01-10-2020, 07:29 AM
(01-09-2020, 04:11 PM)panamaniac Wrote:(01-09-2020, 02:52 PM)MidTowner Wrote: Honest question: these designs are "terrible" and "brutal" compared to what? I can agree that they're not too exciting, but I don't think they're terrible and there's not enough in those sketches to say whether the final result would be something we'd be ashamed about. To be honest, if the roofline of the first option were extended over the tracks, I would probably look at that and say it might very well wind up quite nice.
I can see the merits of future proofing to some extent. It's true that this is a very important parcel of land. But there are parcels nearby that can and will accommodate high-density developments. I'm not sure it would be a good strategy to build nothing and wait for conditions to get better for something grander to make sense. That argument might make sense for a long time, meanwhile we're without an integrated terminal.
Among those available sites is the rest of this site, which one assumes would become more attractive to private developers with the transit hub in place next door.
Indeed. I see in that render a big surface parking lot that will be immensely valuable to developers as soon as so many people are passing through this site. And does the Region still own 100 Victoria- half an acre 350 metres away?