Urban Design Panel
Minutes
For: Wednesday, June 8, 2005
Index
Present
1133/53 West Georgia Street
6650 Arbutus Street
700 Hamilton Street (CBC)
Present: Members of the Urban Design Panel:
Alan Endall, Chair
Larry Adams
Nigel Baldwin (excused Item 2)
Robert Barnes (excused Item 2)
Shahla Bozorgzadeh
James Cheng (excused Item 1)
Marta Farevaag
Ronald Lea
Margot Long (excused Item 3)
Edward Smith
Peter Wreglesworth
C.C. Yao (excused Item 1)
James Hancock*
*Mr. Hancock was present for Item 1 only, as a guest Panelist in accordance
with the General Policy for Higher Buildings.
Recording Secretary:
Carol Hubbard, Raincoast Ventures
1. 1133/53 West Georgia Street
Use: Mixed (550 feet)
Zoning: DD to CD-1
Application Status: Rezoning
Architect: Musson Cattell Mackey Partnership
Owner: Holborn Group
Review: Second
Delegation: Mark Whitehead, Arthur Erickson, Mark Thompson, Jane Durante
Staff: Jonathan Barrett, Phil Mondor
James Hancock, Architect, was a guest panelist for the review of this application,
in accordance with the General Policy for Higher Buildings.
EVALUATION: SUPPORT (10-0)
• Introduction: Jonathan Barrett, Development Planner,
presented this application, referring to the previous Panel review on
March 16,
2005. The Panel did not support the application at that time. The Panel
generally supported the proposed use and height but had concerns about
the density and form which it thought should be reconsidered. There were
also questions about whether this smaller mid block site could accommodate
the density being sought. Concerns about the design of the tower included
a recommendation that the tower form should come down to the ground and
that the façade should better identify the project as a “green” building.
There was concern about the adequacy of the public access to the rooftop
observation area and a recommendation for a stronger public element at
grade. A stronger commitment to sustainability was also recommended.
The zoning for this area of the DD does not allow residential use, density
is limited to 9.0 FSR and height is limited to 450 ft. This rezoning
application, like the earlier submission, seeks approval to include the
proposed residential use, to increase density to 16.4 FSR and to allow
a height of 550 ft.
The General Policy for Higher Buildings seeks developments which exhibit
the highest order of architectural excellence. Other community benefits
should also be provided, e.g., being a recipient site for heritage density
transfer, provision of cultural or social facilities, or provision of
low cost housing. No input from the Panel is required on the community
benefits component which is addressed in a separate process. The development
should also include activities and uses of community significance (e.g.,
observation deck or other public amenity). The development should also
provide significant public open space on site. A significant sustainability
strategy is also required.
• Applicant’s Opening Comments: Mark Whitehead, Architect,
introduced the project design team.
Arthur Erickson, Architect, briefly reviewed the concept of the tower
form which reflects a hyperbolic paraboloid structure that allows the
rigorous view corridor to be maintained. He noted the form takes advantage
of existing open space, including the lanes and the roof of the adjacent
building, and provides a lively public open space at the ground level
and a glass covered “palm court” which allows chairs and
tables to spill out onto the plaza. The lower half of the building contains
hotel use, with residential above. This mix allows the residents to take
advantage of the hotel services and facilities. With respect to the façade,
Mr. Erickson noted the glazing will alter slightly on each of the three
facades to respond to their orientation conditions. The top of the building
will contain a stack of solar condensers which provide approximately
thirty percent of the hot water requirements for the building. Mark Thompson,
Architect, reviewed the geometry of the tower form in greater detail
and referred to material samples of the proposed glazing. He noted that
opening up the ground floor allowed the tower to be brought down to the
ground, which involved major changes to the hotel program. He briefly
described the public realm parti, including the mid-block connector.
The Landscape Architect, Jane Durante, reviewed the landscape design.
She noted the lane provides the vehicular access to the hotel and will
include special paving and a water feature to make it an elegant arrival
and provide a buffer at grade for the townhouses. Ms. Durante stressed
that the open spaced can be viewed as one or two spaces depending on
the functions taking place and the palm court will also function as a
winter garden. The third level contains a pool for residents and hotel
guests and a children’s wading pool. Special fibre optic night
lighting is proposed throughout the site. The top of the tower contains
sky gardens for the penthouse residents and includes an extensive green
roof and green walls for storm water management.
Mr. Thompson noted the drop-off and loading functions have been moved
to the eastern end of the site, away from the townhouses. In addition
to the diagonal mid block connection, there is a secondary, less public
connection through the lobby which allows access from Georgia Street
to the rear of the site. Mr. Thompson said they believe that moving the
public amenity to the ground level makes it much more accessible than
the previous scheme. It is also much larger and more versatile. He stressed
they have tried to make sustainability inherent in every aspect of the
project, including re-use of materials of the existing structure, structural
systems, energy modelling, the building skin and glazing, green roof
and water conservation.
The applicant team responded to questions from the Panel.
• Development Planner’s Summary: Mr. Barrett noted the following
areas in which the advice of the Panel is sought:
• Use, particularly whether residential use is appropriate in
this location;
• Density: whether 16.4 FSR can be accommodated comfortably on
this site;
• Built form: how this tower (and as a pair with the adjacent
Shangri-la) fits overall in the city; scale and height of the tower and
its relationship to the immediate context; response to the view cone
and whether this built form appropriately defines West Georgia Street;
• Overall building character;
• Landscape: the appropriateness of the materials and the publicness,
visibility and definition of the palm court and green court;
• Sustainability;
• Overall architectural excellence; whether the design earns the
requested height and density which will make it one of the tallest buildings
in the city.
• Panel’s Consensus on Key Aspects Needing Improvement:
• The Panel emphasized the need to carefully consider the exterior
skin and envelope of the building (e.g., coordination of vents, spandrel
areas, operable window details, etc…) to achieve the simplicity
and elegance suggested in the model;
• Further resolution of the tower base which does not currently
exhibit the elegance of the rest of the building, e.g., the hotel lobby
and response to the West Georgia streetwall and relationship to the adjacent
Terasen building;
• The need to maintain the transparency and purity of the palm
court to achieve the highest level of public access and openness and
to ensure the quality of landscape materials;
• Some suggestions to reconsider public access to the top of the
building;
• A stronger commitment to sustainability is needed, noting this
is a unique opportunity to set a new standard particularly in the resolution
of the exterior skin of the building.
• Related Commentary:
The Panel offered unanimous support for this application and commended
the applicant for a very well considered response to the Panel’s
previous comments. The proposed solution was recognized as being not
so much an evolution but a revolution of the design, which holds great
promise for achieving the architectural excellence sought for a building
of this stature. It was described as bold, decisive and evocative.
The Panel unanimously supported the proposed uses. The mix of hotel
and residential was considered to be very positive. There was one suggestion
for more uses or to provide some flexibility in the uses for the long
term as a contribution to sustainability, also noting the continuing
erosion of the city’s stock of commercial space in the downtown.
The Panel unanimously supported the proposed density which it thought
was handled very well and accommodated with ease on the site.
The proposed height and scale of the tower were also strongly supported.
It is very dramatic and works work well with the adjacent Shangri-la
tower. Some Panel members suggested it could be the same height as the
Shangri-la and an observation was made that creating a twinning of the
towers as a gateway would be a relevant statement for this location.
The Panel enthusiastically endorsed the revised landscape plan and the
assembly of all the public open space at ground level. It was thought
to be a significant public contribution. The Panel considered the diagonal
connection through the site to be well placed and well handled. Panel
members described the proposed palm court as beautiful and delightful.
The overall character of the landscape was strongly supported and its
starkness and elegance was thought to work very well. However, it was
stressed that the success of the public spaces will depend on careful
attention being given to the materials in terms of their richness and
durability. The ideas presented on the proposed lighting were supported
and it was agreed that considering lighting at this early stage is important
and appropriate.
Questions were raised about maintaining the publicness of the palm court
in the long term, with a recommendation to ensure it is not easily compromised
by the types of services it incorporates. It was stressed that it is
important to make all members of the public feel welcome and comfortable
in the space and that services such as public washrooms be included in
the negotiations with the hotel operator. Movable chairs should also
be provided. Noting that more and more public open spaces are being created
in the downtown, one Panel member also recommended that both the City
and the development community give greater consideration to how these
spaces work so that the programming ensures they remain as welcoming
as possible for the general public.
Some concerns were expressed by one Panel member about the water wall
feature at the lane, in particular how it will be experienced in winter
months. There was also a concern about the sustainability aspects of
this feature and a recommendation to explore opportunities to recycle
water and avoid heavy use of energy and chemicals to keep it functioning.
Incorporating a green component at the lane and integrating it with the
water feature was also recommended.
There was a suggestion to consider a triple row of trees to create a
stronger triangular expression.
One Panel member regretted the loss of public access to the roof, noting
there are few opportunities in the downtown for the public to get to
the top of buildings to enjoy the views.
The Panel liked the way the building addresses West Georgia Street while
also successfully responding the view cone restriction. The project’s
contribution to the sequence of green courts along Georgia Street was
also recognized.
The Panel had a number of concerns about the building skin and questioned
whether the transparency presented in the model can be achieved. In the
elevational studies that will be necessary in the next stage of the design
the applicant was urged to carefully consider such things as staggered
columns, spandrel glass, mullions, and vents, all of which will have
an impact on the appearance of the building. There was a suggestion to
consider a more opaque building with a patterning of transparency where
it can be controlled. There was also a suggestion that the choice of
glazing is somewhat ordinary and could be improved upon.
The Panel found the base of the building on West Georgia Street and
its relationship to the neighbouring Terasen building to be the weakest
part of the project. It was recommended that the tower visibly come to
the ground on Georgia Street, to consider pulling the base back somewhat
and give the whole site more of the vocabulary of the palm court and
tower. It was acknowledged that this is still at the rezoning stage but
in general it was thought that the base is not as elegant as the tower
and needs further design development. One Panel member questioned extending
the expression of the Terasen building and thought the lower floors should
be devoted to creating a grand lobby rather than the meeting rooms shown.
Another area of concern for the Panel related to sustainability and
the applicant was urged to consider the 75 – 100 year life cycle
of the building. One Panel member suggested increasing the height of
the tower in order to put more resources into the skin of the building,
noting this building could be a real masterpiece for Vancouver and make
a significant contribution to the city as a destination for sustainability
tourism. It was suggested there is an opportunity to do something much
more special than single skin glass which is very difficult to treat
from an operational point of view. There is also potential for generating
natural ventilation. Involving the federal government in a sustainability
pilot project for the building might also be explored. Several Panel
members were not satisfied with the applicant’s proposal to strive
for a high level of sustainability and urged that achieving at least
LEED silver should be a requirement. The Panel acknowledged the applicant
is making the right gestures and the project has a much more integral
response to sustainability than previously, however, it was thought that
it can be pushed further.
With respect to the proposed solar tubes on the roof, a comment was
made that it is unfortunate the public will be unable to see them because
they are very interesting and quite beautiful. It was recommended to
explore a way for the public to be able to view this contribution to
the building’s sustainability.
The Panel was unanimous in the opinion that the building achieves, or
has the potential to achieve, architectural excellence. A comment was
made that the project has an apparent simplicity but with a deceptive
complexity which makes it very interesting architecturally. Its conception
is quite unique and dynamic in the way it responds to the two city grids.
It was stressed, however, that the level of excellence must be carried
through in the detailed design.
• Applicant’s Response: Mr. Whitehead thanked the Panel
for its comments and expressed appreciation for the recognition of the
efforts made to respond to the earlier concerns. He assured the Panel
that the next stage of design development will be approached with the
same level of enthusiasm.
2. 6650 Arbutus Street
Use: Residential (2.5 storeys, 28 units)
Zoning: RS-5 to CD-1
Application Status: Rezoning
Architect: Polygon Development Ltd.
Owner: Providence Health Care Society
Review: First
Delegation: Nigel Baldwin, Andrew Rosen, Robert Barnes
Staff: Joanne Baxter, Dale Morgan
EVALUATION: SUPPORT (9-0)
• Introduction: Joanne Baxter, Rezoning Planner, presented this
application to rezone the site at the southeast corner of West 49th Avenue
and Arbutus Street. The site is currently zoned RS-5 and the application
is to permit a medium density residential development. She briefly described
the site and its immediate zoning context, noting the site is a triangular
shaped property bounded on the west by Arbutus Street and on the east
by the CP transportation corridor, beyond which is East Boulevard. The
site is currently occupied by St. Vincent’s seniors’ extended
care facility which is no longer in operation. The site is very well
landscaped with many mature trees worthy of retention. It also includes
a stone wall around the site perimeter. There is a significant slope
to the site, both from north to south and east to west.
This site is within the area is currently undergoing a City Plan Visioning
process which is not yet concluded. There is, however, Council policy
already in place that is applicable to the site and which allows the
rezoning application to be considered, on the basis that the application
involves the re-use of a public institutional use.
The proposal is for ground oriented housing in the form of a rowhouse
development with integrated garages. 28 rowhouses are proposed, averaging
1,650 sq.ft. in size, with an overall project density of 0.84 FSR. The
rowhouses are laid out in an east-west direction and are served by three
semi private mews courts which have individual driveway connections off
Arbutus Street. The courts are depressed relative to the existing grade
so the project reads as a two-storey development from most viewpoints.
Parking for the residents is in attached garages and there are three
visitor parking spaces. The end units have side-by-side garages and the
remainder have tandem parking. Most of the mature trees on the site will
be preserved and integrated into the overall scheme, as will the existing
stone wall and hedges.
Dale Morgan, Development Planner, focused his comments on the urban
design aspects of the scheme and briefly described the intent of the
RS-5 zoning. With respect to the form of development, the proposal is
for five clusters of three-storey rowhouses with three access points
off the street. The units are orientated perpendicular to the street.
End units have main entries directly facing Arbutus Street. A 13 – 14
ft. setback is proposed along the street frontage. The adjacent RS-5
house is set back 50 ft. from the street and a 15 ft. setback is proposed
between this house and the proposed development. Planning staff recommend
increasing this separation by a further 5 ft. to provide a more substantial
buffer. The height of the development generally ranges from 31 to 35
ft., rising to 39 ft. at its maximum. The building modules have a horizontal
expression with vertical bays every second unit, which are 5 m in width.
Materials include brick up to the second level and horizontal cladding
above. An inventory of the site’s existing trees is requested from
the applicant and the retention of as many of the trees as possible will
be sought. Retention of the existing stone wall is also being sought.
The advice of the Panel is sought on the following:
• general comments on the form of development, including use,
density and height;
• the streetscape including the interface with the public realm
on Arbutus Street;
• the edge condition between buildings 5 and 6 and the side yard
setback from the adjacent RS-5 house.
• Applicant’s Opening Comments: Nigel Baldwin, Architect,
briefly described the design rationale, noting the severe cross-fall
on the site. He said it is intended to preserve as many of the trees
as possible and an inventory has already been taken. The stone wall will
also be incorporated and is important to the scheme. He stressed that
there will be very careful design development of the entries in order
to maintain the grades. Mr. Baldwin noted that providing street-facing
townhouses on this site would result in the loss of the wall and the
trees. Robert Barnes, Landscape Architect, reviewed the landscape plan
and the applicant team responded to questions from the Panel.
• Panel’s Consensus on Key Aspects Needing Improvement:
• careful attention should be given to the details of the spaces
in the courtyards given the narrow distance between the buildings;
• consider locating the visitor parking as close as possible to
the entrance to minimize vehicular movement through the site;
• the proposed 15 ft. setback from the adjacent RS-5 house is
supported and should only be increased if necessary for the trees to
be retained.
• Related Commentary:
The Panel unanimously supported this rezoning application and found
it to be a well thought-out scheme on a complex site. The Panel strongly
supported the retention of the existing trees on the site and the stone
wall.
The use was strongly supported. The Panel considered the rowhouses to
be a good contribution to the mix of housing in the area.
The Panel considered it to be a clear, straightforward layout that is
complimentary to the neighbourhood. Orienting the narrow ends to the
street contributes to maintaining views across the site and sets up a
nice rhythm and scale along the street. The interface with Arbutus Street
was thought to be very well handled and locating the rowhouses on end
to the street gives the appearance of single family massing. As well,
the roof massing further breaks down the impact of the buildings and
their length from end to end.
The Panel had no concerns about the proposed density and it was noted
that it clearly has the appearance of a two-storey development, in keeping
with the adjacent streetscape. The height was also supported and considered
to be acceptable even if it does exceed the discretionary maximum height
permitted in the RS-5 zone. One Panel member suggested the only element
that might be reconsidered would be the gable ends which appear somewhat
small for the size of the development.
The Panel unanimously supported the easterly side yard separation as
proposed at 15 ft. and saw no necessity to increase it, noting there
is little impact on the neighbouring house which is unlikely to remain
for the long term in any event. The Panel would support increasing
the setback only if required to ensure the health of valuable trees
in this location.
Preservation of the corner landscape node was supported. There was a
suggestion that there is an opportunity for the developer to turn over
this piece to public use, noting it is not an essential component of
the project itself but would be a nice gesture to consider for the neighbourhood.
The Panel liked the autocourts which they considered will work well
provided they are highly detailed. Consideration should also be given
to sound attenuation.
3. 700 Hamilton Street (CBC)
DE: 409307
Use: Mixed-addition
Zoning: DD
Application Status: Preliminary
Architect: Hotson-Bakker-Boniface-Haden
Owner: Canadian Broadcasting Corp.
Review: First
Delegation: Joost Bakker, Peter Arbuckle, Bruce Hemstock, Walter Francl
Staff: Ralph Segal
EVALUATION: NON-SUPPORT (4-6)
• Introduction: Ralph Segal, Development Planner, presented this
preliminary application for a comprehensive redevelopment of the entire
CBC block bounded by West Georgia, Cambie, Robson and Hamilton Streets.
As well as revitalization of the existing CBC facilities, the project
includes a new residential/retail component in two towers and townhouses
to be developed by Concord Pacific. The proposed density is approximately
2.0 FSR for the CBC component and 3.0 FSR for the residential/retail,
which is within the 5.0 FSR permitted in the DD zone. The proposed height
of the taller tower is 293 ft. The zoning permits a height of 150 ft.,
which may be relaxed. This site is affected by a view cone which the
proposal respects.
Mr. Segal briefly reviewed the applicable guidelines, including the
Downtown Design Guidelines, the Library Precinct Guidelines and Georgia
Street Public Realm. There is also a study currently underway on downtown
historic trails to establish a network of strong pedestrian corridors.
This study, although not yet City policy, identifies Hamilton Street
as an important pedestrian route.
With respect to the residential component, while some concerns have
been raised about developing too much residential use in the downtown,
the Planning Department supports residential on this site on the basis
that the employment capacity of the site is being maintained with the
retention and revitalization of the CBC facilities. The Planning Department
welcomes the redevelopment of this block, which represents a “healing” of
current conditions, including all its street edges and overall pedestrian
amenity. Staff generally support the overall massing configuration with
the higher masses on the Robson Street side of the site and lower massing
on the Hamilton Street side.
Specific areas in which the advice of the Panel is sought include:
• Overall massing;
•
Relaxation of height from the permitted 150 ft. to 293 ft. There will
also be a communications antenna on the taller tower which rises 75 ft.
above the roof;
•
Response to the street edges, including comments on the proposed townhouses
and retail use on Hamilton Street, and pedestrian movement through the
site;
•
Response to Library Square Precinct Guidelines and whether there should
be an overt reference to the cornice line of the library;
•
Hamilton Street setback and response to the potential Hamilton Street
pedestrian corridor;
•
Open space, including the Georgia/Hamilton plaza treatment, use and public
nature of the upper level internal courtyard and its relationship to
the arcade.
•
Applicant’s Introductory Comments: Joost Bakker, Architect, explained
that the CBC is undergoing a major cultural change with respect to how
it engages with the communities it serves and how the news is manufactured
to make it as public and accessible as possible. He noted the original
metaphor for the CBC building was a “media factory”, most
of which is underground. The current proposal intends to open it up to
make the news production in particular very visible.
Walter Francl, Architect, briefly reviewed the design rationale, prefacing
his comments with presentation of a short 3-D computer animation of the
site model. Bruce Hemstock, Landscape Architect, reviewed the public
realm aspects of the scheme, and the design team responded to questions
from the Panel.
• Panel’s Consensus on Key Aspects Needing Improvement:
•
The Panel had concerns about how all four street edges are being addressed
and handled in detail and recommended serious reconsideration of the
mid-block raised pedestrian arcade;
•
Recommendation to relocate the density occupying the townhouses on Hamilton
Street in favour of providing more active retail oriented uses and/or
more porosity to the Hamilton Street frontage to allow visibility and/or
access up to the interior courtyard;
•
Recommendation for design development to the Georgia/Hamilton plaza to
ensure more active uses are located at this prominent corner including
maintaining a strong presence for the CBC as an institution, noting its
relationship to adjacent institutional uses (Library, Post Office, Queen
Elizabeth Theatre);
•
A more serious commitment to sustainable design is warranted given the
mixed uses of the overall development, e.g. consideration should be given
to potential shared energy use.
• Related Commentary:
The Panel did not support this application and had a number of concerns
about the ground plane treatment and the relationships to the street
edges.
The basic massing on the site and the height of the towers was supported,
with some suggestions for design development to achieve a better relationship
between the taller tower and the CBC building – either greater
separation or more integration. There were no concerns about the separation
between the two towers. A comment was made that it is not clear how the
new relates to the old and how the curvilinear form chosen relates to
the CBC “bunker”.
The Panel did not believe the Library Square Precinct guidelines should
be applied to this site, seeing no necessity to reference the library
cornice line or to increase the setback on Hamilton Street.
There were concerns raised about the circuitous mid-block pedestrian
route through the site which the Panel did not believe would be successful
as designed, although it could work for internal circulation or a secondary
route. Further, it was suggested that if such a route was successful
there is a danger that it would suck the life out of the surrounding
streets, particularly Hamilton Street. The Panel generally questioned
whether the interface aspirations indicated for the site would be achievable
over such a large area and frontage.
The Panel was strongly opposed to the townhouses on Hamilton Street
which are very much an anomaly in this area. Residential use on Hamilton
Street was thought to be quite inappropriate in this block which, together
with the library, Revenue Canada, the Queen Elizabeth Theatre and the
Post Office, is devoted to institutional uses. It was thought the townhouses
on the plaza could work. It was suggested that the density from the Hamilton
Street townhouses might be absorbed into the lower residential tower,
possibly making it more of a slab building.
Concerns were also expressed about the disjointed retail spaces on the
site, particularly the two isolated points along Hamilton Street. There
were some suggestions to continue the retail along the length of Hamilton
Street. The Panel did not support a 20 ft. setback on Hamilton Street,
but did believe the Hamilton streetscape needed much more work. Other
suggestions were to open up the courtyard to the street on Hamilton,
providing a good rhythm of studio-main entrance-retail-courtyard and
residential towers and a good response to the very solid massing across
the street. One Panel member was concerned that the sense of the CBC
building as an important institution is being lost on Hamilton Street.
The Panel was disappointed with the lack of information provided on
sustainability, noting that mixed use developments such as this offer
excellent opportunities for long term energy conservation. This potential
must, however, be incorporated in the very early stages of the design
rather than later.
There were recommendations to reconsider the program for the main news
studio on Georgia Street to bring it to the corner of Georgia and Hamilton
where it will be more visible, especially at night. One Panel member
questioned whether the description of the Georgia Street façade
as a lantern and animated space was being delivered in this scheme.
Greater animation was recommended for Robson Street which currently
seems dominated by the residential above the retail. The Panel also questioned
the location of the grand stair which seems to disrupt the Robson frontage
and limit retail opportunities. It was thought the stair would be unused
and unsuccessful.
With respect to the CBC building, there was a comment that there appears
to be no consideration given to its front door, with no improvement to
its current fortress-like nature. A comment was also made that while
the CBC is not a beautiful building, it is of its time and this should
be recognized by providing a gap or glazing so that it can stand proud
on the Cambie Street façade.
In general, the Panel was excited by the potential for urban mending
of this block but agreed that much more work is needed to make it successful.
It was acknowledged that this scheme does represent an improvement over
what exists now on all four streets, but it was thought that they could
be made to improved upon much more. It was noted that little effort seems
to have gone into improving Cambie Street. There was a suggestion that
it might have been beneficial for the Panel to have reviewed this proposal
in a workshop in order to address the basic principles.
• Applicant’s Response: Mr. Bakker said he appreciated the
input of “fresh eyes” on the project. He said he hoped there
was recognition that it is a very complex development which has the challenge
of finding a balance between what works for the transformation of the
CBC from a functional perspective while achieving a successful residential
development. He stressed that designing newsrooms is far from simple
but they will give it further consideration as the project evolves. He
briefly reiterated the rationale for the pedestrian connection and noted
how pedestrian routes in general are evolving in the downtown with the
rapid development that is occurring. Finally, Mr. Bakker stressed that,
apart from the residential towers, the project involves building on top
of existing operating building and, because of its height, views through
the site are virtually unachievable. Mr. Francl also thanked the Panel
for its comments.
There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 8.30 p.m.
|
