I'm not so sure this one would be delayed. It has an abundance of plain white/grey cladding and no balconies. In other words, it addresses some of the CoV's major concerns re: sensitive architectural design. If they reduce the size of the windows then methinks it should be a done deal.

(anyone who has suffered through decades of architectural design controversies in Victoria will appreciate the absurdity)

Another point I want to make about the elimination of the differentiated sections and terrace levels: not only does it make the tower portion look very plain, but it also makes the tower portion look much more similar to View Towers than it otherwise would have looked. Is this what the CoV wants?

Methinks the top priority here re: the overall design should be to strongly distinguish this building's appearance from View Towers' appearance. Slimming the tower was a step in the right direction re: the massing, but if the tower has a plain and repetitive look then why the heck was there ever a bitter fight against the second View Towers building that was supposed to be part of the original plan?

Doesn't all of this CoV history seem to be especially ironic and ridiculous now?

Daily Colonist
March 2, 1972

Tower Shrink Not Likely

Developer George Mulek has been asked by the city of Victoria to voluntarily reduce the size of the apartment-store centre, to be completed at View and Quadra, but there apparently isn't much likelihood that he will.

Mayor Peter Pollen said Wednesday that Mulek was "unbending" in his attitude, and seemed determined to stick by his original plan to build a second tower slightly taller than the 19-storey apartment building already at the site. The second building would have a supermarket and other stores.

The grey, unfinished look of the first building, completed last year, has brought considerable criticism from the city.

But appearances, says Pollen, isn't the major issue.

"It's a matter of density," he said. There would be over 500 units on a relatively small piece of land. There just wouldn't be enough open space, or even really enough room to breathe."

Mulek's argument is that the second tower will have to remain as planned to make the whole project economically sound. There is no legal way Victoria can block construction of the second tower.

"We can only say that we have tried vigorously to get Mr. Mulek to co-operate in the spirit of community interest on a voluntary basis," the mayor said.

Would this be built under the new Step Code.

"269 rental homes averaging 389 square feet in size." If that's the average, I wonder what the smallest units are?

I think they should consider approving a taller building here, at least thirty or thirty five floors would be better.