damn, what a downgrade. Not sure why the height was chopped so much, even if I'm not surprised it's been partially chopped. I wonder if that's more client-driven than city-driven with the reduction in employment area here.

The proposed atrium space is totally dead now as well. Not a surprise really now that the office space in the proposal is an afterthought, but still.
 
Shrug. link
C78A4EAF-EC45-4A55-849E-F15EDB654832.jpeg
 
innsertnamehere said:
damn, what a downgrade. Not sure why the height was chopped so much, even if I'm not surprised it's been partially chopped. I wonder if that's more client-driven than city-driven with the reduction in employment area here.

The proposed atrium space is totally dead now as well. Not a surprise really now that the office space in the proposal is an afterthought, but still.
Click to expand...

What the offer and other docs don't reveal, unless I missed it, is why the height reduction appears to have a central City 'ask'.

To me, any serious argument with this proposal would be about the loss of heritage (though clearly there's a lot preserved here); I'm just saying that would be the more obvious place to go.

I'd really like to hear why this offer constitutes an improvement.
 
Northern Light said:
What the offer and other docs don't reveal, unless I missed it, is why the height reduction appears to have a central City 'ask'.

To me, any serious argument with this proposal would be about the loss of heritage (though clearly there's a lot preserved here); I'm just saying that would be the more obvious place to go.

I'd really like to hear why this offer constitutes an improvement.
Click to expand...
The largest 'loss', - 'change' might be a better descriptor - is the removal of most of the office space. While this was first publicly proposed in December 2020, after COVID had ravaged us for close to a year, I don't think many were thinking about the long-term ramifications on the office market. I can certainly theorize how now, in Q2 2023, DREAM might be celebrating the opportunity to dump the office component and keep the residential as something of a win.

Podium deference to existing heritage stinks of blinkered, anachronistic, HPS, stodgery though.
 
C-mac said:
See issue is I like it better. I'm not really a fan of how those Forma buildings look.
Click to expand...
This development deserves to be a supertall because of its rich detailed facade etc! Chopping it down that much is like a slap in the face to the developers building it! Saying you're not worthy of being tall ! !
 
innsertnamehere said:
damn, what a downgrade. Not sure why the height was chopped so much, even if I'm not surprised it's been partially chopped. I wonder if that's more client-driven than city-driven with the reduction in employment area here.

The proposed atrium space is totally dead now as well. Not a surprise really now that the office space in the proposal is an afterthought, but still.
Click to expand...
Definitely was a major downgrade, this one had good potential, not anymore
 
It should still be a nice addition even with the height cut. It will look much shorter on the skyline but the Forma towers will look more imposing as a result.
 
Riseth said:
It should still be a nice addition even with the height cut. It will look much shorter on the skyline but the Forma towers will look more imposing as a result.
Click to expand...
Why does the Forma towers have the right to be more imposing to begin with! It's not right to give them the height that they have, to not only one but two towers. This tower deserves at least 280m in hieght being across the street from the Metro Hall. Then I wouldn't mind as much to be fair!
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top