The Butterfly | 178.6m | 57Fl | U/C

[s211]

Originally Posted by Jebby

It's a Baptist eclesial community, they don't have Mass (and many would probably be offended at calling their Sunday service Mass).

They'll probably have some reserved spaces in the underground parking, probably under the rental building.

They have use of stalls at 808 Nelson, two blocks east.

[trofirhen]

Does this project have to be presented to the UDP (where it risks being 'dumbed down')?
If not what is/are possible start date(s)?

[Bcasey25raptor]

I like the height and the design but overall to me it feels retro, kind of a "straight outta 80s" design.

I like it but it's not my favourite.

[dreambrother808]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Does this project have to be presented to the UDP (where it risks being 'dumbed down')?
If not what is/are possible start date(s)?

It's interesting how many times it's been explained how the UDP works and yet people will still post comments like this.

[mcminsen]

Originally Posted by dreambrother808

It's interesting how many times it's been explained how the UDP works and yet people will still post comments like this.

Some of us may have real problems with memory, not just a case of being lazy or not paying attention. Why not just give a short answer to the question if you can?

[dreambrother808]

Here is a great post from someone better-equipped to explain:

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

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.

[EdinVan]

Originally Posted by dreambrother808

It's interesting how many times it's been explained how the UDP works and yet people will still post comments like this.

It's interesting how many times it's been explained how civil conversation works and yet people still behave like boors.

[osirisboy]

Originally Posted by mcminsen

Some of us may have real problems with memory, not just a case of being lazy or not paying attention. Why not just give a short answer to the question if you can?

I'm totally with you on that!! Lol

[mcminsen]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Does this project have to be presented to the UDP (where it risks being 'dumbed down')?
If not what is/are possible start date(s)?

Here's a graphic from heartforthecity.ca, the First Baptist Church's website. They now have the boards from this past Tuesday's pre-application open house posted. In this image, "today" was Tuesday September 15th, 2015.

I'm also curious to see what the UDP might want changed or tweaked, if anything. As for a start date… Personally, I would be pleasantly surprised if there was any action on the site within a year from now.





http://www.heartforthecity.ca/?page_id=4888

[trofirhen]

Thank you for that, mcminsen. It's much clearer now.

[dreambrother808]

Originally Posted by EdinVan

It's interesting how many times it's been explained how civil conversation works and yet people still behave like boors.

Yes, this was directly targeted at people like you, with facts, nothing more.

But thank you for proving your own point with your post.

[red-paladin]

Let's move on from that.

[NewWester]

I for one am pleasantly encouraged by this one: it's different in a city that needs some different. I'm also pretty happy by the height: tall enough to stand out a little, but not so tall that it dominates the skyline.

Which, real talk, Shangri-la doesn't get enough credit for being a bit understated: even if it is a little boring from certain angles, it's always tasteful. This one is a bit garish for that much exposure.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by NewWester

I for one am pleasantly encouraged by this one: it's different in a city that needs some different. I'm also pretty happy by the height: tall enough to stand out a little, but not so tall that it dominates the skyline.

Which, real talk, Shangri-la doesn't get enough credit for being a bit understated: even if it is a little boring from certain angles, it's always tasteful. This one is a bit garish for that much exposure.

I think this one WOULD be garish if done in colours other than black and white. But black and white are
sort of a classic combination, and lend this one a smart elegance .... much better than done in sea green and white, or pink and green.
For me, it has a rather classy look, like an elegant lady wearing a smart black, three-quarter length white gloves, and a string of pearls.

[The Corporal]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

I think this one WOULD be garish if done in colours other than black and white. But black and white are
sort of a classic combination, and lend this one a smart elegance .... much better than done in sea green and white, or pink and green.
For me, it has a rather classy look, like an elegant lady wearing a smart black, three-quarter length white gloves, and a string of pearls.

That's one way of looking at it. Apologies for the repost but I still think that this is a closer comparison.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by The Corporal

That's one way of looking at it. Apologies for the repost but I still think that this is a closer comparison.


http://pike.com.au/wp-content/upload...2.12.37-pm.png

Eeeyeeesh !!!! Well, to each his own. "There is no dispute in taste," as the proverb says. (I'd like to know, out of curiosity, how many agree more with my description, or yours)

[Hot Rod]

this is bold and this is iconic, fits the Alberni Luxury District.

Get this done and built it tall (no less than 550)!!

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by Hot Rod

this is bold and this is iconic, fits the Alberni Luxury District.

Get this done and built it tall (no less than 550)!!

This isn't in the Alberni luxury district. It's basically on Burrard almost across from Wall Center.

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by The Corporal

That's one way of looking at it. Apologies for the repost but I still think that this is a closer comparison.

I don't mind the building but now I'm never not going to see this guy's pants when I look at it.

[urbancanadian]

Hey at least it's not Suzhou's Gate to the East (aka the Pants building):


http://www.scmp.com/photos/recent/all/1621562


http://www.ebaumsworld.com/pictures/view/84238157/