Here are some pics from today. It doesn't look like the rendering they have on the fence (2nd pic) was the latest design.
I really wanted to get around to the back to see how the building looks from the neighbouring house's point of view. The back wall is huge looking, especially because of the sharp slope down to the west.
Is it my imagination, or have they built one fewer floors than in the rendering?
I looked and looked for rebar or anything indicating another floor on the way but didn't see it. It's like they lopped the top floor off the final design.
I looked and looked for rebar or anything indicating another floor on the way but didn't see it. It's like they lopped the top floor off the final design.
They are likely doing the top floor out of Structural Steel...If it was me, that's how I'd be building it.
I'm curious how they are getting through with what is built, there is quite a number of major elements, including angles, windows, and the perception of floor to floor that are not coming through in the actual construction vs the UDP and renderings.
Is it my imagination, or have they built one fewer floors than in the rendering?
It was reduced by one floor from the original rendering, I've seen updated renderings with the new floor count.
Agree with vanciti, I drive by this frequently and it appears as though there have been lots of significant design changes, most of the bold elements are gone and the built product is much more simplified and typical. At least it's concrete, Cressey typically builds very high quality projects as well.
Is UDP as concerned with building designs also outside of Downtown?
nothing happens without UDP approval, which is tied to DPB approval. The design of a building is often tied to Development Permit conditions (prior to conditions) - you can deviate to a point...but this is a pretty stark deviation from the pictures anyhow.
Is UDP as concerned with building designs also outside of Downtown?
The short, easy to read Bylaw governing the UDP can be found here, and the most salient excerpts are as follows:
Quote:
1. The Panel shall be advisory to Council but its reports shall go to the Director of Planning or Development Permit Board, as the case may be and be included in toto in such reports as go to Council from either the Director of Planning or the Development Permit Board, provided that the Panel has the additional right to report to Council.
2. The Panel shall assist the Department of Planning and Civic Development and Council in the formulation of design policy and criteria.
3. The Panel's review shall be extended to include all civic works, such as bridges, roadworks, parks, beautification projects, transit systems, civic buildings, and design competitions prior to both the issuance of competition requirements and the subsequent awarding of contracts and to give impartial professional advice directly at the appropriate level and at the appropriate time on any proposal or policy affecting the community's physical environment.
4. The Panel shall have the right to review those projects submitted to it by Council and have the right to select additional projects.
5. The Panel shall review projects in their early conceptual stages or such time as they are first brought to the attention of the Department of Planning and Civic Development.
In practice, the bread and butter of the Panel's work is to give multidisciplinary professional advice to the Mayor and Council and city staff on the proposed use, form, and density of all rezoning proposals in the city, excluding single family homes and duplexes. The Panel also gives its multidisciplinary professional advice to the Development Permit Board on urban design aspects of development proposals, excluding, again, single family homes and duplexes.
__________________ VANCOUVER | Beautiful, Multicultural | Canada's Pacific Metropolis
Last edited by SFUVancouver; Apr 6, 2015 at 9:39 PM.
So it appears they did, in fact, take off the top floor. I wonder why they'd do that? it would seem they'd make a lot less money with one less floor, especially if they built it out of steel instead of concrete...
So it appears they did, in fact, take off the top floor. I wonder why they'd do that? it would seem they'd make a lot less money with one less floor, especially if they built it out of steel instead of concrete...
If I recall correctly, the City forced them to chop-off a floor before being granted the development permit. One of the most arbitrary decisions of this sort I've ever seen - the rationale was that Cressey didn't conduct "adequate" consultation during the rezoning process. I can't look at the building now without getting mad about that.
So presumably the renderings were made before the City stuck its nose in, and they didn't want to re-do them.
This featureless building reminds me of a motor inn.
Hahaha thank you!!! Yes that's what I thought too! The rendering is a lot better! They just stripped it of any character that it originally had. Good job! I love how in the rendering they don't show a single piece of that shit spandrel. Lol. Such bs. It's like they know how crappy it looks
Drove past this yesterday and studied the rendering vs. the building, they're almost nothing alike. So much detail has been eliminated and the angle along the east facade is all but gone. Cressey typically does great work but I'm rather underwhelmed by this. At least the "RIDGE" sign remains but what was once a block full of character and history is gone.
Here are some pics from today. It doesn't look like the rendering they have on the fence (2nd pic) was the latest design.
I really wanted to get around to the back to see how the building looks from the neighbouring house's point of view. The back wall is huge looking, especially because of the sharp slope down to the west.
The neighbours must be real excited about looking at the back of that bunker. It's like having your own Berlin Wall.
Sticking the Ridge sign atop this blandness is everything that is wrong with development and "heritage preservation" in Vancouver.
Prev
Linear Mode
