Olympic Village & Southeast False Creek Updates Discussion

[raggedy13]

Here are some pics I got today. Unfortunately they don't really show anything new since Delirium's pics a week ago. The snow has melted at least.















Looks like there may be a water feature here:




This guy was apparently hamming it up for the camera and I didn't even notice until I loaded them on to my computer:








A different angle of the new recycling bin


The wedge-shaped building

[Metro-One]

It really is a wonderful project, to bad it is getting ass kicked with all the bad publicity.

[vanman]

Sweet pics raggedy. I like how in even overcast skies light glints off that wave building. Btw whats with the backwards facade installation in pic #3?

[officedweller]

You know - if worse came to worst - and the City faced a loss on the overall project after the sale of the last condo - maybe it could rezone some of the parkland in SEFC and sell it for development? Like that field near the Cambie Bridge. There will be ample parkland in NE False Creek when that park completes and there already is parkland west of Cambie Bridge.

[Delirium]

^ that's not a bad idea. they could also get rid of that park just south of science world (where the right arrow is pointing on the rendering above). do they really need that when there's Creekside park just on the other side of science world?

great pics again Raggedy13. thanks for the update.

[Locked In]

Originally Posted by officedweller

You know - if worse came to worst - and the City faced a loss on the overall project after the sale of the last condo - maybe it could rezone some of the parkland in SEFC and sell it for development? Like that field near the Cambie Bridge. There will be ample parkland in NE False Creek when that park completes and there already is parkland west of Cambie Bridge.

Hi,
I'm a long time reader of the forum, and I'd like to add my thoughts to this comment. Rezoning parkland is probably not an easy task - in Burnaby (and I would assume Vancouver) parkland is dedicated by referendum (attached to the civic election ballot). Reversing the dedication likewise requires a referendum. Convincing the voters of Vancouver to convert waterfront parkland to a development site could be difficult (especially given the recent notoriety of this particular development...)
Furthermore, I assume the field just east of the Cambie Street bridge has some relationship to the planned elementary school. I know that when I was between K-7, I really enjoyed having a field to play soccer, softball, kickball, etc. on. Parkland that isn't suitable for sports is probably not a good substitute as far as the school is concerned.
Thanks for all the great analysis on the Olympic Village lately - I've really enjoyed reading it!

[city-dweller]

Originally Posted by Locked In

Hi,
Rezoning parkland is probably not an easy task - in Burnaby (and I would assume Vancouver) parkland is dedicated by referendum (attached to the civic election ballot). Reversing the dedication likewise requires a referendum. Convincing the voters of Vancouver to convert waterfront parkland to a development site could be difficult (especially given the recent notoriety of this particular development...)

Councils also request parks to be included in regional designations to strengthen against future re-zoning. Councils have independent power to rezone their land but are less enthusiastic to rezone once part of the regional designation, which would require an application to Metro Vancouver to remove the area from the regional greenzone designation. I guess this irrelevant until or if the park is created.

Side note: There appears little mention of Millennium's collateral of $250million of assets in all the criticism of SEFC financing issue. (was in the Vancovuer sun this morning though - only spot I have seen)

I like your thinking towards using the park or other space the city owns to find more revenue opportunities to fix the financing issue. I don't think sacrificing park space may be the best option for the community long-term, but this type of thinking is what the city should be doing. Innovative thinking towards a problem instead of complaining and spin. Yes, this comes with party switch to blame the other guys, but we need solutions.

The overwhelming demand for tickets during this recession both here and in the US should indicate that other ticket opportunities may be available. Meet athletes, watch practices, behind the scenes tours, etc. Both Vancouver and the VOC could soften the tax payers burden with more innovative ideas. The party might be here for 4 weeks, but SEFC is here for good.

[crazyjoeda]

The Olympic village looks really good. It is better that they didn't cheap out on it. They could have built some cheap design and we would not be hearing a thing about financing problems, but this development will likely stand for hundreds of years.

I find it ridiculous how the media is saying tax payers on the hook for nearly a billion dollars; first they are rounding up from $800 million (as if $200 million is a trivial amount) and more importantly they are assuming that once the project is finished the development will have no value. Unfortunately due to the financial crisis in the USA there may be losses on the project, but I expect that it would be less than $100 million.

[johnjimbc]

Unfortunately the media is playing directly off of the new mayor's statement, which essentially shook the foundations with a statement about the city being on the hook for $875 million. As much as I've been furious to see that in print as well, Gregor threw it out there in expose fashion.

In the past day I've seen much better reporting. The G&M actually did a much better job today explaining the nuances, including a Q&A section in both print and more extensively on-line in which the reporter / commentator actually mildly criticized the mayor and media for peddling a much starker picture than the reality.

Before someone takes my criticism of the new mayor too harshly, I actually don't have a problem with his basic stance - and political desire - to put all the bad news out there and "shine the light" on the issue. He is a new mayor and will have to take care of this, and basically wrapped up his campaign with this as his closing centerpiece.

But I strongly believe he could have done so without using the most outlandish and ludicrous cost figure as the centerpiece of his statement. He is the mayor now, and he did not need to position his stance in a way that harms the reputation of the city needlessly. He could have stated the truth and emphasized his administration and the new council will act openly to resolve the issue, then outlined the actions he is taking. The extra dose of sensationalism was totally unnecessary and unproductive. That is what escalated - or sank, as the case may be - the headline reporting on the issue. He will still be mayor when the Olympics do come to town, and the decision will not be "undone" at this point. So he should be the mayor of the Olympic city and act like it. I think we should all expect that at this point, regardless of what his personal feelings might be. Otherwise, I hope he plans on taking vacation during those two weeks because he'll look hypocritical relishing in their presence if he spends the next 12 months stoking the passions of those who never wanted them in the first place.

[phesto]

^There are still a lot of question marks surrounding Gregor's yet unproven ability as a public administrator, and his ability to follow through on complex issues while dealing with an entrenched City bureaucracy will certainly be tested on this Olympic Village mess.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by city-dweller

I like your thinking towards using the park or other space the city owns to find more revenue opportunities to fix the financing issue. I don't think sacrificing park space may be the best option for the community long-term, but this type of thinking is what the city should be doing. Innovative thinking towards a problem instead of complaining and spin. Yes, this comes with party switch to blame the other guys, but we need solutions.

Yeah, just tossing around ideas...
Come to think of it - if there's additional "public lands" owned by the City of Vancouver within SEFC (outside of the Olympic Village) that are slated to be redeveloped - i.e. most of the lands north of 1st Avenue (other than the parkland), they could also be "upzoned" to allow for more density to offset the cost of the Olympic Village. Not necessarily drastically, but maybe for a point tower or two on a tall podium that are taller than the rest of the midrises. Of course, people may cry foul if the City is the beneficiary of such rezoning.

[giallo]

Awesome shots, Raggedy.
The village looks amazing. I'm a huge fan.

[nova9]

the village will be built. people will rejoice. people will buy the condos. we will all forget about this nonsense. the olympics will be a success.

'nuff said. we will let the product defend itself no matter what controversy, real or imagined. i believe in this project and have full confidence it will be a success, so much so to silence the naysayers.

strong words i know. but hey, the city is in a down mood - the canucks suck, the global recession, the fog, the snow, the cold....count on me to bring positive thinking back!!

[deasine]

Yes we have proper recycling bins now!

[eduardo88]

Originally Posted by nova9

strong words i know. but hey, the city is in a down mood - the canucks suck, the global recession, the fog, the snow, the cold....count on me to bring positive thinking back!!

i think thats a bit of an understatement as of late...

but anyway on topic: this thing has been blown way out of proportion, its ridiculous.

[sacrifice333]

Looks like the Athletes Village has claimed its first official victim...

Originally Posted by The Canadian Press

Vancouver Olympic Village overseer quits amid financial turmoil, reports

VANCOUVER, B.C. — News reports say the Vancouver city official responsible for the construction of the city's Olympic athlete's village has resigned.

Word of Jody Andrew's departure surfaced Thursday, though there was no word on why he left or who is in line to replace him.

His resignation is the latest in a series of setbacks for the beleaguered Olympic Village project.

Andrew, who is the third top city official to leave their his post in recent months, was not responsible for the project's finances, but oversaw compliance with city planning, design and environmental guidelines.

Construction has already run more than $1 million over budget, and the project's financial backer has stopped forwarding cash to the builder.

The city has been covering costs using a $100 million bailout loan, and Mayor Gregor Robertson has asked the province to allow his government to borrow the rest of the $458 million needed to finish the project.

The B.C. legislature will hold an emergency session Saturday to discuss the financing issues.

Article Link.

[WarrenC12]

Lots of job openings at the City.. time to polish up my resume

[Stingray2004]

The politics behind this whole mess seem to be just getting worse:

Louie proposed Olympic Village financing deal - then voted against it

VANCOUVER - A controversial proposal to guarantee completion of the Olympic village project was initially introduced at a confidential meeting by a Vancouver councillor who has since opposed the decision in public.

Documents obtained by The Vancouver Sun reveal Coun. Raymond Louie moved the motion to give a guarantee of completion to Fortress Credit Corp. in return for Fortress loaning $683 million to Millennium Development, the company building the False Creek village.

Louie, however, says the move was only tactical.

Earlier this week, Louie said he had opposed an earlier council decision to give Fortress a completion guarantee that would effectively make the city liable for the project in the event Millennium defaulted.

In fact, confidential council minutes from the June 26, 2007, meeting show Louie moved a staff recommendation that included the “granting of a guarantee by the city to Fortress to complete the project if Millennium is unable to do so.”

Louie said Thursday he never intended to vote in favour of his motion and had simply moved it in order to open it to debate and to try to fake the NPA majority into accepting a lower level of exposure for taxpayers.

Louie said that at the time he didn’t understand the importance of the completion guarantee, which he claimed was “downplayed” by staff, and that instead he was concerned about reducing the potential liability from $200 million to $50 million.

The minutes show that no motions were made by Louie or opposition councillors to cancel the deal and remove Millennium as the developer.

And this guy is a Vancouver City councillor????? What a Weasel!

Full story:

http://www.vancouversun.com/Louie+propos...al+then+voted+against/1182360/story.html

[city-dweller]

I read this article this morning. I was so confused as to what exactly louie is up to. Taxpayer exposure was set with the completion clause in the agreement from 2002 and reaffirmed in 2007. Then to blame city staff for not highlighting the most key item of the entire agreement is ridiculous. The entire agreement from the city (the guarantor for the developer Millennium with the lender -Fortress) from June 2007 was anchored around the fact the city would guarantee the completion of the project. NO ambiguity. He must be reading his party's spin and not the documents.

Anyway it makes you wonder if the leaked document was another strategic move by someone. Could be a Weasel not sure if they are endangered.

[ravman]

Olympic village official resigns; veteran city engineer wrote memo backing Millennium bid
By Frances Bula January 16, 2009 07:00 am

Olympic village project manager Jody Andrews tendered his resignation on Thursday, after several weeks of being stripped of responsibilities and pretty much ordered not to talk to the public/media about the village.

The relatively young 40-something Andrews, who has worked at the city for 18 years, was put in charge of the Olympic village and Southeast False Creek overall in February 2005.

Although he’s an engineer and spent most of his time making sure that the village developers were carrying out the project according to city guidelines on design, sustainability, etc., he was also the main negotiator with Millennium on financial issues. Andrews wrote the 2006 report recommending Millennium as the successful bidder.

Presumably, that marked him as either: (a) someone who drank the kool-aid at city hall that convinced senior bureaucrats to delusionally think the Olympic village-Millennium deal was a good one, and therefore he had to go; or (b) someone who knew and could explain what the positives of the Olympic village project were, and therefore he had to go. Take your pick, depending on what your point of view.

My colleagues at The Globe and Mail were unable to reach anyone from the Vision Vancouver team who could offer an explanation. Councillor Geoff Meggs said, as far as he knew, Jody was talented but had walked in today and tendered his resignation.

I should explain, for people who don’t understand how the city works, that while Jody would have been the negotiator or had his name on the report, he would have been part of a team that worked together. Finance director Ken Bayne and real-estate services director Michael Flanigan would have supplied numbers. The legal department would have weighed in from their end. Former city manager Judy Rogers would have been part of the team.

So everyone has got to be wondering who else is on the list to go at city hall.