Burrard Place | 168m, 112m, 56m | 54fl, 36fl, 13fl | 938,000 sqft | U/C - Page 53

LeftCoaster · #**1041** Posted **Jun 26, 2017, 7:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

well i mean of course city approval. the other ones are irrelevant and you know it. there is a big difference between being approved by the city and being proposed to the city. an example with this is that there is a giant hole here being dug for the last while. but unless you go into the thread and find the photos of it you wont know this is actually moving along. as osirisboy mentioned you'd assume its doing nothing still.

whether approved or site prep, both mean the same thing. i.e. it isn't "U/C" yet but it is more then just an idea. whatever you want to call it that's what i meant, and i am sure you knew it.

But there are very different levels of approval that are important.

For instance 555 Cordova has it's rezoning approved, but it still can't be built because it hasn't had a separate DP approved.

Some buildings have their rezoning approved and get concurrent DP approval.

Some buildings are approved with PRT conditions which may never be achieved, and thereby are not really approved.

And as for construction, for me it's really easy, is the BUILDING under construction? A hole is not a building, but footings are part of the building, therefore excav is not construction of the building but pouring a footing is.

osirisboy · #**1042** Posted **Jun 27, 2017, 12:19 AM**

But there are also very different levels of proposed as well. Doesn't stop us from using that term

And as for construction why are you so literal with "building". And in order to get the footings done you need to excavate so it's part of the process of doing the footings. For me I see it as the project is under construction, which encompass all aspects of construction, from excavation to Finishing work like painting. You don't consider construction has stopped when they complete building the actual building, right? A project is U/C until occupancy even though the actual building has been finished for awhile

Having this project (until last week) and Gilmore station, for example in the same category as proposed just isn't helpful or accurate. Have the option of labelling something site prep, done. Easy

jlousa · #**1043** Posted **Jun 27, 2017, 1:16 AM**

I guess my question is why does it matter if this one and Gilmore were both listed as proposed at the same time while being at very different stages?
The only person that might care is already probably either reading this forum, or involved with the project and knows where the project is at.
We could get rid of all stages in the title to really drive people bananas.

The current system works well, sure it's not perfect but it's simple and adheres to industry standards.

osirisboy · #**1044** Posted **Jun 27, 2017, 1:52 AM**

I guess you could also ask what's the big deal with listing something as U/C when a project is under construction? Or just add site prep. What's the big deal with doing that

Industry standards? I'm pretty sure the company involved with excavating this site thought they are working on a construction site. Not to mention worksafe bc, the developer, the city etc. I've gotten the impression that the "industry" sees construction starting after the ground breaking. Also, not to mention that's what the Canada section does ie Brentwood three is already listed as U/C

Feathered Friend · #**1045** Posted **Jun 27, 2017, 6:22 AM**

My photos - June 26th 2017

If I'm not mistaken, they've now lined the edge of the pit with Jersey barriers, so I found it a lot harder to get a decent photo of the changes to the pit.

mcminsen · #**1046** Posted **Jun 27, 2017, 6:44 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

If I'm not mistaken, they've now lined the edge of the pit with Jersey barriers, so I found it a lot harder to get a decent photo of the changes to the pit.

I think they've been there for a while now because for a long time I remember being tempted to climb on top of them to try to get pics from over the fence but I decided not to annoy the security or anyone who was still on site.

June 26 '17, my pics

mcminsen · #**1047** Posted **Jun 27, 2017, 6:47 AM**

Here are some pics from today of the other end of the pit (closest to Drake Street).

June 26 '17, my pics

mcminsen · #**1048** Posted **Jun 27, 2017, 7:18 AM**

Here's a pic from about a year ago not long after they started scraping and digging. So, if it's one month to come back up (to get to grade) for every month it took to go down and then about one week overall for each floor, then it might be about two more years to topping out? And then maybe one more year to complete?

June 29 '16, my pic

officedweller · #**1049** Posted **Jun 30, 2017, 10:25 PM**

From Quorum Group twitter today:

We are now well under way at Burrard Place and once we are done this skyscraper will be the third tallest building in all of Vancouver!
https://twitter.com/TheQuorumGroup

Dimswitch · #**1050** Posted **Jul 2, 2017, 1:36 AM**

Or is it? Many city diagram pages seem to count spires, example our One Wall gets listed 4th thx to it's 30 ft spire. The Melville also, so why, I ask you, does the 100 foot mast above Harbour Centre not count, because if it did, it would be 558 ft and that is 3rd place, 8 feet taller than Burrard Place. Plus that mast is much more prominent and visible than any skinny spire, and becomes a 100 foot Xmas tree in the month of December visible all over greater Van.

LeftCoaster · #**1051** Posted **Jul 4, 2017, 9:32 PM**

you're touching on a long raging debate in the architectural community. General consensus now seems to revolve around the spire being architectural or 'tacked on'.

I personally think the Harbour Centre's spire is architectural and should count, especially when it is lit up during the holidays, but clearly it's not agreed upon by all.

Dimswitch · #**1052** Posted **Jul 5, 2017, 2:20 AM**

All I'm asking for is some consistency. Why does one count and another doesn't?

LeftCoaster · #**1053** Posted **Jul 5, 2017, 9:10 PM**

Like I said I agree with you, doesn't make much sense to me.

Dwils01 · #**1054** Posted **Jul 6, 2017, 9:03 PM**

Office building side.

Pictures by me.

LeftCoaster · #**1055** Posted **Jul 6, 2017, 9:15 PM**

Did they forget to order a tower crane or something? Most projects would definitely be crane in at this point in the excav.

Vanville · #**1056** Posted **Jul 7, 2017, 9:02 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Did they forget to order a tower crane or something? Most projects would definitely be crane in at this point in the excav.

Methinks they haven't poured the concrete for the base of the crane yet.

My shot July 5

mcminsen · #**1057** Posted **Jul 12, 2017, 7:48 AM**

Still looking for a crane base. For scale, look at the man in the second pic.

July 11 '17, my pics

osirisboy · #**1058** Posted **Jul 12, 2017, 3:46 PM**

double post

osirisboy · #**1059** Posted **Jul 12, 2017, 3:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Did they forget to order a tower crane or something? Most projects would definitely be crane in at this point in the excav.

True. Although I remember the casino used a mobile crane for the first couple of parkade levels

And great updates mcminsen

LeftCoaster · #**1060** Posted **Jul 13, 2017, 5:24 PM**

Good point. i wonder what the purpose is, certainly seems less efficient to me.