The Ultimate Vancouver Rumour Thread!

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by Mininari

Hypothetical (Fantasy?) Poll: Which underdeveloped site (according to its zoning and lack of view cone shadowing) do you think could be the next to be redeveloped into a 550'+ tower?
A) 1100 Melville (Sunlife Tower)
B) Fortis BC Tower
C) Burrard Tower (the 700' site)
D) 755 Burrard (550' site)
E) other

I'm guessing E? Hudsons Bay maybe? or Anchor Point? That was 450 maybe they can squeeze in 550? Just realised Anchorpoint will partially block out Burrard Place.

[officedweller]

This was posted back in 2019 in the downtown thread:

Originally Posted by Prometheus

Really, guys? Are you dreaming or something? The extreme southwest corner of this site, i.e., precisely where the tower is being proposed, doesn't have any viewcones (other than the Queen Elizabeth Park viewcone, which can be ignored under downtown higher building policy).

Looking at the following map, you can see clearly why the proposed tower's east side doesn't run parallel to Burrard Street but is cut at a sharp angle:



My guess is that this is the 150+ metre tower LeftCoaster referred to in the rumours thread.

Originally Posted by officedweller

Thanks.

Here are the applicable view cones over the Kilborn Building (Anchor Point office) - View cone 12 - from Granville Bridge.
You can see the existing office building with the Lululemon logo in the pics.


https://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/granville-bridge-protected-view.aspx


https://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/granville-bridge-protected-view.aspx

and for reference:

[phesto]

Originally Posted by Mininari

Hypothetical (Fantasy?) Poll: Which underdeveloped site (according to its zoning and lack of view cone shadowing) do you think could be the next to be redeveloped into a 550'+ tower?
A) 1100 Melville (Sunlife Tower)
B) Fortis BC Tower
C) Burrard Tower (the 700' site)
D) 755 Burrard (550' site)
E) other

Based on the building/site characteristics:

A, & C are good candidates but they have office tenants that are still 10+ years with renewals so redevelopment is unlikely in the next decade.

B is still a relatively new building with good rents; I'd be surprised if it is torn down in next 20 years. It is also owned by TA, parent company of Holborn...they'll focus on Bay Parkade first.

D is a wildcard...I believe PCI owns the neighbouring buildings and could see some movement for a tall tower on that in the next few years. 755 Burrard itself is strata and has not been assembled or wound up and seems unlikely to be included.

[jollyburger]

I think it's a question of when they run out of cheaper lots of land to redevelop and increasing land prices to make it worthwhile to build that high. Especially if it's an office/hotel vs anything that has a residential component.

[Alodar]

This is just on the other side of Nelson st, just outside of Yaletown.

Curious on if this is a prime target to get redeveloped sometime soon? Streets on both the East and West side of the building already have high rise condo's and this is squeeze in between, mainly used for office use and only 3 stories tall. Would seem like a possible candidate to get redeveloped into residential as it's a very long lot and could likely put 2 towers in its location.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by Alodar

This is just on the other side of Nelson st, just outside of Yaletown.

Curious on if this is a prime target to get redeveloped sometime soon? Streets on both the East and West side of the building already have high rise condo's and this is squeeze in between, mainly used for office use and only 3 stories tall. Would seem like a possible candidate to get redeveloped into residential as it's a very long lot and could likely put 2 towers in its location.

I guess if they have a really hard time leasing it as offices (it's a sub-lease so maybe SAP is on the hook for a long time) then maybe they would look at it but I doubt you'll see anything happen within 15-20 years.

In the early 2000s when it was still Crystal Decisions the owners of the building seemed to be (Laurelton Investments Ltd., and KBK No. 197 Ventures Ltd.) Who knows if it's connected but some KBK holding company was also behind ShangriLa along with 1000 Georgia Partnership. KBK was the "landowner". Another KBK numbered company is located inside Peterson's 1166 Alberni head office address on the 17th floor.

[GenWhy?]

Not to mention this dumb zoning hot garbage for that lot:

in the areas denoted by the letter ‘L1’, ‘L2’, the maximum density for all uses shall be
floor space ratio 3.00, except that:
 the maximum density for all uses for a site with social housing shall be floor space
ratio 5.00 provided that social housing comprises more than two-thirds of the floor
space ratio;
 the maximum density for all uses on a corner site with a minimum frontage of 175
feet and a minimum site area of 21,000 square feet shall be floor space ratio 5.00;
 the maximum density for all uses on an interior site with a minimum frontage of
200 feet and a minimum site area of 24,000 square feet shall be floor space ratio
5.00; and
all subject to the following limitations:
 office uses, institutional uses, cultural and recreational uses, and hotel use in the
area denoted by the letter ‘L1’, shall not in total exceed floor space ratio 1.00;
except on the 400 and 500 block Pacific Boulevard where office uses shall not
exceed floor space ratio 2.00 and where institutional uses and cultural and
recreational uses shall not in total exceed floor space ratio 1.00 provided that office
uses, institutional uses, and cultural and recreational uses shall not in total exceed
floor space ratio 2.00;

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Not to mention this dumb zoning hot garbage for that lot:

in the areas denoted by the letter ‘L1’, ‘L2’, the maximum density for all uses shall be
floor space ratio 3.00, except that:
 the maximum density for all uses for a site with social housing shall be floor space
ratio 5.00 provided that social housing comprises more than two-thirds of the floor
space ratio;
 the maximum density for all uses on a corner site with a minimum frontage of 175
feet and a minimum site area of 21,000 square feet shall be floor space ratio 5.00;
 the maximum density for all uses on an interior site with a minimum frontage of
200 feet and a minimum site area of 24,000 square feet shall be floor space ratio
5.00; and
all subject to the following limitations:
 office uses, institutional uses, cultural and recreational uses, and hotel use in the
area denoted by the letter ‘L1’, shall not in total exceed floor space ratio 1.00;
except on the 400 and 500 block Pacific Boulevard where office uses shall not
exceed floor space ratio 2.00 and where institutional uses and cultural and
recreational uses shall not in total exceed floor space ratio 1.00 provided that office
uses, institutional uses, and cultural and recreational uses shall not in total exceed
floor space ratio 2.00;

They had to apply for that hot garbage in 2001 because they felt the earlier zoning was too limiting.

https://council.vancouver.ca/010918/p2.htm

Zoning Context: The subject site is situated in Downtown South (sub-area L of the Downtown District), which encourages residential use while permitting smaller scale local serving, office, retail, service and cultural and recreational uses. It is flanked by sub-area C and the Yaletown Historic District (HA-3) which permits residential use plus a broader range and higher densities of office, retail, service, cultural/recreational uses than sub-area L. In addition, some manufacturing uses are permitted in both sub-area C and HA-3.

Zoning History: When the Downtown South zoning was enacted in 1991, it was envisioned that over time the area would develop into a high density residential area supplemented with some local serving retail, service, office, cultural and institutional uses. To achieve the maximum residential densities, in most instances site assemblies would be required with the associated redevelopment of older small scale commercial and service use buildings. Since1991 approximately 3,700 new units accommodating about 5,500 new residents have been built in Downtown South.

Subject Site: The site is a full city block (without an internal lane) under a single ownership. The whole block is developed with a three storey building built in the 1950s as a warehousing/wholesaling building. It contains large clear span floor plates and rooftop parking. The currently approved uses are office with ancillary storage lockers and restaurant for a total FSR of 2.74. (See Appendix C).

Rezoning Proposal: Due to the substantial size of the building and the recent significant upgrades for new tenants, the owner wishes to retain and re-use the building for the foreseeable future. The owner believes the current zoning does not permit a possible and practical array of uses and densities in the existing building.

At the rezoning inquiry stage, staff suggested that rather than pursuing a CD-1 rezoning of the site, the prospective applicant may wish to submit an application to amend the Downtown District ODP to create a new sub-area within Sub-Area L, essentially to permit uses and redevelopment now permitted in Sub-Area L, along with new uses that would only be permitted for the life of the Showmart Building. This procedure would permit the ultimate redevelopment of the site without a further rezoning. All the existing sub-area conditions would apply, and the expanded provisions for a previously existing building (L2) could be removed as a miscellaneous text amendment. The applicant followed this suggestion and included with the application a list of proposed new uses for the building.

Uses: The current zoning (sub-area L) encourages high density residential development, limits certain retail, service, office and cultural and institutional uses, and does not permit manufacturing uses. Across both Nelson Street in HA-3 and Smithe Street in sub-area C, a greater array of uses is permitted. The intent of the amendment is to permit this greater array of uses while recognizing the intent of Council policy and area zoning which identifies residential as the preferred land use in sub-area L. Therefore, when evaluating the proposed new land uses, staff considered the likely impacts on residential livability. Staff believe most potential impacts resulting from the new uses will be contained within the building and vehicular traffic will use the existing entrance and exit adjacent to Nelson Street and Smithe Street.

[GenWhy?]

Good! The existing zoning and most of DD zone is in need of an update. The office and hotel is just so limiting

[officedweller]

There's also a view cone up Cambie St from False Creek, so height is limited to about 29-30 storeys.

[GenWhy?]

Good with the height. 10-15 or 17 wouldn't be bad - it's just that 5 FSR is so wildly low. Down the Street at the Robson-Cambie site they're double that.

[seamusmcduff]

Strangely I actually kind of like the SAP building. In a "so bad it's good" way

[Changing City]

Unless they've sold it, the building is owned by Kingswood Capital. It was built in 1948 as the Hudson's Bay Warehouse. Joe Segal (of Kingswood) bought it in 1976 when he bought Zellers from HBC. At the time the building was valued at $600,000. Joe sold Zeller's back to HBC in 1979, having turned it from a $300m a year loss to a $500m a year profit in just three years, but hung onto the warehouse. He initially turned it into Showmart, a wholesale sales showroom, and then re-worked it by adding windows in 2001, when he built a repalcement fashion exchange on the False Creek Flats. He leased the offices to Crystal Decisions, who were acquired in 2003 by Business Objects, and they in turn were acquired by German software company SAP in 2008. The revised 2001 zoning made sure taxes reflect the low FSR and not some theoretical higher density of residential.

(I'm pretty sure KBK No. 197 Ventures Ltd just means it was transferred to a lawyer's shell company at one time - Peterson and Westbank, among others, also use the same mechanism to acquire and hold individual buildings).

There shouldn't be a problem rezoning to a higher density, but it means there will be a CAC or in-kind benefit generated as the land lift will be greater than if it was already zoned for a high FSR. There's likely to be something like Yaletown Park in terms of density, which is over 7 FSR. That has 3 towers, 30 to 34 storeys, built by Wall in 2006, and the full city block of the SAP building ought to have space for four, or even five, (maybe one as non-market) as well as maybe a new open space to mirror the crappily designed Yaletown Park that's due a makeover soon. There could be at least some retail or commercial in a podium, too.

Joe Segal died last year aged 97, so presumably there could be changes to the company's development portfolio in due course. His companies were privately held, and don't have a website, but they have developed residential in the past, although not on this scale. They could sell on, do it themselves, or in a partnership.

[LeftCoaster]

Still owned by kingswood.

This is very interesting timing for this building to end up in the rumour thread and that's all I'm going to say about that...

[jollyburger]

Isn't this their site?

https://kingswoodproperties.com/

It lists a bunch of sites but no Mainland.

The SAP sub-lease was until 2025 so I guess we'll hear something about the site with a new tenant sooner or later.

https://www.collierscanada.com/en-ca/pro...ouver-british-columbia-canada/can2011248

One of the owners of 910 Mainland (Laurelton Investments Ltd) also had an office at 1040 W Georgia Unit 990 which is a Kingswood Properties building. And Joseph Segal was listed as a President and some other titles to Laurelton at one time.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by officedweller

There's also a view cone up Cambie St from False Creek, so height is limited to about 29-30 storeys.

I'm guessing it's less since Boffo's Smithe project across the street was limited to 26 stories. Unless they get some exception.

Height is limited to 284 ft. by the Alder Terrace view cone as no intrusions are permitted into this space.

https://vancouver.ca/files/cov/committees/minutes-urban-design-panel-20160810.pdf

https://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/alder-terrace-protected-view.aspx

[s211]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Still owned by kingswood.

And in percentage terms, the capital gain would probably be recognized as a world record.

[jollyburger]

That view cone covers most of the site with a tiny sliver on the west side not in it.

[Denscity]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Still owned by kingswood.

This is very interesting timing for this building to end up in the rumour thread and that's all I'm going to say about that...

Oh??

[madog222]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

This is very interesting timing for this building to end up in the rumour thread and that's all I'm going to say about that...

Certainly interesting that it was brought up in the user's first post.