Does anything say ‘mid-second-decade architecture’ better than coloured panels?

It seems to be the way the profession has settled on introducing colour into the highrise palette.  After resisting for decades.
“Gray,” would have been the choice for ‘Does anything say Vancouver architecture better ..?’ going back to the Ericksonian Sixties – and maybe forward.  Here’s a recent high-profile example between the stadiums:

It runs the colour gamut from A to B.  Totally, unrelievedly gray.
Can any architect please explain this?
From Guest:

PS – those coloured panels are for a church that will return to the new building, but the fritt pattern on the glass is a bit unfortunate. The fritt pattern shows crosses for the church, but on close inspection, has the appearance of a field of cemetery crosses.



  1. “Vancouver has so much sun during the year that it’s good to…” Nope. Don’t have a clue.

  2. Vancouver has the worst architecture. Telling no Vancouver Architects work outside of the city, in say, Seattle, Portland, LA, SF…Worldwide

  3. You want to see cool Architecture, go to Brisbane. 1000 times more creative, colourful and innovative than anything Vancouver would ever do, sorry but your city’s building typology is Weak.

  4. The “Peter Wall Mansions” (yes that’s the name) on Richards at Drake were supposed to have yellow balcony glass, but the as-built ended up being clear with a white fritt band to cover the slab.
    Pretty drab.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *