Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Developing Story: Oakridge rezoning takes next step

Earlier this week, Vancouver city council endorsed staff recommendations outlined in an interim report on the controversial Oakridge development, including tower heights of up to 45 storeys, paving the way for more consultation leading up to a public

Earlier this week, Vancouver city council endorsed staff recommendations outlined in an interim report on the controversial Oakridge development, including tower heights of up to 45 storeys, paving the way for more consultation leading up to a public hearing, which could take place in December at the earliest.

Henriquez Partners Architects and Stantec applied to amend the sites zoning on behalf of Oakridge Centre owner Ivanhoe Cambridge and Westbank Development last November. The application proposes 13 towers ranging from 18 to 45 storeys with about 2,800 residential units, as well as rooftop greenspace, retail space and amenities such as a community centre.

Council has endorsed the maximum height. They havent endorsed the number of towers and theyve given a general endorsement to the general level of density proposed, but there are a lot of issues that need to be worked around the form of development and the location of towers and transitions to existing residential properties, explained Matt Shillito, the citys assistant director of community planning.

Theres also a lot of further working out to be done on the public benefits strategy the rooftop park space, the civic centre, the affordable housing component and so on.

Shillito said details within the rezoning application could change based on that technical work, further enhanced public consultation council called for, or following the public hearing.

So at any time the application could be amended either by the proponent themselves or in discussions with staff or indeed by council at the public hearing, so theres more work to do, he said.

Tower locations, for example, could be moved although there are some areas where theres more flexibility than others. Some speakers at the council meeting questioned the accuracy of the projects model, but city staff confirmed its accurate and to scale. Others raised concerns that the model and renderings dont give the public a good idea about how the development will appear to people walking on the street.

Weve asked the applicant to provide some street-level perspective views of the project, so theyre doing that and well be able to bring those forward for the public to look at, Shillito said.

The second consultation phase will likely include more open houses, meetings with interested parties, an online component, and kiosks set up in Oakridge Centre, possibly every other Saturday to provide information about the rezoning application and to collect feedback. Details are being worked out, but the city hopes to organize some consultation for late June or early July and again in the fall, with the potential for a public hearing in December. Thats still our target, but well have to see whether thats achievable or not, Shillito said.

Proponents consider the Oakridge site ideal for densification and sustainable development, but critics like Tracey Moir, of the group Oakridge Langara Area Residents, said councils endorsement of the key and most controversial aspects is alarming.

We believe putting the cart before the horse is prejudicial to the rezoning and public hearing processes. We encourage voters to ask themselves if the processes will be fair or are the outcomes already pre-determined, she said in an email.

Moir maintains community opposition to this size of redevelopment isnt being respected, nor is the current Oakridge policy statement, which limits towers to 24 storeys.

She said the vision for the whole Cambie corridor will add tens of thousands of new people living and working in the area, which will create more traffic and demands on the Canada Line, and that it will require increases to city infrastructure and additional education, medical and emergency services.

And how will all of this be paid for? We say the vision is scary regarding livability and our tax bills, she wrote.

noconnor@vancourier.com

twitter.com/naoibh