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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1701  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2019, 2:13 AM
Klazu's Avatar
Klazu Klazu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Above Metro Vancouver clouds
Posts: 7,532
How tall of a tower could really go there? A tall tower here would add so much urbanity to that corner but residents of The Georgia are guaranteed to complain.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1702  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2019, 2:45 AM
officedweller officedweller is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 29,268
It wouldn't be on the corner - to be tall it would have to be in the view shadow.
Between the yellow and red lines in the pic above.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1703  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2019, 2:57 AM
Metro-One's Avatar
Metro-One Metro-One is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 13,532
Is that lot not in the higher building policy of the CBD? Or is it just outside?

This is definety a lot where a taller structure would make sense...
__________________
Bridging the Gap
Check out my Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/306346...h/29495547810/ and Youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCV0...lhxXFxuAey_q6Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1704  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2019, 5:04 AM
Changing City's Avatar
Changing City Changing City is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 1,180
Don't forget this will only be a commercial building - office, or hotel, or both. That might suggest bigger floorplates, and there would presumably be an economic calculation about what height and therefore floorspace makes sense, if the existing tower is replaced.
__________________
Contemporary Vancouver development blog, https://changingcitybook.wordpress.com/ Then and now Vancouver blog https://changingvancouver.wordpress.com/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1705  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2019, 5:35 AM
Feathered Friend Feathered Friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,169
In other news, with the cut off date for the Moderate Income Pilot Program fast approaching, I have a feeling we'll be seeing a few buildings north of 10 floors in variety of areas in the city.

Also, I'm hearing a few stalled projects might be making reappearances soon as well.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1706  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2019, 5:40 AM
Migrant_Coconut's Avatar
Migrant_Coconut Migrant_Coconut is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Kitsilano/Fairview
Posts: 3,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feathered Friend View Post
In other news, with the cut off date for the Moderate Income Pilot Program fast approaching, I have a feeling we'll be seeing a few buildings north of 10 floors in variety of areas in the city.

Also, I'm hearing a few stalled projects might be making reappearances soon as well.
What happens after the cutoff date? I realize that the City needs a break to analyze the MIRHPP results before they start a MIRHP, but there's still got to be below-market units in the meantime.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1707  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2019, 1:17 PM
Metro-One's Avatar
Metro-One Metro-One is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 13,532
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feathered Friend View Post
In other news, with the cut off date for the Moderate Income Pilot Program fast approaching, I have a feeling we'll be seeing a few buildings north of 10 floors in variety of areas in the city.

Also, I'm hearing a few stalled projects might be making reappearances soon as well.
Is one of those 1445 West Georgia Street?
__________________
Bridging the Gap
Check out my Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/306346...h/29495547810/ and Youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCV0...lhxXFxuAey_q6Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1708  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2019, 3:44 PM
phesto phesto is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: yvr/bwi
Posts: 2,533
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro-One View Post
Is one of those 1445 West Georgia Street?
No. This one will be shelved for at least a couple of years. They are apparently doing 2-3 year lease terms in the building (ie. before demolition clauses kick in).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1709  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2019, 4:25 PM
GenWhy? GenWhy? is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 809
Quote:
Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut View Post
What happens after the cutoff date? I realize that the City needs a break to analyze the MIRHPP results before they start a MIRHP, but there's still got to be below-market units in the meantime.
Some developers are going "rogue" and using MIRHPP as a framework to ask for more height / density even if they apply under Rental 100. These are old land holdings, however for economic reasons.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1710  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2019, 5:12 PM
rofina rofina is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by GenWhy? View Post
Some developers are going "rogue" and using MIRHPP as a framework to ask for more height / density even if they apply under Rental 100. These are old land holdings, however for economic reasons.
Lol. This is exactly the fear voiced by residents about programs like these.

Most of us on here probably agree that more units is a good thing, but this is exactly the way you betray the public's trust going forward.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1711  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2019, 9:06 PM
GenWhy? GenWhy? is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 809
Quote:
Originally Posted by rofina View Post
Lol. This is exactly the fear voiced by residents about programs like these.

Most of us on here probably agree that more units is a good thing, but this is exactly the way you betray the public's trust going forward.
You can't exceed height and density in plans or programs tho, the carrots are to achieve them soley, nothing more.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1712  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2019, 9:33 PM
Feathered Friend Feathered Friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut View Post
What happens after the cutoff date? I realize that the City needs a break to analyze the MIRHPP results before they start a MIRHP, but there's still got to be below-market units in the meantime.
My understanding is that the cutoff is a firm line. Until council says otherwise, MIRHPPs would be on hold. It could be interesting times, as both the Rental 100 and AHCIRP are coming up for review too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro-One View Post
Is one of those 1445 West Georgia Street?
Quote:
Originally Posted by phesto View Post
No. This one will be shelved for at least a couple of years. They are apparently doing 2-3 year lease terms in the building (ie. before demolition clauses kick in).
If I could confirm anything I would. However, a 2 -3 year rezoning/development process is fairly normal. So it would seem a lease term like that wouldn't be burdensome on any proposal. Plus many on the forum have predicted the current slump will be over by that time too.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1713  
Old Posted Jun 10, 2019, 8:48 PM
officedweller officedweller is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 29,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro-One View Post
Is that lot not in the higher building policy of the CBD? Or is it just outside?

This is definety a lot where a taller structure would make sense...
The Higher Buildings Policy is still subject to the view cones.
So the Scotia Tower view shadow would be a way of getting around the (12th & Cambie) view cone.

i.e. It can theoretically go taller than 506.6ft (12th & Cambie view cone limit) to the top of the Scotia Tower view shadow
(remember that the Scotia Tower exceeds the 12th & Cambie view cone)
above that, the 600ft Higher Buildings Policy applies, but I doubt the Scotia Tower view shadow is as high as 600ft.

Here's the discussion for the nearby never-built (Bing Thom) Hotel Georgia addition:

Quote:
3.1 Building Height: A maximum building height of 141.7 m (465 ft.) is proposed, and mechanical penthouse and decorative roof reaching a further 12.7 m (41.6 ft.) to 154.4 m (506.6 ft.). An "alternate scheme" was also submitted, for consideration only, which proposes to increase the decorative roof height by a further 5.5 m (18 ft.), to 158.5 m (520 ft.).

The site is within Area A of the DD in which maximum building height (measured to parapet rooftop of the uppermost habitable floor) is 137.2 m (450 ft.). The site is also identified in the General Policy for Higher Buildings as a probable site for a higher building significantly exceeding current height limits but respecting view cone height limits.

The proposed height is 4.6 m (15 ft.) above the maximum, however it is within the building mass which was supported in the previous proposal, and the 4.6 m increase is not deemed to be significant. On February 21, 2002, after the application was presented to the Planning and Environment Committee for information, Council approved a recommendation from the Director of Current Planning that the application be processed in the normal manner, and not through the Higher Building Advisory Panel process.

The site is within the 12th Avenue/Cambie Street view cone which has a height limit of 154.4 m (506.6 ft.) at this location. The proposed total building height would not encroach this limit. [Note: The maximum building height calculated for view protection includes all appurtenances such as mechanical/elevator penthouses, decorative roofs and aerials. Building height for zoning purposes is calculated only to the roof parapet of the uppermost occupied space.]

The proposed height does exceed the maximum height of the Queen Elizabeth Park view shed at this location, 110.9 m (331.1 ft.). In recent years, a number of buildings which would enhance the downtown profile have been permitted to exceed the Q.E. Park view shed. As on these previous occasions, and recalling that encroachment was approved in 1997, staff support encroachment of the Q. E. Park view shed because the proposed building mass and height will contribute positively to the downtown skyline.

The application was reviewed at Urban Design Panel on February 6, 2002 and received unanimous support (see Appendix D). Staff support the small increase in building height proposed. The alternate scheme, which would encroach the 12th Avenue/Cambie Street view cone by 4.3 m (14 ft.), is not supported and not put forward for consideration.
https://council.vancouver.ca/020514/p3.htm

It could be as tall as Telus Garden (which blocks Scotia Tower) in this pic (just above the view cone 9.2.1 limit):
(strange though, that as-built Hotel Georgia Residences appear to exceed the view cone limit)


View cone 9.2.1 and 9.2.2, 2018.
https://vancouver.ca/home-property-d...cted-view.aspx

Last edited by officedweller; Jun 10, 2019 at 9:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1714  
Old Posted Jun 10, 2019, 8:56 PM
GenWhy? GenWhy? is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 809
I think I heard a cool concept for an atrium and skyway hotel downtown... might be the site we're talking about.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1715  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2019, 1:00 AM
Migrant_Coconut's Avatar
Migrant_Coconut Migrant_Coconut is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Kitsilano/Fairview
Posts: 3,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by GenWhy? View Post
I think I heard a cool concept for an atrium and skyway hotel downtown... might be the site we're talking about.
If there's a restaurant at the top floor, it'll almost be like the Empire Landmark never left!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1716  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2019, 4:39 AM
logan5's Avatar
logan5 logan5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mt.Pleasant
Posts: 4,686
Quote:
Originally Posted by officedweller View Post
The Higher Buildings Policy is still subject to the view cones.
So the Scotia Tower view shadow would be a way of getting around the (12th & Cambie) view cone.

i.e. It can theoretically go taller than 506.6ft (12th & Cambie view cone limit) to the top of the Scotia Tower view shadow
(remember that the Scotia Tower exceeds the 12th & Cambie view cone)
above that, the 600ft Higher Buildings Policy applies, but I doubt the Scotia Tower view shadow is as high as 600ft.

Here's the discussion for the nearby never-built (Bing Thom) Hotel Georgia addition:


https://council.vancouver.ca/020514/p3.htm

It could be as tall as Telus Garden (which blocks Scotia Tower) in this pic (just above the view cone 9.2.1 limit):
(strange though, that as-built Hotel Georgia Residences appear to exceed the view cone limit)
The City is going to review some of these viewcones that affect the Broadway corridor, if I recall correctly. If they do change the viewcone policy for Broadway, that would open up a lot more options for height in downtown Vancouver.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1717  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2019, 9:10 PM
LeftCoaster's Avatar
LeftCoaster LeftCoaster is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toroncouver
Posts: 11,495
Let the rumours fly:

The strata corporation of 850 Burrard has put themselves up for sale, opening up prime sizable lot to redevelopment.

https://goo.gl/maps/GLMGRXSg71y7Kxtq7

Doubtful this goes tall with Robson Square adjacent but it is a very notable location.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1718  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2019, 9:24 PM
Denscity Denscity is offline
Suburbs Suck
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Castlegar BC
Posts: 6,894
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoaster View Post
Let the rumours fly:

The strata corporation of 850 Burrard has put themselves up for sale, opening up prime sizable lot to redevelopment.

https://goo.gl/maps/GLMGRXSg71y7Kxtq7

Doubtful this goes tall with Robson Square adjacent but it is a very notable location.
Ooh ya thats a nice piece of property.
__________________
Daily 1 hour flights from YCG to YVR & YYC on ACX
British Columbia is named after the Columbia River, a 4 minute walk from my house
Exactly halfway between Vancouver and Calgary
castlegar.ca
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1719  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2019, 9:54 PM
SFUVancouver's Avatar
SFUVancouver SFUVancouver is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kelowna
Posts: 5,615
That will sell. Those homeowners are going to make themselves some serious dollarydoos if they can find a buyer with deep pockets and patience to see the site through an ambitious rezoning.
__________________
VANCOUVER | Beautiful, Multicultural | Canada's Pacific Metropolis
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1720  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2019, 10:06 PM
logan5's Avatar
logan5 logan5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mt.Pleasant
Posts: 4,686
Putting the building up for sale is the easy part. After that the strata has to decide if they like whatever offer they get. There's always a handful of people that think that it's worth more. Though in this case, it's pretty clear what can be built there, so you would think a sale would go through fairly quickly.
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


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:50 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.