New developments on Whitecaps Stadium

[towerguy3]

this is interesting... any opinions?

http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/current...s-Final-eb.pdf

[hollywoodnorth]

thanks for the link...........all I can say is WTF?

"Proximity of stadium to areas of Port Lands with future residential development potential will have liveability impacts (noise, views, shadowing)"

"No development over the tracks east of The Landing building for the foreseeable future."



hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm so let me get this straight....... Residential Won't Work........OK no probs there...................


hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm is it just me or is the #1 issue facing downtown Vancouver a shortage of office space and sites for large plate office towers.......................

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm


am I the only person who can logically put 2 and 2 together.

That land is PERFECT for office towers.........no streets yet so floor plates could be large and well located..........waterfront and mountain views.........jesus sometimes I wonder whats wrong with city staff.

[Glacierfed]

Originally Posted by hollywoodnorth

thanks for the link...........all I can say is WTF?

"Proximity of stadium to areas of Port Lands with future residential development potential will have liveability impacts (noise, views, shadowing)"

"No development over the tracks east of The Landing building for the foreseeable future."



hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm so let me get this straight....... Residential Won't Work........OK no probs there...................


hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm is it just me or is the #1 issue facing downtown Vancouver a shortage of office space and sites for large plate office towers.......................

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm


am I the only person who can logically put 2 and 2 together.

That land is PERFECT for office towers.........no streets yet so floor plates could be large and well located..........waterfront and mountain views.........jesus sometimes I wonder whats wrong with city staff.

Yes, I think there needs to be a purging of the City staff when it comes to these issues, come on Brent, just fire these clowns who would erode the tax base, prevent the further development of the economy. A 1 million sq. foot office development right by the waterfront would probably fill up by the time it was completed. There are a lot of firms downtown that need to find some room to grow. Even where I work we've got a bit less than 3 floors in a AAA building downtown and we're bursting at the seams right now, but there really isn't anywhere for us to go, I think in a couple years we'll probably have to find some smaller space near by to put a department or two but even then its really a far from ideal situation, basically a last resort.

There are actually plenty of sites around the core that could be re-developed for larger office buildings but the city really needs to relax its zoning, I honestly think Office use in the core needs to be encouraged the way heritage preservation is encouraged, i.e. bonus density. There is significant value in having a larger amount of office space downtown, in terms of servicing it with transit infrastructure, etc. than the alternative where residential development takes precedence and people drive to their jobs in Burnaby and Richmond.

[renthefinn]

I think it's really hard to encourage office development when the profit margins are so much better for condo developments. Once that changes we'll see a lot more office construction IMO!

[Canadian Mind]

make it so that residential folks have to pay an "office tax" of 5% of their building costs, and then give the collected monies to a developer who will build office, 5% of the total collected tax for a 100 000 square foot office building to 50% for a 1 000 000 square foot office building to 100% for a 2 million square foot office building... although the percentages of funds recieved would also be based on LEED standards, architectural quality, intigration with the city (services, little things for the locals like a park or atriums, etc). kill the taxes on folks who build office towers, kill view cone restictions on office int he 600 foot zone, and bam, you will have a huge demand.

well, maybe not initially, but someoen is bound to bite eventually.

[SFUVancouver]

1. Queue jumping for office-primary developments in the Central Area

Allow any office-primary development to jump to the head of the line in the development permit process. This would shave months and months, if not a year, off the development process for the applicant. Chicago has a similar system that allows buildings which meet its Chicago Standard of environmental building design to jump ahead of conventional development applicants.


2. Eliminate parking requirements from commercial office developments

Eliminating a parking requirement for office buildings will save the developer enormous amounts of money, speed up construction, and will allow the market to respond to, and help encourage sustainable transportation improvements. The hard cost of providing underground parking in a downtown tower starts at around $40,000 per space and this adds up very quickly towards the total cost of a project. In addition to the cost savings a developer will realize further savings from decreased excavation costs and dumping fees.

3. Incentivize commercial floor space in mixed-use residential towers

Allow a FSR exemption for commercial floorspace in mixed-use residential buildings up to a fixed percentage, say 10%, of total building FSR. For example a mixed-used residential development with an FSR of 2.5 on a 100,000 sq.ft site would have a buildable density of 250,000 sq.ft and under my proposal it could include 25,000 sq.ft of office space without drawing down on its original 250,000 sq.ft. This would essentially be an automatic density bonus and it could be multiplied by incorporating conventional density bonusing features, such as a public plaza, daycare space, to further increase the allowable FSR. Continuing the example, say the developer has been able to increase buildable density to 4 FSR by incorporating a daycare. The new maximum buildable density would be 400,000 sq.ft and an additional 40,000 sq.ft of office space for free.

Height and massing limits would start becoming an obstacle but this ties into the city beginning to be more flexible and allowing substantial additional height when it is warranted. It also allows the market to have more influence on the city's built form and simultaneously yielding more public amenities and living space. If the market is screaming for more office space, as it is now, it will make a lot of sense for developers to maximize their "free" office space allowance by bonusing up their residential towers to the maximum allowable amount to get the most office space possible.

4. Significantly increase maximum building height for office towers and apply the Tall Building development guidelines

The current height limit on commercial office developments make them unattractive to develop and costly to lease. This has a lot to do with commercial ceiling heights being higher, resulting in less floor space to lease/sell than a residential building of similar dimensions and height. I recommend the City apply the Tall Building development guidelines to all commercial high-rise developments and increase the height limit to at least 750 ft and perhaps even 1000ft. The guidelines also call upon the applicant to justify approval of the development by incorporating exceptional environmental performance and "architecturally significance" into the building design. The environmental performance does not have to cost a lot either. If it were standardized in the guideline to mean LEED Silver or LEED Gold the actual cost of meeting the guideline would only add about 2-5% of the total building construction cost in the Vancouver context, and it would pay for itself in short order through energy savings alone, while simultaneously offering a healthier and generally more productive work environment due to increased daylight, natural ventilation, and low-VOC (volatile organic compounds) paint, carpets, and finishes, potentially increasing productivity for building tenants.

[hollywoodnorth]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

1. Queue jumping for office-primary developments in the Central Area

Allow any office-primary development to jump to the head of the line in the development permit process. This would shave months and months, if not a year, off the development process for the applicant. Chicago has a similar system that allows buildings which meet its Chicago Standard of environmental building design to jump ahead of conventional development applicants.


2. Eliminate parking requirements from commercial office developments

Eliminating a parking requirement for office buildings will save the developer enormous amounts of money, speed up construction, and will allow the market to respond to, and help encourage sustainable transportation improvements. The hard cost of providing underground parking in a downtown tower starts at around $40,000 per space and this adds up very quickly towards the total cost of a project. In addition to the cost savings a developer will realize further savings from decreased excavation costs and dumping fees.

3. Incentivize commercial floor space in mixed-use residential towers

Allow a FSR exemption for commercial floorspace in mixed-use residential buildings up to a fixed percentage, say 10%, of total building FSR. For example a mixed-used residential development with an FSR of 2.5 on a 100,000 sq.ft site would have a buildable density of 250,000 sq.ft and under my proposal it could include 25,000 sq.ft of office space without drawing down on its original 250,000 sq.ft. This would essentially be an automatic density bonus and it could be multiplied by incorporating conventional density bonusing features, such as a public plaza, daycare space, to further increase the allowable FSR. Continuing the example, say the developer has been able to increase buildable density to 4 FSR by incorporating a daycare. The new maximum buildable density would be 400,000 sq.ft and an additional 40,000 sq.ft of office space for free.

Height and massing limits would start becoming an obstacle but this ties into the city beginning to be more flexible and allowing substantial additional height when it is warranted. It also allows the market to have more influence on the city's built form and simultaneously yielding more public amenities and living space. If the market is screaming for more office space, as it is now, it will make a lot of sense for developers to maximize their "free" office space allowance by bonusing up their residential towers to the maximum allowable amount to get the most office space possible.

4. Significantly increase maximum building height for office towers and apply the Tall Building development guidelines

The current height limit on commercial office developments make them unattractive to develop and costly to lease. This has a lot to do with commercial ceiling heights being higher, resulting in less floor space to lease/sell than a residential building of similar dimensions and height. I recommend the City apply the Tall Building development guidelines to all commercial high-rise developments and increase the height limit to at least 750 ft and perhaps even 1000ft. The guidelines also call upon the applicant to justify approval of the development by incorporating exceptional environmental performance and "architecturally significance" into the building design. The environmental performance does not have to cost a lot either. If it were standardized in the guideline to mean LEED Silver or LEED Gold the actual cost of meeting the guideline would only add about 2-5% of the total building construction cost in the Vancouver context, and it would pay for itself in short order through energy savings alone, while simultaneously offering a healthier and generally more productive work environment due to increased daylight, natural ventilation, and low-VOC (volatile organic compounds) paint, carpets, and finishes, potentially increasing productivity for building tenants.

great ideas! would you mind if I emailed these to city council?

I am going to include my crazy rant above also toned down of course

[SFUVancouver]

Originally Posted by hollywoodnorth

great ideas! would you mind if I emailed these to city council?

I am going to include my crazy rant above also toned down of course

Not at all but please private message me regarding credit.

[towerguy3]

Any new news? When are they expected to break ground?

[twoNeurons]

it's annoying that I READ through this thread expecting new news only to get a "so... any new news" post.

[squeezied]

lolol

[squeezied]

oh... my bad... u were expecting sth more informatively related to the thread.
hehe

[twoNeurons]

and STILL seven more posts before we go to a new page

[mr.x]

^ Stop It!

[twoNeurons]

^ Stop what?

[\/^~<0(_)\/{9]

Originally Posted by towerguy3

Any new news? When are they expected to break ground?

They haven't even started to come up with a final design yet. It will be at least mid 2008 before that would even be submitted to council for approval. Then who knows when they'd actually start building it.

I believe sometime next month city council will vote on whether the revised location meets their initial concerns. If that passes, they'll be another vote on whether the stadium fits into the city's plan for the waterfront. If that passes, then the Whitecaps can go ahead and start planning it all out and submit a development application.

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by \/^~<0(_)\/{9

They haven't even started to come up with a final design yet. It will be at least mid 2008 before that would even be submitted to council for approval. Then who knows when they'd actually start building it.

I believe sometime next month city council will vote on whether the revised location meets their initial concerns. If that passes, they'll be another vote on whether the stadium fits into the city's plan for the waterfront. If that passes, then the Whitecaps can go ahead and start planning it all out and submit a development application.

quite some system we have. -_-

[twoNeurons]

Good news though is that Toronto FC is doing well for Canadian soccer, and since I'm sure the MLS would love to have Vancouver on board, a whitecaps stadium, whenever it gets built would be a perfect venue.

[\/^~<0(_)\/{9]

Originally Posted by mr.x2

quite some system we have. -_-

Indeed. This stadium was being planned before Toronto's BMO Field and Montreal's Saputo Stadium were, yet Toronto's is already built, and Montreal's is under construction. And this is despite the fact that Mr. Kerfoot is wanting to pay for it himself, without tax dollars, like BMO Field.

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by \/^~<0(_)\/{9

Indeed. This stadium was being planned before Toronto's BMO Field and Montreal's Saputo Stadium were, yet Toronto's is already built, and Montreal's is under construction. And this is despite the fact that Mr. Kerfoot is wanting to pay for it himself, without tax dollars, like BMO Field.

What's even more appalling, which is also why construction on the stadium hasn't begun yet nor has the design process, is that the city in 2001/2002 told Kerfoot to look at building a stadium at the False Creek Flats. Then in 2004, Kerfoot was flatly denied as the city had changed its mind and told him to go elsewhere.....and he did, Waterfront.