SUPPORTS ITEM NO. 2
P&E COMMITTEE AGENDA
MAY 16, 1996
POLICY REPORT
URBAN STRUCTURE
Date: April 30, 1996
Dept. File No. MK
TO: Standing Committee on Planning and Environment
FROM: Director of Central Area Planning
SUBJECT: Downtown Vancouver Skyline - Consultant Study
RECOMMENDATION
A. THAT the draft terms of reference for a consultant study of
the Downtown Vancouver Skyline, attached as Appendix 'A', be
approved in principle, subject to refinements made during the
consultant selection process; and
B. THAT funding up to an amount of $65,000 be approved for the
consultant study, polling, public consultation expenses
including staff overtime, and computer resources as outlined
in this report, with the source of funds to be Contingency
Reserve.
GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS
The General Manager of Community Services accepts that there is
some public purpose in regulating heights and the placement of
buildings in order to protect significant public views. He is not
convinced of the desirability or feasibility of sculpting the
city's skyline. Therefore, he submits A and B for CONSIDERATION.
COUNCIL POLICY
Relevant Council policy includes:
- Downtown Official Development Plan (DODP) approved in November
1975 and most recently amended in September 1992.
- False Creek North ODP approved in April 1990.
- Coal Harbour ODP approved in June 1990.
- View Protection Guidelines approved in December 1989 and
amended in December 1990.
PURPOSE AND SUMMARY
At Council's request, this report outlines a consultant study of the
impact of currently approved and future development on the downtown
Vancouver skyline. The study would also provide upgraded computer
resources for continuing use by staff and the public in the development
review process.
BACKGROUND
The City has traditionally held to a 450' height limit in the downtown
with two sets of height policies that have shaped the skyline within
this overall maximum:
- definitions of lower heights in most sub-areas surrounding the core
CBD (areas of 300', 150', 90' and 70' heights); and
- preservation of view corridors, primarily from the south to the
North Shore mountains as well as along street ends to the water,
and focused on key landmarks or heritage buildings.
The policies have been articulated in the Downtown District (DD), False
Creek North (FCN) and Coal Harbour (CH) Official Development Plans
(ODPs), and other inner-city zonings.
The current 450' height limit for the highest density (9.0 FSR) portion
of the downtown, originally set in the 1960's and reconfirmed in 1975,
allows for typical office tower development maximizing density
allowances. The height limit also generally serves to protect public
views of the North Shore mountain backdrop (eg. 'The Lions') from medium
range vantage points in the city (eg. City Hall).
Over the past 50 years, considerable high-rise development has occurred
in the Central Area, which has created a skyline reflective of our
height policies. With improved computer technology, the ultimate effect
of those policies can also now be projected. With this experience and
capacity, we have an opportunity to contemplate the skyline that can be
expected or some alternative skyline. If we decide we prefer an
alternative, we need to change policies now to foster that alternative.
On May 31, 1994, Council adopted the following resolution:
"THAT the Director of Planning report back on the terms of
reference for a study of the skyline and heights,
inter-related with the topography, view corridors and the
views of important landmarks in the city, and what some of the
options may be;
FURTHER THAT the study also consider the implications of the
existing transfer of density policy."
FURTHER to these resolutions, Council on March 12, 1996, requested that
the Director of Central Area Planning report back as a priority on the
terms of reference for the Skyline Study.
DISCUSSION
The last major study of public views was completed about 6 years ago in
1989. At that time, public views of concern were mainly of the North
Shore mountain backdrop looking from the south. The downtown skyline
itself, while somewhat impacted by adopted views policy, was not an
issue. Since then, over 50 new high-rise buildings affecting the
skyline in the downtown and adjoining areas have been either built or
given zoning approval.
Several factors suggest it is now prudent and timely to evaluate
downtown skyline options and decide on the nature of the skyline we want
in the future. These include:
- Growing sophistication of citizens
- much more experience of other cities, more people living in
the inner-city; and
- emerging perceptions that the skyline can be differently
shaped rather than just accepting whatever evolves from
current zoning;
- Growth of tourism as a key part of our economy
- the skyline is very central to the image of the city marketed
to and enjoyed by visitors;
- Expanding zoning opportunities tied to facilitating public
objectives (bonuses, transfer of density)
- questions of how best to accommodate this additional density
within the context of the allowable skyline; and
- concern about the environmental effects of tall buildings on
the livability and amenity of downtown open spaces and
streets; and
- From time to time, development proposals are challenging existing
height policies - we need to make sure these zoning restrictions
are appropriate and represent community consensus.
Staff note that currently adopted public view corridors of the North
Shore mountains are being considered as "given" for this study. While
no intrusions into them are proposed, technical analysis will be done
early in the study to determine if any of these corridors (e.g. View #3
from Queen Elizabeth Park) should be reconsidered or adjusted to allow
opportunities for higher landmark towers. This will be reviewed with
Council at the initial workshop in the fall.
Purpose of Study
The purposes of the Study are as follows:
- To model both the downtown skyline we now have and will get with
existing zoning at potential "build out";
- To model prototypical alternative downtown skylines; and
- To evaluate options against agreed upon criteria and recommend a
preferred downtown skyline type.
A follow-up objective, if Council decides to change current zoning
provisions, is to frame regulatory changes to achieve the preferred
downtown skyline type.
Study Process and Schedule
It is expected the Consultant Study will be undertaken over a 6-8 month
time frame in several phases, as outlined in the attached terms of
reference (see Appendix A) and generally as follows:
- Modelling the status quo and initial technical study
(August - September)
- Initial public discussion and workshops
(September - November) - deciding on goals, sensitive features,
prototypical skyline options, and vantage points
- Modelling possibilities and main technical study
(November - December)
- Main evaluation, public discussion, polling and Council workshop
(January - February, 1997)
- Decision - evening meeting(s) of Council to hear public delegations
(March 1997).
The last step in the overall planning process not covered by the initial
consultant study is:
- Proposing a strategy to implement the preferred skyline form
including zoning changes - maximum building height, built form
guidelines, etc.
This will be a subsequent work program to be reported back and could be
done by staff or consultants (to be determined). This would likely take
an additional 3-4 months to complete.
Continuing Use of Computer Model
This study can only practically be completed with an up-to-date computer
model of downtown development and its context. This would have
continuing benefit to staff and the public in a variety of ways,
including:
- Facilitating visual analysis of individual development proposals;
- Monitoring the overall pattern of downtown development and its
visual impacts in future; and
- Assisting with sun and shadow analysis of development patterns on
downtown public open spaces.
When the computer modelling was done by consultants for the 1989 Views
Study, the City did not have the technical computer capacity (hardware
or software) to be able to make use of this data. Now, with
improvements to technology, the City is in a position to be able to
benefit from the computer modelling done as part of this study. This
will require some additional costs, however, both in computer equipment
and software upgrading and continuing staff time.
Staff are also considering an option to acquire the computer model base
used by the consultant for the 1989 Views Study, and to update that
model for this study. This could save money for the study and will be
reported back to Council at the time of consultant appointment.
Management And Advisory Structures
Staff recommend that the process be managed by a 3 member steering
committee. It would be chaired by the Director of Central Area
Planning, and include the chairperson or other member of the Vancouver
City Planning Commission, and the Deputy City Manager. Council may wish
to expand this steering committee by 2 members to also include
development interests (either from Architectural Institute of British
Columbia or Urban Development Institute) and City Council.
Conceptual work would be framed through workshops with a 12 member
advisory group with participants from a wide range of interest groups,
including:
- City staff (development planner, heritage planner, Directors
of Land Use and Development and Community Planning);
- Downtown business interests (with two participants invited
from among the following organizations - Downtown Vancouver
Association, Downtown Business Improvement Association,
Vancouver Board of Trade, or Building Owners and Managers
Association);
- Downtown resident;
- Other city resident;
- Planning Institute of British Columbia (planner);
- Architectural Institute of British Columbia (architect);
- Urban Development Institute (developer); and
- Urban Design Panel.
Budget, Staffing and Resources
The overall budget required for this work is as follows:
Consultant Study: (i) All work, including analysis
and computer modelling $40,000
(ii) Polling of public opinion $10,000
Sub Total $50,000
Public Consultation and meeting expenses
(including staff overtime) $ 5,000
City computer resources upgrading $10,000
(Purchase of new high capacity computer (e.g. Pentium Pro) $ 6,000
Additional software upgrading $ 3,000
Additional training$ 1,000)
Total Costs = $65,000
Existing Planning staff from the Central Area Division will coordinate
and assist with the study. This will include providing information on
all 'as built' development to the consultant, identifying potential
tower site locations for future development, and coordinating the public
process.
Given the 1996 Planning Department work program, items that may have to
be delayed if this study is approved, include:
- general zoning changes to accommodate live/work in commercial
and downtown situations; and
- miscellaneous housekeeping amendments to several Central Area
ODP's.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
This is one of two urban design consultant studies Council has asked to
be undertaken this year that will require funding from Contingency
Reserve. This program will extend into 1997, with the balance of the
funding for staff resources to be added to the Operating Budget.
CONCLUSION
Given the value of the city skyline image to tourism growth, recent
development enquiries that have challenged current zoning height
policies in the downtown, and general public concern expressed about
downtown livability that could be impacted by taller buildings, it is
timely to undertake a consultant study to model and examine options for
the downtown skyline. The completion of a computer model base would
also have important benefits for ongoing downtown development review by
staff and the public.
* * * * *