Vancouver View Cones - Reviews and Amendments

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by Vin

The title of this article by Vancouver Sun is attempting to rouse the anger of NIMBYs, which has always been the case by most major media outlets here in BC.

"Scenic views" lost VS thousands unable to live within this City.

From the article:

Should affordable rental housing and social housing be built on some of our most prime real estate in the City, let alone getting some of the best views from above 30 storeys if they were to penetrate the viewcones?

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by idunno

I'm not saying there aren't view corridors that shouldn't be removed (obviously Queen E Park for example), but it's not JUST the folks south of downtown that benefit.

I just saw this quote from Councillor Meiszner, and he seems to have a different opinion "This is not about making sweeping changes to the big panoramic view points around Vancouver like Queen Elizabeth Park, which everybody values and loves. This is just targeting those lower priority view cones, many of which people may not even know about."

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Should affordable rental housing and social housing be built on some of our most prime real estate in the City, let alone getting some of the best views from above 30 storeys if they were to penetrate the viewcones?

Conversely, how would market-rate towers built on said real estate be in any way affordable, or lower overall housing prices?

Any benefits to the city would come in the form of a prettier skyline, not cheaper housing - this is another blatant condo rush.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Conversely, how would market-rate towers built on said real estate be in any way affordable, or lower overall housing prices?

Any benefits to the city would come in the form of a prettier skyline, not cheaper housing - this is another blatant condo rush.

Well the odd site is impacted by viewcones that contain social housing, but I do always see removing a viewcone or two and the conversation around it as a method to keep density in one area (downtown) and out of others (the rest of the city).

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Well the odd site is impacted by viewcones that contain social housing, but I do always see removing a viewcone or two and the conversation around it as a method to keep density in one area (downtown) and out of others (the rest of the city).

Agreed. Like or dislike the viewcones, the only winners with a removal are the developers and the Grand Bargain-ers.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Should affordable rental housing and social housing be built on some of our most prime real estate in the City, let alone getting some of the best views from above 30 storeys if they were to penetrate the viewcones?

Absolutely. This should not be confined to the Viewcones corridor, but also spread out all over the city, particularly close to existing commercial centres such as Kerrisdale, Oakridge, Broadway corridor/Kitsilano/4th Avenue, Joyce/Collingwood, Marine Gateway, Marpole, Commercial/Broadway, Nanaimo Station, etc: just to name a few.

[seamusmcduff]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Agreed. Like or dislike the viewcones, the only winners with a removal are the developers and the Grand Bargain-ers.

That's my main issue with this subject. I agree that some of the view cones can probably be removed, but much of this discussion seems to be simply a way for us to add minimal amounts of density in the areas of the City that are already dense, and to try and continue to concentrate development "over there". If this discussion was in conjunction with loosening shadowing/height/tower restrictions City wide, maybe it would be convincing, but as of now the effects of removing view cones impact such a small portion of properties (many of which wouldn't be redeveloping any time soon even with their removal) that the impacts it would have on our housing market are essentially zero. The suggestion that view cones are a significant contributing factor to our housing crisis is a not convincing imo.

[GenWhy?]

Personally I would just keep the following:

Olympic Village (G)
Olympic Plaza (H)
Creekside Park (J)
Queen Elizabeth Park (3) - A revised version
Cambie St (9)
Granville Street (20)
Main Street (22)
Trout Lake (27)

The other ones you'd need binoculars and to stand in a certain single spot to see... something on a clear day.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by seamusmcduff

The suggestion that view cones are a significant contributing factor to our housing crisis is a not convincing imo.

Yup the viewcones benefit some very wealthy people (who don't live in areas with viewcones) and their ability to create taller money making towers.

Once you start proposing "towers" of 4-storeys in their neighbourhood the well-connected come out in force (Jericho Lands comes to mind).

[Jimbo604]

We have a possible motion to propose a study to potentially vote on doing something. Look out, you don't want to get steamrolled by this action train.

[SpongeG]

I see posts on Instagram usually by poorer working class people about this issue recently and they seem very anti-ABC party and how dare the rich remove the viewcones, but don't the viewcones benefit the rich?

[logan5]

It sounds like there will not be a review or consideration to modify the QE Park viewcone, which is disappointing because this is where the biggest impediment to building more rental housing in the Broadway Corridor comes from.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

I see posts on Instagram usually by poorer working class people about this issue recently and they seem very anti-ABC party and how dare the rich remove the viewcones, but don't the viewcones benefit the rich?

Pretty much. The debate in the media/City Hall is basically just pro-development elitists and anti-development elitists dragging the rest of Vancouver into the argument.

I mean really, just shaddap and have a vote already - not like any of this'll make a dent in affordability.

[Feathered Friend]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMNsFrBsVL4&ab_channel=CityofVancouver

The text of the amended motion as approved today.

[officedweller]

Hmmm - are there any view cones that protect ocean views?

[logan5]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Hmmm - are there any view cones that protect ocean views?

Forget the number but yeah there’s one that roughly covers Broadway between around Yukon and Main, to protect the view of Burrard inlet from QE. Buildings here are very limited.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by logan5

It sounds like there will not be a review or consideration to modify the QE Park viewcone, which is disappointing because this is where the biggest impediment to building more rental housing in the Broadway Corridor comes from.

But it's probably the most justifiable view cone in the bunch.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by logan5

It sounds like there will not be a review or consideration to modify the QE Park viewcone, which is disappointing because this is where the biggest impediment to building more rental housing in the Broadway Corridor comes from.

With the viewcone change they made in the Plan, and actually looking into it more would only affect rental taller than 17-stories. I think on 16th Ave you can still get away with 17 or 16 as this is quite a bit up the hill. I was getting the old rules mixed up with the recent changes. The FSR limits us more than the height or viewcones.

If the FSR was increased in the Plan you'd see folks saying they can't build to full height due to viewcones. I will admit, each site is unique.

[GenWhy?]

It does look like west of Cambie you're getting to about 60+ metres above sea level which restricts height. I think below 55 metres you're okay (as we've found so far).

[whatnext]

You can't make this up...hot takes from a developer on why we should get ride of the view cones.

Bob Ransford
@BobRansford
I served on Vancouver’s Urban Design Panel in the past & dealt with view cones. They made developments a lot more complex & more costly. Low cloud cover obscures a lot of the intended vistas many days of the year. Let’s make affordable housing our priority.

https://twitter.com/BobRansford/status/1709650986036556211