Downtown Vancouver Updates - Page 890

red-paladin · #**17781** Posted **Nov 19, 2019, 3:45 AM**

Nothing wrong with a table top skyline. Some people in fact desire this.

Prometheus · #**17782** Posted **Nov 19, 2019, 4:20 AM**

There is so much obviously wrong with a monotonous and unvaried table top skyline, specifically for cities with tall buildings and founded on the dynamic North American skyscraper model, as Vancouver is. It looks ridiculous and is unpleasant.

If you honestly cannot see that, then it really is true "there's one in every crowd."

privatejet · #**17783** Posted **Nov 19, 2019, 4:36 AM**

IMO, I realize the forum is titled skyscraper but this endless focus on height is.....'fill in blanks'.
From an urban realm perspective getting rid of a parkcade garage on a prominent street is more important.

Prometheus · #**17784** Posted **Nov 19, 2019, 4:51 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by privatejet

From an urban realm perspective getting rid of a parkcade garage on a prominent street is more important.

But it's not an either-or situation. Indeed, under more liberal development policies, parking garages and other underdeveloped sites would disappear more quickly while resulting in a more varied built form and a higher quality public realm made possible by the higher economic return of denser development.

trofirhen · #**17785** Posted **Nov 19, 2019, 5:08 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by red-paladin

Nothing wrong with a table top skyline. Some people in fact desire this.

I agree, to the larger extent. That much-hated 'table top' is IMHO preferable to a 'chimney' of varying super talls, surrounded by mid-high rises and parking lots, such as in Seattle.
That said, I still think that the CBD would do well to culminate with several 700 or 800-foot buildings, then spread out into the even, aesthetic table top. The central core is rather the apex.
The 'table top' - and beaches - give Vancouver the sometimes-used (and perhaps naïve) epithet of 'Rio of the North', with the Rio de Janeiro skyline an even, level, (if not high) table top.

GlassCity · #**17786** Posted **Nov 19, 2019, 5:17 AM**

I have gone back and forth on the viewcones for as long as I've known about them, but I actually always have liked tabletop-y skylines more, in many cities. It makes them look fuller to me - a jagged skyline (Montreal always comes to mind) can look sparse because the shorter buildings between taller ones look like gaps.

jollyburger · #**17787** Posted **Nov 19, 2019, 5:37 AM**

I guess it depends where you are looking at the tabletop from.

Prometheus · #**17788** Posted **Nov 19, 2019, 6:54 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GlassCity

I have gone back and forth on the viewcones for as long as I've known about them, but I actually always have liked tabletop-y skylines more, in many cities. It makes them look fuller to me...

If city council's inflexible approach to its viewcone policy remains in place for a couple more decades, then a rigid table top skyline is precisely what much of Vancouver's downtown core will irrevocably end up with.

Check back here at that time. It would be interesting to hear whether you still feel the same way, i.e., whether you believe the rigid, monotonous block of 30-storey, flat-roofed towers policy produced was a better outcome for our city's downtown than the alternative of a more playful and liberated skyline--of a more adventerous and varied urban landscape.

Metro-One · #**17789** Posted **Nov 19, 2019, 9:51 AM**

It is a fantastic building, yes, but that area really needs some more variation in height.

The tabletop is actually an insult to the tower, IMO. At that height would be nice to see it in a setting such as New Westminster or even along Broadway, somewhere where it would have some sort of prominence.

Would be amazing in Kelowna or Victoria!

officedweller · #**17790** Posted **Nov 19, 2019, 11:42 AM**

The height limits and the tabletop skyline are ultimately a limitation on density and the ability of the City to accommodate growth.
The issue may not be the existence of a tabletop - but the height at which the tabletop is set vis-a-vis future growth of the city.
Is it enough to accommodate growth?
What happens in 20-50 years when the CBD is "built out"? (go to the Town Centres?)

Along with those height limitations, you often get wider, bulkier buildings - take the earlier versions of The Post for example.
That, in turn, may create street canyons and a shadowy unpleasant realm at street level.

lokyin · #**17791** Posted **Nov 19, 2019, 7:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Daily Hive says it's already been submitted. More renderings and details on the design:

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/601-west-pender-street-vancouver-office-tower

We sound so small-city when we call this 29-storey tower a "major" office tower haha.

dreambrother808 · #**17792** Posted **Nov 19, 2019, 7:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lokyin

We sound so small-city when we call this 29-storey tower a "major" office tower haha.

Well we are a small city in the grand scheme of things. That shouldn’t bother anyone. It’s just reality.

GenWhy? · #**17793** Posted **Nov 19, 2019, 8:01 PM**

Makes me wonder if we can pull of the same form of building with only 2 levels of parking...

devoleo · #**17794** Posted **Nov 19, 2019, 9:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by red-paladin

Nothing wrong with a table top skyline. Some people in fact desire this.

Table Top skyline reminds me of old Soviet block cities do not like them at all.

Vin · #**17795** Posted **Nov 19, 2019, 10:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lokyin

We sound so small-city when we call this 29-storey tower a "major" office tower haha.

We actually have the capacity to possess all that big cities have, but then again we are restricted by the provincial backwater mentality of decision makers. So here we are, discussing about a 27-storey office building like it's the greatest thing here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by red-paladin

Nothing wrong with a table top skyline. Some people in fact desire this.

Imagine all the buildings in Metrotown capped at 20 storeys. Would you prefer that versus the skyline now?

WarrenC12 · #**17796** Posted **Nov 19, 2019, 11:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vin

We actually have the capacity to possess all that big cities have, but then again we are restricted by the provincial backwater mentality of decision makers. So here we are, discussing about a 27-storey office building like it's the greatest thing here.

Imagine all the buildings in Metrotown capped at 20 storeys. Would you prefer that versus the skyline now?

To both of your points: nobody cares. We'll never be NYC, and it's proven that height doesn't equal density/urbanism/class. Just go to Europe for examples.

SpongeG · #**17797** Posted **Nov 20, 2019, 4:46 AM**

Salvation Army plans new Harbour Light facility on East Cordova

November 19, 2019 By Peter Meiszner

bigger colour render: https://urbanyvr.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/New-Harbour-Light-rendering.jpg

https://urbanyvr.com/new-harbour-light-vancouver

Changing City · #**17798** Posted **Nov 20, 2019, 5:19 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpongeG

Salvation Army plans new Harbour Light facility on East Cordova

bigger colour render:

from Changing City blog

jollyburger · #**17799** Posted **Nov 20, 2019, 5:42 AM**

I wonder what they'll do with the old facility?

Changing City · #**17800** Posted **Nov 20, 2019, 6:29 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jollyburger

I wonder what they'll do with the old facility?

Whatever they do with it doesn't sound cheap. The application says "Existing Building and Programs Renovating or converting the existing north side of the site is not considered viable because of the building configuration, failing mechanical systems, and seismic upgrade requirements. The new building will replace and enhance all of the existing programs."