The Georgia | 157m | 48 fl | Completed - Page 65

Spoolmak · #**1281** Posted **Jan 27, 2011, 11:58 AM**

It has the same glass as Jameson. I like.

Locked In · #**1282** Posted **Jan 29, 2011, 8:30 PM**

There's a crane on Georgia doing some work today - anyone know what? The hotel seems to be coming along... can see wallpaper in some of the rooms, and curtains up in the windows.

Anyways, my photo, today:

Full Size

trofirhen · #**1283** Posted **Jan 29, 2011, 10:26 PM**

Whatever design flaws this building may or may not have, it's going to impart a presence, density, and energy to the CBD that Vancouver has never known before. When it's all finished, and the lights are switched on, so to speak, it will surely be a downtown centrepiece. I'm really excited about that, and looking forward to it.

Coupled with a couple of other "supertalls" in the vicinity (notably on the Burrard Building site,) the whole feel of downtown will change, and fill with a pulsing energy that it never had before.

Locked In · #**1284** Posted **Jan 30, 2011, 1:01 AM**

Some more of my very grainy photos on a rainy Saturday:

Full Size

PROSTSHOCKER · #**1285** Posted **Jan 30, 2011, 2:17 PM**

This building is MUCH larger in person than from the photos. its just an unnatural massing and size of a building for vancouver hahaha

Locked In · #**1286** Posted **Jan 30, 2011, 8:21 PM**

Another photo by me today, in the sun:

Full Size

vansky · #**1287** Posted **Jan 30, 2011, 10:37 PM**

looks great but will van ever erect sth around 250m...look at melbourne, sydney...after all, this is a gateway....

trofirhen · #**1288** Posted **Jan 31, 2011, 2:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by vansky

looks great but will van ever erect sth around 250m...look at melbourne, sydney...after all, this is a gateway....

Take heart ... that's under discussion right now ...a rather hot topic in fact. There are several sites slated for that in the CBD ...

jlousa · #**1289** Posted **Jan 31, 2011, 4:06 AM**

Really because that would be news to me. There is a possibility for a single 213M tower in the distant future, but that's all.

Canadian Mind · #**1290** Posted **Jan 31, 2011, 4:29 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlousa

Really because that would be news to me. There is a possibility for a single 213M tower in the distant future, but that's all.

So not sticking to the designated height plus 10% rule? You mean to say there is all this fuss over 40ft/13m difference in tower height, by setting 700' as the absolute limit? If that is the case, what a waste of time and money.

trofirhen · #**1291** Posted **Jan 31, 2011, 4:38 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlousa

Really because that would be news to me. There is a possibility for a single 213M tower in the distant future, but that's all.

whoops, I stand corrected. It's just that I saw a video where there were three (3) sites in the CBD where "supertalls" *cough cough* would be allowable because they didn't block the view cones.

One was the present Burrard Building site, the other the legendary twisting tower site, and another a bit further east.

I guess I wasn't clear. It's not that there are three buildings in the planning stages, but that there are three sites - at present - where extra tall ones can be build - without traumatizing the populace.

jlousa · #**1292** Posted **Jan 31, 2011, 4:51 AM**

There are several taller buildings possible but only one is above 200m and none near 250m, just correcting things before misinformation spreads.

raggedy13 · #**1293** Posted **Jan 31, 2011, 7:06 AM**

Some pics I took today:

Standing across Cordova from Woodwards (the white building on the left is The Cambie)...

trofirhen · #**1294** Posted **Jan 31, 2011, 7:08 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlousa

There are several taller buildings possible but only one is above 200m and none near 250m, just correcting things before misinformation spreads.

At this point, perhaps it is important to remind people that sheer height isn't everything. Quality of design, a beautiful aesthetic, and harmony with surrounding buildings are as, if not more important, than height alone.

A good example is Montréal, a city I love (and, jlousa, I believe I read a remark by you stating your appreciation for it as well ...). Over twice the size of Vancouver, and with a goodly collection of downtown skyscrapers to be sure, but none of them are nearly as tall as Toronto's, yet in my opinion much more elegant and better placed.

If we strive for higher buildings here in Vancouver, great!! But height for the sake of height isn't everything, and doesn't necessarily indicate the importance of a city.

Let's go for some taller buildings; yes, yes, and yes! But if we focus on maintaining, and developing, a classically beautiful aesthetic in the new tall buildings we DO put up, to me, that's even more important than just height for height's sake.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
PS: Thanks Raggedy! Great stuff ... as always!

Chikinlittle · #**1295** Posted **Jan 31, 2011, 5:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trofirhen

A good example is Montréal, a city I love (and, jlousa, I believe I read a remark by you stating your appreciation for it as well ...). Over twice the size of Vancouver,

Just to clarify, Montréal is not more than twice the size of Vancouver, according to the metro population from the 2006 census. (unless you're looking at city proper populations, by which even Winnipeg would be a larger city than Vancouver)

Montréal: 3,316,615
Vancouver: 2,116,581

trofirhen · #**1296** Posted **Jan 31, 2011, 8:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chikinlittle

Just to clarify, Montréal is not more than twice the size of Vancouver, according to the metro population from the 2006 census. (unless you're looking at city proper populations, by which even Winnipeg would be a larger city than Vancouver)

Montréal: 3,316,615
Vancouver: 2,116,581

Your point is well taken, thank you.
However, without going into numerical academic arguments, my point is that Montréal is still a larger, older, more mature, established city, with a larger built up area, much more developed transit infrastructure, more head offices, more nightlife, more historic buildings, more of just about everything.

And, until the early 1970's or thereabouts it was the largest city in the country, whereas we all know fully well that Toronto has overtaken it by leaps and bounds.

The essential point of my argument, what I was trying to say is, again, simply: HEIGHT ISN'T EVERYTHING.

Is Toronto's skyline more impressive than Montreal's? Of course it is. Moreso than any other city in Canada, by a long shot.

But is it more aesthetic and beautiful? That's subjective, and readers can decide for themselves, but height alone does not a wonderful skyline and city centre make. Aesthetics, harmonization with adjacent buildings, pleasing, elegant design, inviting pedestrian areas, lighting, elegant street furniture, and charm are what really count at the end of the day.

Of course, this is all much enhanced by some tall, handsome buildings, with sleek, canyonesque streets to amplify that truly "big city" feeling.

We just don't necessarily need to go to 85 storeys or more to get there, that's all, nor to lament if we cannot.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, as far as the Georgia goes (and to which this thread is dedicated) it is my personal opinion that, despite criticism by some, and despite the fact that it is not a real "supertall," it is starting, and ultimately will enhance and augment the downtown environment in a dynamic, positive way, even if it is shorter than many of us (including myself) would like it to have been.

sacrifice333 · #**1297** Posted **Jan 31, 2011, 8:56 PM**

The cantilever on that upper SE corner of Georgia is truly awesome! Can't wait to see that finished.

Great vantage point to capture it, Raggedy13

officedweller · #**1298** Posted **Jan 31, 2011, 10:57 PM**

Thanks for the pics.

The glass looks better in the rain than it does in the sunlight!

Cypherus · #**1299** Posted **Feb 1, 2011, 5:49 AM**

The building certainly looks tall in person, almost intimidating, probably because of its small foot print. Once the crown is constructed, it will accent the skyline perfectly.

vansky · #**1300** Posted **Feb 1, 2011, 6:23 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trofirhen

At this point, perhaps it is important to remind people that sheer height isn't everything. Quality of design, a beautiful aesthetic, and harmony with surrounding buildings are as, if not more important, than height alone.

A good example is Montréal, a city I love (and, jlousa, I believe I read a remark by you stating your appreciation for it as well ...). Over twice the size of Vancouver, and with a goodly collection of downtown skyscrapers to be sure, but none of them are nearly as tall as Toronto's, yet in my opinion much more elegant and better placed.

If we strive for higher buildings here in Vancouver, great!! But height for the sake of height isn't everything, and doesn't necessarily indicate the importance of a city.

Let's go for some taller buildings; yes, yes, and yes! But if we focus on maintaining, and developing, a classically beautiful aesthetic in the new tall buildings we DO put up, to me, that's even more important than just height for height's sake.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
PS: Thanks Raggedy! Great stuff ... as always!

i think van got a good style of combination of architecture, surely looks worldly without judging its height. shanghai is the "tallest city", among the cities that i have visited. and the one with the most skyscrapers, that city is just too city, u cannot focus deeply within urself to find peace, everywhere has stuff happening...sometimes peacefulness is a luxury, if van can offer more jobs, higher paid ones, this is heavenly....the rain is fine,for the money.

and the georgia looks quite fine to me, just that it's still 150ish, perhaps a little short these days...