[Delirium]

shangri-la updated their website for Vancouver. here's the homepage photo
http://www.shangri-la.com/uploadedImages/property/Vancouver/slv_overview.jpg
photo; http://www.shangri-la.com/en/property/vancouver/shangrila

notice how they photoshoped on the shangri-la logo.

[SpongeG]

yah i was thinking there is no logo

lol

[Yume-sama]

It is a great photo, though! Some serious photoshop skills, too!

[raggedy13]

Beauty of a photo. Thanks for posting it Delirium.

[Cypherus]

notice how they photoshoped on the shangri-la logo.

Gotta start somewhere I guess. The snow-capped mountains look exaggerated though.

[twoNeurons]

Are they still doing tours of the building on the weekends?

[SpongeG]

^^^ until april

[EdinVan]

I also notice that it's the -only- logo visible in that picture. TD, RBC, and BMO all appear to have been deliberately blurred out.

I don't like the placement of this logo... Logos tend to look odd when they're placed on the middle of a surface and not on a corner (the RBC Olympics signs are another example of poor placement).

[officedweller]

That's probably more a function of the location of the original "ROYAL BANK" signs used to be on the tower - even the shield logo was a bit off centre because of that.
The Olympic ones are really just poorly designed.

[Yume-sama]

Hah, I didn't even notice they edited out the other logos. Good eye.

Kind of a peculiar thing to do.

[Metro-One]

So when is the Shangri-La logo going up?

[jlousa]

The logo isn't going there. ;)

[metroXpress]

So when is the Shangri-La logo going up?

If they were going to put it on...I bet they would have it up while
the construction rather than after.

[Metro-One]

I just came from downtown tonight, the new Bell logo looks great, but i could not believe how non-eventful the Shangri-La was. I could not even see the fins, the building just seemed to tapper out to darkness as if it were in permanent fog! They really need to put some lighting features on it, even some nice simple white light would do or even a red beacon on the top would add something! It is sad that our tallest "signature" tower is so under presented at night. Jlousa's comment intrigues me though, where else would they put the logo?

[officedweller]

There's the "gogo dancer" cage at the top on the southeast orner.

[Metro-One]

haha, a logo there would look awful and fins would remain pointless at night.

[LeftCoaster]

So when is the Shangri-La logo going up?

If they were going to put it on...I bet they would have it up while
the construction rather than after.

There is a logo going up, but don't expect it any time soon; the support structure for the logo is not even in place yet.

Also Metro don't worry your little tush off, this tower isn't done yet...

[Metro-One]

:previous: hehe, ok, i will trust you ;)

[officedweller]

Doubt that the fins would be lit up at night - it would probably drive the penthouse owners crazy.
I think that's the only place for a logo that is isolated from view from the penthouse suites.

[jlousa]

Apr 22 seems to be coming soon. :cheers:

[Metro-One]

Doubt that the fins would be lit up at night - it would probably drive the penthouse owners crazy.
I think that's the only place for a logo that is isolated from view from the penthouse suites.

Why not? Many other condos in the area have simple lighting effects on their rooftops and crowns.

[jlousa]

There is no crown on this building, the penthouse goes straight up to the top. Most towers have mech. rooms above the penthouse and that's what you see lit up, they don't bother the owners as they can't see it.

[Metro-One]

But don't the fins rise relatively far above the penthouse levels? I would think that would be enough clearance for the lights not to be a bother, even 3 simple lights (one on each corner) would add just enough flavor so the building is not lost at night. Also what about beacon lights for low flying aircraft? It seems to me that a building almost 200m tall near a float plane and helicopter port should have some safety lights built in. For goodness sakes the Pitt River bridge towers have beacons on them!

[jlousa]

I'm not sure of any flight paths that would take a plane over downtown at a height of 200m. Any helicopter would be grounded well before visibility didn't allow for them to see a large building.

With the 6/49 at $39Million, maybe one could buy the penthouses and install a white/red light so the tower doesn't get lost in the night. Heck maybe project the bat sign onto the clouds we're constantly under.

[Yume-sama]

I'm not sure of any flight paths that would take a plane over downtown at a height of 200m. Any helicopter would be grounded well before visibility didn't allow for them to see a large building.

With the 6/49 at $39Million, maybe one could buy the penthouses and install a white/red light so the tower doesn't get lost in the night. Heck maybe project the bat sign onto the clouds we're constantly under.

Hmm, that could solve our current murder situation...

And freak out all the potheads. :whip:

[Delirium]

Les Twarog (realtor) posted a bunch of new pics on his website. here are some of them..

all photos can be found here; http://www.lestwarog.com/shangrila/index.html

hotel entrance
http://www.lestwarog.com/shangrila/images/112.jpg

http://www.lestwarog.com/shangrila/images/111.jpg

lobby
http://www.lestwarog.com/shangrila/images/103.jpg

http://www.lestwarog.com/shangrila/images/108.jpg

http://www.lestwarog.com/shangrila/images/120.jpg

gym
http://www.lestwarog.com/shangrila/images/139.jpg

private dining room
http://www.lestwarog.com/shangrila/images/148.jpg

entrance to "Market" by Jean-georges
http://www.lestwarog.com/shangrila/images/122.jpg

upper courtyard
http://www.lestwarog.com/shangrila/images/117.jpg

http://www.lestwarog.com/shangrila/images/119.jpg

http://www.lestwarog.com/shangrila/images/131.jpg

[vanman]

Cool shots thanks.

[SpongeG]

I'm not sure of any flight paths that would take a plane over downtown at a height of 200m. Any helicopter would be grounded well before visibility didn't allow for them to see a large building.

With the 6/49 at $39Million, maybe one could buy the penthouses and install a white/red light so the tower doesn't get lost in the night. Heck maybe project the bat sign onto the clouds we're constantly under.

if I win i will put up iciclye lights all around it :banana: :tup:

[SpongeG]

I see they are watching Seattle TV - King 5 :)

http://www.lestwarog.com/shangrila/images/139.jpg

[EdinVan]

That's probably more a function of the location of the original "ROYAL BANK" signs used to be on the tower - even the shield logo was a bit off centre because of that.
The Olympic ones are really just poorly designed.

Could you rephrase this for me? It's probably because I'm really sleepy today, but I'm not sure I follow....

[EdinVan]

Why not? Many other condos in the area have simple lighting effects on their rooftops and crowns.

I don't understand why 'condo owners' are spoken of so reverentially. If they don't like lights, they should move to the suburbs. I don't mean that to sound rude, but it's just baffling to me why people who are so annoyed by lights and noise and people and garbage and, well, life, would choose to live in an urban area.

[LeftCoaster]

The issue here is that the penthouse owns right up to the roof, so its not just lights outside, it's lights right in the area you just paid 30 million for. For instance if you wanted to go sit on your roof top patio with your wife for a nice romanitic evening LEDs would be illuminating your wife like she was getting an X-ray.... I know would not be pleased and I'm no nimby.

[EdinVan]

I just came from downtown tonight, the new Bell logo looks great, but i could not believe how non-eventful the Shangri-La was. I could not even see the fins, the building just seemed to tapper out to darkness as if it were in permanent fog! They really need to put some lighting features on it, even some nice simple white light would do or even a red beacon on the top would add something! It is sad that our tallest "signature" tower is so under presented at night. Jlousa's comment intrigues me though, where else would they put the logo?

Except for the Bell logo's size; it's just a smidgen too big for the roof (the old Bell logo was of a better size). But I'm not complaining; I'm very pleased to see a lighting feature in that area -- it makes up for the loss of the HSBC's lighting feature (they now turn it off at night, thinking they're going to save a bundle of money).

[officedweller]

Could you rephrase this for me? It's probably because I'm really sleepy today, but I'm not sure I follow....

They probably didn't want to go to the expense of drilling a better placed hole for the wiring and/or re-wiring for the new signs.

The replacement signs on Bentall IV are actually the worst. The original logo was the red Canada Trust logo - then TD took them over but the proportions of its logo were different - so the TD is there, but there are "filler" strips beside it that are aluminum panel - not the precast stone like the original cladding. Bentall III has an awkward looking BMO logo too - the original was the "M" inset in the precast.

[zivan56]

The issue here is that the penthouse owns right up to the roof, so its not just lights outside, it's lights right in the area you just paid 30 million for. For instance if you wanted to go sit on your roof top patio with your wife for a nice romanitic evening LEDs would be illuminating your wife like she was getting an X-ray.... I know would not be pleased and I'm no nimby.

So they paid 30 million without even thinking about such things? Well, they certainly got what they deserve...
It's not like the design and lighting was kept a secret for them...and if it was, they should sue the developers.

I don't understand why 'condo owners' are spoken of so reverentially. If they don't like lights, they should move to the suburbs. I don't mean that to sound rude, but it's just baffling to me why people who are so annoyed by lights and noise and people and garbage and, well, life, would choose to live in an urban area.

+1.
Seriously, don't live there and expect it to be a suburb.

This is causing Vancouver to have an old folks home type atmosphere where it should be most vibrant...and causing places like Granville Street to be too much for most people to handle.

I say, f*** the people living downtown near major streets. They chose to live in the centre of a major city, and want it to be dead slient? Get real :koko:

[LeftCoaster]

So they paid 30 million without even thinking about such things? Well, they certainly got what they deserve...
It's not like the design and lighting was kept a secret for them...and if it was, they should sue the developers.

I think its you who needs to do some thinking... they bought the penthouse on the premise that there would be no lights shining directly into their property... WTF lighting design are you even refering to? At no point have there been any lighting design plans indicating illuminated fins, and that is certianly something their real estate agent would make aware to the seller if there were.

[zivan56]

I think its you who needs to do some thinking... they bought the penthouse on the premise that there would be no lights shining directly into their property... WTF lighting design are you even refering to? At no point have there been any lighting design plans indicating illuminated fins, and that is certianly something their real estate agent would make aware to the seller if there were.

Boo hoo hoo, cry me a river :rolleyes:
I really don't give a damn about them...they should move if they aren't satisfied. There are people that are waiting in line to buy it next...who can put up with a couple of lights lighting up their patio.

[LeftCoaster]

Are you drunk?

No one is crying.

There never was a lighting plan so if all of a sudden there were a bunch of spotlights in their pool I think that would be a bit of a surprise.

Also I wasn't aware of a lineup to buy 15+ million dollar condos in this city... last I checked there were a few still available.

[zivan56]

Ok, think for a second, you are arguing some person who is loaded with money can dictate what the city should look like? Is there a policy somewhere that says how many lumens of light are allowed up onto a patio? Nope...so they should shut up and be quiet or sell the place...it's pretty simple. Now, if it were in Maple Ridge miles from civilization, then it would be an issue. However, in the middle of a major city no way.
I ask you to look at your first reply to me and ascertain as to who is the drunk or who possibly didn't take their pills today.

[LeftCoaster]

Can you please read my post rather than just responding to whatever you please?

Here I'll make it easy for you:

THERE NEVER WERE ANY PLANS TO LIGHT THE FINS!

They were not canceled because some Nimby billionare who bought the penthouse didn't want them.... THERE NEVER WERE ANY.

LIGHTING THE FINS WAS NOT PART OF J M CHENG'S ORIGINAL DESIGN!

There, I surely hope that was clear enough.

[Canadian Mind]

Yes they were, an dude in an orange vest told me so.

[LeftCoaster]

Haha was it Zivan?

[zivan56]

Wow, someone really needs some glasses. Are you just replying because you have a need to argue?
Where exactly did I say "it" was canceled or existed in the first place? In fact, what exactly are you talking about?

I said if light come later from the building itself, they can either:
sue the developer if it is on their building
or
leave
plain and simple. Understand?
Here is what I wrote:

So they paid 30 million without even thinking about such things? Well, they certainly got what they deserve...
It's not like the design and lighting was kept a secret for them...and if it was, they should sue the developers.

Then you went into a hissy fit on something totally random.

[Canadian Mind]

Haha was it Zivan?

I didn't cath his name. Was back around christmas time though, so he might have mentioned a foru account I've conviniently forgotten about. :shrug:

[LeftCoaster]

Wow, someone really needs some glasses. Are you just replying because you have a need to argue?
Where exactly did I say "it" was canceled or existed in the first place? In fact, what exactly are you talking about?

I said if light come later from the building itself, they can either:
sue the developer if it is on their building
or
leave
plain and simple. Understand?
Here is what I wrote:

Then you went into a hissy fit on something totally random.


Whatever Zivan... Grow up.

Anyone who cares enough can read back and make their own opinoins... I'm quite sure they will see who looked foolish.

[zivan56]

Whatever Zivan... Grow up.

Anyone who cares enough can read back and make their own opinoins... I'm quite sure they will see who looked foolish.

Wow, buddy, just do us a favour...take your prozac and the night off. Trust me, it will do you wonders. And yes...of course they will :koko:

[LeftCoaster]

Nice Zivan... resorting to the personal attack... really on a mission to make yourself look good here eh?


Anyway its been a long day at the office so im going home... I look forward to seeing what clever retorts you have mustered up by tomorrow morning.

[Canadian Mind]

And yes...of course they will :koko:

Kinda why I poked fun at you with the orange-vest jibe, if you remember the days of towerguy3... :yuck:

[AlexYVR]

Wow, buddy, just do us a favour...take your prozac and the night off. Trust me, it will do you wonders. And yes...of course they will :koko:

Actually, because of strata, the Shangri-La is basically an extremely tall house in the middle of the city; the builder of your house would have a lot of trouble having ANY ground to come back post move-in and demand that you let him/her build a beacon in your front yard. The penthouse owner owns more than the penthouse, (which they do own, not the developer) they own a share of the building, and a big one at that.

Yall are great entertainment though, keep at it. :haha:

[zivan56]

^^ Well that's fine, they always have the legal option, as I said.

Kinda why I poked fun at you with the orange-vest jibe, if you remember the days of towerguy3... :yuck:

Well I don't work in the construction industry, and my job doesn't require a vest...so I'm not sure what you are getting at?
Wasn't he advocating highways through downtown or something?


Nice Zivan... resorting to the personal attack... really on a mission to make yourself look good here eh?


Anyway its been a long day at the office so im going home... I look forward to seeing what clever retorts you have mustered up by tomorrow morning.

This guy is hilarious :haha:
Gee, I wonder who started the personal attacks?
I understand you are stressed out at the office, so just follow my advice from above and you will be as good as new tommorow ;)

[Hourglass]

Ummm... back to the topic....

Les Twarog (realtor) posted a bunch of new pics on his website. here are some of them..

private dining room
http://www.lestwarog.com/shangrila/images/148.jpg


This picture kind of made me smile -- this could be straight from any restaurant in Mainland China...

[Metro-One]

Actually, you actually could use directional lighting on the top of the fins (use LEDs) and they would not be invasive to the penthouse owner at all, for the lights would be facing away from their rooftop area (A small shield could be built behind them to guarantee as little light disturbance as possible. When i speak of such a lighting display i am not talking about a massive amount of light, just a few bulbs would be nice so we can actually see the top of the building at night. I am sure towers in Hong Kong of Tokyo where the penthouse owner owns up to the rooftop still have some sort of lighting.

And how come we don't have warning beacons on our tallest towers? In rainy cloudy weather it seems quite possible, especially with instrument failure, for a novice or any pilot to fly slightly off path and hit a tower. In Japan it seems every building over 12 floors has red beacons on top!

Zivan is going a little crazy right now but people who move into the middle of downtown should expect some big city aspects. Vancouver seems to be inheriting all the negatives extremely fast that come with a big city (large homeless populations and slums, drug problems and severe gang violence) yet the city is so stubborn to include the fun aspects of major cities such as light displays, interactive public art and true commercial/entertainment districts that are not closed down by 2AM on a weekend and dictated by nimbys who moved in the middle of a city hoping to transform it into a sleepy suburb.

[Canadian Mind]

Well I don't work in the construction industry, and my job doesn't require a vest...so I'm not sure what you are getting at?
Wasn't he advocating highways through downtown or something?


No, he used to advocate that Shangri-la had 59 stories/62 floors, not 58/61. And een thoguh every architect or city-worker who was in any way involved with the project (including Jlousa, who was heavily involved) said 61 floors and 197 meters, towerguy continued to argue that it was 62 floors @ 201 meters. His rational was that some guy in an ornage vest who directed traffic on the site told him so.

Personally, I think the guy is either retarded, some dumbfuck little kid with ADHD all hyped up on ridelin, or a combination of both.

And Jlousa, doesn't he still owe you a steak?

[zivan56]

^^ So are you implying I have those characteristics? Otherwise, not sure how it relates to me...but...ok :shrug:
As was said, all the posts speak for themselves...start at #2435 and go from there.

[amac]

Maybe somebody should start up a "Rich People's Problems" thread.

[giallo]

^^Zivan, let it go. Nobody cares.

http://www.lestwarog.com/shangrila/images/148.jpg

I agree. This could be right out of a 1000+ restaurants in Shanghai. I wonder what the menu is. There's gotta be a big spicy bowl of Sichuan ma po tofu in it. You can't have a turning table and not have that dish. It's a classic!

http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o194/verox7/17%20july%20hong%20la%20qiao/mapobeancurd.jpg

[amac]

Meh. Take away the table and it looks just like a private Karaoke room... or dim sum at Floata in Chinatown. Oh well, luxury comes down to personal taste I guess. Not crazy about the granny decor. I'll pass.

[zivan56]

^^Zivan, let it go. Nobody cares.




PM me if you have further issues you wish to discuss. Same goes for anybody else...

[NewfBC]

Actually, because of strata, the Shangri-La is basically an extremely tall house in the middle of the city; the builder of your house would have a lot of trouble having ANY ground to come back post move-in and demand that you let him/her build a beacon in your front yard. The penthouse owner owns more than the penthouse, (which they do own, not the developer) they own a share of the building, and a big one at that.

Yall are great entertainment though, keep at it. :haha:


Why do people keep mentioning the penthouse OWNER? There are 3 penthouse units in Shangri-La.. and there's prolly some other space on the roof area that's not part of any of them.

Ron.

[duener]

Meh. Take away the table and it looks just like a private Karaoke room... or dim sum at Floata in Chinatown. Oh well, luxury comes down to personal taste I guess. Not crazy about the granny decor. I'll pass.

Agreed. That room looks cramped and ugly... the chairs look cheap. Why would anyone want to eat there?

A communal library/study or sauna would have better a more interesting use of the space.

[giallo]

Well, seeing as it's an Asian hotel chain maybe it's a bit of a throwback to Chinese restaurant dining rooms.

[johnjimbc]

I will try to make this as simple as possible, and non-judgmental.

I have read all of the posts related to the dispute here. And, other than realizing I have lost 5 minutes I'll never get back, here is the conclusion I've reached.

The real issue is that we're dealing with basic strata laws. Zivan, whether you admit it or not, you seem damn pissed that some rich person supposedly has say over what "our skyline" looks like. And you seem to resist any suggestion that there being no landmark lighting on Shangri-La really has nothing to do with that.

Whether someone owns a studio they rent out to tenants on the 4th floor at the back of a strata building with 10 stories facing an alley in Chinatown or one of three $20 million dollar penthouse in the tallest building in the city, they are essentially governed by strata laws which indicate the basic layout of the building, including common areas and privately owned spaces, show the basic building design with notable features, and the rules by which any changes would have to be made. No strata building would agree to just plop a new lighting display to the side or top of the building without having to follow those rules, and no one outside the building (such as the city) could just dictate that they "have to do it." In some places, that is entirely possible, but those places are normally referred to as "dictatorships" or "banana republics." Canada, no matter what issues it may face, doesn't stoop to such antics.

If your suggestion is that someone could design a lighting system that would highlight the building while not disturbing the owners - not just the owners of those penthouse units but also the necessary majority (may be 3/4 for a large change to a common element) of owners in the strata - and that an outside source of funds was provided to pay for the design, installation, and upkeep (since I can't imagine the strata wanting to fund the lighting beacon on behalf of the rest of Vancouver), then yes I suppose a lighting feature might be a possibility in the future. But it would take money, and a sensitive approach (i.e. telling the rich owners of the penthouses to suck it up probably wouldn't get the talks very far).

But the argument you seem to present is that "someone should just do some cool lighting" and let the owners sue if they don't like it because "rich people" shouldn't dictate what happens with our city's skyline.

Not only is that a sort of strange suggestion, it really offers nothing on how the lighting would actually happen.

If what you mean to suggest is that early on - long before the building was build and strata plans created and approved by the city, someone should have designed the building in such a way that some landmark lighting was part of the design, then I agree that would have been nice.

But it is not some hypothetical future penthouse owners "fault" that the building wasn't designed in that way, and the outrage over their being no lighting now is a bit misplaced. It actually had nothing to do with them.

So lay off the rich people . . . they have paint modern paint colours to choose, and distinguished works of art to hang ;).

[Yume-sama]

Agreed. That room looks cramped and ugly... the chairs look cheap. Why would anyone want to eat there?

A communal library/study or sauna would have better a more interesting use of the space.

A Sauna would be a bit of an odd thing to add to a restaurant. :frog:

[Chikinlittle]

With regards to the lighting effects and logo at the top of the tower, what is it that Jlousa and LeftCoaster are referring to, and the 22Apr reference date? Why are you not able to share with us what's happening up there, and exactly 'how' the tower is not yet complete? Maybe that info could stop all the unnecessary animosity being fostered in this thread?

[zivan56]

@johnjimbc:
My point was that the owner of a penthouse should not dictate whether or not anything is installed. Should they have a say? Yes. Should they have a veto vote? Absolutely not. If they have a problem with that, they should pursue legal means or leave.
In regards to strata laws, a penthouse owner is usually not needed for a quorum....do they even qualify for more votes?
The way the discussion was going was basically that the penthouse owner should not be inconvenienced at all costs.
Having lived in a place where there was pile driving on all 3 sides of the building and construction until 2am for over 3 years while paying full rent..and not to mention living beside Canada Line construction after moving...do I go crazy and complain I can't use my balcony? Absolutely not. I could move...and that's pretty much it.

[Yume-sama]

But if there never WAS anything planned, they have nothing to dictate....

[phesto]

@johnjimbc:
My point was that the owner of a penthouse should not dictate whether or not anything is installed. Should they have a say? Yes. Should they have a veto vote? Absolutely not. If they have a problem with that, they should pursue legal means or leave.
In regards to strata laws, a penthouse owner is usually not needed for a quorum....do they even qualify for more votes?
The way the discussion was going was basically that the penthouse owner should not be inconvenienced at all costs.
Having lived in a place where there was pile driving on all 3 sides of the building and construction until 2am for over 3 years while paying full rent..and not to mention living beside Canada Line construction after moving...do I go crazy and complain I can't use my balcony? Absolutely not. I could move...and that's pretty much it.

Since this isn't what is actually occuring at Shangri-la, I take it you're speaking hypothetically, in which case I think some people here might agree with you. However, it's been somewhat difficult to discern exactly what you've been trying to get at in the last couple of pages since rooftop lighting was not part of the Shangri-la design.

[LeftCoaster]

^which is all I was ever saying...

Of course I am not for one rich guy dictating what is happening in the city, all i was ever saying is that isnt the case here, cause it was never even planned.

But I guess that makes me clinically depressed and need to take some prozac :rolleyes:

[zivan56]

^^ No, personal attacks against me was the reason I suggested that, nothing to do with what your opinion was.

Since this isn't what is actually occuring at Shangri-la, I take it you're speaking hypothetically, in which case I think some people here might agree with you. However, it's been somewhat difficult to discern exactly what you've been trying to get at in the last couple of pages since rooftop lighting was not part of the Shangri-la design.

Yes, I was not mentioning this project in particular, rather, the issue of penthouse owners....and their apparent need for god status in the building. Likewise, their NIMBYism preventing some nice lighting from appearing in the city.

[jlousa]

There will not be any lights on top of Shangri-la, there were never any scheduled nor will they be installed later. Leftcoaster has taken the time to explain that much nicer then I would have.
I get a kick out of people that have no money vested in the project feeling they've been ripped off because there's no lights on the roof. The developer has spent a small fortune on public amenities that will actually benefit people unlike some lights that wouldn't do anything. But what the heck do I know apparently I'm some old man who should be living in a cabin in the woods somewhere.

Anyone is free to buy a penthouse and do as they please. There is no secret penthouse owners club that meets every second Tuesday of the month and decides how to screw over the poor people.

[Canadian Mind]

But what the heck do I know apparently I'm some old man who should be living in a cabin in the woods somewhere.

Bout time you came out of the closet. Cozy isn't it? :cheers:

[EdinVan]

The replacement signs on Bentall IV are actually the worst. The original logo was the red Canada Trust logo - then TD took them over but the proportions of its logo were different - so the TD is there, but there are "filler" strips beside it that are aluminum panel - not the precast stone like the original cladding. Bentall III has an awkward looking BMO logo too - the original was the "M" inset in the precast.

Unless my eyesight is going, I think what's up there now is actually a piece of translucent fabric/plastic. I see it fluttering in the wind and it seems to be tied onto the roof. It's very, very tacky. And the M is actually off-centre --- on the logo itself! I know, trivial details, but people notice (and remember), on some level.

[EdinVan]

Interesting discussion today. It's nice to see that people are so passionate about something.

[cjohnny4]

Your post here had me laughing on and off all day, Leftcoaster. I just keep seeing that millionaire's wife being illuminated like an x-ray! LOL. Thanks for injecting some *much needed* humour into this discussion!


The issue here is that the penthouse owns right up to the roof, so its not just lights outside, it's lights right in the area you just paid 30 million for. For instance if you wanted to go sit on your roof top patio with your wife for a nice romanitic evening LEDs would be illuminating your wife like she was getting an X-ray.... I know would not be pleased and I'm no nimby.

[duener]

A Sauna would be a bit of an odd thing to add to a restaurant. :frog:

The photo caption says "private dining" area... I thought it was an amenity for the condo owners like a private gym, cinema, etc. If that's a restaurant as you say, wow, that's even worse... who would pay to eat there?

[EdinVan]

With regards to the lighting effects and logo at the top of the tower, what is it that Jlousa and LeftCoaster are referring to, and the 22Apr reference date? Why are you not able to share with us what's happening up there, and exactly 'how' the tower is not yet complete? Maybe that info could stop all the unnecessary animosity being fostered in this thread?

There has been speculation that there would be some kind of corporate logo (an "S") on top of the tower and/or some kind of lighting effect such as seen on top of One Wall Centre. As for April 22, I have no idea because I'm not part of the clique on here. I think they might be planning some kind of get-together or something. Who knows.

[dreambrother808]

The photo caption says "private dining" area... I thought it was an amenity for the condo owners like a private gym, cinema, etc. If that's a restaurant as you say, wow, that's even worse... who would pay to eat there?

Maybe people who want PRIVACY? You've never heard of or seen a private dining room in a restaurant before? :haha:

[AlexYVR]

Anyone is free to buy a penthouse and do as they please. There is no secret penthouse owners club that meets every second Tuesday of the month and decides how to screw over the poor people.

As Liz Lemon would say. . .I want to go there.

[duener]

Maybe people who want PRIVACY? You've never heard of or seen a private dining room in a restaurant before? :haha:

Then what's the name of the restaurant this private dining room is attached to? :koko:

Looks like there is a sauna and library like I mentioned there ought to be: http://www.lestwarog.com/shangrila/

[Yume-sama]

Well, that's not surprising. Even my building has a pool, sauna, and residents library + lounge.

But I'm not looking down on people from 50 floors up. :(:(

[Locked In]

I get a kick out of people that have no money vested in the project feeling they've been ripped off because there's no lights on the roof. The developer has spent a small fortune on public amenities that will actually benefit people unlike some lights that wouldn't do anything.

I think jlousa and johnjimbc have pretty much covered this. I'll just add my initial thought: why would a developer trying to sell million dollar (and ten million dollar) condos antagonize potential buyers by adding light effects to the building that residents would find annoying?

[metroXpress]

Just visited Shangri-la yesterday. I was expected a larger lobby...but it
sure looks way better in person. Can't wait to finish uploading my pics.

[phesto]

More pics:

http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/8209/3297510355e05283baabb.jpg
flickr, Brian Hill Photography

http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/1927/3232326959c2a1a0da69b.jpg
flickr, Stephen Dyrgas

http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/531/330250628195db452304b.jpg
flickr, abaransk

[KPELLY]

^^^ Wow! I really like the first pic.

[Denscity]

Is the hotel's logo going to be lit up by the squares on the side of the building?

[raggedy13]

More pics:

I appreciate the sourcing info you've provided but it is still missing one thing... an actual link to the page where you found the photos (and I don't mean the flickr homepage). Thanks in advance! :)

[osirisboy]

yea that first one is sexy!!

[skymaster]

Les Twarog (realtor) posted a bunch of new pics on his website. here are some of them..

http://www.lestwarog.com/shangrila/images/131.jpg

I was expecting the pool to be bigger. Also, it looks like the hot tub could fit maybe a maximum of 3 people lol. Not that I care anyway.

[officedweller]

It'll be in constant shadow when the Bentall office building gets built across Alberni, so not much of a loss.

[nickinacan]

Is the hotel's logo going to be lit up by the squares on the side of the building?

I really doubt it. It's essentially glow-in-the-dark paint on each of those squares. I'm not even exaggerating... that's what it is. It is supposed to give the building a bit of a shimmer at night, but it is so bright around there at night that it seems pointless.

[LeftCoaster]

Yeah the squares are fully functioning right now, they look nice in the sunlight but do nothing at night. To be quite honest the squares are one of the few areas of this tower that have disappointed me.

[Canadian Mind]

I still think that even thoguh they didn't have the intended lighting effect, they give the side of the building a rougher looking character without comprimising any of the facades shimmer.

[SpongeG]

people inside would whine if they were too bright

[LeftCoaster]

Yeah but they could glow radiantly with no one being able to see from inside. Dont get me wrong, I think they add to the building, i just wish they were a little more visible at night.

[EdinVan]

people inside would whine if they were too bright

That's what happens, unfortunately, when people have nothing else to do. I've never lived in a city where people had so much time on their hands to complain about things that most other people would consider minor annoyances at worst, and pleasant distractions at best. This is why people need hobbies.

[EdinVan]

http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/531/330250628195db452304b.jpg
flickr, abaransk

Let's see how good people are with their architecture trivia... Is it just me, or does the Shangri-La, in this photo at least, look quite a bit like particular skyscraper in midtown Manhattan? Hint: it starts with "One"...

[nova9]

That's what happens, unfortunately, when people have nothing else to do. I've never lived in a city where people had so much time on their hands to complain about things that most other people would consider minor annoyances at worst, and pleasant distractions at best. This is why people need hobbies.

Definitely, (not to be off topic) did you read the article in the Sun today about most ticketed parking areas of vancouver and they specific listed one block and said the cause was from one resident that qould snitch on all the cars that parked too long or parked in the residential area. ONE resident that would call 3 times a day with a list of license plates.:rolleyes: :sly: :shrug: :koko: :yuck:

[canucks23]

Let's see how good people are with their architecture trivia... Is it just me, or does the Shangri-La, in this photo at least, look quite a bit like particular skyscraper in midtown Manhattan? Hint: it starts with "One"...

One Astor Plaza?

[dreambrother808]

Look at all that hazy smog in the last photo...

I walked from Deer Lake to Metrotown one night last summer after a concert and found that the air was quite unbearable. Downtown Van is luckily saved from that concentration and settling of bad air.

[Coldrsx]

Edinvan - really interesting image there as it basically shows the transition from 'old to new' from enrish bay to coal harbour.