The Ultimate Vancouver Rumour Thread!

[bb1510]

They should release something about the view cones mid month

Supposedly, narrower cones will be revisited as well as partially obstructed ones by trees, boat masts, etc but wider table top ones won't

[BaddieB]

It's about damn time.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by bb1510

They should release something about the view cones mid month

Supposedly, narrower cones will be revisited as well as partially obstructed ones by trees, boat masts, etc but wider table top ones won't

What does that mean - wider table top ones? The QE view cone is partially obstructed by trees.

If we are just dealing with the minor view cones, I can't see there being much of a difference being made. The QE Park view cone is the one that is holding everything back.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by logan5

What does that mean - wider table top ones? The QE view cone is partially obstructed by trees.

I'm guessing QE is a wide table top.

[LowerLonsdaleMike]

Originally Posted by logan5

What does that mean - wider table top ones? The QE view cone is partially obstructed by trees.

If we are just dealing with the minor view cones, I can't see there being much of a difference being made. The QE Park view cone is the one that is holding everything back.

I was up at QE Park last week and I was laughing at how the trees essentially block all of the views that the view cones are there to "protect". I wish they'd just get rid of 90% of these viewcones and start building some 300m towers downtown.

[s211]

Originally Posted by LowerLonsdaleMike

I was up at QE Park last week and I was laughing at how the trees essentially block all of the views that the view cones are there to "protect".

"Every tree is sacred." (with apologies to Monty Python)

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

realistically, they should review the view cones every 5yrs to see which ones are no longer necessary due to vegetation growth. or they should keep the vegetation trimmed to the viewcone limit. otherwise you get what we have now. a pointless view cone stifling the city.

[Migrant_Coconut]

I believe the last check was when they pitched the observation tower in QE; they opted to cut down a hundred-ish trees instead. Seems like a waste if you ask me.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

I believe the last check was when they pitched the observation tower in QE; they opted to cut down a hundred-ish trees instead. Seems like a waste if you ask me.

I personally find the mountains so far away that the view isn't as good versus the viewpoints on the bridges/Broadway.

It looks more like this



Than this



https://vancouver.ca/home-property-d...cted-view.aspx

[Migrant_Coconut]

Preaching to the choir... but it appears the hippies and homeowners like it, so it stays.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by LowerLonsdaleMike

I was up at QE Park last week and I was laughing at how the trees essentially block all of the views that the view cones are there to "protect". I wish they'd just get rid of 90% of these and start building some 300m towers downtown.

May I agree? At least get rid of 75% of the view-blocking trees, and build high downtown. (With the Great Skyscraper where the Burrard Building now is, and several other, ultra-elegant projects nearby).

[griswold]

These view cones are absurd. You could double the height of the current skyline and it still wouldn’t even come close to blocking the view of mountains or their peaks.

[mcj]

Originally Posted by griswold

These view cones are absurd. You could double the height of the current skyline and it still wouldn’t even come close to blocking the view of mountains or their peaks.

From QE park it would just cover up the sprawl on the mountains in North & West Vancouver. Would actually make it look much better imo.

[dleung]

At the very least, any of the viewcones allowing us to see the sprawl of British Properties or North Vancouver need to be updated. I'm all for preserving views, and am always here advocating for new sightlines to be preserved or buildings to be lower, but the whole viewcone exercise seems like an egotistical attempt at post-rationalizing the natural beauty of the city as something that was engineered. I'm not sure if any of the viewcones actually improved views of the mountains; if anything the viewcones diminish the layered look of the skyline by allowing a wall of towers to go right up to False Creek (since they oNlY block views of buildings as if they don't matter). It's futile trying to make a science out of something so subjective.

[bb1510]

https://council.vancouver.ca/2024071...ents/pspc1.pdf

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by bb1510

https://council.vancouver.ca/2024071...ents/pspc1.pdf

Good call as always

[bb1510]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Good call as always

wasn't mid month though

[Vantage]

Wow the number of these view cones that are now obstructed by foliage. Good that they want to get rid of some that don't make any sense.

[Migrant_Coconut]

There's a certain irony in the Greenest City removing its greenery in order to show off how green it is.

[Marshal]

It’s a start. All this discussion would never had ever happened 20 years ago: the cones were either seen as sacred or impossible to change. It is very good to finally see many voices (not just here) considering change. All the viewcones should be swept away. The idea was always based on a weak argument in which heavy handed control was seen as necessary to keep the ‘evil’ city at bay. Who needs to see the mountains from any particular location. They are ubiquitous to our general experience. They are of a scale that the city cannot ever match. And as stated above, the city (skyline) itself is a significant object to be viewed. Unshackle the damn thing.