The Butterfly | 178.6m | 57Fl | Completed

[Feathered Friend]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

I wont be in Vancouver until the 28th... so mathematically improbable for me to be there in person, but I did just send them my e-mail of support!

Great to hear it! I won't have a chance to make it down either, but I made sure to send a letter of support on the 18th.

My observation is that the opposition to this project comes almost entirely from residents of the neighbouring Patina. I can understand why they bemoan the loss of views/space, but honestly I don't know what people expect when they choose to live next to an empty/underbuilt lot in a downtown core that has been changing at the rate Vancouver has.

[christmas]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

I wont be in Vancouver until the 28th... so mathematically improbable for me to be there in person, but I did just send them my e-mail of support!

I did too!

This is the document from July 18th public hearing:

http://council.vancouver.ca/20170718/documents/phea3-SummaryandRecommendation.pdf

The height is currently at 169.5m, not 179m which is written in the title of this thread- although it's likely that this height could change very soon.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

Great to hear it! I won't have a chance to make it down either, but I made sure to send a letter of support on the 18th.

My observation is that the opposition to this project comes almost entirely from residents of the neighbouring Patina. I can understand why they bemoan the loss of views/space, but honestly I don't know what people expect when they choose to live next to an empty/underbuilt lot in a downtown core that has been changing at the rate Vancouver has.

Your observation about most complaints being from the neighbors is so true. This is perhaps understandable, but as you imply, people have to be realistic.
They can't have their cake and eat it, which is seemingly what they somehow expect.

Originally Posted by christmas

I did too!

This is the document from July 18th public hearing:

http://council.vancouver.ca/20170718/documents/phea3-SummaryandRecommendation.pdf

The height is currently at 169.5m, not 179m which is written in the title of this thread- although it's likely that this height could change very soon.

I read through the document, and at either 169.5m or 179m, this building would still be nice and tall, making a significant architectural statement.
A great addition to Vancouver's skyline and urban environment, IMO.

[Feathered Friend]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Here's the diagram:


https://westendneighbours.wordpress.com/2017/07/07/first-baptist-church-969-burrard-public-hearing/

Originally Posted by trofirhen

I read through the document, and at either 169.5m or 179m, this building would still be nice and tall, making a significant architectural statement.
A great addition to Vancouver's skyline and urban environment, IMO.

To the joy of everyone here, the height was actually increased during the application process. I was worried I would have to find a source/explanation for the height difference, happily Officedweller posted the above a couple pages back.

[towerseeker101]

If this proposal doesn't get approved, I'm going to be choked. It seems like every proposal with unique architecture end up being nixed. Perhaps West End residents would prefer something more familiar like this? :

[rofina]

How can the city justify going through a multi year, multi million dollar OCP design process to then go through hearing after hearing for a development that fits into the new OCP?

This is ridiculous.

This is downtown Vancouver - not Squamish, build the damn thing.

[wrenegade]

Not sure why people are so concerned about this one, it's a Westbank application. I'm sure they'll be fine

[Klazu]

I am still sad about the neighbouring proposal. So that's dead? What killed it? It looked like such a nice design for the lot with a great crown...

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by Klazu

I am still sad about the neighbouring proposal. So that's dead? What killed it? It looked like such a nice design for the lot with a great crown...

I think the property was sold during all those quick sales before the foreign buyers tax kicked in. I believe it's been in limbo ever since.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by retro_orange

I think the property was sold during all those quick sales before the foreign buyers' tax kicked in. I believe it's been in limbo ever since.

It would be great if it ever came to be. That, plus First Baptist, set a design benchmark above and beyond just about anything that Vancouver already has.

[Klazu]

Ah yes, didn't the last buyer pay way more for the lot that it could ever be worth? Something like that.

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by Klazu

Ah yes, didn't the last buyer pay way more for the lot that it could ever be worth? Something like that.

That sounds familiar. I would need to do some news digging. I believe the service station next to Vancouver house was purchased in the same manner at an earlier buying frenzy.

[Feathered Friend]

Originally Posted by wrenegade

Not sure why people are so concerned about this one, it's a Westbank application. I'm sure they'll be fine

I know people like to rag on Westbank, but honestly their projects are usually well packaged and respond well to city/neighbourhood guidelines. They definitely don't always get what they want, as evident in their 1668 - 1684 Alberni project. That project was required to chop off part of its penthouse to avoid shadowing Marine Square. To their credit, Westbank knows how to play the game.

As for this project, my own opinion is that it will pass, probably unanimously. After all, the project has literally $100 million in Cacs + Dcls. The only real opposition has come from the neighbouring building, which have been blatant in their purely self serving reasons for being against the project.

That said, there are the usual anti-development groups who are complaining about this project, and if people on here don't want a (somewhat) tall and beautiful tower like this one to be a one off, then we all need to make sure council sees there is support when they come up. After all, is it really too much to write a sentence to say I like this building and want more like it?

[chrisel]

Did anyone attend the public hearing yesterday?

[officedweller]

From Michael Geller's twitter, July 25th:


https://twitter.com/michaelgeller

[city guy]

any resolution at council last night?

[phesto]

Originally Posted by city guy

any resolution at council last night?

They deferred final question and decision until this evening.

[thefly]

1st Baptist Westbank Burrard & Nelson 57 storey hearing: 145 NO 87 YES letters 238 NO petition. Most speakers NO.

https://twitter.com/CityHallWchVAN/status/890320364034703361

[Metro-One]

I hope the city doesnt drop the ball this time and realizes that the No side is just a very vocal tiny minority.

Seriously, IMO this is the most elegant tower being proposed for Vancouver and actually has a chance of being a true landmark.

It better be approved without height reduction or major redesign.

Also, I hope everyone on here who supports this tower also took the time to send their YES letter.... I know mine was one of the 87.

[Feathered Friend]

I wasn't able to make it down, however I did catch up with the video feed. The decision was put off until tonight's council meeting.

So, like the written submissions, most of those against were from the Patina building, though a fair number were also from the Electra building. Interesting to note was that some of those opposed to 105 Keefer also came out to oppose this building. I suppose protecting the view for nearby multi-million dollar residences is more important than the community benefits this project will bring. Really I think the only council that might vote against this is counsellor Carr, as her voting (IMO) tends to be very populist. Although I lean it will probably be unanimous approval.