General Vancouver Updates II

[Feathered Friend]

https://plposweb.vancouver.ca/Public...ctId=237183963

The first proposal under Vancouver’s new Transit-Oriented Area By-law will turn this block of single-family dwellings at Ash & W 29th Ave into a mix of 230 market, & below-market rental homes instead of the original plan for 46 strata townhomes that was approved in 2022.

Yet, this application may see some delays, as the proponent, Sightline Properties, investigates what caused the destruction of their Dunbar rental building last week, & moves ahead with their plans to rebuild it.

https://x.com/City_Duo/status/1824574694152081664

[jollyburger]

The theatre will be called the Freedom Mobile Arch.

The name was chosen through a public voting process, with the other options being Freedom Mobile Amp, Freedom Mobile Rise, and Freedom Mobile Place.

https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2024/0...-amphitheatre/

[jollyburger]

Vienna House progress

https://www.instagram.com/p/C-XtS7pNw6W/?img_index=1

Building updates here:

https://viennahouse.ca/news-updates/

[SpongeG]

Conwest Proposing 24-Storey Tower In East Van, Their First Residential High-Rise
​The tower being proposed by Conwest Developments is planned for 4001-4009 Knight Street and 1348 E 24th Avenue in Vancouver.
Howard Chai
August 19, 2024



https://storeys.com/conwest-developm...t-king-edward/

[jollyburger]

It'll be interesting to see how council receives this application

"The area is considered part of the Cedar Cottage neighbourhood and, in the '90s, the City had a vision document, which was in essence the policy for the area," Carreira says. "That vision document highlighted [the nearby properties] as the Kingsway-Knight Street shopping area and it's been coming to fruition, but very slowly. The Kingsway-Cedar Cottage Village vision document was repealed last year [as part of the implementation of the Vancouver Plan], which in essence makes the tower projects across the street not non-conforming — they have zoning so they're conforming — but without policy. There's no policy. Period. That's why it's outside policy — because there isn't any."

Carreira says that Conwest has owned the property for about 10 years now and they believe the site can handle the density, since it is along two major arterial roads — Knight Street and King Edward Avenue — and near a third — Kingsway. He says the site is also unique because it fronts three streets and has the surrounding infrastructure — shops, parks, buses — that make it similar to a transit-oriented development site.

[idunno]

I still think Knight St is a horribly unhealthy street for residential intensification. A 1 block buffer from that major truck route anyone?

[BaddieB]

I think the issue is more broad. Vancouver's big roads seem infected with shipping trucks because of the ports. I would say the solution to that would be to work to move the ports on the south shore of Burrard Inlet to Tsawwassen. That would allow for the elimination of the undesirable truck traffic, would allow for a Yaletown-like redevelopment of that area, and would allow for the freight rail to be repurposed for commuter rail. Of course road and rail expansion would be facilitated in Tsawwassen. It just seems like poor land use to have the ports there. We can build as much land as we want for ports in Tsawwassen.

It would pay itself off just by the sheer value of the land on the Burrard Inlet.

[Migrant_Coconut]

I suspect CP will take exception to being locked out of Vancouver. CN's not sharing their track.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

It'll be interesting to see how council receives this application

If they allow this with no policy to support it, it would undermine all the land use policies the City took years to write. The developer must have been given some kind of indication from the City though (I would think), or why would they bother with a pointless application.

I'll have to look, but maybe the Vancouver Plan supports this, though that's not an actual land use policy.

[jollyburger]

Ronald McDonald House

The City of Vancouver has received an application to rezone the subject site from R1-1 (Residential Inclusive) District to CD-1 (Comprehensive Development) District. The proposal is to allow for the development of a 14-storey Ronald McDonald House facility and includes:

75 social housing units;
A floor space ratio (FSR) of 3.5; and
A building height of 54.7m (179 ft.) with additional height for rooftop amenity space.

https://www.shapeyourcity.ca/4910-4950-willow-st

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by logan5

If they allow this with no policy to support it, it would undermine all the land use policies the City took years to write. The developer must have been given some kind of indication from the City though (I would think), or why would they bother with a pointless application.

I'll have to look, but maybe the Vancouver Plan supports this, though that's not an actual land use policy.

They're apparently banking on a May 2023 passed Report to Council called "Prioritization Framework for Planning Policy and Processing Appellations".

https://council.vancouver.ca/20230509/documents/r1.pdf

"Policy Enquiry Process (PEP) and Application Volumes The PEP stream, designed to precede a formal rezoning application, enables staff to consider rezoning proposals that do not comply with adopted policies or plans, but offer unique opportunities to further Council goals and objectives. Through this process, a high-level conceptual review is conducted by an interdepartmental staff team, assessing the proposal against the established criteria and guiding principles endorsed by Council. Forty six (46) Policy Enquiry applications have been received since October 1, 2021."

I don't really see how this criteria for PEP projects applies to strata, but maybe it isn't in the PEP scope but another scope.

"Non-priority applications would generally refer to strata/market housing, small floor area commercial proposals, and Zoning District Change applications. "

[csbvan]

The developer submitting against policy and doing 100% market condo shows they have little sophistication with housing development. That's not how you get approval for policy non-compliant rezonings...

[phesto]

Originally Posted by csbvan

The developer submitting against policy and doing 100% market condo shows they have little sophistication with housing development. That's not how you get approval for policy non-compliant rezonings...

This is not a slam dunk application by any means, but Conwest is not an unsophisticated developer. They will likely have met with staff and councillors to gauge their level of support before making the application and spending several hundred thousand dollars required to move it to this point.

If this gets approved, it will be because there is a hefty negotiated CAC that staff feel is appropriate.

[csbvan]

ConWest is sophisticated, but they don't have residential experience.

It's not necessarily that they believe they have staff support. They may be submitting based on discussions with Council and an expectation that they have sufficient political support. Which is always risky.

[jollyburger]

It seems like they are in a neighbourhood centre which would envision midrise towers 7-12 storeys.



https://vancouvermarket.ca/2024/08/1...knight-street/

BC Housing is/wants to build a 14 storey supportive housing tower on the corner of Knight/King Ed as well:

https://plposweb.vancouver.ca/Public...ctId=212728567

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by csbvan

ConWest is sophisticated, but they don't have residential experience.

It's not necessarily that they believe they have staff support. They may be submitting based on discussions with Council and an expectation that they have sufficient political support. Which is always risky.

A fair leap of faith for a $200k exercise, but we've all seen more money thrown away on less risky endevours. I at least thought they might have requested a larger daycare space.

[vanman]

Originally Posted by s211

I'm going to speculate there's some sober second thought about the office component.

Most likely. A hotel would make more sense at this point.

[vanman]

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

While most of the block is within the 400m zone, this site isn't. Plus the approved 5.01 FSR is just a drop higher than could be could be achieved in the 200m zone.

I stand corrected.

[officedweller]

King Edward Village is at Knight and Kingsway only because of the opportunistic redevelopment of the former Safeway site there.

Personally, I don't think that intersection should be a built up.

Knight street is a major truck route running right through the intersection
and it is far from the Expo Line.

[jollyburger]

Here's the referral document for that project.

https://council.vancouver.ca/20061212/documents/p1.pdf