General Vancouver Updates

[logan5]

As this will be our first true metro line, it will be interesting to see how the Broadway Corridor plan plays out. This was an interesting line...

The rental districts within the study area make up one of the City’s core rental areas, containing 17,680 units of existing non-market and market rental housing – including 27% of the City’s total purpose-built rental units in areas covered by the Rental Housing Stock ODP. Planning work will explore potential future options for these sites, noting that rental replacement and enhanced tenant protection and relocation will be prioritized.

The city seems to be conceding that there will be some redevelopment of rental buildings, just how extensive remains to be seen. There are a lot of strata buildings north of Broadway that I presume will be given higher densities. Strata properties are easier to sell now, so I think we'll see lots of development north of Broadway.

I think we're looking at a Broadway Corridor that could be even denser than downtown Vancouver when it's all said and done.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Were the Burrard and Granville viewcones already there? Because if City Council's going to place arbitrary height limits whenever they feel like it, I demand one for the Fir Street off-ramp.



https://i.imgur.com/VfawjCH.jpg

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by logan5

I think we're looking at a Broadway Corridor that could be even denser than downtown Vancouver when it's all said and done.

How so? Can't have density without height, and you can't have height when the viewcones force even shorter buildings than downtown. Or do you mean Broadway west of Oak?

[Feathered Friend]

Better late than never?

Opposition to Broadway Hotel Trivializes Renters and Boasts of Delaying Air Ambulance Flights
878 – 898 West Broadway
While some time has past since this pre-application event, it’s been on my to-do list to write about my experience. Thankfully, we make sure to write notes about each event we attend. Which is lucky, because this time Hannah isn’t able to help jog my memory as she attended a discussion that night about the proposed updates to the Chinatown development policies.

I’m excited about this project, adding extra hotel rooms helps discourage short term rentals, facilitates commerce and, in this case, will provide shelter for out-patients and families of those who need the critical care services that only our province’s lead trauma hospital can provide.

Because of that need, the new hotel will be built in two phases. In the first, the Fairview Pub will be replaced by 180 suites geared towards longer term stays. In the second phase, the existing hotel will be torn down and replaced by 258 more traditional rooms that could be used by visiting medical professionals. Though the applicant team has created a very beautiful building, I feel its courtyard space really helps make it shine. There were also plans for amenity spaces on the rooftops, but that was found to be unworkable due the air ambulances flight path.

https://cityduo.wordpress.com/2018/06/15...and-boasts-of-regulating-air-ambulances/

[scryer]

Maybe I'm not reading it right but am I seriously reading that they want to preserve views of the City Hall?! No disrespect, but preserving views of City Hall is kind of absurd; it's not an architecturally outstanding piece of work or anything...

As for the hotel on Broadway: BRING IT ON !! Whoever owns that building is going to rake in the dough.

[Colin4567]

Originally Posted by scryer

Maybe I'm not reading it right but am I seriously reading that they want to preserve views of the City Hall?! No disrespect, but preserving views of City Hall is kind of absurd; it's not an architecturally outstanding piece of work or anything...

As far as I know it's the views FROM city hall they want to preserve, ensuring the mountains can still be seen above the skyscrapers from places like City Hall and Queen Elizabeth Park.

[officedweller]

I saw that too - obviously flipping the facts to not seem self-serving.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I saw that too - obviously flipping the facts to not seem self-serving.

I don't think any facts are being flipped - there are several views protected that affect the West Broadway and Cambie Street area. There isn't a viewcone that starts exactly at City Hall - there are three from Cambie at 10th and 12th Avenues (that are shown on that diagram). There's also Viewcone K, a view of City Hall from the seawall on the north side of Cambie Bridge. Despite scryer's opinion, it is considered an important architectural landmark. You can see that it's the reason that the recent 425 West 6th office rezoning is massed in the way that it is. (page 7 of the rezoning report).

It appears that as part of the Broadway review, the planners are intentending to review the viewcones, and to try to settle the helicopter approach limitations. It's always possible that the outcome will be existing policy is confirmed, but the 'gateway' towers around NEFC seem to suggest that there's a bit of flexibility - although those towers are getting a lot of negative commentary in some places.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Changing City

I don't think any facts are being flipped - there are several views protected that affect the West Broadway and Cambie Street area. There isn't a viewcone that starts exactly at City Hall - there are three from Cambie at 10th and 12th Avenues (that are shown on that diagram). There's also Viewcone K, a view of City Hall from the seawall on the north side of Cambie Bridge. Despite scryer's opinion, it is considered an important architectural landmark. You can see that it's the reason that the recent 425 West 6th office rezoning is massed in the way that it is. (page 7 of the rezoning report).

It appears that as part of the Broadway review, the planners are intentending to review the viewcones, and to try to settle the helicopter approach limitations. It's always possible that the outcome will be existing policy is confirmed, but the 'gateway' towers around NEFC seem to suggest that there's a bit of flexibility - although those towers are getting a lot of negative commentary in some places.

I wasn't referencing the Ramada site application - I was referencing this quote from the Broadway Planning Report:

C-3A Guidelines (Views to City Hall)
The Cambie Street (east side) C-3A Guidelines and Central Broadway C-3A Urban
Design Guidelines which restrict heights along Broadway between Laurel Street and
Yukon Street in order to preserve views to City Hall from public points along the north
side of the False Creek seawall will be reviewed.

http://council.vancouver.ca/20180620/documents/pspc3.pdf

I don't know of any view cones facing south. Are there any? If so, news to me.
Could be that it's not expressed as a "view cone" if it's in a "design guideline".

This diagram even says "Views to City Hall" with view cone wedges facing south.

Originally Posted by officedweller

Broadway Corridor Planning

http://www.vancouvermarket.ca/2018/06/14/broadway-planning-program-comes-into-focus/

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I wasn't referencing the Ramada site application - I was referencing this quote from the Broadway Planning Report:


http://council.vancouver.ca/20180620/documents/pspc3.pdf

I don't know of any view cones facing south. Are there any? If so, news to me.
Could be that it's not expressed as a "view cone" if it's in a "design guideline".

Yes, that's what 'viewpoint K' is part of. They've been part of the C3-A guidelines for decades. They influenced the height and massing of both Montreux, on W2nd Ave, and Maynards, although it always seemed to me that one was slightly miscalculated as it does slightly block the view of City Hall. Those views also are why the remaining part of SEFC by Cambie Bridge aren't planned to be as tall as the developed area to the east. That could be another reason to revisit those view limits, although I wouldn't expect a dramatic shift to towers.

[officedweller]

Thanks.

I think of the view cones as being those on this list:
http://former.vancouver.ca/commsvcs/views/listing.htm
so those fly under the radar.

Some of the angles of the views to City Hall look a bit far reaching - like the one from Granville Island.

It would have been nice if BC Place's Northern Lights Display was afforded the same protection, to a landmark building.

[officedweller]

Urban YVR has posted some new pics from Rize on the office building by Pacific Central Station:


https://urbanyvr.com/rize-the-onyx-office-space-for-lease-vancouver


https://urbanyvr.com/rize-the-onyx-office-space-for-lease-vancouver


https://urbanyvr.com/rize-the-onyx-office-space-for-lease-vancouver


https://urbanyvr.com/rize-the-onyx-office-space-for-lease-vancouver



• Video Link

[red-paladin]

Not sure how I feel about this one.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Yeah, "building lodged in another building" designs usually don't work all that well.

[s211]

Originally Posted by red-paladin

Not sure how I feel about this one.

I'm sure how I feel: visually abused.

[osirisboy]

I really like it

[rofina]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

I really like it

I second that. I really like it for that location as well.

Stoked. Hope it doesn't change too much.

[scryer]

I like it too.

But I am hoping for is that this project will kick off other projects in the area. For such a predominant station, Main Street-Science World is very undeveloped.

[Feathered Friend]

UDP Approves of Recovery and Social Homes at 1st and Clark but Split Over Northern European Look
1636 Clark Drive & 1321-1395 East 1st Avenue
This was not your average UDP meeting, as it began with city staff asking the rare question of whether the building should be allowed to be even taller. Meanwhile, the applicant admitted their aspiration was to include as much greenery as possible to improve outcomes for the wellness centre, as well as include as many family sized homes on this site as they could. While that might be the goal of every for-profit developer, it’s harder to criticize the motives of this partnership of BC Housing, Vancouver Coastal Health and the City of Vancouver. It’s fair to say that these three organizations are simply trying to get the best value for taxpayers, while dealing with an underfunded government housing program.

Despite that reality, the applicant acknowledged that the community was deeply divided on this proposal, with half in favour of more housing and half against the change to the neighbourhood. Members of that opposition were present during the meeting, and were clearly upset to learn that, while the housing and withdrawal clinic were expected to employee 50 staffers, there would only be 10 parking spaces provided.

https://cityduo.wordpress.com/2018/06/18...k-but-split-over-northern-european-look/

[Vin]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Wonder how much resistance they'll face here..



http://www.vancourier.com/real-estate/ci...rdable-housing-endowment-fund-1.23335136

Funny that they are only starting to realize their cock-up just when they are on their way out. Ironic, isn't it?

Now that they realize that they need to up the density by a huge notch, they suddenly realize that they are inundated with all the messy restrictions that they stupidly set up in the first place. Dummies...