Downtown Vancouver Updates II

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

That's true but I think there's a clear difference with this council vs the last. Having a strong majority at least makes sure progress happens. Whether or not it's your personal flavour of progress, that's obviously up for debate.

The Stewart council spent days and hours ultimately doing nothing.

Well, Kennedy Stewart was just one vote, and didn't have a party with members on Council, so oibviously there's going to be more talking by councillors. There were also a wide range of opinions, and parties, from Colleen Hardwick to Jean Swanson. I think COVID changed things too, because by going to virtual meetings and allowing the public to phone in comments, you saw a lot more participation which led to much longer meetings - but when the vote came down, almost always a majority of Council approved projects, and plans, that were brought forward, and they also advanced policy changes that added greater density to projects already approved.

ABC might also have had less discussion and quicker meetings because they like to pre-determine the party position in caucus discussions, in private. (This is not what is supposed to happen).

To keep it relevant to this thread - There were several changes to allow greater flexibility for rental towers in the West End that were approved by the Stewart era Council, that are now under construction.

[seamusmcduff]

There's no way that ABC would have approved something as bold as the broadway plan. They're approving things that come up to their plate now that it's all set up, but Broadway Plan and Multiplexes are happening because of the Stewart Council.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by seamusmcduff

There's no way that ABC would have approved something as bold as the broadway plan. They're approving things that come up to their plate now that it's all set up, but Broadway Plan and Multiplexes are happening because of the Stewart Council.

Easy to say that but ABC's record on approving housing is miles better than the last council.

[jollyburger]

So Robertson gets no credit for starting the process in 2018?

I guess whoever got the funding for the Broadway Subway deserves most of the credit.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

So Robertson gets no credit for starting the process in 2018?

His council approved all kinds of housing too. You can disagree with their viewpoints, but the Stewart council was just dysfunctional. Let's not forget he ran an as independent who could bring different groups together to move forward. He failed completely.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Easy to say that but ABC's record on approving housing is miles better than the last council.

What housing did the last Council not approve?

The ABC / Sim Council has refused to fast-track social housing approvals, and decided to stop approving new supportive housing projects.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Changing City

What housing did the last Council not approve?

The ABC / Sim Council has refused to fast-track social housing approvals, and decided to stop approving new supportive housing projects.

Here's one:

https://www.biv.com/news/real-estate...defeat-8261785

I'm not going to summarize vote by vote, but there were a number of times The far left and far right got together to vote against various forms of housing.

You can also look here for the previous council: https://cityduo.wordpress.com/haveyoursay/

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Here's one:

https://www.biv.com/news/real-estate...defeat-8261785

I'm not going to summarize vote by vote, but there were a number of times The far left and far right got together to vote against various forms of housing.

You can also look here for the previous council: https://cityduo.wordpress.com/haveyoursay/

I'll summarize vote by vote for all the rezonings that Council refused from 2018 to 2022, based on the spreadsheet.

[N/A]

Council, as a body, approved rezonings for over 17,000 residential units. You can see all the schemes, and the decisions, on the City's website too.

Individual councillors, as you note, from from left and right, opposed a lot of projects. Council, collectively, appear to have approved every one - unless you can find any I've missed.

The mayor's policy proposal for allowing six units per lot was punted to a future meeting and eventually emerged as a revised policy on multiplexes. But you're right, Council collectively didn't support it. That's the problem of having an independent mayor and no controlling party. But the current Council, even with an ABC majority, voted against the City setting up its own Housing Development agency (as well as opposing more supportive housing or fast-tracking social housing) so they're not all-in on every policy proposal either.

As this discussion is not really about Downtown, I'm leaving the conversation here.

[RDW989]

Demolition has begun on the 1525 and 1555 Robson site, my pixs Feb 14

[IMG][url=https://flic.kr/p/2rWH3tz]

[IMG][url=https://flic.kr/p/2rWPrJi]

[IMG][url=https://flic.kr/p/2rWNzNe]

[jollyburger]

I think the 6 storey building is still waiting on their demo permit.

[bluefox]

Originally Posted by RDW989

Demolition has begun on the 1525 and 1555 Robson site, my pixs Feb 14

Kind of funny that they treated the development app signage as a part of the wall to demolish

[gaviscon]

Originally Posted by bluefox

Kind of funny that they treated the development app signage as a part of the wall to demolish

Welp I guess no need for that anymore

I hope we get a proposal for the Whole Foods site down the street as well.

[jollyburger]

Concrete pour for that Gastown project. There's a larger 500 cubic meter core pad pour upcoming

• Video Link

[kikin]

Originally Posted by gaviscon

Welp I guess no need for that anymore

I hope we get a proposal for the Whole Foods site down the street as well.

what is happening at Whole Foods that you are referring to?

[gaviscon]

Originally Posted by kikin

what is happening at Whole Foods that you are referring to?

I don't think I've seen anything for that site yet.

[gaviscon]

Listel Hotel Redev.

When they demolish a building for redev, do they refill the pit with soil before excavating again? I feel like the pit is shallower than before.

by me



20260219_121218 by globalbusinesscentre105 H, on Flickr

[gaviscon]

1555 robson by me

20260219_121811 by globalbusinesscentre105 H, on Flickr

20260219_121706 by globalbusinesscentre105 H, on Flickr

20260219_121703 by globalbusinesscentre105 H, on Flickr

20260219_121840 by globalbusinesscentre105 H, on Flickr

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by gaviscon

Listel Hotel Redev.

When they demolish a building for redev, do they refill the pit with soil before excavating again? I feel like the pit is shallower than before.

by me

I don't think that normally happens.

The 2 level parkade removal that started around December?

Maybe they just partially filled it in so they can finish whatever parkade foundation wall removal and building the new shotcrete wall?

[Zepfancouver]

Live now Public Hearing - February 19, 2026 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eM0vSoImegU speakers dont want the hotel 2028 - 2038 Barclay
Edit: Public Hearing to be continued March 5th 3pm

[jollyburger]

It was already 43 stories so maybe 50 something?

1650 Alberni Street – Value-Uplift Opportunity
We are actively repositioning the project to capture
recent changes to Vancouver’s planning and building
regulations. The updated policy framework would
allow a material increase in permissible height and
floor-plate area (from about 5,500 sq. ft to potentially
about 8,000 sq. ft per floor). These amendments
substantially enhance the project’s economic viability.
We intend to file a formal rezoning application before
year-end 2025.

https://asiastandard.com/wp-content/.../e00129_IR.pdf

Protected Public Views – Council-approved protected public view 20 (Granville St.) extends
across the subject site, generally setting a height limit of approximately 108.9 m (357.3 ft.), or
8.4 m (27.7 ft.) lower than the 117.3 m (385.0 ft.) height set by the West End Plan. However, the
building falls into a “view cone shadow” created by pre-existing development which will conceal
all building elements under 121.9 m (400.0 ft.) within the protected view, thereby enabling
consideration of a tower up to the proposed height.

https://council.vancouver.ca/20211116/documents/rr9.pdf