Burrard Place | 168m, 112m, 56m | 54fl, 36fl, 13fl | 938,000 sqft | U/C

[Delirium]

new rendering

Photo http://media.pixilinkserver.com/upload/house/images/62043/skyfront.png?t=y

if you look at the closeup of the building on their website front page, i'm not very optimistic. seeing a lot of the same light green spandrel as every other building (naturally) http://burrardplace.ca/

[Klazu]

This will be Vancouver's 3rd tallest building and a definitive landmark for the years to come. It is really disappointing if they won't be taking any pride in making this building reflect that special status.

[Dimswitch]

C'mon gang, let's campaign for another 10 or 15 stories! They could easily swipe them from the 2nd tower, no one will notice!!
I mean, does someone from City Hall actually come down there and measure it?

[logan5]

Originally Posted by Klazu

This will be Vancouver's 3rd tallest building and a definitive landmark for the years to come. It is really disappointing if they won't be taking any pride in making this building reflect that special status.

Plus I thought this was suppose to be one of the special "gateway to the City" sites, like Vancouver House.

[logan5]

Here's an excerpt from a Vancouver Sun story from Dec. 2013. Extra height was given in exchange for architectural excellence.

Vancouver council has approved construction of what will be the third-tallest building in the city as part of a massive $500-million, three-tower proposal along Burrard and Hornby Streets near the Burrard Bridge that will redefine the entrance to the downtown core.

In approving the so-called Burrard Gateway project at Drake Street, council also exceeded a recent general height limit of 500 feet it set just three years ago, allowing the tallest of the three buildings to reach 550 feet.

But in doing so, the city said the development partnership of Reliance Properties and Jim Pattison Group had met a demand for architectural excellence that warranted the exception, even though the tallest of the three might shadow other buildings and neighbouring streets.

“This particular applicant was able to design what we think is a building which contributes architectural excellence to the city, and therefore we were prepared to move beyond that and the shadowing effect and the overall effect on the skyline and support 550 feet,” said Brian Jackson, the city’s general manager of planning and development.

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Van...y+tower/9303247/story.html#ixzz3Z7jh7d8Q

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Klazu

This will be Vancouver's 3rd tallest building and a definitive landmark for the years to come. It is really disappointing if they won't be taking any pride in making this building reflect that special status.

Yeah, it's sad, really. The 'zig-zags' on the main building seem angled the wrong way.
Somehow, although it has its good points, it just isn't "sleek." Something this big, this prominent needs to be "sleek," I think.
Too late to go back to the drawing-board now. As you say:

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by logan5

Here's an excerpt from a Vancouver Sun story from Dec. 2013. Extra height was given in exchange for architectural excellence.

We might be ranting ahead of time, but I really hope someone does hold them accountable for those promises. Like trofirhen says, such a landmark tower should be sleek and not busy. If nothing else, please at least use gray spandrel for once and God damnit keep the pattern consistent.

[mcminsen]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Construction slated to start Jan 2016 per the article. Was assuming it would get going before the end of 2015, I wonder why the delay.

Originally Posted by wrenegade

Stopped by Musette Caffe yesterday and noticed that work is underway on the old Pattison Toyota building, likely turning it into a Presentation Centre. And speaking of Musette, they are there until the end of the summer, so no demo or excavation until September.

***crickets***


May 25 '15, my pics

[dleung]

Originally Posted by Klazu

We might be ranting ahead of time, but I really hope someone does hold them accountable for those promises. Like trofirhen says, such a landmark tower should be sleek and not busy. If nothing else, please at least use gray spandrel for once and God damnit keep the pattern consistent.

A 550' tower should not have spandrel. Standards seem to be going down in this city. Anything taller than One Wall should at least look better than One Wall. This will be the first tower that clearly falls short.

[osirisboy]

Yea no "cost engineering" bs allowed

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Klazu

We might be ranting ahead of time, but I really hope someone does hold them accountable for those promises. Like trofirhen says, such a landmark tower should be sleek and not busy. If nothing else, please at least use gray spandrel for once and God damnit keep the pattern consistent.

Originally Posted by dleung

A 550' tower should not have spandrel. Standards seem to be going down in this city. Anything taller than One Wall should at least look better than One Wall. This will be the first tower that clearly falls short.

Thank you both for your feedback. I think "spandrelling up" and "busying up" a landmark tower like this is a travesty.
Not to mention in plain old bad taste.

[scrapin]

Another typical residential glass balcony vancouver special tower, i am excited for the height and the energy that it will bring to the area though.

[NewWester]

Isn't it kind of the epitome of the Vancouver Special tower? Like, if this is *the look* of Van towers in '00s and '10s, shouldn't one of our tallest towers reflect that, an exclamation mark to the movement for better or worse? And who knows, after this maybe we can move on and start something new?

[Delirium]

http://www.mikestewart.ca/burrard-gatewa...properties-and-jim-pattison-developments


http://www.mikestewart.ca/burrard-gatewa...properties-and-jim-pattison-developments


http://www.mikestewart.ca/burrard-gatewa...properties-and-jim-pattison-developments


http://www.mikestewart.ca/burrard-gatewa...properties-and-jim-pattison-developments


http://www.mikestewart.ca/burrard-gatewa...properties-and-jim-pattison-developments


http://www.mikestewart.ca/burrard-gatewa...properties-and-jim-pattison-developments


http://www.mikestewart.ca/burrard-gatewa...properties-and-jim-pattison-developments

[Large Cat]

It's funny that this building won't be on Burrard at all. Maybe they think Hornby cyclists will add the most business to the retail podium!

[Prometheus]

Originally Posted by Delirium

http://www.mikestewart.ca/burrard-gatewa...properties-and-jim-pattison-developments

They have changed the podium again. There used to be a relatively clean street wall. But now there are exposed support columns, creating exterior obstructions and blind hiding spots.


Former design:

Originally Posted by Built Form

Here's the updated model.






pix by Built Form

[Klazu]

Hmm, quite a lot spandrel visible but at least is has a pattern. Hopefully glass color would be darker as the model suggests, but I doubt.

[trofirhen]

Again, I get the feeling that I am "supposed" to like this project. The height is great, yes, but the overall design just doesn't do it for me.
Sorry if this breaks the Politically Correct Rules of Taste here. I wonder how many, if any, feel the same way I do.

[giallo]

^ Nah. I don't think anyone here is in love with this project. Depending on my mood, I find it kinda 'meh' one day, and ugly the next.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by giallo

^ Nah. I don't think anyone here is in love with this project. Depending on my mood, I kinda of find it 'meh' one day, and 'ugly' the next.

Thank you for that confirming feedback. It's a real shame in this case, considering it will be one of our tallest and most prominent buildings.