HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Downtown & City of Vancouver


    The Independent at Main in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Vancouver Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2012, 9:31 PM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,371
Doesn't appear to be much change beside that loss of artist space in exhange for a cash contribution to the city. The FSR is no 5.55 instead of 5.38.

Quote:
Revised Application (January 16, 2012)
Updated January 16, 2012

The Community Amenity Contribution (CAC) for this project has been revised from an on-site amenity of artist studio production space to a cash contribution. While the form of development has not changed from the previous submission (October 2011), the floor area from the artist studio production space is now counted in the floor area calculations as commercial retail space, resulting in an increase in the floor space ratio (FSR) from 5.38 to 5.55.

In addition, the 15 for-profit rental housing units have been removed and these units are now covered under market residential housing. This change has no impact to the FSR calculations.

The revised application includes the following:

•two-storey commercial podium
•241 dwelling units
•building heights of 5, 5, 9 and 19 storeys
•floor space ratio (FSR) of 5.55
•underground parking for 320 vehicles
•increased sidewalk widths on portions of the Kingsway and 10th Avenue frontages
•a cash contribution towards off-site cultural or civic facilities, or other approved public benefit, in lieu of the originally proposed on-site artist studio production space
Revised drawings reflecting these changes will be posted when available
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2012, 4:44 AM
quobobo quobobo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,053
That open house was painful - the City representatives made it clear that they wanted questions, but many people took that as an opportunity to grandstand at length.

Thankfully there were a few good questions and some supporters of the building. Apparently the city has received more positive written comments than negative ones, and the (final, I believe) public hearing will be in late February or March.

I can't wait to see this neighbourhood in 15 years or so, it's going to be amazing with this tower, a possible Kingsgate Mall redevelopment, and the Skytrain extension.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Feb 8, 2012, 3:36 AM
quobobo quobobo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,053
Looks like the public hearing will be on Monday Feb. 27th at 7:30PM.

I've registered to speak in support of the project (more info on exactly how to do that at the above link), and I hope other SSPers are able to do so as well. The NIMBYs will be out in force for this one.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2012, 8:31 AM
squeezied's Avatar
squeezied squeezied is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,625
http://www.straight.com/article-6115...y-and-broadway

Lots of NIMBY talk here. Complains stemming from density and public process.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2012, 8:55 AM
giallo's Avatar
giallo giallo is online now
be nice to the crackheads
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 11,841
^Wow. Any comment, no matter how reasonable, that supports this development has a great number of dislike votes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2012, 9:30 AM
Echowinds Echowinds is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Richmond, B.C.
Posts: 136
News comment are akin to youtube comments. They will rot your brain if you read too much of it.

Besides, the people that agree with it tends to be quiet, while the people most opposed to it will be out in force. It's quite a common phenomenon for pretty much every political decision.

There may be some reasonable criticisms of the project, but complaining about shadows (I guess downtown doesn't see the sun anymore)? The area is an important transportation crossroads (so we should put less density beside it)? The building's too dense (still in the metro core region)? Ugh.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2012, 2:22 PM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,371
This will be this council's first big test. It'll be interesting to see how it goes next week. Think it's a given that it'll be approved, it does have staff's recommendation. I still feel that while it's a improvement over the original proposal that it wasn't quite there yet. The density is workable and even the height could be acceptable (would prefer a slight reduction) but the massing of the project is the worst offender, it's a mess imo.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2012, 3:39 PM
cc85 cc85 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Island City
Posts: 451
"Ned Jacobs, an urbanist and planning critic"

What's an urbanist? Don't tell me PFTF forced CIP to change my professional standards again.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2012, 5:36 PM
PaperTiger's Avatar
PaperTiger PaperTiger is offline
scared of rain
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Gastown
Posts: 526
Quote:
Originally Posted by cc85 View Post
"Ned Jacobs, an urbanist and planning critic"

What's an urbanist? Don't tell me PFTF forced CIP to change my professional standards again.
A bit off topic but, An urbanist is a general term for urban theorist, critic, planner etc. or other people concerned with urbanism.

Not all urbanist are planners and not all Professional planners are necessarily urbanists. There are many of us that work in health planning, resource planning, regional planning, that probably wouldn't be considered urbanists.

In French it is a different story as “Urbaniste” is a synonym for urban planner.

So no we won’t be OICU’s instead of MCIP’s
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2012, 5:52 PM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
ON3P Skis
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lower Lonsdale, North Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by squeezied View Post
http://www.straight.com/article-6115...y-and-broadway

Lots of NIMBY talk here. Complains stemming from density and public process.
I have to agree with most of the article. The public process for this project has been haphazard at best, and dishonest at worst. I am not against density or height, but this is not done the right way at all. It doesn't really offer anything as far as amenities to the community, the arcade along Broadway is backwards in my opinion, and the bubble gum wall is straight up retarded. I am really disappointed in Rize, especially considering other interesting designs/buildings they have done (Rolston, the Waves in Surrey, 1st propsal of Containers).
__________________
Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2012, 6:11 PM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,371
I found one of the comments spot on, the Wall proposal on E Hastings has a higher FSR but is a much better fit with it's surrounding area thanks to more modest heights.
I also found it surprising that that height is over 100% taller then the new community centre at 1 Kingsway and 22% higher then the King Edward Village tower even though it's only one storey higher (19 vs 18).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2012, 6:36 PM
logan5's Avatar
logan5 logan5 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mt.Pleasant/Downtown South
Posts: 7,242
Ned Jacobs lives in the Little Mountain area. Is it appropriate for him to speak for the Mt. Pleasant neighborhood when he doesn't even live in it? I believe there are many like him who show up at these community meetings, which really aren't community meetings, but an anti development rally. And he talks about deceptive tactics by the developer while at the same time saying that this project has been decisively rejected by the community.

The building itself is massive, but what is the alternative if you keep the same density. A 30 story tower would certainly open up some space at ground level and let in more light, and it would not be out of place when you consider the mid rise buildings in the area, as well as towers that will be built at Kingsgate and the IGA site.

Obviously a 30 story tower isn't going to happen at this point, but IMO taller buildings should be given more consideration in the future because I don't think they're as detrimental as some make them out to be, just as more massive mid rise buildings are not as beneficial as some portray them as.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2012, 3:36 AM
quobobo quobobo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,053
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrenegade View Post
It doesn't really offer anything as far as amenities to the community, the arcade along Broadway is backwards in my opinion, and the bubble gum wall is straight up retarded. I am really disappointed in Rize, especially considering other interesting designs/buildings they have done (Rolston, the Waves in Surrey, 1st propsal of Containers).
It offers a huge amount of retail space for the neighbourhood (including one space for a supermarket that will actually interface well with the street unlike the Buy-Low monstrosity that involves passing through parking lots or a mall to get to). Also ,the CAC is contributing $6.25 million to City coffers, something like $25k/unit. Whether that's spent in the community is up to the City now, and I don't think it's efficient or necessarily desirable to demand that amenity contributions are tied precisely to a development.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2012, 6:12 AM
flight_from_kamakura's Avatar
flight_from_kamakura flight_from_kamakura is offline
testify
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: san francisco and montreal
Posts: 1,319
that's a really big cac contribution, wow. anyway, i liked the original plan with the taller tower, definitely the sort of change i'd like to see come to that corner, esp with forthcoming redevelopment of that POS mall and the ubc line. the only thing that i'm thinking of is the parking access, i don't really like how it's set up now, definitely needs to be a less obtrusive lane entry.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2012, 11:48 AM
Alex Mackinnon's Avatar
Alex Mackinnon Alex Mackinnon is offline
Can I has a tunnel?
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: East Van
Posts: 2,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlousa View Post
I found one of the comments spot on, the Wall proposal on E Hastings has a higher FSR but is a much better fit with it's surrounding area thanks to more modest heights.
I also found it surprising that that height is over 100% taller then the new community centre at 1 Kingsway and 22% higher then the King Edward Village tower even though it's only one storey higher (19 vs 18).
That proposal has one big advantage for hiding the height. It's next to a bridge, and about a ~8m high hill. Basically it's got probably 2 of the FSR below grade when you look at it from the Hastings side.
__________________
"It's ok, I'm an engineer!" -Famous last words
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2012, 7:05 PM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,371
Wow! looks like the developers renderings were pretty off, the city's response doesn't seem to be helping either. Take a read of the following document and compare the massings produced by the applicate, a private citizen and then the city. Seems like some of the concerns being raised do have validity.

http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/...6memoFeb20.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2012, 7:27 PM
flight_from_kamakura's Avatar
flight_from_kamakura flight_from_kamakura is offline
testify
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: san francisco and montreal
Posts: 1,319
^ i hope that it comes out looking like the citizen's massings, that would be great for the area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2012, 7:31 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 38,967
One thing I find odd is that the context rendering does not show the MetroVista condo which is kitty corner to the site. That condo and 1 Kingsway are at least 10 storeys and provide context for the rendering. The view selected for the render should have been from the east (to show all tall buildings in the area including the Lee Building) and minimize the "downhill perspective distortion).
I think what you'd end up seeing is a podium consistent with other heights in the area, and a feature tower breaking the tabletop.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2012, 8:03 PM
racc racc is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,241
And just who is going to be viewing it from that height? They should really be using views from various locations along streets where people, not birds will be viewing it from.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2012, 8:23 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 38,967
Voila:

Quote:
Originally Posted by sacrifice333 View Post
Central section:

Untitled by sacrifice333, on Flickr
If you're just looking at views along streets, then it wouldn't matter if there are towers at all
- the street wall would block them out (you'd have to have "towers in the park" to provide long range views)
Ever been lost in London UK because the streets are narrow and you can't see landmarks?
Take a walk along Hornby between Pacific and Drake - that's mid-rise streetwall heaven.

Last edited by officedweller; Feb 23, 2012 at 10:10 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Downtown & City of Vancouver
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:44 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.