HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Urban, Urban Design & Heritage Issues


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2008, 6:53 PM
squeezied's Avatar
squeezied squeezied is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.x2 View Post
[B][SIZE="5"]One of its most popular elements, likely to become visible reality soon, is laneway housing, which may get rolling by early 2009.
this is gonna be pretty cool. i know the row house developement on 33rd and cambie will incorporate laneway housing
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Sep 3, 2009, 8:20 AM
204 204 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Terminal City
Posts: 1,172
One of the simplest ways of "making Vancouver sustainable, livable, affordable" is to have the VPD start doing their jobs. The laws that they are mandated to enforce are not to be "picked and chosen". What happened to having constables on patrol? I'm very glad to see these fine officers at Starbucks in Yaletown, but it might also be to have them walking the beat in other more sensitive areas of the city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2009, 7:09 AM
SFUVancouver's Avatar
SFUVancouver SFUVancouver is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 6,567
"Living above the store" | Vancouver leads Canada's urban mixed-use charge

Property Report
Living above the store


FRANCES BULA

VANCOUVER — Special to The Globe and Mail Published on Tuesday, Nov. 10, 2009 12:00AM EST Last updated on Thursday, Nov. 12, 2009 3:01AM EST

Paul Buck has spectacular views of downtown Vancouver from the two glass walls of his condo, which wow everyone who walks in.

But what really impressed one of Mr. Buck's friends, in from a town near the Yukon border, is that he lives over a giant Home Depot.

"He was visiting from Dease Lake and he was beside himself that I was living right next to a hardware store," says Mr. Buck, the CFO at a biotechnology company that is a convenient two blocks from his condo.

Mr. Buck also lives over a major grocery store, a Winners, a sushi restaurant, a cellphone shop, and a Starbucks, in a complex that has broken new barriers when it comes to an increasingly popular development trend: the mixed-used project.

The Rise is attracting attention and even awards from across North America for its combination of big-box stores on the bottom, with condos and townhouses clustered around an enclosed garden on the top.

But while the combination of uses is unusual, the underlying concept is not.

Cities are aiming to maximize their land use and build greener and denser. At the same time, certain developers have discovered the joy of multiple revenue streams as a niche market of tenants and buyers are drawn to hybrid life. Mixed-use projects have become not only more prevalent but are incorporating wider ranges of uses with each passing year.

In Vancouver, the Shaw Tower has divided a tower on the waterfront edge of the central business district with Triple A office space on the bottom and high-end condos on top. The city's Woodward's project near the Downtown Eastside combines condos, social housing, space for non-profits and city offices, a grocery store, a drugstore and Simon Fraser University's School for the Contemporary Arts, with its multitude of performance spaces.

On Georgia Street, the Shangri-La incorporates a hotel, restaurant, spa, sculpture gallery and condos. Near GM Place, Concord Pacific has four residential towers over a Costco outlet.

In Toronto, the Distillery District east of downtown has mixed 1,500 units of condos with art galleries, offices, restaurants, a theatre and space for non-profit operations. For the World on Yonge, currently being planned in Markham to the north, the drawing board at Liberty Development includes four residential towers, a large shopping complex with an interior plaza, and an office building. In Yorkville, Quadrangle Architects created a complex at 155 Cumberland that combines high-end retail, offices and expensive apartments.

Fans of mixed-use developments say this is a case of cities returning to the way they used to be.

"Zoning was very much a post-war phenomenon when there was a move to separate different uses," says architect Les Klein, whose firm, Quadrangle, is also working on mixed-use projects in Ontario's Kitchener and Niagara-on-the-Lake. "What we're really trying to do is return to a mixed-use society, which also makes cities more green. It's planning catching up with reality."

But even enthusiasts such as Mr. Klein say that challenges come with building mixed-use projects. Often developers dive into them when they know how to do only one part well - the offices, the condos or the retail - but they add on the others, thinking they'll be easy gravy. It turns out they aren't.

Some uses just don't work together, with restaurants being especially problematic because of their smells, waste and noise issues.

Or developers don't think about timing problems and they end up with different groups of users clashing as one tries to leave while the other is arriving.

What does work best is when developers create multiple uses that appeal to a similar demographic.

Both Matthew Rosenblatt at Cityscape Developments, which is part owner of the Distillery District, and Marco Filice at Liberty say they aim to create complexes where each part - shopping, office or residential - draws people from the same general niche.

"We market to the same demographic generally," Mr. Rosenblatt said. So the offices, condos and shops at the Distillery District work together to attract people who like an urban, arty environment.

"We wouldn't entertain the idea of having a nightclub there with 18-year-olds lining up," says his partner, David Jackson.

Mr. Filice said his company aims to create a critical mass of residents who are interested in the kind of retail or office services integrated in the complex. For that reason, he structures his projects so that two-thirds of the space goes to residential, one-third to retail and office.

"It's basically a life-cycle approach - we have a captive audience for them." It's not that different, he thinks, from the area he grew up in near St. Clair and Bathurst, where people lived over shops on the ground floor and doctors' offices on the second floor.

In spite of that, many Torontonians, such as Mr. Klein and Mr. Jackson, are skeptical about Vancouver's radical experiments in putting people on top of giant stores.

"The jury is very much out on the idea of residential on top of big box, like we're seeing in Vancouver," Mr. Klein says.

But Vancouver's planning director, Brent Toderian, said he believes the Rise is a wonderful new example of mixed use. It's one that the city went out of its way to encourage.

The developers of the Rise say it's proven to be a good experiment for their company. "We had to take a bit of a leap of faith," says James Patillo, senior vice-president of Grosvenor Americas.

It wasn't the easiest project. The banks don't always understand mixed-use projects, he acknowledged. And the designers had to come up with an internal loading system for the building underground, so that residents wouldn't be annoyed by constant deliveries or garbage pickup.

Now, he says, they're achieving good rents - about $2.25 a square foot, comparable with anything in the area - and they have very low turnover.

"Some might say they don't like the retail below, but I think the acceptance grows and grows," Mr. Patillo said. "We've made a strategic shift to retail and residential. We think it's here to stay."

Mr. Buck agrees. He doesn't care about the retail below except that it's handy for him. He shops at all of the stores in his building. What matters most is that he lives across the street from his work, he's a block from the subway line to the airport, and it's a cool space.

Living over the store isn't so bad.

THE CHALLENGES OF MIXED USE

Some projects work better with separation

"There is a sense among condo owners that there are strangers in their territory if they aren't separated from the offices users," says Les Klein, Quadrangle Architects.

Some projects work better without much separation

"When you separate your users too much, you lose the opportunity for the synergies. Residents want to be in the mix they bought into," says David Jackson, Cityscape Developments.

Some combinations just don't work no matter what

"Most pure office-type tenants would not want to be in a building with cooking smells, a lot of traffic or after-hours groups," says Rob Armstrong, managing director, Avison Young Toronto.

They're not for every developer

"You don't see a lot of mixed-use projects because most companies are capitalized to do their single-purpose specialty," says Matthew Rosenblatt, Cityscape Developments.

You might need a partner

"Most developers specialize in one area and then they add the other component. But you can end up with something - retail or office or condos - that feels like it's left over if you don't work with a partner who knows that area," says Mr. Klein.

Source
__________________
VANCOUVER | Beautiful, Multicultural | Canada's Pacific Metropolis
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2010, 5:26 PM
sacrifice333 sacrifice333 is offline
Vancouver User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,460
Laneway Housing Becoming a Reality

This is very cool from Square Space...

LaneFab.com/
__________________
Check out TripStyler.com {locally focused travel blog} | My instagram {Travel Photos}
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2010, 5:35 AM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,373
Latest from the COV on it's green plans. Pretty big goals, let's see how implementation goes. I'm too tired to take out the details so I'm just going to link to the documents.

http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/...ents/penv3.pdf

http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/...ents/penv4.pdf

Last edited by jlousa; Sep 9, 2010 at 1:28 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Sep 2, 2011, 3:26 AM
sacrifice333 sacrifice333 is offline
Vancouver User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,460
The sheer number of potential land packages that are cropping up on Cambie & Granville right now are astonishing! I swear there's at least a couple sections of 3-5 houses in every block!
__________________
Check out TripStyler.com {locally focused travel blog} | My instagram {Travel Photos}
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2008, 6:19 PM
twoNeurons twoNeurons is offline
loafing in lotusland
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lotusland
Posts: 6,090
Great density map, deasine. I think on the whole, Burnaby is more dense than Vancouver. I'd rather see all dark orange, like Burnaby, than a few red spots like Vancouver. And this is despite a lot of Burnaby having larger lots. However, if you drive around Burnaby, one thing that you'll notice is that in neighborhoods with SFH, there is a complex of townhouses, or a bunch of low-rise walk-ups interspersed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2008, 12:23 AM
Bert Bert is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 411
The watermark points to the Sightline Institute (slightly different version at link).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2008, 3:00 AM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,373
Figured I'd revive this thread from the dead. Stumbled upon this when cleaning my inbox. Should really do that more often. Anyways it's loaded with great info and well worth the read.

Ecodensity brochure by busbyperkins+will
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2008, 5:09 AM
deasine deasine is offline
Vancouver Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,747
^Great read. Interesting to see a comparison of the tonnes of CO2 per person and I'm shocked to see Portland and San Francisco pretty high up on the list considering they are the "greener" American cities... Calgary = super high too...

Something random just came up in my head: I'm surprised that we still don't have row houses yet...

Last edited by deasine; Sep 6, 2008 at 5:24 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2009, 1:36 PM
Delirium's Avatar
Delirium Delirium is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Earth
Posts: 3,227
thought this was an interesting read. not because another American city is looking to Vancouver for urban planning advice but the fact that a city the size of Dallas (metro pop. ~4.5mil) ONLY has 5,000 people living downtown

Dallas Studies Vancouver's Urban Design Success
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28781994/

Dallas city leaders are looking at how other cities have successfully lured more residents to their downtowns.

Dallas leaders have said they want more of the city to be like Uptown, with businesses and transit within walking distance of large residential and office buildings.

About 5,000 people currently live in downtown Dallas, but more reside in surrounding Uptown neighborhoods. Dallas also competes for residents with North Texas suburbs, and the region's intense growth is expected to continue.

City Hall compared the Dallas' urban design rules to those in cities such as Vancouver, British Columbia, which grew its downtown with dense urban development.

Vancouver doubled the population of its downtown area to nearly 120,000 in just 15 years.

"This is about actually designing the city again, rather than see it happen by accident," said former Vancouver planning director Larry Beasley.

Beasley, who is now a private planning consultant, told the Dallas Council on Wednesday that Vancouver encouraged developers to build extremely high-density projects that would return high profits.

In return, the city made strict demands for high-quality materials and amenities such as broad sidewalks and parks, which the city could not afford on its own.

"We look for some of those costs -- some of those amenity costs -- to be shared with developers," Beasley said. "And the key to all this is not to force people into this living circumstance, but to make it a preferred choice for them."

Dallas Mayor Tom Leppert said he wants Dallas to consider other cities' success as it charts its future.

"If we don't bring those ideas here and push ourselves to think a little beyond where we are today, then we're going to limit ourselves, and we shouldn't do that," he said.

Councilwoman Angela Hunt said Wednesday's daylong session, which focused on urban design, is an example of Dallas' dedication toward accomplishing what cities such as Vancouver have done.

"They have created remarkable growth, remarkable wealth and remarkable development," she said. "We can do that too, if we have the commitment."

However, some of the Canadian measures could be a hard sell in Texas, Dallas Planning Director Theresa O'Donnell said.

"Texas is a strong property rights state, so that’s a big shift," O'Donnell said.

The Dallas City Council took no formal action at Wednesday's briefing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Mar 5, 2009, 12:56 AM
djmk's Avatar
djmk djmk is offline
victory in near
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: North Vancouver
Posts: 1,753
Basements in Single Family Areas

Providing more affordable housing choices throughout the City is a top priority of Council. Facilitating basements in houses helps to meet this goal by providing more opportunities for rental secondary suites in single family areas.

On June 10, 2008, Vancouver City Council instructed staff to report back on "Enabling basements that can accommodate suites …", as part of EcoDensity Action C-6: "More Options for Rental Secondary Suites."

Vancouver residents have told us that single family zoning does not permit a suitable size house that also includes a full basement. As a result, many houses have either a partial basement or no basement at all, especially on smaller lots.

In response to these concerns, the Planning Department is proposing an option for single-family zoning that would permit additional floor area in the basement of a house. This option could also make it easier to add a second floor to an existing one-storey house.

To learn more about this proposal for single family zoning, please come to one of our open houses:
Date: Tuesday March 3rd
Time: 4:00 - 7:30 pm
Location: Sunset Community Centre, 6810 Main Street (at East 52nd Avenue)

Date: Thursday, March 5th
Time: 4:00 - 7:30 pm
Location: Renfrew Park Community Centre, 2929 East 22nd Avenue (east of Renfrew Street)

Date: Monday, March 9th
Time: 4:00 - 7:30 pm
Location: Kerrisdale Community Centre, 5851 West Boulevard (at West 42nd Avenue)

For more information regarding these open houses email [email protected] or call 604.871.6302

http://www.vancouver-ecodensity.ca/content.php?id=50
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Mar 5, 2009, 2:20 AM
fever's Avatar
fever fever is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,019
I don't think this will have much benefit. It's increasing the density of auto-dependent parts of the city when they should be trying to concentrate density in certain areas near transit.

I think they should upzone some areas to allow rowhousing/apartments and to allow bigger apartment buildings along arterials (C-2). Most single-family areas, especially on the west side away from transit, should be left as they are.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2009, 9:00 PM
crazyjoeda's Avatar
crazyjoeda crazyjoeda is offline
Mac User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 861
Quote:
Most single-family areas, especially on the west side away from transit, should be left as they are.
What's wrong with Transit on the Westside? The Westside is very desirable and buses run along 4th, Broadway, Arbutus, McDonald, Dunbar 41st, 49th and other major streets frequently.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2009, 9:32 PM
fever's Avatar
fever fever is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,019
There's nothing wrong with transit on the west side.

The entire area of the city southwest of Oak and 16th, except for pockets in Kerrisdale, Marpole, and a short strip in Dunbar, is basically high end suburbia. It's nice, low-density, auto-dependent, and full of nimby's. It's good the way it is. It fills a need for executive housing close to the city centre.

Increasing density uniformly in this area, which is what a blanket increase in the number of secondary suites will do, will make for more traffic, less parking, and other typical, inane nimby complaints, without really strengthening any of the nearby strips. And politically, I'm concerned it'll bring out unnecessary opposition to worthwhile changes under the eco-density banner, like increasing densities along arterials and in parts of east van.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2009, 10:51 PM
raggedy13's Avatar
raggedy13 raggedy13 is offline
Dérive-r
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 4,450
I think more basement suites in the West Side is a brilliant idea. It is perfect for UBC students, most of whom wouldn't be using a car. It would also add some much needed rental housing to the city in general. The West Side is only auto-dependent because it is full of people who prefer to drive because of their income bracket. Other then that the transit opportunities are great in the area (though there is always room for improvement) and one can easily live and get around without a car in the West Side.

I'm still all for increasing density along arterials and at transit nodes etc but why not increase density in single family housing areas while we're at it. The demand is there long-term and higher densities can support improved transit, higher retail density, amenities, etc. I can't imagine basement suite renters adding all that much to traffic and parking issues anyways. Most renters I know don't even own a car, myself included.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Mar 9, 2009, 11:26 PM
crazyjoeda's Avatar
crazyjoeda crazyjoeda is offline
Mac User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 861
Fever I can see some of your points but I disagree with most of what you said. Bus transit north of 16th AVE is much better than suburban areas of Metro Vancouver. Most people I know who live in basement suites in Vancouver don't have car. By North American standards most of the area you described is fairly high density. Finally, although there are exceptions the majority of the people who live on the West side are not super rich, either they purchased their home many years ago before it was expensive or they purchased it more recently, have a large mortgage and could use rental income. Metro Vancouver has high end suburbia: its called West Vancouver and White Rock.

Cities should ignore nimby's that only have self serving interests.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2009, 2:14 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
re: laneway housing.

i know almost everyone on this forum agrees with almost every part of the ecodensity plan, and particularly laneway housing, but i'd like to give a personal example/rant (lol) of how great an idea this really is.

without going into too much detail, i've been trying to get a small building project off the ground in montreal, and aside from all the usual zoning issues surrounding height and occupancy (which are absolutely maddening in montreal), the major issues that i've been wrestling with are lot coverage and rear entrance. the sum of it is that unless you have the good fortune to have yourself a property that has a grandfathered laneway entrance (in which case, you'll probably have heritage and/or reno-to-code issues that make building out unprofitable), it's absolutely impossible on the plateau to build out the back half of a property without building to a front entrance. and then try to get approval to reorient the building so as to get that back half built out with a front entrance to rear suites - ho ho ho, then it's a shit-storm of permits and lot coverage-based denials and the dreaded heritage panels and all that. basically, current zoning around there makes it very very difficult to densify existing properties in montreal's most central non-core hood, which is an obvious outrage. seriously, if you're ever walking along and you see a guy adding a level or whatever, you just know it's for his personal use, because it's a total money loser. (either that, or you admire/rue his luck at having found one of the very very rare lots where the patchwork zoning allows for building out.) it's enough to break a man.

the reasons for these sorts of rules are pretty obvious - water, city services, etc. make it bothersome to the guys sitting in the offices (not to mention preserving the neighbors' view of the scuzzy lane in the back!). and montreal's had some pretty bad experiences with villainous greeks or anglos coming in and gutting charming little places and replacing them with ugly, value-maximizing boxes. but, done with sensitivity to context and form, these really are an insanely good sort of densification - there's no better way to maintain the integrity of a hood. alas, no joke, speaking to that point, in a recent meeting with a borough planner, the guy actually flat-out said that the plateau is already too dense!

all of this to say that even though the laneway housing in vancouver will only be rental, and won't allow for lateral lot consolidation, and will have a maximum height of 12 feet or whatever, it's a cheap and simple and clever way of densifying neighborhoods (with all the attendant benefits there), and it opens up loads of options to small-scale developers (!).

sullivan may have been a creep and a weirdo and unfit for public office and all that but, by god, he was right on this one.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2009, 2:24 PM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,373
Laneway housing is good for certain neighbourhoods and not so good for others and should still be looked at on a block to block basis, personally I prefer infill housing, but both have their place. What I'm greatfully for though is that they took those measures and applied them citywide, just like they are doing with the new basement regulations.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Jul 17, 2009, 3:54 AM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,373
Big week next week at city hall,

Secondary suites
http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/...ea5summary.pdf

http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/...ents/phea5.PDF

Laneway housing

http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/...ea6summary.pdf

http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/...ents/phea6.PDF

http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/...re_by-law_.pdf

http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/...guidelines.pdf

6 story wood buildings

http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/...cuments/p3.pdf

Additional water conservation measures

http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/...cuments/p4.pdf

Personally I'm not a fan at all of the Secondary suites in apartments, but I'm all for laneway housing.
The 5-6 story wood building are also fine in my books, they list the cost as 11% lower then building with steel/concrete but I'd venture the difference is actually closer to 20%. The COV is making a couple of changes from the BC code but they aren't really a big deal.
The water conservation measures are great, personally I'd love to see them go even further as we are one of the biggest wasters of water on the planet even though we get plenty of rain. It's amazing that even today we waste as much water on our lawns then we do on bathing and washing our clothes combined.
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 > Urban, Urban Design & Heritage Issues
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:45 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.