The Stack (1133 Melville) | 161m | 36fl | Completed

Klazu · #1 Posted **Jul 29, 2015, 2:37 AM**

Okay, let me begin the thread for this one since nobody else seems to be doing it.

Quote:

A rezoning application submitted to the City indicates that Oxford Properties intends to construct a 33-storey, 658,687 square foot office tower at 1133 Melville Street, a large site between Bute and Thurlow streets currently occupied by a 7-storey parkade. It will have a floor space ratio (FSR) of 22.65 and be the tallest office tower in the city.

The tower’s floor area eclipses major office towers in the area including the 583,000-square-foot Bentall 5 office tower and 596,000-square-foot Park Place, which are both 459 feet (140 metres) in height.

Retail and restaurant space in 1133 Melville Street will be located at the base of the tower and underground levels will be purposed for a 287 stall parkade.

New York City-based Kohn Pederson Fox, which also designed Oxford’s nearby MNP Tower, is responsible for the design of the project.

http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2015/07/m...own-vancouver/

All photos by Oxford Properties via Vancitybuzz.

Caliplanner1 · #2 Posted **Jul 29, 2015, 3:01 AM**

The last three renderings of the proposed office tower seem to be a little low for 160 meters relative to the Trump (then at a lower level of construction) and the Shangri la. Hopefully we'll get a more realistic height rendering soon.

mcminsen · #3 Posted **Jul 29, 2015, 3:04 AM**

Here's the beige parkade/office building that the new project would replace.

July28 '15, my pics

Jimbo604 · #4 Posted **Jul 29, 2015, 3:06 AM**

New rezoning app for 33 storey office downtown:

"The City of Vancouver has received an application to rezone 1133 Melville Street from DD (Downtown) District to CD-1 (Comprehensive Development) District. The proposal is for a 33-storey office building with retail at grade..."
Source: COV Rezoning Map

Vancity BUZZ has an article

Currently occupied by what must be one of the ugliest buildings downtown - a truly awful office over multi-level parking lot type: Google Maps These types of above ground parking developments should never be allowed imho. If you want parking then put it underground and out of sight.

Jebby · #5 Posted **Jul 29, 2015, 3:53 AM**

I wonder why they didn't go for one more floor to reach the max allowed height...

WarrenC12 · #6 Posted **Jul 29, 2015, 4:25 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jebby

I wonder why they didn't go for one more floor to reach the max allowed height...

Perhaps our local height fetishists can help explain that one.

Great to see that ugly parking lot go... but it's a big structure, that will be an interesting demo.

rofina · #7 Posted **Jul 29, 2015, 6:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Perhaps our local height fetishists can help explain that one.

Great to see that ugly parking lot go... but it's a big structure, that will be an interesting demo.

Indeed! This should be one of the more interesting demo jobs in recent times. Lots of reinforced concrete, hight, and large floor plate.

Significant demo costs.

trofirhen · #8 Posted **Jul 29, 2015, 7:30 PM**

I can only remark on how much this will dynamize Melville St, and the CBD. Great potential addition, IMO.

LeftCoaster · #9 Posted **Jul 29, 2015, 7:38 PM**

THanks for creating the thread Klazu.

This one has a long way to go through the city's process, however KPF and Oxford know the hoops that have the be navigated so I'm sure they will come out of this with a building that is quite near what they have proposed here.

Personally I'd like to see the UDP recommend they shrink their floorplates by 1,000-2,000 sq ft and add 1-2 more floors to reach the max height and strengthen the towers aesthetic proportions.

osirisboy · #10 Posted **Jul 29, 2015, 8:21 PM**

I don't. I mean yea they should go higher to strengthen the aesthetics but not at expense of the floorplate size. It's nice to see a decently sized building here

Klazu · #11 Posted **Jul 29, 2015, 8:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trofirhen

I can only remark on how much this will dynamize Melville St, and the CBD. Great potential addition, IMO.

I was walking on Burrard today and took a moment to imagine how this tower will add to the Melville Street canyon. It will look massive and fantastic!

Now I am sad that the other new office tower at Thurlow and Pender won't be taller than it is. How much vibrance those would together add to that area (they still do).

Prometheus · #12 Posted **Jul 29, 2015, 8:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Perhaps our local height fetishists can help explain that one.

A likely explanation was already provided:

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlousa

I'm certain that they would've calculated the best footprint to land the maximum FSR onto the site. Going taller might have lead to smaller floorplates...

But jlousa is just a raving height fetishist without any knowledge of development economics, urban development or city planning. Not the kind of person anyone would say the following about:

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Thanks jlousa! Posts like this should be in a sticky or FAQ section.

Klazu · #13 Posted **Jul 29, 2015, 8:30 PM**

Well, that's exactly what jlousa is! Always going to raves...

officedweller · #14 Posted **Jul 29, 2015, 8:35 PM**

Thanks for creating the thread.

Previous posts:

Model of Oxford's new office tower project on Melville Street - posted April 22, 2015 on the B+B Model website:

https://www.facebook.com/pages/BB-Sc...=photos_stream

https://www.facebook.com/pages/BB-Sc...=photos_stream

**********

Here's the site:

It's a site that can go up to 550 feet under the Higher Buildings Policy
- but looks like it won't b built to the maximum height.

http://former.vancouver.ca/commsvcs/guidelines/H005.pdf

Quote:

Originally Posted by Klazu

trofirhen · #15 Posted **Jul 30, 2015, 11:54 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

THanks for creating the thread Klazu.

This one has a long way to go through the city's process, however KPF and Oxford know the hoops that have the be navigated so I'm sure they will come out of this with a building that is quite near what they have proposed here.

Personally I'd like to see the UDP recommend they shrink their floorplates by 1,000-2,000 sq ft and add 1-2 more floors to reach the max height and strengthen the towers aesthetic proportions.

KPF could probably do that ... magnificently. It could be a centrepiece building for its height, presence, and design features, with them at the helm. Remember the MNP !! This one might be its big brother, of a sort.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Klazu

I was walking on Burrard today and took a moment to imagine how this tower will add to the Melville Street canyon. It will look massive and fantastic!

Now I am sad that the other new office tower at Thurlow and Pender won't be taller than it is. How much vibrance those would together add to that area (they still do).

Are you talking about already existent buildings, or one that is planned? If it is planned, could I ask you to give me a link to it? Thanks.

Hourglass · #16 Posted **Jul 30, 2015, 12:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trofirhen

KPF could probably do that ... magnificently. It could be a centrepiece building for its height, presence, and design features, with them at the helm. Remember the MNP !! This one might be its big brother, of a sort.

Are you talking about already existent buildings, or one that is planned? If it is planned, could I ask you to give me a link to it? Thanks.

I think he's talking about the 1090 W Pender development found here

trofirhen · #17 Posted **Jul 30, 2015, 12:36 PM**

I referred to that link given,
( http://former.vancouver.ca/commsvcs/guidelines/H005.pdf )
and found this:

In addition, all Higher Buildings should be considered with cacareful effort to provide a lasting and
meaningful public legacy to
Vancouver and should include careful consideration of the following:

The buildings should achieve community benefits (i.e. as a recipient site for density transfers;
retention of important heritage components; provision of significant cultural or socia
l facilities;
or provision of low cost housing);

The development should not involve the demolition of a Class ‘A’ heritage building;

The building should include activities and uses of community significance such as public
observation decks or other pub
lic amenity;

The development should provide on
-
site open space that represents a significant contribution to
the downtown network of green and plaza space;

The building should not contribute to adverse microclimate effects;

Careful consideration sho
uld be given to minimize adverse shadowing and view impacts on
public realm including key streets, parks and plazas, as well as neighbouring buildings;

Signage on the buildings should not be located at a height which exceeds the building’s current
height limit.
*

........................................................ ........... ....... .........
Disregarding the details, I went back to the opening statement about a distinguished and lasting legacy. I thought of the MNP Tower, and this one at 1133 Melville, and though, "hey, yeah."

Then I remembered Burrard Gateway, and was instantly cured of my happy vision. Oh well, let's hope we learn from the past, and get 1133 right!

Klazu · #18 Posted **Jul 30, 2015, 6:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hourglass

I think he's talking about the 1090 W Pender development found here

Yep, that's the one.

Metro-One · #19 Posted **Jul 30, 2015, 6:39 PM**

So refreshing to see an office proposal at 160 meters, but the last three renders showed on the first post seem to be much shorter than all the others.

logan5 · #20 Posted **Jul 30, 2015, 7:01 PM**

I presume clear glass is less costly, and that's why all these new office towers are clad in clear glass. Too bad, especially for this large tower that could really stand out if it had some kind of reflective glass.

Disappointing to see office towers starting to go a generic formula the same way condo towers have.