Landmark on Robson | Completed
 

The development application is up on the COV website:


"1488 Robson Street - DP-2016-00376

Musson Cattell Mackey Partnership has applied to the City of Vancouver for permission to develop this site with a 28 and 30 storey mixed-use building. The proposal includes the following:

• 280 dwelling units (57 social housing units /223 market units);
• retail use on the ground floor and office use on the second and third floors;
• 393,850 sq. ft. of floor area;
• building height of 300 ft.; and
• four levels of underground parking accessed from the lane.

Under the site’s existing C-6 zoning, the application is “conditional” so it may be permitted; however, it requires the decision of the Development Permit Board.

This application has been scheduled for the Development Permit Board on December 12, 2016, at 3:00 p.m. in the Town Hall Meeting Room (1st Floor, City Hall, 453 West 12th Avenue).

To assist you, a brief explanation of the Development Permit Board process is posted on our website at: http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/development-permit-board.aspx. You or your representative may attend the meeting and, upon request, will be accorded the opportunity to address the Board.

A Community open house is scheduled from 5:00-8:00pm on Tuesday, October 11, 2016 at The Listel Hotel - The Impressionist Gallery, 1300 Robson Street with the applicant team and City staff available to answer any questions.

We welcome your written comments (letter or e-mail) on this development application. Comments should be received on, or before November 4, 2016, to be considered in the staff review. However, written comments will be considered up until the date of decision."

http://development.vancouver.ca/1488robson/documents/1488Robson-postcard.pdf

http://development.vancouver.ca/1488robson/documents/designrationale.pdf

http://development.vancouver.ca/1488robson/documents/projectdata.pdf

http://development.vancouver.ca/1488robson/documents/siteplan.pdf

http://development.vancouver.ca/1488robson/documents/contextplan.pdf

http://development.vancouver.ca/1488robson/documents/streetscape.pdf

http://development.vancouver.ca/1488robson/documents/shadowanaylysis.pdf

http://development.vancouver.ca/1488robson/documents/elevations.pdf

http://development.vancouver.ca/1488robson/documents/landscape.pdf

http://urbanyvr.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Empire-Landmark-Condos-Robson-Street-3-696x887.jpg

http://urbanyvr.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Empire-Landmark-Condos-Robson-Street-2.jpg

http://urbanyvr.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Empire-Landmark-Condos-Robson-Street-3.jpg

http://urbanyvr.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Empire-Landmark-Condos-Robson-Street-5-1024x574.jpg

More details/renderings here: http://urbanyvr.com/empire-landmark-hotel-demolition

Would they remove the wood and copper trimmings once this project is approved, like what Telus Garden did just to save on some costs?

Lets hope not.

These actually look pretty good, and definitely more useful than Landmark.

IMHO - its projects like these that should be fast tracked, this is a total no brainer for the location.

Size appropriate, vastly more useful, decent looking. Just let them build already.

Will we see an implosion here?

I really can't understand this attitude.

I feel like I could copy and paste this exact same sentiment from people in the 1960's / 70's when they were tearing down, at that time, similar aged structures and replacing them with newer and better ones!

Yes, these towers, just like many built in the 1960s / 70s on the graves of older buildings (that we now yearn for), are not bad. The thing is, we have soooooooo many other lots of much lower density currently occupied with forgettable 3 / 4 story structures in the same area that this project can go on instead. There is no need to tear down a tower that has been a landmark in the city for decades.

Several pics were just posted on the skyline page just the other day, and in all of them this tower was one of the interesting peaks, especially the night photos whth its lighting features.

Seriously people, have at least a little self awareness about how much your mentality echos exactly what happened 40 / 50 years ago.

Also, looking forward to losing even more unique retail space to more bland starbucks and dental offices that will be sure to occupy this new project's podium.

The Century Plaza hotel on Burrard or the Sandman at the stadium should go before we consider demolishing this.

Could not agree more. Was in Spain when I heard the news of this and was saddened and since returning have been looking at it from different angles and I've come to realize it's an intrinsic part of our heritage.

For many years it was very much a 'landmark', being the tallest in the West End by far! As a kid, a trip to the top and a meal in Cloud 9 was epic! The view were amazing, far better than Harbour Centre and the experience of making a complete circle in a hour was memorable. When it was a Sheraton, it was kept in immaculate condition but the owners of the Empire have done what Sears did to the Eaton's building, let it decay and become rather unsightly, hence creating a loss of respect for the tower. The 2000 updates now look more dated than the tower sections. I find the tower's small footprint and brutalist elements very pleasing and a nice break from a city of seafoam spradrel and soulless glazing.

In a few years we'll come to regret this demolition as few in-charge seem to recognize what is and what will become heritage until it's too late.

Is nothing safe at this point? What's next, The Blue Horizon, The Coast Plaza? Brutalism is now becoming highly regarded once again. The 1970's was Vancouver's brutalist decade lead by Erickson.

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign...ide-brutalist-architecture-back-in-style

We stand to lose a huge symbol of brutalism and the early 1970's tower boom. Sad that is can't remain or be repurposed in it's existing form.

Brutalist structures need a colossal maintenance budget to look like anything beside concrete prisons, which goes completely against Vancouver's desire to build sustainably.

The Century, Sandman, Blue Horizon and Coast Plaza are generic and unassuming buildings to begin with (and have their concrete balanced out with glass) so they should be safe. The Empire, on the other hand, sticks out like a giant Brutalist vibrator wand - it doesn't even have any murals on the sides like the Continental did. It's a goner.

My only regret is that it's getting replaced with yet more cookie-cutter Jenga stacks.

How are more empty condos more useful than a hotel which helps support hundreds of tourism jobs?

Cross-posting from Downtown Vancouver Udpates thread. Most of the discussion from there could have been moved in here, as this is a major project if approved.

I am not against those towers and would be happy to see them built without the current tower being demolished. :(

Having stayed there once many years ago, my guess would be that one major hurdle in re-purposing would be the very low ceilings. I remember them seeming very low, in the 7' range.

That said, I reiterate from my points above, it's a landmark brutalist tower very representative and reflective of the Erickson influenced brutalist slip-cast concrete trend in the early 70's in Vancouver and should be retained and as Metro-One mentioned, there are blocks of surrounding low-rise structures that would be far better suited to re-development.

I suspect that politics are involved. Replacing a tower with new ones (as opposed to keeping the old one and building even more) probably creates less blowback from the NIMBYs.

5 years ago I would be writing your post.

This is why I immensely enjoy my Euro trips. The character/presence you get out of well restored, well preserved, re-purposed buildings is second to none.

Unfortunately, living and growing up in Vancouver, I realize the priorities in this city need to be vastly different than those of other cities.

Our problems are unique, our status is unique, our challenges are unique.

I will certainly agree that it would be nice to retain the tower and possibly repurpose into condo, or mix use.

However, I'm sure the numbers were ran and its either unfeasible because of structure, or otherwise.

So what would you propose? How can a property like this continue in a city like ours?

If it no longer makes business sense to run a Hotel, whats the future of this property other than redevelopment?

I'd love to see it become a rental tower or social housing. Give it a new shiny coat of paint and either leave the restaurant on top as is or make it a public observation deck?

This is what I am thinking too. Low ceilings don't matter in rental or especially social housing. There could be and amazing number of small bachelor pads in the tower and the restaurant at top could remain!

Boy, won't it be a downer when the dismantling process really starts, and there are photoseries showing it happening? And all for two bland condo towers. Get the antidepressants ready.

In my case I wrote to city hall. I would encourage the rest of you to do so as well.

Bummer. Used to be one of the only things that broke up the tabletop view from the north shore. e.g.

http://i.imgur.com/V346l5Ol.jpg
@gwenfarley11

I wish it was being replaced with one tall tower :( . God knows we have the market for it.

I bet that if a taller or a tower just as tall as the Landmark was proposed, we would all be having a different discussion.

I'm curious what the seismic rating of the tower is. Is it poured in place or made from precast panels?

they should build 2 towers on the site just like what is proposed, but make them 80-floors and 70-floors. then go ahead, tear down the Landmark.

There's no point in writing; this has already approved. As in most cases, the consultation is just a charade to give the impression that the city cares about what the public thinks.

It would not change mine at all. Because it would not change the fact that there are countless lots of low rises perfectly suitable for such towers as well.

Again, this is a landmark tower that if left will surely be seen as a heritage structure in the future.

My dad was an engineer, and I think he said the seismic rating had to be around 7.2 for most newer buildings (when I was a young kid, of course).

I'm pretty sure it's poured ( slip-cast ) concrete, I recall seeing some photos during the construction phase and I recall the wooden cast.

How do you know it's been approved? It hasn't gone before city council yet. :shrug:

Good to know!

It doesn't require rezoning because of the west end community plan. Though i do believe it still has to go before the UDP? (not that it matters)

That is correct there is no rezoning here it's straight to the development permit board. It's going to be tough to disallow something that falls under current zoning.

It's surprising to see such a large structure coming down. If this one is coming down, there are likely to be a lot of redevelopment in the West End. Much more than first thought.

As for this building, it's no big loss in my books. This not the Birks Building. There will be no regrets 30 years from now.

Why the hell is this building being demolished when there is an empty lot right across the street to build on? I don't get it? How can Vancouver be "the greenest city" and demolish buildings left and right? I never thought that such tall towers would come down here. This just reminds me of all the buildings demolished in New York in the 60s like Penn Station and the Singer Building, which some thought were ugly simply because they were old (only about 50) and in a bad state. And now those buildings' demolitions are seen as "regrets", this one will be too.

Write to council, even if it doesn't do anything you'll feel better knowing you made an effort.

I've had a nice view of the Empire Landmark for many years. It may not be pretty but it is a landmark. I think the bright neon signage that the current owner/operator placed on the roof is a bit tacky. I liked the simple ring of lights it had before. I was quite surprised to learn that it may be demolished. Came across this tower being built in Kozhikode (Calicut) India & immediately thought of the Empire Landmark. It might be a more appropriate design to replace the Landmark if one was to replicate it today. Of course this is not what the current owner has in mind. Not quite sure what to think of the current replacement other than "yawn".

Photo: Magnum Opus project in Calicut from www.galaxy-builders.com website.

https://s12.postimg.org/603009e99/magnum_Opus_night_view_big.jpg

^ Yeah, that'd work too.

As usual Klaus you do a great job of capturing the building. Is it brilliant? No, but it's a great example of the Brutalist style being softened for a hotel tower. It's clean and much better looking than its contemporary West End highrises seen in the photos. One could even argue its slender form over a podium set the pattern for the point tower pattern of Vancouverism.

wow that is nice, that would work nice as a replacement. why don't we ever get projects like this? it can't all be because of city hall, can it?

I agree with Vanville re: the Calicut project. Hope the current Landmark design can morph into this awesome design!

Not sure I fully understand the scope of this proposal. Is the demolition of this tower not going to be very expensive and time consuming to justify itself?

While other cities build nice stuff, we tear ours down and replace them with crap.

Hi all, I attended the open house last night, and it seemed like support for the project was 50 / 50. Most people were concerned about how their parking / traffic situation would be effected by the site having more parking. Others were concerned with how the demolition will happen. Lastly, there were even a few people that were offended that more dumpsters would be added for the building....
After talking to the architects, I have some info that will answer some of the unknowns. That said, it definitively won't appease anyone unhappy with the plan.
I also took pictures of the models and info boards, but will need to make time to upload them.

The proposal has a far higher FSR than the current Empire. The FSR with this proposal is maxed out under the West Side plan, even with the addition of a heritage transfer.
Obviously, had they gone with one tower they could have built taller, but as we know more height = more cost.

The Social housing aspect will have a separate common garden amenity, a separate lobby, and even a separate trash area. This is because the city demands the social component be under their full control, and ergo fully separated.
I asked whether the proposed material will make it to the final build, or if we may see the hated seafoam claim another victim. I was told that the city has started to crack down on developers changing materials mid process, so what we see is what we should get. I also heard something similar at 1500 West Georgia's open house, so maybe that's a sign that the response was more than just PR.

There's no firm idea on whether the demolition will be an implosion or a dismantlement. A dismantling would be done by cloaking the building in scaffolding and tarps, and then they would slowly take the building apart. It was hinted that the city's policy and area conditions will force the later, which of course will take more time. The time frame is that the proposal will go to council by December, with hopes to start demolition by June.

Thanks for your synopsis of the open house, Feathered Friend!

Thanks, I was tired of seeing that silly 90's render from India on the last page

Empire Landmark with snowy North Shore backdrop (my photo taken Dec.6)

https://s30.postimg.org/8vlypxb9d/IMG_5482.jpg

Question?
 

Why do you think Vancouver developers are so quick to plan or propose residential buildings of typical Vancouver blandiness to replace older existing buildings? These only add space to house more of the negative, nimby typical resistance of a 'taller' or more provocative sexy building with a few fancy lighting schemes that any modern or burgeoning city should have. My POV is that these people stay outta downtown and probably more importantly, stay outta Mount Pleasant and look at our beautiful mountains from the valley. This building could be renovated, modernized, lighted with proper floods or LEDs and just the 'old' outdated revolving restaurant be replaced with another modern twist, if you will and definitely add an observation deck for the rest of us to take advantage of the unusual high space we have there already.
Sheesh, take it down and make two lower residentials????? Backward, not forward thinking. Gotta keep this "Landmark" where it is. I've been to over 90 countries and the very first thing I do is head straight to the tallest towers and look at the city from the highest perspective. And Vancouver is QUICKLY falling further behind even 'little' cities that are adding height and girth.:koko::koko:
Attached here is one of hundreds of pictures I took from Mount Pleasant side and I certainly do NOT think that a few more groundbreaking tall buildings, +300m would hurt the beautiful views, they would only enhance it.......imo.
https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/...380c0f81c5a2e83cb2f1510e05c5&oe=58B0AE67

It's very disappointing, indeed. This building and its lighting feature have been a fixture of the skyline for decades. The new towers are not only unbelievably bland, but they're out-of-place on such a prominent street and they don't appear to have any remarkable lighting features. It's very sad to see the building go.

wtf ... I just woke up !!
 

Hey, yes, I just realized how much I like that building, how "pioneeringly tall" it was for the 70s, its lines, everything. Don't touch it. Get your sweaty hands off it, whoever developer you are

Can't agree more!! It was called the Sheraton Landmark for a reason, it was bold, tall, brutalist and exciting! Cloud 9 was a huge draw, never before could one dine in a revolving restaurant 42 storeys above Vancouver. I remember who exciting it was as a 10 year old!

For those of us who were kids in the 70s, this building was truly landmark and a game changer and I feel those in charge now have no appreciation for the memories some of us hold dear.

I'll be very sad to see this go, it's more than losing a bold part of our 1970's skylines, it's a testament to how developers and greed stand to demolish anything for a price.

Are they going to implode this thing or is it too tall for that?