HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Downtown & City of Vancouver


The Arc in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Vancouver Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Aug 8, 2015, 7:53 PM
Klazu's Avatar
Klazu Klazu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Above Metro Vancouver clouds
Posts: 10,182
The Arc | 88m | 29fl | Completed

This definitely warrants its own thread by now.

http://arcvancouver.com/

Quote:
Originally Posted by nefc View Post
The development application is up for Concord's "The Arc", complete with a new design:

http://former.vancouver.ca/devapps/89nelson/index.htm
I tried quickly improving some of the new renderings currently only visible in the PDF document (not a great quality source for photos). I will replace these once official renderings are out. One should still get a good idea of the shape of the building.













Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Aug 8, 2015, 8:15 PM
VanLukasik's Avatar
VanLukasik VanLukasik is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 10
Amazing!

Incredible, love this project.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Aug 8, 2015, 8:18 PM
VancouverOfTheFuture's Avatar
VancouverOfTheFuture VancouverOfTheFuture is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 3,263
holy crap. that looks really amazing; nothing you'd expect to see in Vancouver of all places.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Aug 8, 2015, 8:34 PM
osirisboy's Avatar
osirisboy osirisboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 6,041
I love it. Looks great!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Aug 8, 2015, 8:37 PM
Klazu's Avatar
Klazu Klazu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Above Metro Vancouver clouds
Posts: 10,182
The roof feature is to the very centimeter the view cone allows here. It looks like there will be spandrel and I hope the balcony glass will help hide the white one and hopefully they will choose some darker colors for others parts.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Aug 8, 2015, 8:40 PM
Sheba Sheba is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: BC
Posts: 4,291
It's not a featureless square box - the UPD will make them change and dumb it down.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Aug 8, 2015, 8:45 PM
Klazu's Avatar
Klazu Klazu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Above Metro Vancouver clouds
Posts: 10,182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheba View Post
It's not a featureless square box - the UPD will make them change and dumb it down.
Original proposal was along these lines:

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Aug 8, 2015, 9:13 PM
Large Cat's Avatar
Large Cat Large Cat is offline
Vancouver Bus Driver
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 396
This looks really awesome. The whole "south of BC Place" district is starting to have a lot of interesting buildings. I love it!

Two questions:

1. Will there be any rental units?
2. Is there any chance of Concord contributing a matching multi-use path on the west side of the Cambie St. Bridge, next to the new tower?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Aug 8, 2015, 11:31 PM
dreambrother808 dreambrother808 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 3,998
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheba View Post
It's not a featureless square box - the UPD will make them change and dumb it down.
A) It's the UDP.

B) Your misdirected anger is far too common. Where does this silly perception come from that the UDP is rejecting awesome designs and forcing boring constraints? Since when, and what proof? None, just the need to find a convenient enemy.

It's like Translink-haters though, you can explain the same obvious truths over and over again but they will still stick to their original premise.

Last edited by dreambrother808; Aug 9, 2015 at 8:56 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Aug 9, 2015, 3:48 AM
Jimbo604 Jimbo604 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,703
Is this the topic of the upcoming October 19th Development Permit Board (DBP) meeting??

98 Nelson Street - DE419255 - Francl Architecture
To construct a mixed use building containing 28 storey residential towers over one storey retail use over 4 storeys of underground parking.

COV Development Permit Board Meetings List
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Aug 9, 2015, 6:39 PM
domusile domusile is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo604 View Post
Is this the topic of the upcoming October 19th Development Permit Board (DBP) meeting??

98 Nelson Street - DE419255 - Francl Architecture
To construct a mixed use building containing 28 storey residential towers over one storey retail use over 4 storeys of underground parking.

COV Development Permit Board Meetings List
yes
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Aug 10, 2015, 2:02 AM
bb1510 bb1510 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Everywhere
Posts: 587
Similar to The Arch in Hong Kong with the amenities/club house in the bottom part of the overhang.

But Concord has really been stepping up with their designs for the past few years.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Aug 10, 2015, 2:55 AM
Bcasey25raptor's Avatar
Bcasey25raptor Bcasey25raptor is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Vancouver Suburbs
Posts: 2,624
Oh my god, Yes please.
__________________
River District Big Government progressive
~ Just Watch me
- Pierre Elliot Trudeau
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Aug 10, 2015, 4:30 PM
BodomReaper BodomReaper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Metro Vancouver
Posts: 987
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreambrother808 View Post
A) It's the UDP.

B) Your misdirected anger is far too common. Where does this silly perception come from that the UDP is rejecting awesome designs and forcing boring constraints? Since when, and what proof? None, just the need to find a convenient enemy.

It's like Translink-haters though, you can explain the same obvious truths over and over again but they will still stick to their original premise.
Well there's Marine Gateway, where the UDP rejected not 1, but 2 highly innovative designs - only to end up with a pair of Vancouver Special towers marking the entrance to the city.

Plus there are smaller examples like 1819 West 5th:

Pre-UDP


Post-UDP


Both pics from Changing City Book.

Last edited by BodomReaper; Aug 10, 2015 at 4:47 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Aug 10, 2015, 5:01 PM
PaperTiger's Avatar
PaperTiger PaperTiger is offline
scared of rain
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Gastown
Posts: 526
Quote:
Originally Posted by BodomReaper View Post
Well there's Marine Gateway, where the UDP rejected not 1, but 2 highly innovative designs - only to end up with a pair of Vancouver Special towers marking the entrance to the city.

Plus there are smaller examples like 1819 West 5th:

Pre-UDP


Post-UDP


Both pics from Changing City Book.
I suspect the other thing that happened was that the owner had the structural plans costed. and was like
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Aug 10, 2015, 7:07 PM
SFUVancouver's Avatar
SFUVancouver SFUVancouver is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 6,380
On the other hand, the original design for the BC Place Casino was pretty horrid and it did not receive UDP support, while the revised (approved) version is arguably pretty good; certainly unlike anything we have in the city. Similarly, the original design for the MNP tower was a banal extruded hexagon and it did not receive support of the UDP. The revised version has been broadly hailed as one of the best in the city.

It's worth repeating that the UDP is not some ossified bloc. It's a constantly changing group of architects, landscape architects, engineers, and reps from the Vancouver City Planning Commission, the development community, and arts community. There is undoubtedly some group-think that occurs - this is impossible to avoid - but it's a caricature to paint the UDP as being forever on the wrong side and actively working to water down design. If one attends their meetings, calls for boldness and greater design development are commonplace. What's frequently ignored on this board are the cost implications of bold design and high quality materials.

Ultimately, the architects and engineers are working within a far more constrained budget than most would suspect and their developer employers' proforma drives design. Not surprisingly, the handful of projects that are working with exceptional budgets tend to end up with highly atypical design. For every few dozen Wall Centre Central Park and Intracorp MC2-type projects, we get a jaw-dropper like Vancouver House or West Pender Place. Those are the building equivalents of super cars. Yes, they're demonstrably better than a Civic, but they're also decoupled from reality and can't be a realistic basis for comparison.
__________________
VANCOUVER | Beautiful, Multicultural | Canada's Pacific Metropolis
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Aug 10, 2015, 7:12 PM
Vin Vin is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 8,218
I think sometimes if the public love a design, they have to give their utmost support and let the City know. There are cases, like the Vancouver House project, that receive a lot of support from the public and go through without any scratch, so to speak. On the other hand, if the naysayers are drowning the voices of support, as in the case of the Waterfront tower beside the station, then the City would also rip it to pieces. The City also has more prerogative on their say if it's an obscure project that doesn't get too much public attention, as in the case of the 1819 W. 5th project, and in that case they tend to "dumb it down" quite a bit.

I think issues regarding the Arc could be that it is "too wide", but I hope the public lend their support if they love this project, otherwise Nimbys from the surrounding fearing that their views to be potentially obstructed will voice out strongly against it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Aug 10, 2015, 9:30 PM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
ON3P Skis
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lower Lonsdale, North Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,593
Seemingly against popular opinion here, I don't like this. It feels extremely top heavy (because it is) and will likely end up looking like a spandrel mess with all of the shifting panels going up the building. Remember the Mark? I will say that the glass colour does look a whole lot better than the Mark, and I am a big fan of the wrap-around glass balconies, but otherwise no thank you.

Oh, and 1819 West 5th impeded into the view cone so the developer/architect didn't really have any choice but to revise the design (and remove a storey).
__________________
Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Aug 11, 2015, 8:44 PM
Vin Vin is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 8,218
You can take a little survey to gauge your opinion of this building at the bottom of the article from Vancitybuzz.

http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2015/08/m...for-vancouver/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Aug 11, 2015, 9:13 PM
osirisboy's Avatar
osirisboy osirisboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 6,041
I like how it's top heavy
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Downtown & City of Vancouver
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:55 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.