HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage Forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > SSP: Local Vancouver > Downtown & City of Vancouver

    Salt in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • Vancouver Skyscraper Diagram
            
View Full Map

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2011, 2:15 AM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 7,411
Salt | 94M | 31fl | Completed

Since this project could start very soon and has already been approved, I've decided to start a dedicated thread for it.
The project is by Concert Properties, not to be confused with 1304 Howe St by Cressey just a block over and probably to be under construction at the same time.

Context Plan
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...ts/context.pdf

Massing Context
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...ts/massing.pdf

Axonometric Studies
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...xonometric.pdf

Elevation Drawings
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...elevations.pdf

Floor Plan Drawings
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin...floorplans.pdf

Landscape Plan
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/plannin.../landscape.pdf

UDP minutes
Quote:
2. 1304 Hornby Street
DE: Rezoning
Use: Rezone to increase density from 5.0 to 12.44 FSR to allow construction of a 31-storey (309 foot) tower.
Zoning:

DD to CD-1
Application Status: Rezoning
Review: First
Architect:

Bingham + Hill Architects
Owner:

Concert Properties
Delegation:

John Bingham, Bingham + Hill Architects
Richard Henry, Richard Henry Architects
Bruce Hemstock, PWL Partnership
Farouk Babul, Concert Properties Ltd.
Staff:

Karen Hoese and Anita Molaro

EVALUATION: SUPPORT (8-0)

Introduction: Anita Molaro, Development Planner, introduced the proposal for a rezoning of this site from DD to CD-1 to allow an increase in the density beyond that permitted under the current zoning. The proposal can be considered under the Transfer of Density Policy. Ms. Molaro described the policy context for the site as well as the Downtown South Guidelines that provide direction with regard to the design and development of the site. The site is impacted by the Queen Elizabeth Park View Corridor which limits the height on the site to 366 feet. The proposal also falls under the Metro Core Policy/Capacity Review Study which allows for the consideration of a rezoning proposal in Downtown South to view corridors where public benefits may be achieved. Under the Green Rezoning Policy, a minimum of LEED™ Silver or equivalent is required. Ms. Molaro described the context for the surrounding area noting the other buildings in the area. The proposal is seeking an increase in the density from 50.0 to 12.44 FSR. The proposal is for a 31-storey tower with 193 residential units and three commercial retail units at grade. There will also be seven levels of underground parking. An amenity space is proposed at the corner of Drake and Hornby Street with a lounge on the second level and exterior amenity space. The proposal is targeting LEED™ Gold and will include a green roof.

Advice from the Panel on this application is sought on the following:

* Does the Panel support the proposed tower form of development taking into consideration:
o Tower separation and neighbourliness
o Height and subsequent density
* Any other comments the Panel may have:
* Shadow impacts
* Landscaping treatments
* Material treatments

Ms. Hoese and Ms. Molaro took questions from the Panel.

Applicant’s Introductory Comments: Richard Henry, Architect, further described the proposal noting that they did consider going taller with the tower and considered bringing more density on the site but they ran into some obstacles. There were problems in getting enough parking because of the size of the lot. When finished it will have the deepest parking garage in the city at seven floors. If they added more height they would have to accommodate an additional elevator and given the small floorplate size, that is not practical. Mr. Henry described the architectural design for the proposal noting there is to be an iconic soft landmark element proposed for the corner. The balconies, fenestration, articulation and material treatments have been selected to pursue the idea of a tall, slender and vertical expression. A green roof is proposed in order to meet the green quota. They will be collecting and channeling water into water column which will store the storm water for repurposing for irrigation and potential toilet flushing. A continuous balcony is proposed on the south west exposure to mitigate solar gain. CRU’s are proposed along Drake Street on the ground floor.

Bruce Hemstock, Landscape Architect, described the landscape plans noting the residential entry has a light element to identify the entry. The commercial will have simply expression with easy access to the CRU entries. The podium will have a fire pit near the covered area outside the amenity room.

The applicant team took questions from the Panel.

Panel’s Consensus on Key Aspects Needing Improvement:

* Consider relocating the amenity room at north east corner at grade;
* Design development to the shadow boxes including consideration to given to increasing size and colour refinements;
* Consider roof level refinement including giving consideration to enhancement of translucent shroud and making the green roof plate horizontal.

Related Commentary: The Panel supported the proposal and thought it would be a tall and elegant building.

The Panel supported the tower separation, neighbourliness, height and density and thought it was an attractive building. They liked the verticality in the tower and the colourful materials including the colour around the windows. Although the Panel liked the shadow box elements, they thought they should be increased in size and brought down to grade or floated above the streetscape.

The Panel thought ground floor space should all be all retail and that the amenity space should be moved to the second floor off the deck. The Panel had some concerns regarding the roof level refinement and suggested making the green roof horizontal. The Panel supported the landscape plans and particularly liked the outdoor living space with the gas fireplace and the extensive and intensive green roofs. They also liked the water elements and the green privacy screen.

The Panel congratulated the applicant for targeting LEED™ Gold registration. There was some concern with the energy performance of the building as there is a large percentage of glazing to wall ratio. Also some of the balconies seem small and the applicant was encouraged to make them useable so they don’t present a thermal penalty. Also, it was suggested that a solar control element needed to be provided on the west façade. One Panel member suggested roughing in for solar hot water for the future on the roof.
Applicant’s Response: Mr. Henry thanked the Panel and said they appreciated the support and comments. Their intention with the shadow box elements is that they will be part of the art component and will be working with an artist on the design.
Development Application
http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/...mmendation.pdf

Council Report
http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/...cuments/p3.pdf

Last edited by jlousa; Jan 24, 2011 at 2:29 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2011, 3:18 AM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 7,411
A couple of renders can be found within the public art proposal.

http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/civicag...20110110ag.pdf

Can't wait for this project and the other 1304 to get names so this get's less confusing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2011, 7:03 AM
PROSTSHOCKER's Avatar
PROSTSHOCKER PROSTSHOCKER is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 183
Wow this building is pretty nice.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2011, 2:22 AM
SFUVancouver's Avatar
SFUVancouver SFUVancouver is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 4,355
This is where the balance of the heritage density from the Robert Lee YMCA landed after Patina had used up its maximum.

This is a good proposal for a small infill site and it strikes me as being much more representative of the majority of new downtown development we are likely to see in the years ahead, as opposed to large site projects like the multi-tower Burrard Gateway proposed for the opposite side of the intersection on the current Pattison Toyota site. This project is also likely to be the first out of the gate to be built on Hornby since the bike lane trial got under way. With Artemsia at Helmckin, the Murray Hotel restoration/tower between Drake and Helmckin, and the Burrard Gateway at Drake all slated for development in the years ahead, this section of Hornby will be a hive of activity and we do not have any experience in the city yet with building adjacent to separate biked routes.

My hunch is that they will install a temporary tunnel of shipping containers adjacent to the usual wood frame pedestrian sidewalk protection. For both Artemesia and this project the buildings are at the corner so they have the Hemlckin and Drake, respectively, to use as their staging/site access needs. For mid-block sites ensuring continued access to the protected bike route will prove more challenging. I cannot imagine that the City would willing to have the separated bike route closed for a couple of years, nor is it likely that they will give up a general carriage lane. For those with greater knowledge of the construction sector, is a standard downtown commercial lane sufficient for site access if concrete pumping is done from the street? I seem to recall that with Capitol Residences they used the commercial lane for site access and installed a fixed concrete pumping machine on Seymour. They closed that section of sidewalk from time to time during contruction but it was open for the majority of the project. Anyway, this is all hypothetical as there are currently no mid-block development proposals for the protected bicycle lane side of Hornby.
__________________
VANCOUVER | Beautiful, Multicultural | Canada's Pacific Metropolis

Last edited by SFUVancouver; Jan 25, 2011 at 2:36 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Feb 8, 2011, 5:36 AM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 7,411
It passed the UDP 8-0 the first time around, it came back for a second round and passed again unanimously.

Quote:
1304 Hornby Street DE: 414412

Use: To construct a new 31-storey mixed-use building on site with 193 residential units and retail on the ground floor.
Zoning: CD-1
Application Status: Complete
Review: Second
Architect: Bingham Hill Architects and Richard Henry Architect Inc.
Owner: Concert Properties
Delegation: John Bingham, Bingham Hill Architects
Richard Henry, Richard Henry Architects Inc.
Farouk Babul, Concert Properties Ltd.
Bjorn Richt, Recollective
Bruce Hemstock, PWL Partnership
Staff: Anita Molaro
EVALUATION: REZONING - SUPPORT (6-0)

Introduction: Anita Molaro, Development Planner, noted that the proposal is a development permit application following rezoning. The basic form of development was discussed and supported at that time. Ms. Molaro described the context for the area noting the future context may include the Burrard gateway application. The proposal is for a 31-storey tower with 193 residential units and three commercial retail units. There will be seven levels of underground parking and the over all height of the tower will be 309 feet. The applicant is targeting LEED™ Gold certification. Molaro noted the issues that were identified by the Panel at the rezoning stage.

Advice from the Panel on this application is sought on the following:
* applicants response to the previous comments raise by the panel (rezoning conditions)
* demonstration of high quality materials and detailed treatments
o concrete (elastomeric coating);brick; and
o aluminum and glass window systems with spandrel glazing and metal panel infill.
o detailed landscaping treatments
* sustainability attributes (LEED™ Gold targeted by applicant - Note: At the time of rezoning LEED™ Silver was the minimum requirement)

Ms. Molaro took questions from the Panel.

Applicant’s Introductory Comments: Richard Henry, Architect, further described the proposal noting that they determined the height of the building to be around 300 feet. The building is optimized for two high speed elevators and if they had added any more height they would have had to go to three elevators which would decrease the efficiency of the floor plate. They wanted to create a relatively affordable building, so the units are compact and simple in form. The also wanted to be respectful of the neighbours which they took into consideration when they designed the podium. They maintained 70 feet from the Viva tower and there is about 65 feet to Hornby Court. However there won’t be any windows on that façade so there are no privacy concerns. All the bays, balconies and windows were stacked to make a vertical expression except the south west bays which are horizontal to emphasis that the central form as being more vertical. He noted that they will be hiring an artist and are working to identify a location for the art piece. Mr. Henry stated that regarding the sustainability strategy they will be LEED™ Gold registered. They incorporated as much green roof as possible while still having some area for an outdoor amenity space. Rainwater will be captured and stored in a cistern for irrigation. The parking has been reduced and they have included two co-op cars and as well bike storage will be included.

Bruce Hemstock, Landscape Architect, noted that the City was looking for bike racks and seating along the bike lane and will be located on the Hornby Street frontage in the boulevard strip. The landscape is straight forward on the ground plane following the City standard. Mr. Hemstock described the proposed materials noting the residential entry will have planter pots that are lit from above and from below. The terrace has been broken up into three zones. The first zone is opposite the amenity area and is more of an open space with a bench, a barbeque and a fire pit. The mid zone is framed by the three benches and plantings for a social gathering spot. The third space is adjacent to the outside edge and is a more quiet space and will include urban agriculture.

The applicant team took questions from the Panel.

Panel’s Consensus on Key Aspects Needing Improvement:
* Design development to refine and simplify the tower’s base material, colour palette to enhance the visual autonomy and presence of the contrasting shadow boxes.
* Design development to simplify the tower top.
* Design development to enhance the responses of the tower facades to sustainable considerations.
* Design development to corner at grade. This should include consideration of weather protection and integration of art.
* Design development to further enhance the verticality of the tower expression.

Related Commentary: The Panel supported the proposed and thought it was a well considered building.

The Panel said they appreciated the simplicity of the building and supported the verticality in the form but encouraged the applicant to go further. They thought they could express something on the outside to express a shadow line. They liked the shadow boxes and suggested the applicant add a couple more to the tower. One Panel member noted that it would be interesting to see how the artist dealt with the relationship with the shadow boxes while a couple of other Panel members thought the shadow boxes could be playful elements and where colour could be used. It was noted that if this was not a landmark building but more of a background building that needs to fit into the fabric of the neighbourhood. A couple of Panel members noted that there was too much effort at the top of the building while several other Panel members thought there needed to be some work on the corner for some strength in the design. One Panel member suggested the corner was a good place for public art.

Several Panel members noted that the scheme had improved from moving the amenity up in the building and instead adding retail to the ground floor to animate the street. A couple of Panel members noted that the building needed rain protection and thought it could be part of the public art component.

The Panel thought the colour and materials were quite conventional and would like to see a bolder expression with a couple of Panel members stating that the colours could be more monochromatic.

A couple of Panel members wanted the applicant to be more inventive to the ground plane although most of the Panel thought the landscape treatment looked interesting. One Panel member was concerned that the private patio spaces could be over programmed.

Regarding sustainability, one Panel member would like to see the principles demonstrated in the building and that the facades were not helping with the sunlight angle. A couple of Panel members thought the south west façade might be a challenge for the energy target considering the amount of glazing.
Applicant’s Response: Mr. Henry said they appreciated the Panel’s comments and would take them back to the drawing board.
It might look like a nice building but I certainly wouldn't want to live there with only 2 elevators servicing 31 floors above ground plus 7 floors of u/g parking.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Feb 8, 2011, 6:21 AM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 18,001
Quote:
They maintained 70 feet from the Viva tower and there is about 65 feet to Hornby Court. However there won’t be any windows on that façade so there are no privacy concerns.
If I read this correctly, there are no windows on the entire south facade because of the adjacent mid-rise tower.
The elevation drawings and the floorplans clearly show windows on the south facade.

Maybe "won't be" should be "aren't", in which case the reference refers to Hornby Court, not the proposed tower?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Apr 16, 2011, 2:38 PM
jlousa's Avatar
jlousa jlousa is offline
Ferris Wheel Hater
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 7,411
Updated thread to reflect new name.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Apr 17, 2011, 3:02 AM
Locked In's Avatar
Locked In Locked In is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,767
This thread needs a render... any render:


Source: saltcondos.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Apr 17, 2011, 5:02 AM
SFUVancouver's Avatar
SFUVancouver SFUVancouver is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 4,355
I've got one somewhere that I will post.

[edit] I cannot find it on my computer. Sorry.
__________________
VANCOUVER | Beautiful, Multicultural | Canada's Pacific Metropolis

Last edited by SFUVancouver; Apr 19, 2011 at 1:39 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Apr 17, 2011, 8:27 PM
yogiderek yogiderek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: westend Vancouver
Posts: 488
Wen

The west end network under head looser Randy Helton was using the image of the SALT building on their latest attack on more density in the west end. Posting that pic and subsquent sites all over the westend. Basically saying this is what is going to be built. I wish concert would sue them for libel.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Apr 17, 2011, 8:39 PM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam/Rainbow Lake
Posts: 26,182
they showed a ratty little group on the news yesterday protesting by that church in the west end that is going to be redeveloped - they were standing amongst um other towers doing so - i don't understand their reasoning - are they saying "we were here first and we don't want anymore people in our west end" is that their schtick? thats pretty elitist
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Apr 17, 2011, 9:37 PM
hollywoodnorth's Avatar
hollywoodnorth hollywoodnorth is online now
Blazed Member - Citygater
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Downtown Vancouver
Posts: 5,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpongeG View Post
they showed a ratty little group on the news yesterday protesting by that church in the west end that is going to be redeveloped - they were standing amongst um other towers doing so - i don't understand their reasoning - are they saying "we were here first and we don't want anymore people in our west end" is that their schtick? thats pretty elitist
they won't admit that .... but that is exactly what it is.
__________________
http://www.votesmartbc.com
http://www.riskydix.ca
http://www.dixshiddenplan.ca

Quote of the Decade on SSP: "what happens would it be?" - argon007
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2011, 3:19 PM
s211 s211 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpongeG View Post
they showed a ratty little group on the news yesterday protesting by that church in the west end that is going to be redeveloped - they were standing amongst um other towers doing so - i don't understand their reasoning - are they saying "we were here first and we don't want anymore people in our west end" is that their schtick? thats pretty elitist
And before you know it, the West End will turn into the Downtown West Side (with apologies to the DTES), replete with substandard rental housing and declining fortunes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2011, 3:50 PM
dreambrother808 dreambrother808 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,759
It already feels headed in that direction sometimes. Why people are against the rejuvenating energy of new development, especially within an already developed area, is beyond my comprehension. Basically, these people must have an irrational fear of change.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2011, 6:45 PM
yogiderek yogiderek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: westend Vancouver
Posts: 488
so if the city was to give WestBank a deal where they could place lets say 22 stories on top of the TEUS Gardens in exchange for the ST John's church site as a park. Would they be happy with that? Probably not because then it would be like oh you're blocking our views. I have constantly been ripping down all their posters because they misrepresent themselves. The last one was about they could zone up to 70 stories in the westend. (we could only wish) Its like scare tactics against senior citizens that are entrenched in this area. Oh yaletown hooligans are all going to move in. That is what they are preaching.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2011, 6:51 PM
240glt's Avatar
240glt 240glt is offline
HVAC guru
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Edmonton- no snappy tag line required
Posts: 7,728
Salt ? Who picks these stupid condo names ?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2011, 7:19 PM
trofirhen's Avatar
trofirhen trofirhen is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,757
Quote:
Originally Posted by yogiderek View Post
so if the city was to give WestBank a deal where they could place lets say 22 stories on top of the TEUS Gardens in exchange for the ST John's church site as a park. Would they be happy with that? Probably not because then it would be like oh you're blocking our views. I have constantly been ripping down all their posters because they misrepresent themselves. The last one was about they could zone up to 70 stories in the westend. (we could only wish) Its like scare tactics against senior citizens that are entrenched in this area. Oh yaletown hooligans are all going to move in. That is what they are preaching.

Interesting stuff. Do you by any chance know of a link to that in the media? Vancouver news harder to get over here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2011, 7:30 PM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
ON3P Skis
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SEFC, Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,269
Quote:
Originally Posted by trofirhen View Post

Interesting stuff. Do you by any chance know of a link to that in the media? Vancouver news harder to get over here.
You constantly preach this, whether it be for Canadian politics or local Vancouver happenings. The interwebs have tons of info.

Vancouver stuff:

http://citycaucus.com/
http://www.francesbula.com/
http://www.civicsurrey.com/
http://gellersworldtravel.blogspot.com/
http://www.vancouver.24hrs.ca/
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/planning/

And if you like the lefty tilt:

http://www.westender.com/
http://www.straight.com/
http://cityhallwatch.ca/ (nut jobs here)

Canada political stuff (c'mon, this is really easy):

http://www.nationalpost.com/
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/
http://www.cbc.ca/news/
__________________
Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted May 16, 2011, 11:19 PM
Mike K.'s Avatar
Mike K. Mike K. is offline
Website Manager
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: 56th floor of the SSP HQ in Victoria
Posts: 9,125
Concert's site states this tower will be 33 floors, but we have 31 listed in the thread title. I'm going to change the title to 33 unless someone can confirm we should stick with 31?

And this tower is now approved, correct?
__________________
>>>SSP's local website for Victoria, BC - VibrantVictoria.ca
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted May 16, 2011, 11:42 PM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam/Rainbow Lake
Posts: 26,182
thats probably without floor 4 and floor 13?
__________________
belowitall
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 > SSP: Local Vancouver > Downtown & City of Vancouver
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:41 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.