Olympic Village & Southeast False Creek Updates Discussion - Page 143

Delirium · #**2841** Posted **Mar 10, 2011, 4:04 PM**

^ there's a rendering posted on their website now www.opsalliving.com
looks ok. decent height for that area. not to keen on the sawtooth balconies.
reminds me of burrard gateway a bit...

Millennium2002 · #**2842** Posted **Mar 10, 2011, 5:33 PM**

Yeah... they are using roughly the same design elements for both towers. Kind of like having two twin buildings built, although they're not next to each other. Aren't there already a few examples of that in Vancouver? =O

jlousa · #**2843** Posted **Mar 11, 2011, 3:40 AM**

Think the city erred on this project, it's much to tall for the surrounding area. Right next to Main St station and the taller Citygate towers it would've worked, but over on the opposite end it overpowers the scale of the immediate area.
Probably won't get to much agreement on this, but that's my opinion. The design itself looks good though.

agrant · #**2844** Posted **Mar 11, 2011, 4:04 AM**

But then, wasn't Citygate too tall for the surrounding neighborhood? It still is, after all these years. I think by the time you have all the surrounding projects built out, it won't stick out so much.

jlousa · #**2845** Posted **Mar 11, 2011, 4:17 AM**

Yes but Citygate was always envisioned as a cluster and with additional towers abutting it so that it builds up and back down. That is not the case with this tower as the surrounding area is envisioned to be much lower, hence why I think it'll stick out. I agree if there were like sized buildings zoned for the immediate area that this building wouldn't be an issue.

logan5 · #**2846** Posted **Mar 11, 2011, 4:35 AM**

I believe the extra height was given in exchange for the restoration of the Opsal Steel Building.

Seems like a good trade.

dleung · #**2847** Posted **Mar 11, 2011, 5:13 AM**

Ah Vancouver... everything is for sale...

jlousa · #**2848** Posted **Mar 11, 2011, 5:20 AM**

Yes it was due to the restoration, not sure if I agree it was worth it though.

agrant · #**2849** Posted **Mar 11, 2011, 5:28 AM**

Yea, I was just looking at a PDF file, a map of the SEFC plan with proposed heights.... wish I could find the link. Anyways, I noticed the height review area veered around the Opsal project for some reason. Seems a bit of a mystery.

jlousa · #**2850** Posted **Mar 11, 2011, 5:45 AM**

http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/bylaws/odp/SEFC.pdf

Believe it's on page 43 and 44 of the above amended document.

agrant · #**2851** Posted **Mar 11, 2011, 6:14 AM**

Thanks. Seems a bit newer than the version I downloaded awhile ago. Opsal will really be standing out if the area south of 2nd remains as is.

logan5 · #**2852** Posted **Mar 11, 2011, 6:51 AM**

Do these by-laws leave an option for greater densities or heights if an opportunity (like Opsal Steel) presents itself? And what is the cities definition of units in this area that are suitable for families with small children? Does anybody happen to know?

wrenegade · #**2853** Posted **Mar 11, 2011, 5:41 PM**

All of the buildings between 1st and 2nd have the option of 2 additional stories if the developers want to pay the extra CACs that go along with them. I think the city is still quite a ways away from dealing with their land north of 1st and west of Hinge Park.

I do agree that Opsal will be a monster. I wonder if it will turn out something like the Observatory on 2nd Street in North Van? Opsal looks a hell of a lot better, but will still stick out close to 10 storeys above the next biggest building.

cornholio · #**2854** Posted **Mar 11, 2011, 7:46 PM**

Sounds like they should have applied their higher building policies(if that is what its called) to this one to make sure the design is architecturally stunning.

I think any building that goes significantly higher then its neighbors and stands out like this one should have the city force a higher architectural design standard. I think if the building looked great and unique instead of just another condo tower it would fit fine in the area even if its much higher, it could infact be a good thing and create a focal point in the area.

This looks too average though for a building that will stand out and when you look at the area it will be the first thing you see and notice every time for a long long time.

SFUVancouver · #**2855** Posted **Mar 11, 2011, 9:06 PM**

Not great weather for the photo tour this week.

SEFC from the Cambie Street Bridge, looking down First Avenue.

Taken by SFUVancouver, March 10th, 2011.

Maynards Block.

Taken by SFUVancouver, March 10th, 2011.

Maynards Block project detail.

Taken by SFUVancouver, March 10th, 2011.

Taken by SFUVancouver, March 10th, 2011.

Pinnacle Living False Creek.

Taken by SFUVancouver, March 10th, 2011.

Taken by SFUVancouver, March 10th, 2011.

James is basically at grade.

Taken by SFUVancouver, March 10th, 2011.

First and Main social housing as seen from the Creekside Community Centre.

Taken by SFUVancouver, March 10th, 2011.

Demolition/deconstruction work continues on the Opsal Steel heritage building.

Taken by SFUVancouver, March 10th, 2011.

First and Main supportive housing

Taken by SFUVancouver, March 10th, 2011.

SpongeG · #**2856** Posted **Mar 11, 2011, 9:08 PM**

i like that there are some tall buildings mixed in amongst the low - but than i am probably one of the few who loves london skyline with its random skyscrapers dotting the city

i don't like them all massed

officedweller · #**2857** Posted **Mar 11, 2011, 10:39 PM**

I don't mind having a few buildigs much taller than those around it - it adds variety.
I think that CityGate in uniformly placing all of its tall towers on the water side of the complexes messes up the look of the area more than an oddball tall tower will.

jlousa · #**2858** Posted **Mar 12, 2011, 5:22 AM**

No surprise here, more future body heat for the OV.

Quote:

Rezoning Application - 2-88 West 1st Avenue

Bingham Hill Architects has applied to the City of Vancouver to amend the existing CD-1 (Comprehensive Development) District zoning on this site. The application proposes to increase the density and height for the subject site. The proposal includes addition of 2 floors to tower Buildings A and C, and addition of 1 floor to low-rise Building B. The total additional floor area would be 27,096 st. ft., which increases the total permitted floor area by 16.8%. Height of Building A would increase from 9 to 11 storeys; height of Building B would increase from 4 to 5 storeys, and height of Building C would increase from 10 to 12 storeys. The maximum permitted density now proposed is 3.88 FSR.

hollywoodnorth · #**2859** Posted **Mar 12, 2011, 7:38 AM**

interesting to see Bastion is going to be marketing the 2nd phase of the "Opsal" project under a different name .... "Proximity"

Located at East 2nd Avenue and Ontario Street, the Proximity high-rise tower will stand as a visible reminder of the Vancouver’s industrial history. The sleek concrete tower will rise adjacent to the heritage site of Opsal Steel, one of city’s landmark buildings, which will soon offer retail and amenity space in the new Opsal block. Just moments from Vancouver’s Olympic Village site and its abundance of community amenities, this tower will mark a new development within a very historic neighbourhood. Sustainably designed to include green rooftops and solar panels, a new landmark will rise with Proximity.

http://www.bastiondevelopment.com/developments/detail/proximity

pics from link above

invisibleairwaves · #**2860** Posted **Mar 12, 2011, 7:49 AM**

^ R.I.P Airwaves Sound...ah well, I guess this was inevitable. The redevelopment of SEFC is going to make things difficult for a lot of businesses related to film and TV. Hopefully the industry can bounce back in newer buildings, or at least find some good space in Burnaby or whatever. Times are tough for the industry, and the cost of relocating will mean the end for quite a few of these businesses.