General Vancouver Updates - Page 73

SpongeG · #**1441** Posted **Nov 6, 2009, 1:57 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by agrant

I don't think the social housing part of it is the issue that concerns these people. I mean, these are harmless old fogies with wheel chairs and walkers. It is more about the size of the structure vs the size of the houses surrounding it, and the number of people slated to live in it. Basically, they want a smaller building with less people.

I guess so but isn't the area full of 4 storey buildings?

maybe i am thinking of the wrong area -its arbutus and 12th area? or somewhere else?

officedweller · #**1442** Posted **Nov 6, 2009, 2:00 AM**

A block north of the new London Drugs / IGA at Broadway & Vine (a few blocks wesy of Arbutus).

jlousa · #**1443** Posted **Nov 6, 2009, 2:34 AM**

Those signs are great, if a country bombed us, we could then have a bylaw officer fine that country for disobeying the sign and then put the $50 towards rebuilding the city, we would certainly be the greenest city in the world, a glowing green but green none the less.

mr.x · #**1444** Posted **Nov 6, 2009, 2:51 AM**

Now Davies, a city councillor from 1982 to 1993, fears that peace-friendly signs she helped launch within the city limits 25 years ago, proclaiming Vancouver to be a “Nuclear Weapons Free Zone”, are disappearing. She worries about what this could mean for the city.

lol...wow.

Yume-sama · #**1445** Posted **Nov 6, 2009, 2:53 AM**

Funny, North Korea has the same sign up at the border!

agrant · #**1446** Posted **Nov 6, 2009, 4:41 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpongeG

I guess so but isn't the area full of 4 storey buildings?

maybe i am thinking of the wrong area -its arbutus and 12th area? or somewhere else?

Pour vous.

http://maps.google.ca/maps?ie=UTF8&hl=en...m_rKom8QCvroDReRGg&cbp=12,232.85,,0,6.25

SpongeG · #**1447** Posted **Nov 6, 2009, 5:33 AM**

thx

i was thinking it was somewhere else

s211 · #**1448** Posted **Nov 6, 2009, 5:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr.x

Now Davies, a city councillor from 1982 to 1993, fears that peace-friendly signs she helped launch within the city limits 25 years ago, proclaiming Vancouver to be a “Nuclear Weapons Free Zone”, are disappearing. She worries about what this could mean for the city.

lol...wow.

Ah yes, the irrelevant left. And yet those monkeys have a hard-core following that can only go to prove that they've got the lock on stupidity.

WarrenC12 · #**1449** Posted **Nov 6, 2009, 6:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by s211

Ah yes, the irrelevant left. And yet those monkeys have a hard-core following that can only go to prove that they've got the lock on stupidity.

You said it. Best possible outcome from this useless waste of time and space would be to auction off those signs and put the money towards.. whatever.

PROSTSHOCKER · #**1450** Posted **Nov 7, 2009, 8:41 AM**

Stop ragging on the signs, guys. So what if it's irrelevant if a city is unable to hold and utilize nuclear arms, it's the whole historic and cultural fact it exists that matters to me. I'm glad we had a population that had such a mindset during the arms race years. Hell, if it weren't for the hippies, Vancouver would be just another highway carved, vacant North American city with industrial warehouses on the waterfront. They had the balls to rail against such developments that were viewed then as "urban progression".

SpongeG · #**1451** Posted **Nov 7, 2009, 9:23 AM**

Vancouver's Little Mountain housing project demolished

Replacement not expected for another 10 years

Demolition work has begun on one of Vancouver's oldest public housing projects – the landmark Little Mountain development – ending a years-long long campaign to save it.

Several of the 224 units fell to wreckers' backhoes as protesters carrying placards held a vigil on the sidewalk of 33 Avenue east at Ontario Street.

"It's nothing short of criminal to be destroying solid, well-built homes with the knowledge that nothing will be built here for many years to come," said Kia Salomons, spokeswoman for Community Advocates for Little Mountain.

Built in 1954, Little Mountain was once home to about 700 people in 37 buildings.

Most of the residents have moved to other social housing developments in the city, although a handful of people still legally occupy a small corner of Little Mountain.

Once the entire six-hectare site is cleared, the province's plan is to sell it to developer Holborn Properties, who will build a mix of market- and social housing.

Holborn has promised that the priority for subsidized rental units will go to former Little Mountain residents.

"They'll come back to a better unit, definitely," Holborn CEO Joo Kim Tiah told CBC News Friday. "I can almost 100 per cent guarantee it."

But Tiah also said the new project is not expected to be completed for another 10 years.

"Affordable housing keeps disappearing and not getting built," said Salomons.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/11/06/bc-little-mountain-demolition.html

delboy · #**1452** Posted **Nov 7, 2009, 4:13 PM**

[QUOTE=SpongeG;4545878]Vancouver's Little Mountain housing project demolished

Replacement not expected for another 10 years

Demolition work has begun on one of Vancouver's oldest public housing projects – the landmark Little Mountain development – ending a years-long long campaign to save it.

Several of the 224 units fell to wreckers' backhoes as protesters carrying placards held a vigil on the sidewalk of 33 Avenue east at Ontario Street.

"It's nothing short of criminal to be destroying solid, well-built homes with the knowledge that nothing will be built here for many years to come," said Kia Salomons, spokeswoman for Community Advocates for Little Mountain.

Built in 1954, Little Mountain was once home to about 700 people in 37 buildings.

Most of the residents have moved to other social housing developments in the city, although a handful of people still legally occupy a small corner of Little Mountain.

Once the entire six-hectare site is cleared, the province's plan is to sell it to developer Holborn Properties, who will build a mix of market- and social housing.

Holborn has promised that the priority for subsidized rental units will go to former Little Mountain residents.

"They'll come back to a better unit, definitely," Holborn CEO Joo Kim Tiah told CBC News Friday. "I can almost 100 per cent guarantee it."

But Tiah also said the new project is not expected to be completed for another 10 years.

"Affordable housing keeps disappearing and not getting built," said Salomons.

[url]http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/11/06/bc-little-mountain-demolition.html[/ur l][/QUOTtE]

Can't say I'm sorry. Those buildings were an eyesore and weren't exactly a good example of high density.

WarrenC12 · #**1453** Posted **Nov 7, 2009, 4:36 PM**

The development was ugly for sure, but a 10 year wait for a replacement? I don't get it. Why not leave them up until Holborn is ready to build?

whatnext · #**1454** Posted **Nov 7, 2009, 4:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

The development was ugly for sure, but a 10 year wait for a replacement? I don't get it. Why not leave them up until Holborn is ready to build?

Because it might serve a as lightening rod for protest against Gordo.

Stupid, petty political move, just what I'd expect from our beloved Premier. By all means replace the ugly buildings, but leave them until you're ready to do so.

delboy · #**1455** Posted **Nov 7, 2009, 7:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

The development was ugly for sure, but a 10 year wait for a replacement? I don't get it. Why not leave them up until Holborn is ready to build?

I missed that in the article. That is odd.

hollywoodnorth · #**1456** Posted **Nov 7, 2009, 8:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by delboy

I missed that in the article. That is odd.

ya thats odd and new news to me. I think Holburn is 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 the dog as they are in deep sh*t with a few other projects.

djh · #**1457** Posted **Nov 7, 2009, 8:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

The development was ugly for sure, but a 10 year wait for a replacement? I don't get it. Why not leave them up until Holborn is ready to build?

I would expect what they mean is that it will take 10 years to completely build-out all phases of the project, not 10 years until they start work on it. Probably the writers giving the article a sensationalist element. It would not make financial sense for a developer to buy a property and wait 10 years to start work on it when there is pent-up demand right now.

Yume-sama · #**1458** Posted **Nov 7, 2009, 8:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpongeG

Vancouver's Little Mountain housing project demolished

"Affordable housing keeps disappearing and not getting built," said Salomons.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/11/06/bc-little-mountain-demolition.html

Except of course the 3813 units built between Jan. 1 2005 and August 21st, 2008 with hundreds if not thousands more planned before 2010 (I don't know the exact 2009 statistics, yet)

But I'd hate to throw a little wrench in Salomons theory.

Oh, how heartless we are in Vancouver

Unfortunately, though, more people come here seeking handouts faster than we can build them.

SpongeG · #**1459** Posted **Nov 7, 2009, 9:15 PM**

i think it means the social housing will not be back to 100% for 10 years but the development itself will start pretty soon and be built out in phases over the enext 10 years

but some of the buildings still stand occupied so it is kinda confusing and holborn doesn't own the land yet - so that transaction could take a while

djh · #**1460** Posted **Nov 7, 2009, 10:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpongeG

i think it means the social housing will not be back to 100% for 10 years but the development itself will start pretty soon and be built out in phases over the enext 10 years

but some of the buildings still stand occupied so it is kinda confusing and holborn doesn't own the land yet - so that transaction could take a while

I just said that, 2 posts above yours...