POLICY REPORT
DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDING

Date: March 19, 1999
Author/Local: MKemble/7702
RTS No. 00585
CS&B Date: March 30, 1999

CC File No. 5051

TO:	Standing Committee on City Services and Budgets
FROM:	The Director of Central Area Planning, on behalf of Land Use and Development, in consultation with the Directors of Community Planning and Office of Cultural Affairs, and the Managers of Real Estate and Facilities Development
SUBJECT:	Heritage Issues Raised by Dance Centre Proposal - 677 Davie Street

RECOMMENDATION

A. THAT the Development Permit Board be advised that Council favours the retention of the Granville Street facade and the adjoining corner portion of the Davie Street facade of the Bank of Nova Scotia heritage `B' building generally as shown in Option 2 in Appendix B, and their integration into the design of the proposed Dance Centre development at 677 Davie Street, in order to support a heritage density bonus as permitted under Section 3.8 of the Downtown Official Development Plan (DODP) and, further, a parking relaxation as permitted under Section 3.2.1.(c) of the Parking By-law.

CONSIDERATION

As an alternative to A, the Director of Central Area Planning, on behalf of Heritage staff, submits the following for CONSIDERATION as a retention option that conserves all significant heritage features on the exterior of the building:

B. THAT the Development Permit Board be advised that Council favours the retention of both the Granville Street and Davie Street facades, while allowing respectful changes to the Davie Street facade, generally as shown in Option 3 in Appendix B, for the proposed Dance Centre development at 677 Davie Street, in order to justify a heritage density bonus as permitted under Section 3.8 of the DODP and, further, a parking relaxation as permitted under Section 3.2.1. (c) of the Parking By-law.

OR

As an alternative to A, the Director of Central Area Planning, on behalf of the applicant, submits the following for CONSIDERATION:

C. THAT the Development Permit Board be advised that Council favours the retention of only the Granville Street facade generally as shown in Option 1 in Appendix B, as put forward by the applicant in the preliminary development application for the proposed Dance Centre development at 677 Davie Street, acknowledging that the amount of heritage retention is acceptable for the amount of density bonus needed for the Dance Centre programme as permitted under Section 3.8 of the DODP and, further, a parking relaxation as permitted under Section 3.2.1.(c) of the Parking By-law.

CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS

The City Manager RECOMMENDS approval of A but submits B or C for CONSIDERATION as an alternative to A.

COUNCIL POLICY

Council support for a downtown Dance Centre goes back to April, 1990 when it was first identified on a list of civic cultural facility priorities.

On April 24, 1997, Council approved a CD-1 zoning for a City-owned site at 1410 Granville Street to permit the development of a Dance Centre. This included considerable City financial support in the form of a nominal $1.00 per year 60 year lease payment. Although this proposal was approved, it has not proceeded because of a major signage issue that was not approved by Council.

In May, 1998, Council approved, at the Dance Foundation's request, a proposal to rescind the commitment to the previously approved site, and instead, provide a grant to the Dance Foundation.

The DODP contains in part, under Section 3.8, the following:

The Development Permit Board may, for any development which includes the restoration of an existing building which is listed on the Vancouver Heritage Register dated August 1986, permit an increase in the floor space ratio, subject to prior approval by City Council and designation of the building as a Municipal Heritage Site.
In determining the increase in floor area that may be permitted, the Development Permit Board shall consider:

(a) the cost of the heritage-related restoration;
(b) the value of the increased floor area;
(c) the impact upon livability and environmental quality of the neighbourhood; and
(d) all applicable policies and guidelines adopted by Council.

SUMMARY AND PURPOSE

This report assesses the `in principle' heritage issues raised by a development application by Architectura Inc., in association with Arthur Erickson, for 677 Davie Street (at Granville). The site is presently occupied by the two storey Bank of Nova Scotia branch building listed in the `B' category on the Vancouver Heritage Register (see photo Appendix A). The Dance Centre has been offered this 50 ft. by 120 ft. corner site for nominal rent, however the zoning only permits 3.5 floor space ratio (FSR), and the desired programme requires 5.5 FSR on this site. The Dance Centre does not qualify for a Social and Recreational Facility density bonus under the Official Development Plan because the Dance Centre, which will be a tenant, and the landowner are not able to vest freehold tenure with the City. The applicant is therefore seeking a heritage density bonus, under Section 3.8 of the DODP, amounting to approximately 12,000 sq. ft. equivalent to 2.0 FSR, in exchange for the retention of the Granville Street facade of the heritage building. A parking relaxation to nil and a partial relaxation to loading is also requested by the applicant. A parking relaxation can be granted by the Director of Planning for the hardship of site use or retaining the heritage building.

The proposed development consists of a dance centre providing collective rehearsal, production studio, and administrative space for Vancouver's dance companies. The proposed seven-storey building (See Appendix C) includes five rehearsal studios, one large production studio, administration, and support facilities. A small office and banking machine space for the Bank of Nova Scotia is also included on the Granville Street frontage.

While there are a range of manageable urban design issues with the current preliminary proposal, the main questions raised by the application are the extent of the existing heritage building to be retained in order to justify the heritage density bonus, and the extent of parking relaxation. The applicant has considered various preservation options (see Appendix B), three of which are analysed in this report, ranging from retaining only the Granville Street facade, to the Granville Street facade and various portions of the Davie Street facade. The applicant prefers Option 1 - the minimum retention of only the Granville Street facade -for reasons of cost, programming and architectural design. For urban design and heritage reasons,the Planning Department recommends Option 2, which includes in addition to the Granville Street facade, the adjoining westerly corner portion of the Davie Street facade as well. The
Vancouver Heritage Commission (see Appendix D for full minutes) and the Planning Department's heritage staff prefer Option 3, which includes the retention of both the Granville and Davie Streets facades.

Council's decision on its preferred heritage option will enable the applicant to either withdraw the application altogether (probably putting existing funding in jeopardy), or revise it to meet their scheduling objectives, and for the other aspects of urban design to be resolved for consideration of the proposal by the Development Permit Board.

BACKGROUND

A previous development proposal for the Dance Centre project located on the City-owned site at 1410 Granville Street was submitted in August, 1996. This rezoning application was subsequently approved at Public Hearing by Council on April 24, 1997. Following this approval-in-principle, a report on proposed signage for the building was considered by Council's Standing Committee on Planning and Environment on July 24, 1997. At that time, Council did not support the signage proposal which led to the temporary withdrawal from the project of a major financial sponsor. This has delayed further progress on the project until now. Because of the delay in the project, senior government funding for the project has been put in jeopardy.

Federal funding for the project, obtained under the Canada/British Columbia Infrastructure Program, has been extended several times, most recently to March 2000, to enable this project to be completed. Further extensions are unlikely. In the fall of 1998, the Dance Centre Foundation was able to secure the use of a 50 ft. by 120 ft. corner site at Granville and Davie Streets, owned by the Bank of Nova Scotia. The Bank has agreed to a long-term lease for the property, at a nominal cost per year. A preliminary development application was received on March 4, 1999.

DISCUSSION

Use: Similar to the previous proposal at 1410 Granville Street, there are three principal factors that make the proposed uses (production or rehearsal studio, and theatre) appropriate for this site.

Access: The Centre will have a wide variety of people (employees, dancers, choreographers, visitors, etc.) needing good quality access. The site is at a major crossroads in the downtown peninsula at Granville Street and Davie Street. This location is well served by transit, and is within easy walking distance of the downtown core.

Visibility: Cultural facilities need high visibility to help generate the support in the wider community. This site has both a major street frontage on Davie Street as well as high visibility for pedestrians, cyclists, transit users and motorists using Granville Street.

Adjacent Land Use: In September 1998, Council approved the amended Granville Street Guidelines that addressed the future of the area immediately north and south of the subject site. The general intent of these Guidelines is to assist in the creation of a distinct urban character for Granville Street as an entertainment district for the city.

While the proposed uses are not the same as adjacent uses, they are complementary. The minor noise concerns that may be generated by the proposed dance activities can be remediated in the building design.

Form of Development: The proposed form of development is generally seven storeys in height with site coverage of 100 percent (see Appendix C). The overall height is within the recently amended Granville Street maximum height envelope of 90 ft. While staff have identified some concerns with the development proposal, including the pedestrian amenity at grade level, and the massing of the project, these can be dealt with through the development application.

Heritage Density Bonus: Pursuant to the heritage bonus provision under Section 3.8 of the DODP, Real Estate and Facilities staff have analysed the heritage cost information submitted by the applicant outlined in Appendix B. This analysis has not factored in the economic benefit of the parking relaxation requested, as staff proposes not to handle this relaxation through the heritage relaxation provision. Preliminary staff analysis confirms that all of the options provide sufficient density bonus to meet the development proposal's overall floor space requirement of approximately 5.5 FSR (see Appendix F). While Option 1 provides the minimum density bonus sufficient for the Dance Centre needs, the additional density generated by Options 2 or 3 (above that required on site) could be `banked' and sold off-site to cover the heritage costs of the project.

Following the Development Permit Board's consideration of the project, if supported and as a condition of its approval, staff will report further to Council on the detailed heritage bonus density amount requested by the applicant.

Urban Design Issues: The heritage retention options outlined in Appendix B involve a series of trade-offs between heritage and urban design objectives, on the one hand, and the Dance Centre's identity, programming flexibility, and costs on the other. The non-heritage factors are summarized in matrix form in Appendix F. While the applicant's preferred Option1 has the least cost and impact on its programming as well as providing a very contemporary architectural expression for the Dance Centre, it preserves a minimum amount of this heritage `B' building. Staff do not feel this option is sufficient in terms of heritage retention to well enough meet the intent of heritage goals under the provisions of the DODP zoning.

While staff would have preferred a solution that saw all of the building facades preserved, they acknowledge that this would result in substantial additional costs. It would also present a greater challenge for the architect in relating the new design to the old, which would have an impact on the building's identity and desire for a contemporary architectural expression.

After review of these alternatives and in consideration of the Urban Design Panel's support, the Planning Department, on balance, supports Option 2 - retaining the Granville Street facade and the adjoining corner portion of the Davie Street facade - for the following reasons:

· it is a more balanced solution that better preserves the historic integrity of the Granville facade by treating it as a two-dimensional element wrapping around the corner, rather than as the flat one-dimensional facade proposed in Option 1; and

· the length of the Davie Street preserved facade reflects the extent of the bank function to be retained on the ground floor in the new development.

While staff acknowledge that Option 2 results in a slightly higher amount of heritage density than is actually needed by the development proposal, this small surplus can be `banked' and sold off-site to reduce the overall project costs, including the funding of any parking payment-in-lieu condition that the Development Permit Board, with Council's advice, may impose.

Heritage Conservation Issues: Heritage staff and the Heritage Commission recommend CONSIDERATION B (Option 3), which calls for the retention of the Granville Street facade and the majority of the Davie Street facade. Further that, the heritage density bonus should ONLY be granted when these character defining features of the building are appropriately retained and protected, and the new additions are designed in a compatible manner. The reasons for supporting Option 3 are as follows:

A. Retains those defining elements significant to the building's historic and architectural value;

B. Consistent with Council's previous position regarding corner heritage sites and bonusing;

C. Consistent with standard heritage conservation principles;

D. The Dance Centre's identity can be expressed through a contemporary roof addition and modern interventions to the Davie Street facade; and

E. Fully compensates the owner with the density bonus.

A. Heritage staff advise that the defining heritage characteristics of this Register building are the two street facades that together form the front and side of this Art Deco "temple bank" building. Constructed in 1929, this Bank of Nova Scotia building was designed by the prominent architectural firm Sharp and Thompson, who designed many Vancouver landmarks, including the original Art Gallery, the Vancouver Club and the pylons on the Burrard Bridge. This bank building is a very good example of the Neoclassical "temple bank"design; the strong base, colonnade of pilasters on the two facades and the strong entablature above, were designed to recall the image of antiquity to impart a feeling of permanence and stability. In this instance, Sharp and Thompson have skilfully modernized this building typology with restrained Art Deco motifs set in terra cotta and carved in andesite stone. The building has survived virtually intact, including period interior furnishings.

B. In the past, Council has secured the retention and designation of both street facades when providing significant heritage incentives to corner site buildings. Of the 152 municipally designated heritage buildings, 135 designations apply to the entire exteriors, and the remaining 17 designations apply only to part of the exterior. Of these 17, there are several where only the front facade of the heritage building have been preserved and designated. However, these are all mid-block buildings where the side facades are blank common walls. For all corner site conservation projects, both street facades have been designated and retained in the redevelopment process. Providing bonusing to a proposal which retains just a portion of the principle facades would set a significant precedent for the application of Council's heritage policies in the future.

C. The heritage density bonus provision in the DODP (see Council Policy section page 2), calls for the "restoration of an existing building" when granting a heritage density bonus. Restoration, a level of conservation providing maximum respect for historic fabric, is commonly defined as returning a building to the appearance of an earlier time by removing later material and by replacing missing elements and details. While Option 3 does not retain the entire building per say, it retains the important character defining features of the exterior of the building. In the field of heritage conservation Option 3 is considered "rehabilitation", a more permissive conservation approach than "restoration", that makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions and features which are significant to the property's historic, architectural and cultural values.

Heritage staff feel retaining just a portion of the street facades (Options 1 and 2) results in fragmentation and the loss of the presence of the "heritage building". The remaining heritagefabric, in the context of a larger new building, becomes isolated from its original context and its value is greatly diminished.

D. Should Council support CONSIDERATION B, a modern roof addition and the respectful opening-up of the Davie Street facade would allow the Dance Centre to express itself as the dynamic, contemporary user in this rehabilitated heritage building.

E. The density bonus set out in Appendix F compensates the Dance Centre for the cost of heritage conservation. For Option 3 just over half of the bonus density would be transferred off site.

Parking Relaxation: The parking requirement for this application under the Parking By-law minimum standard of one space per 100 m² for this area of the downtown, is 30 spaces. The applicant is requesting full relaxation of parking requirements, based on hardship grounds, the heritage facade retention, and the general impractibility of covered parking on a site of these small dimensions, as allowed in the Parking By-law. The site is within a parking pay-in-lieu area, with public parking located about a block away.

The Parking By-law allows for "hardship" relaxation of required parking spaces either due to the peculiarities of the use of a site [Section 3.2.1(c)], or for heritage retention [Section 3.2.1(e)]. If parking relaxations are granted on heritage grounds, this would normally be seen as a cost benefit to the project, which would accordingly reduce the net heritage retention costs and thus the bonus density amount. In the case of this proposal, staff feel the building configuration necessary to meet basic dance programme needs, and the civic priority non-profit cultural use, justifies a parking relaxation based on hardship related to use under Section 3.2.1(c) of the Parking By-law. While the building areas used by the principal cultural facility users should be exempted from parking, staff feel the full-time administrative office space should provide payment-in-lieu for its parking demand.

Therefore, staff intend to recommend to the Development Permit Board a partial parking relaxation, subject to the following provisions:

· payment-in-lieu for the parking required by office use - six spaces;

· a legal agreement to tie the parking relaxation to the non-profit cultural use; and

· full provision of required bicycle parking.

Engineering Comments: Engineering Services notes that the Parking By-law standards in effect for this site take into account the good level of transit service available and allow discounted parking ratios in consideration of heritage preservation, with payment-in-lieuexpected for the reduced parking requirement if not provided by another means. Relaxation would normally be a consideration for only the floor space preserved, such that it should not be a consideration for new space, or in this case the additional 20,000 square feet sought (which bears a requirement of 19 spaces). Indeed, the City has invested in parking in the South Granville Mall area in anticipation of payment-in-lieu receipts. City Council has in the past, however, looked favourably on cultural developments seen as community assets, and expressed support for reduced parking requirements (e.g. Burrard Five Cinemas and Ford Centre). In this regard, Engineering Services supports a parking relaxation to six spaces as proposed by Planning staff, as long as their three provisions noted above are met.

Vancouver Heritage Commission: On January 18, 1999, the Commission reviewed the preliminary development scheme for the Dance Centre on the Bank of Nova Scotia heritage `B' site at 1196 Granville (at Davie Street). Partial minutes of the discussion include:

"The Commission was supportive of the project and its location in the city. It felt the adaptive re-use of this heritage building was an appropriate conservation approach. However, the commission was disturbed by the amount of intervention vis-a-vis conservation and the "piling of a building" on top of a heritage building. The Commission, generally, is not in support of facadism.

The Commission also supported the density bonus and the relaxations requested provided the two street facades were preserved and the spaces were fully aligned with the existing window opening.

It was resolved:

THAT the Vancouver Heritage Commission commends the applicant for appearing before the Commission at this early stage of the project development.

THAT the Vancouver Heritage Commission finds the existing heritage building has sufficient heritage merits to be eligible for bonussing."

The full minutes of the VHC discussion are attached as Appendix D.

Urban Design Panel: On March 10, 1999, the Panel reviewed the preliminary development application for the Dance Centre project. The Panel expressed support for the applicant's preferred option and its heritage conservation approach (Option 1). Full minutes of the Panel discussion are attached as Appendix E.

Applicant's Comments: "The applicant has carefully reviewed the noted options in terms of planning constraints, cost implications and design opportunities and firmly believes that Option 1 - the restoration of the Granville facade and the five foot return on Davie - is the only appropriate and honest response to the architectural and heritage issues.

In our proposed design the new facade above the restored stonework on Granville is composed of a gentle sine curve of cast corrugated glass. This provides a graceful neutral foil to the historic building below. Due to the dimensional requirements of the five large studios no such setbacks are feasible on the Davie frontage and the first vertical 55 ft. of that
facade must be built out to the property line. This can be handled well if the new facade comes down to the ground, but if it sits on a fragment of the original bank facade the result cannot be anything but awkward.

The Bank of Nova Scotia will continue to operate a small branch on the site, accessible through the original Granville doors. The separation of these two facades, the historic facade on Granville, the new `dance' facade on Davie - the site of its front door - allows a successful expression of the duality of this shared use and the most graceful design resolution for each component. This position was strongly supported by the professionals on the Urban Design Panel who voted five to two in favour of this Option 1, with one member calling it "an audacious and elegant solution".

In the financial analysis included in Appendix F of this report it is noted that the design proposal for Option 1 achieves the density bonus necessary for the additional area required by the Dance Centre. As the Foundation is not in a position to put forward additional capital for Options 2 and 3 and the market for the selling of additional FSR is questionable, the applicant would be unable to assume these additional costs.

In regards to the parking, the applicant has requested a relaxation of this requirement. The existing facility has no parking and within the dimensional limits of the site it would be very difficult to add. The site is centrally located on major transit routes and, as most of the dancers and staff use the transit system, the demand should be not greater than the current situation. Again, it is unlikely that the Dance Foundation will be in the position to provide payment-in-lieu."

Arthur Erickson, on behalf of the applicant, has the following additional comments:

"The Council should be reminded that the Dance Centre has been searching for a site and City approvals since 1995. The Dance Centre has suffered considerable financial loss in proceeding with designs at 1410 Granville which were not approved because of sign issues and are now faced with the hardship of restoring antique facades to a level we consider
inappropriate to the vitality and energy of the Vancouver dance community. Our proposal is the limit that the Dance Centre can afford both financially and aesthetically. It represents a clear definition of what is old and what is new. It avoids what the heritage commission does not support, that is the "facadism" which would be fairly obvious and contradictory when vital creative performers have to fit into an old shoe."

CONCLUSION

Staff support the proposed development of 677 Davie Street to permit the Dance Centre, as an appropriate use, built form, and cultural facility in this highly accessible and entertainment-focussed part of the downtown. While staff are confident the proposed density increase can be accommodated on the site, they feel, however, that the heritage response needs to be strengthened to justify the significant heritage density bonus and parking relaxations requested for the project. Staff feel this can be done without seriously affecting the financial viability, design, or programming needs of the facility. Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that Council endorse Option 2 (generally as shown in Appendix B) as the minimum preferred option to support a heritage density bonus for the project, and that the Development Permit Board be advised of this preference. This option provides a good balance among the various public objectives - supporting in a practical way cultural, neighbourhood and heritage considerations.

If Council prefers the retention of the Granville Street facade and the majority of the Davie Street facade as an approach consistent with past policy and heritage guidelines then Option 3, as reflected in CONSIDERATION B, should be pursued.

If Council prefers the retention of only the Granville Street facade, in consideration of the cultural objectives served by this development, then Option 1 as reflected in CONSIDERATION C should be pursued.

* * * * *

Partial extract of Vancouver Heritage Commission Minutes
January 18, and as amended February 1, 1999

b) 1196 Granville Street Noel Best, MAIBC

This historic Bank of Nova Scotia building was built in 1929 and is in the "B" category on the VHR. It is located at the north east corner of Davie and Granville Streets.

It was proposed that the existing two storey building be redeveloped as five to six storeys. It will house the Dance Centre, an initiative strongly supported by City Council. Limited bank functions will be maintained in an office in the front of the building at Granville Street. The applicants presented a volumetric and organization studies to explore viability of an adaptive re-use for the building.

The Granville Street facade, the entry and vestibule will be preserved. The masonry will be cleaned and repointed, the windows restored and rehabilitated. Missing features and fixtures on the Granville St. elevation will be reproduced.

A contemporary architectural design will be developed along Davie Street that expresses the dance facilities, which will include production and rehearsal spaces and administration offices. Because of the large volume spaces required by the production and rehearsal studios, the applicants contended that the retention of the existing structural system and interior finishes of the building were not possible. The applicants were asking for the following relaxations: a floor space ratio increase from 3.5 permitted to 5.5; parking requirements, reduction of the loading bay size and no rear setback.

Mike Kemble, Development Planner, indicated that Planning staff support the proposed use and generally find the massing acceptable for this portion of Granville Street. Planning staff will, however, ensure a functioning loading bay. The relaxation of parking is not a concern in this "pay in lieu" area. He also stated that the project was not entitled to an amenity bonus; a bonus can only be achieved through heritage preservation.

The applicants have done four design analyses for retaining various portions of the street facades. They (the applicant) prefer retaining the Granville Street elevation (possibly) and the first bay on Davie Street.

A Commissioner acknowledged the architectural challenge of keeping all of the Davie Street elevation, but found a full corner treatment is essential.

The Commission was supportive of the project and its location in the city. It felt the adaptive re-use of this heritage building was an appropriate conservation approach. However, the Commission was disturbed by the amount of intervention vis a vis conservation and the "piling of a building" on top of a heritage building. The Commission, generally, is not in support of facadism.

The Commission also supported the density bonus and the relaxations requested provided the two street facades were preserved and the spaces were fully aligned with the existing window opening.

It was resolved:

THAT the Vancouver Heritage Commission commends the applicant for appearing before the Commission at this early stage of the project development.

THAT the Vancouver Heritage Commission finds the existing heritage building has sufficient heritage merits to be eligible for bonussing.

Partial extract of Urban Design Panel Minutes of March 10, 1999

Address: 1196 Granville Street

Use: Dance Centre
Zoning: DD
Application Status: Preliminary
Architect: Architectura

Owner: Bank of Nova Scotia
Review: First
Delegation: Arthur Erickson, Noel Best, M.A. Faris
Staff: Mike Kemble, Gerry McGeough

EVALUATION: SUPPORT (5-2)

Introduction: Mike Kemble, Development Planner, presented this application, noting the location at a prominent downtown entry intersection in an area currently in transition. The applicant attempted unsuccessfully to purchase an adjacent vacant 25' lot for consolidation. The application is currently submitted as a Preliminary Application, however, due to a funding/scheduling time constraint, the applicant may upgrade the application to Complete. This 50 ft. by 120 ft. site at the northeast corner of Davie and Granville Streets is within the DD zoning which allows a 3.5 fsr and 90 ft. height. Street level retail is required on both frontages, as well as pedestrian weather protection. The applicant is seeking a heritage bonus to develop a seven- storey Dance Centre building housing a production studio on the lower level, dance studios, and administrative offices for a number of dance companies. The existing heritage building on the site is a two-storey former bank building. The applicant proposes to retain only the Granville Street façade, and develop the building in a contemporary expression and not deal with the heritage aspect on Davie Street. The proposal would contain a small bank office and banking machine space at the Granville Street entrance. The proposed building would total 5.4 fsr, with 100% site coverage. The applicant is requesting relaxation of parking and loading requirements. Mr. Kemble noted a variance of staff opinion with respect to the heritage retention options, ranging from retention of both the Granville Street and Davie Street facades to retention of the Granville Street façade and either the first bay on Davie Street or alternatively the first and last bay on Davie Street. A report is being prepared, requesting Council's opinion on the retention aspect.

Mr. Gerry McGeough, Heritage Planner, advised in January, the Heritage Commission reviewed the proposal for this B building, a "temple bank" design with columns and pilasters, carried around the corner. The proposal at that time included the GranvilleStreet façade and possibly the first bay on Davie Street. The Commission was supportive of the project, its location and the adaptive reuse as an appropriate conservation approach. The Commission supported the density bonus and requested relaxations provided the two street facades were preserved and the spaces fully aligned with the existing window opening.

Mr. Kemble requested the Panel's advice regarding:

· the general heritage approach
· the general massing and architectural concept of project
· ground level interface with public realm in terms of street level treatment.

Applicant's Opening Comments: Mr. Arthur Erickson, Architect, advised the nature of the performing and production studios does not allow retention of the Davie Street heritage façade. The façade will be butt glazed with frameless corrugated diffused cast and curved glass, even-textured, no pattern so as not to compete with the old bank. The upper studios are open to light and ventilation and will have more of a factory-type glass to allow dance to be part of the street scene on Davie Street. The lower two-storey height will also be glazed but with animated posters/neon signage behind on the solid wall. The production space has to be a `black box' sound and light proof space. At the upper levels there are strip planters, building setbacks and a glass topped terrace. The entry to the centre is at the eastern end of the Davie frontage.

Panel's Comments: After reviewing the model and posted drawings, the Panel commented as follows:

The Panel supported the proposed use for this building as it would be a positive addition to a neglected part of the city. The proposal is audacious and adds visual excitement through the transparency of its glass facades. The `stage-set' approach to the bank façade was felt to be appropriate as the entire concept is a theatrical one.

One Panel member expressed some concerns about the `aggressive'nature of the floor plate along Davie and Granville Streets. Suggestion was made to set the curved Granville glass curtain further back from the bank façade and to set back the upper levels along Davie Street more. Several members suggested a less frivolous and more functional approach to weather protection along the Davie Street elevation. The blank wall with neon display along Davie at street level was felt to be supportable by most Panel members as it added to the theatrical feel of the project. Other recommendations included further study of the south-facing Davie Street façade to deal with solar heat gainresulting in a more hi-tech expression and for less emphasis on the two rooftop elements on the Davie and Granville facades.

While two Panel members were opposed to the retention of only the Granville Street bank façade and felt that Options 2 or 3 should be the minimum retention in order to justify the bonused density, the majority of the Panel members felt that the Davie Street portion would detract from the clarity of the proposal and that the Granville Street frontage was the most important historical context for this building.

Some concern was expressed over the blank north façade with suggestions that consideration be given to flexibility in that façade (such as knock-out panels) so that once the future of the 25 ft. lot was known, a more appropriate response could be made at that time.

Applicant's Response: Mr. Faris, The Dance Foundation, outlined the costs of the various heritage retention options and the decision to go with only the Granville façade. Mr. Best, Architectura, advised that many alternatives were explored to locate the production studio in another location, but with the constraints of studio dimensions and requirements of the dance community, the lower floor and the resultant `blank wall' were accepted as the only appropriate space. The Panel's comments with respect to the potential sunlight problem and weather protection treatment were noted.

APPENDIX F

Dance Centre Proposal (Granville and Davie Streets)

Comparison of Heritage Retention Options

Options	Extent of Heritage Building. Retention	Urban Design Benefit	Dance Centre Programmatic Impacts *	Capital Cost of Heritage Work	Approx. Density Bonus** (sq. ft.)
Option 1	Only Granville Street facade	minimum	nil	$337,000	*** 11,500
Option 2	Granville facade & Davie corner	minimum acceptable	nil	$411,000	13,700
Option 3	Granville facade & full Davie facade	most acceptable	not acceptable to D.C.	$756,000	25,200

* Note: Characterization of impacts on the functionality of different spaces.

** Note: This analysis has not assumed any economic benefit of the parking relaxation requested.

*** Note: This is within 500 sq. ft. of the requested 12,000 sq. ft., the minimum density bonus amount required to meet the Dance Centre's programming needs on this site, which is within the margin of error of the various inputs for the bonus calculation.

(c) 1998 City of Vancouver