HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Metro Vancouver & the Fraser Valley

    Gilmore Place 1 in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • Burnaby Skyscraper Diagram
            
View Full Map

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #161  
Old Posted Jul 25, 2016, 11:05 PM
phesto phesto is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: yvr/bwi
Posts: 2,412
First 3 residential towers are going in for formal rezoning application tonight. I am told this will include the tallest tower in the project (and all of BC). Not sure of exact height but would not be surprised to see it hit 200 metres or more.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #162  
Old Posted Jul 25, 2016, 11:06 PM
LeftCoaster's Avatar
LeftCoaster LeftCoaster is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Torcouver
Posts: 9,973
I've heard that rumour as well (tallest in BC).

Would be nice if it were true.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #163  
Old Posted Jul 26, 2016, 1:33 AM
rofina rofina is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 421
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoaster View Post
I've heard that rumour as well (tallest in BC).

Would be nice if it were true.
Fingers crossed!

Would be amazing if Brentwood dwarfed DT Van.



Reply With Quote
     
     
  #164  
Old Posted Jul 26, 2016, 5:31 AM
jollyburger jollyburger is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,234
Quote:
Originally Posted by phesto View Post
First 3 residential towers are going in for formal rezoning application tonight. I am told this will include the tallest tower in the project (and all of BC). Not sure of exact height but would not be surprised to see it hit 200 metres or more.
Looked through the packet from the meeting and didn't see any heights mentioned. Just the 40-65 from the master plan.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #165  
Old Posted Jul 26, 2016, 5:45 AM
osirisboy's Avatar
osirisboy osirisboy is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 4,117
65 floors would be over 200 metres
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #166  
Old Posted Jul 26, 2016, 2:36 PM
sburnaby33 sburnaby33 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by phesto View Post
First 3 residential towers are going in for formal rezoning application tonight. I am told this will include the tallest tower in the project (and all of BC). Not sure of exact height but would not be surprised to see it hit 200 metres or more.
That would be unreal to have three of the five tallest towers in the Lower Mainland outside of Downtown. Literally overnight a city is being born at Brentwood. I imagine that sometime in 2017/2018 there could be upwards of 20 cranes working in the area, which would make it arguably the largest residential construction site in the region.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #167  
Old Posted Jul 26, 2016, 5:56 PM
Vin Vin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3,542
Quote:
Originally Posted by sburnaby33 View Post
That would be unreal to have three of the five tallest towers in the Lower Mainland outside of Downtown. Literally overnight a city is being born at Brentwood. I imagine that sometime in 2017/2018 there could be upwards of 20 cranes working in the area, which would make it arguably the largest residential construction site in the region.
Don't forget commercial as well.


Quote:
Originally Posted by rofina View Post
Fingers crossed!

Would be amazing if Brentwood dwarfed DT Van.



Oh yeah! Can't wait to see that, and the "squalor" just across Boundary Road.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #168  
Old Posted Jul 26, 2016, 8:04 PM
sburnaby33 sburnaby33 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vin View Post
Don't forget commercial as well.




Oh yeah! Can't wait to see that, and the "squalor" just across Boundary Road.
I did forget about commercial. The scale and scope of what is happening at Brentwood is incredible and, I believe, a bit more impressive given the size of the development projects our region.

Last edited by sburnaby33; Oct 30, 2016 at 10:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #169  
Old Posted Aug 28, 2016, 2:53 AM
GilmoreStation GilmoreStation is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 230
This project has been renamed to Gilmore Place
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #170  
Old Posted Oct 30, 2016, 9:40 PM
red-paladin's Avatar
red-paladin red-paladin is offline
Vancouver Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Burnaby
Posts: 3,317
Thread title updated.
Has there been any clarification on the heights of the towers?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #171  
Old Posted Oct 30, 2016, 9:45 PM
BobLoblawsLawBlog's Avatar
BobLoblawsLawBlog BobLoblawsLawBlog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Metrotown
Posts: 381
Not yet but they said it wouldn't go over 60 storeys because it would cost to much.
__________________
"Looks cheap and spandrelly, as expected. But it's good that they're adding density, or whatever." -csbvan
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #172  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2016, 5:41 PM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam/Rainbow Lake
Posts: 29,947
would it even be that noticeable in that spot? its so much lower than brentwood, it would look a lot shorter
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #173  
Old Posted Nov 19, 2016, 1:36 AM
BobLoblawsLawBlog's Avatar
BobLoblawsLawBlog BobLoblawsLawBlog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Metrotown
Posts: 381
According to Vancouver Market's twitter, these are the new renders or the first phase of Gilmore Place.



There are going to be 1563 units in all three towers, the tallest being 64 storeys with 643 units.

I'm not really a big fan of the site and design. For British Columbia's tallest it's surely not the prettiest. Even then I'd rather have these tall towers go on Willingdon and Lougheed to balance the skyline.

http://www.vancouvermarket.ca/2016/1...rs-1563-units/
__________________
"Looks cheap and spandrelly, as expected. But it's good that they're adding density, or whatever." -csbvan

Last edited by BobLoblawsLawBlog; Nov 19, 2016 at 2:21 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #174  
Old Posted Nov 19, 2016, 1:53 AM
Flynn86 Flynn86 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 78
Ugly! What a waste. Your going to have the tallest tower in BC you should at least make it look nice or crazy.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #175  
Old Posted Nov 19, 2016, 2:20 AM
Infrequent Poster Infrequent Poster is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 611
What are the actual heights? I'm enjoying the scale of these. Burnaby is stepping up the scale of things.

Edit. kind of a stupid sounding statement
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #176  
Old Posted Nov 19, 2016, 3:15 AM
sburnaby33 sburnaby33 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 139
Another pedestrian high rise in the GVRD. Not a surprise with the conservative city planners and developers we have here. Surely one of the tallest buildings in BC would be spectacular when it comes to how it looks. This is just oatmeal or plain rice cakes in terms of design.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #177  
Old Posted Nov 19, 2016, 3:31 AM
Sheba Sheba is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: BC
Posts: 1,745
Have we forgotten about how Trump Tower looks good from the outside and the layouts are crap on the inside?

It's really monochromatic. Burnaby isn't afraid of a little colour - maybe that would make for a nicer looking tower.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #178  
Old Posted Nov 19, 2016, 3:37 AM
VarBreStr18 VarBreStr18 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 345
I don't have any problem with the LOOK of this 64 storey building. Some of you think it is ugly and plain, do you have rendering of similar hight building which in your mind is spactacular? Trump tower looks interesting from the outside , but terrible odd shape floor plans and wasteful space. Takes forever to build and costs more which ultimately pass to the owners. Simply achieving 64 storey is spactacular enough in my mind!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #179  
Old Posted Nov 19, 2016, 4:00 AM
sburnaby33 sburnaby33 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheba View Post
Have we forgotten about how Trump Tower looks good from the outside and the layouts are crap on the inside?

It's really monochromatic. Burnaby isn't afraid of a little colour - maybe that would make for a nicer looking tower.
Quote:
Originally Posted by VarBreStr18 View Post
I don't have any problem with the LOOK of this 64 storey building. Some of you think it is ugly and plain, do you have rendering of similar hight building which in your mind is spactacular? Trump tower looks interesting from the outside , but terrible odd shape floor plans and wasteful space. Takes forever to build and costs more which ultimately pass to the owners. Simply achieving 64 storey is spactacular enough in my mind!!
I have seen the layouts of the Trump Tower and they are indeed awful.

What I am most perplexed by is the sameness of these renderings to many new buildings in the area. It just seems like there is a monoculture of form permeating the area. It would indeed be nice if there were some colour in these buildings. It would make the generic design easier to swallow.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #180  
Old Posted Nov 19, 2016, 4:16 AM
SFUVancouver's Avatar
SFUVancouver SFUVancouver is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kelowna
Posts: 5,228
So, after years of criticism being aired about how it is abundently clear that the sameness of the residential high rises in the City of Vancouver is due to, in turns, City Hall's ineptitude or overbearing, why do we think it is that Burnaby, free of view corridors, mountain views from across False Creek, the psychological and historic baggage of west side vs east side neigbourhoods, the involvement of Vancouver planners, and the dastardly UDP, why with all of these constraints and shackles thrown off is Burnaby developing such a boring skyline?
__________________
VANCOUVER | Beautiful, Multicultural | Canada's Pacific Metropolis
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 > Metro Vancouver & the Fraser Valley
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:36 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.