Major Vancouver landowners aiming higher after view-protection policies relaxed

Real estate players, including Bosa Properties, Concord Pacific, and the City of Vancouver itself, are revising their plans for sites affected by recent changes to the city’s policies on view cones.

Major property owners in Vancouver are revising their plans to see how much taller they can build after city council relaxed view-protection policies last year.

This doesn’t mean the sky’s the limit, however, and some observers say the city should push developers to spend more time and money considering what they will give back to the community in return for these lucrative height and density accommodations, such as adding public parks or plazas.

Earlier this month, owners of two major sites in northeast False Creek said they plan to build more than previously envisioned because of the view corridor changes.

Others are following suit.

“It’s absolutely true and very obvious that every freaking developer and landowner is trying to do that,” said James Cheng, the Vancouver architect who helped shape the city’s skyline and has designed about 50 downtown towers since opening his firm in 1978.

Reached this week, Dan Cupa, Bosa Properties’ senior vice-president of residential, said the developer is now working with Army & Navy CEO Jacqui Cohen and city staff on a new plan “that delivers additional secured rental housing and commerce space, enabled by the view protection policy changes.”

“We plan to move forward with an amended rezoning application this winter and remain committed to working with the community to bring renewal to Gastown and the Downtown Eastside while harnessing the history and spirit of Army & Navy,” Cupa said in an emailed statement.

ABC Coun. Peter Meiszner, who introduced the 2023 motion to relax the view cones, said this week some of the towers planned in the Broadway area are also being tweaked to add between two and five more storeys, and other proposals totalling thousands of rental units will also “be coming forward to council soon as a direct result of these changes.”

Several large properties owned by the City of Vancouver will also be affected, including the undeveloped land on False Creek’s south shore, east of the Cambie Bridge. Meiszner said there could be more news soon regarding that long-undeveloped site.

Green Coun. Pete Fry said he is not opposed to changing view protections, but would prefer an approach where the city considers allowing encroachment into public views based on “performance-based” criteria, “so it would be contingent on what the greater good is, what the value is beyond just profitability for the lucky developer that owns it.”

“What is the net benefit of sacrificing these cherished views? How is it delivering back to the people?” Fry said. “I would have liked a little bit more accountability in determining what we’re sacrificing those views for.”

Cheng said there are indeed some “greedy” property owners who want to secure the option for building more on a site and then quickly sell it off at a profit without ever developing it.

Cheng thinks the city can push the owners of some of the most prominent development sites harder to compensate for the financial gain of getting to build more and higher, such as getting them to contribute thoughtful spaces for public use.

“First, I’m in support of view cones, and I was in support of modifying the view cones,” he said. At the same time, “View cone policy should be established with a clear set of public benefits and priorities.”

Examples, he said, could include adding south-facing plazas that get the end-of-day sunshine, public observation decks in the taller towers, and creation of destination areas where people can gather and interact.

He cited La Rambla, the lively, tree-lined pedestrian street with shops and restaurants in Barcelona, Spain.

“It’s like a living room on the street. We should study what a community needs.”

For certain projects that still fall within the city’s existing view-protection corridors, developers do have an option to apply to the city for an exemption.

The guidelines approved last year contain a special section for select “exceptional downtown sites.” Such sites would have to be at least 8,000 square metres, and have “the potential to contribute to strategic and transformative city-building” and contribute public benefits, the guidelines say.

One site that may fall under special consideration is St. Paul’s Hospital on Burrard Street.

Peter Webb, Concord Pacific’s senior vic-president of development, said the company is considering what the future of the St. Paul’s property could entail after the hospital moves to its new home near Terminal Avenue, which is now under construction. Concord Pacific bought the property in 2020 for $850 million.

Webb said Concord Pacific has a 3D-printed model of what a development of the St. Paul’s site could look like with the existing view restrictions. The same model has an attachable piece to show how much additional building could be achieved by relaxing view cones.

The company is not yet in a position to make images of the models public, Webb said.

“It’s still in early, early stages of working with the city at this point, and it hasn’t even in a meaningful way evolved to the point where we have any confidence about our ability to impact the presently existing view cones,” he said.

The city confirmed in an email that the St. Paul’s site is one of two “prominent parcels” — the other is the Hudson’s Bay parkade — which could be considered as exceptional downtown sites, although it noted no rezoning applications have been submitted for either of these sites.

Cheng said the rationale for making this kind of exception is that cities need what is called topographic clarity or a landmark that orients people.

“It’s like the castle on an Italian hilltop, something that signals (a city’s) identity from far away. But there has to be a very strong case for public benefit in return.”