The Post | 67m | 27 fl | U/C

[connect2source]

I think they should go with something like this. Maintain the original integrity and essence of the overall design, honour the mid-century architectural while adding density.

They could easily add some height to this concept and perhaps closely achieve the desired # of units.

The tower design could be altered to achieve a look somewhat like Telus Gardens. Not only would this compliment and preserve the overall design but the less bulky massing would preserve light.

source : http://www.vancouverheritagecommunity.com

[dleung]

The current proposal is essentially a doughnut extrusion up to the view cone with some cuts through it; it even uses the little wedge of space outside the viewcone to go a bit taller, so it's already the densest possible configuration. What you're suggesting adds only 1/3 to 1/2 the proposed density addition. If it was done from the very beginning it would've been perfect, but to preserve and build on top of the existing building is an expense that probably requires more density to pay for it.

Still I think the current proposal is way too dense at the expense of daylight for inward facing units and causing wind shear for adjacent public space. I agree that there should be at least a part of the "podium" that should remain a true podium. And I agree that a more solid grid-form is better than glass.

[BobLoblawsLawBlog]

Originally Posted by connect2source

I think they should go with something like this. Maintain the original integrity and essence of the overall design, honour the mid-century architectural while adding density.

They could easily add some height to this concept and perhaps closely achieve the desired # of units.

The tower design could be altered to achieve a look somewhat like Telus Gardens. Not only would this compliment and preserve the overall design but the less bulky massing would preserve light.

source : http://www.vancouverheritagecommunity.com

Oh my god that would look amazing, especially 50 storeys high. An added bonus is it's easy to add balconies (are they even needed anyways?) in those boxes.

It would resemble the Grosvenor Pacific building going up in Yaletown.

[connect2source]

Originally Posted by BobLoblawsLawBlog

Oh my god that would look amazing, especially 50 storeys high. An added bonus is it's easy to add balconies (are they even needed anyways?) in those boxes.

It would resemble the Grosvenor Pacific building going up in Yaletown.

Agreed!! I'll forward this to the UDP!! The high rise portion would also resemble the MacBlo Tower at Thurlow and Georgia as well.

[Vin]

You guys all forgot about the lovely viewcones? There is a reason why a bunch of bulky short buildings were designed in the first place.

[BobLoblawsLawBlog]

Okay, this might sound a little out there, but why not have the building look exactly like a mountain. In mountain camouflage. That way we can build very high without blocking the views of those sacred mountains.

[officedweller]

Definitely better than the first iteration.
But you'd think that with all the stepping, they'd be able to set back the towers from the podium edge
- to pay deference to the Post Office façade.

[scryer]

Overall I am kind of underwhelmed by the design.. But to the architect's defense, it is very hard to design something spectacular with that large of a podium that you can't cut up or build tall because of the city.

I'm still very "meh" about the design..

[EdinVan]

Originally Posted by connect2source

Just so odd to me. Would have loved to have seen the entire building preserved, as is, and made into a cultural facility including the VAG. This massing is just weird to me, zero integration with the design of the mid-century building, imposing scale to say the least. The old post office is reduced to a 'memory' and becomes a crazy mis-match and rather disturbing to look at.

I agree; it's quite hideous. But it's across the street from the similarly-hideous Telus Garden, so at least it respects the context of the area.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by scryer

Overall I am kind of underwhelmed by the design.. But to the architect's defense, it is very hard to design something spectacular with that large of a podium that you can't cut up or build tall because of the city.

I'm still very "meh" about the design..

Personally I feel that they should just retain only the West Georgia facade and a quarter of the facades on Homer and Hamilton of the Post Office building. The remaining part of it should be redesigned to match what's going on top. With a bit of architectural design innovation, they should make the original 50s structure look separate from the updated facades, with the tower set back quite a distance from the West Georgia side.

[Bcasey25raptor]

Originally Posted by EdinVan

I agree; it's quite hideous. But it's across the street from the similarly-hideous Telus Garden, so at least it respects the context of the area.

I actually quite like the Telus garden.

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by logan5

Can somebody explain this? I thought the point of tinted glass was to reduce the amount of solar heat transmitted into the building, which would save energy used on AC (which are energy hogs).

Tinted glass does help reduce heat gain in the summers, but it also has the opposite effect in the winters of reducing any solar gain, ramping up the heating bill. Modern low-e glass is also much more effective at insulating than in the 80s and 90s when you saw a lot of tinted glass, so you can achieve similar insulation performance (R values) without tinting. Which brings us to the reason you don't see tinting any more, which is light. Tinting increases the amount of time internal lighting needs to be run and the intensity it needs to be speced at, so since we can achieve similar R values and better light transference with untinted glass, LEED is structured to award projects that use it.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by Bcasey25raptor

I actually quite like the Telus garden.

I think the office tower turned out quite well.

The residential tower is a huge dissapointment, though (although I didn't see it 100% finished last time I was in Vancouver). The shape is nice, but the colo palette is terribly bland.

[osirisboy]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Tinted glass does help reduce heat gain in the summers, but it also has the opposite effect in the winters of reducing any solar gain, ramping up the heating bill. Modern low-e glass is also much more effective at insulating than in the 80s and 90s when you saw a lot of tinted glass, so you can achieve similar insulation performance (R values) without tinting. Which brings us to the reason you don't see tinting any more, which is light. Tinting increases the amount of time internal lighting needs to be run and the intensity it needs to be speced at, so since we can achieve similar R values and better light transference with untinted glass, LEED is structured to award projects that use it.

So the casino isn't leed? I thought it was

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

So the casino isn't leed? I thought it was

It's not a LEED requirement to have clear glass, just makes getting LEED points easier and, presumably, cheaper.

LEED needs to be scrapped, though.

[BobLoblawsLawBlog]

Originally Posted by Jebby

It's not a LEED requirement to have clear glass, just makes getting LEED points easier and, presumably, cheaper.

LEED needs to be scrapped, though.

I totally agree. If we want to protect the environment, maybe we should look at China before making one of the cleanest, most environmentally conscious places on earth more so.

Also, can't they taint windows another colour then blue. Whatever happened to black, brass or dark dark blue?

[jlousa]

Anyone else attend the open house this evening? They had some pretty nifty models of the reuse of the building. The boards should be up in a couple of daye.

[mcminsen]

Yes, I was there and was intrigued by the inner (re)workings of the old building. I was wondering if some people might be able to drive up the inner circular ramp and park on the same level as they live or work. Also, there seemed to be a rather large subterranean retail space if my memory serves me right.

It's just one block from where I live so it will be easy to watch if it goes ahead as proposed. I imagine we might not see anything rising above the original old roof for at least a year or two?

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by BobLoblawsLawBlog

I totally agree. If we want to protect the environment, maybe we should look at China before making one of the cleanest, most environmentally conscious places on earth more so.

I'm not sure what you mean here, but LEED isn't the only way to achieve clean and sustainable designs. The CoV should open up and end LEED's monopoly and allow other "green" certifications and allow more leeway in achieving their "green" requirements.

[Joat]

So they're going to have indoor parking for most of the original building? I didn't notice any mention of how much retail space they're planning to lease.