Cambie Corridor Plan and Project Updates

[logan5]

It's disgusting to see all that white area. The City refuses to respond to the critical need for higher density. Even in a corridor served by rail transit. It's criminal incompetence. Marpole is especially pathetic.

[Aroundtheworld]

Beyond the dearth of density, I think not stretching commercial down the east-west arterials is a mistake. Here is an opportunity to put goods and services within easy walking distance of people and they are missing it.

[retro_orange]

Next municipal election is only 16 months away...

[Vancity]

Originally Posted by Aroundtheworld

Beyond the dearth of density, I think not stretching commercial down the east-west arterials is a mistake. Here is an opportunity to put goods and services within easy walking distance of people and they are missing it.

Yeah. I agree. Missed opportunity.

[Prometheus]

Originally Posted by Vancity

Yeah. I agree. Missed opportunity.

It's more than a missed opportunity. It's a harmful dereliction of leadership. This ongoing policy of grossly inadequate density increases along (and around) major transportation corridors and transit nodes is irresponsible and cowardly, and will have irrevocable adverse consequences for Vancouver for many decades (or even generations).

[Vancity]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

It's more than a missed opportunity. It's a harmful dereliction of leadership. This ongoing policy of grossly inadequate density increases along (and around) major transportation corridors and transit nodes is irresponsible and cowardly, and will have irrevocable adverse consequences for Vancouver for many decades (or even generations).

well. that's been a problem with the city for a long time. poor decision making, and stupid planning like this. but the city keeps on making decisions like this, and nobody seems to be saying nothing - no change, means we get the same old shit over and over again. That's what's frustrating too. I don't understand how the city doesn't seem to understand. With that being said, the station on King Edward has some retail right next to it. Why can't more development be like that?

Even some of the newer development further south on Cambie Boulevard doesn't have retail at the bottom (some do - i.e. new condos on 49th and Cambie, just sourth of the Baptist Church, but before 49th Ave). It's poor planning. We need new blood at City Hall with new policies with things like view cones - but alas, this will probably never change.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by officedweller

... and another generic Cambie corridor midrise.

From VancouverMarket.ca:

5130-5170 Cambie St.
(Near West 35th Ave., excluding the corner lot)


http://www.vancouvermarket.ca/2017/0...udes-65-units/

This is what's proposed for the corner lot (5110 Cambie):


http://rezoning.vancouver.ca/applica...mbie/index.htm

[Vin]

Sad. this type of residential building should be located 2 or more blocks away from the main road of Cambie, and not along the major road!

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by Vin

Sad. this type of residential building should be located 2 or more blocks away from the main road of Cambie, and not along the major road!

I agree. Cambie should be 10-14 stories, scaling down to 8 stories one block away, then 6 stories.

[officedweller]

In the bizarre world of Cambie densification comes Coromandel Properties plan for the NE corner of Cambie & 41st Ave.
for a 3 storey office building.

I figure it's a placeholder for the future.

The development permit application now submitted for the 130′ x 122′ site indicates plan for a new 3-storey, mixed-use building, consisting of:
◾Retail & restaurant uses on the ground floor;
◾Office uses on the 2nd and 3rd floor;
◾A total building size of 26,686 SF;
◾A total density of 1.7 FSR;
◾Peak Height: 59 ft.; and
◾48 underground parking spaces on 1 1/2 levels all having vehicular access from the lane.

http://www.vancouvermarket.ca/2017/0...fice-building/


http://www.vancouvermarket.ca/2017/0...fice-building/

[Feathered Friend]

http://vancouver.ca/your-government/...ign-panel.aspx

Related Commentary: Overall feedback from the panel included:
There will be active uses at grade. There is concern for the heights are not high enough in the area for Oakridge Town Centre (OTC). The separation between the towers is quite wide.
Rethink the sites to look more like Oakridge. The separation between the towers makes theproportions seem ‘blocky’.

The evolution of townhomes will be slow over time, mingled with single family homes mixed in.
There is a missing middle typology in the proposal. Most of the area will be higher density. There is market, social housing and non-market. This is great opportunity to create new housing types.
Maintain variety, diversity, flexibility and creativity of form.

The concept of ‘Happy City’ design and other elements need to inform the development of the neighbourhood. There are a lot of new urban design ideas that reflect new values of the city. Have a variety of building forms and plans throughout each block to avoid monotony. However, a panel member supported more towers to accommodate density.

Office space demand is being studied, according to the Planners. It seems like a favourable place for office space to be accommodated. There will be higher density through planning programming.
There are a lot of social amenities in the area. Push the commercial typology on 43rd Ave, starting with one building so it spreads. Put some metrics in to the design plans.

Support the height and density with more podium presence. Podiums need to be 5-6 storeys. If you want to introduce density and penetration from block to block, if you increase the podium level and height it will increase the penetrations.
Look at what is livable for community living, and more than commodification. Do careful light studies to look at livability on the streets. Look at community oriented development.
The sunlight transitions are good. The arterial form along Cambie Street is good.
The greenspace has to work as hard as the bus stops. The parks need to be considered. Consider the facilities and amenities for future density and population growth. Parks need to be ‘nice’.

Overall, a panel member concluded by stating the panel supported ‘urbanity not uniformity’.

Adjournment
There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m

So, for all the criticism the UDP gets on our forum, I have to say there's plenty of commentary that everyone should like. Asking for taller podiums, more towers, more office space and, most importantly, adding badly needed density to the area. I debated about attending this meeting, but given that it ended at 8:40 PM, I'm rather glad I didn't try to tough it out.

[Feathered Friend]

Note that the model contains errors, like the impossibly low parking ramp roof






Here's two projects from separate owners that, thanks to the prescriptive nature of the Cambie Corridor plan, were commented on looking like twins. The projects sharing the same development team were presented at the same time during the UDP meeting. Due to that prescriptive nature, the hearing wasn't the most interesting, so I'll save everyone the time and be brief. The UDP voted to support with the recommendations to relocate the amenity space, voiced concerns about the expression of the daycare and townhouse elements, and wanted a bit more shading.

[osirisboy]

So the udp somehow didn't think this was bland? But they thought the Chinatown one was? Lol

[officedweller]

Thanks!
And a reminder of what's proposed for the bottom corner in the first pic.

Originally Posted by officedweller

This is what's proposed for the corner lot (5110 Cambie):


http://rezoning.vancouver.ca/applica...mbie/index.htm

[officedweller]

Vancouver condo developer cancels Langara West on Cambie
Joanne Lee-Young
Published on: September 8, 2017 | Last Updated: September 8, 2017 11:06 AM PDT

...
Vivagrand said in an email, “the project will not be re-marketed and the property will be sold. This was an incredibly difficult decision, which was driven by extensive permitting delays, sharply rising construction costs and the subsequent loss of project financing.”

It explained to Postmedia: “Langara West submitted its development permit application to the City of Vancouver two years ago, in September 2015. To date, the final development permit for the project has not yet been issued. As such, construction has not yet been able to commence and the project would not be finished by the contractual completion date (July 2019).

Details in letters shared by the company with buyers reveal a possibly shorter timeline, and the city, in an emailed reply to Postmedia’s queries, agreed:

“The City of Vancouver is disappointed that the developer has chosen to halt the project at this time, when the permit is close to completion, after years of collective work on the project, and when the city is in dire need of more housing.”
...

http://vancouversun.com/business/com...west-on-cambie

Here's a rendering (Flamingo Restaurant site):


http://www.vancouver-real-estate-dir...est-render.jpg


https://www.vancouvernewcondos.com/w...4/Langara4.jpg

[Prometheus]

Among other things, the Cambie Corridor Plan is a lost opportunity to move Vancouver ubanity foward in a meaningful way. Outside the scattered, pre-existing commercial nodes and a few isolated exceptions, the plan does not introduce any new urban amenities along the corridor. Outside the few exceptions, if you felt you had to drive to reach basic urban amenities before, then the Plan will not change your feelings; if your walk to access basic urban amenities was inconvenient before, then the plan will not shorten it. For the most part, the Cambie Corridor Plan increases density but only marginally; it increases density but not the availability of urban amenities--the very urban amenities that a more meanignful increase in allowed use and density would have brought. The majority of the corridor was a suburban street before the Plan, and the majority of the corridor will be a suburban street after the Plan, despite the corridor now having a subway running along it. Much of the corridor will have more people, but not more urban amenities for those people to enjoy.

[whatnext]

There's something fishy about that. Every other bland Cambie Corridor project inches along to completion, yet Langara West blames the city for cancelling? And they claimed to be "Sold Out" on their sign? Anyone know who is really behind the development? With a Chinese company you never know what is really in play.

[officedweller]

With the Pearson lands and Langara Gardens across the street, maybe it's a play for higher density?

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by officedweller

With the Pearson lands and Langara Gardens across the street, maybe it's a play for higher density?

More likely a play just to make a quicker buck by doing nothing. Why build and flip when you can just buy lots and flip them? It's a subsidiary of a Mainland Chinese company, no doubt there are differences between what we would deem ethical and what they do.

[s211]

Market chatter is that non-local development firms have been naively over-paying for land, not appreciating market nuances, CACs and the like. I've heard of one particular site where there was no research done on the zoning specifics and the then-required need to rezone and resultant CACs, etc., have created a bit of a poop-show.

The prices per buildable sq.ft. being paid for residential sites absolutely astounds me, sometimes being a factor of 20 times what was paid a decade or two ago.