aside, I almost think that these spaces are awkwardly too small.  They're too big to be intimate alleys, but not big enough to be public squares.  I think I'd prefer that they take each pair of towers and push them closer together, and leave a larger single contiguous space.

I just noticed the tunnels that go through each of the buildings too.  I'm not sure the purpose of having a weather-exposed internal corridor when they have all those spaces between the buildings too.
Reply
#39
(05-30-2017, 08:41 AM)urbd Wrote: I find it 'cute' how you guys think this is some crazy topography situation... just look at these pics from my native Mexico City:

Sigh. I get it - and I wish that we could do amazing things architecturally here, but my point is, for our very, very basic Region that never does anything mega-exciting for architecture or buildings, this is flat out insane! I'm glad!

Yes, I agree, for the rest of the world, nothing special whatsoever.
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
#40
(05-30-2017, 08:58 AM)tomh009 Wrote: All it takes is time and money!  And I expect the TPSS move would be relatively inexpensive when compared to the overall development cost.

Yep, lots of $$$, and even more $$$ to do it without a disruption to ION (ie, have to build an entire new TPSS and have it online, before the existing one can be removed - wasteful).
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
#41
(05-30-2017, 09:10 AM)urbd Wrote: A continuous podium would be way too long, but I agree that the gaps are too many and too wide. They really need to improve on the tower design, but the massing/articulation of the podiums is ok.

?? I thought everybody was big on the continuous street wall!

But regardless of the exact design, there should be an indoor path connecting all the buildings at the main floor level. It’s absurd not to do so with a master-planned area like this in our climate.
Reply
#42
(05-30-2017, 11:24 AM)ijmorlan Wrote:
(05-30-2017, 09:10 AM)urbd Wrote: A continuous podium would be way too long, but I agree that the gaps are too many and too wide. They really need to improve on the tower design, but the massing/articulation of the podiums is ok.

?? I thought everybody was big on the continuous street wall!

But regardless of the exact design, there should be an indoor path connecting all the buildings at the main floor level. It’s absurd not to do so with a master-planned area like this in our climate.

Yes, a continuous street wall composed of many different buildings! not just one continuous facade.

And disagree about the indoor path, they have been proven ineffective except in very specific scenarios (PATH). The whole point is to promote active and welcoming streetscapes even in the middle of the winter. Yes it can be done.
Reply
#43
(05-30-2017, 11:11 AM)Canard Wrote:
(05-30-2017, 08:41 AM)urbd Wrote: I find it 'cute' how you guys think this is some crazy topography situation... just look at these pics from my native Mexico City:

Sigh.  I get it - and I wish that we could do amazing things architecturally here, but my point is, for our very, very basic Region that never does anything mega-exciting for architecture or buildings, this is flat out insane!  I'm glad!

Yes, I agree, for the rest of the world, nothing special whatsoever.

hehe, well I wouldn't consider it insane. Think about it, the foundations and underground parking for any tower this size have to be excavated quite a bit, In this case, a lot of that excavation has already been done because its just empty space! (except for the foundations themselves of course) yes, they have to add a significant retaining wall, but they would have to do that anyway for underground parking on all sides. In fact, I think this is significantly easier than a project with actual undergound parking; the topography is working in their favour.
Reply
#44
(05-30-2017, 11:12 AM)Canard Wrote:
(05-30-2017, 08:58 AM)tomh009 Wrote: All it takes is time and money!  And I expect the TPSS move would be relatively inexpensive when compared to the overall development cost.

Yep, lots of $$$, and even more $$$ to do it without a disruption to ION (ie, have to build an entire new TPSS and have it online, before the existing one can be removed - wasteful).

Sorry, why does the TPSS need to be moved? Isn't it on the other side of Block Line?
My Twitter: @KevinLMaps
Reply
#45
(05-30-2017, 10:10 AM)Markster Wrote: My current concern with the podium design is that those gaps will be very wind-swept.  The prevailing winds will be coming in from the west, and forced up past the parking garage and between the towers.  

Paradoxically, windsweptness aside, I almost think that these spaces are awkwardly too small.  They're too big to be intimate alleys, but not big enough to be public squares.  I think I'd prefer that they take each pair of towers and push them closer together, and leave a larger single contiguous space.

I just noticed the tunnels that go through each of the buildings too.  I'm not sure the purpose of having a weather-exposed internal corridor when they have all those spaces between the buildings too.

Would it be giving the developer too much credit to think that the width of the gaps between the builidings may reflect a consideration of the "wind tunnel effect"?  It's hard to tell, but the renders seem to show a wall of some sort at the back of the open spaces.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)

About Waterloo Region Connected

Launched in August 2014, Waterloo Region Connected is an online community that brings together all the things that make Waterloo Region great. Waterloo Region Connected provides user-driven content fueled by a lively discussion forum covering topics like urban development, transportation projects, heritage issues, businesses and other issues of interest to those in Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and the four Townships - North Dumfries, Wellesley, Wilmot, and Woolwich.

              User Links

              Advertise