The Exchange | 115.7m | 31fl, 13fl | 400,000sqft. | Completed - Page 14

trofirhen · #**261** Posted **Mar 1, 2013, 8:11 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redkey

What the hell happened to the old design?

It went into the paper shredder, what else?

Hed Kandi · #**262** Posted **Mar 1, 2013, 5:02 PM**

The developer in their attempt to have a 'starchitect' quality attached to the project, has ultimately failed.

Instead of going with going with Herzog and De Meuron themselves, they go with a former employee associated with the firm - whose designs are less than inspiring. To me, this is kind of like aiming for sex but ending up home alone solo with a night in front of the computer.

Close, but no cigar.

Anyhow, I think that it should be noted that box buildings don't necessarily have to be boring. Take the China Resources Building for example, a box yes but a pretty one at that.

Source: worldarchitecturenews.com

Jebby · #**263** Posted **Mar 1, 2013, 7:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redkey

What the hell happened to the old design?

Vancouver mediocrity happened to it.

jlousa · #**264** Posted **Mar 1, 2013, 7:42 PM**

Put me in the camp that thinks the new design shows more potential then the old one. I think we are judging this one a little early, let's wait until some detailed renders are supplied and it works it's ways thru the udp. The old design looked more interesting but I think it's safe to say the current design will end up looking like the better choice in 20yrs time. There is simple elegance in a timeless design.

Prometheus · #**265** Posted **Mar 2, 2013, 12:48 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlousa

Put me in the camp that thinks the new design shows more potential then [sic] the old one. I think we are judging this one a little early, let's wait until some detailed renders are supplied and it works it's ways thru the udp. The old design looked more interesting but I think it's safe to say the current design will end up looking like the better choice in 20yrs time. There is simple elegance in a timeless design.

Spoken like one who defended the city's ad hoc choice to abandon its very own CBD policy and acquiesce to the groundless complaints of Jameson House residents, needlessly forcing this redesign. You own it, so you might as well praise it, no matter how absurd.

trofirhen · #**266** Posted **Mar 2, 2013, 1:56 AM**

I agree that a "box" can look attractive. The one you show IMO recalls the Bentall Centre theme somewhat. However, in a city that already has its fair share of boxes, I would prefer something snazzier and more daring. IMO the stock exchange part should be boldened and not absorbed by the main structure, which in itself should be interesting, a little unusual perhaps, but pleasing. But that's only an opinion.......

officedweller · #**267** Posted **Mar 2, 2013, 2:00 AM**

A box on a tightly constrained site is unimaginative and can't be appreciated / viewed from a distance (it is just responding to the site) - a box in a more open setting (such as TD Centre in TO) becomes sculptural.

cornholio · #**268** Posted **Mar 2, 2013, 4:47 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prometheus

Spoken like one who defended the city's ad hoc choice to abandon its very own CBD policy and acquiesce to the groundless complaints of Jameson House residents, forcing this redesign. You own it, so you might as well praise it, no matter how absurd.

Speaks like someone with a plan to dabble a bit in politics (public or private sector)

Definitely a very positively neutral "step on no feet" attitude lately.

Nothing wrong with playing it safe with public comments by the way.

trofirhen · #**269** Posted **Mar 2, 2013, 11:30 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by cornholio

Speaks like someone with a plan to dabble a bit in politics (public or private sector)

Definitely a very positively neutral "step on no feet" attitude lately.

Nothing wrong with playing it safe with public comments by the way.

Mais oui, carrément !!

jlousa · #**270** Posted **Mar 2, 2013, 10:25 PM**

Trust me I have no current interest in moving into politics, the pay cut doesn't interest me at all.

Perhaps after I retire from working I might give it a run and try to fix what I feel is broken, but knowing myself I'm don't think I'm cut out for it and am bound to cause more a couple of questionable soundclips and probably do my issues my damage then good.

Like I said I'm willing to see this project work it's way thru the system before I make a judgement on it. Even in it's new form it's still superior then the Manulife proposal which doesn't seem to get as much flack from anyone here.

dreambrother808 · #**271** Posted **Mar 2, 2013, 11:05 PM**

The old design tried too hard to be interesting while this one has some appealing minimalist and raw elements. That being said, I am conflicted on the redesign. If this is built, is there a travesty of some sort? No. As for Manulife, it is a bit outside of the CBD and that is most likely why people are more accepting of its basic nature.

trofirhen · #**272** Posted **Mar 3, 2013, 5:59 PM**

http://urbantoronto.ca/sites/default/fil...rojects/1626/urbantoronto-1626-13097.jpg

I've always liked this one for Toronto. Probably too big for Vancouver, but they've incorporated an original building within it. Anyhow it's snazzy, IMO

Vancity · #**273** Posted **Mar 4, 2013, 7:15 AM**

Ugh. That redesign is awful. Vancouver at it's finest.

If they wanted the design like the one in China, should've just signed a 'starchitect' to redesign the building. this one's plenty awful.

Vancouver really does need to up it's design for buildings. looks so ugly, plain and boring (uninspiring).

Vancity · #**274** Posted **Mar 4, 2013, 7:15 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trofirhen

http://urbantoronto.ca/sites/default/fil...rojects/1626/urbantoronto-1626-13097.jpg

I've always liked this one for Toronto. Probably too big for Vancouver, but they've incorporated an original building within it. Anyhow it's snazzy, IMO

Love it if we had something like this.

Vancity · #**275** Posted **Mar 4, 2013, 7:18 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hed Kandi

The developer in their attempt to have a 'starchitect' quality attached to the project, has ultimately failed.

Instead of going with going with Herzog and De Meuron themselves, they go with a former employee associated with the firm - whose designs are less than inspiring. To me, this is kind of like aiming for sex but ending up home alone solo with a night in front of the computer.

Close, but no cigar.

Anyhow, I think that it should be noted that box buildings don't necessarily have to be boring. Take the China Resources Building for example, a box yes but a pretty one at that.

Source: worldarchitecturenews.com

Wouldn't mind if our redesign looked something like this. Would be a big improvement over the current one. yuk.

Metro-One · #**276** Posted **Mar 4, 2013, 7:20 AM**

Nah, it would never fly here, too many lighting features on the one in China, ours would have to be as plain and dark as possible.

trofirhen · #**277** Posted **Mar 4, 2013, 11:18 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Nah, it would never fly here, too many lighting features on the one in China, ours would have to be as plain and dark as possible.

As plain and dark as possible? Are you being serious, or facetious, Metro?

SpongeG · #**278** Posted **Mar 4, 2013, 4:16 PM**

the city would never allow so much lighting

officedweller · #**279** Posted **Mar 4, 2013, 7:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trofirhen

http://urbantoronto.ca/sites/default/fil...rojects/1626/urbantoronto-1626-13097.jpg

I've always liked this one for Toronto. Probably too big for Vancouver, but they've incorporated an original building within it. Anyhow it's snazzy, IMO

That's by Oxford.
It's the big brother to Oxford's Vancouver MNP Tower.

LeftCoaster · #**280** Posted **Mar 4, 2013, 8:03 PM**

I'd say Vancouver won that one. Richmond Adelaide is nice but MNP tower is much more attractive IMO.