[vanman]

New Hotel Georgia Tower Proposal

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

from raggedy13:


meeting with the City Planning Department held Aug. 31.

---------------------------------------------------

Rough notes from the meeting:

The City commented that there were some interesting, subtle aspects to the tower demonstrated in the material provided to them, but the overall form and expression was "too subtle".

The Hotel Georgia is seen as being one of the first of the "new generation" of towers in Vancouver, and is one of only 3 or 4 taller towers anticipated in the downtown core.

The prominence of this site and the height of the proposed tower demands a strong, dynamic architectural statement. Considerations include;

- A more dramatic tower form and top as seen on the city skyline both day and night
- A more sophisticated tower "skin" and expression, particularly on the south and west exposures where issues of orientation, solar heat gain, views, etc need to be reconciled. Options for solar shading, innovative glazing systems, etc... should be explored.
- Overall sustainable design considerations are important
- The tower's contextual relationship to neighbouring buildings and in particular its role as a backdrop to the existing heritage hotel building.

The City suggested that some leeway in height may be considered if warranted to achieve a more interesting, unique profile to the top of the building.

The City noted that attention should be given to the street level drop off area in order to achieve an exciting arrival experience (dramatic lighting, animation, transparency, etc...)

-------------------------------------------------

The current planned height is no less than 160m but an exact height is unconfirmed.

To add to all this wonderful information, here are some newer renderings of the tower...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/vannmann/zing3.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/vannmann/zing2.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/vannmann/zing0.jpg

[Dougall5505]

nice the couv just can't get enough of those point towers. and thats a good thing!
=

[ATLBlaxican]

Absolutely stunning!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! though they should put on in Atlanta being it's name is Hotel Georgia

[zerokarma]

Looks great!

[MistyMountainHop]

Absolutely stunning!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! though they should put on in Atlanta being it's name is Hotel Georgia

It's because the building is on Georgia Street (although the highrise will be on Howe). The original design was even more amazing:

http://www.bingthomarchitects.com/admin/uploadedImages/1056415940.825.jpg

http://www.bingthomarchitects.com/admin/uploadedImages/1053976676.864.jpg

http://www.bingthomarchitects.com/admin/uploadedImages/1053976417.3495.jpg

[MolsonExport]

Bring back the original design.

[colemonkee]

Oh no! The original design was much better! I like the current design, but the original would have been an instant classic.

[Lecom]

Great building, congrats Vancouver.

And how deep is that basement? Is it just me or do they seem to dig deep in Vancouver (ex. Living Shangri-La).

[Hed Kandi]

I'm not a fan of Bing thom's design. It's too art deco/gothic for me.

I'd prefer the Hotel Georgia to have a modern design like those in upcoming developments in Tianjin or Guangzhou China.

[Hed Kandi]

These architects need to take a look at what's going on in China right now. The architecture is truly insping. They could take those amazing designs and shrink it down to 160m height.


See this thread:
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=116595


The current Hotel Georgia proposal is absurd. It has no rhyme or reason. Vancouver needs to look beyond it's borders and have international design competitions for towers with world renowned architecture firms, much like they do in Dubai and China.

Local architects with unruly designs are not allowed anymore !

[Canadian Mind]

how come this isn't in the diagrams? it isn't even listed under vancouver.

[mSeattle]

I like how the design people in Vancouver would support more height for more dramatic/iconic design throughout and at the top. Totally not like the design people in Seattle on that point.

[WonderlandPark]

I remember the original models, bring back that design.

[raggedy13]

how come this isn't in the diagrams? it isn't even listed under vancouver.

I think that's because it isn't an official proposal yet that has been made public. The developers are just undergoing priliminary discussions with the City. However, there is a much better chance that this tower will go through than with the former tower. Also, we'll know much more about this project before the new year as the developer is set on getting approved before Vancouver alters its bylaws in 2007 regarding earthquake-related design. This project uses some sort of engineering technique (or something like that) that will no longer be allowed under the City's upcoming changes which many feel will be too architecturally restrictive.

I found out that the height in those renderings in the first post was 162m (531ft) but I'm sure they'll take advantage of the City's generous offer to allow for additional height given a more interesting roof is incorporated. Since the roof is pretty flat, I'm sure they could get it up atleast another 10m (33ft) with something more unique. It would be nice to have a tower of no less than 175m.

[Canadian Mind]

new bylaw regarding earthquake-related design? Are they going to have to stick in massive diagnol columns in the future or what?

[Bergenser]

I like both designs! :D

[raggedy13]

New rendering...

http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g296/raggedy13/Misc/nightt.jpg

[Canadian Mind]

Could someone pin point on a map where this, shangri-la, and 1152 west gergia will be on a map? My not living in vancouver makes it harder for me to visualise where therse buildings are going up.

[Thefigman]

Sweet rendering!

[squeezied]

i added wall center just for reference!
http://penguindude.250free.com/800px-Downtown_vancouver.JPG
notice the geometry of the building too!

viewing from the south, our dome-shaped skyline is incomplete! btwn shangri-la and hotel georgia is a GAP!! we really need a 700-800ft office tower there to complete the dome.

[Canadian Mind]

squeezied you are a god.

[vanman]

New Renders:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/vannmann/2017.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/vannmann/hgrendering28.jpg

The majority of Vancouver forumers dislike this design but it is not the final, approved design for this building

[Thefigman]

New Renders:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/vannmann/2017.jpg



Man, I really love the way the short section of the building blends into the tower. This thing is really nice.

[Wooster]

The old one was my favourite high rise proposal anywhere. It is a shame that it didn't get built. The new one is nice, but is spoiled by the knowledge of what should have been.

I would welcome Thom's tower in Calgary as a signature piece. Oh well.

[Wheelingman04]

Very beautiful and stunning!!

[Canadian Mind]

by our standards its a piece of crap. You can have it if you want it.

[LeftCoaster]

By our standards?? 99% of our buildings are architechtural crap!

[Canadian Mind]

Just because we set high standards doesn't mean that they are met. We are a people of underachievers or people who really don't give a shit about makign the bar, nevermind crossing it. To chillaxed to care.

[mSeattle]

The new design is pretty impressive. Not as classic as the original but maybe that's good too.

[androo3]

Really the design is fine all it needs is to do something with the roof. right now it just has those false pointed walls going up the south and east side with a flat roof behind. From the north or west this will look horrible. It will probably look like the melvilles fin. Which is too clear and doesn't look good from angles behind it. Give the Hotel Georgia a real roof structure and then we have a building. Maybe a roof that has a Hotel vancouver / Cathedral flavour with a more modern touch. I think this is what the UDP was saying they wanted when they wanted a more prodominet roof and then maybe they would allow more height. The floors would stay the same but if the better looking roof went over the view cone they would make allowances. Of course the developers don't want to pay for a better looking roof they want a flat roof like every other condo in Vancouver, and if they have to put a better struture up there like the UDP wants they will just put those ugly false walls up so it looks good in the rendering. Why do you think they released all those renderings from ground level... so you can't see the stupid flat roof behind those false walls. Still waiting to see a north or west view of this tower. Probably won't happen though, I don't remember seeing one of melville. Sneeky Developers I hope you read this.

[squeezied]

i thought it was an autrocity wen the developers bought the site and screwed the crystal tower for this one. they deemed it "unworkable"... the hell is that suppose to mean??? that they could make more money with a bland easy-to-build tower like all the other condos here?

those false walls really iritate me. they remind me of all those new houses being built in the eastside with the brick facade in the front with the sides without the brick. makes it look soooooooo cheap and mass-produced, void of any craftmanship.
http://images.mls.ca/mls/reb89/highres/2/v619932_1.jpg

this on the other hand is simple, yet elegant.
http://images.mls.ca/mls/reb89/highres/8/v618908_1.jpg

i like to think of it as this:
wall center/shangri-la/1133 west georgia is to hotel georgia as...
http://images.mls.ca/mls/reb89/highres/2/v619932_1.jpgistohttp://images.mls.ca/mls/reb89/highres/8/v618908_1.jpg

althought i must mention the difference in the two are roughly a million(one being in the 700's, and the latter 1.7 mill), but that has mainly to do with location. nevertheless, the point is that it costs money to produce something nice. and the developers are cheaping out by massproducing this, if u may, "vancouverized" condo crap.

[androo3]

So true... I hope hotel Georgia doesn't have different colored doors though :haha:

[vanman]

Awesome renderings courtesy of raggedy:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/vannmann/render002_View06.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/vannmann/render002_View05.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/vannmann/render002_View04.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/vannmann/render002_View03.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/vannmann/render008-lights.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/vannmann/CourtyardView.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/vannmann/Courtyard-01-1.jpg

[DizzyEdge]

Awesome renderings courtesy of raggedy:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/vannmann/CourtyardView.jpg



Sweet, clones!

[colemonkee]

^ The old design was definitely better, but it they're going to have clones of runway models on the pool deck, I think that's a pretty fair trade-off. ;)

[androo3]

Runway deck:tup:
Roof Structure:yuck:

[AlexYVR]

The problem is that no one in Vancouver actually dresses like that. Show that to any Vancouverite and they would laugh at you . . .

[LeftCoaster]

New rendering in this weekends paper... Looks pretty much the same except for the added lighting effects on the crown, which will apparently be continuious shifting colour.

Credit to jlousa for the pic

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p155/jlousa/georgia.jpg

[raggedy13]

Here's a pic of the model from www.lestwarog.com

http://www.lestwarog.com/699howe/images/building2.jpg

[Cypherus]

Thanks for the update, raggedy. The Tower is starting to grow on me, with its sleek facade contours and the now emphasized crown.

[LeftCoaster]

What really amazes me about the project is the size of the footprint. It cannot really be seen from the renderings but this is going to be a VERY thin tower, it cant be more than 100 feet across.

[WHISTLERINMUSKOKA]

Thanks for the update, raggedy. The Tower is starting to grow on me, with its sleek facade contours and the now emphasized crown.

I'm going the opposite direction with this tower. The old design was way better.

[Complex01]

That is one nice looking tower...

:cool:

[Hed Kandi]

http://img487.imageshack.us/img487/3289/untitledmh1.jpg

[LeftCoaster]

I'm going the opposite direction with this tower. The old design was way better.

I think almost everyone agrees with you... but we've gotta move on, make the best of what we've got.

[giallo]

http://www.lestwarog.com/699howe/images/building2.jpg

This is the most flattering angle I've seen of the tower. I actually kind of like it.