Vancouver Infill & Lowrise Updates Discussion

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by zahav

I can't think of any areas of Vancouver that have new SFD developments (like Coquitlam's Burke Mountain, or so many parts of Surrey or Langley). You really need greenfield space for new subdivions, for the most part (or redvelopment of old massive lots or "rural" type housing like what Burke Mountain had before). All of those units in Vancouver were old houses that got torn down

there is one i think. though it is only 8 homes... it looks nice, though as they say, location location location

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

that would be absolutely terrible.

I dunno, isn't that kind of what a rowhouse is?

[Tetsuo]

Originally Posted by zahav

I can't think of any areas of Vancouver that have new SFD developments (like Coquitlam's Burke Mountain, or so many parts of Surrey or Langley). You really need greenfield space for new subdivions, for the most part (or redvelopment of old massive lots or "rural" type housing like what Burke Mountain had before). All of those units in Vancouver were old houses that got torn down

Killarney/Champlain area was really the last of that, and even most of that was townhome development.

The closest that exists to that today is when a large size lot gets redeveloped into a duplex.

Even new greenfields that come into play in places like Burnaby (Byrne and Southlands) are earmarked for Townhome/Lowrise apartment housing

[Marshal]

Originally Posted by Vin

That's because things haven't changed since I last talked about it. Need to vomit into your throat for greater effect. Looks like it's working.

Well I tried.

Here is a little dialogue for you.

9PM Person, "It's a beautiful sky tonight."
9PM Vin, "No, it is too dark."
10PM Vin, "It is too dark."
11PM Vin, "It is still too dark."
12PM Vin, "It is too dark."
1AM Vin, "It's too dark."
2AM Vin, "It's not bright enough . . . too damn dark."
3AM Vin, "It's too dark."
3AM Person, "Vin, stop repeating yourself."
3AM Vin, "Why? The sky hasn't changed since I last said it is too dark. It's still too dark."
3AM Person, "I tried."
4AM Vin, "It's too dark."
5AM Vin, "It's too dark."
. . . ad nauseum . . .

[djh]

Originally Posted by Marshal

Well I tried.

Here is a little dialogue for you.

9PM Person, "It's a beautiful sky tonight."
9PM Vin, "No, it is too dark."
10PM Vin, "It is too dark."
11PM Vin, "It is still too dark."
12PM Vin, "It is too dark."
1AM Vin, "It's too dark."
2AM Vin, "It's not bright enough . . . too damn dark."
3AM Vin, "It's too dark."
3AM Person, "Vin, stop repeating yourself."
3AM Vin, "Why? The sky hasn't changed since I last said it is too dark. It's still too dark."
3AM Person, "I tried."
4AM Vin, "It's too dark."
5AM Vin, "It's too dark."
. . . ad nauseum . . .

[Vin]

Originally Posted by zahav

I can't think of any areas of Vancouver that have new SFD developments (like Coquitlam's Burke Mountain, or so many parts of Surrey or Langley). You really need greenfield space for new subdivions, for the most part (or redvelopment of old massive lots or "rural" type housing like what Burke Mountain had before). All of those units in Vancouver were old houses that got torn down

Yes, old ones get torn down and new ones built. It's not that we have any more land for new SFH subdivision sprawl. However it is still really shocking so many got built in 2019, meaning that many SFH lots will not get rezoned for a long time.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by Tetsuo

Killarney/Champlain area was really the last of that, and even most of that was townhome development.

The closest that exists to that today is when a large size lot gets redeveloped into a duplex.

Even new greenfields that come into play in places like Burnaby (Byrne and Southlands) are earmarked for Townhome/Lowrise apartment housing

And same with Surrey, Langley, Coquitlam, Maple Ridge, etc. SFHs still getting built for sure, but lots of townhouse developments getting built as well. Even Winnipeg suburbs are building 1/4-1/3 of land in new subdivisions as townhouses, it's just the way (relative) land values are going.

[Migrant_Coconut]

And when you put it in perspective, 3,426 new detached houses is 171 blocks - less than a hundredth of the city, much less the metro. Still plenty of room to upzone.

[Feathered Friend]

https://www.google.com/earth/

A Chance To Make Amends – Will 78 New Rental Homes Heal A Broken Community

1405 East 15th Avenue & 3047 – 3071 Maddams Street
At first glance this may seem like a terrible location to add new homes. After all, why would anyone want to live near the Clark-Knight diversion where traffic to the port is forced to bend around a wavey s-curve. It’s no wonder that, nearly 50 years ago, it was the namesake of one of Vancouver’s most notorious gangs. However, all things change with time, and the area’s average household income has soared to almost $90,000 annually.

Naturally this has led to an increase in land values too, which can be seen as the older housing stock is torn down and replaced with new single-family luxury designs. Fortunately that might not happen here, as the old Affordable Housing Choices Interim Rezoning Policy allows these four properties, worth an average of roughly $1.4 million each, to be transformed into an 78 home rental building instead.

Based on the past, this could be a controversial one
https://cityduo.wordpress.com/2020/01/24...ew-rental-homes-heal-a-broken-community/

[Feathered Friend]

In September, the neighbourhood representatives on the 1st Shaughnessy Advisory Design Panel refused to support this colourful “conservation” of 1374 Laurie Ave, a property valued at $6.7 million. Was this month's 2nd review the best use of #Vancouver's limited resources?

https://twitter.com/City_Duo/status/1221950669763969026?s=20

We can't say why it failed to win support last year, or if the result was different last week, as the minutes haven't been released, & we don't care to spend our time at these mansion reviews. That said, you can easily learn more about the project here
https://development.vancouver.ca/pc1374laurier/index.htm

https://twitter.com/City_Duo/status/1221950674184720384?s=20

[Feathered Friend]

A Square Peg In A Round Hole – UDP Recommends Rental Housing Confirm To Main Street’s Eclectic Character

4745-4795 Main Street
Ironically, as I was busy at another Urban Design Panel meeting, I missed out on this six floor rental building’s open house last November. Unfortunately, Hannah wasn’t able to attend that event either, as she had a prior commitment that day too. So, we simply don’t know whether those who came out supported the transformation of this car dealership or if they questioned its fit with the vibe of Main Street. However, it soon became clear these volunteer panellists were worried about the later.

It wasn’t a debate on whether this height and density was appropriate, but whether the architectural style was. Almost everyone was confused why the applicants had chosen to emphasize the height of the building through the use of repetitious pilasters. A couple members criticized it for creating a lifeless monolithic appearance, and almost everyone agreed it looked out of place. The majority believed this could be remedied if the long frontage was broken down, varied, and better articulated.

https://cityduo.wordpress.com/2020/01/30...firm-to-main-streets-eclectic-character/

[osirisboy]

Ugh. God forbid a building emphasizes its height and size. I'm confused as to why the panel always seems to like to make things look smaller.

They can break it up all they want. It will still be lifeless stretch of a building if the city continues to forbid individual retail tenants from customizing their storefronts

[officedweller]

To me the pilasters impart a more traditional look, which would give the building a look of permanence (especially in brick).
As for the retail window width, that's no different than any heritage building (ie Yaletown) and arguably provides more character than a wide expanse of glass (ie a typical commercial retail frontage).

i.e. Opus Hotel, Yaletown
(although pilasters don't all come to ground on Davie side)


https://www.agoda.com/opus-hotel_2/hotel/vancouver-bc-ca.html?cid=-218

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

Ugh. God forbid a building emphasizes its height and size. I'm confused as to why the panel always seems to like to make things look smaller.

They can break it up all they want. It will still be lifeless stretch of a building if the city continues to forbid individual retail tenants from customizing their storefronts

It's usually the owner that doesn't like tenants changing storefronts. East is East were allowed to build their 'rather different' storefront on Main a few years ago.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by officedweller

To me the pilasters impart a more traditional look, which would give the building a look of permanence (especially in brick).
As for the retail window width, that's no different than any heritage building (ie Yaletown) and arguably provides more character than a wide expanse of glass (ie a typical commercial retail frontage).

i.e. Opus Hotel, Yaletown:

That's true, but might it look a bit odd on Main Street? It would fit in Yaletown really well.

[osirisboy]

Originally Posted by Changing City

It's usually the owner that doesn't like tenants changing storefronts. East is East were allowed to build their 'rather different' storefront on Main a few years ago.

Are you sure? wasn't it the city that tried to have them remove it and had a huge problem with it.

[osirisboy]

Originally Posted by Changing City

That's true, but might it look a bit odd on Main Street? It would fit in Yaletown really well.

It would fit better than most of the new buildings that have gone up on main

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Changing City

That's true, but might it look a bit odd on Main Street? It would fit in Yaletown really well.

I think it would fit in Mt Pleasant.
I don't see why it would look so out of place up near King Edward and may help create some focus to the long strip of lowrises.
The proposed yellow brick will also reduce the bulkiness of the building.

I remember that the 1 Kingsway building (apartments and the library) was originally proposed to be yellow brick,
but it was changed to be red brick to conform to the neighbourhood.
That building would have been more interesting in yellow brick.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I think it would fit in Mt Pleasant.
I don't see why it would look so out of place up near King Edward and may help create some focus to the long strip of lowrises.

And as midtown Vancouver spreads outward, so might the look. Main could become the "brick district" street.

[logan5]

That section of Main Street doesn’t seem to have a clear and firm name. I guess Riley Park?

But I would go one step further in density and height since we are so desperate for rental housing. And it’s renters that drive neighborhoods like Mt. Pleasant and Riley Park, so let’r rip.