HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


View Poll Results: Vote for your favourite design!
TorontoDrew 1 5.00%
koops65 1 5.00%
urbandreamer 8 40.00%
dleung 5 25.00%
ericmacm 5 25.00%
Voters: 20. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #101  
Old Posted Nov 19, 2020, 8:31 PM
ericmacm's Avatar
ericmacm ericmacm is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: SW Ontario
Posts: 716
Keep in mind that in the case of view cones, they are not absolute limits on height. Vancouver will also allow taller buildings through that are architecturally significant. Shangri-La, Trump Vancouver, The Butterfly, and Vancouver House, in addition to proposed buildings 1075 Nelson and 601 Beach Crescent, all break view cone policies but are being allowed to poke through.
__________________
Opinions expressed here are solely my own and do not represent those of my employer.

Come See My Work: Mississauga Future Skyline Model | Pan-Canadian Future Skylines Project - Kelowna, Saskatoon, Windsor, London, Hamilton, Niagara Falls, Barrie, Ottawa, Halifax​​​ | Astrophotography Thread
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #102  
Old Posted Nov 20, 2020, 1:01 AM
dleung's Avatar
dleung dleung is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,952
I find the Robson site too generic. Denman one is better. I also have a couple suggestions below:

Parking lot for Coal Harbour Community Centre. This is a quintessentially-Vancouver site in that you'll have to design for how to orient the units, through views to the water from Pender St, parkland shadowing, public space, replacement parking and a new/friendlier entry/public space for the community centre, and above all, minimizing privacy/view impacts to Crazy-Rich NIMBYs. The closest 2 u/c condos nearby are by Shigeru Ban and Kengo Kuma, and they aren't even on the water, so any design here better look expensive.




There's also the Burrard and Georgia site, the only one to be free from view cones, thus a potential site for the city's new tallest office tower.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #103  
Old Posted Nov 20, 2020, 1:14 AM
urbandreamer's Avatar
urbandreamer urbandreamer is offline
recession proof
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,507
^Maybe the BG site. I realized the R&R site might as well include the lot to the west:
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #104  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2020, 5:31 AM
urbandreamer's Avatar
urbandreamer urbandreamer is offline
recession proof
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,507
I've sketched out two generic condo towers for the R&R site, 3rd tower facade development under way. Podium facades roughed in.


When I'm done here I'll turn my attention to the BG office tower site.

I saw a social housing project proposal for the Coal Harbour site - looks kind of underwhelming.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #105  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2020, 2:04 PM
dleung's Avatar
dleung dleung is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,952
^^Yeah, I didn't even realize that Coal Harbour project was coming back when I proposed the site. It explains why the site has remained vacant all these years, similar to the 3 empty plots in Concord pacific slated for social housing. Apparently the cost is over $1M for each unit of social housing.

Btw, Vancouver, unlike Toronto, is very strict about tower separation requirements - 80ft (25m).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #106  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2020, 10:50 PM
urbandreamer's Avatar
urbandreamer urbandreamer is offline
recession proof
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,507
Yeah 80 feet between all 3 towers is what I'm doing. Vancouver likes small floorplates - in Toronto 8000 sq ft is considered small yet I see Van is doing 6500sqft yikes.

Office tower + hotel or just an office tower?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #107  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2020, 11:31 PM
dleung's Avatar
dleung dleung is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,952
8000sqft works as a slab, but in more squarish floorplates creates more bowling-alley style windowless-bedroom units, and corner units with squiggly tails of dead space linking up to the unit door, though the Vancouver rule is born more out of building mass than from liveability of units
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #108  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2020, 1:46 AM
urbandreamer's Avatar
urbandreamer urbandreamer is offline
recession proof
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,507
Who wants to lease office space in Vancouver's 1000 foot tower?

Answer: the BC Liberal Party
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #109  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2020, 3:31 AM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is online now
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 9,003
So in a competition to design imaginary structures someone posed a strict height limit on the Halifax site for some reason causing people to lose interest and not even want to compete, yet the Vancouver site is allowed a supertall even though in reality Vancouver has strict height limits as well? Where exactly is the consistency here?

Personally I think people should be able to decide what they think is a good scale for a site regardless of any real-world restrictions, since there's no actual limit on the imaginary. But if real world restrictions are to be imposed they, it should be should be on any site that has such restrictions in the real world including Vancouver which doesn't allow supertall heights. Unless they've changed their regulations at some point?
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
Don't ask people not to debate a topic. Just stop making debatable assertions. Problem solved.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #110  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2020, 3:53 AM
ericmacm's Avatar
ericmacm ericmacm is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: SW Ontario
Posts: 716
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
So in a competition to design imaginary structures someone posed a strict height limit on the Halifax site for some reason causing people to lose interest and not even want to compete, yet the Vancouver site is allowed a supertall even though in reality Vancouver has strict height limits as well? Where exactly is the consistency here?

Personally I think people should be able to decide what they think is a good scale for a site regardless of any real-world restrictions, since there's no actual limit on the imaginary. But if real world restrictions are to be imposed they, it should be should be on any site that has such restrictions in the real world including Vancouver which doesn't allow supertall heights. Unless they've changed their regulations at some point?
You're right, there is no consistency. I think the issue surfaced in the fact where we were rotating on who got to pick the site, with each person picking the ground rules for that round. Once height limits became included in the rules for round 3, it turned everyone off of the competition.

I think moving forward, if we want to keep this as a regular thing going on into the future (which I honestly would), it would be best to do things sort of like we are now, where we come to a consensus on the site and keep it free from restrictions, so we allow everyone's creative juices to flow fully. The addition of rules makes it more interesting, but it's not good for the spirit of the competition, where we are just amateurs having a go at designing our own buildings.

I also would like to revisit Halifax for the next round so we can do it right.
__________________
Opinions expressed here are solely my own and do not represent those of my employer.

Come See My Work: Mississauga Future Skyline Model | Pan-Canadian Future Skylines Project - Kelowna, Saskatoon, Windsor, London, Hamilton, Niagara Falls, Barrie, Ottawa, Halifax​​​ | Astrophotography Thread
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #111  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2020, 4:05 AM
dreambrother808 dreambrother808 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 3,998
As has been noted, that specific Vancouver location is free from the view cone policy and allowed to go higher when it is redeveloped.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #112  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2020, 6:43 AM
dleung's Avatar
dleung dleung is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,952
There should be no height limits or zoning restrictions on a competition. Based on previous rounds, SSPers have proven capable of not simply rewarding height lol.

Have we landed on one site yet?
Personally I prefer a small site to focus on one tower rather than 2-3.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #113  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2020, 1:52 PM
TorontoDrew's Avatar
TorontoDrew TorontoDrew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 9,775
I will work with whatever site. the small one will be more of a Challenge, but that's ok.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #114  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2020, 6:05 PM
ericmacm's Avatar
ericmacm ericmacm is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: SW Ontario
Posts: 716
My vote is for the Robson & Richards site, due to the fact that there is nothing built there currently.
__________________
Opinions expressed here are solely my own and do not represent those of my employer.

Come See My Work: Mississauga Future Skyline Model | Pan-Canadian Future Skylines Project - Kelowna, Saskatoon, Windsor, London, Hamilton, Niagara Falls, Barrie, Ottawa, Halifax​​​ | Astrophotography Thread
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #115  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2020, 7:04 PM
TorontoDrew's Avatar
TorontoDrew TorontoDrew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 9,775
Unlike the Winnipeg Project I won't start with any high detail model first and run out of time to finish..

01 by Andrew Moore, on Flickr

02 by Andrew Moore, on Flickr

03 by Andrew Moore, on Flickr

04 by Andrew Moore, on Flickr

cummings_01 by Andrew Moore, on Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #116  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2020, 7:04 AM
urbandreamer's Avatar
urbandreamer urbandreamer is offline
recession proof
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,507
^Nice. I wouldn't call the R&R site easy: I've torn up 3 massing plans before deciding on the direction I'm going: 3 towers/80 feet separation distance/6500 sqft floor plates/8-10 units per floor/120m height x 2 & a third shorter tower/mixed use podiums/CRU at grade/under ground parking. Then there's the facade designs, public art, street furniture. It's a lot of fun/work.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #117  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2020, 6:41 PM
LeftCoaster's Avatar
LeftCoaster LeftCoaster is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toroncouver
Posts: 12,624
One other site, not to throw a wrench in the works too late, is the Bay Parkade site. It is nearly an entire city block and rumour is it is looking to be the first private project to puncture the viewcones, so going tall is reasonable at the site and not just an exercise in fantasy like Robson and Richards.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #118  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2020, 9:15 PM
ericmacm's Avatar
ericmacm ericmacm is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: SW Ontario
Posts: 716
At this point, I've already started working on my model for the R&R site. Unless there are any major objections, I suggest we keep moving forward with it.
__________________
Opinions expressed here are solely my own and do not represent those of my employer.

Come See My Work: Mississauga Future Skyline Model | Pan-Canadian Future Skylines Project - Kelowna, Saskatoon, Windsor, London, Hamilton, Niagara Falls, Barrie, Ottawa, Halifax​​​ | Astrophotography Thread
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #119  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2020, 9:41 PM
urbandreamer's Avatar
urbandreamer urbandreamer is offline
recession proof
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,507
Yeah I've invested too much time in the R&R site so I'm going ahead with it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #120  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2020, 10:25 PM
TorontoDrew's Avatar
TorontoDrew TorontoDrew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 9,775
Hopefully I will have some free time this weekend if I'm not busy hanging out in a mall or at a bar.
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
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:40 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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