Suburban Updates - All Other Metro Vancouver Municipalities

[osirisboy]

That far is low! That’s the first thing that stuck out to me. Maybe instead of the single story podium it could be ten. That would add a bunch of density

[GeeCee]

Previous news about this site includes the pre-rezoning notice at the end of 2019: https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/5680...rquitlam-plaza

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by invisibleairwaves

So the developer is Morguard- same people doing the Coquitlam Centre redevelopment. 20-50 storey towers, but 5.5 FAR seems a bit low? Other nearby tower projects are around 6-7 and this one is right next to the station so you'd think you'd want the most density here.

The 7-tower Whitgift Gardens project by Concert is also 5.5 FAR. A lot of the projects in other suburban locations like Burnaby are lower FAR than they seem, because they have tall towers, but they're on a relatively large site.

[p r i n c e]

Originally Posted by Changing City

The 7-tower Whitgift Gardens project by Concert is also 5.5 FAR. A lot of the projects in other suburban locations like Burnaby are lower FAR than they seem, because they have tall towers, but they're on a relatively large site.

On top of that (if I'm not mistaken), the Burquitlam skytrain station is currently part of the titled parcel. They get the density on the gross area and have to fit it on the net site (excluding the station and road through the site). Hence the seemingly 'lower' FAR for the dev.

I bet if you were look look at the net density it would be much much higher.

[SpongeG]

demo progress at Royal Columbian Hospital in New West

March 4
2021-03-04_05-28-06 by snub_you, on Flickr

2021-03-04_05-28-29 by snub_you, on Flickr

[SpongeG]

Another tower proposal for the area in the NW section of North Road and Como Lake in Coquitlam.

Feb 22, 2021 21-021 618, 622, 626 Claremont
St, 631, 633 Gardena Ave
Project Proposal: to construct a 29-storey residential tower with 246 units and a 6-storey rental building with 103 units Applications associated with proposal: Rezoning from RS-1 to CD zone based on RM-6 Non-delegated Development Permit for form and character Subdivision for site configuration Road Cancellation for portion of lane

[officedweller]

I think we had heard of this before, but great to hear it's proceeding
(though it's not the prettiest building).

14-storey office tower coming to Coquitlam City Centre
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/2992...rive-coquitlam


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/2992...rive-coquitlam


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/2992...rive-coquitlam

Overhead walkway to neighbouring condo tower.


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/2992...rive-coquitlam

There's already an opening in the neighbouring building. Is that parking up there?


https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2827...7i16384!8i8192


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/2992...rive-coquitlam

[invisibleairwaves]

Originally Posted by p r i n c e

On top of that (if I'm not mistaken), the Burquitlam skytrain station is currently part of the titled parcel. They get the density on the gross area and have to fit it on the net site (excluding the station and road through the site). Hence the seemingly 'lower' FAR for the dev.

I bet if you were look look at the net density it would be much much higher.

Ah ok that makes sense, and I guess the new roads are bringing it down as well. I do think those podiums look a bit short but it's pretty early in the process. Hoping we get a public hearing (and the accompanying details) sometime this year.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I think we had heard of this before, but great to hear it's proceeding
(though it's not the prettiest building).

There's already an opening in the neighbouring building. Is that parking up there?

Yes - the residential buildings all appear to have some above grade parking - it looks like some are two floors, and some may be four. The approved scheme (from 2011) had 53,000 of office in 9 floors, but the proposal now is to build 78,000 in 14. That extra 25,000 square feet ("a significant expansion of the previously approved office tower" - Daily Hive) will take the developed FSR to 5.13. They will be strata offices, so likely small, local serving rather than larger businesses.

[SpongeG]

that area doesn't have underground parking, the ground is not suitable for it. I heard that it was quite swampy marshy land that was filled in over the years.

[Colin4567]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

that area doesn't have underground parking, the ground is not suitable for it. I heard that it was quite swampy marshy land that was filled in over the years.

The proposal at 2992 Glen actually does have 2 or 3 levels of underground parking planned and I'm pretty sure the under-construction Sophora (Polygon Homes, southwest corner of Glen and Westwood) has underground parking as well as above-ground parking. But yes, Coquitlam Centre's geology (at least in that area) prevents deep excavations for underground parking.

[vanman]

My pics from yesterday.

[goodcitywhenfinished]

Originally Posted by vanman

My pics from yesterday.

The missing middle could not be more obvious.

We need to level a few SFH neighbourhoods and fill them with mid rises.

[vanman]

There are probably 100s of units of townhomes/low rise apartments in the last pic I posted alone. I was walking around Victoria Hill in New West yesterday and that neighbourhood is almost entirely made up of "missing middle" housing.

Just watched this video yesterday that highlights Vancouver as a place with no "middle" housing.
• Video Link

Yet in the aerial footage used the 1000s of units of townhomes and lowrise apartments of the Olympic Village and Fairview Slopes is ignored.

[seamusmcduff]

I think you and the video poster are both correct in your own ways. You're correct in that Vancouver actually does have a more gradual shift from towers to single family than most North American cities with a not so insignificant portion of missing middle housing. However, I think the main point of the video is still valid, that there is still way too much of our land base that is dedicated to single family homes. This may be changing, but the changes clearly aren't happening fast enough to meet our housing needs.

[scryer]

Originally Posted by seamusmcduff

I think you and the video poster are both correct in your own ways. You're correct in that Vancouver actually does have a more gradual shift from towers to single family than most North American cities with a not so insignificant portion of missing middle housing.

And to be totally fair, the COV has improved this significantly with a lot of proposals and changes that go pretty much unnoticed on these forums just because we don't want to dedicate a thread to every project . There are townhouse projects proposed that do change the zoning from a SFH to a multi-family zone that are popping up more frequently deep in the COV. Perhaps the link I shared wasn't the best since it's technically a part of the Cambie Corridor plan but it's the one that's sticking out for me atm.

However the COV, IMO, does missing middle housing better than most of the Metro Vancouver & Fraser Valley suburbs. So there's that lol.

So yeah, things are changing albeit far too slowly.

Originally Posted by seamusmcduff

However, I think the main point of the video is still valid, that there is still way too much of our land base that is dedicated to single family homes. This may be changing, but the changes clearly aren't happening fast enough to meet our housing needs.

I agree as well. Actually over 60% of COV's land is dedicated to SFH zones. (As outlined by the light grey) Interactive map here.



To simplify: housing demand has outpaced the housing supply in an unbalanced way. And it's a true shame that the current mayor that was voted in promised changes to update the city-wide zoning policies that he hasn't delivered on or is interested in delivering. In fact, I'll call it now, he may seek re-election with promises to finish the city wide zoning update . And I don't want to hear any excuses for him; he was sworn in 3 years ago and has nothing to show for it regarding the city wide plan.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by vanman

There are probably 100s of units of townhomes/low rise apartments in the last pic I posted alone. I was walking around Victoria Hill in New West yesterday and that neighbourhood is almost entirely made up of "missing middle" housing.

A lot of that neighbourhood is also "adult only" housing, where they don't allow anybody under the age of 19 to live. That's not particularly great for families.

[GenWhy?]

That is a very dated interacting map:

"The building data (2009) and zoning data (2018)".

[Vin]

Originally Posted by vanman

There are probably 100s of units of townhomes/low rise apartments in the last pic I posted alone. I was walking around Victoria Hill in New West yesterday and that neighbourhood is almost entirely made up of "missing middle" housing.

Just watched this video yesterday that highlights Vancouver as a place with no "middle" housing.
• Video Link

Yet in the aerial footage used the 1000s of units of townhomes and lowrise apartments of the Olympic Village and Fairview Slopes is ignored.

Shameful. Vancouver's suburb is simply ugly and unsustainable.

The stubbornness of North American municipalities and planners to maintain the status quo is simply mind-boggling.

When Canada was still part of the British Empire, the planners of the day were definitely way better than the backward America-centric planners of today, as per what the commentator said about how Toronto used to be planned. I totally agree.

[GenWhy?]

It is rather interesting to note the resilience of not planning (aside from the old industrial issues and other maladies) and town / master / suburb planning.

Interesting to note on early Vancouver suburban development pre-war are the formation of the Town and Country Planning Association and the Garden City movement in the U.K. and the training and work done by Thomas Adams (Halifax Explosion rebuild) and our very own Horace Llewellyn Seymour who in a way created Canadian planning and of course Bartholomew in the 20's and the advent of the car. All seeking to escape the chaotic pre-war planning system thus creating what we have now.