City of Vancouver
Search
Help

Index

Development Permit Staff Committee Members

Applicant

Executive Summary

Development Permit Staff Committee Recommendation

Technical Analysis

Context

Background

Applicable By-laws and Guidelines

Rezoning Approval Conditions

Conclusion

Urban Design Panel

Engineering Services

Social Planning

Processing Centre - Building

Vancouver Coastal Health Authority

Licenses and Inspections - Environmental Control Branch

Fire and Rescue Services

Notification

Development Permit Staff Committee Comments

Appendix A - Standard Conditions

Appendix B - Standard Notes to Applicant and Conditions of Development Permit

Appendix C - Comments from Processing Centre-Building and Fire and Rescue Services

Appendix E - Applicant's Design Rationale

Appendix F - Urban Design Panel Minutes, May 14, 2003

Back to Agenda

Development Permit Staff Committee Report
for the Development Permit Board
651 Expo Boulevard - DE407454 - Zone CD-1 (Complete Application)
(For: Monday, July 7, 2003)

Development Permit Staff Committee Members

Executive Summary

Proposal:  To construct a mixed-use project consisting of: at the Expo Boulevard level - a commercial component ("Costco Wholesale" [Costco]) of approximately 144,725 sq.ft., with two levels of underground parking for 680 vehicles; and at the Georgia Street and Dunsmuir Street Viaduct level - four residential towers (23, 26, 30 and 32 storeys in height), and two-storey townhouses, for a total of 900 dwelling units, with two levels of structured parking for 713 vehicles, including 23 vehicles associated with the Beatty Street Drill Hall. Total parking is for 1,393 stalls.

See Appendix A - Standard conditions
Appendix B - Standard Notes and Conditions of Development Permit
Appendix C - Processing Centre - Building and Fire & Rescue Services comments
Appendix D - Plans and elevations
Appendix E - Applicant's design rationale
Appendix F - Urban Design Panel Minutes of May 14, 2003

(Apendix D is not included - copies of the full report may be obtained from the Planning Department)

Issues:
1. Tower separation and design quality
2. Extent of townhouses
3. Costco façades
4. Viaduct design issues

Urban Design Panel: Non Support*

* Note: UDP - Support at second review - May 14, 2003. (See Appendix F to this report)

Development Permit Staff Committee Recommendation: Approve

THAT the Board APPROVE Development Application No. 407454 as submitted, subject to Council's approval of the final form of development, the plans and information forming a part thereof, thereby permitting the construction of a mixed-use project consisting of: at the Expo Boulevard level - a commercial component of approximately 144,725 sq.ft., with two levels of underground parking for 680 vehicles; and at the Georgia and Dunsmuir Viaducts level - four residential towers (23, 26, 30 and 32 storeys), and two-storey townhouses, for a total of 900 dwelling units, with two levels of structured parking for 713 vehicles, subject to the following conditions:

1.0 Prior to the issuance of the development permit, revised drawings and information shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning, clearly indicating:

1.1 design development to meet a minimum 80 ft. tower separation to improve livability and privacy;

Note to Applicant: This can be achieved by, among other things: reducing the floor plates of the two lower towers (Towers B and D) by approximately 450 sq.ft. and designing a more compact tower plan; and modifications of the floor plates of the two higher towers (Towers A and C).

1.2 design development to strengthen the street presence of the towers by, among other things, extending the townhouses so they engage the tower base in a more positive manner and expanding or articulating the lobby areas;

1.3 design development to the tower roof forms (mechanical penthouses) to improve their visual quality on the City skyline and to be more responsive to the overall tower form;

1.4 design development to the external material colours of the towers and townhouses to improve their visual quality;

Note to Applicant: The conceptual 'Mondrian' colour intentions would be appropriate. (See Residential Building Colour discussion)

1.5 design development to increase the extent of townhouses along the internal east-west street to fully realize its intended residential character;

1.6 design development to the north and south Costco façades to substantially improve their visual character and the adjacent environment;

Note to Applicant: Aspects to review should include, among other things, the use of higher quality exterior materials, lighting, colour and large scale graphics and/or sculpture. CPTED principles should be of prime concern in consideration of all design changes.

1.7 design development to strengthen the vertical landscaped wall of the Expo Boulevard-facing (east) Costco façade to more strongly reflect the original Beatty Street escarpment;

1.8 design development to the materials of the viaduct-level streets to differentiate their function and nature;

Note to Applicant: Pavers or similar material, should be considered for the private east-west street to assist in creating a 'Mews'-like character.

1.9 design development to provide a complete landscape plan for the public open space adjacent to the Beatty Street Drill Hall;

1.10 undertake negotiations with BC Transit (Translink) as owner of property beneath the Dunsmuir Viaduct, in consultation with the City, to enhance the public environment by providing landscaping in that location;

1.11 design development to provide a phasing plan that addresses all aspects of all proposed phasing including, among other things, temporary treatment of unbuilt /open portions of the site and access systems;

Note to Applicant: Strata phasing may also be an aspect the applicant should clarify.

1.12 design development to provide conceptual drawings for the residential scheme intended for the adjacent site (Lot D), to ensure that pursuant to CD-1 By-law #415, the intended development is viable, to the satisfaction of the Director of Housing Centre;

Note to Applicant: The concept must illustrate that the floor area remaining following development of this project is adequate to provide the minimum of 111 affordable family units and 105 units targeted for "core-need" households, as per the CD-1 By-law. (See also Standard Condition A.1.22)

1.13 design development to provide a minimum of 65 m (215 ft.) unobstructed sight distance, as measured from the outbound lane at the southerly exit from the site onto Expo Boulevard, and to confirm that the tree planting proposed does not obstruct the visibility for motorists exiting the site;

Note to Applicant: A driver must be able to see this sight distance without positioning the vehicle such that it is obstructing the path of pedestrians. Pulling back the south east building corner appears necessary.

1.14 design development to delete the portion of the elevated (residential) parking structure encroaching into the 3 m (10 ft.) Dunsmuir Viaduct "buffer zone"; and

Note to Applicant: The current design shows considerable construction within the buffer zone, which was established pursuant to registered rights of ways and is required for maintenance and potential reconstruction of the Viaduct. The General Manager of Engineering Services may consider alternatives to complete elimination of the encroachments, if such alternatives can be shown to meet the City's needs. (See Engineering Services Commentary and Standard Condition A.2.27.)

1.15 design development to provide a minimum clear width for the permanent viaduct walkways to match the width of the existing temporary viaduct walkways, to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering Services.

Note to Applicant: The 2.4 m (8.0 ft.) indicated on the plans is not sufficient. The "clear" width must be free of any obstructions, such as sign posts, signal poles, lamp posts, tree grates, bike racks, etc. (See also Engineering Services comments on page 15 and Standard Conditions A.2.23 and A.2.24.)

2.0 That the conditions set out in Appendix A be met prior to the issuance of the Development Permit.

3.0 That the Notes to Applicant and Conditions of the Development Permit set out in Appendix B be approved by the Board.

Technical Analysis

¹Note on Site Size/Area: A survey plan is required to verify and confirm the site dimensions and area. See Standard Condition A.1.1.

²Note on Floor Area: Due to the nature of the information submitted and recognizing that satisfaction of recommended design conditions will result in significant changes to the project, the applicant's figures, where available, have been used in this review. Floor levels that are not typical need to be clarified and clearly labelled on all FSR overlays, including reference to geometric shapes, for calculation purposes. No summaries (statistics) of the floor areas have been provided. See Standard Conditions A.1.2 to A.1.4.

³Note on Balconies: Open and enclosed residential balcony areas are calculated as a percentage of the residential floor area that is proposed. The "Permitted Maximum" column indicates the allowable open and enclosed balcony area based on the applicant's floor area figure. Calculations of balcony areas have not been provided. See Standard Condition A.1.6.

⁴Note on Height: Prior to submitting the application, City staff and applicant agreed upon a base grade of 60.69 ft. (18.5 m) for the purposes of calculating height. This base grade is an approximate grade elevation taken from the contour lines at the Beatty and Dunsmuir Street intersection. Under the CD-1 By-law, height calculation is determined from the base surface and excludes the mechanical penthouse and roof. See Standard Condition A.1.8.

⁵Note on Parking: In addition to project parking, as a condition of rezoning this development is required to accommodate and secure 23 parking spaces on parking level P1 for the exclusive use of the Beatty Street Drill Hall. While an additional number of parking spaces (off-site) are shown under the viaducts, these are not part of this development application and have not been included in the technical analysis. See Standard Conditions A.1.10 and A.2.19(f).

⁶Note on Loading: Under Section 6(e) [Parking, Loading and Bicycle Parking] of the CD-1 By-law, wholesaling - Class B must provide oversized loading spaces in quantities and dimensions, and with access, circulation and manoeuvring, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning in consultation with the General Manager of Engineering Services. See Standard Condition A.2.7.

⁷Note on Bicycle Parking: Separate Class A bicycle spaces are required for wholesale use. Each residential tower should have 6 Class B bicycle spaces. Though not required in the Parking By-law, Class B bicycle spaces for customers are expected to be provided for wholesale use as part of the Transportation Demand Management Plan. See Standard Conditions A.1.11 and A.2.22.

⁸Note on Unit Types: Information provided by the applicant indicates 20 family units between level 4 to level 8 on each tower, for a subtotal of 80 family units plus 18 townhouse family units, for a total of 98 family units within the first eight storeys. Family units are defined as two bedrooms or more, at or below the eighth floor. See Standard Condition A.1.21.

Site: The site, governed by CD-1 #415, is designated as Area 7B in the False Creek North (FCN) Official Development Plan (ODP) and is located at the eastern edge of the Downtown neighbourhood at the foot of the escarpment to the False Creek lowlands. Generally bounded by Beatty Street, the Georgia and Dunsmuir Viaducts, and Expo Boulevard, the site is 23 810 m² (256,305 sq.ft.) or 2.38 ha (5.9 acres) in size. It has been used for many years for surface parking (580 spaces, including approximately 30 spaces for the adjacent Beatty Street Drill Hall).

Context

Surrounding the site are the City-owned Block 48 (previously referred to as "Larwill Park") to the west across Beatty Street, the Stadium Skytrain Station across the Dunsmuir Viaduct with the Keefer Steps and International Village beyond that, GM Place across Expo Boulevard, BC Place Stadium across the Georgia Viaduct, and Central Heat at the southwest corner of Georgia and Beatty Streets.

The area between the viaducts also contains the Beatty Street Drill Hall (BC Regiment) at 620 Beatty Street and a future "affordable" housing site at 696 Beatty Street. The Drill Hall, occupied since 1896 by the BC Regiment, is a municipally-designated heritage building (Evaluation Group 'A').

Significant adjacent development includes:

(a) 620 Beatty Street, Beatty Street Drill Hall (Heritage A)
(b) Block 48 (Larwill Park)
(c) Stadium Skytrain Station
(d) Keefer Steps
(e) International Village neighbourhood
(f) GM Place
(g) GM Place office tower (approved but not constructed)
(h) Central Heat, 720 Beatty Street
(i) Sandman Hotel
(j) Future affordable housing site, 696 Beatty Street (CD-1 #415)

Background

he site was rezoned to CD-1 following a Public Hearing in July 2002. A preliminary form of development was approved by Council as part of the rezoning.

Included in the CD-1 boundary and immediately adjacent to the project site is a future residential (affordable housing) site at the corner of Georgia and Beatty Streets (Lot D). As indicated in the preliminary form of development approved by Council, the site is proposed to be developed with a 20-storey tower, having a 7-storey base, providing a minimum of 216 affordable units (111 family and 105 "core-need" non-family). That project is not part of this application and is included on the plans for illustrative purposes only. Staff are, however, seeking confirmation that the floor area and number of units required can be achieved on Lot D as part of this review. (See Condition 1.12)

The development application discussed in this report was reviewed by the Urban Design Panel on April 30, 2003 and was not supported. The concerns noted, among others, included the Panel's preference for taller, slimmer towers and the suggestion that they should be "signature towers" given the prominence of the site on the City's skyline. Further, the Panel commented that the residential character of the internal street was not exciting enough. There were other concerns expressed, regarding the design of the street system and number of towers proposed, but these did not fully acknowledge the significance of the Council approved form of development.

After discussions with the applicant and the Chair of the Development Permit Board, it was agreed that the applicant would return to the Urban Design Panel with revisions to the scheme to address the stated concerns. It was further agreed that if the revisions were supported, the submitted application would proceed to the Development Permit Board without requiring a full resubmission and recirculation to all staff groups.

The understanding established with the applicant was that: all staff review and commentary would be based on the application as submitted; all recommended "prior-to" conditions would be based on the application as submitted; that staff would need to be confident that all the issues identified and the comments of the Urban Design Panel could be addressed by conditions (and the applicant would concur with them); and, finally, that it would ultimately be at the discretion of the Board whether to review the application and any appropriate revision material presented.

The Urban Design Panel reviewed the application for a second time on May 14, 2003 and unanimously supported the application. (See Appendix F)

Applicable By-laws and Guidelines

CD-1 #415

Rezoning Approval Conditions

At the Public Hearing the approval included the following:

....the applicant shall obtain approval of a development application by the Director of Planning or the Development Permit Board, as the case may be, who shall have particular regard to the following:

DESIGN DEVELOPMENT

1) design development to the non-market residential site to ensure livability and viability - aspects to review include, among other things: eliminating the stepped built form; combining the two parking access points into one to provide more semi-private open space; orientate more built form toward the public open space to better define that space;

Applicant Response: "This application does not include a design for the affordable component. This portion of the project will be built at a later date per scheduling and timing by the City. In spite of that, the recommendations from the Public Hearing have been made--the stepped form has been deleted, replaced by a low-rise structure. The two parking access points have been consolidated into one that will be built off the Beatty Street Ramp, and finally the low-rise structure will have an orientation towards the open space opposite the Drill Hall."

Staff Review: Drawings illustrating a conceptual massing plan for the affordable residential site have not been received. Conceptual drawings, and modeling, are important to ensure that the project is viable in this location and that there is adequate floor area remaining to meet the housing commitment. (See Condition 1.12)

2) design development to the market lower built form to introduce more variety and residential presence on the viaducts - aspects to review include, among other things: increasing the building height at the south-west and north-east corners, and strengthening the townhouse character and use;

Applicant Response: "Variety and presence have been introduced to the viaduct edges. The townhouses and lofts throughout the project set up a stylistic rhythm of concrete roof protrusions and mondrian-like window patterns. A sculptural roof structure has been designed into the corner units located at the north-west and south-east corners of the site to emphasize the corners."

Staff Review: Staff consider the condition met.

3) design development to the residential character and presence on the internal street - aspects to review include, among other things: locating the parking entrances onto the north-south road; minimizing the tower lobby areas;

Applicant Response: "The two parking access points for the residential portion of the project have been located onto the secondary street (running north-south). This frees up the primary residential street (running east-west) with more townhouses, thereby reinforcing the residential character and quality of the development. In addition, all primary entrances to the townhouses are on the internal street system.

The lobbies to the two northern towers (B and C) are positioned to pick up on the rhythm set up by the townhouses. The lobby for tower A is facing the Georgia Viaduct, while the entrance to Tower D is located at the east end of the secondary internal street (east-west).

In response to the various directions that both pedestrians and vehicles approach the project, the towers have been shaped, positioned and varied in their heights. The more sculptural towers are taller and are located at the viaducts serving as 'entry' and 'exit' markers to the downtown core.

The shorter towers occupy the interior of the site, and have a closer relationship to the residential low-rise, interior garden spaces, and general pedestrian flavor of the new street system. The built crucifix form of the towers responds to the views from all four sides and reflects the diversity and vibrancy that the project will bring to the area."

Staff Review: The extent of townhouses along this street have not been fully realized, and does not fully reflect the intentions indicated at the rezoning stage, thereby not meeting the residential character intended. Staff recommend expanding the number and presence of townhouses along this street. (See Condition 1.2)

4) design development to allow views through the site to GM Place - aspects to review include, among other things: relocating the amenity area or providing pedestrian access through or under the amenity area to the pedestrian path above the Expo Boulevard facade, taking into consideration the principles of CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design);

Applicant Response: "From the initial discussions during the re-zoning phase of this project, views and open spaces from Beatty Street, south, through the site have been an integral part of the design. The open space adjacent to the Drill Hall serves both the public along Beatty and the residents within the project. This space opens views to GM Place and allows for pedestrian movement through the site.

The Amenity Building has been pulled to the west side of this north-south 'view corridor'. Landscaped walkways provide pedestrian passage to the southern pedestrian link that runs parallel to Expo Blvd below. 'Eyes on the Street' and careful planning of the walkways and planting will reinforce the principles of CPTED."

Staff Review: Staff consider the condition fully met.

5) design development to optimize the width of the pedestrian system along the upper level of the Expo Boulevard facade, taking into consideration the principles of CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design);

Applicant Response: "Discussions on the optimized width of the pedestrian walkway above the Expo Blvd façade must recognize the presence of the Townhouse/loft Units that front onto a portion of this system. Privacy for these units, 'eyes on the street' that they provide, and overall livability are all important issues that have been considered. It was also discussed in meetings with the City Planners that this pedestrian walkway would most likely have limited access (dawn to dusk)."

Staff Review: Staff consider the condition fully met.

6) design development of the public open space and the Expo Boulevard facade and pedestrian walkway above it at the south corner of the site (Georgia Viaduct and Expo Blvd.) - aspects to consider include acknowledgment and reference, and re-integration or replication if possible, of the historic resources on the commemorative plaza at 696 Beatty Street, including sculpture, railings and lamps from the original Georgia Viaduct's western approach, and the Dunsmuir rail tunnel portal;

Applicant Response: "Several 'threads' of recollection and reference to the history of the site have been/will be incorporated into the project. The existing park located at the corner of Beatty and Georgia will in the future become the Social (affordable) Housing Site. It has been envisioned that the existing sculpture and plaque presently located at the corner can be integrated or re-integrated into an open public space at the base of the affordable tower.

Further down the Georgia Viaduct is the terminus of the pedestrian walkway, described in the above response. This east-west (sic north-south) pedestrian connector is the new 'edge' of the downtown core; it is an artificial 'escarpment'. The project has treated this edge, which runs the full length of the site (400'+), with railing and lamps that will be designed in a style reminiscent, though modern, of the original railing and lamps. An open space has been created off the walkway in the middle of the site and at the west end near the Georgia Viaduct, providing views to the south and west. The discussions are still being held as to the future of the Portal."

Staff Review: Staff consider the condition largely met. The "small park" referenced in the applicant's commentary above will be replaced at the time that the adjacent housing site is developed. A small plaza will be incorporated into that project.

7) design development to the Expo Boulevard facade to enhance its visual experience and recollect the escarpment - aspects to consider include, among other things: introducing a substantial vertical landscaped wall at the westerly end of the facade; introducing a vertical water course at the easterly end of the facade in conjunction with the elevator and stair system;

Applicant Response: "A significant objective for Expo Blvd is to ensure that the Costco Store generates a positive experience in an area that is, at present, a no-man's land. The façade treatment of the store reflects the industrial heritage of the area. Materials range from concrete and steel structure to industrial-type window frames and glazing. It is the intent to provide visual interest to the street, and to serve as a catalyst to jump start further development in the area.

The public plaza outside the store entrance is a gathering place which will add to the animation of the street environment. Pedestrian movement will converge at this area, from the stair tower above, the Skytrain Station, both stadiums, as well as from the pedestrian connections from Chinatown, Gastown, and International Village."

Staff Review: The condition has been largely met although a strengthening of, and improvements to, the vertical landscaped wall at the westerly end of the Costco facade between grid lines A-D should be undertaken. (See Condition 1.7)

8) design development to increase the amount of planting including trees, along the parking facade facing Expo Boulevard South;

Applicant Response: "Planting along the entire length of the parking façade above the Costco Store has been incorporated into the design. Trees are located along the pedestrian walkway above the parking, while significant broad-leaf evergreen hedge planting will cascade over the parking edge. It must be noted that this plant material must be tolerant of urban conditions."

Staff Review: See comments above, Condition 1.7 and Standard Condition A.1.29.

9) design development to the canopy system along Expo Boulevard South to ensure natural light access - aspects to review include, among other things: maximizing the amount of glass;

Applicant Response: "Natural light has been introduced into the façade and canopy of the Costco Store. The pedestrian ramp system that runs in front of the store along Expo Blvd is sheathed in glass, allowing a visual interaction at the street level. The sloping roof and canopy above creates another visual excitement, that responds to the sweep of the road as it curves in front of the store, while suggesting the sloping ramp system under it. The roof/skylight glazing over the ramp, together with the vertical glass will provide ample natural light. Openings such as the one around the stair tower also bring natural light into the plaza area."

Staff Review: Staff consider the design elements of the condition fully met, but note that there are Engineering Services concerns outstanding. (See Standard Condition A.2.30).

10) design development to the landscaping and treatment of the areas under the viaducts - aspects to review include, among other things: horizontal and vertical materials;

Applicant Response: "While the areas under the viaducts are utilitarian in their proposed uses - parking, entry access, and loading, landscaping and visual treatment of the hard surfaces has been introduced. Planting along the eastern edge of the City lane will help soften the harshness of the area and shield the Skytrain Station. Retaining walls, planting and seating around the viaduct support columns near the Costco entry will serve the same purpose. It is the project's desire to call attention to the viaducts and their structure. Sculptural lighting columns made of architectural metal mesh will be located at the viaduct support columns. Their design will tie into the 'industrial-type' character of the Costco façade, using similar elements. Planting, tolerant of urban conditions, will grow up the face of these 'column planters', while up lighting will highlight the underbelly of the viaducts."

Staff Review: There is more design work necessary to improve the environment under the viaducts. See Costco Viaduct Facades comments below and Condition 1.6.

CRIME PREVENTION THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN

11) design development to consider the principles of CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design), having particular regard for:

(i) design of underdeck areas to reduce opportunities for mischief and vandalism.

(ii) separation of parking users including exit stairs to ensure security.

(iii) ensuring that all pathways are clearly defined with defensible design.

(iv) reducing opportunities for graffiti and skateboarding.

(v) preparation of a parking security report.

Applicant Response: Not provided.

Staff Review:

The underdeck areas are generally resolved, however significant information and design details remain outstanding. (See Standard Conditions A.1.24 through A.1.28) With specific reference to discouraging opportunities for skateboarding, graffiti and climbing, information is required with respect to the following:

•the resulting embankment for the retaining wall of the park, the Beatty connector ramp and Drill Hall;
•a parking security report;
•the residential parking enclosure material such as decorative grilles;
•the interior and exterior spaces at the base of the towers, as well as the pathway connector between the towers;
•the concrete block walls of Costco and the Beatty ramp connector;
•the planters and low walls; and
•the public elevator to the viaduct.

LANDSCAPE

12) preparation of a comprehensive landscape plan, including consideration of the following:

(i) a second pedestrian walkway, with double row of trees, along the southern edge of the public open space adjacent to the Drill Hall.

(ii) a double row of trees along the east side of the new street connecting West Georgia to Dunsmuir.

(iii) east-west pedestrian access by creating a walkway between the proposed Amenity building and Tower B.

Applicant Response: Not provided.

Staff Review: The landscape "concept" plan submitted with this application is incomplete and insufficient for review. A plan indicating all landscape treatment (private areas and the public realm) is required. (See Standard Condition A.1.29)

PARKING AND LOADING

13) parking provision will be subject to the following:

(i) preparation of a transportation demand management plan, including the development of a car pool plan/transit policy for employees;

(ii) pilot project to assist Costco members who choose to walk to the store, including provision of shopping carts, wagons and/or other pedestrian-serving conveniences;

(iii) pilot project for the operation of delivery services;

(xii) Arrangements for the development of parking spaces for the Beatty Street Drill Hall (620 Beatty Street), including 23 normal-sized spaces and 7 spaces for over-sized vehicles, in area under the Dunsmuir Viaduct.

Applicant Response: Not provided.

Staff Review: Items (i), (ii) and (iii) have not been addressed (see Standard Conditions A.2.22 and A.2.26). Item (xii) has been addressed through inclusion of parking spaces for the Drill Hall on the submitted plans. Legal arrangements to secure the parking spaces are required. (See Standard Condition A.2.19[f]). Further, clarification is being sought regarding for the status of all these spaces as new or replacement parking and for the seven spaces on the lower level as to their adequacy in terms of their size, security, and accessibility. (See Standard Condition A.2.6).

•Tower Built Form: The Council-approved preliminary form of development located four towers in approximately the positions presented in the subject application. The one primary concern with the subject application is the physical separation between the towers, which affects livability. At the rezoning stage, floor plates of approximately 7,000 sq.ft. were proposed. Based on this, the 80 ft. separation was met. In this application, however, the separation between the towers has been reduced to at, or below, the typical 80 ft. minimum, even though the floor plates are smaller than those shown at the rezoning stage (6,800 sq.ft.). The reduced separation results from changes to the structural system locating the towers and changes to the shape of the floor plates (i.e., they became less compact). Also the shorter two towers were reduced by two storeys.

Because the tower structural system cannot change at this time, staff recommend: reducing the floor plates of the two lower towers (Towers B and D) by approximately 450 sq.ft. by designing a more compact tower plan; and increasing the tower heights beyond those shown at the rezoning stage. (See Condition 1.1)

•Tower Bases: The tower bases present a neutral presence to their respective street locations and do not present to the public realm the desired strong visually interesting, animated and active areas more typically found. This is partly caused by pulling the tower lobbies well back from the tower footprint above which creates a somewhat dark and unanimated area. Staff recommend strengthening the street presence of the towers by expanding the lobby areas and extending the residential uses, primarily townhouses, so they engage the tower base in a more positive manner. (See Condition 1.2)

•Tower Roof Forms: The proposed towers will be very prominent on the City skyline, particularly when viewed from a southerly direction. The proposed tower roof forms (mechanical penthouses) are very simple boxes and are not as visually interesting as they could be, or reflective of the design qualities of the lower portions of the towers. Staff recommend an improvement to the design of the tower roof forms. (See Condition 1.3)

•Residential Building Colour: There are no guidelines indicating colours for the external materials for the residential buildings (or indeed the commercial components) and generally staff look to the applicant for colour preferences. However, the general appearance of the model presents a rather dull and unexciting character which staff understand is not the intention of the applicant. The applicant's conceptual 'Mondrian' colour intentions indicated in a preliminary manner are potentially a very exciting approach and need to be fully realized in the final design. (See Condition 1.4)

Note: Mondrian, Piet (1872-1944), Dutch painter, who carried abstraction to its furthest limits. Through radical simplification of composition and color, he sought to expose the basic principles that underlie all appearances. Important works include: Composition with Red, Yellow, and Blue (1937-1942, Tate Gallery, London), in which the painting, composed solely of a few black lines and well-balanced blocks of color; and Broadway Boogie-Woogie (1942-1943, Museum of Modern Art, New York City) which presented lively chain-link patterns of bright colors.

•Townhouses: A very successful part of the application is the design quality of the townhouses (live/work units). They provide definition and visual interest to the streets, provide "eyes on the street", capture and acoustically protect semi-private open space, and give a human scale to the inherent large scale nature of the project. This success needs to be strengthened further. This is particularly needed on the private east-west street. At the rezoning stage there were approximately 10-12 townhouses indicated on this street. Now there are three. There have been changes to vehicular access that require some reduction in the extent of the townhouses but there are opportunities for increasing the townhouse numbers. (See Condition 1.5)

•Costco Viaduct Facades: The south facade of Costco faces the underneath of the Georgia Viaduct and, because the adjacent portion of the site belonging to Central Heat is undeveloped, is highly visible from Expo Boulevard. The north facade faces the underneath of the Dunsmuir Viaduct and the southerly side of the Stadium Skytrain station, creating a potentially dark and forbidding environment.

The proposed design of both of these facades consists of very utilitarian roll-up doors and exposed concrete block. Greater effort needs to be made to substantially improve the visual character and environment along both of these facades. There may be opportunities to conceptually link the Expo Boulevard level with the viaduct level. Aspects to review would include the use of higher quality exterior materials, lighting, colour and large scale graphics and/or sculpture. (See Condition 1.6)

•Landscaping on the adjacent Translink site: In addition to improvements to the Costo facades themselves, greening the area between the site and the Stadium Skytrain station would be a great assistance in creating a more positive environment and character in this area. The application proposes some landscaping treatment on property owned by BCTransit, beneath the Dunsmuir Viaduct. However, as it is on adjacent property, the applicant will have to negotiate with the property owner. (See Condition 1.10)

•Costco Expo Boulevard Facade: One of the intentions of the rezoning design was to recollect the Beatty Street escarpment along a portion of the Expo Boulevard facade. The appropriate location for this is the easterly facade portion (between grid line A and D). As submitted, the facade design has some planters along the parking structure edge, signage, mechanical louvers, concrete and metal panels. While recognising there are some technical requirements for this facade portion, the treatment could be more visually responsive to the escarpment recollection objective. (See Condition 1.7)

•Public Realm: The street paving materials are not indicated for either the north-south or east-west streets. The two proposed streets are different in function and it would be preferable to treat them differently. The north-south street linking the viaducts will be City-owned and very public in nature. The east-west street will be privately owned and maintained, for the residents of the development. To emphasise the different nature and function of the two streets they should be differentiated materially. (See Condition 1.8)

•Beatty Street Public Open Space: There is an area of public open space proposed adjacent to the Beatty Street Drill Hall. Although this portion of the site is part of this application, no design has been undertaken, or landscape plan submitted, for this open space. (See Condition 1.9) Pursuant to the "Area 7B Costco - Open Space Agreement [Lot 7]", the open space must be constructed prior to occupancy of any residential building on Lot 291.

•Phasing: Staff understand the construction of this very large project will be phased. Clarification of the proposed phasing with respect to, among other things, existing adjacent buildings, interim treatments to undeveloped portions of the site, the Beatty Street public open space, the affordable housing, Beatty Street access, and residential tower phasing, is sought. (See Condition 1.11)

Conclusion

his is a very large and complex application. The major planning and urban design intentions established at the rezoning, and the Council approved form of development, have largely been carried out with many successful refinements. However, there are many substantial design changes recommended which include, among others, the residential towers and town houses, and Costco facades. Some of the design work that has been carried out by the applicant since the application was submitted indicates that many of the identified concerns can be successfully addressed. In addition, significant technical, engineering and legal matters remain outstanding as detailed in the recommended conditions of approval.

The applicant has reviewed the major design conditions and agrees to the recommendations. Staff recommend approval with the conditions as presented.

Urban Design Panel

(Refer also to the Appendix F - Minutes of Urban Design Panel Meeting, May 14, 2003)

The Urban Design Panel reviewed this application on April 30, 2003, and provided the following comments:

"EVALUATION: NON-SUPPORT (1-6)

Introduction: Jonathan Barrett, Development Planner, referencing various project models, introduced the application in the context of the surrounding neighbourhood. Mr. Barrett noted that the application featured approximately 900 units above the viaduct level, a Costco level taking up the floorplate, vertical circulation, and new street system from viaduct to viaduct with a more private street to the heart of the residential.

Mr. Barrett then reviewed rezoning conditions applicable to the project and its responses to each. The Panel was advised that staff considered that many of the rezoning issues had been addressed and were encouraged with the new design. Notwithstanding this, the Panel was asked to comment concerning:

•relationship between towers in terms of livability, spacial separation and privacy;
•residential character along the project's internal street; and
•reinforcement of residential character along the base of the towers.

In response to questions, Mr. Barrett advised that a neighbouring tower had been approved 10 years prior but had not been built, and commented that the distance between the towers was approximately 75 feet as opposed to the 80 foot separation typically sought by the City.

Applicant's Opening Comments: James Cheng, Joseph Fry, Peter Webb, and David Rogers joined the meeting for consideration of this item.

Mr. Cheng advised that this application was to originally have been two office towers with a connection to the Skytrain route but that it had been changed to residential given the low demand for office space in the area. Members were advised that the project's floor plate had become larger as a result of varying the height of the towers, and it was offered that the 80 foot minimum between towers would be maintained through design development. As well, Mr. Cheng offered that the lack of townhouses on the interior would be addressed as a prior to condition.

Joseph Fry discussed the project's landscape design, and advised of particulars relating to the frontage including: street trees in front of townhouses; screening adjacent to the loading areas; seating edge in front of the main entry to Costco; and opportunities for signage. Mr. Fry noted that planting adjacent to the Skytrain edge and viaduct would be encouraged, and discussed plans for double rows of street trees, retaining walls with hedge planting and private gardens. The Panel was informed that a Water feature would be used to create a sense of entry into the vehicle port, and that greenspace by the Armoury would be dedicated to the public.

Panel's Comments: Concerning the relationship between towers, the majority of Panel members indicated a preference for taller, slimmer towers that would have covered less of the site and been less dense, and suggested that three instead of four towers would have been the best solution. However, one member did offer that the separation was not to tight for the project's urban setting.

A Panel member commented that the internal residential character was not very exciting, while others offered that it would be influenced by relationship between the towers; was a good way of bringing down the speed on the viaduct; and that lessening density and opening more spaces in the site would allow for building up the edges with a more protected semi-private space for residents.

With regard to the base of the towers, a member commented that the viaducts did not lend themselves to townhouses and that their livability could be improved drastically. Another member commented that they could not rationalize townhouses below the massive structure and offered that the entries could be emphasized instead with a 4-5 storey apartment tower at the base. Alternately, several members commented that the design brought more visibility to the site, was good from a security point of view, and that more townhouses and less open lobbies would be preferred.

A member commented that the site had been established as a "texture" rather than "signature" tower site, and that it should be the latter - to which several members indicated their agreement. He offered that Georgia viaduct was a gateway from the east with characteristics of scale and appropriateness that should be recognized. As well, it was offered that there were different scales of manipulation for vehicle vs. pedestrian uses and that this site was incorrectly reflected in the latter context.

Further general comments from the Panel included:

•nothing at grade has a flow - everything is linear;

•the project will work in this area and will bring density to the area;

•support introduction of colour and would support a stronger scheme, i.e. towers in different colours;

•project offers a negative context of privileged upper level and lower level in darkness, an - upstairs/downstairs condition with Expo Boulevard suffering;

•east edge needs to be more solid;

•Costco element is vibrant and a great use;

•need to study what the shadows of the towers do to internal spaces;

•suggestion to remove the three townhouses to the north of the new street to create a large public space anchored by four towers; and

•pedestrian access to Beatty should be re-emphasized.

Applicant's Response: Mr. Cheng thanked the Panel for its comments and spoke of the challenges facing the project at the first piece in the City's longer 20 year vision, and as a link between the divergent neighbourhoods of the international village, Chinatown and the waterfront."

Engineering Services

The parking provision shown for the residential use is near the low end of the range established in the CD-1 by-law, which employs the Downtown South standard requiring only one space per two dwelling units for units up to 65 square metres gross floor area. This results in well under one space per market housing unit with very limited visitor parking. The parking provision can work, however, given the accessibility of the site, close to Downtown and Skytrain. Visitors will rely heavily on either on-street parking or existing off-street resources nearby. The applicant may wish to consider hosting several car-share vehicles to help meet the mobility demands of future residents.

For the Costco warehouse/store itself, the parking provision has reduced from the maximum 726 spaces indicated at the rezoning stage to a currently designed 703 spaces. This reduction is encouraging, as excessive provision of parking for the wholesale use has been a concern of staff and some members of the public. Staff anticipate that the Transportation Demand Management Plan, delivery service, and a system to promote walk-in clientele will complement this reduction in parking. (See Standard Conditions A.2.22 and A.2.26)

The 1990 Stadium Parking Agreement between the City and Concord Pacific recognized that surface parking stalls would be lost as a result of the development of Concord Pacific properties. Under this agreement, Concord is obligated to provide public parking spaces within new developments and/or provide payments in-lieu of parking spaces to compensate for this loss. On this site, there is a requirement for pay-in-lieu equivalent to spaces. This revenue will be deposited in the City's GreenLinks account and will be used to fund improvements to transit/cycling/pedestrian facilities in the Downtown. (See Standard Condition A.2.19 [h])

Loading remains the greatest concern to Engineering Services staff. The facility on the south side of the building and close to Expo Boulevard leaves scant space for manoeuvring and threatens to conflict with pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists along the sidewalk and street. Staff will work closely with the applicant and consultants to develop a loading design which functions satisfactorily while maintaining public safety. (See Condition 1.13)

Engineering Services staff do not accept the residential parking structure encroaching into the Dunsmuir Viaduct's 3 m (10 ft.) buffer zone. This zone is required for maintenance and potential reconstruction of the viaduct. (Portions of Costco's underground parkade and Costco's surface parking and minor landscaping works will be allowed in this zone, as these will not significantly affect the City's ability to service the viaducts. However Costco's underground parking must be designed so that any excavation that fully exposes the viaduct footings will not have detrimental effects on the Costco structure.) Therefore, either the building will have to be re-designed to not encroach in this area or alternate arrangements must be made, to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering Services. (See Condition 1.14) Arrangements must be made to the satisfaction of the Director of Legal Services and the General Manager of Engineering Services to revise the existing Viaduct Agreement, to ensure that any costs associated with work on the project site to accommodate maintenance and potential reconstruction of the viaduct would be the responsibility of the owners of the building. (See Standard Condition A.2.27)

On the plans submitted, the permanent Georgia and Dunsmuir Viaduct walkways are shown with an unobstructed sidewalk width of only 2.4 m (8.0 ft.) between two rows of trees. Engineering Services staff require that as a minimum, the clear width for both permanent walkways matches that which is currently provided on the temporary walkways, to ensure that the existing level of service to pedestrians is maintained. (See Condition 1.15)

Engineering Services is planning a seismic review of the Georgia and Dunsmuir Viaducts in early 2004. The results of this study could vary from no action occurring, to exposing and upgrading all of the footings to improve their load carrying capacity. If the upgrading requirements identified are minor, work may occur in the next 2-3 years, if existing budgets allow. If major work is required, it could begin as early as 2006. In light of this, the applicant is advised to consider and plan for future disruption to the areas under the viaducts. Alternatively, the applicant may consider contributing to funding the seismic study to try to allow the completion of any required seismic upgrading prior to or during the construction of the Costco store.

Staff also note that due to timing constraints and lack of detailed design information at the rezoning stage, many of the rezoning conditions were deferred to the Development Permit stage, including the completion of a number of key legal agreements. (See Standard Condition A.2.19) In addition, detailed road and infrastructure drawings have not yet been completed by the applicant and accepted by the General Manager of Engineering Services. Given the complexity of this site and proposal, the final plans and the resolution of technical issues may take considerable time to achieve and may affect the final built form of this development.

Further recommendations of Engineering Services are contained in the recommended Standard Conditions (A.2.1 through A.2.34) noted in Appendix A attached to this report.

Social Planning

The False Creek North ODP describes residential neighbourhoods which accommodate families with children. (See Section 2.2.7 "Plan for all Age Groups with a Particular Emphasis on Children"). Section 3.2.1 sets out the requirement that 25% of the total number of dwelling units shall be suitable for families with children and references the City's Guidelines for High Density Housing For Families with Children. This proposed development, 900 residential units, does not incorporate any outdoor or indoor play areas. Staff recommend that at least two equipped outdoor play areas, each a minimum of 1,000 sq.ft. and suitable for young children, be incorporated into the garden level. Further, at least one outdoor play/gathering area suitable for school-age children should be accommodated adjacent to the amenity areas of the residential towers. (See Standard Conditions A.1.18 through A.1.22)

Processing Centre - Building

This Development Application submission has not been fully reviewed for compliance with the Building By-law. The applicant is responsible for ensuring that the design of the building meets the Building By-law requirements. The options available to assure Building By-law compliance at an early stage of development should be considered by the applicant in consultation with Processing Centre-Building staff.

To ensure that the project does not conflict in any substantial manner with the Building By-law, the designer should know and take into account, at the Development Application stage, the Building By-law requirements which may affect the building design and internal layout. These would generally include: spatial separation, fire separation, exiting, access for physically disabled persons, type of construction materials used, fire fighting access and energy utilization requirements.

Further comments regarding Building By-law requirements are contained in Appendix C attached to this report. Processing Centre-building staff have confirmed that all Building Code concerns can be met through additional design development.

Vancouver Coastal Health Authority

The Vancouver Coastal Health Authority (VCHA) advises as follows:

(i) garbage storage area to be designed to minimize nuisances;

(ii) underground parking should be adequately ventilated to prevent the build up of noxious gases;

(iii) details of amenity areas and food/retail spaces should be submitted for review by the VCHA for compliance with Vancouver Health By-law No. 6580 and the Food Premises Regulations prior to construction; and

(iv) details of swimming pools/hot tubs are to be submitted to the VCHA and Provincial Health Engineer prior to construction.

The VCHA notes that an acoustical consultant's report has been submitted and accepted. Confirmation that the recommended measures will be incorporated into the final design are required, as noted in Standard Conditions A.3.1 through A.3.3.

Licenses and Inspections - Environmental Control Branch

Staff advise that a "No Occupancy" Agreement was registered as a condition of the Area 7B rezoning in 2002, which requires that a Confirmation of Compliance be issued by the Province prior to issuance of any Occupancy Permit for the new development. As a result, no further requirements need to be placed on this development permit approval. (See Standard Notes to Applicant B.1.6)

Staff further advise, however, that an erosion and sediment control plan (including a wheel wash system) is required for review and approval at the first Building Application stage of this project and that all building plans regarding waste water treatments systems will require review and approval.

Fire and Rescue Services

The comments of Fire & Rescue Services staff are contained in Appendix C to this report.

Notification

Two signs were installed on the site on April 15, 2003, advising the public of the application. On April 16, 2003, letters were sent to 477 surrounding property owners and 59 community and business groups (total sent = 536) to advise them of the application and ask for their comments. To date, 12 responses have been received. Two respondents oppose the application and ten support it. The reasons given are as follows:

Opposing the application:

•there will be a loss of views from an upper suite at 183 Keefer Place;

•there are too many buildings proposed for the site and they are too high; and

•there is too much parking being provided.

Supporting the application:

•this will bring a much-needed increase to the residential population in the neighbourhood;

•the project will help to create an exciting and livable urban environment;

•the commercial tenant (Costco Wholesale) will be a welcome addition to the neighbourhood; and

•the project will create a link between Chinatown, International Village and Yaletown.

Although supporting the application, two respondents did express concerns about future plans for pedestrian and bicycle facilities along Expo Boulevard in particular.

Staff Response To Notification Results:

Loss of views: Keefer Place is approximately 460 ft. distant from the nearest proposed tower (Tower C). View impact will be marginal.

Too many buildings: The number of towers, their height and location were approved by Council through the preliminary form of development adopted at the rezoning stage.

Too much parking: The parking numbers were carefully negotiated at the rezoning stage. Staff note that although more cars may come to the area the overall environmental impact may be reduced as users of Costco will be closer to such a facility than currently and the high density residential is close to downtown and Skytrain thereby reducing travel to work by car. (See also Engineering Services Comments)

Pedestrian and bicycle facilities along Expo Boulevard:

Engineering Services staff are working with Costco and other stakeholders to develop a new design for Expo Boulevard which improves facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists, and which will be implemented concurrently with construction on the Costco site.

Development Permit Staff Committee Comments

June 11, 2003

The Committee noted that while the applicant has made obvious advances in terms of the design and form of the project since the CD-1 by-law was enacted last year, significant technical, engineering and legal aspects, many of which had been deferred from the rezoning stage to the development permit stage, are still outstanding.

June 18, 2003:

Appendix A - Standard Conditions

The following is a list of standard conditions that must also be met prior to issuance of the Development Permit.

A.1 Standard Conditions:

A.1.1 submit a survey plan verified by a B. C. Land Surveyor, indicating site dimensions and area, including any dedication and subsequent site area;

A.1.2 provide detailed, accurate and fully dimensioned floor plans;

Note to Applicant: Dimensions used to calculate floor areas must be basically reflected on the floor plans. These include all exclusions such as balconies, unit storage rooms, amenity spaces, heating and/or mechanical shafts, etc. Provide separate, complete floor plans for all non-typical floors. Clarify use and operation of Costco. Use for Costco should be labelled as wholesaling - Class B as listed under Section 3 (Uses and Conditions of Use) of the CD-1 By-law. Costco floor plan to be drawn to a minimum scale of 1/8" = 1'-0". Provide floor plan of roof deck access on townhouses and stair tower to Dunsmuir Viaduct. Delete "lofts" from site plan and elevations. Clarify location and provide details of cooling tower adjacent to Expo Boulevard and clarify location of all support columns/walls on floor plans for the towers. Indicate direction on all stairs and property lines on all floor plans, elevations and sections. Clarify and identify location of all family units in each tower. Clarify if retail use is part of Costco operation. If retail use is part of the operation, clarify location and floor area. Section 4.5 (Floor Area and Density) of the CD-1 By-law restricts the location of retail uses to within 35 ft. of the front boundary of the Expo Boulevard level.

A.1.3 verify and confirm that floor areas are as proposed;

Note to Applicant: Provide detailed calculations and tabulations of floor areas for each level, including all exclusions, with subtotals and totals. Cart and bicycle storage rooms, lobby lounges, support columns/walls, open spaces under the towers on the garden level, covered access to roof decks on townhouses, areas in unit storage rooms less than 4 ft. minimum, area under canopy in front of Costco, stair tower to Dunsmuir Viaduct, etc., are all to be included in the computation of floor areas. For criteria to exclude storage rooms from floor area, refer to the Planning By-law Administration Bulletin titled, "Bulk Storage - Residential Developments". Mechanical rooms on level 26 of Tower B must be excluded from floor area calculations. Tracing overlays must be on vellum or a product of similar quality, and signed and sealed by both the Architect and BC Land Surveyor to verify and confirm the floor areas and calculations of the project.

Section 4.3 (Floor Area and Density) of the CD-1 By-law allows for exterior wall exclusions, subject to the recommendation of a Building Envelope Professional as defined in the Building By-law. To qualify for exterior wall exclusions, refer to the Planning By-law Administration Bulletin titled, "Floor Space Exclusion for Additional Wall Thickness to Control Building Envelope Leaks". Floor levels need to be clarified.

A.1.4 provide a summary of all technical statistics, including calculations of CD-1 By-law requirements;

Note to Applicant: A summary of the number, type and size of all units is required. Include a note for unit areas that storage room and/or enclosed balcony are not included in the unit floor area. The maximum exclusion for storage is 40 sq. ft. for each unit. Indicate the number of units less than 700 sq.ft. and the number of units equal to or greater than 700 sq.ft.

A.1.5 verify and confirm that smaller dwelling units have a minimum net floor area (excluding storage rooms and enclosed balconies) of 400 sq.ft.;

Note to Applicant: Net floor area should be measured to the inside of walls of dwelling unit.

A.1.6 verify and confirm that total balcony area, both open and enclosed, has not exceeded the maximum of 8 percent of the residential floor area provided;

Note to Applicant: Calculations of open balconies are required. Clarify all open balcony areas and roof decks. Portions of roof decks over balconies below are to be included as balcony areas. Floor levels need to be clarified.

A.1.7 provide details of balcony enclosures;

Note to Applicant: To qualify for an exclusion from floor area calculations, an enclosed balcony must be a distinct space separated from the remainder of the dwelling unit by walls, glass, and glazed doors (hinged or sliding), have an impervious (tile) floor surface, a flush threshold at the bottom of the door (for disabled access), large, openable windows for ventilation, and distinct exterior architectural expression. In addition, each dwelling unit should have no more than one enclosed balcony, and all balconies, both open and enclosed, should be clearly identified on the floor plans. Notation should also be made on the plans stating: "All enclosed balconies shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the Council-approved Balcony Enclosure Guidelines." Limitations on the amount of exclusions and enclosures permitted are described within the regulations of the CD-1 By-law. For further details and specifications on enclosure requirements, refer to the Council-approved Balcony Enclosure Guidelines.

A.1.8 verify and confirm that height of all residential towers has not exceeded the maximum height under Section 5 (Height) of the CD-1 By-law and height restrictions in the view cone area;

Note to Applicant: Height of a building is measured from base surface. Base surface is the hypothetical surface determined by joining "official established" building grades at all corners of the site. Engineering Services is currently reviewing design grades submitted by the applicant. Provide an up-to-date copy of a City building grades plan when available. Existing grades must be provided on a survey plan verified by a registered B. C. Land Surveyor. Detailed calculations, including location of and distance to critical points and all interpolations, are required.

A.1.9 provide elevations of all towers and typical sections, and details of canopies, fences, gates, retaining walls and lamp posts;

A.1.10 provide details of all parking spaces to comply with the applicable provisions of the Parking By-law and the Parking and Loading Design Supplement, having particular regard to space sizes, manoeuvring, height clearances, curbs, etc.;

Note to Applicant: Spaces located next to walls and structure require extra width. Column sizes, spacing and encroachment into parking spaces may be permitted, subject to compliance with the City Engineer's guidelines. Clarify minimum vertical clearance for all entrances, exits, drive aisles, other access to disability parking spaces, and egress therefrom. All spaces which do not meet the minimum required width of standard spaces must be clearly marked as small car spaces. Parking spaces #10 and #11 on the northwest lobby level are two such examples. Delete all off-site parking spaces from the plans or add note to indicate that a separate development application is required.

A.1.11 provide separate Class A bicycle spaces for wholesale use and 6 Class B bicycle spaces for each residential tower;

Note to Applicant: Class A bicycle parking requirement for wholesale use is a minimum of one space for each 10,764.26 sq.ft. or one space for every 25 employees on a maximum work shift, whichever is greater. Clarify the number of employees on a maximum work shift. Class A bicycle spaces for wholesale use should be provided in a convenient and readily accessible location for users. Bicycle storage rooms should be located no lower than the first level of underground parking for residential and wholesale uses. Dimension bicycle spaces and manoeuvring aisle. Clarify access to all bicycle storage rooms, especially where parking spaces are located adjacent to them. Provide Class B bicycle spaces for wholesale use, to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering Services.

A.1.12 provide clothing lockers in compliance with Section 6.5 of the Parking By-law;

Note to Applicant: Shower and other change facilities are required for non- dwelling uses when the number of required Class A bicycle spaces exceeds three under Article 3.7.4.10 of the Vancouver Building By-law.

A.1.13 annotate on plans stating: "The design of the parking structure regarding safety and security measures shall be in accordance with Section 4.13 of the Parking By-law.";

Note to Applicant: Section 4.12 has been revised to Section 4.13.

A.1.14 provide details of type, finishing, equipment and/or furnishings for all amenity spaces;

Note to Applicant: Submit a letter of undertaking, signed by the owners, regarding the furnishing and availability for use of the amenity spaces by all occupants of the buildings.

A.1.15 design development to locate, integrate and fully screen any emergency generator, exhaust ventilation, electrical substation and gas meter in a manner that minimizes their impact on the building's open space and the public realm;

Note to Applicant: In order to prevent contaminated air from being drawn into the building, all fresh-air intake portals must be located away from driveways and parking or loading areas.

A.1.16 delete all proposed signage on Expo Boulevard level floor plan and landscape plans;

Note to Applicant: Signs are regulated under the Vancouver Sign By-law and require separate permits.

A.1.17 submit reduced drawings for inclusion in the Form of Development report to City Council;

Note to Applicant: The plans must incorporate all design changes described in this report, be in 8.5 in. x 11 in. format and contain a site plan and elevations.

Social Planning/Housing Centre Conditions:

A.1.18 provide two separate, secure and equipped outdoor play areas suitable for pre-school children (refer to Section 3.3 of the "High Density Housing for Families with Children Guidelines"), to the satisfaction of the Director of Social Planning;

Note to Applicant: Particular care should be given to locate the play areas in close visual proximity to the buildings' amenity rooms, to provide fencing, and to avoid toxic plants and landscaping materials in and around the play area (a list of toxic plants is available as an appendix to the City's "Childcare Design Guidelines" and is available on line or by calling the City's Early Childhood Co-ordinator at (604) 871-6042.

A.1.19 provide at least one outdoor gathering area suitable for school-aged children (refer to Section 3.3 of the "High Density Housing for Families with Children Guidelines"), to the satisfaction of the Director of Social Planning;

A.1.20 execute legal agreements to secure use and access to all play areas for use by all residents of the development to the satisfaction of the Director of Social Planning and the Director of Legal Services;

A.1.21 indicate location of all family units, containing two bedrooms or more, at or below the eighth floor, to the satisfaction of the Director of Social Planning;

Note to Applicant: The CD-1 By-law requires a minimum of 180 family units.

Office of Cultural Affairs

A.1.23 submission and approval of a Detailed Public Art Plan, pursuant to the Public Art Agreement (BT408219-BT408219), registered prior to enactment of the CD-1 By-law;

Safety and Security (CPTED)

A.1.24 provide elevations and details of public open space, Drill Hall and Beatty Street connector ramp walls;

A.1.25 provide a detailed parking security report;

Note to Applicant: The report must be reviewed by staff. Contact Mary Beth Rondeau at (604) 873-7492 for specific details to be addressed in report.

A.1.26 provide detailed landscape and architectural drawings for interior and exterior of the tower bases;

A.1.27 significant design development to reduce opportunities for graffiti and skateboarding;

A.1.28 provide details of public elevator to viaduct to ensure climbing opportunities are reduced; and

Landscape Conditions:

A.1.29 submit a complete landscape plan which contains details of all landscaping treatments on both project site and public realm, specifically including details of:

a) surface parking area adjacent to Costco entry plaza;

b) vertical landscaped wall of Expo Boulevard facing facade (Costco); and

c) all patio planting areas and hard surface treatments.

Note to Applicant: The landscape plan as submitted is incomplete.

A.2 Standard Engineering Conditions:

A.2.1 provide improvements to drop-off area in front of Tower D to accommodate vehicles larger than passenger vehicles;

Note to Applicant: The drop-off area should be able to accommodate vehicles the size of a "Handy-Dart".

A.2.2 clarify or modify residential loading spaces or access to such spaces as follows:

a) clarify operation and access through security gates to enable truck access to loading spaces;

Note to Applicant: Provide a more convenient and direct link from on-site loading space to Tower C lobby entrance and elevator .

c) provide a minimum 3.5 m (11.5 ft.) unobstructed vertical clearance for all access and manoeuvring areas to residential loading spaces;

Note to Applicant: A 3.8 m (12.5 ft.) clearance is preferred.

d) relocate island and enterphone at gridlines I12/J12 westward to provide the necessary egress for a truck in the loading space;

Note to Applicant: As proposed, the truck must drive up onto the sidewalk to avoid conflict with the raised island.

e) clearly show all loading spaces dimensioned on the plans and indicate which building they are serving if not located directly beside the tower to be served; and

f) provide improved access to Tower D lobby from adjacent loading space.

Note to Applicant: A door located east of the mail room is recommended.

A.2.3 delete all reference to "visitor parking" on the future north-south City street;

A.2.4 provide an improved inside turning radius on residential parking ramps and a parabolic mirror on opposite wall for both ramps;

Note to Applicant: A 9 ft. x 9 ft. corner-cut should be provided or approximately 24 ft. width of ramp through the curved section.

A.2.5 provide access doors into all bicycle rooms and relocate some to ensure safety of pedestrians with their bicycles;

Note to Applicant: Some bicycle rooms appear to have no access doors while others require cyclists to step out onto drive aisles situated at the top of parking ramps. Access to the bicycle room between gridlines J and K and 9 to 11 requires improvement and redesign.

A.2.6 clarify Drill Hall parking uses within the development:

a) clarify the size of the vehicles which will be occupying the secured area under the Georgia Viaduct and the need for fencing and gated access; and

Note to Applicant: If gates are required, provide details of their operation and ensure that when opened, they do not obstruct access road into the Costco portion of the site.

b) clarify access and use of the Drill Hall parking spaces on P-1.

A.2.7 clarify Costco loading functions and redesign as necessary, to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering Services, including:

a) clarify intended activities and functioning of area beneath Georgia Viaduct from gridlines 6 to 13;

Note to Applicant: Indicate all spaces where trucks will need to manoeuvre or stop.

b) show manoeuvring for trucks servicing the trash compactor;

Note to Applicant: There appears to be potential conflict with a viaduct pier.

c) clarify the longest semi-trailer which is expected to deliver to the site and for which loading docks are designed to accommodate; and

d) provide an enlarged plan showing the loading docks and associated access and truck manoeuvring area.

Note to Applicant: Plans must also show all truck swath/turning movements required for access/egress onto the site from Expo Boulevard and into and from each of these loading spaces. All necessary truck manoeuvring for access must occur on-site and must not require trucks to back into the site from or across Expo Boulevard. The plan must clearly show that required on-site manoeuvring can be achieved even when adjacent loading spaces are occupied. It appears that some or all of the loading bays need to be set back and/or angled to achieve full on-site manoeuvring. Programming of all loading uses within this area is necessary, to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering Services.

A.2.8 clarify the operation of the automotive (tire) service centre, including the associated parking:

a) redesign the exit to intersect with the lane beneath the Dunsmuir Viaduct at closer to a 90 degree angle and indicate signage to discourage unwanted entry;

b) consider positioning these spaces at a reduced angle to encourage intended one-way eastbound flow; and

c) identify any other key service functions not already detailed, including large-item customer pick-up areas.

A.2.9 clarify measures to encourage safety, visibility and to discourage a flow of traffic northbound into lane east of 500 block Beatty Street;

Note to Applicant: Attention should be given to ensuring that exiting southbound delivery trucks in lane east of 500 block Beatty Street have good visibility of approaching inbound vehicles. Provision of an improved pavement treatment to clarify the route into the Costco site may be necessary. Applicant is to provide traffic controls (i.e., signs and/or road marking) to discourage Costco customers from using the north-south portion of the Beatty Street Lane, to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering Services.

A.2.10 correctly label the parking ramps between the Expo Boulevard parking level and parking level P3 below at gridlines M to N and 8 to 11;

Note to Applicant: The northerly lane is indicated as "down" to parking level P3 but should read "up" from parking level P3.

A.2.11 clarify cart storage issues as follows:

a) clarify cart operations and routing between the parking levels and store entry;

b) clarify handling and storage of larger flat-bed dollies; and

c) clarify where customers will pick-up and drop-off carts.

Note to Applicant: Cart storage as proposed does not appear to work. Problems identified include the location of access doors into some cart storage rooms requiring customers to take a cart between a structural column and a parking space, and at another requiring customers to step into a drive aisle intersecting with a parking ramp.

A.2.12 provide design elevations on both sides of all ramps and at all break points of all ramps;

Note to Applicant: Locate design grades 2 ft. off of the inside wall through curved sections of all parking ramps (grade must not exceed 15% at this alignment). Also clearly note the length of ramp at specified slope on plans.

A.2.13 clarify the slope of the entry ramp from Beatty Street into the Costco parking and provide design elevations on both sides of ramp at all break points and 2 ft. off of inside wall through all curved sections of ramp (where 15% maximum slope is permissible), and clarify slope and provide design elevations on all parking ramps between Costco store level and parking levels P3 and P4;

Note to Applicant: The maximum permitted slope for all ramps is 10% for first 20 ft. and 12.5% thereafter, except as noted above.

A.2.14 design development to prevent vehicles from exiting under the Georgia Viaduct via the Central Heat site;

A.2.15 provide plans not less than 1/16" = 1'- 0" scale for all parking levels;

A.2.16 provide unobstructed manoeuvring aisles;

Note to Applicant: An example is residential parking space #346 on parking level P2 which is obstructed by the adjacent column.

A.2.17 provide a notation on the plans that ramps and drive aisles providing access and manoeuvring into disability parking spaces will have a 2.3 m unobstructed vertical clearance;

Note to Applicant: Way-finding signage directing drivers to disabled parking spaces may be required if some routes to these spaces have compromised vertical clearance.

A.2.18 provide corner-cuts at the top and bottom of all ramps to provide adequate radii for continuous two-way traffic flow where 200 or more vehicles are served;

A.2.19 arrangements shall be made, to the satisfaction of the Director of Legal Services and General Manager of Engineering Services, for completion of following:

a) subdivision of Lot 291 and Lot 7, including creation of City road parcels;

b) shared use of private open spaces for all residential buildings;

c) completion and execution of volumetric lease arrangements for parking and other uses below viaducts;

d) access over Lot 291 and to leased areas under viaducts;

e) access over lot 7 to the site (Beatty Street ramp);

f) the Drill Hall parking agreement (currently in Draft form);

g) elevated walkways agreement for temporary walkways (Orca Bay, City and Concord Pacific);

h) revisions to the Stadium Parking Occupancy Restriction Agreement (BT408224-BT408225), to allow for phasing of pay-in-lieu;

i) revisions to the Services Agreement (BT408210-BT418213)to secure payment of $150,000 from Concord Pacific for connection to B.C. Place Stadium;

j) registration of appropriate easements and rights of way, including provision of maintenance, by site owners, of the east-west private street;

k) maintenance by City of only top surface, curbs, sidewalks and street lighting for north-south street connecting the two viaducts;

Note to Applicant: Given that there is a structure underneath this roadway, the City will carry out maintenance at a level required only for a typical road (an air-space parcel will be required to define portion of roadway to be dedicated to and maintained by the City.

l) dedication of permanent elevated walkways to the City and execution of a permanent walkways agreement will be required to ensure that maintenance of walkways is responsibility of site owners; and

m) construction of proposed seating wall and features around Dunsmuir Viaduct column;

Note to Applicant: The proposed signage on column retaining walls is not supported.

n) detailed design of the stairs and elevator from the Dunsmuir Viaduct to the Expo Boulevard level; and

o) requirement for reconstruction of Abbott Street outfall.

Note to Applicant: This development will trigger the requirement, as per previously registered agreements. Reconstruction of this outfall must be completed prior to occupancy of any building on this site.

A.2.20 submit a detailed engineering infrastructure plans and specifications, to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering Services;

A.2.21 submit a detailed fire response study, to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering Services of a fire study;

A.2.22 submit a Transportation Demand Management Plan, to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering Services;

A.2.23 clarify and provide details of interface between viaducts and permanent walkways;

A.2.24 clarify and provide details of how trees will be accommodated on sidewalks adjacent to viaducts;

A.2.25 provide a traffic signal at Griffiths Way/Expo Boulevard intersection, including site access as a fourth leg, designed to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering Services and subject to approval by City Council;

A.2.26 provide details of a Costco cart rental program for customers who choose to walk or bicycle to the site and of a Costco delivery service; to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering Services;

A.2.27 make arrangements, to the satisfaction of the Director of Legal Services and General Manager of Engineering Services, to revise the existing Viaduct agreements to allow for the encroachments into the 3 m buffer zone as accepted by the General Manager of Engineering Services (Costco parking structure), including provisions to ensure that any costs associated with temporary removal of encroaching structures, would be the responsibility of the owners of the building;

A.2.28 consult with Engineering Services staff on seismic review of viaducts;

Note to Applicant: See Engineering Services comments.

A.2.29 indicate City building grades and corresponding design grades on both sides of all entrances along the property line (Expo Boulevard, Beatty lane and Beatty Street);

Note to Applicant: City building grades at the viaduct level can only be provided when street design is completed and accepted by the City. The applicant should make an application for building grades with Engineering Services, Streets Design office, at 604-873-7316.

A.2.30 clarify canopy/roof encroachment shown at Expo Boulevard;

Note to Applicant: Canopies must meet Vancouver Building By-law for demountability and drainage. Engineering Services does not support a canopy design that does not meet these requirements. Drawings appear to propose a significant roof type encroachment that is not supported.

A.2.31 make arrangements for street trees, to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering Services;

Note to Applicant: Street trees must conform to standard spacing and clearance. Tree species must be approved by the Park Board. Before purchase of trees, final tree locations to be determined to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering Services. Also, a separate application to Engineering Services is required for street trees, tree grates and any other non-standard treatment of City sidewalks. Delete planters shown at Expo Boulevard, street tree locations and provide standard 4 piece tree surrounds and sidewalk treatments. Submit a copy of landscape plan directly to Engineering Services for review.

A.2.32 delete all references to banners on lamp standards;

Note to Applicant Banners are approved under a separate application to the General Manager of Engineering Services.

A.2.33 clarify/provide garbage/recycling storage and pick-up provisions for each of the towers at the viaduct levels and provide details of the pick-up operations; and

A.2.34 make arrangements for crossing applications, to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering Services.

A.3 Standard Vancouver Coastal Health Authority Conditions:

A.3.1 confirmation is supplied by the applicant that the acoustical measures identified in the Brown Strachan Associates report submitted March 14, 2003, will be incorporated into the final design and construction, based on the consultant's recommendations as concurred with or amended by the Medical Health Officer (Senior Environmental Health Officer);

A.3.2 confirmation is supplied by the applicant that adequate and effective acoustic separation will be provided between the commercial and residential portions of the building complex; and

A.3.3 confirmation is supplied by the applicant that mechanical equipment (ventilators, generators, compactors and exhaust systems) will be designed and located to minimize the noise impact on the neighbourhood and to comply with Noise By-law #6555.

Appendix B - Standard Notes to Applicant and Conditions of Development Permit

B.1.1 The applicant is advised to note the comments of the Processing Centre - Building, Vancouver Coastal Health Authority and Fire & Rescue Services contained in the Staff Committee Report dated June 18, 2003. Further, confirmation that these comments have been acknowledged and understood, is required to be submitted in writing as part of the "prior-to" response.

B.1.2 It should be noted that if conditions 1.0 and 2.0 have not been complied with on or before September 30, 2003, this Development Application shall be deemed to be refused, unless the date for compliance is first extended by the Director of Planning.

B.1.3 This approval is subject to any change in the Official Development Plan and the Zoning and Development By-law or other regulations affecting the development that occurs before the permit is issuable. No permit that contravenes the bylaw or regulations can be issued.

B.1.4 Revised drawings will not be accepted unless they fulfill all conditions noted above. Further, written explanation describing point-by-point how conditions have been met, must accompany revised drawings. An appointment should be made with the Project Facilitator when the revised drawings are ready for submission.

B.1.5 A new development application will be required for any significant changes other than those required by the above-noted conditions.

B.1.6 The Occupancy Permit will be held pending issuance of a Certificate of Compliance from the Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection for this site.

B.2 Conditions of Development Permit:

B.2.1 All approved off-street vehicle parking, loading and unloading spaces, and bicycle parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Parking By-law within sixty(60) days of the date of issuance of any required occupancy permit or any use or occupancy of the proposed development not requiring an occupancy permit and thereafter permanently maintained in good condition.

B.2.2 All landscaping and treatment of the open portions of the site shall be completed in accordance with the approved drawings within six(6) months of the date of issuance of any required occupancy permit or any use or occupancy of the proposed development not requiring an occupancy permit and thereafter permanently maintained in good condition.

B.2.3 All approved street trees shall be planted in accordance with the approved drawings within six(6) months of the date of issuance of any required occupancy permit, or any use or occupancy of the proposed development not requiring an occupancy permit, and thereafter permanently maintained in good condition.

B.2.4 Amenity spaces (exercise room, lap pool, multi-purpose, billiard, multi-media and dance rooms) of 12,597 ft.², excluded from the computation of floor area, and outdoor play and gathering areas shall not be put to any other use, except as described in the approved application for the exclusion. Access and availability of the use of all amenity facilities located in this project shall be made to all residents and occupants of the buildings;

AND

Further, the amenity spaces and facilities approved as part of this Development Permit shall be provided and thereafter be permanently maintained for use by residents and users of this building complex.

B.2.5 The enclosed balconies are to be maintained at all times in accordance with the balcony enclosure details on the approved plans and are not to be used as an integral part of the interior space of the building.

B.2.6 Any phasing of the development, other than that specifically approved, that results in an interruption of continuous construction to completion of the development, will require application to amend the development to determine the interim treatment of the incomplete portions of the site to ensure that the phased development functions are as set out in the approved plans, all to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning.

Appendix C - Comments from Processing Centre-Building and Fire and Rescue Services

The following comments have been made by the Processing Centre - Building and are based on the architectural drawings submitted on March 17, 2003. by James K. M. Cheng, Architects Inc. for the proposed Development Application. This is a preliminary review in order to identify issues which do not comply with Vancouver Building By-Law #8057.

1. Storage Garage Security

The provisions of 3.3.6.7. apply.

2. Provisions for the Disabled

a) Access

-Provisions for Handicap Access require certain minimum clearances for a landing adjacent to opening doors to allow for wheelchair manoeuverability. The doorways accessing the stair cores on floor level P1 appear deficient in this respect.

b) Areas of Refuge

-Areas of refuge conforming to the requirements of 3.8.3.19 should be designated on the plans for those floor areas providing disabled access. The exits serving the Parking Level P1 require designated & accessible areas of refuge.

c) Parking Spaces

The provisions of 4.8.4 (Parking By-law No.6059) relating to the required number of disability parking spaces are applicable.

d) Enhanced Accessibility Requirements

The applicant should be aware that Bulletin 2002-006-BU Enhanced Accessibility For Multi-family Residential Buildings is applicable to the extent prescribed.

3. Fire Separations - Occupancy Separations

-The roof canopy over the Costco entry may be required to be treated as a fire separation to protect the occupancies over.

4. Exits: ***

a) Integrity/Exposure of Exits.

-The exit located at gridlines 13/B on the Expo Boulevard Level is not permitted to terminate in another occupancy (which in this case is a loading area).

-The exit located at gridlines 13.5/C on the Lobby Level is not permitted to terminate in the parking garage but should exit to the exterior.

-The exit located at gridlines 14 & J on the Lobby Level is not permitted to terminate in the loading area but should exit to the exterior.

-The exit stair located at Gridlines 9 & E should protected from fire exposure from the adjoining Lounge at the Lobby Exit Level.

b) Lobby used as Exit

-The provisions of 3.4.4.2. are applicable for all lobbies used for exiting purposes of other floor areas.

c) Access to Exit

-Rooms exceeding an occupant load of 60 require a second and separate means of egress with doors swinging in the direction of exit travel. This applies to the amenity uses (multi-purpose rooms) located n the "garden level"

-The secured parking area at the Lobby Level at gridlines C/12 should be provided with 2 remotely located exits.

-The door in the exit located at Expo Boulevard Level at gridlines M/16 should swing in the direction of exit travel. (The stair which serves the stories below grade also exits at this level).

-Stairways located at Gridlines I/16 on Parking Levels P3 and P4 indicate 2 risers. A minimum of 3 risers is required per 3.4.6.2..

-Travel distances in the residential parking levels P1 and P2 are excessive (exceeding 45 metres) in a number of locations. EG. Intersections of gridlines N/17, A/5 & J/9.

-Egress routes of adequate width should be provided to access exits. Eg. Storage areas located on P1 Level at gridlines C/16 and D/6.

-The "Drill Hall" area on Parking Level P1 is required to have access to 2 exits.

-The Penthouse units on tower A & C are required to have access to 2 exits.

-The Mechanical room located at the roof level on towers A & C are not allowed to open directly into an exit.

5. Spatial Separation***

The amount of unprotected openings for the north (gridline N) and south faces (gridline A) of parking levels P2 and P1 appear excessive based on limiting distances measured to the property line.

6. Interconnected floor space **

-The provisions of 3.2.8. apply to the following areas.

A) Levels P4, P3, and Expo Blvd Level are interconnected by virtue of the common customer ramp servicing these levels and located at gridlines J and 17.

B) The "Garden Level" common amenity areas within each of the residential tower cores are interconnected to their respective Main Lobbies on the floor below.

7. High Rise Measures

-The provisions of 3.2.6. in the Building Bylaw for Additional Measures for High Buildings are applicable for the entire project.

-The smoke venting provisions by natural means may be difficult to achieve for the stairs opening into the Lobby on the Main Floor.

-Cross over floors complying to the provisions of 3.4.6.17. should be designated.

8. Acceptable Open Space

-Exits are normally expected to terminate at streets. However, in some high-rise multi-tower complexes, the building exits at "grade" into an interior courtyard (which is not necessarily considered as acceptable open space.). From there a safe egress route must be provided which leads to the street. The acceptability of this egress route and the designation of acceptable open space for exiting purposes must be confirmed by the Chief Building Official.

9. Building Permit Issuance Requirements ***

-The issuance of a building permit for construction is contingent on all legal covenants and equivalents (if necessary) being accepted and in place.

For this reason, a code conforming back up solution should be shown on the drawings submitted for construction otherwise delays in approval or refusals may disrupt the construction approval process.

Notwithstanding the above, code conforming (including Planning, Engineering regulations etc. ) back-up solutions shown on the building application drawings are also acceptable for the issuance of building permits.

-Projects submitted under the Certified Professional Program are also required to demonstrate conformance with the Building Bylaw. In the case of phased construction, the comments above regarding equivalents/covenant approval would apply to each phase of the work proposed.

Notes:

1. Items marked with asterisks have been identified as important, no-conforming Building By-law issues. Although resolvable, their solutions may necessitate partial redesign and changes to the built form.

2. All code references unless noted otherwise refer to Vancouver Building By-law #8057.

3. The applicant may wish to retain the services of a Building Code consultant in case of difficulty in comprehending the comments and their potential impact on the proposal. Failure to address these issues may jeopardize the ability to obtain a Building Permit or delay the issuance of a Building Permit for the proposal.

Fire & Rescue Services comments:

For Costco retail store (& warehouse), fire dept. access is to be from street and a max. 15m (50 ft.)from curb. Distance measures approx. 80'. At earlier meeting with consultant, access from street was proposed. Access from parking areas are never good. In conjunction with access, review fire dept connection (x 2 as high bldg.) locations.

• Secondary fire dept. response point required as Costco tenant space is 'huge' and it would be impossible to adequately access from 'basically' one extreme corner of the building. This access is from underneath a viaduct. Manoeuvring and turnaround area to be reviewed in more detail to ensure adequate AND safe access to building. There is conflict with access to parking. What are measures to be taken in the event of an emergency? Also location of trash compactor is not good.
• Fire dept. access to below grade stairs (Costco parking) is not direct from within building BUT from exterior. This is to be reviewed.

Note: There is no access to levels above Costco from this response point.

• Fire dept. responds to street address of residential towers. What is address of Tower 'D'? Location of Tower 'D' entry doors to be reviewed. Access route is the driveway to underground parkade. Conflict here.
• Fire dept. vehicle response locations for Tower 'B' and Tower 'C' on new residential street to be enlarged. Largest fire vehicle is approx. 49' in length and would require a parking/manoeuvring space of 100' minimum.

Note: 15m distance is from curb(at fire vehicle) and entry doors(in closed position). Review Tower entry locations.

• For Tower 'B' above and below grade access stairs to be more direct. Similarly for Tower 'C' access stair.
• Review addressing of T/House units wrt fire alarm sequencing and fire dept response. Max 45m from fire vehicle permitted. Review this requirement. In particular T/House units that do not face a city street/units that do not have internal access from principal entrance. Separate response point may be considered. (ie T/H units that face Expo Blvd & Dunsmuir Viaduct).
• There was an earlier discussion with Code Consultant wrt to some of uses at retail store (ie tires).
• This will require further review.
• Fire alarm sequencing and response to this single bldg? to be submitted for review.
• Are any Equivalencies proposed?
• Building Code Analysis and Code Report to be submitted for review.

The above comments are based on the Architectural Development Permit drawings submitted for review.

Further comments may be forthcoming when more detailed drawings are received for review.

Appendix E - Applicant's Design Rationale

DESIGN RATIONALE James K.M. Cheng Architects

651 Expo Boulevard March 7, 2003

Background:

From the inception of the overall False Creek North Official Development Plan (FCN ODP), unprecedented care has been taken to achieve, with the City of Vancouver, planning that would result in a firm foundation for a successful and high quality urban design. This was done with extensive input from City staff and advisory bodies, as well as with special interest groups and the public.

In order to provide effective guidance for the long-term development of False Creek North, it was intended that the FCN ODP be reviewed from time to time to ensure that it accurately reflected prevailing public opinions. Since FCN ODP was approved in 1990, there have been a number of reviews that have lead to changes, such as, an increase in the unit count, conversion of a hotel site to residential use, and expansion of the seawall walkway. In addition, the City has applied various policies--Downtown Vancouver Skyline Study and the Bridgehead Study--to the site.

All of these changes were made in an attempt to enhance the form of development for FCN.

In the original FCN ODP Sub-Area 7 was designated as an office precinct. In October 1993 it underwent a major change and was divided into Sub-Areas 7A and 7B to facilitate the development of General Motors Place on 7A.

In 1999 the City initiated a design review of the northeast quadrant of the FCN ODP in a response to changing land uses in and around the area. It was noted that Sub-Area 7B has a unique geography that is a transition from the downtown commercial precinct to the residential neighborhoods along the shoreline of False Creek. One of the preliminary conclusions of this review was that Sub-Area 7B would make a successful mixed-use neighborhood with residential uses at the Beatty Street Level and retail down at Expo Blvd.

The rezoning application of April 2002 and by extension this Development Permit Application complete the process that began a number of years ago. While the overall development incorporates many of the planning principles that have been integral in the creation of other nearby projects in FCN - Yaletown Edge, Roundhouse, and Quayside, Area 7B's complexity has given rise to a unique set of issues and solutions.

Located between the Downtown District and the False Creek waterfront areas, 651 Expo. Blvd. (Area 7B) is designed to integrate with the downtown conditions as well as provide and improve lower level access to the waterfront. In addition, its adjacency to the International Village development, and Chinatown is seen as a vital planning component that will help 'knit' and stimulate growth to the area. The approved Re-zoning established Beatty Street as the residential access on the upper level; Expo Blvd as the principal access for Costco at the lower level.

Design Development Response

As requested by the City Planner, the following section reviews the design issues item by item that were stated at the time of the Public Hearing, dated July 25, 2002.

Statement: Design development to the affordable residential site to ensure livability and viability - aspects to review include, among other things: eliminating the stepped built form; combining the two parking access points into one to provide more semi-private open space; and orient more built form towards the public open space to better define that space;

Response: This application does not include a design for the affordable component. This portion of the project will be built at a later date per scheduling and timing by the city. In spite of that, the recommendations from the public hearing have been made--the stepped form has been deleted, replaced by a low-rise structure. The two parking access points have been consolidated into one that will be built off the Beatty Street Ramp, and finally the low-rise structure will have an orientation towards the open space opposite the Drill Hall.

Statement: Design development to the lower built form of the market housing to introduce more variety and residential presence on the viaducts - aspects to review include, among other things: increasing the building height at the south-west and north-east corners (note: compass directions are not correct. Should read North-west and South-east), and strengthening the townhouse character and use;

Response: Variety and presence have been introduced to the viaduct edges. The townhouses and lofts throughout the project set up a stylistic rhythm of concrete roof protrusions and mondrian-like window patterns. A sculptural roof structure has been designed into the corner units located at the north-west and south-east corners of the site.

Statement: Design development to the residential character and presence on the internal street - aspects to review include, among other things: locating the parking entrances onto the north-south road, and minimizing the tower lobby areas;

Response: The two parking access points for the residential portion of the project have been located onto the secondary street (running north-south). This frees up the primary residential street (running east-west) with more townhouses, thereby reinforcing the residential character and quality of the development. In addition, all primary entrances to the townhouses are on the internal street system.

The lobbies to the two northern towers (B and C) are positioned to pick up on the rhythm set up by the townhouses. The lobby for tower A is facing the Georgia Viaduct, while tower D's entrance is located at the south end of the secondary internal street (north-south).

In response to the various directions that both pedestrians and vehicles approach the project, the towers have been shaped, positioned and varied in their heights. The more sculptural towers are taller and are located at the viaducts serving as 'entry' and 'exit' markers to the downtown core.

The shorter towers occupy the interior of the site, and have a closer relationship to the residential low-rise, interior garden spaces, and general pedestrian flavor of the new street system.

The built crucifix form of the towers responds to the views from all four sides and reflects the diversity and vibrancy that the project will bring to the area.

Statement: Design development to allow views through the site to GM Place - aspects to review include, among other things: relocating the amenity area or providing pedestrian access through or under the amenity area to the pedestrian path above the Expo Blvd façade, taking into consideration the principles of CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design);

Response: From the initial discussions during the re-zoning phase of this project, views and open spaces from Beatty Street, south, through the site have been an integral part of the design. The open space adjacent to the Drill Hall serves both the public along Beatty and the residents within the project. This space opens views to GM Place and allows for pedestrian movement through the site.

The Amenity Building has been pulled to the west side of this north-south 'view corridor'. Landscaped walkways provide pedestrian passage to the southern pedestrian link that runs parallel to Expo Blvd below. 'Eyes on the Street' and careful planning of the walkways and planting will reinforce the principles of CPTED.

Statement: Design development to optimize the width of the pedestrian system along the upper level of the Expo Blvd façade, taking into consideration the principles of CPTED.

Response: Discussions on the optimized width of the pedestrian walkway above the Expo Blvd façade must recognize the presence of the Townhouse/loft Units that front onto a portion of this system. Privacy for these units, 'eyes on the street' that they provide, and overall livability are all important issues that have been considered. It was also discussed in meetings with the City Planners that this pedestrian walkway would most likely have limited access (dawn to dusk).

Statement: Design development of the public open space and the Expo Blvd façade and pedestrian walkway above it at the south-east corner of the site (Georgia Viaduct and Expo Blvd.) - aspects to consider include acknowledgment and reference, and re-integration or replication, if possible, of the historic resources on the commemorative plaza at 696 Beatty Street, including sculpture, railings and lamps from the original Georgia Viaduct's western approach, and the Dunsmuir rail tunnel portal;

Response: Several 'threads' of recollection and reference to the history of the site have been/will be incorporated into the project. The existing park located at the corner of Beatty and Georgia will in the future become the Social (affordable) Housing Site. It has been envisioned that the existing sculpture and plaque presently located at the corner can be integrated or re-integrated into an open public space at the base of the affordable tower.

Further down the Georgia Viaduct is the terminus of the pedestrian walkway, described in the above response. This east-west pedestrian connector is the new 'edge' of the downtown core; it is an artificial 'escarpment'. The project has treated this edge, which runs the full length of the site (400'+), with railing and lamps that will be designed in a style reminiscent, though modern, of the original railing and lamps. An open space has been created off the walkway in the middle of the site and at the west end near the Georgia Viaduct, providing views to the south and west.

The discussions are still being held as to the future of the Portal.

Statement: Design development to the Expo Blvd façade to enhance its visual experience and recollect the escarpment - aspects to consider include, among other things: introducing a substantial vertical landscaped wall at the southerly end of the façade; introducing a vertical water course at the easterly end of the façade in conjunction with the elevator and stair system;

Response: A significant objective for Expo Blvd is to ensure that the Costco Store generates a positive experience in an area that is, at present, a no-man's land. The façade treatment of the Store reflects the industrial heritage of the area. Materials range from concrete and steel structure to industrial-type window frames and glazing. It is the intent to provide visual interest to the street, and to serve as a catalyst to jump start further development in the area.

The public plaza outside the store entrance is a gathering place which will add to the animation of the street environment. Pedestrian movement will converge at this area, from the stair tower above, the Skytrain Station, both stadiums, as well as from the pedestrian connections from Chinatown, Gastown, and International Village.

During re-zoning discussions, it was determined that the Public Art component to this project would be focused on the Stair Tower. The program as to how it will be treated is still to be finalized. The area at the south-west end of the property, as described in the preceding response, is designed as part of an abstracted escarpment, with viewing areas at the Viaduct level, and planting that will cascade down the façade.

Statement: Design development to increase the amount of planting, including trees, along the parking façade facing Expo Boulevard;

Response: Planting along the entire length of the parking façade above the Costco Store has been incorporated into the design. Trees are located along the pedestrian walkway above the parking, while significant broad-leaf evergreen hedge planting will cascade over the parking edge.

It must be noted that this plant material must be tolerant of urban conditions.

Statement: Design development to the canopy system along Expo Blvd to ensure natural light access - aspects to review include, among other things; maximizing the amount of glass;

Response: Natural light has been introduced into the façade and canopy of the Costco Store. The pedestrian ramp system that runs in front of the store along Expo Blvd is sheathed in glass, allowing a visual interaction at the street level. The sloping roof and canopy above creates another visual excitement, that responds to the sweep of the road as it curves in front of the store, while suggesting the sloping ramp system under it. The roof/skylight glazing over the ramp, together with the vertical glass will provide ample natural light. Openings such as the one around the stair tower also bring natural light into the plaza area.

Statement: Design development to the landscaping and treatment of the areas under the viaducts - aspects to review include, among other things: horizontal and vertical materials;

Response: While the areas under the viaducts are utilitarian in their proposed uses - parking, entry access, and loading, landscaping and visual treatment of the hard surfaces has been introduced. Planting along the eastern edge of the city lane will help soften the harshness of the area and shield the Skytrain Station. Retaining walls, planting and seating around the viaduct support columns near the Costco Entry will serve the same purpose. It is the project's desire to call attention to the viaducts and their structure. Sculptural lighting columns made of architectural metal mesh will be located at the viaduct support columns. Their design will tie into the 'industrial-type' character of the Costco façade, using similar elements. Planting, tolerant of urban conditions, will grow up the face of these 'column planters', while up lighting will highlight the underbelly of the viaducts.

The challenges of this project are many: to develop both a high density residential community and a big-box store that can be integrated into both the downtown core and an industrial no-man's land; to knit the existing pedestrian routes surrounding the site; to extend the downtown core and provide a link to the False Creek waterfront; to improve the vehicular routing surrounding the site; and as a major objective to provide a livable environment for the residential community.

This submission has responded positively to the concerns and desires of both the city staff and the general public, and we feel that everyone will greatly benefit from this challenging undertaking.

Appendix F - Urban Design Panel Minutes of May 14, 2003

The above application was reviewed by the Urban Design Panel on April 30, 2003 and not supported. Staff agreed that the application could return to the Panel and, if support was given by the Panel, that the application could proceed to the DPSC and the DPBD.

The understanding with the applicant was: the staff review would be based on the application as submitted with no revisions; all prior to conditions would be based on the submitted application; that staff are confident that all the issues identified by staff and the Urban Design Panel could be addressed by conditions and the applicant would concur with them; and that it was up to the discretion of the DPBD whether to review the application and any appropriate revision material presented.

The Panel reviewed the application for a second time on May 14 2003 and supported the application as per below.

MINUTES OF URBAN DESIGN PANEL MEETING, MAY 14, 2003

EVALUATION: SUPPORT (7-0)

Introduction: The Development Planner, Jonathan Barrett, began by providing an overview of the Official Development Plan for False Creek North and the changes made subsequently, primarily converting previously approved commercial use to residential. The principal of extending the city grid and meeting the viaducts was agreed to in principle. It was noted that a number of inquiries have been received with respect to the Plaza of Nations, and the long-term potential for BC Place Stadium is likely to be an extension of residential/commercial uses. A strong pedestrian route is anticipated from the Georgia Viaduct down to grade at Pacific Boulevard and False Creek. Phil Mondor, Rezoning Planning, added that recently a number of inquiries have been made about converting some of the older heritage type commercial buildings in this area to residential use. It was noted the viaducts are likely to remain in place for at least 25 years. A tram route is proposed along Pacific Boulevard and the Panel will be invited to provide comments on it in due course.

Applicant's Opening Comments: James Cheng, Architect, pointed out there were a couple of workshops held last year with the previous Urban Design Panel on the whole False Creek North area when some of the principles were endorsed. These included the alignment of Smithe Street and establishing a pedestrian link directly to the water, and normalizing the intersection with the ramp and bringing a successful texture and urban design of the Quayside Neighbourhood into this area. Studies were also conducted around calming Pacific and Expo Boulevards. Much of this work has been suspended due to the Pavco's subsequent withdrawal from the discussions.

Mr. Cheng briefly reviewed the revisions made to the scheme since the Panel's last review and non-support on April 30, 2003. These include:

•the previous 9 units per floor has been reduced to 8 units per floor;

•floor plates of towers A and C have been reduced by more than 400 sq.ft. and now comply with the floor plates approved at rezoning;

•tower width has been reduced from 105 ft. to 85 ft.;

•tower separation has been increased to at least 80 ft.;

•townhouses have been added to the base of Tower A facing the internal cul-de-sac;

•colour has been introduced to accentuate Towers A and C.

Ground plane changes have not been made but will be addressed in the final stage of design development.

The intent is that the two corner buildings will be stronger, signature towers with the other two towers being more contextual, background buildings.

Mr. Cheng noted the question of the appropriateness of locating townhouses on Georgia viaduct was raised at the rezoning stage. Acoustic and marketing studies concluded that this end of Georgia is no different than at the entry to Stanley Park in terms of livability issues. It is also felt to be more important to extend the street and make it less of a freeway by introducing residential and trying to anticipate the evolving neighbourhood. This was endorsed by the previous Panel and City Council. Peter Webb, Concord Pacific Developments, added, the intent is that on the busy streets the townhouses will be two-storey loft units (live/work) with bedrooms at the back.

Joseph Frye briefly reviewed the landscape plan and the design team responded to questions from the Panel.

Panel's Comments: The Panel unanimously supported this submission and congratulated the applicant on responding so quickly to the Panel's previous comments. The Panel also found the Development Planner's explanation of the overall design intent for the neighbourhood to be very helpful in terms of understanding what is trying to be achieved on this site.

The Panel unanimously supported the towers' revised dimensions and expression. It was agreed the taller, slimmer tower forms are preferable. One Panel member thought even greater height would be acceptable.

Most Panel members liked the introduction of colour to the two corner towers and encouraged further development of this idea. One Panel member suggested extending colour to the other two towers as well, as a means of tying them together, but others preferred the differentiation.

One Panel member found the scale of the roof elements too small.

Given that this site will be much less of a signature site in the long term it was thought that the treatment of the massing and the townhouses works quite well to blend into the grid and the larger neighbourhood. A comment was made that the proposed live/work use goes a long way to mitigate concerns about livability for the townhouses along Georgia Street.

The efforts to tame this end of Georgia Street were strongly supported by the Panel. One Panel member recommended further study on the public realm aspects, noting that this project provides a good opportunity to create a special transition block - narrowing the surface carriageway, for example.

Some concern was raised about the space at the edge of the new escarpment. It is not clear whether it is public or private, and it seems a bit like left over space. It was suggested that further thought be given to taking full advantage of the opportunity that exists at this edge.

Some Panel members suggested the internal streets should have a better quality paving material than the asphalt currently shown.

Concerns were raised about the long term durability of the proposed painted concrete. A more integral and durable material was recommended.

Comments were made that improvement is needed to the east elevation of Costco to make it a more interesting space, particularly at night. Suggestions included incorporating back-lit advertisements.

Some Panel members prefaced their remarks by expressing continuing discomfort with the direction established by the rezoning. There was concern about the relationship between this site and International Village to the north, and the fact that this site remains somewhat disconnected from the neighbourhood below.

Applicant's Response: Mr. Cheng thanked the Panel for the good comments, particularly about the creation of the upper and lower environments and the space beneath the viaducts which he said they have already started working on. The facade treatment will also be reviewed further before they proceed to the Development Permit Board.

Questions or Comments? E-mail: carol_hubbard@city.vancouver.bc.ca

© 2003 City of Vancouver