|
|
|
- Thread starter Surrealplaces
- Start date
haltcatchfire
Senior Member
The Familia
Active Member
I don’t mind the location (would rather they leave it as green space). If they have no choice I hope they do a redesign and at least make the 6th Ave side more pedestrian friendly.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
Why do we like to put weird things on top of our old buildings
Like I get old buildings sometimes need new things to be functional (a new elevator, HVAC etc.) but strikes me as a weird design fetish from the mid-2000s to take the most literal and heavy handed approach to "incorporating heritage" with some bulky, dated office appendage. These aren't always terrible but hopefully we can do better in the courthouse example.
Like I get old buildings sometimes need new things to be functional (a new elevator, HVAC etc.) but strikes me as a weird design fetish from the mid-2000s to take the most literal and heavy handed approach to "incorporating heritage" with some bulky, dated office appendage. These aren't always terrible but hopefully we can do better in the courthouse example.
Mountain Man
Senior Member
Good God no! that street presence on 6ave is brutal!
darwink
Senior Member
If I remember correctly, the excessively poor street presence on the entire complex comes from needing to both extend to the edges of the parcel, and provide protection against car bombs.
haltcatchfire
Senior Member
A car bomb is exactly what that design needs.
1875
Senior Member
city building, turn a green space into the death star. must be a government operation. hard no.
MichaelS
Senior Member
I recall this was a design factor as well. Thanks for finding those old renderings. I went searching through the ghosts of SSP past, but had no luck.
I am a bit surprised they would build a new building, given there is no lack of space currently available downtown. I believe the current court of appeal is located in the TCPL building. Is continuing to add non-residential floor space to our downtown a good use of stimulus money?
darwink
Senior Member
The budget document says purpose built, but that does not necessarily mean new. Plenty of good options.
If I was the Chief Justice with a heavy amount of preference for the project I would rank the following:
1) Buy the City TV building from Rogers, and renovate both the City TV building and the old Court House into a unified complex, with the old courthouse having a small pavilion added for connections to both the parkade, the main courthouse (need the plus 15 for secure prisoner and staff movement), and across 8th.
2) Buy the Barron Building, and leave a lot of it empty for future use or as decant space for various provincial buildings. If possible, you could still build a secure +15 to it
3) Buy the Petex or Ford Buildings and renovate and connect
4) The province owns another lot on the same block:
A map for people:
Secure +15, 30, 45 Options
Last edited:
Normally I'd post these in the old photos section, but they give a good idea of the changes around Calgary's inner core. Some good and some bad...mostly good, but sad to see those Victoria Park houses now mostly empty lots.
www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100015617041964
www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100015617041964
FCC1982
Active Member
^Fabulous set Surreal.
All from the newly opened Husky Tower I presume ?
All from the newly opened Husky Tower I presume ?
Chinook Arch
Active Member
Mostly good. As we see in the pics the damage was already done by 1970 and the core in general was kind of abysmal. Victoria Park is about 20 years behind in following the path of the other areas around downtown. Houses and building bulldozed to make way for parking lots, and 40 years later built back up again.
Roaring Flames
Senior Member
Stampede Park is currently at the beginning of a major expansion. In that picture you can see Stampede Park shortly before it's last major expansion which stretched between the early 70s and early 80s. That major expansion added the Saddledome, Roundup Centre, chairlift, new north/south entrances, 2 C-Train stations, and the current Grandstand which replaced the old one that was built in 1919
JonnyCanuck
Senior Member
Re Victoria Park: inner city single family houses were a casualty in just about every city in North America. As cities grew, attracted more business & other activity, there was need for more commercial space. Also people were moving to the suburbs in the 50"s & 60's. Neighborhoods slowly disappeared. Unless you were a low rent tenant, no one wanted to live in those old Vic Park houses. Many of them looked rather sad and seedy by the end. I agree with the sentiment about tearing them down to put up parking lots for decades to come. What was the point?