510 Seymour | 48.2m | 10 Fl | Completed - Page 5

Metro-One · #81 Posted **Feb 25, 2016, 5:46 AM**

Such an improvement for that corner. Thanks for the pics!

mcminsen · #82 Posted **Mar 3, 2016, 5:28 AM**

March 2 '16, my pics

Prometheus · #83 Posted **Mar 3, 2016, 6:36 AM**

Nice update.

Just three more floors and this one is done.

EDIT: Actually, I don't know what to believe about the floor count of this building anymore. The first renderings published for this building depicted a 10-floor office building with a rooftop amenity space:

Source: http://www.mcmparchitects.com/portfolio/109

But then, many months later, new renderings depicting only 9 floors plus a rooftop amenity space began to appear (and someone who presented himself as an insider claimed it had been revised to 9). Even the current rendering on the hoarding depicts the revised version consisting of only 9 floors plus a rooftop amenity space:

But I just checked their website on a lark, and the only diagram of the building on the website depicts 10 office floors plus a rooftop amenity space again:

http://fivetenseymour.com/#/building

But the website video, like the rendering on the hoarding, depicts only 9 office floors plus a rooftop amenity space:

Video Link

So, I don't know whether this is just a case of a sloppy website that hasn't been fully updated, or whether they have revised the building for a second time and is a case of sloppy hoarding and a website video which hasn't been corrected. My guess is that it is the former. In my layperson's experience, I have found the hoarding rendering to be the most reliable document regarding floor count. I would love to be wrong in this case, however. I think the extra floor will give the building just a little more gravitas.

Klazu · #84 Posted **Mar 3, 2016, 2:39 PM**

I can't believe how quickly this tower is rising! It isn't that long ago I was in the area and they were only working on the first floor. Wow, what a difference.

trofirhen · #85 Posted **Mar 3, 2016, 3:24 PM**

Can't help wondering if and when the old brick run-down in the foreground, containing Malone's Bar & Grill, will be on the "redevelopment" list.

officedweller · #86 Posted **Mar 3, 2016, 9:48 PM**

Yeah, but you gotta think that Malone's is also on the heritage list.

trofirhen · #87 Posted **Mar 3, 2016, 9:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by officedweller

Yeah, but you gotta think that Malone's is also on the heritage list.

I kind of figured it might .... does that entire ramshackle old brick building make the heritage list, too? I guess it does.

Klazu · #88 Posted **Mar 3, 2016, 10:37 PM**

That brick building makes the rendering (and the block in real life) look like a ghetto. Only good thing that could happen to that building would be to erase it with a bulldozer. Luckily it can't be many years away from that happening. Heritage building my ass...

csbvan · #89 Posted **Mar 3, 2016, 10:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Klazu

That brick building makes the rendering (and the block in real life) look like a ghetto. Only good thing that could happen to that building would be to erase it with a bulldozer. Luckily it can't be many years away from that happening. Heritage building my ass...

I think that it makes the block somewhat interesting. Thank god for older buildings in the eastern core of the business district. Otherwise it would be as cold and lifeless as the rest of the CBD. As many of the old buildings should be kept and, hopefully as more office goes into the area, they are refurbished and interesting restaurants go into them. New buildings have terrible food options. Just look at Burrard...Cactus Club, Earls, Joey's...more like the food options at a strip mall parking lot in the Okanagan.

Klazu · #90 Posted **Mar 3, 2016, 10:45 PM**

I know what you mean and certainly agree, but I also think that there are several buildings beyond saving, even if restored. In my books this one building is like that.

WugOverlord · #91 Posted **Mar 4, 2016, 12:49 AM**

For what it's worth, Malone's doesn't look nearly that grungy in real life. I am curious what year the original photo was taken for that rendering because ever since I've been in Vancouver (about 6 years) it has never had that menu/signage outside and has had a couple paint jobs

Klazu · #92 Posted **Mar 4, 2016, 12:56 AM**

Well, it is an interesting rendering with a ghost car and everything. HDR gone bad.

logan5 · #93 Posted **Mar 4, 2016, 1:29 AM**

For me that Malone's building, along with a lot of other buildings along that stretch of Pender are fantastic. You could not duplicate the interior Malone's without spending big bucks, so it's not just the exterior that is worth saving.

This particular stretch of Pender is where I think that height limits and density should be pushed to what is practically possible, so that we can bring in the critical mass necessary to make this part of downtown highly functional.

The residential building at Seymour and Pender for example. There are no other tall buildings around that lot, so why not go 30 stories? Probly have to relax the parking requirements, but there are plenty of people who would buy or rent a suite here that won't need a parking spot.

Locked In · #94 Posted **Mar 13, 2016, 5:58 PM**

My photos:

March 8:

IMG_3630 by 604 City, on Flickr

March 10:

IMG_3642 by 604 City, on Flickr

IMG_3638 by 604 City, on Flickr

jollyburger · #95 Posted **Mar 13, 2016, 9:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WugOverlord

For what it's worth, Malone's doesn't look nearly that grungy in real life. I am curious what year the original photo was taken for that rendering because ever since I've been in Vancouver (about 6 years) it has never had that menu/signage outside and has had a couple paint jobs

Sometime around 2014. Google Maps except for one sign looks exactly the same.

mcminsen · #96 Posted **Mar 13, 2016, 9:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Locked In

My photos:

March 8:

March 10:

Thanks! Nice to see that angle.

mcminsen · #97 Posted **Mar 15, 2016, 7:20 AM**

March 14 '16, my pics

Metro-One · #98 Posted **Mar 15, 2016, 8:46 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by csbvan

I think that it makes the block somewhat interesting. Thank god for older buildings in the eastern core of the business district. Otherwise it would be as cold and lifeless as the rest of the CBD. As many of the old buildings should be kept and, hopefully as more office goes into the area, they are refurbished and interesting restaurants go into them. New buildings have terrible food options. Just look at Burrard...Cactus Club, Earls, Joey's...more like the food options at a strip mall parking lot in the Okanagan.

One of the most annoying side-effects regarding the rapid redevelopment in Vancouver.

I for one love the old brick building. Inside the Malone Bar and Grill is a fantastic atmosphere IMO that you can only get in older structures.

Again, wish Vancouver had more of a variety in bars / restaurants. Single locations are so much more interesting than mega chains (give me three smaller independently owned bars / clubs on a a city block anyday over one single mega club owned by the Donnelley Group).

mcminsen · #99 Posted **Mar 15, 2016, 10:10 AM**

Immediately to the south of Malone's Bar & Grill on Seymour Street is a Mexican food place (can't remember the name). I'm sure some of the new workers at 510 Seymour will really appreciate having these places close by.

Feb.24 '16, my pic

WarrenC12 · #**100** Posted **Mar 15, 2016, 3:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Again, wish Vancouver had more of a variety in bars / restaurants. Single locations are so much more interesting than mega chains (give me three smaller independently owned bars / clubs on a a city block anyday over one single mega club owned by the Donnelley Group).

I think you can blame the consumers of Metro Vancouver for this, at least in part. I never go to a DG owned place any more, but it's becoming more and more difficult. Vote with your wallet.