Little Mountain Redevelopment | U/C

[scryer]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

this who development has been insane. so much special treatment, handouts, etc. and theyre just the absolute worst.

they should have been forced to forfeit the land a long time ago.

Or at least have a forensic accounting team investigate where all the money is going...

[GenWhy?]

I understand, that as of the 2016 Referral Report, $18 million in DCLs and $12 million worth of CAC (cash and built amenities), is being taken from this site by the City.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

I understand, that as of the 2016 Referral Report, $18 million in DCLs and $12 million worth of CAC (cash and built amenities), is being taken from this site by the City.

There! That's where it went. $30 million going to the City. How much actually ends up in the hands of the people remains to be seen. Previous administrators were extremely corrupt. The verdict is yet to be determined for the current ones.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by Vin

There! That's where it went. $30 million going to the City. How much actually ends up in the hands of the people remains to be seen. Previous administrators were extremely corrupt. The verdict is yet to be determined for the current ones.

CACs and DCLS are "the peoples" money:

- The funds are for the on-site housing component, parks, community centre, daycare
- Funds are also for off-site park improvements
- DCLs cover a variety of improvements as well that are of public benefit.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Various levels of government paid a lot of money to have Holborn do something with the property - it's only fair they and the taxpayer get some of it back in return.

[Feathered Friend]

62 social housing apartments, 1 retail store, 2 restaurants

Master Plan Rezoning Application Submitted – October, 2015
Development Application Submitted – November, 2017
Building Permit Issued – August, 2020

https://www.instagram.com/p/DA1wR44x6g3/

[hollywoodnorth]

Building Permit Issued – August, 2020

WOW .... here we are 4 years plus later and they are doing literally zero work on the project at current. just using the CRUs for construction office space for the adjacent projects


that said .... a 2nd tower crane is now up on the site.

[BaddieB]

Such an ugly building. We need better design bylaws.

[GMD]

Originally Posted by BaddieB

Such an ugly building. We need better design bylaws.

I think the design bylaws might be the problem. It is hard to imagine anyone actually made a building look like that on purpose.

It is honestly so easy to build something that isn't ugly. Build a rectangular box, use consistent materials, add a bit of ornamentation, done. If you can't do it yourself, just copy an existing building and change the colour or something.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by BaddieB

Such an ugly building. We need better design bylaws.

If we're in a housing crisis do looks really matter? Makes you wonder why Eby didn't mandate the abolishment of boards like the UDP if this is the result. Just more hoops to jump through.

[djh]

Originally Posted by whatnext

If we're in a housing crisis do looks really matter? Makes you wonder why Eby didn't mandate the abolishment of boards like the UDP if this is the result. Just more hoops to jump through.

I think that mentality is exactly how so many ugly post-war tower blocks ended up being created. Many of which are now the eponymous American "housing projects" or European "council flats" and cold war repetitive eastern european towers. They just wanted cheap buildings to accommodate people, and any costs above function were eliminated.

If the builders don't care, how can the residents be expected to care? Of course you end up with the worst places to live if they are nothing more than cages in the sky?! So no, I don't think Vancouver should simply build the cheapest, ugliest buildings all in the name of "it's a housing crisis, let's just get them up and who cares how it looks". Equally so, no development should be mired in red tape or architects agonising over minutiae. But there is a sensible balance point in the triangle where there is rapid progress, at a reasonable cost, at a decent aesthetic quality.

[Feathered Friend]

Little Mountain
Photos Taken September 22, 2024
Master Plan Rezoning Application Submitted – October, 2015

122 E 36th Ave – Little Mountain Building BA – Photos 2 & 3 (from the bottom)
49 social housing apartments
Development Application Submitted – August 2022
Building Permit Issued – April 2024

150 E 36th Ave – Little Mountain Building AB – Photos 4 & 5 (from the bottom)
48 social housing apartments, 69 space daycare, neighbourhood house community programs & services
Development Application Submitted – April, 2019
Building Permit Issued – November, 2023

4930 James St – Little Mountain Building EA – Photos 7 & 8 (from the bottom)
70 social housing apartments
Development Application Submitted – December 2020
Building Permit Issued – March 2024

https://www.instagram.com/p/DA4VKu4Sgzw/

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by djh

If the builders don't care, how can the residents be expected to care? Of course you end up with the worst places to live if they are nothing more than cages in the sky?! So no, I don't think Vancouver should simply build the cheapest, ugliest buildings all in the name of "it's a housing crisis, let's just get them up and who cares how it looks". Equally so, no development should be mired in red tape or architects agonising over minutiae. But there is a sensible balance point in the triangle where there is rapid progress, at a reasonable cost, at a decent aesthetic quality.

On that same note, having those kinds of butt-ugly fire/earthquake hazards are a large part of why North America has such a negative image toward public housing. Build something clean, livable and up to code, yet still cost-effective, and that image slowly goes away and the public starts asking for more.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by djh

I think that mentality is exactly how so many ugly post-war tower blocks ended up being created. Many of which are now the eponymous American "housing projects" or European "council flats" and cold war repetitive eastern european towers. They just wanted cheap buildings to accommodate people, and any costs above function were eliminated.

If the builders don't care, how can the residents be expected to care? Of course you end up with the worst places to live if they are nothing more than cages in the sky?! So no, I don't think Vancouver should simply build the cheapest, ugliest buildings all in the name of "it's a housing crisis, let's just get them up and who cares how it looks". Equally so, no development should be mired in red tape or architects agonising over minutiae. But there is a sensible balance point in the triangle where there is rapid progress, at a reasonable cost, at a decent aesthetic quality.

Meh, there are plenty of rather plain highrise buildings in the West End that date from the 1950's-60s that would never pass the UDP yet have given people homes for decades.

[gaviscon]

20241215_102657 by globalbusinesscentre105 H, on Flickr

20241215_102808 by globalbusinesscentre105 H, on Flickr


4902 James Street




20241215_102903 by globalbusinesscentre105 H, on Flickr

20241211_074552 by globalbusinesscentre105 H, on Flickr


167 E 36th Ave, Vancouver




20241211_074326 by globalbusinesscentre105 H, on Flickr


137 E. 37th Ave




20241211_074402 by globalbusinesscentre105 H, on Flickr

[Vin]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Meh, there are plenty of rather plain highrise buildings in the West End that date from the 1950's-60s that would never pass the UDP yet have given people homes for decades.

Must be depressing living in those neighbourhoods. Those are not plain, but plain ugly. Many other neighbourhoods possess those traits in Vancouver (Marpole, Kerrisdale, etc.), and I want them to be redeveloped ASAP.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Vin

Must be depressing living in those neighbourhoods. Those are not plain, but plain ugly. Many other neighbourhoods possess those traits in Vancouver (Marpole, Kerrisdale, etc.), and I want them to be redeveloped ASAP.

And other than being newer this isn't any better.

Keep_BTO_Flats_on_Track_Banner by bcborn, on Flickr
Credit: Government of Singapore


The UDP is just another municipal hurdle to jump through.

[gaviscon]

Originally Posted by whatnext

And other than being newer this isn't any better.

The UDP is just another municipal hurdle to jump through.

We are moving towards this though, when you look at all the cheap greyness going up throughout the city.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by Vin

Hopefully a new City Council (in a few year's time) can drop the dumb restrictions. Holborn has the tenacity.

Vin gets a Costco hot dog.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

62 social housing apartments, 1 retail store, 2 restaurants

Master Plan Rezoning Application Submitted – October, 2015
Development Application Submitted – November, 2017
Building Permit Issued – August, 2020

https://www.instagram.com/p/DA1wR44x6g3/

C Market Coffee Vancouver taking both restaurant spaces and the retail space:

Vancouver's largest cafe is set to open later this year — and it's over 5,000 sq. ft.
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/c-market-vancouver


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/c-market-vancouver