CF Pacific Centre Developments

[mr.x]

My main issue is with the Broadway Tech Park-like facade for the office levels in the rendering. I could take the sandstone facade, which is Nordstrom's brand, and the glass facade on the northwest and southeast corners, which are similar to the glass facade at Holt Renfrew.



Some simple local inspiration for the facade of the office levels...it can't be that costly (and yes, reflective dark glass would be preferable):


http://vreaa.wordpress.com/2010/09/

[mr.x]

According to Vancitybuzz, there's going to be a entrance to Vancouver City Centre Station at the building's corner at Robson and Howe. Seems a bit far away, wouldn't a entrance at Granville and Robson make more sense (and be cheaper too)?

http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2012/07/i...ears-building/

[SpongeG]

Originally Posted by mr.x

According to Vancitybuzz, there's going to be a entrance to Vancouver City Centre Station at the building's corner at Robson and Howe. Seems a bit far away, wouldn't a entrance at Granville and Robson make more sense (and be cheaper too)?

http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2012/07/i...ears-building/

vancitybuzz took all the speculation in this thread including the render for that entry, he also says the basement level will become mall space for more tenants which was brought up in here

[Pinion]

Howe is better than another Granville one. It's not a long walk to the existing escalator on Granville/Georgia.

And of course western Robson st is under-served by transit despite being the more interesting side.

[itinerant]

There is no reason why a simple cladding, or alteration to cladding cannot be achieved that will improve rather than diminish Pacific Centre. If CV's goal is to revitalize with a contemporary design that provides retail and office in the current volumne, and makes the shopping portion a destination, then perhaps they should look elsewhere for their architects. There are plenty of good to outstanding firms who will do a really good job for them using a smidgeon of creativity and imagination.

Here is one example by UN Studio of the Galleria department store in Seoul in 2003. Tell me if you cannot see the similarities. The glazing for the office portion could be dark tinted mullionless glazing on the top few floors, or perhaps by cutting down a diagonal across the less-prominent retail facades down to street directly across from the art gallery.

Galleria Department Store, Seoul, 2003


Images from UN Studio website

[Metro-One]

I hope it is a true entrance, and they strike a deal with translink / protrans to add a new stairway / escalator at the south end of the station's platform (not taking up any more station space)

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

I hope it is a true entrance, and they strike a deal with translink / protrans to add a new stairway / escalator at the south end of the station's platform (not taking up any more station space)

Surely, Vancouver City Centre Station needs more than 5 fare gates loll....to be on the safe side. And that's just what a second entrance would provide.

[osirisboy]

yes we know its already sizable but why not allow an increase for it to be even bigger? true it would add time to the process. but why do you say that the current council would not allow an increase? what is the reasoning? saying, well its already a sizable FSR isnt a reason to not increase.

[jlousa]

That is a valid reason for not increasing it. It's already at the max allowable FSR for the district. The city would need to justify going above and beyond the district guidelines and would require extensive CACs payable. The city doesn't just dole out FSR it needs to be justified.

[osirisboy]

no its not a valid reason its BS reason lol. an actual valid reason to not allow an increase would be if they could show that by doing so would be detrimental somehow to the city. but this is beside the point.

I was just thinking what made you wonder why an increase might be possible in the future with a different council.

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

no its not a valid reason its BS reason lol. an actual valid reason to not allow an increase would be if they could show that by doing so would be detrimental somehow to the city. but this is beside the point.

I was just thinking what made you wonder why an increase might be possible in the future with a different council.

http://snapshotsofgod.com/outsidebox.htm

[Prometheus]

I am so embarrassed for Vancouver. This is taking our reputation for blandness and small thinking to unprecedented (and hitherto inconceivable) lows.

Why on earth would anyone waste so much money on creating absolute nothingness? My God. Compared to this ridiculous proposal, the current facade is vastly more modern and has vastly more potential. If this is all we can expect, then it would be far superior (and far cooler) to just spend a fraction of the budget and simply restore the current facade to its original gleaming state and make intelligent use of some funky colour programmable LED lighting, turning the ivory surface into a dynamic, sparkling gem, thus adding to the electric character of Granville Street, not injecting it with sedatives.

This is so uncreative and small-minded that it is immoral.

[NewfBC]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

I am so embarrassed for Vancouver. This is taking our reputation for blandness and small thinking to unprecedented (and hitherto inconceivable) lows.

Why on earth would anyone waste so much money on creating absolute nothingness? My God. Compared to this ridiculous proposal, the current facade is vastly more modern and has vastly more potential. If this is all we can expect, then it would be far superior (and far cooler) to just spend a fraction of the budget and simply restore the current facade to its original gleaming state and make intelligent use of some funky colour programmable LED lighting, turning the ivory surface into a dynamic, sparkling gem, thus adding to the electric character of Granville Street, not injecting it with sedatives.

This is so uncreative and small-minded that it is immoral.

It would be kinda difficult for office workers on the upper floors to see out though the current facade.

Ron.

[itinerant]

Originally Posted by NewfBC

It would be kinda difficult for office workers on the upper floors to see out though the current facade.

Ron.

Square donut, with atrium in the centre open to the sky all the way to the bottom, with offices facing inward. Garden on top for the worker bees, and perhaps lunch crowd on rooftop restaurant. Which leaves open the opportunity to go higher by a few floors, as well, since the open hole would leave room to use up some of that floorspace to restore their FSR.

[Darren Tate]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

I am so embarrassed for Vancouver. This is taking our reputation for blandness and small thinking to unprecedented (and hitherto inconceivable) lows.

Why on earth would anyone waste so much money on creating absolute nothingness? My God. Compared to this ridiculous proposal, the current facade is vastly more modern and has vastly more potential. If this is all we can expect, then it would be far superior (and far cooler) to just spend a fraction of the budget and simply restore the current facade to its original gleaming state and make intelligent use of some funky colour programmable LED lighting, turning the ivory surface into a dynamic, sparkling gem, thus adding to the electric character of Granville Street, not injecting it with sedatives.

This is so uncreative and small-minded that it is immoral.

You mean you'd prefer to tart up that oppressive structure with tacky multi-coloured lighting? Are you familiar with the term "putting lipstick on a pig"? Even if LED lighting does manage to transform the building into a so-called "dynamic, sparkling gem", it would likely still look like rubbish during the daytime. I would prefer a design that looks good 24 hours a day, thank you very much.

[Prometheus]

Originally Posted by Darren Tate

Even if LED lighting does manage to transform the building into a so-called "dynamic, sparkling gem", it would likely still look like rubbish during the daytime. I would prefer a design that looks good 24 hours a day, thank you very much.

If the render is remotely accurate, then the proposed design won't look good any time of the day.

What I would prefer is a new design which meets the developer's economic needs while possessing a modicum of style and attitude, considering its location at the very crossroads of Vancouver's cultural and entertainment district.

I think a very modest amount of creativity, vision and effort could achieve both criteria. Other comparable cities do this; so can we.

The lack of imagination, ingenuity and resourcefulness shown by the mediocrities who proposed this generic, suburban design in the beating heart of a cosmopolitan city is astounding.

[Klazu]

If this is really the way they are going to go, I hope they at least give the building a nice green roof patio. I am sick of looking at that empty rusty (brown) roof.

[spaceprobe]

the new proposal is bland and boring. The original toilet bowl is far better...just keep it clean!

If they want windows....then add windows, but keep the original shape and design. It looks much more modern and, despite the urinal references, is actually a worthy design. Make the street level better, keep the walls clean, add windows if required.

[SpongeG]

street level entrance... like they punched a new one out for the store - the two current corner entrances are quite awkward and a more centered entrance on robson side would be good

[SpongeG]

lets just make everyone happy and do this in the spot


soapboxmedia.com