Incorrect shadow studies for 1551-1581 W7th Ave rezoning (Acton Ostry Architects), and case study at 228-246 E Broadway & 180 Kingsway (same company). Big problems with renderings vs reality in the Broadway Plan area.

Rendering showing tower height at 180 Kingsway during rezoning stage in 2012 (left) vs. a photo of the completed tower (right). The main tower height remained unchanged during the development permit stage. As height was a highly contentious issue during the Public Hearing, does showing a rendering of a shorter tower benefit the proponent? And what does it tell us about the public process and the regulatory oversight by public employees and our elected officials?

Sometimes it’s worth looking back at the renderings made by architects and to compare these with the finished product. In this case, we’ve done comparisons with the work shown during the controversial rezoning of 228-246 East Broadway and 180 Kingsway (now known as ‘The Independent’, also referred to as ‘the Rize’ during the rezoning). Here we’ve posted several comparisons of renderings shown during the rezoning stage of this project along with corresponding photos taken in the field. Clearly, the renderings misrepresented the height of the building as well as the location. Compare for yourself. The shadow studies were also incorrect (see comparisons further below).

Acton Ostry Architects is also the firm responsible for the drawings submitted for the 21-storey tower rezoning at 1551-1581 West 7th Ave (online Q&A 13-26 March, details here).

The Broadway Plan clearly states that no new shadows on public parks are permitted between 10am and 4pm on the equinox. We’ve included a number of renderings that show that new shadows will indeed be cast on 6th and Fir Park (future Burrard Slopes Park) during this time (or more precisely, from 10am to about 11:38am on the spring equinox). City staff posted shadow analysis from the architect, and subsequently claim in a Q&A answer: “shadows from the building only skirt the southern edges of the park, between 10am-11:30am.” [Update: see our new post here for additional shadow study comparisons]

Fake shadow studies in this case are being used to circumvent the meager solar access protections for parks in the Broadway Plan. City staff are more than willing to post materials straight from the architect, without checking the materials themselves even after someone asks a question in the Q&A session. It also appears that the ‘Q&A’ session has now effectively been unofficially ended, as we’ve heard from residents that City staff are not responding to follow-up questions during their ‘consultation’ (which is a process City staff creating using their own rules, and now staff are not answering questions within 2 business days in their limited two week window for a Q&A session). As the City’s once-public processes continue to recede behind a virtual wall and municipal officials and staff increasingly avoid direct public contact, the undermining even of online interactions is not acceptable.

Architect’s predicted tower height shown in rendering (top) vs. photo taken in the field (bottom)

During the rezoning of ‘the Independent’, City staff had internally made comparisons with the architect’s renderings and with their own internal 3D computer model. This information was never released to the public prior to the end of the Public Hearing, and was obtained thanks only to an FOI request.

However, the image below shows that staff have the capacity to verify renderings for accuracy. It also demonstrates that City staff know that Acton Ostry Architects have a track record of submitting inaccurate renderings.

The following comparisons were made using the architect’s renderings and photos taken in the field:

Above: Rendering by architect (left) vs. photo in the field (right). Compare the predicted height of the tower shown during the rezoning.

Above: Rendering from rezoning stage from architect (left) vs. original photo in the field (taken in 2018). One of the conditions of the rezoning was to lower the height of the building along Broadway; the height of the tower remained unchanged in the Development Permit Stage. The architect’s rendering removed a street lamp and some of the overhead wires.

Above: Compare the predicted location of the tower from the architect’s rendering (left) with a real world photo (right). Note where the tower is aligned in comparison to the gas station in the real world.

Anyone can grab a camera, go into the field, and take photos for themselves to compare the architect’s renderings with the height and massing of what was constructed in the end. For the rezoning (of 246-256 E Broadway and 180 Kingsway), there will be some minor differences in details from the DP phase and adjustments to height and stepping of buildings along Broadway; however, the main tower height at 180 Kingsway will remain the same.

Shadow studies might be a little bit more work to check without a 3D rendering package; however, the general direction of the shadows can be very quickly verified using free online tools such as the NOAA Solar calculator. The original shadow study included with the rezoning application for 228-246 E Broadway and 180 Kingsway is reproduced below:

Above: Acton Ostry Architects’ shadow studies are inaccurate (rezoning 228-246 East Broadway 180 Kingsway).

Above: Compare Acton Ostry Architects’ shadow study for March 21 10am (left) with our shadow study for the same time (right, showing model from rezoning stage). Notice how the shadow extends into the intersection of Main Street and Broadway on the right.

Above: Compare Acton Ostry Architects’ shadow study for March 21 10am (left, rotated to approximately line up with our model and true north) with our shadow study for the same time (right, showing model from rezoning stage). Notice how the shadow extends into the intersection of Main Street and Broadway on the right.

Above: The NOAA Solar Calculator can be used to verify the direction of the shadow for a given date and time anywhere on Earth (showing direction of shadows on March 21, 10am). The elevation of the sun above the horizon can be used to manually calculate the length of a shadow based on a given building height.

For reference, the original street level views study shown during the rezoning stage is reproduced below (see this link for the full archive of the materials shown for 228-246 East Broadway & 180 Kingsway, which includes the shadow study archive):

Above: Our shadow study for March 21, 10am in a 3D rendering, showing the massing model from rezoning stage. Notice how the shadow extends into the intersection of Main Street and East Broadway.

Above: In the field. A view of the Lee Building (on the left) and “The Independent” tower at 180 Kingsway in the upper right. It’s possible to align a camera for a ‘best fit’ with markers seen in the applicant’s renderings, and then compare the photo with the predicted massing of the rezoning.

Resources

1551-1581 West 7th Ave rezoning (online Q&A 13-26 March). 21-storey tower would shade Burrard Slopes Park. Application (on ShapeYourCity) clearly violates Broadway Plan solar access policy, CityHallWatch, March 13, 2024

2328 Galt Street: Compare photos with renderings and model, CityHallWatch, December 28, 2020

Burrard Gateway (One Burrard Place) rendering vs reality. A look at the Skyline Study. CityHallWatch, April 7, 2021

Fantasy renderings vs real world views for rezonings & developments: A case study using the Semlin & 12th Ave rezoning (CityHallWatch, June 8, 2020)

Burrard Gateway (One Burrard Place) rendering vs reality. CityHallWatch, December 4, 2020

Lack of rules for architectural renderings results in the Wild Wild West for developers (CityHallWatch, June 2, 2020, with links to previous posts on this topic)

CALP-Visioning-Guidance-Manual-V1-1 (UBC)

For the record, here’s the screenshot from the ShapeYourCity.ca page for 1551-1557 West 7th Avenue (on Monday, March 25, 10:15am):