Downtown Vancouver Updates

[officedweller]

WRT 58 West Hastings, I liked the first design better.
The new design is trying too hard to break up the massing.
The first design has some prominence - a sense of place.
The current design disappears into the background...


http://rezoning.vancouver.ca/applications/58whastings/documents/3Streetscapes.pdf


http://rezoning.vancouver.ca/applications/58whastings/documents/5-Renderingsandstreetscape.pdf

[hrhsheba]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Wow another Ole Scheeren design in the city? I'm interested...

This site has the ability to go quite tall as well I think.

as I mentioned when Bosa bought 1060, 1080 and 1090, one of the towers is slated to be 56 stories. The park is not an issue.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by hrhsheba

as I mentioned when Bosa bought 1060, 1080 and 1090, one of the towers is slated to be 56 stories. The park is not an issue.

Here's what the views will be like from that Bosa tower (suite in Patina for sale).

http://urbanyvr.com/patina-luxury-condo-for-sale

[Chikinlittle]

I'd be disappointed to see 1040 torn down (Barclay Mansion). While I'm not suggesting it's the most amazing building ever, I think it has heritage value. Plus it already provides decent density, if that is to count for anything.

Link: 1040 Barclay Street View

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Just did some more digging and this could be a major project announcement.

The areas in question are the entire block other than the Patina and it's in 'Area E' of the west end community plan which is the same as Nelson on the Park (188M) and First Baptist (179M).

[officedweller]

The site looks much longer from a side view.

I could see an interesting building with bridges or arches on that site.
(i.e. since those have been a feature of Büro Ole Scheeren's other work)

http://buro-os.com/
http://buro-os.com/angkasa-raya/


https://www.google.com.mx/maps/@49.2843903,-123.1224372,347a,35y,235.03h,44.87t/data=!3m1!1e3

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by Chikinlittle

I'd be disappointed to see 1040 torn down (Barclay Mansion). While I'm not suggesting it's the most amazing building ever, I think it has heritage value. Plus it already provides decent density, if that is to count for anything.
Link: 1040 Barclay Street View

I agree. Unfortunately the windows were replaced in the past few years and they removed the great strong horizontal lines the building had. The blue ribbon windows redone in blue spandrel would have been acceptable but the off the shelf windows are just —. Many retro west end towers and buildings are getting some really ugly window replacements lately.

When I lived in the west end over ten years ago I came to appreciate how many nice small mid century retro buildings there are in the west end, unfortunately many are deemed 'under built' to today's standards. Someone needs to do a thorough analysis of what's there before too much gets torn down and/or poorly altered to where they are ugly and nobody cares. Many of the drab grey and brown buildings were originally painted vibrant colours or had colourful mosaic tiles that were often painted over.





http://www.prospero.ca/residential/15-barclay-mansion

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by hrhsheba

as I mentioned when Bosa bought 1060, 1080 and 1090, one of the towers is slated to be 56 stories. The park is not an issue.

Great, so we're just going to lose four affordable rental buildings in favour of higher priced accommodation.

[Denscity]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Great, so we're just going to lose four affordable rental buildings in favour of higher priced accommodation.

Im afraid you may be right. I like 50+ storey towers for sure but there is an affordable rental shortage in Vancouver.

[osirisboy]

I thought that in the west end that they have to replace the rentals that get torn down. So there shouldn't be a loss of actual units although might be more expensive

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Great, so we're just going to lose four affordable rental buildings in favour of higher priced accommodation.

I don't think so. The largest of those buildings is a strata; three are rental. The postcard says it will be social housing - so presumably it's similar to other West End projects where the rental is a separate parcel and rented at a mix of below market and welfare rents. It will theoretically be more affordable - certainly over time, as market rents have been rising quite a bit for new tenancies.

[Denscity]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

I thought that in the west end that they have to replace the rentals that get torn down. So there shouldn't be a loss of actual units although might be more expensive

Oh ok cool. For roughly the same rental rate I wonder?

[phesto]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I could see an interesting building with bridges or arches on that site.
(i.e. since those have been a feature of Büro Ole Scheeren's other work)

The rezoning policy strictly limits the tower floorplates to 7,500 SF max, and since the building heights will presumably be maxed, I think the building massing won't be as adventurous as 1500 West Georgia.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Denscity

Oh ok cool. For roughly the same rental rate I wonder?

I doubt that, so it should be the prerequisite for this kind of development: similar suites (ie. bedrooms) must rent at the same rate as the old building and be locked into inflation for future rate increases.

[osirisboy]

Originally Posted by phesto

The rezoning policy strictly limits the tower floorplates to 7,500 SF max, and since the building heights will presumably be maxed, I think the building massing won't be as adventurous as 1500 West Georgia.

Here is a policy that needs changing!! This does nothing but increase costs

[a very long weekend]

^ Doesn't do nothing but increase costs. Also decreases number of units, appeases neighbors' NIMBY parking worries, and burns valuable/rare land where the city allows more than a detached single family home. Plus, as a policy (which Vancouver surely has), underbuilding viz demand drives up property values city-wide, making incumbents rich and fueling the speculator market (which is now global in scale thanks the predictability of these policies), locks younger people out, and guarantees developer profits. Almost everyone on this site is pro-developer, but think about it, if you could build citywide and not just on 20-25% of the city's territory, so many more people would get in that profits would decrease. Even in hyper-regulated Vancouver, the incumbent players have every incentive to ally with neighbors, planners and captured politicians in a common plan to keep the vast majority of the city zoned as single family homes. Shouldn't be that way, not only as a matter of equity, but as a matter of public policy.

[officedweller]

Global News said that the new tree atop Eugenia Place would be planted today.

[mcminsen]

Originally Posted by RDW989

A card in the mail yesterday from Bosa Properties (and Büro Ole Scheeren and Frankl Architecture) about a NOT-CITY open house, re: rezoning 1040, 1060, 1070, 1080 Barclay Street "to permit 2 residential building that will provide a mix of condo and social housing units."
Wednesday, Nov 1, 5 to 7:30, Century Plaza.

Here are some of the display boards.



Nov.1 '17, my pics

[csbvan]

It's the Jenga building meets 400 W. Georgia!

Thanks for sharing. Interesting how they still show Nelson on the Park...

[officedweller]

Thanks!

The massing definitely looks like one of Ole Scheeren's buildings.

I like this design better than the twin towers south on Thurlow (near Harwood)
because these ones accentuate the massing with alternating vertical and horizontal lines on the various boxy protrusions.

[Metro-One]

Are these both 550 feet tall? (167 meters)

Because their massing looks worryingly short compared to the surrounding towers.

Would be a waste to have 2 towers not built to the max height allowed on one of our few sites downtown that allow higher buildings.

The Nelson Park shadowing is a bit of a joke as well.

Since the old Nelson proposal is dead does that mean any new project will have to be shorter to adhere to this new layer of height limits? Or will it be grandfathered like first-baptist?