1021 W Hastings | 143M | 36Fl | Completed - Page 72

osirisboy · #**1421** Posted **Mar 26, 2015, 1:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by red-paladin

I think it looks the exact right size for that location.

Oh god I dont. It would've looked better if it was taller than shaw/fairmont

Delirium · #**1422** Posted **Mar 26, 2015, 5:00 PM**

agreed. doesn't even have to be much taller but something like this would have made a big difference. in any case, it's still a great building.

original photo by Yellow_Fever

Prometheus · #**1423** Posted **Mar 26, 2015, 9:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Delirium

agreed. doesn't even have to be much taller but something like this would have made a big difference. in any case, it's still a great building.

original photo by Yellow_Fever

Excellent job. Is there anyway you can do that again but add a couple more floors and post it side-by-side an unaltered photo?

What little height you have already added shows just how much more aesthetically pleasing this building (and surrounding skyline) would have been had the tower had greater vertical expression. And regarding the effect on the Marine Building specifically, the extra height is not detrimental in the least. Indeed, the Marine Building's prestige appears lifted, not lessened, in the presence of a more majestic MNP Tower.

https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.281072,-1...1!3m2!1sIIv5n5SI58pnRcfXsd_2Mw!2e0?hl=en

Canadian Mind · #**1424** Posted **Mar 27, 2015, 4:29 PM**

Prometheus, I'm pretty sure the tower height is what it is because of economics. Have you seen the inside of the building? The elevator core takes up around half of the lower floors. Any taller and the core would have been even bigger. <4000 square feet per floor is not really economical for a building who's largest usable space is around 8000 square feet. It is what it is, and I think it turned out good.

Now, start conceptualising replacement of the Guinness tower for something taller. I still think the step-up effect would be fantastic if a Guinness replacement is designed as tastefully as the MNP was.

Prometheus · #**1425** Posted **Mar 27, 2015, 4:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Canadian Mind

Prometheus, I'm pretty sure the tower height is what it is because of economics.

I know exactly why the tower is the height it is, as a reading of this thread will show. Indeed, you need only read the last few posts to see that.

On my part, any discussion regarding a taller version of the MNP Tower has obviously been no more than an aesthetic/philosophical/hypothetical exercise.

Canadian Mind · #**1426** Posted **Mar 27, 2015, 6:56 PM**

I'm still curious to see what you think of building an even taller structure where the Guinness building is?

Prometheus · #**1427** Posted **Mar 27, 2015, 8:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Canadian Mind

I'm still curious to see what you think of building an even taller structure where the Guinness building is?

I think I would hate to see the Guinness Building go. I would be against it. I think it would be much more preferable to build something special in the garden immediately west of the Guinness Building or across the street in place of the old, short, black office building.

Canadian Mind · #**1428** Posted **Mar 27, 2015, 8:28 PM**

I don't understand what the redeeming features of the Guinness building are. It's damned ugly. The only thing that I like about the building is the stories my Grandfather told me about driving golf balls off the roof into Coal Harbour back in the day, but those probably aren't true.

officedweller · #**1429** Posted **Mar 27, 2015, 8:53 PM**

It's a very refined building in the International style.

LeftCoaster · #**1430** Posted **Mar 27, 2015, 11:15 PM**

The Guiness Building should never go. Should get heritage designation at some point IMO.

vanman · #**1431** Posted **Apr 1, 2015, 4:04 PM**

I was under the assumption that the Guinness building already had heritage designation. I would rather see the Fairmont Pacific Rim go before Guinness.

Condo_Livin' · #**1432** Posted **Apr 7, 2015, 11:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by vanman

I was under the assumption that the Guinness building already had heritage designation.

Vancouver has three levels of heritage designation: A (Primary), B (Significant) and C (Character). The Guinness Tower (1055 West Hastings) is listed in the "B" category. See:

http://former.vancouver.ca/commsvcs/guidelines/V001.pdf