Downtown Vancouver Updates

[wrenegade]

Wow, what a shame. That old building was gorgeous.

[mcminsen]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

Before the bank building that is being demolished, there stood an older, grander structure. I really wish it was the one still standing. The new building is not befitting of an old civic square surrounded by so much consequential, historic, urban architecture:

Looking west along Hastings Street before the cenotaph was built in Victory Square Park (left) and before the construction of the Dominion Building (right)

Source: https://changingvancouver.wordpress.com/2012/01/11/west-hastings-west-from-cambie/

What an amazing picture, thank you. According to Changing Vancouver it's probably from about 1898. No cars, no crosswalks, no war memorial (World War I was still years away), probably still staying to the left when going down the street, cyclist having to watch out for piles of cow and horse poop and not getting his wheels caught in the streetcar tracks.

[s211]

Originally Posted by wrenegade

Wow, what a shame. That old building was gorgeous.

Yes, but on the positive side the lowly structure on the north side of the road was replaced by the Dominion Building.

[Delirium]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

My photo, taken February 14, 2015.

i noticed the other day that the spandrel is... you guess it... the EXACT same seafoam green as the rolston, the mark, telus, maddox and pretty much every new condo in the city. ugh. i just don't get it.

before people are quick to say that's what the city wants, i don't know if i agree. they aren't even given the option. they had no problem approving the bright orange on the rolston or even Maddox's terra cotta. so why the hell does every architect or developer use the exact same colour spandrel? what's the issue here? is it cheaper or something? i read the UDP minutes and i've never come across them saying to tone down colours. look at the city's social housing projects. they tend to me be more colourful than market buildings.

anyway, going forward, i'm just going to assume it's the same colour and if it isn't, i'll be pleasantly surprised.

[Klazu]

Yeah, I noticed the spandrel yesterday as well. Pretty disappointing how this little project is turning out to be. I REALLY wish that the twisting tower in the area will be something else.

[osirisboy]

That's disappointing. Maybe all the developers get together and buy their glass in bulk. Lol

[officedweller]

It's been up for a while, but there's a "sold" sign on the former Tony Roma's/Darchin Restaurant at Howe & Pacific. I'm wondering if the buyer is the owner of the now demolished and vacant lot adjacent on Pacific.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by Delirium

i noticed the other day that the spandrel is... you guess it... the EXACT same seafoam green as the rolston, the mark, telus, maddox and pretty much every new condo in the city. ugh. i just don't get it.

before people are quick to say that's what the city wants, i don't know if i agree. they aren't even given the option. they had no problem approving the bright orange on the rolston or even Maddox's terra cotta. so why the hell does every architect or developer use the exact same colour spandrel? what's the issue here? is it cheaper or something? i read the UDP minutes and i've never come across them saying to tone down colours. look at the city's social housing projects. they tend to me be more colourful than market buildings.

anyway, going forward, i'm just going to assume it's the same colour and if it isn't, i'll be pleasantly surprised.

It's hard to believe that this is the best that 13 professionals in their field can come up with. The city is well aware of the complaints about the amount of glass used in these developments, yet they keep churning out this crap. There's something wrong here.

The panel consists of at least 13 members, representing the following groups:

Six members, Architectural Institute of British Columbia

Two members, Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia

Two members, The BC Society of Landscape Architects

One member, the development industry, from the Urban Development Institute, the Greater Vancouver Home Builders’ Association, or the Building Owners and Managers’ Association

One member, Vancouver City Planning Commission

One member, practicing professional artist

All members are appointed by Council, and may be reappointed. There is no limit on the number of terms a member may serve.

That last line makes me wonder if maybe the game is fixed, and maybe these UDP folks are just developer lap dogs. Come to think of it, that's the only logical explanation for their colossal incompetence.

[Klazu]

Neon a week ago.

[officedweller]

In this case, isn't it STIR rental housing?

So I wouldn't necessarily expect a high level of finishing
- BUT that mid-block project up Granville that completed a few years back was much nicer.

Also note that it has been built with round columns set back from the window wall,
so the only floor-to-ceiling spandrel looks to be the narrow bands shown in Klazu's pic.
So in that respect, it's better than The Mark and other market condos.

[mcminsen]

Originally Posted by Jimbo604

Pano of Sequel 138 @ Main and Hastings. Excuse the pano artifacts, there didn't seem to be a time with no cars going by...

Source: me

Here's an updated look.


March 28 '15, my pics

[hollywoodnorth]

thanks for the update on Sequel 138 ... 1 more floor to go .... this should provide a good infusion of 'regular' people to that block.

[trofirhen]

.... sorry to be disloyal but I rather agree, and cannot understand why Vancouver thinks that it MUST be iconic. This impacts on what will be built around it.
Wrong thread, I know, but pls excuse me on that. Not sure where exactly to post.
link:
http://www.city-data.com/forum/city-vs-city/715057-seattle-vs-vancouver-skyline-looks-better-6.html
Hollywood Inquirer

Sorry buddy your architectural merit is horrendous


fashionguy
1,235 posts, read 2,481,451 times
Reputation: 553

I don't rely on you to judge my architectural merit, so there is no need for you to be sorry, and clearly I am not the only one who think that tower is ugly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hollywood Inquirer
Sorry buddy your architectural merit is horrendous



&
Deezus
9,976 posts, read 8,018,058 times
Reputation: 9193

If we can just all agree that the goofy observation tower in Vancouver is crap, I'll consider my job done...And I really do love Vancouver and Seattle
for the most part.

[red-paladin]

To paraphrase the age old saying about the Eiffel Tower, Harbour Centre has the best view in the city, because it's the only place that you can't see it from.

[Klazu]

Neon from above.

[Klazu]

They have began demolishing the small building at Seymour and Helmcken.

[mcminsen]

Something that caught my eye today on the Hotel Vancouver was the copper trim being put on. I presume it will eventually become the same colour as the roof.




April 4 '15, my pics

[red-paladin]

Lovely!

Yeah, copper starts out coppery, then oxidizes darker until it's chocolate brown, then slowly turns green and brightens until it reaches that patina colour. Iron rusts and flakes apart, but copper's patina is actually becomes a waterproof / corrosion proof layer to protect the rest of the copper underneath, which is why it's always been used for roofs, pipes, etc.

[Canadian Mind]

Speaking of which, how is the Melville's copper roof coming along?

[mcminsen]

I'm not sure when this new artwork appeared on the Dal Grauer Substation on Burrard but I think it was fairly recently.



April 5 '15, all my pics