Vancouver View Cones - Reviews and Amendments

[seamusmcduff]

I don't think it's a stretch to assume that public sentiment could have shifted drastically since 2010.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by seamusmcduff

I don't think it's a stretch to assume that public sentiment could have shifted drastically since 2010.

Possibly, although it hadn't altered much in the 20 years up to 2010. It probably doesn't matter, as ABC don't seem particularly interested in finding out public opinion on policy change, and have already requested another review of the view cones

[jollyburger]

How many Vancouverites know that there's a view cone policy seems like a more interesting question.

[Changing City]

deleted response to removed comment

[jollyburger]

Even look at their analysis of the survey questions.

Overwhelmingly the citizen response to this question indicates that the primary consideration in view protection is the view of the mountains. Responses to this question indicate that the value Vancouverites place on the view is relative to
the amount of mountain available in a view since views ranked most important were consistently those views with the most visible amount of mountains. Views with the least amount of mountains and the most skyline buildings ranked the lowest.

They think that the worst views are caused by the skyline when in reality most of those views are horrible because you have to squint to see any mountain viewpoints between existing towers.

They talk about moving a False Creek seawall viewpoint from a pathway down to the seawall so more people can enjoy it. Then they have some view point in the middle of nowhere at Choklit Park.

[Jimbo604]

Kenneth Chan of Daily Hive continues crusade against View Cones!

16,000 jobs and 3.4 million sq ft of building floor area forfeited near two SkyTrain stations due to Vancouver view cones
Kenneth Chan | Jan 4 2024, 7:00 pm
Link


I can't wait until council deep-sixes view cones later this year! Goodbye parks board, goodbye cones!

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by Jimbo604

Kenneth Chan of Daily Hive continues crusade against View Cones!

16,000 jobs and 3.4 million sq ft of building floor area forfeited near two SkyTrain stations due to Vancouver view cones
Kenneth Chan | Jan 4 2024, 7:00 pm
Link


I can't wait until council deep-sixes view cones later this year! Goodbye parks board, goodbye cones!

It's my understanding that the City Hall viewcones were already eliminated to their fullest (I think they got rid of 3 or 4 really dumb ones - thank you $$$!) and that they were not under further review. I could be wrong but surprised if the prominent ones are eliminated.

[logan5]

A 10 story office tower with 3 train stations within walking distance is absurd. When you are that close to rt, the majority of people will take Skytrain to work, so the viewcones in this case are severely limiting the efficiencies that transit infrastructure can bring to a busy city.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Possibly, although it hadn't altered much in the 20 years up to 2010. It probably doesn't matter, as ABC don't seem particularly interested in finding out public opinion on policy change, and have already requested another review of the view cones

I don't think they need to be interested at the misguided views of a vocal minority group. Just do what is right to make Vancouver better.

Originally Posted by jollyburger

How many Vancouverites know that there's a view cone policy seems like a more interesting question.

Exactly.

[jollyburger]

SFU hosted a talk on the view cones for anyone interested

• Video Link

[Vin]

Goofballs really spewing lots of BS regarding the "benefits" of the Viewcones. Micromanaging and pushing their own agenda were what these ex-planners were good at though, resulting in many businesses and developers moving to the suburbs and other cities to build, affordability in the city getting much much worse due to the loss of larger scale developments, developers spending more on design around the complicated Viewcone policies and other bureaucratic crap passing on the costs to residents, and beautiful landmarks such as the BC Place Stadium blocked by short stubby buildings.

[Mininari]

Maybe this was long answered ago in this thread, but I'm curious to know what impact the Sen̓áḵw towers will have on the existing view cones, and what "view shadowing" they create?

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by Mininari

Maybe this was long answered ago in this thread, but I'm curious to know what impact the Sen̓áḵw towers will have on the existing view cones, and what "view shadowing" they create?

As far as I can see, Sen̓áḵw won't really make any difference.


global news

[Migrant_Coconut]

Might intrude on the Granville cone... so if anybody was planning to build forty floors on the Cactus Club at the beach, now's the time.

[LeftCoaster]

Good luck with the shadowing on the beach...

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Good luck with the shadowing on the beach...

The southern edge of English Bay Beach is 1.3KM away from Senakw so at the PEAK of December when the sun is at its absolute lowest, Senakw would have to have almost 400m tall towers to shadow English Bay. YEAH RIGHT. When it's actually beach season the towers would need to be some of the tallest in the world to shadow English Bay Beach.

On December 21st, the noon sun angle is 17° (Senakw is directly south of English Bay Beach so noon is when the shadow would hit the beach)

1300m*tan(17°) = 397m

[officedweller]

Posted April 2019 in the Senakw thread.
So maybe view shadows may allow taller towers on the east side of Burrard (if the view cone is the only limiting factor?)

Originally Posted by officedweller

Check the Burrard Slopes Guidelines:

https://guidelines.vancouver.ca/B019.pdf


And it appears that I missed a Burrard Street view cone, but it stops at 1st Ave.
(which is bizarre (i.e. cant build a wall close up but you can build one farther away):


https://guidelines.vancouver.ca/B015.pdf

[madog222]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Might intrude on the Granville cone... so if anybody was planning to build forty floors on the Cactus Club at the beach, now's the time.

Yes, towers T10 and T11 just catch the Granville Cone but the only location that would make a difference is at Cardero & Beach, the rest is covered by the Granville Island cone.

[Jimbo604]

A short recap:

Oct 4, 2023 9:30 AM Standing Committee on Policy and Strategic Priorities: Meeting Minutes

> Item 4. Modernizing the City’s View Protection Guidelines to Unlock New Housing and Economic Opportunities

> "FINAL MOTION AS APPROVED WHEREAS ... THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED

> A. THAT Council direct staff to initiate a review of the City’s View Protection Guidelines to determine the amount of additional housing, job space, hotel space and public benefits, that could potentially be built on sites currently impacted by view cone restrictions if various view cones deemed to be obsolete and/or no longer functionally relevant were potentially removed from the view protection guidelines, and for staff to report back on preliminary assumptions and scope of work by Q4 2023, to be followed by a full report by the end of Q2 2024;

> FURTHER THAT the review and report back include a comprehensive list of all enforced framed and panoramic views and/or view cones in the city.

> B. THAT Council direct staff to conduct a review of framed views with the intent of reviewing, refining and/or considering for removal from the view protection guidelines with clear criteria to unlock additional housing and job space over the immediate short term while highlighting the view cones that should be retained for the public benefit of protecting Vancouver’s spectacular mountain and ocean views and report back by Q2 2024;

> FURTHER THAT staff’s report back in Q4 2023 will specifically seek Council’s endorsement of the specific and well-considered framed views be adjusted or removed, prior to bringing forward the necessary bylaw changes."


It is now after Q4 2023 and I believe we haven't seen any information on "preliminary assumptions and scope of work by Q4 2023" so it could be safe to assume they won't release any more details until the full report is released "end of Q2 2024".

Please discuss the pros and cons of view cones for the next five months. Thank you, that is all.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by Jimbo604

It is now after Q4 2023 and I believe we haven't seen any information on "preliminary assumptions and scope of work by Q4 2023" so it could be safe to assume they won't release any more details until the full report is released "end of Q2 2024".

Please discuss the pros and cons of view cones for the next five months. Thank you, that is all.

It's presumably the Director of Planning who will report to Council. Unfortunately the previous Director had her contract 'concluded' in mid September, and there is still no replacement.