HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2017, 4:30 AM
Feathered Friend Feathered Friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,180
Boards from the development hearing













I went down to the UDP meeting on Wednesday and snapped photos of these boards. As recently as a couple weeks ago, I was told that there still hasn't been a choice to how the existing building will be demo'ed. I hope for an implosion, as it's been too long since Woodwards. More importantly, it would allow the new housing stock to come online faster.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2017, 5:37 AM
retro_orange retro_orange is offline
retro_orange
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: East Van
Posts: 2,029
Opportunity?

I am hoping someone has the foresight to dismantle the mechanism for the revolving restaurant so it could be reassembled and reused on a new taller hotel in the city

If in good condition, I'm sure someone would buy it. I wonder if it's possible to make the floor wider on a new structure.

(... hopefully I have piqued the interest of someone in a higher echelon reading this) Have a private revolving penthouse at least?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2017, 5:58 AM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,371
There is no appetite for revolving restaurants they are a dead fad from a bygone era. No local visits the ones we have now on any regular basis. Heck the Hotel Van couldn't even keep it's "Roof" space opened.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2017, 3:33 PM
Vin Vin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 8,218
There is definitely appetite, but people expect better food and services, and general ambience. The owners of the Empire Landmark Hotel basically gave up on their hotel ages ago, and that's why it feels sad when you walk inside. Age doesn't help either. If a revolving restaurant or lounge is at the burrard/georgia/granville area, I'm sure it would be buzzing with traffic. All businesses need synergy from their surroundings to succeed. However, restrictions in this city for development has made the part of Robson where Empire Landmark hotel sits today become isolated from this synergy. The City wants to keep it a village and they have succeeded. .
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2017, 4:28 PM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,371
Yes that must be why "the roof" failed too. Nothing is stopping a developer from building a rooftop restaurant, well except for economics. Those pesky economic factors getting in the way of everything that is keeping Vancouver a village in some peoples mind.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2017, 4:59 PM
trofirhen trofirhen is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,829
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vin View Post
There is definitely appetite, but people expect better food and services, and general ambience. The owners of the Empire Landmark Hotel basically gave up on their hotel ages ago, and that's why it feels sad when you walk inside. Age doesn't help either. If a revolving restaurant or lounge is at the burrard/georgia/granville area, I'm sure it would be buzzing with traffic. All businesses need synergy from their surroundings to succeed. However, restrictions in this city for development has made the part of Robson where Empire Landmark hotel sits today become isolated from this synergy. The City wants to keep it a village and they have succeeded. .


I don't understand this fear of Vancouver becoming a "big city" type of city. In Europe, Stockholm and Amsterdam feel 'quaint' with cyclists, etc, but those are world cities nonetheless.
I don't get the mentality here. They don't seem to care much about dress or fashion either. Just look at Geoff Meggs. Where does he buy his clothes; have his hair styled?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2017, 6:36 PM
logan5's Avatar
logan5 logan5 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mt.Pleasant
Posts: 6,848
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feathered Friend View Post
It's nice to see that they are going to have each retail space with their own canopy. Makes a huge difference imo.

Oh wait. Or are they just putting the same "individual" canopy on each suite? Which it looks as if they are, looking at the board closer. Dang,. More blank street wall.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2017, 2:22 AM
Klazu's Avatar
Klazu Klazu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Above Metro Vancouver clouds
Posts: 10,182
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlousa View Post
Heck the Hotel Van couldn't even keep it's "Roof" space opened.
Ah, so that's what happened to it. I was curious about it when it opened, then forgot about it and was recently wondering about it, but didn't find any info. Too bad that it failed. I wonder what's in the space now?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2017, 4:42 PM
Graham_Yvr's Avatar
Graham_Yvr Graham_Yvr is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klazu View Post
Ah, so that's what happened to it. I was curious about it when it opened, then forgot about it and was recently wondering about it, but didn't find any info. Too bad that it failed. I wonder what's in the space now?
It's a banquet space. Basically used for weddings and such now. It was completely renovated before the lobby renovation was done, and served as the restaurant/lounge until Notch 8 was complete. Now carries on its life as bookable space. They did a very nice job updating it. The decor is very neutral to allow event planners to decorate as their event needs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2017, 4:53 PM
Vin Vin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 8,218
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlousa View Post
Yes that must be why "the roof" failed too. Nothing is stopping a developer from building a rooftop restaurant, well except for economics. Those pesky economic factors getting in the way of everything that is keeping Vancouver a village in some peoples mind.
Don't think anyone knows about "The Roof". Marketing was horrible. I don't even see anything directing people to the Roof for sumptuous food on the main lobby. Never ever seen anyone snapping photos of how the Roof restaurant looked too. Where are the view pictures from up there? Also, does anyone know of any unforgettable cuisine/cocktail drinks that people tried and were raving about? Nada, and hence its failure.

However, Hotel Vancouver did have awesome food and beverage services back when Griffins was still around. The Sunday Brunch was always packed with people, and even the dessert buffet from back in the days were popular. Too bad they converted the space to a boutique, with St John's as the retailer renting the space now.

Last edited by Vin; Jun 19, 2017 at 5:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2017, 4:57 PM
Vin Vin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 8,218
Quote:
Originally Posted by trofirhen View Post
[/B]
I don't understand this fear of Vancouver becoming a "big city" type of city. In Europe, Stockholm and Amsterdam feel 'quaint' with cyclists, etc, but those are world cities nonetheless.
I don't get the mentality here. They don't seem to care much about dress or fashion either. Just look at Geoff Meggs. Where does he buy his clothes; have his hair styled?
Agreed. For example London's The Shard under Shangrila's management has 3 or 4 separate lounges/clubs and restaurants on the 40th floor or above: awesome view and great vibes. The places are teeming with patrons, and offering great views of the City of London.

Here we are tearing down innovative businesses of yesteryears, but because unsound city policies have made it hard for them to survive, many of them are becoming tired-looking, losing patrons and bleeding money. Yet we have people here still thinking that these policies work and are defending them. Sad.

The City should have insisted the Empire Landmark hotel owners maintain one tower as a partial hotel with a rotating restaurant on top to carry on the legacy of the existing building, but built taller with a market condo element. The other shorter tower could have some rental units and subsidized housing.

The vacant space across the street should be allowed to be developed into a major retail/food centre with another hotel/condo on top. These two anchors of Robson street would definitely rejuvenate the area, and not let it slip into another quiet boring bedroom community.


The Shard sky lounges and restaurants:

From SSC:
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Hawk_ View Post
The Shard

Панорамные рестораны

Aqua Shard

Расположен на 31 этаже. В этом ресторане даже туалеты имеют высотный вид на город.

Кухня: Современная британская, с ингредиентами "все получено на Британских островах".

Стоимость: Большинство горячих блюд от £ 16 до £ 33. По будним дням ланч из 2-х блюд вам обойдется £24, из 3-х -£28





http://emphasisphotography.blogspot....rd-london.html


http://lifestyleetc.co.uk/2013/10/07...-james-dilley/



Oblix

Находится на 32 этаже.

Кухня: американская в стиле гриль-бара.

В ресторане можно попробовать себя в роли сомелье, продегустировав разные вина, что бы выбрать особенно подходящее под ваш ужин. Рыба, гребешки, все виды мяса... изящество, способное покорить любого гурмана...

Стоимость: около £ 50-60 на человека плюс напитки.











http://emphasisphotography.blogspot....rd-london.html



Hutong

Кухня: северо-китайская

Расположенный на 33 этаже Осколка, ресторан Hutong имеет специальное освещение, практически исключающее блики окон, что позволяет любоваться панорамами Лондона в течение всего дня и ночи.

Стоимость: горячие блюда - £ 10-30, утка по-пекински с персональной разделкой около вашего стола £ 58.













http://emphasisphotography.blogspot....rd-london.html

Last edited by Vin; Jun 19, 2017 at 5:24 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Aug 24, 2017, 8:01 PM
EastVanMark EastVanMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by trofirhen View Post
[/B]
I don't understand this fear of Vancouver becoming a "big city" type of city. In Europe, Stockholm and Amsterdam feel 'quaint' with cyclists, etc, but those are world cities nonetheless.
I don't get the mentality here. They don't seem to care much about dress or fashion either. Just look at Geoff Meggs. Where does he buy his clothes; have his hair styled?
Its just been the Vancouver way in its recent history. We USED to be REALLY progressive city but in more recent times we have a civic administration that is obsessed with keeping things quiet, small, plain, & slow, all the while engaging in various social engineering projects, rather than letting us reach our truest potential.

For a recent example of this look attitude, no further than how we are the largest city in North America without Uber.

The city has punted the issue and has stalled, & delayed this thing to death.

For a more older classic example, look no further than the "viewcone" debacle or our puzzling hate for bright signage (although I will admit things FINALLY appear to be SLOWLY be changing on that front)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Aug 24, 2017, 8:43 PM
connect2source's Avatar
connect2source connect2source is offline
life in the present
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,701
Empire Landmark slowly being covered in marketing for Landmark on Robson.

"Where Opulence and Beauty Coverage" lol

Photos by : Me



__________________
source | energy
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Aug 24, 2017, 10:06 PM
Pinion Pinion is offline
See ya down under, mates
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,167
Why are they calling it Landmark when it will no longer be one?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2017, 7:28 AM
Tetsuo Tetsuo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,382
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinion View Post
Why are they calling it Landmark when it will no longer be one?


"Ties to the block's historic past"

Ron.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2017, 6:55 PM
Vin Vin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 8,218
Boooooo!



Quote:
Originally Posted by Urban recluse View Post
Really? I think if they are replacing this tower, they need to be spectacular, and IMO they fall short.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanman View Post
No doubt. I'm still in shock that this is going ahead.
I'm so shocked I'm totally numb.

Quote:
Originally Posted by connect2source View Post
Landmark name makes so sense at all. Pretentious tag line "where opulence and beauty coverage" is vomit worthy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by giallo View Post
"Landmark"? Ha. It's like they are mocking us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by csbvan View Post
Agreed. The tower there is an interesting example of its era of architecture. It's wasteful to demolish it for a development so painfully mundane. And for them to market it as "Landmark" is salt in the wound.
Yeah exactly, that Kengo building a block or so away is more deserving to be called a "Landmark" building.

http://westbankcorp.com/1550-alberni
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2017, 9:23 PM
ranvancan ranvancan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 107
I agree with Vin and all those he quoted that, too, are saddened about this. IMO, the fact that Vancouver will so easily let go of something that one day was cutting edge, iconic and "Landmark" material so much that they put the word in the name. Vancouver is soooo backward or non-forward thinking that they could not even have seen a way to re-invent this taller building (in the area) for the icon or landmark that it's name says. I mean, it frustrates us all to no end that we just could have added some modern lighting features or even flood lit from below and evenly crawling the tall mass. We should have left a good thing alone and re-invented it. The restaurant could have been re-invigorated with a new owner, the tower could have taken on a whole new look and meaning or status. Two new boring residentials will only invite more opposing residents to lobby against 'normal city growth'. I hate this, I hate what the message Vancouver is making, and I have lived in Vancouver and metro Vancouver for my whole 52 years of life...........and I am out! A $5m house up the road owned by an investment corp in order to hold it for ransom to a new developer and put it for sale at $11m has pushed me out from ever being able to buy in this messed up city. I AM CANADIAN, and I am out of here!!!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2017, 11:52 PM
mezzanine's Avatar
mezzanine mezzanine is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,998
IMO, won't be sad to see the landmark go. it interacts poorly at the street (a large section of it is literally a concrete wall) and makes the block devoid of activity. Of buildings from that era, I much prefer the blue horizon hotel. a similar slender tower but the street front is better handled and the tile makes it stand out.

for some it has nostalgic appeal, but not enough for me to feel strongly about it. i see less of the nostalgia and more of the anachronism. who goes to revolving restaurants anymore?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Aug 26, 2017, 12:18 AM
VancouverOfTheFuture's Avatar
VancouverOfTheFuture VancouverOfTheFuture is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 3,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by mezzanine View Post
IMO, won't be sad to see the landmark go. it interacts poorly at the street (a large section of it is literally a concrete wall) and makes the block devoid of activity. Of buildings from that era, I much prefer the blue horizon hotel. a similar slender tower but the street front is better handled and the tile makes it stand out.
that can always be fixed though. i think the bigger issue isnt that it is being torn down per-say, but that what is replacing it is average at best and quite a bit shorter then what is being removed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Aug 26, 2017, 12:24 AM
whatnext whatnext is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 22,112
Quote:
Originally Posted by mezzanine View Post
IMO, won't be sad to see the landmark go. it interacts poorly at the street (a large section of it is literally a concrete wall) and makes the block devoid of activity. Of buildings from that era, I much prefer the blue horizon hotel. a similar slender tower but the street front is better handled and the tile makes it stand out.

for some it has nostalgic appeal, but not enough for me to feel strongly about it. i see less of the nostalgia and more of the anachronism. who goes to revolving restaurants anymore?
The Seaforth Armoury interacts poorly with the street, it should have been blown up too.

Outside of the architectural argument, there's the sad fact that hundreds of permanent jobs are disappearing with that building. And unlike so many others, they tend to be relatively decent paying jobs. For many new immigrants hotel work is the first step on building a sustainable life in Canada. Timmy Hos isn't going to give them that,
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 1:24 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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