Urban Design Panel
Minutes
For: Wednesday, December 7, 2005
Index
Present
101 West Cordova Street
Present: Members of the Urban Design Panel:
MEMBERS OF THE URBAN DESIGN PANEL:
Larry Adams, Chair
Nigel Baldwin
Robert Barnes
James Cheng
Ronald Lea
Margot Long
Edward Smith
C.C. Yao
Peter Wreglesworth
Regrets:
Alan Endall
Shahla Bozorgzadeh
Marta Farevaag (excused Item 1)
Recording Secretary:
Debbie Kempton
1. 101 West Cordova Street (Woodward's)
DE: 409942
Use: Mixed
Zoning: DD
Application Status: Complete
Architect: Henriquez & Partners
Owner: City of Vancouver
Review: First
Delegation: Ian Gillespie, Gregory Henriquez, Greg Smallenberg
Staff: Scot Hein, Michael Flannigan, Phil Mondor
Marta Farevaag was excused for consideration of
this application due to conflict of interest.
EVALUATION: SUPPORT (8-0)
•
Introduction: Scot Hein, Development Planner, introduced this application
for development on the existing Woodward’s site. Mr. Hein described
the site context and reviewed the site history and Council approved urban
design guidelines. He also noted that the Hoburn lands which are immediately
to the west of this site will be formally integrated as a specific sub-area
to the Downtown District via a Council process in early 2006. Staff are
assessing the development permit application submission based on the
assumption that these lands will be formally integrated into the sub-area.
Mr. Hein highlighted two important aspects of the design guidelines
which are: a requirement for a strong design response to the prevailing
qualities of this important historic precinct (Hastings Street corridor/Gastown/Victory
Square/Chinatown) and that additional height/tower form may be considered
in response for architectural excellence.
Mr. Hein stated that a challenging and intense use program is being
proposed with many separation and circulation issues that the applicant
team has had to address which has resulted in the siting/location of
the various programme components. A Council approved Community Advisory
Committee has been established and as a mechanism to ensure appropriate
involvement, as well as a steering committee at City Hall to assist in
key decisions, including budget, timeline and significant design considerations.
The areas in which Panel advice are sought include:
- Comments on the proposed overall design concept with respect to the
location of uses, open spaces and entries;
- The design approach taken to the distribution of proposed density (four
distinct building components), noting scale and contextual considerations;
- Specific to the west tower, comments regarding the encroachment into
the view cone of 11’6”;
- Building character and expression given the historic precinct context;
- Comments on the west tower architectural expression, specifically the
north elevation;
- Open space configuration noting the programming considerations presented
in the landscape architecture materials;
- Comments regarding ensuring the viability of the proposed landscape
systems, specifically the proposed roofscape, and vertical “greenscreen” systems
on the west tower;
- Comments on the proposed vehicular circulation noting the interface
with the public plaza and future Cambie Hotel outdoor space.
• Applicant’s Introductory Comments: Gregory Henriquez,
Henriquez & Partners, provided a PowerPoint presentation which followed
the same format as the materials which were distributed to the Panel.
He discussed the community response and input into the proposal; noting
that job creation is included in the proposal. Mr. Henriquez described
the project in detail and asked the Panel to provide comments on the
proposal to keep the existing areaway which the Engineering Department
would like to have filled in.
Greg Smallenberg, Landscape Architect, reviewed the landscape plan noting
that the project is trying to achieve LEEDS silver certification. The
applicant team responded to questions from the Panel.
• Panel’s Consensus on Key Aspects Needing Improvement:
- the Panel expressed some reservations regarding the green systems
and the ability to make them work and last long term. It was felt that
the building would have to look good without the greenwall in the event
that it is not successful;
- further design development to the open space configuration, address
permeability and the public nature of the space. Some concern that the
public space is simply a food and drug store entrance/exit;
- give further consideration to the Cordova Street interface and the
possibility of adding street trees;
- concern regarding the legibility of the Cordova Street axis. Consider
adding another entrance through the space or opening up the Abbott Street
section;
- consider extending the atrium roof to make it larger and possibly
adding more glazing connections at grade for more permeability.
• Related Commentary:
The Panel unanimously supported this application and commended the applicant
team on their thorough presentation. The Panel acknowledged the complexity
of the application and the work that has taken place to respond to the
community needs and the City’s Guidelines.
With respect to the overall design concept, the Panel was supportive
of the direction the project has taken. The Panel did not express any
concerns with the proposed density distribution and they offered strong
support for the view cone encroachment. The Panel was also supportive
of the building expression and character as well as the north elevation
on Cordova Street. The Panel was supportive of exploration of the areaways
if they are authentic.
From an energy conservation perspective the green systems will create
many positive benefits; however the Panel expressed concern about the
viability. It was suggested by several Panel members that the applicant
team investigate the feasibility of the proposed trees on the roofs.
One Panel member suggested that if pedestrian animation on the street
is trying to be achieved then a second floor connection from the parkade
might be re-considered to bring as much pedestrian activity down to the
street. It was also suggested that through lobbies for the west and Abbott
towers could bring more people through the courtyard and add animation.
Applicant’s Response: Mr. Henriquez thanked the Panel for their
excellent comments and said that he felt most of the Panel suggestions
could be achieved. Mr. Henriquez concluded by stating the applicant team’s
commitment to making this project work.
Meeting adjourned at 8:15 p.m.
|
