HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage Forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

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

    750 Pacific Boulevard East Tower in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Vancouver Skyscraper Diagram
            
View Full Map

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 3:48 AM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 7,396
750 Pacific Blvd | 87.5M | Proposed

Okay we knew this was coming and we've discussed the initial vision. They have now made a official proposal. Here it is...

Quote:
James K.M. Cheng Architects Inc. has applied to the City of Vancouver to amend the existing CD-1 (Comprehensive Development) District By-law for 750 Pacific Boulevard. The proposed amendment would change the CD-1 (349) By-law to include residential (130 525 m²), commercial (32 515 m²),and community centre (5 338 m²) uses, with a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 3.9. The residential use will provide 1,700 to 2,000 dwelling units. The commercial use will provide retail, office, hotel, restaurants, and cafes. The community centre and associated uses include a daycare for 69 children, an ice rink, and sports science centre. All required parking will be below grade. The buildings will vary in height and be up to a maximum of 30-storeys (87.5 m) to meet view cones.
Introduction
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin.../1.1_intro.pdf

Key Project Features
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...1_features.pdf

Project View
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin.../1.12_view.pdf

City Skyline
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...13_skyline.pdf

False Creek Aerial and Open Space
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...2.1_aerial.pdf

Context Photos
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...2.3_photos.pdf

Urban Context
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...bancontext.pdf

Diagrams
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...1_diagrams.pdf

Uses Diagrams
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...sediagrams.pdf

NEFC Open Space Context
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...s/4.1_nefc.pdf

Context and Open Space Plan
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...ontextplan.pdf

Civic Plaza
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin.../4.4_plaza.pdf

Section and Edges
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin.../4.5_edges.pdf

Skyline
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin....6_shadows.pdf

Built Form Context
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin..._builtform.pdf

Guideline and Land Use Context
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...guidelines.pdf

Site Plan and Floor Plan
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...5_siteplan.pdf

Underground Parking
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...15_parking.pdf

Sections
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...6_sections.pdf

Private and Public Views
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...5.17_views.pdf

Sustainability
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...ainability.pdf

Project Data
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...s/7.0_data.pdf

Urban Design Evolution
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin..._evolution.pdf

Site Development
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...ents/app-a.pdf

Looking it over I'm not overly thrilled with the proposal, just think the bridge building looks awful and that the project would be better w/o it.

Last edited by jlousa; Jul 4, 2012 at 4:14 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 4:00 AM
SFUVancouver's Avatar
SFUVancouver SFUVancouver is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 4,326
Thanks for posting this, Jlousa.

massing study - not the final design


Source: http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin.../1.12_view.pdf
__________________
VANCOUVER | Beautiful, Multicultural | Canada's Pacific Metropolis

Last edited by Dylan Leblanc; Jul 5, 2012 at 10:46 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 4:14 AM
Metro-One's Avatar
Metro-One Metro-One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 8,652
And hopefully all these new residents understand that they will be living next to a stadium, with noise and lights and electronic billboards, in an entertainment district with more lights, signs, noise, a casino, bars, hotels, etc....

haha, well, I am dreaming, this is vancouver, they will all complain as soon as they move in...

Looks nice though!
__________________
Bridging the Gap
Check out my video production website at: http://www.hailstorm-media.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 4:18 AM
Klazu Klazu is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Vancouver-Downtown
Posts: 2,000
At least the proposal looks different, so +1 from me.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 4:18 AM
Chadillaccc's Avatar
Chadillaccc Chadillaccc is online now
ARTchitecture
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Cala Ghearraidh
Posts: 14,839
So it's finally an official proposal or what?
__________________
Fortis et liber
Strong & free

When trying to assert a truth, first make sure it's not an opinion that you desperately want to be true. - Neil deGrasse Tyson
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 4:58 AM
Spoolmak Spoolmak is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: British Columbia
Posts: 681
Best proposal Vancouver has seen yet.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 5:10 AM
Locked In's Avatar
Locked In Locked In is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,714
I'm not terribly impressed overall.

The Uses Diagrams PDF appears to indicate that two sides of the civic plaza will be residential from Level 2 up - that doesn't seem conducive to creating a lively public space (in general and for events...).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 9:31 AM
Pinion's Avatar
Pinion Pinion is offline
Lower Lonsdale YIMBY
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: City of North Vancouver
Posts: 2,227
So bland, and the one "interesting" building just blocks the view of the BC Place roof.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 10:18 AM
juniorpnm juniorpnm is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 11
Very bland.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 11:30 AM
Hed Kandi's Avatar
Hed Kandi Hed Kandi is online now
+
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,918
This is about as uninspired as it gets.

I'm dumbfounded as to how James Cheng can go and endorse Bjarke Ingles 1400 Howe project and then come out out without a design as insipid as this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 12:23 PM
trofirhen's Avatar
trofirhen trofirhen is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,637
Quote:
Originally Posted by Locked In View Post
I'm not terribly impressed overall.

The Uses Diagrams PDF appears to indicate that two sides of the civic plaza will be residential from Level 2 up - that doesn't seem conducive to creating a lively public space (in general and for events...).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinion View Post
So bland, and the one "interesting" building just blocks the view of the BC Place roof.


I'm not big on it either. Surely, with its pool of architectural talent, Vancouver can come up with a sleeker design than this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 1:43 PM
WarrenC12 WarrenC12 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: East Yaletown!
Posts: 3,711
What about our beloved neighbourhood casino?

Looks ok, could be better. I agree about the building blocking the view of the stadium, and people won't want to live there anyway. Maybe it will get presold and people will take a bath once it's built, like some units at the Capitol.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 3:42 PM
mezzanine's Avatar
mezzanine mezzanine is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,456
Looks promising. It's no Bjarke and ingles, but it's different and a prominent landmark for the site. The improtant thing would be how they treat the plaza below the arch and the surround ing public space, and what if any amenity would be on the arch roof (roof top observation deck? publicly accessible garden?)

NB, the arch building is residential, so i don't think any amenity on the roof will be for the public.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 4:46 PM
red-paladin's Avatar
red-paladin red-paladin is offline
Vancouver Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Burnaby
Posts: 2,017
I hope this is just a rough idea until it gets further along.
I love the arch idea, but over all this looks as 1985 as what's already there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 5:00 PM
phesto phesto is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: yvr/bwi
Posts: 2,180
Guys, if you look at the "Key Project Features" pdf, you can clearly see that these renderings are simply intended to show massing and the project will not end up looking exactly like this for a variety of reasons - among them: a)there are no balconies, b)the glass is reflective, c)there are no mechanical penthouses, and d) the glass won't likely be clean curtainwall and will incorporate spandrels and mullions.

The comments here that these renderings are bland or appear like a 1985 project are funny because the next iteration, once they incorporate the above items and knowing James Cheng, will likely be far more ugly...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 5:08 PM
easy as pie's Avatar
easy as pie easy as pie is offline
testify
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: 94109
Posts: 853
really looks like the result of a first year architect's charrette. like cheng is a really uninaginative architect, but this one looks like he must have handed it off to his teenaged son. and that arch building is a tour de force of decontextualized design bordering on anomie - impressively bad design, impressively poor relationship to site and locale, impressively arrogant and anti-popular stand viz the broad consensus on the form the city ought to take.

my guess is that if this is anything like the final proposal, this will, again very impressively, meet such virulently hostile opposition during the approvals process that the entire project will be reworked.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 6:31 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 17,636
Agreed that it's just a massing study - the concern of course, is that the arch building is still there!!

I like the retail/restaurant uses right up along the seawall.

Personally, I think that the sites along Pacific Boulevard are probably sites where the buidlings could be "one-sided" - with elevator cores facing BC Place and suites facing water views to the south.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 9:33 PM
EastVanMark EastVanMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,034
That arch building would have made a tremendous sky terrace for a casino and/or major hotel development. Too bad this project will just be yet another "mixed use" building which in Vancouver terms means 99% residential with a coffee shop on the ground floor. To add insult to injury it appears the historic BC Pavilion will be lost as well That means yet another reminder of Expo 86 will be lost forever.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 9:56 PM
red-paladin's Avatar
red-paladin red-paladin is offline
Vancouver Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Burnaby
Posts: 2,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by EastVanMark View Post
That arch building would have made a tremendous sky terrace for a casino and/or major hotel development. Too bad this project will just be yet another "mixed use" building which in Vancouver terms means 99% residential with a coffee shop on the ground floor. To add insult to injury it appears the historic BC Pavilion will be lost as well That means yet another reminder of Expo 86 will be lost forever.
I think you forgot about the A&W....I'm pretty sure there's going to be an A&W...

All joking aside, I would have hoped the BC Pavilion / Enterprise Hall / Casino would be retained too, I mean, it matches with the green angular glass of the new BC Place now too! But wasn't it said that it had HVAC issues or the glass enclosure was problematic?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2012, 2:32 AM
trofirhen's Avatar
trofirhen trofirhen is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,637
Boxy and blaaaah. we're ruining good opportunities.
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 > SSP: Local Vancouver > Downtown & City of Vancouver
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:56 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.