What I learned when I was a city councillor:
As the rate of change slows down, people’s perception of change speeds up.
So even small changes that would have been insignificant in the past become the focus for community anxiety once things have settled down. For instance: the difference in the West End from the 1960s to today. Once, there were dozens of new highrises being built every few months; today a single building creates a ripple of effects, and sometimes a wave of resistence.
Like the highrise built at the corner of Davie and Bidwell – encouraged and approved under STIR, Vision Vancouver’s “Short-Term Incentive for Rental” program along with a heritage bonus, but opposed by those who thought it a developer giveaway and an inappropriate intrusion.
Now finished and occupied, this is what it looks like from the southwest corner:
.
.
Three elements: the four-storey mid-rise block, wrapped in stone; the highrise behind; and a remnant of Maxine’s, done in 1920s Mission-style, now a facade for The Alexandria. How well does it all fit together?
And how does the whole project fit into the West End? A highrise is not much of a change of scale for this neighbourhood, and so that’s not a big intrusion. Consequently, it’s the mid-rise block that has the biggest impact. So, as I’ll ask with other recent examples from around the metro region, is this a change of scale that works?
Going as a zombie. Not much of a change, I know.
Sorry – please ignore!
That is one of the best quotes I’ve heard in a long while. A great truism that we all know intuitively, that I’ve never heard said as succinctly.
If I remember rightly, Gord the threat to Maxine’s caused a ruckus!
Too bad it’s such a light killer. I’m not averse to high-rise development but the result on the street is (post noon) a virtually sun-less wind tunnel down to English Bay.
Yes.
… the result on the street is (post noon) a virtually sun-less wind tunnel down to English Bay.
Belly, do you have actual light measurements or building shadow studies to substantiate your statement? It seems to me this is a rather specious statement to make just as monsoon season is starting up. Denman was bathed in swaths of sunlight every time I’ve been on it in daylight hours thei summer.
MB, with respect, I’m talking about Davie, which runs east-west. Hence the mass on the south side does block a lot of light. I also live a block away, so even without light measurement data, I’m still pretty familiar with it since the building was completed a few months back. I’m just making an observation—I’m not against the development per se. TP
I like it. My calculation is that 181 high rises were built in the West End from 1956-1973; 1973 was when the TEAM government fired G Sutton Brown And ended the first highrise boom. However, even during this early period public opposition made a substantive impact that is not always appreciated.
The 1957 Ocean Towers structure was proposed in conformance with the established rules (the top floor penthouse that was added required several city council discussions/ approvals but the rest of the building was within the rules). In any case, the project proceeded but sparked public opposition, which resulted in a new rule being added to the West End zoning requirements that effectively prevented any similar structures from being constructed. This was important because it meant that the West End became a district of spaced point towers. Had the Ocean Towers precedent becom the norm then you would have seen the entire West End walled off from the view by large slab structures hoarding the view.
During the 1956-1973 high rise boom the housing stock in the West End deteriorated somewhat because landlords deferred maintainence of low rise structures, expecting to sell their land to high rise developers for a profit. Under such conditions they expected to soon see these low rises demolished. Ending the high rise boom effectively changed this calculation and conditions improved.
There appears to have always been an anti high rise crowd in Vancover and they sometimes have succeeded in stopping major projects. I think what happens is that with more projects their energy gets dissipated, while when there are fewer targets they are able to focus a more sustained opposition to a project.
My own impression is that the West End has enough high rises right now and the rules in place make it hard to add new ones anyway. The thing which might be improved would be the street scape, which could be strengthened by the addition of low rise infill such as townhouses to reinforce the street edge, especially in places now occupied by large parking lots.
One final note: it was Harland Bartholomew who iron ally recommended drastically boosting the density of the West End in a report he authored sometime between 1944 and 1949. He had concluded that Vancouver was going to see people leaving the city to live in surrounding suburbs, resulting in declining downtown businesses and a loss of tax revenue. To counteract this he recommended eliminating the six story height limit and increasing the residential density of the West End to 85 persons per acre. His recommendation was adopted by Gerald Sutton Brown in 1954 and put into effect by the city in 1956, and I think this move has proven to have been a success.
It’s only a change in scale because it seeks to create a streetwall from the sidewalk up.
Most of the retail frontages on Davie are one or two storeys, and the towers are of a 1960/70s variety, which are setback from the sidewalk.
A wider angle shot with more streetfront context would have perhaps shown more “change”.