POLICY REPORT
Urban Structure
Date: February 20, 1997
Dept. File No. MG
CC File: 8007-1
2604-1
2606-1
TO: Vancouver City Council
FROM: Director of Central Area Planning
SUBJECT: Downtown Vancouver Skyline Study - Recommended Option
RECOMMENDATION
A. THAT the recommended skyline and general policy for higher
buildings, as detailed in Appendix C of this report, be
approved as the basis for adjustments to the maximum permitted
heights in the Downtown Official Development Plan (ODP),
noting that in the area covered by this ODP:
- buildings up to but not exceeding 600' high will only be
considered in the current 450' height area of the Central
Business District, north of Robson Street;
- buildings up to 400' high will be considered in the north
westerly current 300' height area of the Central Business
District, generally south east of Bute and Pender Streets;
- in no case will building heights be considered that intrude
into adopted view corridors (except the Queen Elizabeth
Park view corridor); and
- elsewhere, buildings significantly exceeding current height
specifications will generally not be considered.
B. THAT staff report back with text amendments for the Downtown
Official Development Plan and design guideline amendments
regarding the proposed changes to the permitted building
heights and a process for considering higher buildings.
C. THAT buildings exceeding the current 450' height limit will
not be considered until guidelines, zoning text amendments,
review criteria and a process to enable the consideration of
buildings at this scale are completed.
D. THAT the Skyline Study Advisory Committee be thanked for their
time and effort and, further, that they be consulted during
the implementation and follow-up work that is outlined in this
report.
E. THAT the preparation of the text amendments and design
guidelines for the implementation of the revised height limits
be undertaken as soon as staff resources become available to
do this work, expected to be in 1998; and further that a
budget in the amount of $6,000 be approved in the 1998 budget
(subject to the availability of funds and priorities) for
public meetings and computer resources to do this work.
CONSIDERATION
As an alternative to recommendation E:
F. THAT $18,000, as an addition to the 1997 Operating Budget, be
approved for consultants, public meeting costs and computer
resources to proceed with preparation of zoning text
amendments, design guidelines and the appropriate review
process for immediate implementation of revised height limits
in the Downtown District.
GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS
The General Manager of Community Services notes that these
recommendations are adding further complexity to the regulatory
environment. As the desireability of any skyline form is very much
a matter of community aesthetic taste as experienced through the
community's elected representatives and as there is no correct
technical alternative, the General Manager of Community Services
submits A through F for CONSIDERATION.
COUNCIL POLICY
- The View Protection Guidelines were approved on December 12, 1989
and amended on December 11, 1990, establishing a number of view
corridors in the downtown with height limits to protect views of
the north shore mountains from a variety of locations south of the
downtown peninsula (see Appendix 'D').
- The Downtown District Official Development Plan (ODP), the False
Creek North ODP, the Coal Harbour ODP and the C-5, C-6, RM-5,
RM-5A, RM-5B, RM-5C and RM-6 District Schedules regulate building
heights in the downtown peninsula. Generally, heights in the
Downtown District range from 450 ft., 300 ft., 150 ft., 90 ft., and
70 ft. Elsewhere in the downtown peninsula, heights are 350 ft.
(106 m) or less on the remainder of the north shore of False Creek,
210 ft. (64 m) or less in the West End and 75 ft. (22.39 m) in
Yaletown (See Appendix C for further details) The height limits
in the Central Business District and Downtown South were originally
set in the 1960's and confirmed in 1975. Elsewhere, height limits
have been established as part of area-specific planning
initiatives.
SUMMARY
Various people have commented that Vancouver's skyline lacks visual
interest and there is a need for some taller buildings that reflect
Vancouver's contemporary image. Others are worried about proposals for
much higher buildings. Many are concerned that the natural setting and,
in particular, the north shore mountains may be compromised as tall
buildings proliferate. In response to these concerns and the desire to
have a clear City policy for considering buildings that exceed current
height limits, Council directed staff to undertake a Skyline Study.
The Skyline Study prepared the following 5 prototypical skylines and
illustrated them from eight vantage points:
'build out' skyline (retain existing height limits);
landmark - 600' skyline (2 landmark buildings at 600 feet);
landmark - 750' skyline (2 landmark buildings at 750 feet);
gap tooth skyline (8 buildings between 450 and 550 feet);
dome skyline (12 buildings between 450 and 550 feet).
During a public review of the prototypical skylines there was not a
clear majority in support of any particular one. There is a split
opinion about building height - with many suggesting taller buildings
and others lamenting any further taller buildings. Most felt that the
skyline is important and symbolic. The landmark - 750' was preferred by
one-third of respondents attending the open houses and meetings. The
dome skyline was chosen by about one-fifth of respondents. The 'build
out' or status quo skyline was favoured by approximately one-seventh of
those commenting. The remaining comments indicated preferences either
for other options or a hybrid of the prototypes or did not choose any of
the prototypes. Many were concerned that the north shore mountains
should remain the predominant element in the skyline.
Staff are presenting for Council adoption (i) a recommended skyline that
melds preferred features of the different prototypes but with an upper
building height limit of 600 feet and (ii) a general policy for higher
buildings (see Appendix 'C'). It is proposed that all buildings
exceeding current height limits must be in the Central Business
District, generally north of Robson Street. Detailed guidelines and
special requirements are also suggested for buildings exceeding current
height limits. Prior to approving such buildings, further work is
required to prepare guidelines that address the massing, design and
impacts of tall buildings and finalizing boundaries for where they will
be permitted. This work will also outline a review process which
includes Council approval of the buildings and review by a special
panel.
PURPOSE
This report recommends a policy for downtown building heights to achieve
a preferred profile for the Downtown Vancouver skyline. A work programme
and resources for further work are also put forward for consideration.
BACKGROUND
Current downtown height limits allow for typical office, hotel and
residential towers at maximum density allowances. The height limit also
serves to generally protect public views of the north shore mountain
backdrop from medium range vantage points in the city (i.e. south of
Broadway). Close in views of the mountains are protected by selected
view corridors (see Appendix 'D').
In recent years, various people have questioned the current height
limits. Their concerns are that:
it appears that the skyline is becoming flat and does not have a
peak;
permitting higher buildings would add interest to the skyline;
views of the north shore mountains are being lost and we should not
be entertaining additional building height.
With improved computer technology, the skyline that we will probably
obtain if all development sites are built within current height
allowances can be viewed. Options for adjusting height limits can also
be observed.
On May 16, 1996, Council initiated a Downtown Vancouver Skyline Study to
identify potential prototypical skylines for the future and recommend a
preferred skyline. A consultant was hired in July and work began in
August. A public review of work in progress was completed in October and
a second public review was completed in mid-February to examine the
prototypes. The final conclusions of the study are based on the urban
design analysis by staff and the consultants, input of a specially
appointed Advisory Committee and comments received from the public. The
consultant s full report, completed by the Spaxman Consulting Group and
Jankovic Consultants is on file with the City Clerk.
Council s adoption of a general building heights policy for the skyline
will conclude this study. However, there is essential follow-up work to
implement such a policy, prior to which extraordinary building heights
should not be considered.
DISCUSSION
The Skyline Prototypes
The study was done on the assumption that existing density limits and
view corridors (except the Queen Elizabeth Park corridor) would be
respected. While this limited options, it reflects widely held public
concerns that were reconfirmed in the public process.
After reviewing many possibilities, five prototypical skyline options
were prepared for public discussion (see Appendix 'A'):
a 'build out' skyline (resulting from no change in current height
regulations);
a landmark skyline - 600' (tallest buildings at 600 feet);
a landmark skyline - 750' (tallest buildings at 750 feet);
a gap toothed skyline;
a dome shaped skyline.
These prototypical skylines are created by hypothetically locating
taller new buildings on a selected number of the 76 potential
development sites in the downtown peninsula (while recognizing that the
actual building locations could take a variety of specific patterns).
The study examines the skylines from 8 vantage points that were selected
through the public discussion. The tallest buildings in the prototypes
(with the exception of the build out skyline) exceed the existing
height regulations.
The following general observations were drawn:
the 'build out' skyline is not flat from most vantage points;
higher buildings in the southern part of the downtown peninsula
will appear much more dominant and block more northerly views in
comparison to buildings in the northern part, because of the visual
effects of foreshortening;
while many people responded positively to higher buildings or more
variety in building heights, most people strongly supported the
predominance of the north shore mountain backdrop (especially the
'Lions') and want this carefully preserved;
landmark towers in the central business district core must be
significantly taller (550 to 750 feet) to be noticeable in the
skyline;
the skylines are not dramatically different from each other due to
the limited number of development sites, particularly in the core,
and the height restrictions of the view corridors; and
achieving a preferred form of skyline is problematic because
depending on how and which sites are developed, a landmark skyline
could evolve into a gap toothed skyline or ultimately to overall
higher building heights.
The Selection of a Preferred Form of Skyline
As summarized below, staff evaluated the 5 prototypical skylines with
consideration of the following factors:
relationship to the natural setting (mountains and water);
the location of the Central Business District is easily identified;
providing visual interest;
impact on sensitive areas such as residential neighbourhoods and
parks;
impact on the economic and business functions of the downtown;
practicality of creating the skyline through height regulations and
the straightforwardness of administration;
level of public support for the skyline.
Conclusions regarding each prototypical skyline are identified below.
Since no one prototype best balanced urban design objectives and public
preferences, a hybrid is recommended based upon what was learned from
each one. A detailed list of pros and cons for each prototype is in
Appendix 'B'.
'Build Out' Skyline (Retain existing height regulations)
The mountains remain the most significant element in the skyline.
South of 12th Avenue, the tallest buildings are below the ridge
line of the mountains.
Apart from the mountain backdrop, the skyline does not have strong
visual interest.
There are minimal impacts on sensitive areas.
There are no opportunities for landmark buildings (i.e., taller
than existing buildings) in the core.
There is no problem creating this skyline through height
regulations.
Public support for this option at the open houses and meetings was
13.6% (30 responses)(Also noted by the public as build-out-dome:
0.5% for a total of 14.1%).
This option would represent an acceptable future. However, it does not
provide an opportunity to bring more visual interest to the skyline
(beyond the mountain backdrop) and does not emphasize the location of
the core with landmarks.
Landmark - 600' Skyline (two towers at 600 feet)
The mountains remain the most significant element of the skyline.
The buildings are below the ridge line of the mountains from most
areas south of 12th Avenue.
Some visual interest created by 600 foot landmark towers.
There are minimal impacts on sensitive areas.
There are limited opportunities for landmark buildings in the core.
Limiting the number of landmark towers to two will result in a
relative monopoly situation and other owners will want to be dealt
with equitably and have similar opportunities provided. This will
result in difficulties administering the regulations.
Public support at open houses and meetings was 6.3% (14 responses).
This option is not recommended because it creates so few opportunities
for taller buildings that would emphasize the core and it would be very
difficult to administer equitably.
Landmark - 750' Skyline (two towers at 750 feet)
The mountains do not remain the most significant element of the
skyline and the view of 'the Lions' is compromised from certain
vantage points south of False Creek.
Landmark buildings at 750 feet are not below the ridge line at 12th
Avenue.
Visual interest is created by 750 foot landmark towers.
There are minimal impacts on sensitive areas.
Limiting the number of landmark towers to two will result in a
relative monopoly situation and other owners will want to be dealt
with equitably and have similar opportunities provided. This will
result in difficulties administering the regulations.
At the open houses and meetings, 32.1% of those filling out a
comment sheet chose this skyline (71 responses). (Also noted by
public as: gap tooth-landmark 750': 4.1%, landmark 750'-dome: 1.8%
for total of 38%).
Although this is a popular option, it is not recommended because
buildings of 750 feet would intrude significantly into the mountain
backdrop and profile, challenging the predominance of the mountains. It would also block views of the 'Lions' from many locations south of False
Creek. Moreover, it creates very few opportunities for taller buildings
thus creating a difficult situation for equitably administering the
regulations.
Gap Tooth Skyline (8 towers between 450 and 550 feet)
It makes the prevailing height of the overall skyline appear taller
because buildings are located throughout the core, Triangle West
and Downtown South.
It begins to challenge the mountains as the most significant
element of the skyline.
The tallest buildings are below the ridge line at 12th Avenue.
There is some visual interest created by having a series of towers
that are higher than other towers.
There are impacts on sensitive areas because some towers are in or
adjacent to residential areas.
There are some new opportunities for landmark office buildings in
the core.
This option would be less complex to administer through revised
height regulations.
At the open houses and meetings, public support for this option was
12.2% (27 responses). (Also noted by public as: gap
tooth-landmark-750': 4.1%; gap-tooth-dome: 1.4% for a total of
17.7%).
This option is not recommended because it would generally have the
affect of raising the sense of overall heights over the downtown
peninsula without providing the benefits of shaping the skyline. It
unduly diminishes the contrast between the building skyline and the
mountain backdrop. It would have to include tall buildings (450 feet) in
sensitive residential areas such as Downtown South and Triangle West.
Taller buildings in Downtown South will appear even taller and intrusive
from vantage points south of False Creek due to the effects of
foreshortening.
Dome Skyline (12 towers between 450 and 550 feet)
The mountains remain the most significant element of skyline.
The tallest buildings are below the ridge line at 12th Avenue.
Some visual interest is created by having a dome shape.
There are some impacts on sensitive areas because some towers are
in or adjacent to residential areas.
There are some new opportunities for landmark buildings in the core
at early stages of new development.
There are significant problems administering complicated height
regulations because permitted heights for each building site would
have to be individually calibred to ensure that a clear dome effect
was being achieved.
The public support for this option at open houses and meetings was
17.6% of those responding to a comment sheet (39 responses). (Also
noted by the public as: landmark 600'-dome: 2.7%; landmark
750'-dome: 1.8%; gap tooth-dome: 1.4% for a total of 23.5%)
This option would represent an acceptable future but it is very
difficult to achieve a highly premeditated dome shape due to the height
limits of the view cones. It would be complicated to administer the
regulations with varying heights in the core and in shoulder areas in
order to achieve the desired dome profile.
Recommended Skyline and General Policy for higher Buildings
Based on the analysis above and comments from the public and the
Advisory Committee, staff and the consultants recommend a skyline which
combines attractive features of several of the prototypes and
incorporates the following principles:
the mountain backdrop remains a predominant element in the skyline;
the buildings do not block 'the Lions' from most vantage points
south of False Creek;
buildings significantly exceeding current height limits are limited
to the Central Business District, generally north of Robson Street,
to minimize blockage of the mountains from locations south of False
Creek;
building heights should step down as they approach the water;
there are enough sites for taller buildings to ensure that one or
two owners will not have a monopoly on the opportunity to develop a
tall building exceeding current height limits.
The recommended skyline involves allowing buildings in the current
450-foot high zone to go up to 600 feet. Buildings exceeding the current
height limits would all be in the Central Business District, generally
north of Robson Street (see map on the following page, more details in
Appendix 'C'). A review of existing development sites and view corridor
limitations indicates that there are probably 5 practical opportunities
for buildings to exceed 450 feet. In two locations, there is the
opportunity to go up to 600 feet. In other locations, heights would
range from 475 feet to 550 feet due to view cone restrictions. The
increases of height above 450 feet would have to meet criteria discussed
below and be the subject of a special review process.
In one small area, west of Thurlow and east of Bute where the current
height limit is 300 feet (see map on the following page), buildings
could go up to 400 feet. The boundaries of this area may be slightly
adjusted after further study.
map
In no case, is it proposed that there will be buildings significantly
exceeding current height limits in locations south of Robson Street nor
along the Coal Harbour shoreline. One of the intents of this policy is
to clarify that significant increases above the current height limits
will generally not be approved for locations outside the core.
This option is recommended because:
it addresses the desire, as expressed by some people, for more
visual interest and shaping of the skyline;
the 600-foot high landmark buildings will generally keep buildings
below the ridge of the mountains and not block 'the Lions' from
most vantage points south of 12th Avenue;
it provides clear direction on the locations where the current
height limits may be relaxed significantly and designates the
Central Business District as the only location where this may
occur;
it clearly identifies the Central Business District as the centre
of the downtown;
it has minimal impacts on sensitive areas (eg. residential
neighbourhoods) of the city;
it would have minimum impact regarding view blockage or the sense
of encroaching tall buildings from vantage points south of False
Creek.
One caution about this proposal is that the area between Bute and
Thurlow Street (where the relaxation of the 300-foot height limit is
proposed) is adjacent to Triangle West, a mixed use area that includes a
significant amount of housing. Detailed analysis of shadowing, view and
wind impacts would need to be undertaken to ensure that this area is not
negatively impacted. On the other hand, Triangle West may have one or
more other sites for low-impact taller buildings. Follow-up work is
necessary to finally settle on boundaries for height increases in the
northwest corner of the core.
The preferred skyline will evolve over many years. Once one or two
taller buildings are built, the skyline will have the quality of the
landmark prototypes we tested; after more buildings are constructed it
will take on a more 'dome like' quality, although not a perfectly shaped
dome. In any event, it will provide enough development opportunities
while minimizing negative view impacts south of False Creek or
environmental impacts on sensitive areas such as residential
neighbourhoods.
General Policy for Higher Buildings
Within the boundaries outlined above, a special process and policies are
proposed when considering building proposals which exceed the current
height limits established by the Downtown District ODP. While this must
be fully fleshed out during implementation, the following aspects are
essential:
the highest buildings (i.e. 575-600 feet) should be on one of
downtown Vancouver s three primary streets - West Georgia,
Granville and Burrard;
the building should exhibit the highest order of architectural
excellence;
the building should achieve other community benefits such as being
a recipient site for density transfers or density bonusing relating
to heritage retention or the provision of significant cultural or
social facilities or low cost housing;
it should not involve the demolition of a Class A heritage
building;
where possible, the building should include activities and uses of
community significance such as a public observation deck or other
public amenity;
the development should provide on-site open space that represents a
significant addition to downtown green and plaza spaces;
the building should not contribute to adverse microclimate effects;
signage on buildings should not be located at a height which
exceeds the current height limits (i.e., 300 or 450 feet);
the building should be the subject of a special review process
which includes, in addition to the current review requirements
(which includes review by staff and the Urban Design Panel and
approval by the Development Permit Board), a review assessing
architectural excellence with input from a special panel of
respected community leaders and notable design experts, and
approval by Council.
Public Comment
Staff organized a series of open houses and a public meeting in October
to assist in identifying key vantage points for examining the skyline
and directions for preparing skyline prototypes. Public Comments from
this are summarized in Appendix 'E'. In January and February a second
series of public open houses in a variety of locations and a public
meeting offered the opportunity to review the prototypical skylines and
identify a preferred skyline. Public Comments from this are summarized
in Appendix 'F'.
The following were the key themes expressed by the public during the
October and the January and February events:
1. The skyline should complement, not compete with the natural
setting. The north shore mountains should clearly be predominant,
especially 'the Lions'.
2. The skyline should work with the topography and water features.
3. The skyline is an important symbol of the city.
4. Landmark buildings should achieve a variety of community
objectives.
5. Landmark buildings should achieve a high degree of architectural
excellence.
Staff estimate that several thousand citizens have become aware of this
study with approximately 1000 individuals having reviewed the
presentation boards between January 25th and February 5th. There were
221 comment sheets submitted by participants. The open houses were held
in Pacific Centre Mall, Library Square and community centres in False
Creek, Kitsilano, Mount Pleasant and Britannia. This survey is not
statistically representative of all the public. It reflects the views of
those individuals who visited the public open houses or attended the
meeting and took the time to fill out the comment sheet.
The results are as follows:
Is the shape of the Vancouver Skyline important?
%
very important 139 63
important 57 26
no response 10 5
little importance 4 4
not important 6 3
don't know 1 0
Total responses 221
Of the five prototypical skylines illustrated, which do you feel is most
appropriate for Vancouver?
%
landmark 750' 71 32
dome 39 18
'build-out' 30 14
gap tooth 27 12
no response 17 8
landmark 600' 14 6
gap tooth/landmark 750' 9 4
landmark 600'/dome 5 3
landmark 750'/dome 4 2
gap tooth/dome 2 1
'build out'/landmark 600' 1 .5
'build out'/dome 1 .5
Total responses 219
The results to the question on the preferred skyline varied by the
location of the open house or meeting. Generally, the landmark 750'
skyline was more favoured by those attending the events in the downtown
at Pacific Centre Mall and Library Square. About 75% of those submitting
comment sheets attended these events. At open houses in Kitsilano, False
Creek, Mount Pleasant and Britannia, there were a smaller number of
respondents. Generally, the 'build-out' and dome skylines were preferred
more than the other options at these events.
Advice from the Skyline Study Advisory Committee
A majority of the members of the Council-appointed Advisory Committee
expressed support for the recommended skyline, as illustrated in this
report.
The preference for the retention of the existing height limits (i.e.,
the 'build-out' skyline) was also brought forward. The importance of
retaining mountain views was emphasized by those suggesting the
retention of existing height limits. They noted that further analysis,
including the provision of more viewpoints for examining a skyline
should be required prior to final approval of it.
The committee was unanimous regarding the need to look carefully at the
implications and impacts of increased building heights and the necessity
of developing guidelines for tall buildings prior to permitting
buildings that exceed the current 450 foot limit. The committee also
noted the importance of carefully defining the areas within which taller
buildings would be considered, so that the boundaries of those areas
make sense to the public, City staff and the development community.
The Advisory Committee is willing to reconvene to work with the staff on
follow-up work.
Next Steps - Urban Design Analysis, Zoning and Guideline Amendments
Once Council has approved a general building heights policy based upon a
preferred form for the skyline, follow-up work will be required to:
review the impacts of the highest buildings (i.e., exceeding 450
feet) on views, shadowing and wind and prepare guidelines for
mitigating these impacts;
prepare guidelines for building massing, roof treatments and
signage on the highest buildings;
finalize the exact boundaries within the Central Business District
where buildings exceeding existing height limits will be
considered;
identifying specific criteria and a process for reviewing proposals
for the highest buildings that involves Council, the public, the
Development Permit Board and staff;
draft text amendments for the Downtown Official Development Plan
and ancillary regulations to permit buildings above the current
height limit of 450 feet in a limited area of the downtown;
consultation with the Advisory Committee on this work.
It is recommended that this work be deferred to 1998 when existing staff
resources become available to do this work. It is unlikely that there
will be a rush to take advantage of new height opportunities. To date,
owners of only one site (Bentall V) have expressed interest in a taller
building. Staff are currently committed to other Council priorities for
the remainder of this year.
Funding of $6,000 will be required for public meeting expenses and
software and hardware up-grades of two of the city's computers to
facilitate use of the computer model of downtown buildings for height
impact analysis. Staff are recommending that Council approve this
funding for the 1998 budget subject to the availability of funds and
priorities. The computer model of the downtown peninsula is being sold
to the public and staff expect that it will generate revenues that
defray the costs of computer software and hardware expenses in the long
run.
Alternatively, so that this work can proceed immediately, Council could
approve funding for a consultant at a cost of $12,000 plus $6,000 for
public process and computer related costs. CONCLUSION
The skyline is an expression of the community, its image and the way it
works. Based on the Skyline Study, staff are recommending that a
limited number of buildings be permitted that exceed the current height
limit of 450 feet. Prior to considering buildings of this height,
further work is needed to define boundaries where tall buildings will be
considered, draft guidelines, text amendments, review criteria and a
process to enable the consideration of buildings at this scale.
* * * * *