Downtown Vancouver Updates

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by city guy

if they wish to improve the humanly-scaled attributes of these towers the city should insist that the architects invest the bottom 4 floors with rich detail and spaces that engage with pedestrians, because this is the area that matters...the dumb appliqué of 23 different patterns up in the sky is a misguided idea that somehow it matters way up there

The bottom 2 floors has a CoV-owned Art Gallery.

[officedweller]

Nice!

The small operable window looks odd in the corner. It'll obscure the view.
I guess they put it there to be behind the column, but they would have
gotten better cross ventilation with the sliding glass door if the operable
window were placed on the other end of that row of windows (right hand side).

Originally Posted by mcminsen

I love those faceted panels. The light was just right in these last pics. They will look a little different with every light situation.

April 1 '19, my pics

PS - as a side note - 1 Yorkville in Toronto has more deeply faceted spandrel panels,
but also has plain glass spandrel as well.
https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threads/to...8s-bazis-rosario-varacalli.19292/page-87

[Changing City]

There's a report in the Vancouver Sun that the St Paul's site is on the market. If you dig back on the new St Paul's thread you'll see they were hoping to get $500m from the existing site. It's now assessed at $784m.

This is the detail that will affect what get's built instead of the hospital "The brochure says the property has an FSR (floor-space ratio) of 6.6, which means in theory you could build 1,928,751 sq. ft. on the site. But a city spokesperson said various factors may limit the square footage to 1.4 million.

“Based on some very preliminary analysis and taking into account view corridors, shadow analysis of nearby parks, on-site open space, heritage retention, tower form and separation, and transportation requirements, it is anticipated that the density achievable on the site under the existing zoning could be in a range of roughly 1.4-million sq. ft. gross floor area,” said a city spokesperson in an email."

[logan5]

I'm willing to bet that whoever develops the St. Paul's site gets all 1.9 million sq feet built, or even more. The City will almost certainly have to make concessions in order to preserve the original St. Paul's building. I predict that we will see a very tall building on this site. Certainly much taller than anything in Vancouver right now.

[officedweller]

Also:

Former MacMillan Bloedel headquarters on West Georgia changes hands
https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news...al&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1554102242

[s211]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Also:

Former MacMillan Bloedel headquarters on West Georgia changes hands
https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news...al&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1554102242

I wish them luck. That's a nasty floorplan for multi-tenanting. That and the lower rise windows are set quite aways far back from the outer edge of the building face due to the depth of the "waffles".

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by logan5

I'm willing to bet that whoever develops the St. Paul's site gets all 1.9 million sq feet built, or even more. The City will almost certainly have to make concessions in order to preserve the original St. Paul's building. I predict that we will see a very tall building on this site. Certainly much taller than anything in Vancouver right now.

The original St. Paul's Hospital building would make a great counterpoint to a new, tall integrated neighbouring high rise, agreed.
But you said "taller than anything Vancouver has now." How could that be, with the viewcone policy. They're so strict on that. (I'm amazed 'The Butterfly' made it through, frankly).
Would that extra height be part of the concessions you mention to keep the original building? If things go as you say they will, I just hope it's a classy building; we're due for one.

[officedweller]

The St Paul's site is outside the 550' tall zone under the Higher Buildings Policy.

https://guidelines.vancouver.ca/H005.pdf

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by officedweller

The St Paul's site is outside the 550' tall zone under the Higher Buildings Policy.

https://guidelines.vancouver.ca/H005.pdf

Thank you for that info.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by s211

I wish them luck. That's a nasty floorplan for multi-tenanting. That and the lower rise windows are set quite aways far back from the outer edge of the building face due to the depth of the "waffles".

i like the building myself, but what do the floor-plates look like? i have never been inside.

[mcminsen]

Originally Posted by mcminsen

Feb.28 '19, my pics

April 2 '19, my pics

[osirisboy]

Nice. That's how glazing should be! None of that clear transparent crap

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Changing City

There's a report in the Vancouver Sun that the St Paul's site is on the market. If you dig back on the new St Paul's thread you'll see they were hoping to get $500m from the existing site. It's now assessed at $784m.

Thanks I saw that too. Another detail in that article is the current $1.9B budget for St. Paul's includes $990M from the BC government, which means Providence needs to come up with $910M. I don't know the size of their current fund, Pattison has $75M earmarked for it as well.

Safe to say they need as much as possible from this site. Somewhere in the $800-900M or more. I wonder how much negotiating is going on with the city over both sites, zoning, etc.

[rofina]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Thanks I saw that too. Another detail in that article is the current $1.9B budget for St. Paul's includes $990M from the BC government, which means Providence needs to come up with $910M. I don't know the size of their current fund, Pattison has $75M earmarked for it as well.

Safe to say they need as much as possible from this site. Somewhere in the $800-900M or more. I wonder how much negotiating is going on with the city over both sites, zoning, etc.

The FSR for such a premium DT site seemed quite low to me. Something like 6.5?

Also - who has pockets deep enough to buy this for 800-900. That has to fit into some 2 decade dvelpment plan for sure.

On the flip side - how often does this much land come up for sale i the centre of a City?

Its an interesting one, no doubt.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

Nice. That's how glazing should be! None of that clear transparent crap

Loving this too.

Unfortunately nice glazing is usually only used on small short insignificant buildings like this one here. On the other hand, I thought everyone loves the transparent glazing as per Cadillac Fairview office tower recladding? Folks were commenting the highly reflective windows are outdated.

[officedweller]

Those windows have some reflective qualities, which is nice.
It's still not the mirrored glass you see on other [older] office towers.

None of the Pacific Centre towers are / have been mirrored glass - they have tinted glass. The Canaccord Tower's new glass isn't mirrored, but it is tinted (but not really darkly tinted so doesn't appear reflective except at extreme angles).

MNP Tower seems more mirrored. 745 Thurlow is darkly tinted and appears reflective due to that. The Exchange may be fairly clear with fritt.

[officedweller]

Looks like the former Expo 86 BC Pavilion / Edgewater Casino Building has been re-branded the "Harbour Convention Centre" (a year ago!):

http://harbourconventioncentre.com/

[Feathered Friend]

Urban Design Panel Blown Away by “Fantastic, Well Thought Out” Downtown Office Building

600 Robson Street
I may have been under the weather when Hannah and I attended the open house for this new office building, but even I could see the design was really something else. I understand that some are troubled by change, and have a hard time when familiar places are altered, even if they haven’t been inside the buildings for years. However, like the Urban Design Panel, I try to take a more objective view.

After all, it’s hard to be upset about the addition of over 57,000 sq. m. of job space to our city, and the retail spaces that will be coming back too. Unfortunately, even though their sheltered rooftops would have been perfect patio spaces for restaurants and cafes, floor space ratio limitations prevent this, much to the dismay of the panel and even city staff.

That issue didn’t stop the panel from forming a consensus over how appreciative they were for the design team‘s well thought out proposal, commending them for doing a fantastic job. In forming that opinion, individual panellists described it as incredibly elegant and sophisticated. Another felt it was proof that beautiful things could come in a simple form.

https://cityduo.wordpress.com/2019/04/03...ll-thought-out-downtown-office-building/

[officedweller]

Thanks!
The outlook from The Capitol is rather bleak, but few prying eyes I suppose.

At first I thought the stack of chairs in the background was another building model!

[dleung]

Love fine-grain additions to the skyline, as always. Looks almost Richard Rogers-esque. The less we see of the Capitol the better.

I'm curious why they didn't pull the podium massing right up to Capitol's firewall?