Sen̓áḵw (Squamish Nation) | 11 Towers | 171m | 58fl | 4M sqft | U/C

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by cov

Most of kits is complete crap, an utter disgrace to the amazing amenities surrounding it. Ample of beachfront park, a great community center, directly adjacent downtown view, 10 minutes away from the densest business district in BC, kits could be one the best neighborhoods in Canada but instead its a retirement town of dilapidated walkups and less than 10 decent restaurants.

So glad this is happening. I hope they block as much view cones as physically possible

Why does someone like you live in Vancouver at all?

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

In the case of OV, the city went with a developer with a questionable record because they offered the most for the land, then the great recession dried up credit worldwide.

I'm not saying that can't happen again, but it was a perfect storm.

In this case, the land doesn't even cost money, and we have a more well respected developer putting the proposal forward. Private capital looking to make a nice return will be lining up to invest in this.

Your list of concerns is laughable.

"Well-respected" or well-connected?

Some of those concerns are perfectly legitimate.

Whether one agrees with the city's developemnt fees or not, the fact is they do go to providing services for residents of new developments etc. In this case the city is getting nothing. Will the residents not be using our parks? Will they be forbidden from attending public schools? False Creek Elementary is pretty much full, as is Henry Hudson.

The pushback on the new Oakridge's lack of parking for residents leads one to believe Westbank is being extemely disingenuous in saying residents of what will undoubtedly be high-priced rental or condos won't be needing cars.

[logan5]

Holy cow. What's with all the crazy posts lately? lol.

[Prometheus]

I am actually counting about 61 storeys!

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Some more renerings courtesy of the Vancouver Sun:






https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news...-to-expand-downtown-vancouvers-footprint

Revery (Formerly Bing Thom Architects) is a great firm so I expect as this one progresses the design will continue to improve and the final product will be quite good.

As a Kits resident I personally am really excited to see this one move forward, 56 storeys just off the downtown peninsula will be a huge change for Vancouver. Hopefully it breaks the height fear some have, just like Shangri-La did for downtown.

[LeftCoaster]

Ya the sun article said just shorter than Trump or Shangri-La so I wouldn't be surprised to see this in the 175+ range.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by misher

Definitely we are taking it in the ass here. Plus businesses can move there to avoid paying property taxes so they'll likely be able to charge much higher lease rates. They also don't need permits and a bunch of other things. 10's to 100's of thousands can be saved by businesses. Millions if they open a casino. Imagine if the FN open a casino, gas station, weed store, and tobacco store.

Basically their going to cash out building luxury condos for the rich while we somehow build social housing without the bundles we used to get from development fees. Basically turning the surrounding low to mid rise area into a slum ghetto of old rental buildings and social housing surrounding a pristine community for the rich. I can already see the Squamish nation building a wall around their area to keep the homeless out.

That was out there, even for you.

[scryer]

Originally Posted by logan5

Holy cow. What's with all the crazy posts lately? lol.

This thread is fire and my new favourite...

'Tis a torrent of major change and it is forcing the NIMBYs to step out into the light.

I'm gonna love reading this one with a snack.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Pretty sure logan means the posters who're predicting that either Kitsilano or Squamish-Burrard is or will turn into a slum after this. Love or hate the towers, that's a ridiculous thing to type.

Originally Posted by misher

... Millions if they open a casino. Imagine if the FN open a casino, gas station, weed store, and tobacco store.

Basically their going to cash out building luxury condos for the rich while we somehow build social housing without the bundles we used to get from development fees. Basically turning the surrounding low to mid rise area into a slum ghetto of old rental buildings and social housing surrounding a pristine community for the rich. I can already see the Squamish nation building a wall around their area to keep the homeless out.

Dude, really?

[Spr0ckets]

This thread is..........wow.

Just,.......wow.

'Tis the Twilight zone up in here.

[Metro-One]

Yeah, what’s going on hear?

A lot of odd fear mongering.

[cairnstone]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

To be fair, the 2008 recession put Millennium in bankruptcy because its financier Fortress Capital had a liquidity crises and stopped all scheduled construction payments. The City took over because it still technically owned the land and was obligated to deliver the Olympic Village on time.

The OV had about 1,200 units, so perhaps this project is five times larger in terms of unit count, not "7 times".

But despite the building heights and tight site, this is a far, far less complicated project: (i) no Olympic deadline and complicated ownership situation stymieing conventional financing and requiring single-phase construction; (ii) no 2:1 replacement obligation for red-lined shoreline disturbance that resulted in the creation of an island; (iii) no precedent-setting environmental performance, including district energy and naturalized stormwater management; and (iv) not a City of Vancouver-based 'large development' project, requiring Council Policy Statement and Official Development Plan on top of rezoning.


Are you for real?

The Amazing Brentwood has 6,000+ units under construction and in the pipeline, plus almost 4M sqft of commercial space. Concord CityPlace and its 7,500 units comes to mind, too. My goodness, The City of Lougheed has 10,000 units planned!

So the projects you sited are all on freehold land and mainly market sale units that are going to be or have been developed over a much longer timeline. There is a huge difference between a mutiphase scaled project that is 10000 plus units and a project that is being advertised as complete in less than 6 years.

The Amazing Brentwood has been under development 5 years and has almost 2 towers complete so 600 or so units. So not 6000 in 5 years yes there is a mall portion but that gets built as the towers rise.

[cairnstone]

I have a question for members here that have more of a structural background. Since there is hardly any parking. Has there been 60 plus story buildings built with only maybe a 20 foot deep parkade.

And im not against the project hope it does get built as it will but Canada on the map for building something this big in a scale that has not been done here. This is the way they build in China where labor is cheap and the use of precast is common.

[misher]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Yeah, what’s going on hear?

A lot of odd fear mongering.

What does a nice expensive area with towers with a bunch of low rise buildings to the east, many of which are decades old or are bc housing projects sound like to you, what part of Vancouver does that resemble?

Do you think the area with the multi million dollar luxury condos or the area with a bunch of social housing projects and old buildings with below market rents that’s near a skytrain station is going to attract crime and homelessness?

This situation sounds so familiar.

[cairnstone]

Im still trying to figure out who will be the renters here. Read a portion will be below market, A portion will be considered low end and then there are the Squamish Nation has another block for their people. So from the 16th floor up will be market rent at $3.50 and up a square foot? And how will they alot parking here?

Also when this project comes to market there should be alot of attention in the news about the plight of the strata and co-ops that were built on leasehold land and now are looking at 200% increases in the lease and having to put plans on hold for modernizing there buildings.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Yeah, what’s going on hear?

A lot of odd fear mongering.

Racism. I don't see any other explanation.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by misher

What does a nice expensive area with towers with a bunch of low rise buildings to the east, many of which are decades old or are bc housing projects sound like to you, what part of Vancouver does that resemble?

Do you think the area with the multi million dollar luxury condos or the area with a bunch of social housing projects and old buildings with below market rents that’s near a skytrain station is going to attract crime and homelessness?

This situation sounds so familiar.

Are you trying to equate Kits point to the DTES?

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by cairnstone

Im still trying to figure out who will be the renters here. Read a portion will be below market, A portion will be considered low end and then there are the Squamish Nation has another block for their people. So from the 16th floor up will be market rent at $3.50 and up a square foot? And how will they alot parking here?

Also when this project comes to market there should be alot of attention in the news about the plight of the strata and co-ops that were built on leasehold land and now are looking at 200% increases in the lease and having to put plans on hold for modernizing there buildings.

Why is leasehold a problem if the towers are rental?

Who will rent? I don't know, people struggling to find a place under $4/sf in an incredibly tight residential rental market?

[misher]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Why is leasehold a problem if the towers are rental?

Who will rent? I don't know, people struggling to find a place under $4/sf in an incredibly tight residential rental market?

Some rentals but also they are proposing leasehold condos of 120 years too I believe.

I doubt anything here will be targeted at anyone below upper middle class, the buildings look too expensive.

[cairnstone]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Why is leasehold a problem if the towers are rental?

Who will rent? I don't know, people struggling to find a place under $4/sf in an incredibly tight residential rental market?

will make a difference to the market condos that are talked about.

And how many units below $4 will there be? There is no breakdown on the unit count and the finish details besides saying there is a portion for the Nation and then a portion of low market. If they came out and said 3000 units will be rented at $2 a foot and 1000 at market and the remained by some formula thats cool.

[WarrenC12]

Of course it's just a high level proposal at this point.

I find it funny the people who complain the most about city red tape and road blocks are somehow still finding a million issues with this development which is free from most of those problems.