Downtown Vancouver Updates

[Vin]

If they shadow Robson Street, so be it. It's downtown for heaven's sake. There are plenty of bright sunny outdoor shopping malls all over the Metro region that would never be "shadowed". The part of Robson east of Burrard is already "shadowed in" anyways because of the office towers around. Does it reduce the vibrancy of the area? No.

Love those heights, and it's about time for downtown's West End.

[Marshal]

Originally Posted by Vin

To me, I don't see this as BS. It clearly shows how you can achieve much more in high population density development if you stack what's currently at the West End up this way, on a tiny footprint. This is also to show people who like to argue that one can achieve the same density by having a short building wrong.

Except its a building design not an info-graphic, nor an argument about city planning.

[Marshal]

Originally Posted by s211

My favourite BS phrase back in the early 90s was "creating a spirit of place"; I kid you not.

This is mine: while teaching a third year design studio, a student was presenting their design in a crit and pointed to a narrowing space between two larger public spaces. He spoke of its efficiency based upon its narrowness because it expressed a compression of space which would "shoot" the user from one public realm to the other. I just asked if people would get hurt when they smacked into one another. We then had a class discussion about how spatial descriptions are metaphoric and do not literally characterize end conditions. I had noticed students from time to time using verbs to describe spatial configurations. It belayed a desire to be able to control the experience of the end user as if spatial shapes could be organized and designed to act upon them in some mechanical way . . . compressing the atmosphere, blowing people about, literally squirting them like toothpaste.

Designs do control things like options: circulation patterns, spaces that are at a remove and so foster gathering/pausing/waiting . . . but, the control architecture can effect is 99.9% passively static.

Its all very funny. And these are relatively smart people, all with at least one degree and had to fight their way through the competitive process to get into the program in the first place. What is useful about this example is not that bullshitting is inherent, but rather that well intentioned people can struggle mightily to speak about and convey the meaning of what is a fully non-verbal design process and product.

[Feathered Friend]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

My pics from the event:

Didn't see anyone in a bird costume though!

Why would you expect to see someone in a bird costume? Do you think people are trying to imitate my tail feathers? or are they just copying the birds I see circling when I have a migraine?

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

My pics from the event:









All in all I like the design, but of the latest round of 'starchitect' proposals it is probably my least favourite.

As i eluded to before I am very disappointed by the height, especially the reason behind the cut. Shadowing a playground on a school or something like that is one thing but a shadow on a downtown shopping district that is only there for a few weeks of the year is just nuts IMO.

Also I asked the Bosa rep about the Nelson on the Park proposal and as far as he knew that design was still alive and is why they used it. Who knows what will come with that property though.

Didn't see anyone in a bird costume though!

It really seems that Vancouver is trying to come up with any reason to limit tower heights. It is too bad because Vancouver has a great natural setting to build a soaring skyline. Especially considering how modern Vancouver is and it’s over zealous desire to be seen as a dense urban setting.

Any links / emails we can send our comments to insisting for the full 167 meters?

By looking at them I am guessing yet again these towers are around 135 meters?

It feels that 120 to 140 meters is the new Vancouver table top.

[connect2source]

Bye-bye Davie Street Safeway!

[Chikinlittle]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

It really seems that Vancouver is trying to come up with any reason to limit tower heights. It is too bad because Vancouver has a great natural setting to build a soaring skyline. Especially considering how modern Vancouver is and it’s over zealous desire to be seen as a dense urban setting.

Any links / emails we can send our comments to insisting for the full 167 meters?

By looking at them I am guessing yet again these towers are around 135 meters?

It feels that 120 to 140 meters is the new Vancouver table top.

I'm not too fussed about shadowing on Robson street, but having the sun visible on a downtown shopping street, is that does a horrible attribute to want to maintain?

Besides that, however, I am not generally a fan of these two buildings as proposed.

1) I'm never generally a fan of 'twin tower' designs.
2) This architect already has one design on the books for downtown - we don't need two more (uglier cousins) of the same design.
3) If all these proposals in this block come to fruition, there is a sudden and stark contrast to the rest of the west end that I don't think lends well to an overall urban design. A bit of a transition between the soaring heights towards Burrard street to the more moderate average heights of the West End may be a better treatment, creating more density towards street level to compensate, and maintain more of the ground level dynamic consistent with the rest of the West End. This street is a very comfortable cozy block, and to rip it down and replace it with this will tear away what is nice with the street.

People in this forum generally seem to be obsessed with height in every possible circumstance. I share some similar opinions in many cases, but this is not one of them.

Besides that, I really hope the rest of the West End does not end up going the same route. While I do think there are some places that can be densified and replaced with some taller buildings, this development doesn't really fit in as best as it could. I don't think it would take a lot to get it there, however. It might, given that it's in the transition/edge of the West End, but certainly not if it were placed in the middle of the West End. The West End is a bit of a gem and it really doesn't need the cold concrete treatment of the rest of Yaletown. Let's hope future West End design can be respectful and complimentary to the existing West End setting.

There are also countless opportunities for substantial infill in the West End without always going for massive heights. So many surface parking lots that can be replaced by either row homes, or even small narrow multi-story infill apartment buildings.

[mcminsen]

Originally Posted by connect2source

Bye-bye Davie Street Safeway!

I guess I'm getting old because I remember when they built that Safeway. It replaced an older Safeway store on the corner that was only about half that size. It was interesting how they did it because they kept the old store open while they built the western half of the new store (the one being torn down now). Then they opened the new part and closed and tore down the old one. Finally, they completed the eastern half and joined them together to make the new larger store that we saw for the past few decades.

[connect2source]

Originally Posted by mcminsen

I guess I'm getting old because I remember when they built that Safeway. It replaced an older Safeway store on the corner that was only about half that size. It was interesting how they did it because they kept the old store open while they built the western half of the new store (the one being torn down now). Then they opened the new part and closed and tore down the old one. Finally, they completed the eastern half and joined them together to make the new larger store that we saw for the past few decades.

I remember the old Safeway as well, if was a very nice example of the classic Marina-Style Safeways that were all over the west coast. It had the wavy roof and soaring glass, those stores were beautiful to look at, well designed and filled with natural light. I think our best and largest local example was at Granville and 70th.

[osirisboy]

Originally Posted by Chikinlittle

I'm not too fussed about shadowing on Robson street, but having the sun visible on a downtown shopping street, is that does a horrible attribute to want to maintain?

Besides that, however, I am not generally a fan of these two buildings as proposed.

1) I'm never generally a fan of 'twin tower' designs.
2) This architect already has one design on the books for downtown - we don't need two more (uglier cousins) of the same design.
3) If all these proposals in this block come to fruition, there is a sudden and stark contrast to the rest of the west end that I don't think lends well to an overall urban design. A bit of a transition between the soaring heights towards Burrard street to the more moderate average heights of the West End may be a better treatment, creating more density towards street level to compensate, and maintain more of the ground level dynamic consistent with the rest of the West End. This street is a very comfortable cozy block, and to rip it down and replace it with this will tear away what is nice with the street.

People in this forum generally seem to be obsessed with height in every possible circumstance. I share some similar opinions in many cases, but this is not one of them.

Besides that, I really hope the rest of the West End does not end up going the same route. While I do think there are some places that can be densified and replaced with some taller buildings, this development doesn't really fit in as best as it could. I don't think it would take a lot to get it there, however. It might, given that it's in the transition/edge of the West End, but certainly not if it were placed in the middle of the West End. The West End is a bit of a gem and it really doesn't need the cold concrete treatment of the rest of Yaletown. Let's hope future West End design can be respectful and complimentary to the existing West End setting.

There are also countless opportunities for substantial infill in the West End without always going for massive heights. So many surface parking lots that can be replaced by either row homes, or even small narrow multi-story infill apartment buildings.

Wanting to see this built to its allowable height limit doesn't make someone obsessed with height. And I think its more that people get tired of things getting watered down. The city always seems to go in one direction. Wanting shorter, thinner and lighter buildings.

Also, having some shadowing on robson isn't going to suddenly make the street less inviting. I personally find alberni street very inviting and it has tall building all up and down it

And I'm not sure why people are obsessed with "transitions". What's wrong with tall buildings beside short ones?

[Feathered Friend]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Open House this Tuesday at the Woodwards Atrium for Henriquez's building on Cordova backing onto Blood Alley. Includes the demo of two Canadian Heritage Registry buildings and the reincarnation of their facades from Cordova, but not onto the alley.

http://development.vancouver.ca/33wcordova/index.htm

http://vancouver.ca/your-government/vancouver-heritage-commission.aspx

WHEREAS
1. The Vancouver Heritage Commission regrets the loss of two heritage structures
in Gastown and maintains their reservation for permitting projects to exceed
neighbourhood height guidelines for Gastown;
2. The Vancouver Heritage Commission recognizes that this project meets key objectives within the Gastown policy to provide important forms of housing (e.g. Single room occupancy and rental units).

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Vancouver Heritage Commission offers its
circumspect support for the revised development application for 33 West Cordova
Street, the Stanley Hotel and New Fountain Hotel, noting the following:

• the application has been significantly reduced in massing and is now more in keeping with Gastown;
• the building design has been improved to integrate the floor to floor heights of the heritage building; and
• the commercial storefront design has been improved through restoration of its original rhythm, and through the use of steel metal frames to better fit the aesthetic of more traditional commercial units in the neighbourhood.

FURTHER THAT the Vancouver Heritage Commission asks that further design
consideration be given to meeting the Gastown guideline setbacks, and to the heritage character of the storefront design, through the use of traditional materials and character defining elements of the rear façades.

FURTHER THAT, the Vancouver Heritage Commission asks that all opportunities to preserve the rear heritage façades be thoroughly exhausted.
Carried
(Commissioners Massey, Massie, and Norfolk opposed)

I was glad to see that the project passed the heritage hearing, though it still has a date with the Gastown Historic Area Planning Committee on November 8th (the day after the open house). Here's hoping the model at the open house will be better than what was at City Hall this Friday.

[mcminsen]

^^^ Thanks for that. I noticed that the big old trees seem to be included in the model. My personal preference would be that both the front and back sides are preserved as they are now. That back alley space wouldn't be the same with a new building facade. I have many good old memories of partying at John Barley's and Club 23 West decades ago.

For anyone going to the open house and are not familiar with the alley space I would encourage them to walk over and have a look.


May 21 '16, my pics

[EdinVan]

Those Barclay Street towers look like the same garbage that's going up at 1500 West Georgia.

And I see they managed to get all the requisite buzz-words onto their info boards: "animate," "activate," blah blah blah. Sad thing is that they actually believe their own BS.

[csbvan]

Originally Posted by mcminsen

^^^ Thanks for that. I noticed that the big old trees seem to be included in the model. My personal preference would be that both the front and back sides are preserved as they are now. That back alley space wouldn't be the same with a new building facade. I have many good old memories of partying at John Barley's and Club 23 West decades ago.

For anyone going to the open house and are not familiar with the alley space I would encourage them to walk over and have a look.

I agree. I am glad that the Heritage Commission brought it up, but I wish they were more forceful with the retention of the alley-facade.

[BobLoblawsLawBlog]

It's just so ugly

[mcminsen]

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

Vancouver oak tree replaced atop West End highrise
Initial pin oak tree was installed on roof deck in 1987 but removed after it died
By Chad Pawson, CBC News Posted: Nov 01, 2017 8:36 PM PT Last Updated: Nov 01, 2017 8:36 PM PT


(Kelly Gavin)

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-co...ach-avenue-vancouver-replanted-1.4382702

I was down at English Bay a couple of days ago and took some pics of the new tree. It looks great and I'm really pleased that it's a substantial sized replacement.

Here's a pic of the old mostly dead tree from about a year and a half ago, and then some pics of the new one to compare to.


April 2 ’16, my pic



Nov.3 '17, my pics

[GenWhy?]

I'm glad to see the Heritage folks bring up the retention of the alley-facing façade. That's my biggest concern and point of dissent on that project. Had a long conversation with my girlfriend about the rear façade, and she said she fully supports glass elements to refresh and modernize Gastown and move it away from the Disneyland effect that many long-time locals feel about he area. The Yuppie-ness and the Social Housing sandwiching. Fake urbanism is what I think she'd call it.

The catwalks on the rear I think were added with the 70's creation of Blood Alley Plaza, but are a very unique urban presence and pose a unique opportunity similar to Market Square in Victoria. Brick retention of at least one of the buildings needs to be made, with a fully modern glass-element mews that shortcuts to Cordova. With the alley revamp coming soon... the gritty and unsafe nature of the plaza - especially at night - will encourage many of this areas like-ability. I think many non-heritage folks won't care about their rear-façade retention due to the area's / building's / alley's bad rap and ugly current state of neglect and the poor lighting making the area feel even more unsafe.

In my attendance at the Open House I will be stressing the rear-façade retention as an element of urban design, heritage, and reflecting the original Gastown elements that were / are present in the alleys as pedestrian routes reflective of history... not just Cordova or roadways, but alleys too.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

I'm glad to see the Heritage folks bring up the retention of the alley-facing façade. That's my biggest concern and point of dissent on that project. Had a long conversation with my girlfriend about the rear façade, and she said she fully supports glass elements to refresh and modernize Gastown and move it away from the Disneyland effect that many long-time locals feel about he area. The Yuppie-ness and the Social Housing sandwiching. Fake urbanism is what I think she'd call it.

The catwalks on the rear I think were added with the 70's creation of Blood Alley Plaza, but are a very unique urban presence and pose a unique opportunity similar to Market Square in Victoria. Brick retention of at least one of the buildings needs to be made, with a fully modern glass-element mews that shortcuts to Cordova. With the alley revamp coming soon... the gritty and unsafe nature of the plaza - especially at night - will encourage many of this areas like-ability. I think many non-heritage folks won't care about their rear-façade retention due to the area's / building's / alley's bad rap and ugly current state of neglect and the poor lighting making the area feel even more unsafe.

In my attendance at the Open House I will be stressing the rear-façade retention as an element of urban design, heritage, and reflecting the original Gastown elements that were / are present in the alleys as pedestrian routes reflective of history... not just Cordova or roadways, but alleys too.

Pre-construction



http://searcharchives.vancouver.ca/blood-alley-before-reconstruction-blood-alley-square-2

[mcminsen]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Open House this Tuesday at the Woodwards Atrium for Henriquez's building on Cordova backing onto Blood Alley. Includes the demo of two Canadian Heritage Registry buildings and the reincarnation of their facades from Cordova, but not onto the alley.

http://development.vancouver.ca/33wcordova/index.htm

I think I counted no less than 46 display boards at the open house today. Here are pics of some of them.



Nov.7 '17, my pics

[mcminsen]

Nov.7 '17, my pics