[Burnaby] Station Square | 35,38,48,41,52 fl | Completed

[Marshal]

Originally Posted by Caliplanner1

If I'm not mistaken the top of the podium will be holding trees, grass lawns etc..

That doesn't explain it. Most buildings of this form do the same with a finer looking structure.

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by Marshal

That doesn't explain it. Most buildings of this form do the same with a finer looking structure.

....good to know,...but I've always wondered about the strength of such concrete roof structures given that I've seen the powerful negative impact of tree roots damaging swimming pools/sewer pipes and lifting the foundation of buildings.

[Marshal]

Originally Posted by Caliplanner1

....good to know,...but I've always wondered about the strength of such concrete roof structures given that I've seen the powerful negative impact of tree roots damaging swimming pools/sewer pipes and lifting the foundation of buildings.

Well, that kind of damage can occur: tree roots can split granite and concrete, but they need cracks and you would have to make the mistake of building on top of organic material. I have seen old house foundations broken by roots, but large buildings, like properly designed houses, have their foundations resting below any organic surface soil layers (we use the term "undisturbed inorganic soil" for what must be under structural footings). On big buildings like Station Square, the excavation goes well below where tree roots could be a problem.

As for trees on top, there is no real issue, but the "planter" would be designed to match the tree's root potential. The worry here is for the health of the tree (preventing root binding), modern concrete is not going to let tree routes to penetrate. Any garden plantings on these rooftops are a light load for the structure.

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by Marshal

That doesn't explain it. Most buildings of this form do the same with a finer looking structure.

.....so what's your explanation for this bulky design?

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by Caliplanner1

.....so what's your explanation for this bulky design?

It's most likely a design choice by the designing architect.

Also most roof/podium slabs tend to support a lot of mechanical elements (vents, pipes, pumps), but the thickness of the slab would hardly be a consideration for such support of those kinds of loads much like it wouldn't be for the support of less dense structures like organics (trees and green roofs) as well as live loads (people).

Where you'd see thicker slabs like that supporting actual load with that as a primary function would be where the support has to span a considerable distance without columns or with minimal column support beneath (like in auditoriums and stadia and those sorts of large spaces) and even then the structural engineer would more like recommend you just go with steel frame instead of concrete since it's more efficient.

You can support a lot of load with less bulk in modern structural design thanks to steel reinforcement in the concrete and steel frames where necessary, and in most cases where you see a bulky design like this it's more likely than not a design choice (considering the cost-to-efficiency ratio of what you're spending).

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Caliplanner1

....good to know,...but I've always wondered about the strength of such concrete roof structures given that I've seen the powerful negative impact of tree roots damaging swimming pools/sewer pipes and lifting the foundation of buildings.

Put a steel box in to limit root growth? Some smaller trees have smaller root systems, and can thrive in limited soil space.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

It's most likely a design choice by the designing architect.

Agreed. A lot of it is probably just a parapet wall.

Here's pic of the first tower of the last phase circulated by e-mail.
EDIT: [Doesn't] seem all that spectacular given they went with a different, big name architecture firm, KPF, for the last 2 towers.


Web: www.stationsquare.ca

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Agreed. A lot of it is probably just a parapet wall.

Here's pic of the first tower of the last phase circulated by e-mail.
Does seem all that spectacular given they went with a different, big name architecture firm, KPF, for the last 2 towers.


Web: www.stationsquare.ca

KPF are indeed a big deal, big name architect.
It's amazing they were able to get them to design the last phase, although the concern now might be that the last two towers will be markedly different from the first three and might look out of place, or like they're from a different project altogether.

Still,...
You can't turn down the chance to have KPF do your towers.
That in itself is a marketing selling point - especially for the demographic they'll be going after here and for this particular locale (they've done lots of recognizable towers in Asia and particularly in China, including the Shanghai World Financial Center).

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Agreed. A lot of it is probably just a parapet wall.

Here's pic of the first tower of the last phase circulated by e-mail.
Does seem all that spectacular given they went with a different, big name architecture firm, KPF, for the last 2 towers.


Web: www.stationsquare.ca

I just realized that something is off with that image.

Is it flipped?

Looking at the background, there's no way that Metroplace tower would be situated that way relative to the Metrotown office Towers (just in the middle background behind the shorter tower).

Part of the problem is I can't tell if you're looking at the view from Kingsway or from Central Boulevard.
If it's the latter then the existing residential tower shown at the right edge of the picture should really be on the left side, no?
And you wouldn't see Metroplace tower at all.
Likewise, if you were looking from Kingsway, the Metroplace tower and the metropolis office towers would likewise be on the left side of the picture (and out of frame from this angle).

Did the email perchance indicate when the last phase is slated to begin construction? (or at least, sales?)

[officedweller]

PS - just noticed atypo in my post - i.e. "doesn't" seem spectacular.

It does, however, looked more refined, simpler with cleaner lines.

[Marshal]

Originally Posted by Caliplanner1

.....so what's your explanation for this bulky design?

Spr0ckets' answer is close enough. It is not uncommon, but I have never understood the expense of so much extra material for that reason (design choice).

Vin: a steel box would not help - the concrete can do it + it would have to be an expensive box as it would need to be corrosion proof. Modern concrete is up to all of these tasks. The load is not very much. Its more about proper planting choices and the health of those plants and trees.

[vincent114]

anyone knows about the price ?

[Marshal]

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

. . . although the concern now might be that the last two towers will be markedly different from the first three and might look out of place, or like they're from a different project altogether . . .

I would be happy if each phase looked like a different project; fully or partially. As long as the design was good. And we all know, that while this project is fine, its architecture could be many times better than it is. If it actually was a group of different projects, we would all be happy with a multitude of good designs.

[Vin]

I was at the Metropolis over the weekend and made a point to walk out towards Kingsway to observe how it looks like now from the street level. I have to say Station Square is looking very spectacular despite construction still going on. When all the towers and mall podiums are built, this neighbourhood will look really amazing.

[Freeform]

The tower shown in the above rendering is the forth tower(called tower 5) with tower 3 in the background. Tower 2 not seen is behind tower 5 in that rendering looking south east. Tower 6 which is on the corner of Kingsway and McKay would be to the left not shown and is the "KPF" tower. The beefy columns of the tower 2/3 podium are an architectural choice and not required structurally.

[BobLoblawsLawBlog]

Why does the 5th/4th tower gotta be so short? It seems more logical to rake in the money.

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

Looking at the background, there's no way that Metroplace tower would be situated that way relative to the Metrotown office Towers (just in the middle background behind the shorter tower).
And you wouldn't see Metroplace tower at all.

The view is from the Hilton hotel on Mackay, facing east. That's a real view but the dimensions are a little off. Only the trees in foreground are fake.

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by Vin

When all the towers and mall podiums are built, this neighbourhood will look really amazing.

I have very little regrets moving to Metrotown from Downtown. Sure it's not the same vibe but projects wise there is so much interesting going on and the area is constantly improving.

I hope I will get the chance to witness these giants rising from our penthouse!

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Klazu

I have very little regrets moving to Metrotown from Downtown. Sure it's not the same vibe but projects wise there is so much interesting going on and the area is constantly improving.

I hope I will get the chance to witness these giants rising from our penthouse!

Stay put buddy, we're all counting on you to provide us with some awesome shots of the megalopolis of Burnaby in the next few years.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

I just realized that something is off with that image.

Is it flipped?

Looking at the background, there's no way that Metroplace tower would be situated that way relative to the Metrotown office Towers (just in the middle background behind the shorter tower).

Part of the problem is I can't tell if you're looking at the view from Kingsway or from Central Boulevard.
If it's the latter then the existing residential tower shown at the right edge of the picture should really be on the left side, no?
And you wouldn't see Metroplace tower at all.
Likewise, if you were looking from Kingsway, the Metroplace tower and the metropolis office towers would likewise be on the left side of the picture (and out of frame from this angle).

The arrow below shows the angle of the rendering.
The new tower lines up with the 3rd(2nd?) tower (hiding it).
The 2nd(3rd?) tower is shown in the rendering to the left of the new tower (at the end of the side street).