|
Posted by Warm Worm on March 11, 2008, 3:07 am
++ wrote:
>
>
> Michael Bulatovich wrote:
>
>> Warm Worm wrote:
>>
>>
>>> This is a shot I took a couple of days ago, of the construction of the
>>> Skytrain downtown sub-section beneath Granville street. You might
>>> notice what appears to be one of the tunnel-boring machines still in
>>> the left tunnel, along with three cute little construction workers--
>>> including one in the other tunnel and one hiding in the forklift:
>>> http://www.sfu.ca/~rmacinty/subdig.jpg
>>>
>>
>> Cool. What's the wider orthogonal section in front? A passing layby?
>>
>>
>>
>>> This image is from my window overlooking English Bay. Might anyone
>>> know what those things are? Ventilation fans? The tug seems to be
>>> headed in the direction where there is a small forest of
>>> construction-cranes-- possibly for the upcoming Olympics:
>>> http://www.sfu.ca/~rmacinty/seacargo.jpg
>>>
>>
>> I think someone's sunk your battleship :.. (
>>
>>
>>
>>> Ken, if you're reading this, did you catch the lunar eclipse about 2
>>> weeks ago? I did, and later, in the wee hours of the morning, decided
>>> to take a quick capture of the full moonset:
>>> http://www.sfu.ca/~rmacinty/moonset.jpg
>>>
>>
>> I took in a presentation by your head of urban design last year,
>> talking about various issues. One that really caught my attention was
>> what they were requiring for pedestrian-friendly streetfronts-
>> overhangs of certain dimensions, retail door spacings, signage etc. in
>> the downtown. If you're dragging the camera around anyway and you
>> remember this, can you bang off some shots of this recent work? (Don't
>> have to be as pretty as the last ones.)
>>
>>
>
> If you have any specifications for this pedestrian friendly design
> guideline (s?) please email me with them or a link to themas I would
> love to see them for an upcoming project.
>
>> I, for my part, will try to do the same on our now-forming railway
>> lands streetscapes near the dome, after the snow melts a bit. The guy
>> responsible for it has left, and those remaining in the department are
>> privately admitting that thay've dropped the ball pretty badly when it
>> comes to the pedestrian context there.
>>
>> Our guys look to New York and Chicago massing issues, and done OK with
>> it, but you'd have to add Vancouver now too. There's still lots of
>> railway lands left to go (about half) so it's not too late to get it
>> right for pedestrians. In the mean time we can take bets on how long
>> before there is a public charette on what to do about the ground plane
>> in the first half....it's pretty bad.
>>
>>
>
> Every single shadow study falls short of a state of the art. The cities
> are not comparable in many scale respects.
What are shadow studies, and vis-a-vis state-of-the-art and scale?
I might have mentioned this on here before, but why is it that a lot of
"inward-looking-use" architecture seems to be situated right on the
waterfronts-- areas that would otherwise be put to better advantage for
their views?
For examples, in Halifax and Vancouver (Sydney's Opera House?), they
have their casino and trade/convention centre, respectively, right on
the waterfronts.
There just seems to be a kind of counter-intuitiveness and/or
inward-looking way, as to how a lot of urban waterfronts are
designed/developed.
(BTW, in Vancouver, they have 2 Stadiums and a mall/cinema along with
many residential highrises and assorted retail outlets, in a narrow
"peninsular bottleneck".)
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap