Vancouver View Cones - Reviews and Amendments

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I assume that's a QE viewcone, which are the dumbest in the city for sure.

How so? At least that one is at an actual viewpoint, somewhere tourists and locals alike get a sense of scale of the mountains and city. Some of the others are more tenuous.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by whatnext

How so? At least that one is at an actual viewpoint, somewhere tourists and locals alike get a sense of scale of the mountains and city. Some of the others are more tenuous.

Maybe in its current form it's silly. Buildings could easily be significantly taller with no real impact to mountain views. Or the views might be even better.

[officedweller]

People need to recognize that the City is a part of the view.
There are plenty of viewpoints and observation towers worldwide where the main attraction is a view of the buildings of the city.

[GenWhy?]

But that's why 3.1 is silly. You're looking at the skyline no matter what from QE, whether that be the skyline on the north or south side of the downtown peninsula

[Vin]

Originally Posted by madog222

View cone intrusion of the 130 W Broadway proposal.


Image from NSDA Architects https://www.shapeyourcity.ca/130-w-broadway

This must be viewed by a 15ft giant or troll standing in front of the conservatory, with a super-vision ability that can magnify the view 10X.

For an average person, the view of downtown towards the mountains looks more like this:

https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2423064,...41.45604-ro11.133246-fo100!7i5472!8i2736


Makes no difference even if the buildings go a lot taller since downtown is mostly blocked by trees.

[chowhou]

As a proponent of ending view-cone tyranny in the city, to be fair the QE viewcones are from this vantage point.

[Linky]

It's kind of funny how you can precisely see Living Shangri-La cut off at the top of the BPs.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by chowhou

As a proponent of ending view-cone tyranny in the city, to be fair the QE viewcones are from this vantage point.

[Linky]

It's kind of funny how you can precisely see Living Shangri-La cut off at the top of the BPs.

For that little corner of the park, thousands can't afford to live, or companies cannot locate in this City. Really makes sense huh?

No wonder the City of Vancouver is bankrupt.

[Migrant_Coconut]

*Dozens of residents and companies; roughly 10-20 housing units per tower, and much fewer offices. And real estate in any downtown (the most desirable part of practically every city) is by definition unaffordable to most people.

Removing the viewcones is necessary for a prettier skyline, but won't do jack to affordability.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by Vin

No wonder the City of Vancouver is bankrupt.

I remember, bankrupt is another of the words you don't understand. The 2023 budget shows the City of Vancouver had an operating surplus of $190m in 2022.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Removing the viewcones is necessary for a prettier skyline, but won't do jack to affordability.

Supply and Demand is a thing.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

*Dozens of residents and companies; roughly 10-20 housing units per tower, and much fewer offices. And real estate in any downtown (the most desirable part of practically every city) is by definition unaffordable to most people.

Removing the viewcones is necessary for a prettier skyline, but won't do jack to affordability.

On the long run, it opens up more volume to be developed, increasing supply.

If the QE viewcone was kept as-is, Broadway would be max 15 stories, OV-Style.

[GenWhy?]

adjusting the QE viewcones is the only real one that'll provide a majority of affordable housing

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

adjusting the QE viewcones is the only real one that'll provide a majority of affordable housing

Some of the ones around False Creek South reduce the heights of stuff in Yaletown and Granville (though Vancouver basically started to ignore those before the QE one), and the Main St. viewcone limits the height of St. Paul's and NEFC.

Also, some shadowing ones are dumb. Some shadowing on parks is fine, especially if other towers are already shadowing them anyways.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Also, some shadowing ones are dumb. Some shadowing on parks is fine, especially if other towers are already shadowing them anyways.

Shadow policies on parks already takes into account any shadows from existing buildings. For example: here's the Marine Landing Policy Update. "Proposed heights should not result in new shadow impacts on Ash Park at the equinoxes between 10am and 4pm."

[logan5]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

adjusting the QE viewcones is the only real one that'll provide a majority of affordable housing

And give Vancouver it's swagger back. That's more important than affordable housing.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Some of the ones around False Creek South reduce the heights of stuff in Yaletown and Granville (though Vancouver basically started to ignore those before the QE one), and the Main St. viewcone limits the height of St. Paul's and NEFC.

Also, some shadowing ones are dumb. Some shadowing on parks is fine, especially if other towers are already shadowing them anyways.

Right but I'm talking about where the majority of affordable housing can be built. NEFC and St. Pauls site doesn't factor in.

You'd have some more condos to take nice pictures of for downtown towers that raises land costs and speculation, but that'd be about it.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by logan5

And give Vancouver it's swagger back. That's more important than affordable housing.

Damnit I knew I forgot something. Jon Stovel swaggerrrrr

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Supply and Demand is a thing.

Originally Posted by fredinno

On the long run, it opens up more volume to be developed, increasing supply...

Sure, and a lot of things that're completely outside the viewcones would add 100x the supply at lower prices. Put another dozen-ish $2 million condos in the market once or twice a year, nothing happens.

Originally Posted by fredinno

... If the QE viewcone was kept as-is, Broadway would be max 15 stories, OV-Style.

Originally Posted by fredinno

Some of the ones around False Creek South reduce the heights of stuff in Yaletown and Granville (though Vancouver basically started to ignore those before the QE one), and the Main St. viewcone limits the height of St. Paul's and NEFC.

Also, some shadowing ones are dumb. Some shadowing on parks is fine, especially if other towers are already shadowing them anyways.

20-30 floors, actually, depending on which part of the corridor you look at. And the QE viewcone actually stops east of Oak, which is how we're getting all the 40-floor developments around South Granville.

Again, I'm all for having an observation tower at QE and lifting the 'cones accordingly; until that's politically viable though, there's much more important fights to pick that would yield actual affordable housing. Yaletown will never be cheap again.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Sure, and a lot of things that're completely outside the viewcones would add 100x the supply at lower prices. Put another dozen-ish $2 million condos in the market once or twice a year, nothing happens.

Unless you honestly believe building more housing increases demand faster than it increases supply, you're just wrong. Building high end condos means reducing pressure on lower end housing that high end buyers are buying because they have nothing else to buy. Supply is supply. Let's not pretend it does nothing. Housing = good.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by chowhou

Unless you honestly believe building more housing increases demand faster than it increases supply, you're just wrong. Building high end condos means reducing pressure on lower end housing that high end buyers are buying because they have nothing else to buy. Supply is supply. Let's not pretend it does nothing. Housing = good.

Housing is good. More, cheaper, faster housing is better. Once again, lifting the viewcones adds dozens to market which'll take decades to become affordable... when other policies could be giving us hundreds of MIRHPs, co-ops or other Day One $1k/bed units.