Canada's 50 Tallest Proposals - Page 74

MonkeyRonin · #**1461** Posted **Apr 21, 2011, 4:16 AM**

Looks very "Australian".

dleung · #**1462** Posted **Apr 21, 2011, 4:21 AM**

Thank God the UDP isn't even considering the design. It's like they hired a different architect for each facade. Looks as standard as anything in Miami or the Gold Coast, but it will be a sad day if this city's 3rd tallest is merely part of another cheapass twin tower on podium scheme.

edit: yea it totally looks Australian

Metro-One · #**1463** Posted **Apr 21, 2011, 4:27 AM**

How strange dleung doesn't like a tower proposal, never heard that before...

dleung · #**1464** Posted **Apr 21, 2011, 4:31 AM**

Doesn't mean I'm not 100% right.

caltrane74 · #**1465** Posted **Apr 21, 2011, 2:19 PM**

That Vancouver Proposal is very amazing... has a similar bend to the Hotel Georgia Project that i love so much...

steveve · #**1466** Posted **Apr 21, 2011, 7:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Looks very "Australian".

yeah! almost Gold Coast like!, the designs look interesting, cool to see if they work,

anyone notice the toyota dealership and/or logo at the bottom?

SFUVancouver · #**1467** Posted **Apr 21, 2011, 8:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by dleung

Thank God the UDP isn't even considering the design. It's like they hired a different architect for each facade.

Second part first; each facade was designed to be different and to respond to their solar orientations. That's how passive design works and the days of symmetrical towers are basically over if they want to achieve any real degree of environmental performance which isn't the result of mechanical solutions. As for the UDP not even considering the design, a 5-7 vote of non-support is not a reflection of zero support for the design. It's a message that tweaking is required. The Panel identified a few areas that they felt deserved attention before the project proceeds to the development permit stage. There was a preference for the architects to revisit the identical expressions for the two residential towers and reflect in their design the towers' different solar orientations due to one shading the other, especially since the architects stated the towers' expressions were 100% a result of passive design choices to address their solar orientation. There was also some real concerns about the ground plane, especially the layout of the auto court/lane hybrid and the sense that too many gaps were proposed on the Burrard and Hornby frontages in addition to the sense that the grade change on Drake was handled poorly for the Toyota dealership. Plus the building's LEED Gold equivalent sustainability credentials, which is less than is required if the rezoning were to have been initiated today, are not in keeping with the City's requirement for tall buildings to demonstrate leadership in sustainability. Lastly there was concern about the use of the white concrete trellis as a solar shading device on elevations that do not require it, trading off in the process significant seasonal heat loss or absorption via the load bearing white trellis slab extensions without the gains of shading that the trellis offers through its employment on the south western elevation.

Had it been a 0-12 vote of non-support, or close to it, I would expect to see a wholesale redesign. This is exactly what happened recently with Oxford properties office project on 1075 West Hastings. However with a 5-7 vote of non-support I expect that tweaking and further design development will be the order of the day.

dleung · #**1468** Posted **Apr 22, 2011, 12:24 AM**

Designing for solar orientations does not necessarily require a different design on every side. The same language on one facade can be tweaked/rotated to suit the needs of another facade, without introducing an entirely new competing element. I think of the potential in Morphosis' le Phare proposal in Paris, where the mesh screen fins wrapping 90% of the tower could very well sweep horizontally across the south face and curve into a more vertical orientation on the east and west facades.

The reason why we end up with so many bi-polar towers in this town (tri-polar in this case) is for developers and architects to show off their green credentials to an immature market that can only perceive sustainability in the form of intentionally-messed-up facades. Why else would they put louvers on the office component of the Georgia, at the very bottom of a perpetually-dark skyscraper canyon?

Traynor · #**1469** Posted **Apr 22, 2011, 12:58 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by dleung

...The reason why we end up with so many bi-polar towers in this town (tri-polar in this case) is for developers and architects to show off their green credentials to an immature market that can only perceive sustainability in the form of intentionally-messed-up facades...

I agree with this sentiment. It applies to the Toronto condo market in a similar way, when it comes to interior designs. I can illustrate by paraphrasing the above.

The reason we end up with so many bad floor plans in this town is for developers and architects to show off they are designing an urban space to an immature buyer that can only perceive hip and urban spaces in the form of kitchens in your living room and obtrusive and unnecessary round columns.

caltrane74 · #**1470** Posted **Apr 22, 2011, 11:31 AM**

What else can you do when a One bedroom apartment costs half a million dollars.

caltrane74 · #**1471** Posted **Apr 25, 2011, 4:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbandreamer

Surfing around just came across a real aA stunner of a rendering or two, with a Charles St tag....hmm....looks cool even if it's not the design...

screenshot taken from http://www.ghkint.com/GHKCanada/Projects/Planning/LandDevelopmentApprovals.aspx

Building to the left in rendering has similar massing to Cresford's neighbouring BSN project....and to the right, the post office building. But does it add up to 64s?

Very Exhibit Residences, albeit in a 100% sexier fashion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbandreamer

Ms Condo Guide editor says this is not the right rendering. Will be announced/revealed next week... So stacked box haters, relax.

This regarding 64 Charles.

The proposal above is not for this tower. - Stay tuned New Rendering to be released shortly.

WhipperSnapper · #**1472** Posted **Apr 25, 2011, 5:45 PM**

Why post a rendering of a design that wasn't selected?

caltrane74 · #**1473** Posted **Apr 25, 2011, 5:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Why post a rendering of a design that wasn't selected?

I didn't even know that this rendering was submitted in a design contest for 64 Charles. So this is news to me.

I just wanted to be clear, this IS NOT the rendering of the new tower, it had been deduced by urbandreamer that because this project was marked Charles Street Proposal that it might have been the final rendering for the project. I'm not making the news, just reporting it for the top 25 list here.

WhipperSnapper · #**1474** Posted **Apr 25, 2011, 5:59 PM**

My point is why report it? It's nothing but spam and just adds to the confusion. Design contest? You're have quite the imagination.

caltrane74 · #**1475** Posted **Apr 25, 2011, 6:14 PM**

oh geez, I'm not even bothering with you....

All I am saying is that the design i posted last week is NOT the proposal. I don't know what is so confusing about that.

Anyways.. A NEW DESIGN, will be released next week.

Unless everyone on this board is mentally retarded, I don't think it's that hard to follow.

good loard!

Traynor · #**1476** Posted **Apr 25, 2011, 7:08 PM**

Don't apologize Cal, you did the right thing. Just ignore WhippeSnapper, he's been extra cranky lately.

That image was posted earlier as a possible 42 Charles proposal and now that it is proven not to be, it is proper to post the image with a disclaimer to clear up any confusion. WS is talking out of his hat.

In the Newspaper/TV game that is exactly what they do when they print a retraction. You must show the mislabled image and correct the data to clear up the confusion.

In the future if WS gives you trouble I'll send him my copy of The Canadian Press Standards.

kw5150 · #**1477** Posted **Apr 25, 2011, 7:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

My point is why report it? It's nothing but spam and just adds to the confusion. Design contest? You're have quite the imagination.

Big deal. At least he posts pictures.

WhipperSnapper · #**1478** Posted **Apr 25, 2011, 10:47 PM**

This is NOT the rendering of the proposed tower for 42 Charles

kw5150 · #**1479** Posted **Apr 25, 2011, 10:57 PM**

Congrats!!! You posted your first photo in 10 years!

Traynor · #**1480** Posted **Apr 25, 2011, 10:58 PM**

Now, you really are being obtuse about this WS.

Cal did NOT post a random, out of context picture. The picture had been circulating as a possible 42 Charles proposal and he was simply clearing up that what had been seen previously, will not be the that proposal. Perfectly logical.