1045 Haro Street | 177m | 55 fl | Proposed

[jollyburger]

Impeding view cones and creating shadows... yes please



https://giphy.com/gifs/please-beg-i-...SgqnYzX9JJjBhw

[hollywoodnorth]

great news! I love this project.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Impeding view cones and creating shadows... yes please

i wouldn't bet on that in CoV...

[Sheba]

Vancouver developers defend downtown rezoning applications to city council

Developers behind two big applications for rezoning at the edge of Downtown Vancouver and the West End had their chance Thursday to defend proposals that deviate from existing city policy before planners complete recommendations to reject the developments.

Planning staff had asked for city council’s guidance in their review of the applications, one for a 56-storey condo tower and a 14-storey market rental building at 1045 Haro St., the other a 47-storey rental apartment building at 1075 West Georgia St.

Both applications were deemed “significantly non-compliant,” which would result in recommendations that council not approve them before they’re put before public hearings.

However, the developer Intracorp Homes argued that its proposal for 1045 Haro, which is at the corner of Thurlow, argued that it does fit within the city’s West End plan, particularly because it includes the public contributions of a 47-space daycare and $35 million in cash of community amenity charges.

Planner Tess Munro told council that Intracorp’s proposal varies “significantly from what would otherwise be anticipated at this location,” with a 56-storey tower that would cut into two view cones on a site where building height would be limited to 260 feet.

Intracorp executive Evan Allegretto argued that staff’s interpretation would reduce development in the West End plan, and that whether they’re allowed to build a taller building should be something that council decides at a public hearing and not as a reason for staff to reject it. The overall development would include 443 condos in a 580-foot-tall tower, 66 rental apartments in a second building, 46,000 square feet of retail and 15,000 sq. ft of open public space on-site.

“We feel it complies to that West End community plan,” Allegretto said. “And this is actually supported by the Robson Street (Business Improvement Association), which would be the most negatively impacted group.”

Council didn’t debate the application itself, but did direct staff to consider additional height and density within the West End plan, particularly outer streets such as Alberni, West Georgia and Thurlow.

On the second application by Reliance Properties, council recommended that the company withdraw its initial application and resubmit it under its policy inquiry process, which would allow the developer to talk to staff about finding a better fit for the site.

...

[phesto]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Intracorp and Patkau?
This got more interesting...

Intracorp doesn't own 1045 Haro, they are simply the development manager for it. I believe it is owned by a Chinese company.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by phesto

Intracorp doesn't own 1045 Haro, they are simply the development manager for it. I believe it is owned by a Chinese company.

CM Partners - who I think may have Singapore connections. They owned Grouse Mountain from 2017 to 2020 before selling on to Northland (The Gaglardi family). This now appears to be their only Canadian asset.

Forseed Group Holdings - does appear to have Chinese connections. No previous development history (under that name, anyway).

[officedweller]

Thanks.
At least with Intracorp, they would know how to negotiate through the process and adds some credibility, versus an unknown.
With Patkau, I wonder if the shorter building would be mass timber?

[GenWhy?]

I dunno I feel like Intracorp has been working on this (in the same stage of City negotiation) for over 3-4 years. I think the strata was bought out and former owners were still living there renting even in 2018 - so they've had definitely 3-4 years, but usually what I see is instead of taking what you can from the City, so one will whisper in the Owner's ear that we can get what they want (more) and you keep crawling up the molehill. Could be at BP by now. From what I've seen, the Owner simply paid too much to buy everyone one out and they designed their budget around a building that exceeded height. Like get it together.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Impeding view cones and creating shadows... yes please

No doubt! With the heat we are getting lately, downtown streets are the coolest in the Lower Mainland, literally.

This is one of the best larger development projects of late here in downtown Vancouver. The retail space available will help rejuvenate Robson Village even more by creating a true shopping node closer to Burrard Street, as well as creating much needed pedestrian alleyways with shops. I hope the City doesn't kill it.

[gaviscon]

The building as proposed is great, but I'm just happy to see that ugly laneway disappear and hydro lines probably buried underground as they've been doing throughout downtown.
From the looks of the land use plans, we might even see a retail-activated laneway which is what this city needs more of.

[s211]

Originally Posted by gaviscon

hydro lines probably buried underground as they've been doing throughout downtown.

Huh? They've actually been doing that? I'd be curious where, since the last I'd heard was some wags were trying to get them designated as HERITAGE RESOURCES.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by s211

Huh? They've actually been doing that? I'd be curious where, since the last I'd heard was some wags were trying to get them designated as HERITAGE RESOURCES.

Time for a hearing aid? There were suggestions that the H Frames should be retained in some of the Chinatown lanes because in many cases they are as old as the buildings, and are as definitive a part of the character of the area as the sawtooth pattern of buildings, for example. And the movie industry were also keen that there should be some frames retained as there are often sets that use the lanes (often doubling as a US city). There has never been a suggestion that any electrified power lines or operative transformers should be kept.

One of the main reasons that Water Street still hasn't had a new surface is that Hydro contractors have been digging it up and putting services underground for many months. They've only just put the sidewalk back at Maple Tree Square, and the road surface is still a mess. They've been steadily working through areas of Gastown and Chinatown in the past couple of years.

[gaviscon]

Originally Posted by s211

Huh? They've actually been doing that? I'd be curious where, since the last I'd heard was some wags were trying to get them designated as HERITAGE RESOURCES.

It's so satisfying to look at:

Before:


After:


Before:


After:


Before:


After:


Before:


After:


Before:


After:


Before:


After:

[WarrenC12]

Great set of examples, thanks!

Is there anywhere we can see future areas on BC Hydro's website?

[officedweller]

Thanks for those!
Now I wonder if the frames at the new park are supposed to reference the H-frames?

[wabooba]

[QUOTE=officedweller;9133961
The viewer should be farther to the east (right) than as depicted.[/COLOR][/B]

[img]https://i.imgur.com/ZHcwGWm[/quotes,

Yes, and to me, that strange zig-zag in the middle just doesn't work. Maybe it's supposed to be elegant, but I find it awkward and unattractive.

http://i.imgur.com/hRU3YQil.jpg

and @gaviscon: Thank you for those pictures of before and after. Cleaning up and neatening up the lanes, taking out the telephone poles, and spiffing up the sidewalk, really does add refinement to the city there.

[s211]

Thanks for all of those before and after photos. It's refreshing to see the positive changes!

[gaviscon]

Is this dead from the looming recession? Any updates?

[gaviscon]

It says here the expected move-out date is December 2023, next month.
Does the date still hold? What's going on?

https://www.1045harostreet.com/tenant-information

[idunno]

Did it ever proceed past the rezoning report where staff said it wasn't supported by policy?