Central (1618 Quebec St.) | 18 & 19 st | Completed - Page 12

Sir Conga · #**221** Posted **Jan 1, 2014, 1:19 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlousa

Guys don't feed the troll, we've been watching the posts of some of the new users and will be acting accordingly in due time.

As if there aren't any regular members that act trollish...

Vancouver_Highrise · #**222** Posted **Jan 1, 2014, 2:03 AM**

^^

Yeah I agree some people take this site way too serious.

I also agree this building looks terrible. I was just talking to my
Friends about how cheap this development looks. It looks like
a development right out of the surrey central infinity project.
On a positive note at least the city is trying to be a little different
with it's architecture..

whatnext · #**223** Posted **Jan 1, 2014, 3:11 AM**

The problem is that the "opening" (is there a correct term for it?) should have faced east/west where it would not have been obscured by ths surrounding buildings. The way it is sited now, the unqiueness of that feature is lost.

djmk · #**224** Posted **Jan 2, 2014, 4:21 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by whatnext

The problem is that the "opening" (is there a correct term for it?) should have faced east/west where it would not have been obscured by ths surrounding buildings. The way it is sited now, the unqiueness of that feature is lost.

true, but this way maximizes store frontage and condo views. I think the "opening" is still fairly visible from main and quebec.. well, I try to look through as I drive by...

i guess it will be determined what gets built at the Mcdonalds and that parking lot at main/terminal/quebec...

Thousands Wouldn't · #**225** Posted **Jan 2, 2014, 8:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vancouver_Highrise

^^

Yeah I agree some people take this site way too serious.

I also agree this building looks terrible. I was just talking to my
Friends about how cheap this development looks. It looks like
a development right out of the surrey central infinity project.
On a positive note at least the city is trying to be a little different
with it's architecture..

This site had so much potential to look amazing. Instead , it looks like a hospital. Oh well , no point crying over spilled milk.

osirisboy · #**226** Posted **Jan 2, 2014, 8:35 PM**

Lol wow I don't get what you people see. I think it looks great

Vancity · #**227** Posted **Jan 2, 2014, 10:58 PM**

yeah. so many people complain about the architecture of the city, that when something different finally comes around, people complain about it? truly, cannot please everyone. personally, i like it. i think it stands out, because it looks so different.

officedweller · #**228** Posted **Jan 2, 2014, 11:58 PM**

I think it looks great, too.
The use of the red brick is well done (compare to Busby's 1 Kingsway up the street).

rsxstock · #**229** Posted **Jan 3, 2014, 2:57 AM**

i wonder if they'll add any fancy lighting to highlight the gap or columns at night, would look great

Thousands Wouldn't · #**230** Posted **Jan 3, 2014, 3:31 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rsxstock

i wonder if they'll add any fancy lighting to highlight the gap or columns at night, would look great

It probably looks better at night and adding lighting to the open space would be great. Again, too bad it is facing the wrong direction.

connect2source · #**231** Posted **Jan 3, 2014, 4:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by djmk

i guess it will be determined what gets built at the Mcdonalds and that parking lot at main/terminal/quebec...

That's a prime development lot so it's very likely the 'gap' will be totally obscured in a few years. It should have absolutely faced 90 degrees from where it is positioned now as it makes no senses to have such a prominent architectural feature be totally hidden.

Pier 27 in Toronto http://www.pier27.ca/ has the 'gaps' facing the water so they'll be forever visible from both the waterside and the street to the north, a brilliant move.

When the 'gap' at Central is obscured the building will look very odd, bulky and made little sense.

Vin · #**232** Posted **Jan 3, 2014, 8:53 PM**

Not going to work if the 'gap' faces the streets. I think developers would rather have shops and apartments facing the steets than a huge 'gap'. Would be a different story if the ground/underground space was developed as a mall, then this might work.

Pinion · #**233** Posted **Jan 7, 2014, 6:43 AM**

Some better quality shots

IMG_6164 by Yellow Fever @ SkyscraperCity, on Flickr

IMG_6165 by Yellow Fever @ SkyscraperCity, on Flickr

More on his Flickr

Alex Mackinnon · #**234** Posted **Jan 7, 2014, 7:09 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vin

Not going to work if the 'gap' faces the streets. I think developers would rather have shops and apartments facing the steets than a huge 'gap'. Would be a different story if the ground/underground space was developed as a mall, then this might work.

On the upside, have the gap on a North/South alignment means that the windows facing inwards will get light consistently.