CF Pacific Centre Developments

[Prometheus]

Originally Posted by jhausner

That said, I don't think this building was going to be winning any awards anyway given I'm sure the redesign/reskin budget wasn't likely massive.

It seems to me that the design could have been improved in ways that would have decreased its expense. Part of what makes this design unattractive and dated is its unnecessary complexity and clutter, i.e., its protruding boxes, its double layers of glass and so on. I think a far simpler, cleaner--and likely cheaper--design would have been much more pleasing and timeless.

[Vancity]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

It seems to me that the design could have been improved in ways that would have decreased its expense. Part of what makes this design unattractive and dated is its unnecessary complexity and clutter, i.e., its protruding boxes, its double layers of glass and so on. I think a far simpler, cleaner--and likely cheaper--design would have been much more pleasing and timeless.

I'd agree with this.

I feel like some of our local architects sometimes try to do too much with their design. The best, and most elegant designs are often the ones that are the simplest. They age WELL. Timeless in a sense.

I thought this project would be different. But the more I see it to completion, the more I dislike the building. I don't know what it's going to look like inside, but the outside is not quite appealing. Unfortunate too

[logan5]

A massive building like this really makes its presence felt, so breaking it up into smaller sections is probably a good idea. I just hate glass though. It's cheap looking most of the time.

[Metro-One]

Again...given its location some nice animated lighting effects, screens, and even billboards would have added a lot!

[Darren Tate]

Wow. So much rage for this building. While it's obvious that the hodgepodge exterior is a not-so-successful attempt to break up the vast surface, it's still an improvement over the old building—which was sterile, oppressive and poorly maintained. Hopefully all that glass will reflect the surrounding area and make the street feel lighter and more open.

I question the need to break up the surface in the first place. Instead, they could have chosen to take advantage of all that surface area to do something sweeping and dramatic. Clearly there are some missed opportunities here—but knowing what it looked like before, I think I can live with this.

[officedweller]

Pic by me today:

[Prometheus]

Originally Posted by Darren Tate

While it's obvious that the hodgepodge exterior is a not-so-successful attempt to break up the vast surface, it's still an improvement over the old building...

This is the old building:


https://www.flickr.com/photos/285511...n/photostream/

[red-paladin]

Makes me sad every time we see the old hotel.

[wrenegade]

That building was magnificent. A real shame it was lost.

[sacrifice333]

BISON and MOOSE "GARGOYLES"!!!

[osirisboy]

Funny to see cars driving on the other side

[Vanelevatorman]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

This is the old building:


https://www.flickr.com/photos/285511...n/photostream/

I'm way too young to remember this, but this building was gorgeous! if only it was still around today, never mind adding class and sophistication to the area it would be (if kept up) a landmark property downtown. Compared to whats there now, well....no question.

[SpongeG]

it was amazing

people keep mentioning that granville should have boutique entrances but given the big difference in sidewalkto store ground lvel it would have needed stairs and ramps eating up valuable floor space and would look really awful imo

[officedweller]

There's enough ceiling height on the main level that a false floor could have been level with the sidewalk for streetfront retail. They would not connect to Nordstrom in the back.

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by Vanelevatorman

I'm way too young to remember this, but this building was gorgeous!

My 68 year old mom who moved to Vancouver in 1946 is too young to remember this building.

I never looked up how it met its demise until just now. Basically wrecked by squatters that no one dared to challenge?

During the Second World War, the second Hotel Vancouver was used as a barracks. The building was boarded up and placed under guard at the end of the war, a time when returning veterans were having difficulty finding housing. In January 1946 thirty-five veterans, unimpeded by Army sentries, took over the vacant hotel and announced the building was now veterans housing. They organized themselves and soon were housing approximately 1,000 veterans and some spouses.

The building was used by the veterans until 1948 and torn down a year later. The block became a parking lot until 1969. The Pacific Centre, including the TD Tower and the main Vancouver Eaton's Store (now Nordstrom's), was constructed between 1969 and 1972 and stands on the site today.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hotel_Vancouver_%281916%29

[Vin]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

Funny to see cars driving on the other side

Today, I think Canada is the only commonwealth country that drives on the 'wrong side'.

[officedweller]

Pics by me today:

Brackets are up over the Nordstrom entrance
(may have been up for a while, only just noticed):



They've installed steel for the raised floor at the rotunda entrance ((wood is at the entrance doorway):



This is the step between the area I showed before and the newer area at the entrance.

[officedweller]

Better pic by me last night of the steel inside for the rotunda entrance mezzanine.
Note the level in front is lower than the level behind.

[connect2source]

Looks like the main level of Nordstrom won't have the open feel Eaton's and Sears did but instead a more intimate-boutique feel likely to more efficiently direct shoppers to their intended destinations rather than have customers wander aimlessly through a vast open space.

Sears basically became a pass-through from Robson Street to Pacific Centre, I'm sure Nordstrom wishes to avoid that.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by connect2source

Looks like the main level of Nordstrom won't have the open feel Eaton's and Sears did but instead a more intimate-boutique feel likely to more efficiently direct shoppers to their intended destinations rather than have customers wander aimlessly through a vast open space.

Sears basically became a pass-through from Robson Street to Pacific Centre, I'm sure Nordstrom wishes to avoid that.

Pass-throughs are good if the store actually sells things that people want to buy. For Sears, their basement could have been a market selling cooked food and other delicacies at a fair price. People walking through could be tempted to stop and chow. How many people walking through would buy men's clothing and underwear?

For the new Nordstrom, there would be minimum pass-throughs as customers accessing PC would go underground quite directly via the escalator from the Robson/Granville entrance.