MNP Tower | 143M | 36Fl | Completed

[jlousa]

Since there is an actual application in at the city, I decided it's time for it's own thread.

Retail/restaurant on the ground floor
Office space floors 2-36 (serviced by 2 low rise elevators/6 high rise elevators plus one freight elevator)
444ft to roof slab
470ft to elevator machine room slab
12.0FSR
4 levels of u/g parking (serviced by 2 elevators)

Lobby will be small with 11 elevators and both staircases.

Knowing how much people like images here are links to a couple of renders. Please note the shape of the building which does not really come out in the renders.

Site Plan
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/develop...s/siteplan.pdf

North and East Renders
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/develop...elevations.pdf

South and West Renders
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/develop...elevations.pdf

Notification Letter
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/develop...gs/notiltr.pdf

[touraccuracy]

little bland looking. guess i'll wait for a better render.

[dleung]

I'm not even going to wait for the better render.

Sticking a wall of glass next to the Marine Building might possibly be spun as a low-key "mirror" or something, but I see it as generic and uninventive. A more solid aesthetic with less glazing would have been especially appropriate (call it sustainability, whatever). I get they're trying to preserve views looking out from the 2 towers, but the fact that the floorplate is practically a equilateral hexagon actually voids the little attempt to orient one face parallel with the Marine Building. The floorplate isn't efficient either with how tightly it wraps around the core... why not have a side-loaded core and let it be exposed as a solid vertical element to ground the architecture?



Something like this building, but with a brown stone/copper cladding would be nice.

[wrenegade]

So this will be a hair taller than the Fairmont and a hair shorter than Shaw tower. Lots of grey glass. Yawn. The density is great but I feel this building will be lost from many angles, although perhaps that's not a bad thing. Great to see more office being built but I would rather see the GM Place....err, Rogers Arena tower or Bentall 6 built first.

[Metro-One]

I believe the Fairmont is 140M. Anyways, I would hardly say we are seeing more office getting built, since none of the other proposals lately have made it past the drawing board.

How many proposed office towers is this now?

And how many have broken ground???? Hint, the answer is 0.

It is nice to see these proposals, but I wont be taking this, or any of the other office proposals seriously until a crane is erected. After what has happened with "Vancouver's Turn" excavation is not even enough for me to get excited anymore, hehe.

I take Vancouver office proposals as seriously as 150m + tower proposals in Surrey. In both cases we have seen a lot of talk, but no walk.

[TwoFace]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

It is nice to see these proposals, but I wont be taking this, or any of the other office proposals seriously until a crane is erected. After what has happened with "Vancouver's Turn" excavation is not even enough for me to get excited anymore, hehe.

Having the site approved is the Big deal from the landowners perspective regardless if the project goes ahead or not.
This establishes market value and precedent for the site with a turnkey option if the situation warrants. Luckily for them they don’t have to pay taxes based on the sites maximum potential.

[Canadian Mind]

Based on the floorplate size, location, developer, and other factors, do you guys think this will be an efficient and effective development? Further, based on the efficientcy of the smaller floorplates, does anyone else feel that this actually would have been one of the better sites downtown for a hotel/residential development vice office?

Don't get me wrong, the more office the better. But I would have hoped for a single 600 foot Amacon tower rather than this slender figure & the stubby Bentall 6.

[phesto]

Thanks for posting jlo.

It is really a shame that MCMP appears to be the only architectural firm entrusted with designing office buildings in this city. They specialize in efficient and cost effective designs and their buildings look okay...Bentall 5, 745 Thurlow are both good looking buildings, but I don't think anyone drooled over them; and definitely not this one.

As far as this proposal becoming a reality; it is all part of the game. There will eventually be one or two existing downtown companies with a large enough requirement to warrant pre-leasing in a new tower. If these large office building owners/managers such as Bentall and Oxford aren't as prepared with a DP in place, then they will be behind their competitors.

dleung- the floorplate doesn't have an exposed core for circulation issues (ie. the floorplates would be cutoff and not as desirable for full floor tenancies) Agreed it isn't very efficient, but with floorplates so small efficiency is kind of thrown out the window.

[PaperTiger]

There is no pleasing some people.

All this forum says is "more office, more office!" We finally get a proposal on an interesting site that I'm sure most of you didn't even consider was development site, and it is all “too short,” “ wrong place,” “wrong glass,” “wrong shape.”

Jeez guys, we are not getting the Bow, we are never getting the Bow. Get over it.

I for one am excited to see this proposal , and I hope it gets built. I think it will create a really interesting block with some good examples of some different eras of architecture offering a nice compare and contrast.

[LeftCoaster]

If I were you I would take proposals from certain firms seriously.

Oxford is one of those firms to be taken seriously.

Despite my personal alegiances, there is little doubt they are the premier office developer in the country.

[mrjauk]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

If I were you I would take proposals from certain firms seriously.

Oxford is one of those firms to be taken seriously.

Despite my personal alegiances, there is little doubt they are the premier office developer in the country.

Moreover, just as this completes the global economy should be pulling out of its economic doldrums--like 2014, 2015, or so.

[Prometheus]

A 135 metres! Wow! It should be really exciting watching this supertall go up! Can't hardly wait. The era of the flat, monotonous skyline is hereby over.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

A 135 metres! Wow! It should be really exciting watching this supertall go up! Can't hardly wait. The era of the flat, monotonous skyline is hereby over.

... ... or should we say () another "superbland" ....

[Hed Kandi]

..

[navazan]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

A 135 metres! Wow! It should be really exciting watching this supertall go up! Can't hardly wait. The era of the flat, monotonous skyline is hereby over.

lol! i know right?!?! finally vancouver has matured and allowed a massive structure to be built!

[DKaz]

Isn't there already a 1075 W. Hastings? The glass building from the 60s?

EDIT: N/m it's 1055, with its sorta twin 1066 across the street, but if the existing building is 1055 and the new building is east of 1055, shouldn't the number be lower?

EDIT 2: Drawings say 1021 W. Hastings.

[officedweller]

Ditto on the "supertall" comment!

Originally Posted by DKaz

Isn't there already a 1075 W. Hastings? The glass building from the 60s?

EDIT: N/m it's 1055, with its sorta twin 1066 across the street, but if the existing building is 1055 and the new building is east of 1055, shouldn't the number be lower?

EDIT 2: Drawings say 1021 W. Hastings.

I was thinking the same thing!

********

I too would have expected a side-core tower, but with the core fronting Hastings Street. I'll bet that the city would reject outright as proposal to place an exposed core behind the Marine Building (and the views from this property are to the north, northwest and to the east.

Not sure if the ability to circumnavigate a floorplate is all that essential to tenants, especially with such a small floorpate - i.e. our office has truncated the corridor on our main floor to make use of the space that would have otherwise been hallway.

EDIT: The floorplate as designed does, however, allow for a reception and/or adjacent boardrooms to take full advantage of the views, which a southside core would not allow. An east side core would allow allow for a reception/boardrooms with views, but would probably be a non-starter with the Marine Building.

[Coldrsx]

^nope... Edmonton too. Our new 149.3m tower i nearing the Burj heights.

[officedweller]

BTW - does anyone know how the floorplate size compares with the Bower Building and Bower II on Granville Street?

[navazan]

oh and we cant have the bow because its in calgary, it'd cost way too much to ship it over here, lawl. then youd have a flock of hippies protesting it, as it would block a mountain view from some yuppy neighborhood. even if vancouver abolished the view cone debacle, itd be at least a couple decades before a massive tower like the bow would be necessary here.