Burrard Place | 168m, 112m, 56m | 54fl, 36fl, 13fl | 938,000 sqft | U/C

[LeftCoaster]

That pleases me, good pannel too.

[Metro-One]

I look forward to the re-vamped design with the increased height. I hope the Turn gets off the ground within a reasonable time frame as well. There will be a lot less to complain about in the height department when Vancouver has 5 towers over 150 meters IMO. Not to mention how many will be between 130 and 150, big change from the 100 to 110 meters plateau of 10 years ago

[officedweller]

Well, 2 of those 3 examples were wholly rejected by a higher building Urban Design Panel - so .....
- 550 Bute (The Melville) was originally a neo-classical tower.
- 1133 West Georgia - Vancouver's Turn was originally the "vase".

The Melville became quite busy in its new incarnation, while 1133 West Georgia became streamlined.

[PROSTSHOCKER]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Well, 2 of those 3 examples were wholly rejected by a higher building Urban Design Panel - so .....
- 550 Bute (The Melville) was originally a neo-classical tower.
- 1133 West Georgia - Vancouver's Turn was originally the "vase".

The Melville became quite busy in its new incarnation, while 1133 West Georgia became streamlined.

I'm curious to see what the old designs for those towers were.

[Canadian Mind]

Time to bring back the original "Crystal" design from the original Hotel Georgia plans?

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Canadian Mind

Time to bring back the original "Crystal" design from the original Hotel Georgia plans?

Hey!! Yes !! There's an idea if ever there was. No guarantee it would be the chosen winner, but it would certainly set a standard in the competition. And imagine if it were chosen. Wow !!

[Mininari]

Originally Posted by Canadian Mind

Time to bring back the original "Crystal" design from the original Hotel Georgia plans?

I second this idea. Great, great idea!

[dubsH]

Originally Posted by Canadian Mind

Time to bring back the original "Crystal" design from the original Hotel Georgia plans?

Haha wouldn't that constitute a conflict of interest, seeing as Bing Thom's on the panel? (and seeing as it was this very same panel, albeit with different panel members, that rejected the original crystal proposal).

It would look a lot better than what they have proposed right now though!

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by dubsH

Haha wouldn't that constitute a conflict of interest, seeing as Bing Thom's on the panel? (and seeing as it was this very same panel, albeit with different panel members, that rejected the original crystal proposal).

It would look a lot better than what they have proposed right now though!

That WOULD make for a sticky situation!!? Nevertheless, I still think it's worth refloating. Other board members might just approve it, given the different context and location, even if Bing Thom might have to suspend his vote to avoid conflict of interest. It was a beautiful design, and too good to throw away!!

[flight_from_kamakura]

diamond is a monster in toronto/montreal, pretty neat he'd join that crew, though i'd guess that he'd probably like this design more than he'd dislike it.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by flight_from_kamakura

diamond is a monster in toronto/montreal, pretty neat he'd join that crew, though i'd guess that he'd probably like this design more than he'd dislike it.

Who precisely is Diamond?
Why is he a monster in Toronto / Montreal?
Why is it good that he'd join that crew?
Who is "that crew?" The panelists?
Why do you think you would like this design more than he'd dislike it?
Could his influence be instrumental in rescucitating the "Crystal?"

Thanks.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by PROSTSHOCKER

I'm curious to see what the old designs for those towers were.

For the old 1133 West Georgia proposal see this page of the thread:

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=138004&page=30

[trofirhen]

There didn't seem to be any old pictures of the concept at that link, unfortunately. But I went to google and entered bing thom hotel georgia crystal design - and variants thereof - and clicked on photos - and one or two came up, including the reasons (questionable) why they ditched the "crystal" and chose the current design.

The Crystal was really magnificent. Hunt around on google using all entry combinations, and a picture or two of the design will pop up, I am sure.

That was a real loss. Maybe it can be resurrected.......

[officedweller]

scroll down

[flight_from_kamakura]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Who precisely is Diamond?
Why is he a monster in Toronto / Montreal?
Why is it good that he'd join that crew?
Who is "that crew?" The panelists?
Why do you think you would like this design more than he'd dislike it?
Could his influence be instrumental in rescucitating the "Crystal?"

Thanks.

jack diamond, dude, google! anyway, monster because he's responsible for so many big time buildings, including very large performance halls in both montreal (under construction) and toronto, the mcgill master plan, and numerous other institutional buildings. i think his gang also did a project up at kamloops college, and one out at ubc. the "crew" is the panelists, the local regulars (thom and henriquez), the cv-building yank (cook) and diamond, to round represent the east. i was being wry with the prediction on his like/dislike based purely on some of his buildings, which tend to be more conservative and to employ glass and mass in similar ways (though i should say much more elegantly). and the crystal?? jesus, man, how could there possibly be any link between jack diamond and some notion of somehow replacing this design with that of a completely different project? anyway, i think it's safe to say that there's no chance that will ever be resuscitated.

a further aside: i wonder that the locals on the panel wouldn't generally tend to be more aggressive in their critiques? i see thom especially as a real design pugilist, especially when it comes to monumental projects like this. i just can't really see a jack diamond walking in here and telling these guys they need to re-design the building.

[Landmate]

Hey everyone. First post!

Is it just me, or would the Vertical Street proposal for the Woodwards project also look at home on this lot?

[jlousa]

I'm really confused as to why anyone would think that a design for a completely different building would be an option here. This forum is full of information if people take the time to read posts instead of just look at pictures. Developers pay an architect to design a building to their specs. If the developer wanted the Crystal design they would've hired the architect that designed it and had a replicated design customized for this site. Any architect can design some crazy design that looks great on paper, heck most architects dream of that chance.

There's a great article in this weeks BIV where the principal of MAC marketing explains that people will not pay extra for design, they will choose it but will not pay a premium for it. Think a good example of this is Jameson which had a rough time selling and cost one developer his shirt.

Personally I think people are judging this thing too early, wait a few more weeks as it works it's way through the system.

[Canadian Mind]

JL, I brought it up as one comparison of architectural quality to strive for. I understand the legal issues behind using the design, as well as what you posted about how if the developer wanted that, they would have asked for it.

As far as initial renders go, the renders for the crystal are a lot better than the renders for this development. I hope this can be improved or revised substantially.

[dleung]

Originally Posted by jlousa

I'm really confused as to why anyone would think that a design for a completely different building would be an option here. This forum is full of information if people take the time to read posts instead of just look at pictures. Developers pay an architect to design a building to their specs. If the developer wanted the Crystal design they would've hired the architect that designed it and had a replicated design customized for this site. Any architect can design some crazy design that looks great on paper, heck most architects dream of that chance.

That may be true, and would explain why we won't get HG3 materials on this site, but some of the best buildings can be done on a budget. In Vancouver, developers and architects just aren't trying hard enough, which is why we have $1000psf condos that look like shit.

Personally I think a "taller" tower on this site should go for dark mullions and deep green glass like HG3, cuz it will distract from the cheapness of what will surely be windowwall. If we get a taller, more sleek version of The Pointe in Coal Harbour (built in the 90's) I'd be ok with it. It's sad that I'm drawing references to decades-old precedents for new buildings...

[ckkelley]

Originally Posted by dleung

That may be true, and would explain why we won't get HG3 materials on this site, but some of the best buildings can be done on a budget. In Vancouver, developers and architects just aren't trying hard enough, which is why we have $1000psf condos that look like shit.

I know you're the 'angry cynic' here but where exactly do we have $1,000.00psf condos that look like shit?!!