Downtown Vancouver Updates

[Metro-One]

Okay, thanks for the info. When do you expect that to be?

I have the exact same idea in mind. Building one to the max height allowed and shortening the other would greatly enhance this proposal.

[Feathered Friend]

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?
.

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Once the Rezoning/DP is posted on the city's website it will have an email and I fully encourage anyone to submit their comments, whatever they may be.

Ah, I missed that request for a contact email. You can always email the consulting company, as they gather the comments from the pre-app and submit them to the city.

The comment cards are listed below:





You can email [email protected]
After all, every bit of feedback helps.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

My feelings exactly, that stretch of Robson was my favorite part of the entire street because of the amazing selection of Korean and Japanese eateries (most of the Japanese ones are / were actually owned and operated by Japanese, which is relatively rare in Vancouver) with authentic atmospheres in interesting retail spaces.

Just feels a shame to lose that unique corner of our city. There are so many drab, boring, and rundown corners of our city, I would much prefer that those areas were redeveloped before the western end of Robson, which is a complete well maintained neighborhood with its own unique vibe.

PS thanks for the info on that Robson Hotel. I hope the renovations work out and it is not replaced.

As long as there are relatively cheap apartments for foreign students to rent there will always be restaurants in that area to serve them a taste of home, even if they have to pay a higher rent for new CRUs. But if more and more of the affordable apartments give way to condos that demographic will eventually be forced out.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by whatnext

As long as there are relatively cheap apartments for foreign students to rent there will always be restaurants in that area to serve them a taste of home, even if they have to pay a higher rent for new CRUs. But if more and more of the affordable apartments give way to condos that demographic will eventually be forced out.

How do affordable apartments give way to condos? Is it due to the zoning in the area or just C-2 sites you're discussing?

[EdinVan]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Seriously, with the Empire Landmark now dead, Gyoza King gone (already mentioned my personal connections to that establishment in the restaurant thread) and now possibly this cute structure disappearing, all replaced with soulless cookie cutter condos, this stretch of Robson street it losing all of its character and is simply becoming an extension of Coal Harbour. Can't wait for the Starbucks and dental offices that will fill out the cold and sterile condo street front retails.

Isn't "progress" wonderful?

As long as people keep voting Vision/NPA, the sterilization of this city will continue.

[vancouvercitizen]

Has there been any update on what will happen with the St.Pauls Burrard site? I'm just wondering if they intend to keep any of the existing brick work for whatever goes in next. It would be a shame if they left nothing behind.

[jollyburger]

Looks like they started 401 W Georgia demolition.

[Feathered Friend]

Here is Strand's newest proposal for the West End. There were renderings at the UDP which are much better than what are posted on the city's website but, unfortunately, I didn't get a chance to grab them. This project has been in the media a fair bit lately due to the backlash against the city's Building Within a Building policy. I actually support this policy as it is makes the best of a bad situation; trying to fulfill the need for social housing in a world where it lacks the funding. The panel addressed a specific part of this, feeling that the separated play areas being so close together was just plain cruel. There was, however broad support for the project. The units are being designed around the balcony spaces, and the interior design is being harmonized with the exterior architecture. While not triplets, all three of Strand's West End buildings are being designed to relate to each other. This specific project is incorporating a water feature to help mask traffic noise for residents.

As I mentioned, the panel voted to support the project with recommendations. The biggest gripe, again, was the segregated playgrounds. There was a feeling that the tower wasn't truly achieving the Tower in the Park policy of the West End, and that some of the amenity space should be moved to the roof to declutter at the ground level. This might need to be done anyways, to provide a public bike share. The last condition was that they should marry the base with the tower, as currently there is a high contrast and they do not speak to each other; much like a marriage? - A joke made by one of the panelists.

I feel the choice of materials is going to make or break this one. The design calls for precast panels and, while the renderings at the UDP looked nice, choosing the wrong colour scheme, or letting value engineering win out would make this project rather bland. At least it seems the rooms will be nice in any event.

http://rezoning.vancouver.ca/applications/1068-1080burnaby1318thurlow/index.htm

[Vancouver_Highrise]

I heard that anchor point(burrard/drake) is being sold and all the owners are being approached to sell. Any idea who is buying or what would be allowable for height/density?

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Vancouver_Highrise

I heard that anchor point(burrard/drake) is being sold and all the owners are being approached to sell. Any idea who is buying or what would be allowable for height/density?

Isn't Anchor Point that mid-rise brick building with a sort of 'Toronto' look to it?
Do you know if a redevelopment is part of the deal? It probably would be, IMO, due to the way the downtown peninsula is developing, or am I wrong?
Thank you for any information on this.

[officedweller]

Re: Anchor Point
I had heard that last year some time.
Presumably redevelopment would exclude the office block fronting Pacific St.
Not sure, but there may be 3 different strata corps. - one for each building.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by vancouvercitizen

Has there been any update on what will happen with the St.Pauls Burrard site? I'm just wondering if they intend to keep any of the existing brick work for whatever goes in next. It would be a shame if they left nothing behind.

It's not just a shame if they do that, but also a crime. They should preserve the entire block fronting Burrard street, and at least the facade of the block along Comox. It would be a real shame if they cannot utilize the space for some kind of large scale museum or art gallery, as such a stately-looking building would be perfect for that. behind the heritage building portion could be a plaza with a fountain with underground retail attached to the museum portion, and then a new 60 storey signature tower can rise up to replace the existing 70s hospital block.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Vin

It's not just a shame if they do that, but also a crime. They should preserve the entire block fronting Burrard street, and at least the facade of the block along Comox. It would be a real shame if they cannot utilize the space for some kind of large scale museum or art gallery, as such a stately-looking building would be perfect for that. behind the heritage building portion could be a plaza with a fountain with underground retail attached to the museum portion, and then a new 60 storey signature tower can rise up to replace the existing 70s hospital block.

Great idea, Vin! I hope it catches on. You really need a render so people can 'get their teeth' into the concept!

[Vin]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Great idea, Vin! I hope it catches on. You really need a render so people can 'get their teeth' into the concept!

St Paul's Hospital Aerial view:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.2790301,-123.1288018,236a,35y,39.45t/data=!3m1!1e3

I know, a render would be great except, unfortunately, I don't have the tools for that.

Here's a "sunken fountain" concept that could be used for the plaza with underground retail attached to the old St Paul's. In such a way, the new tower or towers can be be separate from the heritage portion, but at the same time connected.
"Sunken fountain":
https://i2.wp.com/www.tuckys.com/wp-content/uploads/Mbs_Vortex.jpg?resize=940%2C651&ssl=1
or this:
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/3f/1c/48/3f1c48f55884f330eb88948e7b281e64.jpg
or this:
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/73/73/ae/7373aea73b875195bb44799ca596d044.jpg
or this in London: notice the heritage portion and the new tower:
https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/pict...us_publicrealm_sunkenplaza_molbanner.jpg

I will be protesting if they decide to demolish old St Paul's.

[officedweller]

There's a view cone over the St. Paul's site - can't recall specifics though.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by officedweller

There's a view cone over the St. Paul's site - can't recall specifics though.

Which is a real pity because the future developer would probably demolish most of St-Paul's just to get the desired density for profitability for the new buildings. Like I mentioned many times before, City policies are why we can't even properly preserve many of our heritage buildings. They also curtail the scope and type of developments that would be desirable to make our city landscape not only more interesting and fun, but also progressive and functional.

I just hope the City will give an exception to the St Paul's site to allow a taller building, like what they did at the Shangri-la, Trump hotel. Vancouver House and Burrard Place sites.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Semi-relevant article:

MacConnell said the 1912 building on Burrard Street, with its heritage-designated red-brick facade, would ideally be preserved. But apart from that architectural gem, the rest of St. Paul’s Hospital will be demolished; it’s a plan that has been debated for 35 years.

So if everything goes right, the red-brick building will be safe. The broke-assed hospital annexes surrounding it, on the other hand...

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Semi-relevant article:



So if everything goes right, the red-brick building will be safe. The broke-assed hospital annexes surrounding it, on the other hand...

Quote from article:
"West End residents will lose a hospital in their own backyard, and possibly the 1912 iconic brick building fronting Burrard Street; however, Plant said, “It’s my view that health care has to trump nostalgia all the time,” later adding that St. Paul’s is beyond help since it’s a “pile of bricks that could fall down in an earthquake."


This is highly BS because ALL old buildings could fall down in an earthquake, including Sinclair Centre, Hotel Vancouver, The Empress Hotel, City Hall, etc etc. So we should demolish all these piles of bricks and forsake nostalgia? Pretty much the same lame excuse they are using for the viaduct removal.

[officedweller]

Crane for the Cardero from Bosa twitter:
Trump in the background with a couple gaps in the lighting.


https://twitter.com/BosaProperties

[idunno]

The Trump lighting is a little bit underwhelming. While I'm really glad it's there at all, the majority of the time, it has some piece that is not working, and it rarely changes colour.

My hope is that it somehow spurs more lighting features around town.