Telus Garden | 135m, 88m | 46fl res, 22fl office | 928,000sqft | Completed

[Vin]

Originally Posted by rofina

Wow.

The building is just brutal from that last angle.

Looks like a 5 year old sketched it, and got bored halfway through.

It's the viewcone.

[csbvan]

Such a lazy response. The viewcone is not the main problem. Sure, it is a problem, but in reality the view cone was always there. The building was designed with full knowledge of there being a view cone and yet the architect decided to half-ass the design and shave a piece off instead of doing something interesting with the zoning limitations.

The problem lies with lazy architects and cheap developers far more than with a piece of zoning policy, however frustrating that policy may be.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by csbvan

Such a lazy response. The viewcone is not the main problem. Sure, it is a problem, but in reality the view cone was always there. The building was designed with full knowledge of there being a view cone and yet the architect decided to half-ass the design and shave a piece off instead of doing something interesting with the zoning limitations.

The problem lies with lazy architects and cheap developers far more than with a piece of zoning policy, however frustrating that policy may be.

Trust me, it is the viewcone.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Vin

Trust me, it is the viewcone.

Needs a mall somewhere in there too.

[LeftCoaster]

You're missing the point Vin.

The viewocones, as frustrating as they can be, are not the excuse for a half baked response to them. The viewcones are the reason Trump Tower twists the way it does, the reason for Elan's angled facade or the triangular shape of Shangri-La. There are plenty of attractive ways to work with the viewcones, blaming them for shoddy design is not an acceptable excuse.

[mcminsen]

It looks like the Telus Garden condo tower crane is coming down. I just noticed today that the boom is lower than the roof now.



March 15 '16, my pics

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

You're missing the point Vin.

The viewocones, as frustrating as they can be, are not the excuse for a half baked response to them. The viewcones are the reason Trump Tower twists the way it does, the reason for Elan's angled facade or the triangular shape of Shangri-La. There are plenty of attractive ways to work with the viewcones, blaming them for shoddy design is not an acceptable excuse.

Well, at least the setback isn't just an angled slice - like on the Main Post Office proposal.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

You're missing the point Vin.

The viewocones, as frustrating as they can be, are not the excuse for a half baked response to them. The viewcones are the reason Trump Tower twists the way it does, the reason for Elan's angled facade or the triangular shape of Shangri-La. There are plenty of attractive ways to work with the viewcones, blaming them for shoddy design is not an acceptable excuse.

If not for the viewcones, this particular Telus Garden residential tower would just go straight up and symmetrical without that weird half semi-circle on top. Viewcones increase the possibility of a structure looking weird if a developer only has a certain budget, especially on this one here. On the other face not affected by the viewcones, the tower looks just fine and dandy. Also, I'm only commenting on this tower, not other ones.

Other than that, I don't see how else this tower is shoddy. I'm just incensed the City can't even let that little bit of viewcone slice go. That's very anal, especially for a non-sensical policy.

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by mcminsen

It looks like the Telus Garden condo tower crane is coming down.

Yeah, it's bye bye crane and it will be a while before we will see another one hovering over the city skyline.

Telus Garden was a massive project now that I think about it. I remember there having been four cranes at the site at the busiest time, which is a lot in this city.

[squeezied]

Originally Posted by Vin

If not for the viewcones, this particular Telus Garden residential tower would just go straight up and symmetrical without that weird half semi-circle on top. Viewcones increase the possibility of a structure looking weird if a developer only has a certain budget, especially on this one here. On the other face not affected by the viewcones, the tower looks just fine and dandy. Also, I'm only commenting on this tower, not other ones.

Other than that, I don't see how else this tower is shoddy. I'm just incensed the City can't even let that little bit of viewcone slice go. That's very anal, especially for a non-sensical policy.

You're still not getting the point. Viewcones themselves do not result in unattractive looking buildings. Some of the most attractive and pleasing buildings are a result of restrictions and constraints, physical or artificial. In addition to Trump, Elan and Shangri-la, the Vancouver House wouldn't have it's pleasing shape without the setback from the bridge as a constraint. Imposing restrictions and constraints do not hinder attractive design, so long as developers are creative. Instead of always needing to find fault in the city, you can blame the developer for not being creative with the Telus building.

[Prometheus]

Originally Posted by squeezied

Viewcones themselves do not result in unattractive looking buildings. Some of the most attractive and pleasing buildings are a result of restrictions and constraints, physical or artificial. In addition to Trump, Elan and Shangri-la, the Vancouver House wouldn't have it's pleasing shape without the setback from the bridge as a constraint. Imposing restrictions and constraints do not hinder attractive design, so long as developers are creative. Instead of always needing to find fault in the city, you can blame the developer for not being creative with the Telus building.

Didn't you get today's memo?

Originally Posted by jlousa

Lets make this crystal clear, no more view cone talks in this thread or any other building thread...If someone feels a viewcone pertains to a certain project thats great, bring that up in the viewcone thread. Pretty simple.

[squeezied]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

Didn't you get today's memo?

No I don't read every single thread. But more than happy to oblige knowing the incessant and petulant whining will end.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

Didn't you get today's memo?

I think Squeezied only likes reading my postings, and picks at any "fault" he can find.

[squeezied]

Originally Posted by Vin

I think Squeezied only likes reading my postings, and picks at any "fault" he can find.

Good to know you've realized your shortcomings.

[mcminsen]

This might take another day or two but I am getting a little excited about being able to see something soon that is close to the final look from this angle.


March 16 '16, my pics

[officedweller]

The ledges / frames do pull it together, but it's not as clean as it could be.

[NewWester]

I think it was intentionally going for a granular finish though. I was skeptical, but I *really* like this building from this angle. But it does beg some questions:

1. If a building has one strong facet, but the rest of it is weaker, is it a failure? Or is okay to focus on a statment facade?

2. Would this one side of Telus be as impactful if the other angles were as ornate/interesting?

[officedweller]

I actually like the west facade better, because it's plainer / cleaner, but the balconies on the west side would have been better with tinted glass or more frit to emphasize the horizontal banding - like a number of Toronto-style towers.

[mcminsen]

Welcome home.

Of course, they're not open yet. I took this pic a little while ago through the fence along Richards Street.


March 18 '16, my pic

[officedweller]

Thanks.

That's the same sliding door I saw on the Robson side.

Now that I look at the pic, that sliding door provides only a narrow opening, since only one side opens (i.e. versus double doors).

Can anyone else think of a condo tower that has a vestibule with two consecutive sets of doors like that?