I must say that it actually looked better BEFORE because at least then it appeared that the mismatched glazing was intentional; now it just looks like they ran out of money to clad the entire building with the same glass.
My cloudy day photo on the previous page was a quick shot from the most unimpressive angle of the building, so here are a few more taken in a similar weather on Friday. The new glass is definitely an improvement, but it is still sad that it is not the same as the original.
*******************************
Now, I had an interesting discussion about the whole thing and found out that the end result comes from several compromises. I think I can't go into too much detail, but I can tell you that there was no technical reason why they could have not match the old glass. The current glass color is an achieved compromise, as is the place where the glass changes. I know mentioning this will bring people nightmares, but the original proposal was to have dark seafoam green glass on the top floors. I am dead serious.
Having heard the whole story I am now sure that the end result is the best compromise that could be achieved. Intention was definitely to make the building 100% dark, but unfortunately they were forced to compromise.
*******************************
Today the last part of the project started with them detatching the notch part of the stage and lowering it down. Weather permitting, they may be able to complete all glass changing still this week.
The scaffolding stage they have built for this project has been an amazing untertaking and is truly unique as we can see here.
Yes, by the city. Here is an article explaining the background.
Quote:
This case has its origins with the City of Vancouver’s red tape. It certainly fits well into the City’s history of being over-controlling with the architectural designs of the city, to the point that architects and developers have now built a strong industry culture of “dumbing down” their own unique creative tastes and preferences in order for their designs to fit within the narrow framework of what the Planning Department and City Council will approve. Why spend money on designing and engineering a building that will not be green lighted, only to spend even more money and time later on to go back to the drawing board?
If you have ever wondered why so many of Vancouver’s towers look the same (a.k.a. “cookie cutter” designs), and why every tower built over the last 20-years uses light blue or green translucent glass, the answer lies largely with the City and its restrictive policies and conservative preferences. In all fairness, with recent city-approved proposals such as Arthur Erickson’s 1133 West Georgia and Bjarke Ingel’s Beach & Howe Tower, the City has made headway in gradually moving away from its past ways.
The City’s red tape controversy over the One Wall Centre goes into the history books of record-breaking poor taste and over-reaching. Mid-way into the skyscraper’s construction, when reflective dark glass was being installed onto the exterior, the Planning Department requested developer Wall Financial Corporation (Peter Wall) to change the tone of the entire building facade’s glass to a clear light blue tone that would blend in with the mountains and blue sky. It was concerned the reflective dark glass would dominate the appearance of the Downtown skyline, it strongly insisted on a change of glass tone mid-way into construction (even if it were to cost the developer millions in additional costs).
Quote:
Originally Posted by spm2013
I blame the condo tenants since I don't see Wall wanting seafoam green.
Oh well, can't do anything now. Just hope for sunny days.
The condo tenants are the least to be blamed. Now they paid hundreds of thousands to correct this mistake, and yet its still screwed up. So they gave what they have...for nothing...
Yes, by the city. Here is an article explaining the background.
The condo tenants are the least to be blamed. Now they paid hundreds of thousands to correct this mistake, and yet its still screwed up. So they gave what they have...for nothing...
Hmm, if I recall news stories of the time correctly Wall was told after the construction of Wall Centre that those two towers used glass that was too dark and forbidding, and that one Wall Centre should use a lighter shade.
The condo tenants are the least to be blamed. Now they paid hundreds of thousands to correct this mistake, and yet its still screwed up. So they gave what they have...for nothing...
uhh..wasn't the main purpose in replacing the glass to reduce heat gain?
uhh..wasn't the main purpose in replacing the glass to reduce heat gain?
And how is that the fault of the condo tenants? And didn't you read the article? Even if Peter Wall's desire to correct the mistake wasn't a factor, what about the breaking seals and moisture?
There is plenty of blame to pass around with this monstrosity, but certainly the condo unit owners are the least to be blamed.
Now you’ve done it! I’ve managed to go a couple of years without posting. Now all that gained productivity is going to go out the window!
You are quoting an opinion piece in Vancitybuzz as the irrefutable source of fact? Come on.
How about hearing it from someone who was actually there when it all went down: http://pricetags.wordpress.com/2013/02/19/wall-centre-controversy-it-wasnt-about-the-glass/
Fact is Wall bullshitted the City and the public about the glass and then went ahead and did what he wanted all along. You can argue the merits of the compromise outcome (and the new insult to injury situation) but you can‘t put it on the feet of the City. If the building was designed and communicated correctly in the first place there would have been one glass and an appropriate HVAC design.
Now you’ve done it! I’ve managed to go a couple of years without posting. Now all that gained productivity is going to go out the window!
You are quoting an opinion piece in Vancitybuzz as the irrefutable source of fact? Come on.
How about hearing it from someone who was actually there when it all went down: http://pricetags.wordpress.com/2013/02/19/wall-centre-controversy-it-wasnt-about-the-glass/
Fact is Wall bullshitted the City and the public about the glass and then went ahead and did what he wanted all along. You can argue the merits of the compromise outcome (and the new insult to injury situation) but you can‘t put it on the feet of the City. If the building was designed and communicated correctly in the first place there would have been one glass and an appropriate HVAC design.
The City is to blame, they are extremely short sighted and archaic! That IS a fact! One Wall Centre is not the only building that was f*cked up because of their over meddling. The original 687 Howe Street (now the disastrous Residences of Georgia), the Hudson, and most recently, that abomination that is The Exchange, is a direct result of the incompetence of those overpaid, know it all City of Vancouver staff who have absolutely no clue on how to properly plan a regional downtown core.
Yes, most definitely the City is to blame. If not for Peter Wall and his obstinate and ostentatious nature, we wouldn't be able to see such a fine development as the Wall Centre. He tried to defy the City and achieved quite a lot, although the City still tried to screw him back with the glass issue. If Peter Wall already had the building with the dark glass going up halfway, why did the City have to order him to take it all down and replace them? Why wouldn't the inspector order a stop order when the first pane was installed? Also, who made the City 'art critics' to say that a dark glass tower would spoil the scenery of the mountains? I have much more to say regarding view cones, etc, but I shall stop.
With cases like that, Vancouver's developers are known to 'dumb down' their designs in the hopes of getting their projects approved by the City as swiftly as possible. Vancouver has been attracting some visionaries but it's just too bad that we have a hick City planning unit and council. They should go out more (I mean outside the Lower Mainland and North America). The tradition seems to be carrying on.
*l* Amazing how naive some members can be, the history is there to rea, I can't beleive how anyone can interpret it so differently then how it occured.
Now you’ve done it! I’ve managed to go a couple of years without posting. Now all that gained productivity is going to go out the window!
You are quoting an opinion piece in Vancitybuzz as the irrefutable source of fact? Come on.
How about hearing it from someone who was actually there when it all went down: http://pricetags.wordpress.com/2013/02/19/wall-centre-controversy-it-wasnt-about-the-glass/
Fact is Wall bullshitted the City and the public about the glass and then went ahead and did what he wanted all along. You can argue the merits of the compromise outcome (and the new insult to injury situation) but you can‘t put it on the feet of the City. If the building was designed and communicated correctly in the first place there would have been one glass and an appropriate HVAC design.
Can't help but notice the irony of calling out someone for quoting an opinion piece then going right ahead and posting one of your own.
If anything Price's garbage just goes to affirm what the piece in the Vancitybuzz was speaking to. The problem originated from certain persons and a certain brain dead civic department deciding to play god for the rest of us and deem the glass Wall wanted to use for his new tower as "too dark". Irregardless of Wall's actions afterwards, the root of the problem most certainly does lie at the feet of the city.
Also, the Wall Centre development is sadly not alone when it comes to the whims of uncles Gordie and Larry and their hand picked crony successors. Their have been plenty of examples of developments that have been forced to be "dumbed down" in recent Vancouver history and smart developers have followed nearly identical formulas in order to guarantee success in gaining approval for their projects. (just as the "buzz" piece asserts).
The City is to blame, they are extremely short sighted and archaic! That IS a fact! One Wall Centre is not the only building that was f*cked up because of their over meddling. The original 687 Howe Street (now the disastrous Residences of Georgia), the Hudson, and most recently, that abomination that is The Exchange, is a direct result of the incompetence of those overpaid, know it all City of Vancouver staff who have absolutely no clue on how to properly plan a regional downtown core.
Right, the developers are just itching to deliver stunning buildings like this one...
or this one:
Do you honestly believe Vancouver would be better if developers could build whatever they wanted with out limit? Do you understand why planners politicians and urbanists come from all over the world to study Vancouver?
Can't help but notice the irony of calling out someone for quoting an opinion piece then going right ahead and posting one of your own.
Sometimes you gotta fight fire with fire.
The reality is though, regardless of the outcome on this specific building, (which could have been mitigated by working with in the rules, rather than trying to flout them,) Vancouver's planning ethos has served use well on the whole.
Prev
i wonder if there are any cheap solutions like adhesive or spray tint
I am dead serious.
Linear Mode
