|
Community Services | |||
| Urban Design Panel |
| CITY OFVANCOUVER | |||
|
|
Urban Design Panel
|
| DE: | 410879 |
| Use: | A mixed-use multiple dwelling/liquor store development with 3 buildings and 2 levels of underground parking |
| Zoning: | CD-1 |
| Application Status: | Complete |
| Architect: | Merrick Architecture |
| Review: | Design Update |
| Delegation: | Roger Bayley, Rob Ciccozzi |
| Staff: | Scot Hein |
Introduction: Scot Hein, Development Planner, reminded the Panel that Parcel 6 and Parcel 3 would be a design update based on the commentary from the Panel at the previous review. He noted that both parcels will be going to the Development Permit Board on February 26th.
Applicant’s Introductory Comments: Roger Bayley, Project Manager representing Millennium Development, advised the Panel that there had been some design changes to the suite layout. With respect to sustainability practises, a decision has been made to include the capillary heating/cooling system throughout the project which will be tied into some high performance wall and glazing systems. There is to be a water balance program to deal with storage of rain water and the use of rainwater for toilet flushing. Mr. Bayley stated that they are working with the National Home Warranty program to deal with the issues around “Green Roofs” and the home owner’s program. Indications from their warranty supplier are they will be able to meet the conditions. Mr. Bayley added that they are working with the commercial contributors and have met with the BC Liquor Control Board regarding their retail programming.
Robert Ciccozzi, of Robert Ciccozzi Architecture Inc., advised the Panel that they have been working on the suite layouts. The lobbies have been enlarged and they have looked at the liveability and marketability of the suites. The bedrooms have been moved to the outside wall and some of the units have been pulled back on Walter Hardwick Avenue. The north elevation which faces the water has been cleaned up at the top the building and the edge pulled back about ten feet to open up the gateway between Parcel 3. The east elevation flats facing the plaza have also been cleaned up and the balconies pulled back with the addition of a guard rail across the front of the façade. On the south elevation, the lower floor has been pulled back to create more space on the sidewalk. The amenity space which will be two stories and has been cleaned up with the addition of a frame. The entry to the lobby has been exaggerated and now ties in with the opening on Parcel 3. Privacy panels will be added within the glazing. The penthouse will have a two storey townhouse expression. The covered arcade will be created along Walter Hardwick Avenue by pulling out the upper floor to continue the arcade. The bedroom window will be a sliding glass door with the addition of a Venetian balcony of around eighteen inches in depth.
Mr. Hein noted that there had been some positive moves with the design of the penthouse as well as the opening up of the mews between Parcel 3 and Parcel 6. He added that the development will be done without guidelines and are following a strategy to differentiate between the blocks within a framework of design principles. He added that there is an interest for exuberance in the architecture with the use of colour in the glazing and buildings.
Jennifer Stamp, Landscape Architecture, advised the Panel that the ground plain hadn’t changed very much but that there was a different configuration and shape to the patios on Athletes Way. The patios are now flush with the ground plane as well as the entries to the elevator lobbies. The courtyard level which is the main amenity level has been reconfigured. The urban agriculture for the modest market building has been put on the roof along with the children’s play area so that they will have full access to the sun. The area is accessible by an elevator and another set of stairs. The market building has 400 square feet of urban agriculture allocated to the building.
The applicant team took questions from the Panel.
| DE: | 410877 |
| Use: | A multiple dwelling development with 3 buildings and 2 levels of underground parking |
| Zoning: | CD-1 |
| Application Status: | Complete |
| Architect: | Merrick Architecture |
| Review: | Design Update |
| Delegation: | Roger Bayley, Mitch Sakumoto, Jennifer Stamp |
| Staff: | Scot Hein |
Introduction: Mitch Sakumoto, of Merrick Architecture - Borowski Lintott Sakumoto Fligg Limited, advised the Panel that the wave has been articulated differently on the west building (bookend building) to make it more fluid and make the suites more liveable. As well the glazing has been brought forward. The suites on the bottom have been changed to flats that are single units of about 450 square feet. A double column has been added on the colonnade and the single column has been removed to open up the elevation. The proportions have been changed to make the building more asymmetrical and added more glass which has been recessed. The units have been eliminated above the ramp to make the courtyard larger. Some units have been eliminated at the top of the eastern building which opens up the access between Parcel 6. Also the amenity has been moved inside the market building and the intent is to have an outdoor pavilion in the courtyard. Mr. Sakumoto noted that they still have to resolve the use of materials. He added that the stair and elevator areas will most likely be concrete with a Swiss pearl panel.
Jennifer Stamp, of Durante Kreuk Landscape Architects, advised the Panel that the amenity pavilion was removed and a portion of the building was redesigned. The water course will now run through the courtyard and will tie in to the different portions of the building from the entry. With respect for safety concerns, the water course will have a glass guard rail. She noted that Social Planning may ask for gates as the play area adjacent to water needs to be secure. The bamboo grove will be extended further east over the parking ramp. The children’s play area has been pulled away from the mechanical vent on the northeast corner. Also there will be a walkway along the parking entry ramp. Ms. Stamp added that part of the process is to differentiate between the public and semi private spaces.
The applicant team took questions from the Panel.
| DE: | 411068 |
| Use: | Two residential buildings of 8 and 9 storeys with 2 levels of underground parking |
| Zoning: | CD-1 |
| Application Status: | Complete |
| Architect: | Erickson/Milkovich/Doyle |
| Review: | First |
| Delegation: | Nick Milkovich, Roger Bayley |
| Staff: | Scot Hein |
EVALUATION: NON-SUPPORT (1-5)
Introduction: Scot Hein, Development Planner, introduced the application for Parcel 4 in South East False Creek. Mr. Hein reminded the Panel that there are no guidelines for SEFC. There had been a number of workshops with the applicant regarding the question of character and expression. A lot of attention has been paid to the building envelope quality. There will be a formal right-of-way that resolves itself at the active water edge and a large water feature on the Athletes Way frontage. The bookend building is part of the terracing down to the water on both ends at the park edges. Ground oriented townhouses facing Athletes Way to the south and wrapping the waters edge are proposed. Mr. Hein asked the Panel to comment on the form and development for the site. He added that the applicant will be seeking additional height of approximately eight feet which will require a text amendment from Council. Mr. Hein also asked the Panel to comment on the bulk and scale of the buildings and the character, expression as well as the building envelope.
Mr. Hein took questions from the Panel.
Applicant’s Introductory Comments: Nick Milkovich, of Nick Milkovich Architects Inc., described the submission in further detail. The proposed massing showed two independent blocks along the east and west boundaries. Consolidating the allowable density into the two buildings created a generous sun-filled courtyard. There are distant views to False Creek and the city beyond to the living units directly south on Athletes Way. Both buildings step up from six storeys at the north end to eight and nine storeys at the south end. The buildings also step back from the east and west building lines continuing the six storey mid-rise height along the public way. The landscape courtyard forms the common entry for the complex.
Peter Kreuk, of Durante Kreuk Landscape Architects, described the landscape design noting the edges, courtyard and rooftops had been utilized to provide access for residents to green space within each parcel. The courtyard and rooftops support a variety of amenities such as patio gardens, rain water pools and opportunities for urban agriculture.
Panel’s Consensus on Key Aspects Needing Improvement:
Related Commentary:
The Panel did not support this submission and thought the project seemed
to be too early in its development to be viewed by the Panel.
The Panel thought there were fundamental problems with the massing and form of development. They agreed that there was a disparity between the eastern and western blocks and suggested taking the bulk out of the eastern building and adding it to the western building. They agreed that this could be an iconic building and required a bold gesture to create interest and character on the waterfront. One member of the Panel suggested making the two buildings asymmetrical.
The Panel agreed that the problem came from taking the density off the Community Centre and adding it to this site and one Panel member suggested the applicant might want to explore a lighthouse type of massing. The Panel suggested having a connection between the Community Centre and the site with the use of materials. They agreed that the success of the project was contingent on the connection to the Community Centre.
Most of the Panel would like to see the semi private courtyard space moved into the public realm although one Panel member thought it should be private. They agreed that there needs to be another layer of detail on the internal courtyard to make it more interesting.
One Panel member liked the idea of a landmark site and that the buildings breaks away from the rest of the development and thought it was a wonderful opportunity to have something showcased and different. Another Panel member thought the balconies were too deep.
Applicant’s Response: Mr. Bayley acknowledged that they
would need to go back to rezoning to get the additional height and to
inform Council as to the change in the massing. He noted that it would
be important for Parcel 3 to keep the opening to maintain views. Mr.
Milkovich thought the Panel had expressed the issues very well.
| DE: | 410957 |
| Use: | 7-storey mixed-use retail/residential project |
| Zoning: | C-3A |
| Application Status: | Complete |
| Architect: | Nigel Baldwin Architect |
| Review: | First |
| Delegation: | Nigel Baldwin, Kim Maust, Chris Sterry |
| Staff: | Mary Beth Rondeau |
EVALUATION: SUPPORT (8-0)
Introduction: Mary Beth Rondeau, Development Planner, introduced the application for a seven storey mixed-use building with residential and retail on the ground floor with parking and loading from the lane. The massing meets the intent of the Central Broadway Urban Design Guidelines for the site. The retail height is about 13 feet minimum floor to floor at the corner of Maple and Broadway and the floor to floor height of the residential is on average 9 feet 8 inches. There is a ten foot setback on Maple Street with the southern area taken up with residential patios. In terms of residential liveability, every unit has plenty of frontage and no inboard bedrooms. There is a proposed amenity room on the podium and private roof decks. Ms. Rondeau noted that staff were considering moving the amenity room to add more shared open space and were also considering if there needed to be some masonry on the project.
The Panel’s advice was sought on the following:
Ms. Rondeau took questions from the Panel.
Applicant’s Introductory Comments: Nigel Baldwin, of Nigel Baldwin Architects Ltd., noted that the massing is consistent with what happened on the Molson lands using mostly simple urban forms. He described in detail the architecture for the building noting the spiral staircases to the roof decks. The south side of the building has been greened to give a neighbourly response. Mr. Baldwin noted the public open space will provide a corner CRUs which will probably be a café or coffee shop. He stated that retail on Maple Street was not a good response and are negotiating to make the units wheelchair accessible.
Chris Sterry of PWL Partnership Landscape Architects Inc., described in detail the landscape plans. He noted the generous patios, the amenity room which will have a green roof and a trellis over the parking ramp.
Kim Maust, of Bastion Development, stated that they will be meeting a strong LEEDTM Silver. Regarding energy efficiency, they are using geothermal heating for the units with heat recovery from the commercial units. Some building lights will run on solar panels and some of the roof top patios may be reduced slightly to accommodate the panels.
The applicant team took questions from the Panel.
Panel’s Consensus on Key Aspects Needing Improvement:
The Panel had no substantial concerns with this proposal. There was a general consensus that the design of the corner plaza should be enhanced.
Related Commentary: The Panel unanimously supported this application and commended the architect on a well executed project.
The Panel agreed that the massing was appropriate with the project earning its density and height and they also agreed that the building didn’t need to be set back on the upper floors. The Panel liked the amenity space as a separate building noting that it was unique. One member of the Panel suggested greening the blank wall of the amenity space to soften the concrete. Several members of the Panel also suggesting adding a green roof to the south east corner roof.
The Panel agreed the corner plaza needed design development through the use of landscaping, an inner row of trees and specialty paving. It was generally agreed that retail wasn’t an appropriate response along Maple Street and would be a difficult retail opportunity. The also agreed that the landscape element was the right way to go at the residential units. Several members of the Panel thought it would be appropriate to take the pavers out to the corner at West Broadway and Maple Street. One member of the Panel felt the residential entry needed more design development as it seemed lost.
One Panel member suggested making the pathways on the roof clearer to show the boundaries between the units. The Panel liked the spiral staircases stating that they were the fun part of the project and it was important for the technical aspects to be resolved for these to be retained.
The Panel liked the daylighting of the units and the use of natural ventilation. They congratulated the developer for putting sustainability up front on the project. One member of the Panel suggested operable Venetian blinds on the west façade.
Several Panel members suggested that if the clear concrete proposed would give the desirable depth of material similar to masonry and adding more colour to the concrete should be considered. The green accent colour was also important to the building. Several members of the Panel thought the canopy could be raised a bit to take advantage of the concrete band and to make the retail appear taller.
Applicant’s Response: Mr. Baldwin thanked the Panel. He
noted that he would like to be able to incorporate a special paving to
the edge on the corner of Maple Street and West Broadway but that would
need to be negotiated with the City.
There being no further business the meeting ended at 7:45 PM
|
|
|
Questions or Comments? E-mail: planning@vancouver.ca
|
