|
Community Services | |||
| Development Permit Board |
| CITY OFVANCOUVER | |||
|
|
Development Permit Staff Committee Report
|
| Present: | Also Present: |
| B. Boons (Chair), Development Services M. Thomson, Engineering Services J. Evans, Real Estate Services D. Robinson, Social Planning/Office of Cultural Affairs R. Whitlock, Housing Centre T. Driessen, Vancouver Park Board |
R. Segal, Urban
Design & Development Planning B. Mah, Development Services A. Higginson, Development Services |
Applicant |
Owner of Development |
| Downs Archambault + Partners Architects 200 – 1014 Homer Street Vancouver, BC V6B 2W9 |
Delta Land
Development Ltd. 200 – 1014 Homer Street Vancouver, BC V6E 3T5 |
[top]
Proposal: To construct a 30-storey multiple dwelling, and four townhouse/general office live-work units (total 140 units) a grocery store (2 106 m2) and four levels of underground parking for a total of 322 vehicles.
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 Applicant’s Shadow Analysis
(Apendices D - F are not included - copies of the full report may be obtained from the Planning Department)
Issues:
1. Height increase from 275 ft. to 300 ft.
2. Detailed interface with westerly neighbouring walkway.
Urban Design Panel: Support
THAT the Board APPROVE Development Application No. DE408040 as submitted, subject to enactment of the pending CD-1 by-law and Council’s approval of the final form of development, the plans and information forming a part thereof, thereby permitting the construction of a 30-storey multiple dwelling building, four townhouse general office live-work units, a grocery store and parking for a total of 322 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 the northern-most portion of the top floor amenity space to minimize shadowing of the Coal Harbour waterfront walkway at 3:00 pm on the Spring and Fall equinox (March 21 and September 21);
Note to Applicant: Consideration should be given to pulling back this space or glazing its roof to allow sun penetration. See also Standard Condition A.1.3.
1.2 design development to refine details of the Bute Street sidewalk interface to improve its publicness, by:
(a) extending the corner restaurant window further west along the blank wall facing Hastings Street and pulling back the planter to increase exposure of the active use at the corner;
Note to Applicant: Public seating for pedestrians wishing to contemplate the art piece should be incorporated.
(b) stepping down the height of the planters and Triangle West “pedestals” with the slope of Bute Street along the outdoor restaurant seating area frontage, as well as lowering the planter height at the south edge of the Bute/Cordova Streets corner plaza; and
(c) providing a lighter, more open column and beam canopy structure for the outdoor restaurant seating area to open up the street-end view and create a less enclosed, segregated feeling for this space from the sidewalk.
1.3 design development to the westerly edge adjacent the neighbouring
walkway to refine the landscape and wall treatment and address CPTED
issues;
Note to Applicant: Landscaped terraces should be shaped and planted
to maximize views and surveillance by residents of both developments
(no hidden areas). The planted northwest corner should be accessible
and programmed. The design solution may result in the need for a legal
agreement with the neighbouring property to provide access for maintenance
purposes. See also Condition 1.4, below.
1.4 design development to the West Hastings Street interface with the neighbouring westerly walkway to set back the vehicular access from the west property line to incorporate a minimum 2 ft. wide landscape planter at grade level;
Note to Applicant: This planter should extend north at least 40 ft.
1.5 design development to the treatment of both vehicular entries (West Hastings and Cordova Streets) including walls, ceilings, lighting, exhaust vents, gas meters, etc., to minimize their negative impact on the sidewalk;
1.6 design development to the tower’s façade treatment to better accentuate and differentiate its dynamic angled planes through changes in detailing, colour or materials;
1.7 design development to provide a secure and equipped outdoor play area on the podium roof garden (residential level 2) suitable for children (refer to Section 3.3 of the City’s “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 area in close visual proximity to the amenity room (library) on that level. This may require relocation and/or expansion of the amenity room to provide the appropriate overlook. The applicant should take care to provide adequate secure fencing where necessary, to provide a resilient play surface 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 online or by calling the City’s Child Development Coordinator, at (604)-871-6042.
1.8 confirmation that the pre-cast concrete exterior material shall specify a terra cotta aggregate finish consistent with the submitted sample; and
1.9 design development to the West Hastings water feature to better engage the sidewalk as part of the public realm.
Note to Applicant: The exhaust vent in front of the water feature should be reconsidered or relocated to a less prominent location. Consideration should be given to providing a water fountain to add interest to the adjacent pond.
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.
[top]
click here to view the table (pdf)
[top]
| Legal Description | History of Application |
| Lot: K Block: 29 Plan: LMP29893 District Lot: 185 and of the Public Harbour of Burrard Inlet |
03 11 04 Complete DE submitted 04 01 21 Urban Design Panel 04 02 04 Development Permit Staff Committee |
Site: The site is located on the west side of Bute Street, between Cordova and Hastings Streets.
Significant adjacent development includes:
(a) Bute Street End Plaza and Harbour Green Park
(b) 1233 West Cordova Street (‘Carina’), residential tower and
townhouses
(c) 1281 West Cordova Street (‘Callisto’), residential tower and
townhouses
(d) 408 Jervis Street (‘C-Side’), residential tower and townhouses
(e) 1228 West Hastings, residential tower and townhouses
(f) 575 Bute, DE408162 in process (prelim.), residential tower, townhouses
and commercial
(g) 550 Bute, DE407110 approved (prelim.) for residential tower (400 ft.),
hotel and commercial
(h) 1177 West Hastings, office tower
(i) 1239 West Georgia (‘Venus’), residential tower and townhouses
(j) 1166 Melville (‘The Orca’), residential tower and townhouses
[top]
The pending CD-1 by-law for this site, along with the form of development, was approved by Council subject to a series of conditions, following a Public Hearing in October 2003. Staff met with the applicant prior to submission of a development application to review progress on the responses to rezoning conditions and generally supported the directions being pursued. On December 4, 2003, Council approved an amendment to the Downtown Character Area Descriptions (guidelines), establishing Bute Street as a neighbourhood shopping street for this Coal Harbour/Triangle West area.
1. CD-1 By-law
2. Rezoning Conditions
3. DD, C-5, C-6, HA-1 and HA-2 Character Area Descriptions; Character Area F:
Bute Street Neighbourhood Centre
[top]
1. CD-1 By-law (pending)
Use and Density: The proposed uses (residential, grocery store and general office live-work) and density generally conform to the provisions of the By-law, subject to Standard Condition A.1.1.
Height: The By-law specifies a maximum height of 83.8 m (275 ft.). However, in order to allow consideration of a dramatic, very transparent tower cap, proposed as an amenity space and roof deck, provision was made in the by-law for an increase in height to 91.4 m (300 ft.) if:
(a) the Director of Planning or Development Permit Board first considers the height, bulk, location and overall design of the building and its effect on the site, surrounding buildings and streets, and existing views;
(b) in the opinion of the Director of Planning or Development Permit Board:
(i) the additional height enhances the overall appearance of the building
and the top of the building as seen on the skyline;
(ii) the design of the higher portion of the building minimizes shadow
impact on the waterfront walkway;
(iii) the higher portion of the building is predominately glazed, appropriately
integrates all mechanical equipment enclosures, and considers lighting
so as not to impact neighbours; and
(c) the area of the floor plate of the higher portion of the building is no
greater than 50% of the typical floor plate, excluding mechanical equipment.
In addition, the By-law provides that Section 10.11 – Relaxation of Limitations on Building Height – of the Zoning and Development By-law does not apply to any increase in maximum building height, measured above the base surface, beyond 91.4 m.
Staff have assessed the design of the proposed amenity space located above the 275 ft. height (noting that it is similar to that presented at Public Hearing) and conclude that it meets all the provisions of the pending CD-1 by-law, but can be further improved in respect to its shadow impact on the waterfront walkway [clause (b)(ii) above]. Staff recommend that the northernmost portion of the amenity space be pulled back or the north portion of the sloped roof area be glazed to allow sun penetration through this space in order to reduce shadowing on the walkway at 3:00 pm on the Spring and Fall equinox. (See Condition 1.1 and Standard Condition A.1.3)
2. Rezoning Conditions; and
3. DD, C-5, C-6, HA-1 and HA-2 Character Area Descriptions; Character Area
F: Bute Street Neighbourhood Centre.
(1) Design development to improve pedestrian animation along the Bute Street by providing more continuous storefront presence and weather protection and by increasing the setback as needed to accommodate the Triangle West Public Realm Treatment, modified as appropriate for proper grade and commercial interface.
The store frontage (restaurant – ancillary to the grocery store use) along Bute Street has been extended for the full block and provided with a continuous canopy for rain protection. The restaurant’s covered outdoor seating area fronting Bute Street has been expanded, providing additional animation along this street. The Triangle West Public Realm Treatment has also been accommodated with a slightly greater setback. Staff consider the rezoning condition as well as the Bute Street Neighbourhood Centre guideline substantially met, but seek several further detailed refinements to maximize the publicness of Bute Street. (See Condition 1.2).
(2) Design development to minimize the impacts of the parking/loading entrance on the existing townhouses across Cordova Street.
The parking entrance and exit, as well as loading access, have been relocated to West Hastings Street, with loading egress only on Cordova Street. This solution noticeably reduces the impact on the Cordova-facing townhouses, as well as the overall traffic load on Cordova Street. The condition has been satisfied.
(3) Design development to improve the interface with the four existing neighbouring townhouses to the west by providing as much setback as feasible, minimizing the height of any blank walls and through extensive landscape treatment and high quality materials.
Note to Applicant: CPTED concerns should be considered along the west side of the site. Also, an access agreement may be required between the neighbouring properties to allow for maintenance of any landscaping or other features ultimately located between the neighbouring walkway, along the east side of the property line, and the retaining wall(s) on the development site.
Applicant response: “We have met with both the residents of the C-Side and the representative of the building owner, Affordable Housing Society. Given the changes to the parking and loading entrances, we have improved the interface between the two projects. The DP proposal illustrates a series of extensively landscaped terraced gardens that provide a green edge to the property. The lower planter wall shall be the same high quality pre-cast concrete used on the grocery store and townhouse facades.”
Staff comments: Staff consider the design of this edge and its relationship to neighbouring townhouses to have been substantially improved and the condition generally satisfied. However, CPTED concerns have not been fully addressed in that the proposed series of terraces contain areas of concealment. Condition 1.3 addresses this concern as well as identifying the possible need for an access agreement for maintenance, depending on the design solution.
(4) Design development to provide landscape treatment with stepped planters and small trees along the West Hastings frontage of the townhouses and to ensure the interface with the neighbouring pathway at Hastings Street is given a sensitive landscape treatment;
The West Hastings Street frontage has been handsomely landscaped, adding to the public realm on this frontage. The interface with the neighbouring pathway next to the proposed vehicular ramp needs further detailed landscape refinement. (Condition 1.4)
Architectural Treatment: The architecture of this proposal has followed
through admirably in this development application from the promise illustrated
in the rezoning submission, with the Urban Design Panel strongly supporting
it. One comment from the Panel suggested that the tower facades be further
treated to accentuate their dynamic angles. (Condition 1.6)
[top]
This proposal will be a positive addition to the Coal Harbour neighbourhood. A number of detailed design items remain. Approval is recommended, subject to the conditions put forward in this report.
The Urban Design Panel reviewed this application on January 21, 2004, and provided the following comments:
EVALUATION: SUPPORT (8-1)
• Introduction: Ralph Segal, Development Planner, presented this application. The Panel reviewed the project at the rezoning stage, in April 2003. The Panel unanimously supported the application and Council subsequently approved the rezoning. Since that time, Bute Street from Cordova to Georgia Streets has been designated as a neighbourhood shopping street for Triangle West, requiring the Bute Street frontage to have a strong retail pedestrian character. Following a brief review of the project, the Development Planner noted the following areas in which the advice of the Panel is sought:
- building height, proposed at 300 ft.;
- interface with the adjacent C-Side project to the west, especially the four townhouses facing directly into this development;
- the project’s contribution to the Bute Street neighbourhood shopping street;
- relationship of the tower to the podium.
• Applicant’s Opening Comments: Mark Ehman, Architect, described the project in greater detail, including response to the Panel’s earlier comments. The landscape plan was briefly reviewed and the design team responded to the Panel’s questions.
• Panel’s Comments: The Panel strongly supported this application and generally found it to be a very attractive, nicely detailed building.
The Panel considered the additional 25 ft. up to 300 ft. to be well earned, in particular for the proposed amenity at the top of the building. The Panel thought the building would make a good contribution to the skyline.
The Panel acknowledged the improved relationship with the C-Side development to the west, but some Panel members thought there was room for further improvement, possibly through landscaping. Several Panel members commented that the relationship to the C-Side townhouses is very unfortunate and is likely remain a poor one.
The Panel thought the project made a good contribution to the new Bute Street shopping precinct. The inclusion of the urban grocery store was strongly supported. The need for further design development to the Bute Street canopies was noted, and one Panel member questioned the appropriateness of the proposed grass boulevard on a retail frontage. Another recommendation was to avoid the stepping at the southern end of the restaurant, if possible, to provide better integration with the sidewalk. There was also a recommendation to consider incorporating heating in the overhead glazing to encourage year round use of the outdoor public space. A comment was made that, from an urban design point of view, it would have been preferable to have the café right at the corner because it is an excellent location for a very good outdoor urban space.
The Panel found the tower/podium relationship to be improved since the rezoning stage. However, it is still not perfect and could benefit from further design development in some areas. Among the suggestions were to allow the general public visual access to the proposed water element, which currently can only be enjoyed from the entry lobby. It was noted the public art feature has not been fully integrated into the project, as previously suggested by the Panel, but the developer’s satisfaction with this aspect of the proposal was acknowledged. One Panel member recommended a stronger connection of the tower to grade at the corner. As well, design development to the residential entry was recommended, currently somewhat overpowered by the very large canopy. Another concern was the view of the podium from above, which could be improved through revised landscaping or a different treatment to the lower part of the tower.
The Panel generally found the tower architecture to be very exciting and dynamic. However, some Panel members suggested that the proposed uniform materials might not be showing it to best advantage. It was thought there might be opportunity to “showcase” the different planes of the building by using different materials or changes in detailing or colour. Another comment was that the rezoning submission had a sense of verticality that is somewhat diminished in the current iteration, in particular around the notch on the north side, which now seems too “busy”.
The Panel considered the enclosed amenity space at the top of the building to be very successful. Recommendations were made for further design development to architecturally integrate it better with the building. A comment was made that it seems too much like an outdoor space that has been enclosed. The elevator penthouse could also benefit from better integration.
The Panel had serious concerns about the architectural treatment of the garage entrances where blank walls need to be carefully handled. Consideration should also be given to the pedestrian experience of the overhead garage door, with careful attention given to the appearance of the ceiling, and lighting.
Two Panel members questioned the orientation of the townhouses at the base of the building, suggesting they could have been equally successful on the city grid.
The Panel liked the proposed terra cotta coloured aggregate concrete being proposed.
In general, the Panel thought this development should make a much greater commitment to sustainability, particularly in the area of solar heat gain and a better response to the orientation of each elevation. It was noted that sustainability features, particularly reduced energy costs, are also a good marketing tool. One Panel member did not support the application because of its lack of commitment to sustainability.
• Applicant’s Response: Mr. Ehman expressed his appreciation
for the Panel’s comments.
[top]
The recommendations of Engineering Services are contained in Appendix A.
Recommendations related to landscape issues are contained in Appendix A.
Recommendations related to CPTED issues are contained in Appendix A.
The proposed building contains 140 residential units of which 26 contain two bedrooms or greater, are located below the 8th floor, and are therefore, classified as “family units” under the High-Density Housing for Families with Children Guidelines. This project does not incorporate a children’s play area, but does include an amenity room (library) at the podium level, which if relocated, could provide visual surveillance to a designated play area on that level.
Staff recommends that a play area be located to provide maximize visual surveillance from the library, with a durable, resilient play surface and that it be adequately fenced for security. See Condition 1.7.
Through the rezoning process, this project is required to provide a public art contribution. Prior to enactment of the pending by-law, the property owner is required to enter into a legal agreement with the City, in accordance with the City’s Public Art Policy. A Public Art Plan has been submitted to the Office of Cultural Affairs and is currently under review. The proposed location of the art piece is illustrated on the landscape plan. (Appendix D, page 10 of 27) The art piece will be wholly located on private property.
[top]
Clearance from the Ministry of Water Land and Air Protection in the form of an Approval-in-Principle or a Certificate of Compliance is required prior to issuance of this development permit. See Standard Condition A.4.1. The applicant is also advised that a sediment and erosion control plan must be submitted, reviewed and approved by the Environmental Protection Branch during the Building Permit process.
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.
[top]
The VCHA advises the applicant to take note of the following:
(i) detailed drawings of food/retail spaces are to be submitted for review
by the Environmental Health Division for compliance with Health By-law
#6580 and the Food Premises Regulation, prior to construction;
(ii) details of swimming pools/hot tubs are to be submitted to the Environmental Health Division and Provincial Health Engineer prior to construction;
(iii) garbage storage area to be designed to minimize nuisances; and
(iv) underground parking to be adequately ventilated to prevent the build-up of noxious gases.
Further conditions from VCHA are contained in Standard Conditions A.3.1 through A.3.4.
[top]
The comments of Fire and Rescue Services are contained in Appendix C attached to this report.
Two site signs describing the project were installed on December 10, 2003. On December 15, 2003, letters were sent to 1,553 neighbouring property owners and two community groups advising them of the application. To date, nine responses have been received. The comments received are summarized as follows:
• Six objections to the requested building height increase, on
the basis of shadowing and view impacts on neighbouring buildings;
•
Two objections to the egress point on Cordova Street from the grocery
store loading area, on the basis of the impact on traffic generally,
and on the townhouses immediately across Cordova Street;
•
Four objections to the impact on the already congested traffic in the
area;
•
One response concerned that there are an inadequate number of parking
spaces assigned to the live/work and grocery store components of the
development;
•
Three objections to the grocery store use, on the basis of noise, smells
(refuse) and traffic that it would generate; and
•
One respondent supported the grocery store use.
Staff Response to Objections:
Tower Height Increase: The intent of the height increase provision in the CD-1 By-law was to allow for sculpting of the tower’s top, noting that the inevitable, permitted mechanical appurtenances (elevator penthouses, etc.) typically extend up another 25 ft. above the height (refer to Height). In terms of views, staff consider the additional volume to have minimal impact. Some additional shadow is generated which staff recommend be reduced (Condition 1.1).
Vehicular Egress, Traffic and Parking: The substantially redesigned vehicular access and egress, with loading egress only on Cordova Street, will minimize traffic impacts on both the street and the adjacent townhouses. Traffic for this predominantly residential development will be considerably less than for an office development that could have been pursued under the previous (DD) zoning. Parking meets the by-law provisions.
Grocery Store Use: This use was specifically provided for in the pending
CD-1 by-law as it was identified as a need in the Coal Harbour, Triangle
West neighbourhood.
[top]
The Committee emphasized the importance of this project containing an adequate children’s play space, pursuant to the City’s High Density Housing for Families with Children Guidelines. The Committee supports the application, subject to the conditions put forward.
[top]
The following is a list of conditions that must also be met prior to issuance of the Development Permit.
A.1 Standard Conditions
A.1.1 comply with Section 5.1(a) (Density) of the pending CD-1 By-law;
Note to Applicant: The maximum floor space ratio for dwelling unit or general office live-work is 6.0. Verify and confirm all floor areas, including all exclusions and summaries. Exclusions for mechanical equipment (heat pumps) located in a storage room must include clearance space and access or shared access to them for servicing. After deduction of the excluded mechanical area, the remaining area in the storage room must have a minimum leftover dimension of 4 ft. in any direction to qualify as excluded space for storage. Clarify differences in floor area for levels 5 to 28 and renumber floor levels, elevations and sections consecutively starting with the grocery store as level 1. The applicant is encouraged to meet and review the FSR overlays and plans with the Project Coordinator prior to resubmitting.
A.1.2 verify and confirm all open balcony areas, and reduce total balcony area by 11 m2;
Note to Applicant: Open residential balconies must not exceed 8% of the residential floor area provided. Indicate wall lines above or below floor plans where appropriate to clarify balcony and roof deck areas.
A.1.3 comply with Section 6.1(c) [Height] of the pending CD-1 By-law;
Note to Applicant: Reduce floor area of amenity space at level 31 by 10 m2 to not exceed 50% of typical floor plate. Typical floor plate has been averaged between level 7 to level 28 inclusive.
A.1.4 provide and designate separate parking for general office live-work use;
Note to Applicant: Clarify the floor area of general office live-work use.
A.1.5 provide one additional disability space, for a total of eight spaces and relocate four of the disability spaces inside the secured residential parking levels;
A.1.6 comply with Section 6 (Off-street Bicycle Space Regulations) of the Parking By-law;
Note to Applicant: Provide 6 Class B bicycle spaces for each of the grocery store and general office live-work/residential uses, for a total of 12 spaces.
A.1.7 comply with Section 6.5 (Clothing Lockers) of the Parking By-law;
Note to Applicant: Provide two clothing lockers for each sex in the grocery bicycle storage room.
A.1.8 provide detailed and fully dimensioned floor plans;
Note to Applicant: Dimensions used to calculate the floor areas should be reflected on the floor plans. These include all voids and exclusions. Indicate setbacks of the parking structure, podium and tower from property lines. Use gridlines to clarify alignment of floor plans. Revise uses on levels 1 and 2 to read grocery store and ancillary restaurant to grocery store, and slopes of exit loading ramps. Add general office live-work use to townhouses on level 2. Indicate section locations on all parking levels and floor plans. Clarify all voids, amenity spaces, access to roof decks and chimney for amenity fireplace. Delete café from juice bar in fitness area and “up” stair on east half of core exit stair.
A.1.9 clarify small section on building section B-B, structure above vehicle access ramp from West Hastings Street, proposed and existing developments on street elevations and podium elevations;
A.1.10 provide details of gas meter enclosure, mechanical grates, canopies, trellises and rooftop mechanical units;
A.1.11 provide details of all parking spaces to comply with the applicable provisions of the Parking By-law, having particular regard to space sizes, manoeuvring, height clearances, 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. Delete small car designation on parking space #R-12 and clarify dimensions on disability parking space #V-1.
A.1.12 revise statistics on cover sheet to accurately reflect the proposed development;
A.1.13 provide details of type, finishing, equipment and/or furnishings for all amenity spaces;
Note to Applicant: A letter of undertaking, signed by the owners, is to be submitted regarding the furnishing and availability for use of the amenity spaces by all occupants of the buildings.
A.1.14 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.”;
A.1.15 annotate on the landscape plan stating: “The treatment of the Bute Street sidewalk area will be in accordance with the Triangle West public realm treatment.”
Standard Landscape Conditions
A.1.16 provide detailed, large scale (1/4" or 1:50) sections and plans, illustrating the detailed treatment of the public realm interface (street, open spaces, etc.), including planter walls, stairs, gates, guardrails, landscaping, soil depth (indicating any underground structures), patios and privacy screens;
A.1.17 provide a large scale (1/4" or 1:50) section, showing planting depths on the main roof garden, including the planter for the specimen tree;
A.1.18 provide an irrigation system to be specified in all common areas, including the roof terraces;
Note to Applicant: Irrigation system design and installation shall be in accordance with the Irrigation Industry of BC Standards and Guidelines. Hose bibs shall be provided in private areas such as patios and courtyards. Notations to this effect should be on the landscape plan.
A.1.19 provide two additional sets of the final landscape plan prior to permit issuance;
Note to Applicant: These copies will be stamped and returned to the applicant for attachment to the submission of the related Building Permit. See also Standard Condition A.2.11 – a total of three extra landscape sets are required.
Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED)
A.1.20 design development to reduce opportunities for graffiti on planter and up-stand walls, by reducing where possible the height of the walls;
A.1.21 design development to reduce opportunities for theft in the underground parking garage;
Note to Applicant: Consideration should be given to providing additional gating of the visitor parking, which would include the residential elevator core and remove access to the residential exit stair at the grocery level, in coordination with fire exiting requirements. The door in the residential security fence should be in a solid wall and the residential exit stairs should be separated from the elevator lobby in the underground. Contact Mary Beth Rondeau for more information, at 604.873.7492.
A.1.22 provide gates at loading spaces to be closed during non-business hours; and
A.1.23 design development to reduce opportunities for mischief.
Note to Applicant: The inside of the commercial exit to the street should have the internal walls replaced with visibly open handrails.
A.2 Standard Engineering Conditions
A.2.1 clarify north and south property line dimensions;
Note to Applicant: City records differ by approximately 0.24 m. Public artwork on the south corner must be located entirely on the development site.
A.2.2 provide an adequate turning radii for trucks accessing the loading facility (both ingress and egress);
Note to Applicant: The entry area from the parking access ramp to the loading facility requires a minimum width of 4.2 m and the exit path before the turn to the driveway exit requires a minimum width of 4.4 m.
A.2.3 provide a 0.3 m setback from the manoeuvring aisle for columns encroaching on standard stall widths;
A.2.4 provide adequate parking space lengths;
Note to Applicant: The elevator core encroaches into parking space #G-17, #R-144 and #R-231. Consider changing those parking spaces to small car spaces.
A.2.5 provide a building section for the parking/loading access ramps to verify that adequate vertical clearance into the truck loading facility is provided;
A.2.6 provide written assurance that all loading activities, regardless of the supplier, can and will be conducted on site, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and General Manager of Engineering Services;
Note to Applicant: The commercial loading area is not intended to accommodate Class C loading vehicles.
A.2.7 delete the trellis and planter extending onto City property along West Cordova Street;
Note to Applicant: The steel trellis must be pulled back behind the property line, or must be redesigned to comply with the City’s “canopy” specifications.
A.2.8 clarify garbage pick-up operations for each of the uses in the building;
A.2.9 arrangements shall be made, to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering Services, for a canopy application;
Note to Applicant: Canopies must be fully demountable, at or behind the property line, and drained to the buildings internal drainage systems.
A.2.10 arrangements shall be made, to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering Services, for a crossing application; and
A.2.11 arrangements shall be made, to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering Services, for street trees.
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. The Bute Street sidewalk treatment is to be in accordance with the Triangle West Public Realm treatment. An extra copy of the landscape plan must be submitted with the prior-to response package for Engineering Services to review.
A.3 Standard Vancouver Coastal Health Authority Conditions
A.3.1 an acoustical consultant's report shall be submitted which assesses noise impacts on the site and recommends noise mitigation measures in order to achieve noise criteria;
A.3.2 confirmation must be supplied by the applicant that the acoustical measures 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.3.3 confirmation must be supplied by the applicant that adequate and effective acoustic separation will be provided between the commercial (grocery store) and residential portions of the building; and
A.3.4 confirmation must be supplied by the applicant that mechanical (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.
A.4 Standard Licenses & Inspections (Environmental Protection Branch) Conditions:
A.4.1 confirmation of approval by the Ministry of Water, Land and Air
Protection must be supplied, in
the form of an Approval-in-Principle or a Certificate of Compliance,
with respect to soil contamination issues.
[top]
B.1.1 The applicant is advised to note the comments of the Processing Centre-Building, Vancouver Coastal Health Authority and Fire and Rescue Services Departments contained in the Staff Committee Report dated February 4, 2004. 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 1, 2004, 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 by-law 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.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 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 Treatment of the Bute Street setback is to be in accordance with the Triangle West Public Realm treatment.
B.2.5 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.
B.2.6 Amenity spaces (library, fitness, lounge and meeting rooms) of 322 m², excluded from the computation of floor space ratio, 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 building;
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.
B.2.7 No exposed ductwork shall be permitted on the roof or on the exterior face of the building without first receiving approval of the Director of Planning.
B.2.8 This site is affected by the Development Cost Levy By-law No.
7847. Levies will be required to be paid prior to issuance of Building
Permits.
[top]
The following comments have been provided by Processing Centre - Building and are based on the architectural drawings dated November 4, 2003. This is a preliminary review intended to identify areas in which the proposal may conflict with requirements of the Vancouver Building By-law.
1) A-3 (typ. in parkade) Travel distance from the NW corner to an exit
exceeds 45m.*
2) A-3 (typ.) Doors in series require 1200 mm + the door swing distance
between them (e.g., from the storage room).
3) A-6 Missing Areas of Refuge for center stair + door swing direction
to be from elevator lobby towards stairs.
4) A-7 Dead-end corridor exceeds 6m.*
5) A-8 The exit stairs at the SW corner and the NE corner are required
to be restricted to servicing only the storage garage (not the grocery
level).*
6) A-8 A 2-hour fire separation is required between the restaurant and
the grocery store.
7) A-9 Dead-end corridor exceeds 6m.*
8) A-9 Should confirm where the kitchen exhaust will be discharging.
9) A-10 Stairs are required to have uniform run and rise in any one flight.
(To change from a straight run to a curved stair requires a landing in
between.)
10) A-10 Compliance with 3.8.2.27.(4) required for the landscape area
(clearance beside door latches for access, exiting for disabled persons,
etc.).*
11) A-12 Exits not adequately remote from each other on Floor 30 (see
Article 3.4.2.3).*
12) A-12 Showers in amenity area to be accessible.
*Items marked with an asterisk have been identified as serious non-conforming
Building By-law issues.
Written confirmation that the applicant has read and understood the implications of the above-noted comments is required and shall be submitted as part of the prior-to response.
The applicant may wish to retain the services of a qualified Building Code consultant in case of difficulty in understanding 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.
The applicant is to note Vancouver Building By-law requirements that
are applicable for building applications received on or after August
15, 2003, regarding the provision of accessible access to all storeys.
For further information, see Bulletins 2002-06-BU (July 22, 2002), and
2002-08-BU (August 28, 2002). The Applicant is to note that Vancouver
Building By-law requirements that are applicable to building applications
received on or after June 1, 2003, regarding new elevator devices and
alterations to existing ones, which will need to conform to the new elevator
code. For further information, see
www.city.vancouver.bc.ca/commsvcs/CBOFFICIAL/pdf/BCI2003-003.PDF.
Fire and Rescue Services Comments
Fire and Rescue Services staff review was based on architectural plans dated November 4, 2003. Comments received are as follows:
1) No Fire and Rescue Services Concerns.
2) DE clear.
[top]
|
|
|
Questions or Comments? E-mail: carol_hubbard@city.vancouver.bc.ca
|
