General Vancouver Updates

[Kodii]

Actually, yes

I guess training in the pool that gave rise to the Knoll made them realize the true worthlessness of that thing.

Well, actually it's a bit short-sighted of me to say its worthless, because it can be pleasant. It's alternative is a LOT more pleasant though

[hollywoodnorth]

Originally Posted by phesto

Bosa does indeed own that site, though I'm not sure what, if any, plans they have for development.

I imagine the key would be to get the site beside it.....or even better that site AND the Cobalt site. Then you would be able to actually do something of size. Conversely small Metroliving Style infill is never a bad thing if done right.

[osirisboy]

WTF is the Knoll?

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

WTF is the Knoll?

A great question.

Webster defines it as "a small round hill; mound".



More locally, it's not just a hill but a symbol for preppy student hippies to voice their opposition against any progress at UBC:




What a beautiful sight....




And yet, they complain about being arrested? If you're gonna protest by forming a human chain around a police car and being asked to leave by officers several times, they have every right to arrest you.



- end rant -

[jlousa]

I always though of it as a
Troll = small hairy creature protecting a bridge
Knoll = small hill protected by hairy creatures.

[jlousa]

Looks like the development at 2080 W Broadway passed it's first hurdle. It received UDP support. A few interesting notes in the minutes.

EVALUATION: SUPPORT (7-2)

Introduction: Dale Morgan, Development Planner, introduced the proposal for 7-storey mixed use development located at West Broadway and Maple Street. The application is for retail and townhouses at grade with residential above. Mr. Morgan described the M-1 site context noting the separate site to the south and the dedicated lane between the two sites that dead ends at the rail line. The Arbutus Corridor Official Development Plan, adopted in July 2000, calls for the Arbutus Corridor to be preserved for rapid transit and Greenways purposes with a future extension of the Millennium ALRT line along Broadway with a possible station at the intersection of West Broadway and Arbutus Street. Mr. Morgan described the history of the site noting that several years ago there was a development enquiry for a large format retailer, which was not supported. Subsequently, guidelines specific to block entitled Broadway-Arbutus C-3A and 2000 Block West 10th Avenue (North Side) Guidelines were written and adopted by Council in 2004.

Mr. Morgan also noted that the intent of the Guidelines is to:
* To assist in the transition of the Broadway-Arbutus district into a vibrant shopping area which connects and unifies this local shopping area within the Arbutus Neighbourhood Centre;
* To ensure the size and scale of future developments are compatible with the surrounding neighbourhood and local-serving character of the Arbutus shopping area;
To encourage a strong residential component above the Broadway and Arbutus street level and on the north side of the 2000 block of West 10th Avenue with a high degree of livability;
* High quality public and private realms and building form which respects adjacent buildings and takes into consideration sun light access and private views;
* Ensure that vehicular traffic is well managed so that the area remains accessible, and surrounding residential areas are not negatively impacted.

Mr. Morgan added that it was the City’s desire that both sites be developed concurrently and that a comprehensive development be undertaken that would look at both sites as a whole, however, both sites are separate legal entities with no legal constraints that would otherwise tie the two properties together with the exception of providing parking for the grocery store use. It is anticipated that the IGA store will be closed and eventually demolished. The future development of this site is yet unknown, although current policy identifies residential uses as the preferred use. Also social planning has identified this site as a possible location for daycare.

Advice from the Panel on this application is sought on the following:
1. Density: Does this application satisfactorily earn the discretionary increases in density up to 3.0 FSR?
2. Height: The proposed height at 77.6 feet exceeds the recommended Guideline height of 70 feet and is slightly higher than the other recent C-3A next door at 75.3 feet. Subject to private view impacts, is this height supportable?
3. Massing: Is the Panel supportive of the general massing concept of two larger elements? Is the skewed alignment of the mid level massing justified? Does the massing “fit” within the Broadway/Arbutus neighbourhood in terms of scale and identity?
4. Retail Uses: The Guidelines suggest minimum depths of 50 feet, maximum recommended frontages of 50 feet and ceiling heights between 14 and 17 feet. However, several potential CRU’s propose a depth of less than 30 feet and a portion of the potential larger space will have a reduced ceiling height of less than 11 feet to underside of the concrete slab to enable a partial floor of residential units above. What is the Panel’s view of these “less than recommended” spaces?
5. Livability: General comments are requested on unit livability, in particular the 2nd level units at the lane, overlooking the at grade parking. Could (should) these units come down to grade?
6. Lane Treatment & use: Not withstanding the functional requirements for loading and parking, is the lane sufficiently pedestrian friendly? Should the loading areas be reduced in width, with more landscaping and less parking? Would townhouses at grade be supportable along the lane?
7. Materiality & Architectural Expression: Should there be greater consistency of materials on all building frontages, in particular, for the base treatment or does the change in materials give visual emphasis to the principal façade? General comments are requested on the overall architectural character.
8. Parking below Grade: The entry stair and elevator to the parking level is mid block and faces onto Broadway as a key entrance, emphasized with full height glass walls that partially light the first floor parking level and make the entry/arrival sequence more pleasant to experience. Should this idea be further enhanced with light wells, or enlarged stair or transparent elevator cab, to add further value to what is prominently identified as an important portal?
9. Sustainability: General comments are requested on the LEED initiatives seeking silver compliance. Have they gone far enough?

Mr. Morgan took questions from the Panel.

Applicant’s Introductory Comments: John Bingham, Architect, further described the project noting that they had several public meetings with the neighbourhood. Mr. Bingham described the uses that are planned for the retail.
Doug Nelson, Architect, described the overall building plans noting the Broadway massing to give a low rise/high rise component. The upper level massing has been developed to offer more daylight and views to people on the south side of West 10th Avenue and the lane which created some terracing and residential outdoor spaces. He noted that the colour palette would be simple with masonry at the retail level.

Peter Kreuk, Landscape Architect, described the landscape plans noting the pedestrian zone on the lane as well as parking spaces. Some urban agriculture is planned for sixth level as well as a children’s play area. The tops of the buildings are all private outdoor roof terraces which are accessed by stairwells with a substantial amount of plantings. The mechanical space sits behind a screen with maintenance access through the elevator/stair extensions.

Panel’s Consensus on Key Aspects Needing Improvement:
* To provide a contextual study including building massing of the neighbouring M-1 site;
* Design development to correct the compromised height of the retail units;
* Design development to improve the lane treatment and associated landscaping;
* Design development to the parkade stairs and residential entry;
* Design development to improve how the building meets the ground and provide greater differentiation between ground level and the residential portion; and
* Design development to provide more differentiation and articulation of the long retail frontage.

Related Commentary: The Panel supported the proposal and complimented the applicant team for a handsome piece of architecture.

The Panel thought the proposal had earned the increase in density and height with a couple of Panel members suggesting it could go higher. They agreed that the ceiling height of the retail was an important component and warranted the additional height as it fits the Broadway corridor context. They also noted that the retail would not be successful with a ceiling height of less than eleven feet.

Most of the Panel had some concerns regarding the future development of the site to the south noting that it was hard to know if there were going to be some adjacency problems with the future building without a contextual study of possible massing. Also, most Panel members were not sure the townhouses on the lane would be appropriate since the type of development across the lane was still unknown. The Panel thought the City and the applicant needed to have some sort of strategy in place for the M-1 redevelopment and the future mass transit site.

The Panel liked that there were a number of unit types, although several members thought the units at the lane were not of the same standard of livability although some thought the units would be more affordable.

A couple of Panel members were concerned with the concrete slab in front of the parking noting that the space could be dark wells and would need good lighting to make them work. Most of the Panel supported the idea of having neighbourhood parking along the lane as well as some viable landscaping. Several Panel members thought the lane treatment on the west half was a little stark and could use some design development. One Panel member thought that the trellis on the back wall, unless it was attached to the ground, wouldn’t stay green.

The Panel had some concerns regarding the parkade entry stairs along West Broadway as they would be visible from the parking and suggested they be more dramatic. Several Panel members noted that the residential entry was recessed and thought it could be more interesting if there was a dramatic canopy to emphasize the area and make a connection to the street.

The Panel noted that there weren’t a lot of areas for greenery nor many opportunities for the residents to enjoy the outdoor amenities although they thought the uses for the roof were well done.

Several Panel members thought the colour scheme could be improved as well as the materials at the ground plane noting that the weakest part of the proposal was how the building meets the ground.

A couple of Panel members thought the corner piece on Maple Street and the horizontal piece closer to Arbutus Street could have more contrast. They thought it was important with this type of building to identify a couple of design pieces that could be special and made as visual features. They also thought there needed to be more differentiation as the building seemed to have the same expression on all four sides.

Regarding sustainability, the Panel thought the applicant could go further but supported the applicant achieving LEED™ Silver compliance. One Panel member suggested adding a cistern for irrigation and low water consumption for plantings. A couple of Panel members noted that the solar screens needed to be consistent. One Panel member suggested using the elements on the slab extension where they make sense and to do energy modeling. Also, it was suggested that the applicant consider the operable windows have the proper indoor shading elements to handle more effectively the internal heat gains during the summer. Consideration should be given to the buildings active systems and combine the retail and residential systems for energy recovery. Also, recommended, was having the suite layouts be consistent so that the washrooms and kitchen cores are back to back which could save the applicant money. Since the City has now adopted the ASHRA model, the applicant was encouraged to demonstrate compliance with this standard.

Applicant’s Response: Mr. Bingham noted that they did ask for extra density and were turned down. He thanked the Panel for their good comments adding that they had gained a lot of insight which would help to refine the project.

[SpongeG]

when i hear Knoll i think of this

[Metro-One]

Now that the Cherry Blossoms are out i i am even more frustrated over the city of Vancouver's decision to phase out the cherry trees. They simply add so much colour to our streets during early spring, they literally make the city beautiful. Even if we do have to replace them every 20 or 30 years (even though i know of many that are well over 40 years old) it is a small price to pay for what they add to our streets. The street in front of my apartment is a wonderful example, the south side is lined with cherry trees and is currently a symphony of colour, while the north side of the street is lined with eastern maples and is still bald as a cue ball.

[jlousa]

The main problem isn't the 20-30yr life cycle although it does bear weight as well, if you took the time to read the report by the city it states the major issue is the root structure and the damages they cause to the sidewalks and roadways. The new trees they have selected do not pose those issues. Cherry trees are still fine, just not in certain locations, like next to sidewalks.

[Metro-One]

That makes a little more sense, but i really hope they keep them around Burrard Skytrain station. That area becomes amazing this time of year and really gives it a Tokyo feel (train station, office towers, lots of people & cherry trees).

[DrT]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

That makes a little more sense, but i really hope they keep them around Burrard Skytrain station. That area becomes amazing this time of year and really gives it a Tokyo feel (train station, office towers, lots of people & cherry trees).

Yeah, the foliage display there is special. I love that little pocket park there.

[SFUVancouver]

Lumen (3rd and Pine)

Taken by SFUVancouver, April 11th, 2009


Mosaic (Is that correct? 4th and Pine)

Taken by SFUVancouver, April 11th, 2009


Burrard and 3rd infill

Taken by SFUVancouver, April 11th, 2009


Pulse (Broadway and Maple)

Taken by SFUVancouver, April 11th, 2009


Crossroads Whole Foods (not really digging the blue neon awning)

Taken by SFUVancouver, April 11th, 2009

[squeezied]

thanks for all your photos, looks like you had a VERY long walk!

[hollywoodnorth]

that is some great infill

[raggedy13]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

Mosaic (Is that correct? 4th and Pine)

Taken by SFUVancouver, April 11th, 2009

I believe it's called "Mantra", though I could be wrong.

[osirisboy]

mantra seems interesting although a bit bland color wise. is there any interesting retail going in?

[officedweller]

I think Mantra has a large retail space suitable for a grocery store - no word though. I think it would have been great for a Capers - pre-Whole Foods takeover. Maybe a Nestors may move in?

[SFUVancouver]

That neighbourhood really needs a mid-sized grocery store.

I think the building was designed for such a tenant but when I spoke to one of their sales staff last year I was told that it would be a high-end house ware and furniture store. Whether that will fly in the current economy is anyone's guess.

[giallo]

You're the gift that keeps on giving, SFU.

I love all the infill happening in Kits. Most of it looks good.

[sacrifice333]

Here's a very cool little bit of infill on 7th just West of Granville. Third shot is it's best angle.