HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2010, 8:05 AM
djh djh is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,934
Quote:
Originally Posted by squeezied View Post
-Major East/West routes that intersect at Cambie (king ed, 41, 49) will be solely residential and have maxium heights of 4 floors. Previous plans called for mixed-use and heights of 4-6 floors; this is to respect the residential nature of the area. (no retail on 41st ave opposite of oakridge mall as some of us would have liked to see)
Sounds like a big mistake to not allow retail at the major intersections.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2010, 8:30 AM
squeezied's Avatar
squeezied squeezied is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by djh View Post
Sounds like a big mistake to not allow retail at the major intersections.
Sorry I should clarify there will be mixed-use (retail) at the intersections (see the points regarding the nodes immediately around the stations). What I meant to say was other than the immediate sites around the stations (hence the intersections) that will be mixed-use, the rest of the sites on the East/West routes will be all residential and 4 floors high.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2010, 3:13 PM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,371
Sad to see them reduce the height and density along Cambie. Would've been much better to keep it at 6 stories and lower the height/density at Marine Gateway and immediate neighbours instead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2010, 5:50 PM
Canadian Mind's Avatar
Canadian Mind Canadian Mind is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,921
Why couldn't the density be maintained for all corridors?

Just cruised through Hoboken, NJ again this morning. It's the densest residential community in North America, and there are very few problems with crowding, driving, etc. Of course you have your typical rush hour mash-ups, but other then that going there is awesome. You have almost everything you need in town, and if not, it's either a short walk or a train ride to where you need to go.

Granted, the place is connected by PATH to Manhatten, the Hudson-Bergen LRT that links the NJ communities on the west side of the Hudson River, and Commuter rail that takes you to Newark and deeper into NJ, NY State & Pen.

Of course, this solidifies the argument for more transit to increase density, but why build low-medium now, only to have to tear everything down, when you can build medium-high density later when more transit arrives.

More people = more transit & more local amenities = more transit options = lower ratio of people in their cars on the roads
__________________
"you're eating chicken periods" - Vid
"I love eggs, especially the ones with runny yolks" - Me
"EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW, you're disgusting!" - Vid
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2010, 5:58 PM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
ON3P Skis
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lower Lonsdale, North Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,593
Son of a bitch, can't believe I missed the one last night. I will definitely be there on Thursday.

Squeezied, let me see if I got this correct. The draft emerging plan (June 10, 2010) called for 6-8 storeys of mixed use between 16th and 19th, and then again between 24th and King Ed. Is this now 6 max between 16th & 19th, and 8 storeys max just around the King Ed station? After that, the residential only sections east and west along King Ed and south along Cambie until just before 41st that were previously planned for 4-6 will now be 4 max?

If this is the case it's definitely a shame. I'll read those comments, I'm less concerned about Oakridge, there is more of a precedent there for taller buildings, but the Cambie Village area could have been more much.

edit: Wait, NO retail at grade across from Oakridge on 41st? That doesn't make any sense. Retards!
__________________
Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2010, 6:52 PM
invisibleairwaves's Avatar
invisibleairwaves invisibleairwaves is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 638
I'm really curious as to how "density" became such a dirty word among CoV residents. I thought it was something Vancouver took pride in because of its environmental benefits and more efficient use of land, but now it seems every single proposal comes under fire for being dense. It's like these people speak a completely different language, where the word "density" actually translates into "sewage treatment facility" or "oil refinery" or something.
__________________
Reticulating Splines
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2010, 7:23 PM
squeezied's Avatar
squeezied squeezied is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by awvan View Post
Squeezied, let me see if I got this correct. The draft emerging plan (June 10, 2010) called for 6-8 storeys of mixed use between 16th and 19th, and then again between 24th and King Ed. Is this now 6 max between 16th & 19th, and 8 storeys max just around the King Ed station? After that, the residential only sections east and west along King Ed and south along Cambie until just before 41st that were previously planned for 4-6 will now be 4 max?
If I recall correctly, yes the previously 6-8 floors between 16-19th Ave will now be 6 floors; I don’t recall if it’s still mixed-use or optional mixed-use. 8 floors (or was it 10? I don’t remember) around Kind Ed station sounds about right to me.

The residential only sections east and west along Kind Ed, aside from the sites immediately next to the station, will be 4 stories. This is the same for 41st and 49th Ave.

However, South along Cambie from King Ed to 41st Ave will be 6 floors (not 4).

Basically, aside from the sites immediately next to the stations, North/South along Cambie will be 6 floors and East/West routes will be 4 floors.

Quote:
edit: Wait, NO retail at grade across from Oakridge on 41st? That doesn't make any sense. Retards!
That's right, no retail at grade across from Oakridge on 41st. I have a feeling that proposed senior housing without retail to be on 41st may have set the precedent. But mind you, retail is still planned on the northeast corner of 41st and Cambie.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2010, 7:26 PM
squeezied's Avatar
squeezied squeezied is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlousa View Post
Sad to see them reduce the height and density along Cambie. Would've been much better to keep it at 6 stories and lower the height/density at Marine Gateway and immediate neighbours instead.
Along Cambie they're keeping it 6 floors (previous plans called for 6-8 floors)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2010, 6:51 AM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,371
Thanks for the clarifications, looks like I misinterpreted the original posting. Uunfortunately I have been unable to attend the correct round of meetings. The current plan while not ideal does not sound too bad, I would imagine when rezoning actually proceed there will be a little push and take left on the table as well.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2010, 7:30 PM
djh djh is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,934
I would guess that in the areas that were proposed as 6-8 floors and are now reduced to 6 floors, that if a good proposal came through and requested a discretionary height of 8 floors in exchange for some amenity, that they would be allowed to proceed.
So yes, sad that the height was not allowed forthright, but it might actually help developers to push through higher-standard projects.

I think of West Broadway right after Arbutus, and look at some of those 4 storey developments that were obviously not built with that great quality (similar area: East Broadway around Clark). This decision might prevent average-quality developments getting thrown-up on Cambie.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2010, 10:06 PM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
ON3P Skis
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lower Lonsdale, North Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,593
Reminder that there is a Cambie Corridor Open House this afternoon/evening from 4-8pm at the Docksteader warehouse at 8515 Cambie street.
__________________
Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Dec 5, 2010, 2:39 AM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 39,104
this ***** sure feels entitled and i am sure she is pretty typical of what is going to ball things up

Neighbourhood density rankles longtime Oakridge resident

BY MEGAN STEWART, VANCOUVER COURIER DECEMBER 3, 2010

The owner of an Oakridge bed and breakfast near Cambie Street worries the character and livability of her neighbourhood will deteriorate as density increases.

Corinne Sanderson owns and operates the Beautiful B&B one block east of Cambie Street on West 40th Avenue where her white, two-story manor looks south toward the Fraser River and Mount Baker. "Ours has been a lovely neighbourhood, but recently we have been asked to accept the greatly increased density," she told the Courier. "We have done so gracefully but feel we have been more than fair in accepting more than our share of densification."

The Cambie Street corridor is intended to become increasingly dense. The city has opened four major intersections south of King Edward to case-by-case applications to build up to 12-storey buildings for residential, office and commercial use. The intersections--on Cambie at King Edward, 41st Avenue, 49th Avenue and Marine Drive--were chosen to concentrate density because the hubs include a Canada Line station.

"It's critical to make sure that incredible investment in infrastructure pays off," said Brent Toderian, the city's director of planning. "From many different perspectives, both professional and community, density around transit is the right thing to do. The discussion is how to do it well. But it's not been generally about preserving single-family houses."

For now, the areas open to special zoning applications are adjacent to the Canada Line station on Cambie Street for two blocks on either side of 41st Avenue.

The rezoned area continues on 41st Avenue two blocks east of Cambie to Manson Street across from the Oakridge Centre.

Buildings can reach 12 storeys in lots nearest the intersection.

Further from the corner, buildings can reach six storeys and developments are slated for mixed use, including retail and office space at ground level with additional office and residential space above.

Toderian said the city has received one application to build. A six-storey seniors housing complex is slated for the 600 block of 41st Ave between Manson and Ash streets.

Council approved this phase of development along the Cambie corridor in January.

At the time, NPA Coun. Suzanne Anton argued that building height not be restricted and the neighbourhood be allowed to develop into a vibrant commercial and residential focal point in South Vancouver.

She was not supported by the Vision-dominated council.

"I would like to give people's imagination the process and free reign at Oakridge," she said. "It is a major geographical centre of the city at the intersection of two major streets and it's on a height of land. I think the development could be significantly higher--if you do it right."

The owner of Omnitsky Kosher Delicatessen on Cambie Street north of 43rd Avenue welcomes the densification.

"It will change for the good. I'm a storeowner. Put more people in the area, it's better for stores," said Eppy Rappaport, who has run the destination eatery at the same location for 14 years.

"The second they started digging that tunnel, I knew there'd be a change."

...

Read more: http://www.vancourier.com/Neighbourh...#ixzz17CXBxfrY
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Dec 5, 2010, 4:28 AM
zivan56 zivan56 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,207
Those types should move to Abbotsford/Chilliwack/Mission if they want to continue living in their fantasy land. Don't live close to Downtown in the 3rd largest city in Canada if you can't stand city life.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Dec 5, 2010, 7:36 AM
djh djh is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,934
Quote:
Originally Posted by zivan56 View Post
Those types should move to Abbotsford/Chilliwack/Mission if they want to continue living in their fantasy land. Don't live close to Downtown in the 3rd largest city in Canada if you can't stand city life.
No no, let's be reasonable here.
Firstly, let me state that I'm in no way a NIMBY. I really support densification and especially along major arterials.

BUT (and this applies to any situation like the above):
You're suggesting the complainers move to a quiet neighbourhood to get away from the city life. Well, what if they move there, and the city changes the zoning and where they moved to suddenly becomes "city"? Do the people have no right to complain? Do they yet again pick up sticks and move to another quiet neighbourhood and hope that too doesn't get rezoned? Constantly live in fear that their new home gets upzoned?
Alternatively, look at it this way. What if the complainer in the article moved here 50 years ago when that part of Cambie *was* a quiet neighbourhood in the middle of nowhere? And now it's going to get upzoned...do they just keep their mouths shut?

All I'm saying is people pick an area to invest in based on lots of complex reasons depending upon their life stages. But things change. They change, their needs change and on top of that the neighbourhood evolves. It's not always easy to just pick up and leave. Maybe so if you're a 21 year old renter with no family, a truck and a flexible work arrangement. Maybe less so if you're an empty-nesting senior who relies on local support facilities, has long-term friends, children and grandchildren within walking distance, no vehicle and needs to be near transit. Or a young family with kids in a special school, or with a dependent that needs to be near constant specialist medical attention.

We far too often take it for granted that if we're unhappy we're able to change that easily. But many of the people that made our favourite neighbourhoods so great are the stable long-time residents and businesses, and when they get fed up and leave the area loses some of it's soul. So let's not be in such a hurry to say to people "shut up or leave, you're replaceable". Yes, the average whiny NIMBY, they can go but sometimes there's really good reasons for the complaints about neighbourhood change.

Last edited by djh; Dec 5, 2010 at 7:52 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Dec 5, 2010, 7:42 AM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 39,104
change and growth is inevitable
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Dec 5, 2010, 7:44 AM
whatnext whatnext is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 22,106
Very well put.

Why don't Toderian and the City put their money where their mouth is when it comes to making the Canada Line investment pay off. Sell the Langara Golf Course, develop it and build the station at 57th. Where does it say the City has to provide a luxury like a golf course for a figurative handful of residents? Shouldn't skiiers expect a city-owned ski hill as well?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Dec 5, 2010, 4:45 PM
delboy delboy is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 653
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpongeG View Post
change and growth is inevitable
yes indeed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Dec 6, 2010, 6:34 PM
squeezied's Avatar
squeezied squeezied is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,625
For those who didn't get a chance to attend the recent Phase 2 open houses, here are the information that was presented. I recommend people taking a look at the precincts for each station area for a rendering of what the Cambie corridor would look like. It doesn't look too bad considering decreases in the number of floors.

Introduction and Background
Systems and Public Realm Framework
Neighbourhood Precinct Map
-Cambie Village Precinct
-Queen Elizabeth Precinct
-Oakridge Town Centre Precinct
-Langara Precinct
-Marine Landing Precinct

(source)

Generally speaking: 4 floors on East/West routes, 6 floors along Cambie, 8+ floors at station nodes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Dec 6, 2010, 7:22 PM
whatnext whatnext is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 22,106
A couple quick thoughts:
-Why not encourage more office development around King Ed & Cambie. There's already a 3 story building on the NE corner. The corner is served by the C-Line and 3 bus routes. Plus office workers would help animate that corner of QE Park which is really underused.
-Marine Landing, where did the Intracorp/Cheng renders come from for the NE corner? Did I miss those in another thread? That's where the two story commercial/apt building is, right?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Dec 6, 2010, 9:50 PM
josiebug josiebug is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext View Post
A couple quick thoughts:
-Why not encourage more office development around King Ed & Cambie. There's already a 3 story building on the NE corner. The corner is served by the C-Line and 3 bus routes. Plus office workers would help animate that corner of QE Park which is really underused.
-Marine Landing, where did the Intracorp/Cheng renders come from for the NE corner? Did I miss those in another thread? That's where the two story commercial/apt building is, right?
I don't understand this hard on they have for densifying the corridor but not the stations? They have 6 story buildings all along Cambie, but two blocks away from the stations it's just single family housing...Why not have concentric rings of density around the stations with arms up the major arterials?
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


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:27 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.