Vancouver Convention Centre Expansion Project | Completed

[metroXpress]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

ok I'll ask this again what would have been a better way to use this space?

Can you look back a few pages, there are some renderings and text about the previous plans.

[metroXpress]

HERE, I got it for you:

Originally Posted by mr.x2

What could've been.....the previous convention centre designs:
http://bobbea.com/expo-86/now3.html




Much Like Expo 86, The convention Centre Expansion has taken on several forms. The artist's drawing below was one of the first concepts to be unveiled. The White roof line was to match the sails of Canada Place.




Around the same time, a private developer was looking towards the east side of Canada Place. The concept here was to build a convention centre, parks, plazas, a hotel and a brand new seabus terminal. Much of the cost was to be absorbed by the developer. There was a catch, however. Wynn wanted to build a large, Las Vegas style casino, very much like one of its Las Vegas franchise.





The third concept was perhaps the most streamlined and stylish of the bunch -- even if it looked a bit like an overtturned canoe.

__________________________________



As you can see, if the Convention centre was built on the other side of Canada Place, there would be nothing at the moment. However, we have it on this side now and the other side would be for the Waterfront Transit Hub.

[TwoFace]

I vote for the current green roof concept.

[osirisboy]

no allen. I meant something OTHER than a convention centre!!

since some people on here think having a convention centre in the current location on the awter is stupid, what would be better suited for that spot?

[Hourglass]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

ok I'll ask this again what would have been a better way to use this space?

Sydney has the Opera House and Darling Harbour.

Cape Town has the Victoria and Alfred waterfront, providing a vibrant waterfront area of shops, restaurants and attractions.

San Diego is an interesting example as there is an Arthur Erickson-designed convention center on the waterfront. But almost right next door, there is also Seaport Village, a popular dining and shopping complex.

...to name a few.

Apart from Granville Island and a few spots here and there along False Creek, it's primarily park and seawall. The seawall is fantastic (especially in spring and summer -- less so in winter but then I don't like cold and rain), but it'd be nice to have a better mix of activities -- something I think Sydney does quite well. The convention centre expansion might have brought people to the water's edge if they opened up the roof to make it a public facility, but as it is, it's a no-go zone. So to answer your question, I think cultural facilities or a maritime-themed shopping/dining area such as Victoria and Alfred would have added some life to that area of downtown -- not to mention put in place a ready-made place within a stone's throw of Canada Place for cruise ship passengers or conventioneers to spend their hard-earned dollars...

[osirisboy]

finally, thank you^^

although I think that stuff would be better on the eastern side of canada place

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Delirium

225,000sq/ft of exhibition space is located underground in the new convention centre. that's more than half of the new space.
and why do we want it on the waterfront? hmmmm.. seems rather obvious. it's close to a major transportation hub (waterfront station), most large hotels, office buildings and downtown amenities.

makes sense to me. but your right. let's bury the thing in the middle of nowhere and hope people will come
clearly you don't know much about the convention business.

Hate to disappoint you, but I know plenty about the convention business. Do you think conventions flock to McCormick Place because of the fantastic views (look it up if your convention expertise can't pinpoint it)? Vancouver is the draw, not the convention centre itself. All it has to be is big.

Originally Posted by osirisboy

You make absolutely no sense. you call it a bunker but then you think we should have gone with an underground proposal? you say its just a box yet you also call it a showy billion dollar monument. youre all over the place on this one.

Umm, the best place for a bunker is usually underground, not on irreplaceable waterfront. Better uses, heck, condos would be a better use. But how about a cultural space incorporating the new art gallery and long-delayed Coal Harbour arts complex. At least Vancouver residents would be able to enjoy the space, rather than conventioneers.

Originally Posted by osirisboy

judging from your past posts you clearly have a hate on for Gordon Campbell and I dont think it would matter what his government did regarding a new convention centre you would always still bitch and complain

Campbell's an edifice happy twit. Good pick on the site Gordo, pretty much guaranteeing cost overruns.

Originally Posted by Hourglass

Actually, political innuendo aside, I think the point being made by whatnext is a fair one. Convention centers are inherently big internally-focused boxes due to the need to maximize exhibition space (think Suntec in Singapore). They become dead areas when there isn't an event going on. As such, putting the building underground the way Moscone Center is in San Francisco or as Bing Thom originally envisaged makes a lot of sense...

Exactly

[officedweller]

Actually I think that the City and the Downtown Business Improvement Association or the Vancouver Tourist Agency/Board - whatever it was called - was the reason that the Bing Thom proposal was dropped from the previous bidding process - it wanted the iconic view, etc. and had concerns about a separated site.

I tend to agree that convention centres are generally windowless boxes and it doesn't need to be on the waterrfront. The main hall of the expansion is actually underground and the smaller meeting rooms and ballrooms are the ones that open up to the circulation areas with the sweeping views. While the attendees don't necessarily care, it may help sell the site to convention organizers. As for retail in the area, it may be a good thing for convention goers to meander into the City - patronizing restaurants etc. in the CBD and in Gastown rather than sticking to a convention centre food/retail area (recall that the food fair (not the Prow restaurant) at the north end of Canada Place (before the extension) - was a major flop.

Likewise, I don't see why the Vancouver Art Gallery needs an iconic space on the waterfront (the galleries themselves (apart from sculpture, restaurant or circulation space) don't need or want direct sunlight. But if the project can inject some life into the waterfront (which is also doubtful - how often do you attend an Art Gallery event?) I suppose that it's better than more condos with nimby condo owners complaining about any lively activity on the waterfront. i.e. an Art Gallery plaza or event space would at least provide a commercial focus / excuse to make some noise once and a while.

Likewise, I think that cultural facilities (theatres) are also event based and would not provide a steady flow of patrons like commercial space would do. i.e. QE Theatre and the former Ford Theatre are dead outside of event times. The "cultural district" near the library and theatres tends to be devoid of activity.

[Denscity]

There will be retail around the outside of this place yes? As well as some touristy "Ripley's..." or something like that?

[Delirium]

[QUOTE]
Umm, the best place for a bunker is usually underground, not on irreplaceable waterfront. Better uses, heck, condos would be a better use. But how about a cultural space incorporating the new art gallery and long-delayed Coal Harbour arts complex. At least Vancouver residents would be able to enjoy the space, rather than conventioneers.[QUOTE]

condos would be a better suited? you don't think we have enough condos along our waterfront? on one hand you want a "public" waterfront but your ok to add more gated condos patrolled by security as an alternative.
that makes no sense.

ideally i would have preferred to have to the convention centre to the east of canada place and zone the site west as cultural/entertainment (ala Sydney). but this is vancouver. it would never happen. coal harbour residents were freaking out over the proposed restaurant at the cc marina and because of that, it will have to close at 11. one little restaurant! lame.

give that, a convention centre IS the most practical use for that site. way better than another row of high end condos that would sit half empty as is the case now for most coal harbour buildings.

[natelox]

Originally Posted by Hourglass

Sydney has the Opera House and Darling Harbour.

The Opera House only attracts people to the area because it is iconic. Programmatically, or functionally, there really is no reason to be there. The opera and/or concerts usually only occur at night, and all the functions are just as inwardly focused as a convention centre. The SOH has a really poor connection to the water. The VCCEP is much better in this regard. At least it tries to create an active harbour front.

[sacrifice333]

I'm really confused as to how a building that looks pretty neat and will attract thousands of people to the downtown core, support countless businesses, fill numerous hotels, show off some of what makes Vancouver so great (water & mountains), all within excellent proximity to existing CBD offices could be a misuse of space?!

[Delirium]

Originally Posted by natelox

The Opera House only attracts people to the area because it is iconic. Programmatically, or functionally, there really is no reason to be there. The opera and/or concerts usually only occur at night, and all the functions are just as inwardly focused as a convention centre. The SOH has a really poor connection to the water. The VCCEP is much better in this regard. At least it tries to create an active harbour front.

agreed. case in point;

[SpongeG]

vancouver is blessed with tons of waterfront and most of it is used well

it doesn't all have to be where the convention centre is

[Hourglass]

Originally Posted by natelox

The Opera House only attracts people to the area because it is iconic. Programmatically, or functionally, there really is no reason to be there. The opera and/or concerts usually only occur at night, and all the functions are just as inwardly focused as a convention centre. The SOH has a really poor connection to the water. The VCCEP is much better in this regard. At least it tries to create an active harbour front.

Yes, I agree with the general consensus on cultural facilities on the waterfront, but the fact is that the Opera House IS iconic and hence draws people. I'm not sure the VCCEP is, for all its green credentials. I'm also not sure I agree with you that it tries to create an active harborfront, although I'm happy to be proved wrong once the building is open for business.

Like I said earlier, I believe the VCCEP could attract people if they opened up the roof to the public -- something conceptually like the Oslo opera house.

[vanman]

^It would've been cool if the roof were open to the public but at least the VCCEP will have wrap around retail along the seawall, which could become quite lively if the right kind of businesses move in.

[crazyjoeda]

The Opera House in Sydney attracts people because it is a famous landmark, but there are many cafes and shops along the side that you can not see from the aerial photo. It is a successful design.

[natelox]

Architecture is many things. It is never outright successful or unsuccessful. It is successful in some areas and unsuccessful in others. Having been to the SOH, I would say that it mostly unsuccessful in its connection to the harbour. VCCEP has, as mentioned, retail along the waterfront, a connection to an existing seawall system, a beautiful urban plaza missing from Vancouver, a live waterfront with a marina and dock for float planes, and a large green roof to attract copious birds. SOH has blank walls all the way around, and a sea wall that doesn't go anywhere. SOH has some incredible attributes, but as an addition to the programmatic liveliness of the harbour, it is very poor.

[Vancouver_Highrise]

Originally Posted by crazyjoeda

The Opera House in Sydney attracts people because it is a famous landmark, but there are many cafes and shops along the side that you can not see from the aerial photo. It is a successful design.

Yeah trust me... it's crazy at SOH. This coming from
someone who has been there. I think it's sort of like
VCC because I doubt anyone will really be using the front walkways
or the lower level walkways.

[Locked In]

Originally Posted by Vancouver_Highrise

Yeah trust me... it's crazy at SOH. This coming from
someone who has been there. I think it's sort of like
VCC because I doubt anyone will really be using the front walkways
or the lower level walkways.

You doubt that people will use an extension of the incredibly popular seawall that's directly adjacent to downtown?