Whistler is out, the Interior of BC is in. Huge real estate deals are out, powder chasing is in. If you're a long-time reader of this blog, you'll know that I do a ski and snowboard trip with a group of friends each year around this time.
Our last three trips were to Park City (where it snowed so much we lost power); Trois Vallées (which also served as my bachelor party and which involved equal parts snowboarding and dancing on tables); and Hokkaido (where it looked like Toronto looks right now).
This year — for annual number fifteen — we're headed to Revelstoke and Kicking Horse in the Selkirk and Purcell Mountains.
On some trips we like to combine an urban trip with the mountains, so that we can also gawk at architecture and urbanism. That's what we did in Japan last year. But this year's trip is not about that. It's about unadulterated time in the mountains.
It has been a weird season for snow. The west coast has been too warm with not enough of it, and the east coast has been too cold with unusual amounts of it. I have no idea what's in store for us this week, but here's to hoping it looks like the cover photo of this post.
In some related real estate news, Extell Development Company and Hilton just announced that they'll be opening a Waldorf Astoria Resort and Residences in the new Deer Valley East Village.
It's going to have 132 hotel keys and 105 one- to six-bedroom branded residences ranging from 1,099 to 5,155 square feet. Of the 105 branded residences, 56 will be "hotel residences" located above the hotel, and the remaining 49 residences will be in a more exclusive standalone residential building.
Architecture for the project is by KPF and the interiors are by AvroKO.
If you missed my recent post about the East Village and the new Four Seasons that is also currently under construction, click here.
I arrived in BC yesterday for ICSC Whistler. This is my first time here for this conference. I came around this time several years ago for a Slate investor day, but I never participated in ICSC activities per se. So, I’ve come to realize that I don’t really know the proper protocols. I’m an ICSC newbie. Most people I know don’t attend the actual conference. My loose understanding is that you wear Patagonia, ski and snowboard all day, après at Longhorn, and then real estate deals and capital get thrown at you from all angles. I’ll try this and see what happens.
If you’re around, drop me a text or email me at brandon.donnelly@globizen.com.
I recently tweeted a photo of 701 Côte de la Place-d'Armes in Montréal and asked: Who says buildings need stepbacks?
Whistler is out, the Interior of BC is in. Huge real estate deals are out, powder chasing is in. If you're a long-time reader of this blog, you'll know that I do a ski and snowboard trip with a group of friends each year around this time.
Our last three trips were to Park City (where it snowed so much we lost power); Trois Vallées (which also served as my bachelor party and which involved equal parts snowboarding and dancing on tables); and Hokkaido (where it looked like Toronto looks right now).
This year — for annual number fifteen — we're headed to Revelstoke and Kicking Horse in the Selkirk and Purcell Mountains.
On some trips we like to combine an urban trip with the mountains, so that we can also gawk at architecture and urbanism. That's what we did in Japan last year. But this year's trip is not about that. It's about unadulterated time in the mountains.
It has been a weird season for snow. The west coast has been too warm with not enough of it, and the east coast has been too cold with unusual amounts of it. I have no idea what's in store for us this week, but here's to hoping it looks like the cover photo of this post.
In some related real estate news, Extell Development Company and Hilton just announced that they'll be opening a Waldorf Astoria Resort and Residences in the new Deer Valley East Village.
It's going to have 132 hotel keys and 105 one- to six-bedroom branded residences ranging from 1,099 to 5,155 square feet. Of the 105 branded residences, 56 will be "hotel residences" located above the hotel, and the remaining 49 residences will be in a more exclusive standalone residential building.
Architecture for the project is by KPF and the interiors are by AvroKO.
If you missed my recent post about the East Village and the new Four Seasons that is also currently under construction, click here.
I arrived in BC yesterday for ICSC Whistler. This is my first time here for this conference. I came around this time several years ago for a Slate investor day, but I never participated in ICSC activities per se. So, I’ve come to realize that I don’t really know the proper protocols. I’m an ICSC newbie. Most people I know don’t attend the actual conference. My loose understanding is that you wear Patagonia, ski and snowboard all day, après at Longhorn, and then real estate deals and capital get thrown at you from all angles. I’ll try this and see what happens.
If you’re around, drop me a text or email me at brandon.donnelly@globizen.com.
I recently tweeted a photo of 701 Côte de la Place-d'Armes in Montréal and asked: Who says buildings need stepbacks?
In fact, I specifically chose to share this building because it's exactly the kind of architecture and urban design that conveys the feeling of grandeur I get when I'm in Montréal. I also chose it because it's taller than six storeys, which is the height that Toronto is hoping to one day deliver along its major streets at scale.
But here's a question: If this stepback-less building is so great, why are stepbacks so in-demand?
Firstly, I should point out that when the building was completed in 1870, it only had five floors. The top floor was an attic storey and had a mansard roof reminiscent of Haussmannian Second Empire architecture.
Then in 1909, the attic floor was removed, and three new floors were added (a net increase of two floors). If you look closely above the fourth floor, you'll see a slightly different architectural expression, but one that remains harmonious with the original design of the building.
This approach breaks many of the rules for how modern planning thinks about heritage buildings. Today, it is likely that someone would have asked for a stepback above the existing building, with a completely new expression above it. Admittedly, this can produce desirable results. But it's not what was decided in 1909, and the result is a very handsome building.
This gets us back to our original question: Why do we insist on stepbacks, but still like architecture like this one so much? I think there are at least two answers at play here.
The first has to do with architecture and design. If you were to pluck random people off the street and ask them about their architectural tastes, I would bet you that more people would prefer something Neoclassical or Beaux-Arts over something modern. And if people actually like the architecture, then I think they become more comfortable with scale, or perceived scale.
The second answer has to do with the fact that one way to look at stepbacks is as a defensive architectural tool. They have become a tool we use when someone doesn't actually want a building to be built. We use them to try and soften the massing by hiding as much of it as possible.
The problem with this approach is that it also means we're not playing offence. And if you want urban grandeur, I think you need to play offence. You need to be confident and decisive about what you're trying to do. And I think this is part of the reason why so many people seem to like 701 Côte de la Place-d'Armes. It is all of these things, and it's not in their backyard.
Cover photo by Macy Nguyen on Unsplash; historic photo from Hôtel Place d'Armes
In fact, I specifically chose to share this building because it's exactly the kind of architecture and urban design that conveys the feeling of grandeur I get when I'm in Montréal. I also chose it because it's taller than six storeys, which is the height that Toronto is hoping to one day deliver along its major streets at scale.
But here's a question: If this stepback-less building is so great, why are stepbacks so in-demand?
Firstly, I should point out that when the building was completed in 1870, it only had five floors. The top floor was an attic storey and had a mansard roof reminiscent of Haussmannian Second Empire architecture.
Then in 1909, the attic floor was removed, and three new floors were added (a net increase of two floors). If you look closely above the fourth floor, you'll see a slightly different architectural expression, but one that remains harmonious with the original design of the building.
This approach breaks many of the rules for how modern planning thinks about heritage buildings. Today, it is likely that someone would have asked for a stepback above the existing building, with a completely new expression above it. Admittedly, this can produce desirable results. But it's not what was decided in 1909, and the result is a very handsome building.
This gets us back to our original question: Why do we insist on stepbacks, but still like architecture like this one so much? I think there are at least two answers at play here.
The first has to do with architecture and design. If you were to pluck random people off the street and ask them about their architectural tastes, I would bet you that more people would prefer something Neoclassical or Beaux-Arts over something modern. And if people actually like the architecture, then I think they become more comfortable with scale, or perceived scale.
The second answer has to do with the fact that one way to look at stepbacks is as a defensive architectural tool. They have become a tool we use when someone doesn't actually want a building to be built. We use them to try and soften the massing by hiding as much of it as possible.
The problem with this approach is that it also means we're not playing offence. And if you want urban grandeur, I think you need to play offence. You need to be confident and decisive about what you're trying to do. And I think this is part of the reason why so many people seem to like 701 Côte de la Place-d'Armes. It is all of these things, and it's not in their backyard.
Cover photo by Macy Nguyen on Unsplash; historic photo from Hôtel Place d'Armes
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
