HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


    Peter Wall Mansion & Residences in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • Vancouver Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 3:40 AM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,371
I think there are parts of this proposal that need some work and I expect some adjustments to be made to it as it works it's way thru the process.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 3:59 AM
osirisboy's Avatar
osirisboy osirisboy is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 6,039
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus View Post
If I am reading the plans correctly, then the way this building interacts with the street corner is shockingly residential and suburbian. The retail units that do exist have been illogically pushed down Richards, far away from the busy street corner, where a cafe, bistro or something that adds urban vibrancy should be. Instead, there is just an oversized residential lobby.
Its hardly a busy street corner though. That section of the city is very residential and very quiet. Im surprised there are any retail units in there at all
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 4:59 AM
Prometheus's Avatar
Prometheus Prometheus is offline
Reason and Freedom
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Vancouver/Toronto
Posts: 4,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by osirisboy View Post

Its hardly a busy street corner though. That section of the city is very residential and very quiet.
I see. All that is missing are some stop signs.

Of course, it is a busy street corner. And that is precisely where retail, such as a corner street cafe, should go.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 5:09 AM
osirisboy's Avatar
osirisboy osirisboy is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 6,039
I meant that the other corners of that intersection are all very residential (townhomes) and quiet (except one which is the a small office) and as I said before I'm surprised there's any retail at all being proposed here. This area IS shockingly residential
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 5:13 AM
dleung's Avatar
dleung dleung is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,943
How "quiet" could it have been when the project is replacing a nightclub? People need to stop referencing free-standing point towers on podiums as "infill"... and where's the quality? This is uglier than anything I've seen in Toronto. There's absolutely no redeeming aspect besides the slender profile. The design needs a lot more than "some adjustments". I usually try to be constructive and say what would improve the design, but right now there's nothing to work with.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 5:20 AM
Built Form Built Form is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 691
Although I couldn't make it to the open house I managed to gets some pix at city hall today. Because of it's height it should be subjected to the higher buildings design panel to ensure architectural excellence; right now it doesn't qualify. Of major note is the mini storage to the south is for sale for $32.5 million thru DTZ Barnicke. If Wall picks it up that would change the dynamics of this development. Regardless this tower should be moved further south to offset Pacific Point on Homer.
























All pix by Built Form
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 5:23 AM
Prometheus's Avatar
Prometheus Prometheus is offline
Reason and Freedom
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Vancouver/Toronto
Posts: 4,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by osirisboy View Post

I meant that the other corners of that intersection are all very residential (townhomes) and quiet (except one which is the a small office)...
That is only two corners out of four. Don't forget that this building is replacing a purely commercial building and a nightclub no less. Furthermore, the character of Drake Street is still largely commercial.

But it is true, as you point out, that the buildings on the north-west and north-east corners are "very residential" and are very suburban in their design at the street level. And this is precisely my point: This project, as it is currently designed, expands on the mistakes of the recent past and will "exacerbate the over-residentialization of downtown."

Last edited by Prometheus; Feb 29, 2012 at 5:48 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 6:02 AM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
ON3P Skis
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lower Lonsdale, North Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,593
I was at the Open House for pretty much the duration this evening and spoke at length with many of the project architects and principal Norm Hotson. I recognize that they are dealing with an extremely slender site (100' deep as opposed to the usual 120' in the area), hence the very thin tower. I also don't have a problem with the retail being tucked away. It will actually be the only building at this intersection with retail at all. I am not a fan of the architecture myself. It is far too pedestrian, and the lane side borders on criminal (although it doesn't look as bad in person). There has to be a better way to do it. Hotson acknowledged that it needs work and asked for ideas (does anyone here have any?)

I support the project in its current design, if it were 300', but feel it needs a lot of work to push through that boundary. And when I say I support it, I really only say that because it basically meets the neighbourhood guidelines. I would prefer the building to be substantially worked on regardless of its height. It is interesting to note that the city encouraged Wall to go above the 300' traditional height limit.

To the point of moving the tower further SW Richards, that isn't possible, there is a view cone (actually 2 I think) that bisects the site. It was my understanding that Onni had previously tied up the SW site but perhaps they have now dropped it. It is severely hampered by the view cones. There is a slight possibility of a triangular-shaped tower at the very corner but it would have a minuscule 2,500-3,000 sf floor plate (how you fit two elevators and two stairwells in there I have no idea).

I got the sense from many people that 400' was too tall. Many thought that the Mark and WestOne were perhaps anomalies, and now you can add 1400 Howe, Burrard Gateway and (almosts) the Bonds Group tower in the 1200 block of Howe in the 400' range in addition to this one. I didn't hear anyone think the building was attractive. Many (perhaps most?) supported at 300' building but wanted to know what the community would get in exchange. This site, although having a ~150' frontage on Richards is only ~100' deep and thus qualifies as a "small site" with a max height of 70' and 3.0 FSR instead of the neighbourhood norm of 5.0 FSR and 300'. I think too many people were harping on this, when I see it more of a technicality. As per usual the CAC number is not yet defined (and likely won't be public until it goes before council). The neighbourhood does seem to want another park, saying George Wainborn is far too busy. Most of the residents opposed were from the Grace across the street, which isn't surprising, but it was nice to see James Schouw out to help educate his buyers about aspects of the project and zoning in the area.
__________________
Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 6:31 AM
osirisboy's Avatar
osirisboy osirisboy is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 6,039
thanks for all the pics!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 6:40 AM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,371
Wonder how residents would react to the back wall if it were used as the public art contribution and used as a canvas for the worlds tallest mural.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 6:51 AM
dleung's Avatar
dleung dleung is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrenegade View Post
...The neighbourhood does seem to want another park, saying George Wainborn is far too busy...
lol

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 7:00 AM
Prometheus's Avatar
Prometheus Prometheus is offline
Reason and Freedom
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Vancouver/Toronto
Posts: 4,015
You actually made Emery Barnes Park too small. Its true size is twice as as large as your decpiction; the park now encompasses the entire width of the block from Richards to Seymour. And David Lam Park also includes the basketball and tennis courts and open space to the left of the field.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2012, 1:03 AM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 38,192
Skinny tower done better (although I don't know what the north side (not shown) looks like) - Massey Tower proposed for TO:

http://urbantoronto.ca/news/2012/02/...ing-impression

It's really just a box clad in a fancy balcony - like that Aqua tower in Chicago.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2012, 1:31 AM
NewWester NewWester is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 353
Kind of looks like a bigger tower cut in half, doesn't it? I think I kind of like it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2012, 1:44 AM
mr.sandbag mr.sandbag is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 155
not that im anywhere near an architect, but I agree with Buitlform, it needs to offset the Pacific Point, maybe widen it at at the base taking up some of the podium roof top green space and then step back from the corner at say around the 20th floor (midway) this was coming down drake you can still see the top of pacific point and more of the tower from false creek.

anyways thats what i would try
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2012, 1:49 AM
phesto phesto is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: yvr/bwi
Posts: 2,675
Offsetting the tower from pacific Point isn't possible because of a view cone (as wrenegade already pointed out).

There needs to be some form of articulation on the blank wall though if it is going to be so visible. This is what they did for the Sapphire at Pender and Bute.

I don't mind the massing, but this is a very boring tower.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2012, 2:25 AM
mr.sandbag mr.sandbag is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 155
good point, i scanned over that paragraph too quickly, too bad.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2012, 3:58 AM
Hed Kandi's Avatar
Hed Kandi Hed Kandi is offline
+
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 8,092
..

Last edited by Hed Kandi; Oct 4, 2022 at 4:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2012, 4:22 AM
ckkelley's Avatar
ckkelley ckkelley is offline
Bridge Walker!
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Forest City
Posts: 1,037
Thanks for these and all your photographs Built Form, you're a solid asset to this forum.
__________________
Just chimin' in.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Mar 13, 2012, 10:36 PM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
ON3P Skis
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lower Lonsdale, North Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,593
Ugh. Somehow this

Quote:
Originally Posted by Built Form View Post







pix by Built Form
sailed through UDP unanimously (6-0). Minutes haven't been posted yet, but I really want to hear comments from the panel on that DISGUSTING lane elevation. Unacceptable in my opinion. They are going for 11.90 FSR, I'm sure there is room in the budget to improve the architecture of that side of the building. The rest is rather blah, but whatever, at least it isn't offensive.
__________________
Flickr
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 6:13 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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