Agenda Index City of Vancouver

POLICY REPORT
URBAN STRUCTURE

Author/Local: MGordon/7665

TO:

Vancouver City Council

FROM:

Director of Central Area Planning, in consultation with the General Manager of Engineering Services, the Manager of the Housing Centre and the Director of Social Planning

SUBJECT:

CD-1 Text Amendment: 1610-1650 Bayshore Drive
(Bayshore Gardens Neighbourhood)

 

RECOMMENDATION

GENERAL MANAGER’S COMMENTS

COUNCIL POLICY

Relevant Council Policies for the site are:

· Central Area Plan, adopted December 3, 1991.
· Coal Harbour Policy Statement, adopted February 6, 1990, which provided a density “allowance” for the construction of rental accommodation, with units not larger than 70 m2 (750 sq. ft.), over the entire Coal Harbour site between Denman and Thurlow Streets. This was subsequently incorporated into the Bayshore Gardens neighbourhood CD-1 zoning schedule.
· The Coal Harbour Policy Statement also states that a minimum of 20% of dwelling units should be non-market housing.
· On November 9, 1993, Council enacted the CD-1 No. 321 (By-law No. 7232) which applies to this site.

PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

This report assesses an application to amend CD-1 By-law No. 7232 for the Bayshore Gardens neighbourhood, and related changes to the site’s form of development. The applicant proposes the following text amendments to the CD-1 By-law:

· permitting an increase in the size of the rental incentive units by amending the zoning to define a rental incentive unit as being an average size of 69.7 m2 (750 sq. ft.) rather than the current maximum size of 69.7 m2 (750 sq. ft.);
· increasing the maximum permitted height of the residential towers from 74 m (243 ft.) to 79 m (259 ft.); and
· reducing the parking requirement for the rental incentive units by requiring a minimum of one space per unit rather than 0.4 spaces/unit plus 1 space/100 m2 (1076 sq. ft.) gross floor area.

The applicant has proposed increases in the heights of two residential towers and two mid-rise non-market housing buildings by between one and five storeys. It is also proposed that a stepped building on Bayshore Drive will be revised to take the form of a point tower. Lastly, the developer is proposing a reduction of two storeys or five m (16 ft.) in the height of a residential tower (Building K) proposed for the north side of Bayshore Drive.

Map One - Context Map showing the location of Buildings

Staff support the proposed text amendments in respect to the increase in the size of the rental incentive units and the increase in the permitted height, but do not support the proposed reduction in the parking requirement. Staff recommends that the existing by-law parking standard be maintained as it reflects rates of car ownership for the proposed size of units, based on a survey of car ownership in the West End. A reduction in the standard will result in there being limited parking for the visitors of tenants in the rental building (Building D) at Cardero Street and West Georgia Street. The reduced parking standard will also apply to a rental building on the north side of Bayshore Drive (Building K) which will be built in a later phase (See Map on page 8).

The major public benefit of the changes to the form of development is that it results in two non-market housing sites that are not physically integrated with market projects. This greatly increases the flexibility for the timing and construction of non-market housing. The relocation of Building D will also simplify the construction of the transit line because it no longer straddles the right-of-way. It will also reduce the cost of constructing rental housing.

DISCUSSION

Use and Floor Area: The proposed amendments will not result in any changes of use on the site or an overall increase in total floor area. The total number of residential units in the entire Bayshore Gardens neighbourhood will remain the same, with a minimum of 230 rental units and a maximum of 750 market and non-market units, in compliance with the current CD-1 By-law. Although residential will be the principal use of the area, there will also be retail uses on the ground floor of Building J (non-market housing) fronting on Cardero Street and a child-care centre on the roof of this building. Open space and play areas, including grassed and landscaped areas for the child-care centre will be provided on the roof. Underground parking for the residential and non-residential uses and the Westin Bayshore Hotel will be provided in a parkade under the buildings, with access from Bayshore Drive.

Built Form: The proposal consists of three towers and two mid-rise buildings. In summary, there are four proposed changes to the form of development:

· one building will be a point tower rather than a stepped building, due to the excessive construction cost of a stepped building;
· the non-market housing projects now proposed will no longer be integrated with the adjacent market residential building. Staff considers this a major public benefit as the construction of non-market housing will not depend on the timing of the market buildings. Previously, the two non-market housing projects were to be located in podiums integrated with two market towers and non-market housing units were also located on several floors of one of the market towers;
· the rental tower (Building D), which was at the corner of West Georgia and Cardero Street, is located further west so that it does not straddle the rapid transit tunnel right-of-way (further discussion below); and
· height increases are proposed for five buildings and a reduction in height is proposed for one building (further discussion below).

Proposed Increase in Permitted Height: Currently, the maximum height limit for any building is 74 m (243 ft.) and the proposal will increase this to 79 m (259 ft.).

The proposed height increases for four buildings are summarized below (see map one on page three):

Building D (rental tower at Georgia and Cardero) 74 m (25 st.) 79 m (29 st.)
Building G (market tower on Bayshore Drive) 55 m (19 st.) no change
Building H (non-market housing on Bayshore Drive 12 m (4 st.) 15 m (5 st.)
Building I (market housing at Bayshore and Cardero) 64 m (22 st.) 79 m (27 st.)
Building J (non-market housing on Cardero Street) 18 m (6 st.) 23 m (8 st.)

In summary, staff conclude that the changes have the following impacts:

· most private views are not impacted and while some views are negatively impacted, this is offset by positive impacts on other private views (see Appendix D for Public Comments); and
· there are some reductions and increases of shadowing of private open space and some minor increases in the shadowing of the park.

Staff support the applicant’s proposal because the pattern of building heights meets the intent of the guidelines whereby the highest buildings are on the eastern edge of the neighbourhood and buildings adjacent to the park, in the centre of the neighbourhood, are lower. Also, the increased height assists in creating non-market housing sites which are not physically integrated with market buildings. Given the possibility that no funding may be available for seniors housing, the proposed low- and mid-rise buildings are more appropriate for family housing. Although there are negative implications regarding some increased shadowing and some impacts on private views, there are sufficient public benefits to justify supporting the proposed increases in height.

Proposed Decrease in Permitted Height: As a result of the public discussion and an analysis of the proposal’s impacts on private views, the developer suggested that the maximum height of Tower K (see Map One on page 3), currently proposed at 18 storeys (52 m; 171 ft.), could be reduced by two storeys (5 m; 16 ft.). This will require an amendment of the design guidelines. This height reduction will have a positive impact on the views of upland residents. Tower K is located on the north side of Bayshore Drive, immediately west of the Bayshore Westin Hotel and is designated as a rental tower.

Proposed Increase in the Size of Rental Units: Staff, including the Manager of the Housing Centre, support the proposed text amendment to permit the rental incentive units to be an average rather than a maximum net size of 69.7 m2 (750 sq. ft.) for the following reasons:

· the large majority (80%) of units will be between 58.6 m2 (631 sq. ft.) and 70.4 m2 (758 sq. ft.) in size and thus will achieve the intent of Council’s policy to achieve some degree of affordability by limiting the size of the units;
· staff concluded that the rents for the smaller units were only marginally lower as compared to those for the larger units;
·
it will provide more variety in the size of the rental units available in the area, noting that the rental incentive units approved at 1529 West Pender Street last year resulted in almost exclusively small one bedroom and bachelor units;
· there will be an increase in the number of two bedroom units suitable for families; and
· allowing some units to exceed the 69.7 m2 (750 sq. ft.) maximum will facilitate the design of liveable two bedroom units because these are difficult to achieve when the floor area is 69.7 m2 (750 sq. ft.).

Proposed Reduction in the Parking Requirement: The applicant has proposed a text amendment which reduces the parking requirement to one space per rental incentive unit (equivalent to 152 spaces for Building D - Rental Building). Despite the reduced parking standard, the applicant subsequently agreed to provide 168 spaces. But this still does not meet the current by-law standard (equivalent to 183 spaces).

The developer argues this reduction in the parking requirement will decrease the cost of the rental building and visitors can use the hotel visitor parkade or the public parkade under the park, west of the hotel. Staff do not support this proposal for the following reasons:

· these rental units are larger and there will be a need for parking reflected by the parking requirement;
· the current by-law standard reflects the rate of car ownership in the West End, where the majority of housing is rental;
· the applicant is requesting a standard less than that applicable in the Downtown South community and staff conclude that the rate of car ownership is likely to be higher in the Bayshore Gardens neighbourhood;

· the parking requirement was reduced by approximately 20% for the Bayshore Hotel due to the mixed-use nature of that project and staff are concerned that further parking reductions will result in a particularly tight parking situation; and
· staff believe that the shortages of parking will be compounded when the second rental incentive building is built on the north side of Bayshore Drive and the lower parking requirement is applied to it, with no provision for visitor parking.

Staff note that the developer has the option of providing the parking off-site where it is secured by a covenant registered against title. Staff further note that the parkade under the Marina Square Park cannot be considered for justifying parking relaxations, as it is intended to service a restaurant, marina, the seawall and Stanley Park users.

Revision of the Rapid Transit Tunnel Right-of-Way and relocation of Building D: Because the rental tower (Building D) was initially located above the underground right-of-way (ROW) for a future rapid transit line, the owner was held legally responsible for designing, constructing and maintaining a transit tunnel, at no cost to the City as a condition of the rezoning of this site in 1993. It is proposed that Building D be moved further west so that it does not straddle the ROW. This is a public benefit because there will be more flexibility in the construction of the transit system, without having to go beneath a building.

However, with the relocation of Building D, staff were concerned that the public view corridor (as called for in the design guidelines) was compromised because the width of the view corridor was reduced. Therefore, it is proposed that the underground transit ROW adjacent to the corner of West Georgia Street and Cardero Street be modified. A tighter radius allows Building D to be sited further east. This maximizes the width of the view corridor as compared to what it would be if the existing ROW was maintained (illustrated in Maps Two and Three on page 8). Staff support the resulting view corridor as there are sufficient public benefits resulting from the increased flexibility for constructing the transit line.

Map 2
CURRENTLY APPROVED FORM OF DEVELOPMENT AND RAPID TRANSIT ROW

Map 3
PROPOSED FORM OF DEVELOPMENT AND REVISED TRANSIT ROW

BC Transit and engineering consultants working on the Broadway ALRT have indicated that the revised ROW alignment can accommodate existing ALRT technologies. Staff and the owner's consultant will work together to finalize the ROW alignment to meet ALRT requirements.

With the revised ROW alignment and the relocation of the rental tower further west, the owner will be discharged of the obligation to build the transit tunnel. This will allow the market rental housing to be offered at a more reasonable rent.

It is notable that the at-grade transit ROW does not change and it will be available for transit development as planned, when needed. Staff are ensuring that the surface landscaping treatment can easily accommodate the construction of the transit line, when necessary and will thereafter be compatible with its operation.

Child-care Facility: Staff, including the City’s Child-Care Coordinator, endorse the applicant’s proposal to locate the facility and the associated open space and play areas on the roof of the proposed non-market housing building on Cardero Street. A condition of this rezoning will be to amend the legal agreement to reflect the provision of the proposed facility.

Consequential Amendments: Staff recommend a number of amendments to the Bayshore Gardens CD-1 Guidelines to reflect the proposed revisions in height and to amend the definition of ‘rental incentive unit.’

Applicant’s Comments: The applicant has reviewed the report and confirmed that they are in general agreement with its contents.

Public Comments: See Appendix D, page one.

CONCLUSION

Staff support most of the applicant’s proposed amendments to the CD-1 By-law and the associated changes to the form of development because:

· there is a major public benefit in securing two separate sites for non-market housing and simplifying the construction of non-market housing;
· the shadowing and private view impacts are neither better nor worse than the former proposal;

· adjusting the size requirements for the rental incentive units will provide a greater variety in rental units;
· the developer has also indicated that relocating the rental tower so that it does not straddle the rapid transit right-of-way will reduce the cost of providing the rental housing by eliminating the requirement that the developer construct a tunnel;
· the relocation of Building D will simplify the construction of a rapid transit line; and
· the reduced height of Building K, north of Bayshore Drive, will have a positive impact on the views of upland residents.

Although relocating Building D does narrow the width of the public view corridor from West Georgia Street to the mountains, called for in the guidelines, staff support this change because relocating the tower has other benefits as discussed above.

Staff do not support the proposed reduction in the parking requirement because the current requirement reflects the rate of car ownership for similar sized units in the West End and a reduction will result in limited visitor parking for the tenants in Building D and Building K (to be developed in a later phase).

Staff recommend that the application be referred to a Public Hearing with a recommendation from the Director of Central Area Planning that it be approved, subject to the draft CD-1 By-law amendments generally as shown in Appendix A, the draft CD-1 Guideline amendments generally as shown in Appendix B and the proposed conditions of approval listed in Appendix C.

* * * * *

ag990323.htm

Draft CD-1 Bylaw Amendments

Amend By-law No. 7232, generally in accordance with the amendments noted below. Note: all additions are in bold and deletions are in (brackets and italics):

Section 3 (Definitions)

The following amendment will allow for all rental incentive units in a building to have an average floor area of no greater than 69.7 m2 (750 sq. ft.) rather than a maximum floor area of 69.7 m2 (750 sq. ft.). This will allow for rental incentive units which exceed 69.7 m2 (750 sq. ft.) to be balanced by smaller units.

“Rental Incentive Units means units which are secured by agreement for rental use only, and which, when calculated for each building have (having a net) an average net floor area of no more than (less than) 69.7 m2 (which are secured by agreement for rental use only).”

Section 7.1 (Height)

The following amendment will allow for an increase in the height of buildings in one sub-area of the Bayshore Gardens neighbourhood.

“The maximum building height measured above the base surface, but excluding the mechanical penthouse and roof, shall be as set out in Table 4.”

Table 4
Maximum Height (in metres)

USE

Sub-Area (from Diagram 1)

1

2

3

4

5

Maximum Height

(74) 79

50

0

55

5

Section 9 (d) Parking

The following amendment will reduce the parking requirement for the two proposed market guaranteed rental buildings. One building is the subject of this rezoning and a second, on the north side of Bayshore Drive, will be developed at a later date. Staff do not support this amendment.

“market guaranteed rental residential dwelling uses shall provide a minimum of (0.4 spaces for each dwelling unit plus 1 space for each 100 m2 gross floor area, except that no more than 2.2 spaces for each dwelling unit need be provided) 1 space for each dwelling unit;”

Draft Amendments to “Bayshore Gardens CD-1 Guidelines”

Amend Bayshore Gardens CD-1 Guidelines, By-law No. 7232, in accordance with the amendments noted below. Note: all additions are in bold and deletions are in (brackets and italics).

Amend location of building D and change of building G from terrace to tower on Figures 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11.

3.4.1 Height

3.4.3 Terraced Buildings (F (and G))

3.4.4 Towers (A, B, C, D, E, G and I)

4.3.1 The Cardero Precinct should consist of a combination of building types, as follows:

APPENDIX C
Page 1 of 5

PROPOSED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

NOTE: These are draft conditions which are subject to change and refinement by staff prior to the finalization of the agenda for the public hearing.

(a) THAT the proposed form of development be approved by Council in principle, generally as prepared by Hancock Bruckner Eng and Wright Partners, Architects and stamped “Received, City Planning Department, November 13, 1998“ provided that the Director of Planning may allow minor alterations to this form of development when approving the detailed scheme of development as outlined in (b) below.

(b) THAT, prior to approval by Council of the form of development, the applicant shall obtain approval of a development application by the Director of Planning, who shall have particular regard to the following:

CPTED

CARDERO STREET ENTRANCE FOR BUILDING D

NORTH FACADE OF BUILDING H

APPENDIX C
Page 2 of 5

DESIGN DEVELOPMENT FOR LANDSCAPING
AT CORNER OF CARDERO AND GEORGIA

TREATMENT OF THE BASE OF BUILDINGS ’C’, ‘D’ AND ‘G’

DELETE THE DRAFT AMENDMENT TO REDUCE PARKING REQUIREMENT

(c) THAT the amending By-law be amended to delete the amendment of the parking requirement.

(d) THAT prior to enactment of the amending By-law, and at no cost to the City, the registered owner shall:

FIRE ACCESS FOR BUILDING D

APPENDIX C
Page 3 of 5

VOLUMETRIC TRANSIT R.O.W. PLAN

VOLUMETRIC TRANSIT R.O.W. AGREEMENT

GROUND LEVEL TRANSIT R.O.W AGREEMENT

TRANSIT TUNNEL CONSTRUCTION

APPENDIX C
Page 4 of 5

ACCESS REQUIREMENTS FOR THE UNDERGROUND PARKADE

NO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN

RENTAL TENURE

USE OF COMMON OPEN SPACE

INTERIM OPEN SPACE LANDSCAPING

APPENDIX C
Page 5 of 5

CHILD CARE

APPENDIX D

Page 1 of 4

Comments from the Public, Reviewing Agencies and the Applicant

Public Input: Rezoning information signs were erected on the site on December 11, 1998 and on December 22, 1998, Planning Department staff sent a notification letter to approximately 762 nearby property owners. The notification area was bounded by Robson Street to the south, Chilco Street to the west, Broughton Street to the east, and as far as the harbour headline to the north.

Staff received several phone calls from residents south and west of the site and about a dozen residents came to City Hall inquiring about the rezoning. Concerns focussed largely on the impact of increased building heights on existing views, and to a lesser extent the potential impacts of the proposed transit tunnel right-of-way, and the reduction in available parking.

On January 19, 1999, the applicant held a Public Information Open House at the Bayshore Hotel. Notification letters for the meeting used the same boundaries as the Planning Department notification. Approximately 60 people attended the open house. Concerns included increased building heights and the negative impacts on views and shadowing. The inclusion of non-market housing in the development, and the location of the entrance to the Westin Bayshore Hotel off Cardero Street was not supported by several individuals. Most of the residents at the meeting were supportive of the development.

General Manager of Engineering Services:

The General Manager of Engineering Services supports the applicant’s request that the underground transit right-of-way (R.O.W.) adjacent to the corner of West Georgia and Cardero Street be modified generally as shown in Appendix F.

Parking: The General Manager of Engineering Services does not support the proposed relaxation of the parking requirement for Building D for the following reasons:

· The proposed 168 spaces provides only about 1.1 spaces per unit on average. This is tight based on our most up to date survey returns from various neighbourhoods on the Downtown Peninsula. As well, City standards are always geared to the average, and this site is expected to be at that level or higher, given the location and overall quality of the Bayshore Gardens project.

APPENDIX D
Page 2 of 4

· The hotel parking has already been reduced to the minimum on the basis of mixed-use and, indeed, may be very tight given that the 365-space requirement was based on only the larger ballroom being assessed. For the hotel the reduction is already approximately 20%, with no parking requirement assessed for meeting rooms and other uses.

· While a 5% mixed-use reduction was approved for Coal Harbour, it only applies to non-residential uses. Likewise, staff will not consider extending a mixed-use reduction to residential use in Bayshore Gardens.

· The residential requirement follows the existing zoning, and makes use of the discounted rate for rental units, saving 15 spaces from what would be required for condominium units. The calculation for Building D will exceed that for 1529 West Pender, a rental building on the Coal Harbour site, because the units are significantly larger (all rental units are smaller than 50 m2 (538 ft2) in 1529 West Pender). As well, 1529 West Pender is an experiment in home office residential construction, and is expected to have a reduction in car ownership as a result.

Staff note the developer has the option of providing the parking off-site if it is secured by a covenant registered against title. Staff further note that the parkade under Marina Square Park cannot be considered for justifying parking relaxations, as it will service restaurant, marina, seawall and Stanley Park users.

The General Manager of Engineering Services has no objections to the proposed rezoning provided the following issues can be addressed prior-to By-law enactment.

Arrangements to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering Services and the Director of Legal Services for the following:

· Changes/realignment to the “Transit” right-of-way (volumetric easement) to accommodate the proposed siting of the buildings.

· Appropriate rights-of-way and access agreements to accommodate the proposed cross boundary manoeuvring and driving aisles proposed within the parkade.

APPENDIX D
Page 3 of 4

Social Planning (Child-care) Comments: The Child-Care Co-ordinator is concerned with the configuration of the outdoor space and wants to ensure that all areas are usable. The availabity of parking, access to the street for pedestrians, and drop-off areas are also a concern. These issues can be resolved as part of the development permit applicant

Urban Design Panel Comments: On December 16, 1998, the Urban Design Panel gave unanimous support for the proposed text amendment. The Panel acknowledged the reasons for moving Building D and agreed it is likely the only option. The change in Building G from terraced form to a point tower was also fully supported.

With respect to the Cardero/Georgia corner, the Panel stressed that its treatment will be critical to this high profile corner. There were suggestions to ensure there are good connections from the cul de sac to the various pedestrian connections through the site, and mixed opinions on the corner landscape treatment. Some Panel members called for making it stronger while others felt the views through might be more important. This is clearly an area that the applicant will need to negotiate with the City. An observation was made that moving the tower to the west does create a more interesting prospect at this corner and there may be opportunities for some views through which would be helpful. There was also a recommendation to further consider the historical aspects of this important corner.

Regarding the distribution of the massing, concerns about density focused on the adjacency of some of the uses, noting the somewhat uncomfortable relationship that exists on the neighbouring Marathon site, between a high-end condominium building and a non-market housing component. There was concern that the fusion of the family housing and market condominiums may be too aggressive in this instance. The Panel did not support the proposed division of the open space according to the various uses and generally felt it should all be dedicated to the family housing and provide a visual amenity only for the market housing. It was suggested that more effort should be given to providing roof terraces for the condominium building.

With respect to the distribution of height in this precinct, the Panel generally agreed with the proposal for building G and the transfer of density to Cardero Street. There was a further comment regarding the necessity for building G to specifically address the street and a question whether there could be a stronger gesture to address the park in some way.

There were no major concerns about the impact of this proposal on the view corridor, although the applicant was urged to provide a transparent base for both buildings B and C, with the use of pilotis strongly encouraged.

APPENDIX D
Page 4 of 4

Crime Prevention through Environmental Design Comments: Design development to take into consideration the principles of CPTED (Crime Prevention through Environmental Design). Concerns identified included:

Theft in underground parking areas.
- Numerous user groups increases opportunities for theft in the underground. This problem can be mitigated by providing full separation of commercial, hotel, residential, visitor and daycare users. This includes separate gating, elevator and stair use. Ground level townhomes should have secured parking with direct access to the residences.

Making the underground parking area feel safe.
- This can be achieved by improving security and visibility in accordance with section 4.12 of the Parking By-law and consideration to painting the walls and ceiling of the parking garage white.

Break and enter.
- Ground floor units have proven to be most susceptible to break and enter. Opportunities can be reduced by raising the units slightly above street grade and by providing additional electronic security and hardware to these units. Areas of concealment around doors and windows should be deleted and landscaping should allow visual permeability.

Graffiti.
- Graffiti is prevalent in the Vancouver area and its removal is an expense to building owners and strata councils. Opportunities for graffiti can be mitigated by reducing areas of exposed wall, by covering the walls with vines, hedges, lattice or steel mesh or by using a protective coating material.

Pedestrian right of way.
- Clarification is required regarding the pedestrian right of way. The landscape plans differ from the development plans.

Applicant’s Comments: The applicant has reviewed the report and confirmed that they are in general agreement with its contents.

APPENDIX E
Page 1 of 1

Additional Information

Site and Surrounding Development: The proposed development at 1601 Bayshore Drive is bounded by Cardero Street to the east, Denman Street to the west, Georgia Street to the south, and Coal Harbour to the north. The westerly portion of the Bayshore site (west of Bidwell Street) has two completed towers on Georgia Street, with two buildings on the waterfront side under construction. The sites directly east of Bayshore Gardens are zoned CD-1 and include 1575 West Pender, a 13-storey residential tower, as well as the Marathon development with the Avila at 560 Cardero Street (21 storeys), the Bauhinia at 535 Nicola Street (25 storeys) and Coal Harbour Co-op at 588 Cardero Street/ 1515 West Hasting Street (4 and 7 storeys). Bordering the site immediately to the west is Devonian Harbour Park. The area immediately to the south across West Georgia Street is zoned RM-6 and currently includes a restaurant, a gas station an office building, as well as several residential towers.

Proposed Development: The proposed development in sub-area 1 has three buildings fronting onto Cardero Street: a 29-storey rental residential tower (Building D), an eight-storey non-market housing building (Building J), and a 27-storey market residential tower (Building I). Commercial, retail and office uses are found at grade along Cardero Street. A five-storey non-market building (Building H) comprised of ground level townhouses with residential above, and a 19-storey tower (Building G), front onto Bayshore Drive, which also provides access to the residential component of Building I.

The proposed CD-1 amendments will result in changing the form of Building G from a terraced or stepped building to a point tower. The resulting decrease in density will be used to increase the height of the Buildings D, H, I and J.

Vehicular access to 5 levels of underground parking is provided via two entrances off Bayshore Drive. Pedestrian access to commercial/retail services is on Cardero Street, while pedestrian access to the residential units is on Cardero Street and Bayshore Drive.

Social and Environmental Implications: The development has positive social and environment implications because it provides:

APPENDIX F
Page 1 of 1

Transit row Map

APPENDIX G
Page 1 of 29

drawings of development

APPENDIX H
Page 1 of 2

Applicant, Property, and Development Proposal Information

Applicant and Property Information

Street Address

1600 Bayshore Drive

Legal Description

Lots L&M, Public Harbour of Burrard Inlet, NWD, Plan LMP 12980 and Lot N, DL 185, Blk 54, Public Harbour of Burrard Inlet, NWD, Plan LMP 12980

Applicant

Hancock, Bruckner, Eng and Wright Partners, Architects

Architect

Hancock, Bruckner, Eng and Wright Partners, Architects

Property Owner/Developer

Bayshore Gardens Development Ltd, Partnership (Owner)
Aoki Corporation (Agent)

Site Statistics

 

Gross

Dedications

Net

Site Areas

      

Development Statistics

 

Development Permitted Under Existing Zoning

Proposed Development

Recommended Development (if different than proposed)

Zoning

CD-1 (321)

CD-1 (321)

  

Uses

Multiple dwellings (market & rental);
retail uses; service uses; office uses; community, cultural & recreational uses; marine terminal or berth; parking uses; and accessory uses customarily ancillary to the above uses.

No Change

  

Total Dwelling Units

Market

    Non-Market

980

750
230

No Change

  

Max. Floor Space Ratio

- Residential
- Retail, Office, Service
- Hotel

155,470

102,000
3760
49,710

No Change

  

Maximum Height

74 m

79 m

  

Max. No of Storeys

25 storeys

29 storeys

  

Parking Spaces

0.4 spaces/unit plus 1 space/ 100 m2 gross floor area

1 space per dwelling unit

  

Comments or questions? You can send us email.
[City Homepage] [Get In Touch]

(c) 1998 City of Vancouver