Broadway Corridor Updates

[Migrant_Coconut]

Yeah, I'm not sure why a symmetrical glass box is preferable to an asymmetrical one; both are just going to fade into the background as Broadway comes to life.

Originally Posted by vanman

In Burnaby there's decades of room left to build just in existing town centres alone.

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

do you mean Burnaby will run out of room for tall buildings? theres lots of Room at the town centres just on their own.

Maybe, maybe not. Metrotown's already halfway maxed-out, and that only took a decade or so; at that rate, it's either stagnation or picking a fight with the homeowners by 2030-35.

[officedweller]

They want it to look cluttered and busy - like it's wearing jewellery and make-up.

[jollyburger]

Waiting for the day when they call a building girlish.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Maybe, maybe not. Metrotown's already halfway maxed-out, and that only took a decade or so; at that rate, it's either stagnation or picking a fight with the homeowners by 2030-35.

What do you mean? There are still acres of parking lots and strip malls in Metrotown that can still be built on, and developers haven't torn down every affordable wood frame condo south of Beresford yet (whether this is a good or bad thing depends on your perspective).

That's ignoring the major redevelopment of the mall, which will also take several decades.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Maybe, maybe not. Metrotown's already halfway maxed-out, and that only took a decade or so; at that rate, it's either stagnation or picking a fight with the homeowners by 2030-35.

Metrotown isn't by any means 'maxed out' yet.

In Metrotown, in 10 years there have been just under 7,500 apartments in 27 towers completed, there are about 6,000 more under construction in 16 towers at the moment, completing in the next 6 years.

There are 9,000 more apartments in 25 towers already identified in rezoning proposals that fit policy, or have already been approved to be built. There are also 11 more rezonings where the number of units hasn't been identified yet, and around 20 sites for towers that haven't yet had a rezoning proposal. That should be around 12,000 more units.

So at current development rates there's at least 20 years of development still to start in Metrotown, (and there's also the mall, with capacity for around 15,000 more apartments).

[MIPS]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Waiting for the day when they call a building girlish.

Das sexist! .3.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

The Urban Design Panel rejected this for a second time earlier this month, with a substantial amount of recommendations (as has become the normal). Comments included that it looked to manly, and aggressive for such a prominent location in Vancouver's skyline.

In slightly more positive news, the Translink/PCI building at Arbutus barely managed to make it through after an impassioned speech by Jon Stovel, and the city noting that the project would likely return for further review at the DP stage.

Yeah totally.

When I stare at this building, I just have the urge to pick a fight with it since it's so manly and aggressive.



The CoV Urban Design Panel is really beyond hope of redemption.

[Metro-One]

I’m surprised they didn’t call the tower “The Patriarchy.”

[Feathered Friend]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

what does it being "too manly" even mean? is aggressive being used as another word for "not another square box?" i think the building is decent the way it is. nothing stunning, but nothing terrible.

This panelist's comments related to the desire for a landmark building in this location.

To quote:
"I think that this is a really aggressive, masculine, and hard building, and I don't think that reflects the people of Vancouver, or who Vancouver wants to become particularly relative to the Broadway Plan's goals of some of the things like we talked about in the last application (Broadway & Arbutus) which is a celebration of cultural equity, and diversity.

I think that is reinforcing a kind of stereotypical expression of the tower that I think has taken the glass tower a little far personally. That being said, if we just want it to be different, then it is different than what's around it."

Still, as I've said before, the response to the previous panel meeting has created a worse design that needs a big rethink at the development application stage. Though that's no reason to delay at a time when the review should only be about the use, height, massing, and density.

Maybe we should start uploading our recordings of these meetings so people could listen to them like a podcast, assuming anyone else would willingly subject themselves to this stuff.

[Migrant_Coconut]

"I think that this is a really aggressive, masculine, and hard building, and I don't think that reflects the people of Vancouver, or who Vancouver wants to become particularly relative to the Broadway Plan's goals of some of the things like we talked about in the last application (Broadway & Arbutus) which is a celebration of cultural equity, and diversity.

I think that is reinforcing a kind of stereotypical expression of the tower that I think has taken the glass tower a little far personally. That being said, if we just want it to be different, then it is different than what's around it."

... That has got to be the dumbest word salad I've heard all season. It's a glass box with a few oblique angles.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Maybe, maybe not. Metrotown's already halfway maxed-out, and that only took a decade or so; at that rate, it's either stagnation or picking a fight with the homeowners by 2030-35.

nahh, there's lots of space left like others have pointed out.

Originally Posted by Vin

The CoV Urban Design Panel is really beyond hope of redemption.

yup. it really is. i wonder what the UDP would think of this building if proposed today.


Source

i like this building a lot, im glad its been preserved in its original state, and i wish the 2nd tower had been built.

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

This panelist's comments related to the desire for a landmark building in this location.

To quote:
"I think that this is a really aggressive, masculine, and hard building, and I don't think that reflects the people of Vancouver, or who Vancouver wants to become particularly relative to the Broadway Plan's goals of some of the things like we talked about in the last application (Broadway & Arbutus) which is a celebration of cultural equity, and diversity.

I think that is reinforcing a kind of stereotypical expression of the tower that I think has taken the glass tower a little far personally. That being said, if we just want it to be different, then it is different than what's around it."

Still, as I've said before, the response to the previous panel meeting has created a worse design that needs a big rethink at the development application stage. Though that's no reason to delay at a time when the review should only be about the use, height, massing, and density.

Maybe we should start uploading our recordings of these meetings so people could listen to them like a podcast, assuming anyone else would willingly subject themselves to this stuff.

i dont even know what to so to this really. thats so dumb. holy 🞵🞵🞵🞵. and people wonder why it costs so much to build here, and why it takes so long, etc etc. so much red tape.

like honestly. its just. insane. i dont even know. sigh. time to rid ourselves of this useless massive road block of a UDP.

[Metro-One]

That is 100% the word salad speak of someone who thinks they are way smarter than they actually are.

They are just regurgitating contemporary buzz lingo they have either heard on social media or learned at a useless degree at college.

Sadly no one will have the balls to say to their face that they are speaking nonsense.

[giallo]

I mean, I'm no fan of that office proposal. It's pretty bland, and that area would be better suited for something more.....original, but just say that. That panelist's comment sounds like someone who adores the sound of their own voice.

[WarrenC12]

LMAO as a friend of mine would say: "Get over yourself." It's a functional building, we struggle enough with getting things done here.

These people think they are art critics.

[giallo]

Update of the office building (sorry, forgot the name) on East 6th Ave next to VCC Station

Scroll -------->

[Vin]

^^ So flat in Vancouver we can literally build a large airport here.



In contrast, here's how the "suburbs" look like today:

Originally Posted by officedweller

Posted by Trish Jewison on Oct 15th:


https://twitter.com/TrishJewison

[Migrant_Coconut]

Spoiler alert: 80% of the visible SFHs in Trish Jewison's photo belong to Surrey, New West and Burnaby, but nobody wants to build an airport there either; Surrey and Burnaby can't even attract an office tower over twenty-five floors.

They can build as high as they want, they're still stuck as bedroom communities for the rest of the decade.

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Spoiler alert: 80% of the visible SFHs in Trish Jewison's photo belong to Surrey, New West and Burnaby, but nobody wants to build an airport there either; Surrey and Burnaby can't even attract an office tower over twenty-five floors.

They can build as high as they want, they're still stuck as bedroom communities for the rest of the decade.

More like,... for the longest time no one could build (tall) in those SFH areas because of their respective cities' short-sighted and narrow-minded zoning policies, that have only recently started to catch up with the times and stop protecting those SFH millionaires.

And you'll be hard-pressed to find anyone who wants to build an office tower over twenty-five floors ANYWHERE in today's market.

Even the ones proposed for the Broadway corridor have hit the skids in their applications and proposals (for various reasons, to be fair), despite the upcoming Broadway line extension and the revamp of the Broadway corridor plan.

On the flip side, Vin's childish comparison games between Vancouver and the Suburb Towers are tiresome and characteristically nonsensical.

You shouldn't indulge him or engage his (obvious) trolling.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

More like,... for the longest time no one could build (tall) in those SFH areas because of their respective cities' short-sighted and narrow-minded zoning policies, that have only recently started to catch up with the times and stop protecting those SFH millionaires.

And you'll be hard-pressed to find anyone who wants to build an office tower over twenty-five floors ANYWHERE in today's market...

The suburbs are still protecting the SFH millionaires; all their towers are going up on malls, warehouses, diners and walkup apartments. The province had to step in and legalize laneways just last month - the horror.

Missing the point: if that was the best Surrey could manage during the office boom, the bust is going to be even worse for them.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

The suburbs are still protecting the SFH millionaires; all their towers are going up on malls, warehouses, diners and walkup apartments. The province had to step in and legalize laneways just last month - the horror.

Missing the point: if that was the best Surrey could manage during the office boom, the bust is going to be even worse for them.

FWIW Burnaby technically beat BC to legalizing laneways.