HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Metro Vancouver & the Fraser Valley


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1261  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2009, 8:52 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 41,479
From the Now:

Quote:
City vetoes development, citing lack of infrastructure

Coquitlam NOW


Friday, December 11, 2009


Port Moody council stuck by its no-new-development-without-the-Evergreen-Line edict, defeating a proposed Henry Street development at Tuesday's meeting.

"I made a commitment to the residents of Port Moody that I will not be supporting new developments," said Mayor Joe Trasolini. "And this is a new development."

The proposal would have seen an 11-storey, 149-unit building constructed in the 3000 block of Henry Street, in the empty lot next to the Terravista condos. The proponent promised a condo terraced into the hillside, using only 25 per cent of the property for the building and leaving the remaining 0.6 hectares (1.5 acres) for park. It was to include a communal car system, terraced green space with rainwater being collected and used for irrigation, and ample bike storage.

Although council members saw merit in the design and sustainability of the development, Trasolini said, they could not go ahead with the proposal due to traffic and density concerns. He added that these are problems that would be alleviated by the Evergreen Line and Murray-Clarke Connector.

"Further growth in Port Moody, with the lack of infrastructure, is not sustainable."

Meanwhile, residents who spoke out at the public hearing were torn over the development plan, with those from Terravista opposed and many echoing council's concerns about density and traffic.

However, Wendy Swalwell, president of the Moody Centre Community Association, said her group supports the project.

"I think it's very forward thinking. We've talked about a blanket issue of no more development because of infrastructure, but you know we need some help ... We would like to see something of this calibre built [now], rather than later on when you need to meet your density requirements and think, 'OK, let's slap a highrise somewhere.'"

Timothy Ankenman, the proposal's architect, said after the meeting that he was disappointed with council's decision. After two and a half years of working on the project, he's not sure his client will want to bring the proposal forward again once the city begins allowing development, which may be a long way off.

"Till infrastructure is addressed I cannot justify any more development in our city," said Coun. Bob Elliott. "We have no infrastructure, we've been promised over and over again ... we might as well forget about it. It won't happen in my lifetime and it won't happen in my kids' lifetime, as far as I'm concerned."

Trasolini, Elliott and Coun. Karen Rockwell voted against the development, while Couns. Mike Clay, Gerry Nuttall and Diana Dilworth voted in favour. Motions are defeated on a tie, however, which happened because Coun. Meghan Lahti was absent.

© Coquitlam Now 2009
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1262  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2009, 8:55 PM
WarrenC12's Avatar
WarrenC12 WarrenC12 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: East OV!
Posts: 24,536
What an idiot he is. I'm not sure how to respond to that.

Glad I don't live in Port Moody.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1263  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2009, 9:03 PM
paradigm4 paradigm4 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Surrey, BC
Posts: 688
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenC12 View Post
What an idiot he is. I'm not sure how to respond to that.

Glad I don't live in Port Moody.
At least he's actually standing up for his community and stuck by his word. I don't think the decision will do much, but it's more about political symbolism anyways. I don't see the Mayor's Council really pushing the provincial government to commit to transit expansion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1264  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2009, 9:06 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 41,479
From the Record:

Quote:
Westminster Pier park plans moving ahead

Theresa McManus
The Record


Wednesday, December 16, 2009


The City of New Westminster has selected the project management team that will oversee the development of Westminster Pier Park.

On Monday, city council approved the awarding of the project management contract to MKT Arkle Development Management Inc. and Dugal Purdie, the successful proponent of a request for proposal process earlier in the fall.

"We're very excited about the Westminster Pier Park project and what it means for our citizens," said Mayor Wayne Wright. "The new park will reconnect downtown New Westminster with the Fraser River waterfront, creating recreation opportunities and a destination for residents and visitors alike."

According to a staff report, the city received seven proposals in the request for proposals process. Four were shortlisted and MKT Arkle Development and Management and Dugal Purdie scored the highest for combined projected management skills, experience and price.

The contract is for $397,800, plus taxes.

"The project management team we've selected brings a wealth of knowledge and experience in this area and, working with city staff, we are confident they will be able to effectively manage the challenges and complexities of the design and construction of Westminster Pier Park," said city administrator Paul Daminato.

The City of New Westminster purchased the former Westminster Pier site in March 2009 for $8 million. In September 2009, the City was awarded $16.6 million from the Government of Canada and Province of British Columbia through the Build Canada Fund, established to help B.C. communities meet their pressing infrastructure needs, stimulate the economy, create jobs and support continued economic growth.

"The city's intent is to redevelop the brownfield site into a waterfront park and has been successful in obtaining grant funding from senior levels of government to accomplish this goal," said a staff report. "The grant funding is subject to the city being able to complete the project by March 2011."

According to a staff report, the city's 2009 to 2013 financial plan includes funding in 2010 for site remediation. This budget item will be used to fund the project management contract.

© The Record (New Westminster) 2009
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1265  
Old Posted Dec 16, 2009, 9:21 PM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 39,976
is that the area sort of under just next to the parkade - near the quay?
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1266  
Old Posted Dec 19, 2009, 4:02 AM
GeeCee's Avatar
GeeCee GeeCee is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Posts: 2,816
This project in Coquitlam seems to have restarted. The sales office reopened about two weeks ago.

http://liveatm1.com/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1267  
Old Posted Dec 21, 2009, 9:31 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 41,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpongeG View Post
is that the area sort of under just next to the parkade - near the quay?
Yeah, I think that's right. Water side of the parkade.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1268  
Old Posted Dec 24, 2009, 3:58 PM
hollywoodnorth's Avatar
hollywoodnorth hollywoodnorth is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Downtown Vancouver
Posts: 6,385
I cant find the Grouse Mountain Wind thread.........soooooo

I think it would be very cool to see something like thise down the line....

http://gizmodo.com/5433282/siemens-awes-autobahn-drivers-with-spinning-led-christmas-star
__________________
Quote of the Decade on SSP: "what happens would it be?" - argon007

"orange vested guy" - towerguy3
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1269  
Old Posted Dec 25, 2009, 2:17 AM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 39,976
new bike way project - not sure if its done or not but they reconstructed this intersection - the sod was laid a few weeks ago...

__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1270  
Old Posted Jan 3, 2010, 4:28 AM
Sonicwolf Sonicwolf is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Abbotsford
Posts: 68
Some valley news here. Hope this is the right thread. Today I went walking around downtown Abbotsford, job searching, and beside the Superstore there is a lot that has been very recently dug up. It has a bunch of construction equipment and materials in it and beside the dug out part there is a development rezoning sign about a 26 story tower. Interesting. Just a couple weeks ago it was a dumpy little 1930's house that had been abandoned. I cant find any information on this though. I hope all goes well with this one, we seem to have problems building towers here in Abbotsford.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1271  
Old Posted Jan 3, 2010, 8:54 AM
mooks28 mooks28 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 200
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeeCee View Post
This project in Coquitlam seems to have restarted. The sales office reopened about two weeks ago.

http://liveatm1.com/
Haha. I have *never* heard anyone describe this area as the "westwood" area of Coquitlam. Westwood is either the street or the Plateau, of which this is definitely not.

Good project despite the silly marketing, though...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1272  
Old Posted Jan 5, 2010, 11:58 PM
Whalleyboy's Avatar
Whalleyboy Whalleyboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Surrey
Posts: 2,014
wrong thread
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1273  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2010, 8:31 AM
Xrayal's Avatar
Xrayal Xrayal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: New Westminster
Posts: 174
I look, Victoria Hill doesn't seem to have its own thread, so suburbs it is.
An article from The Record in New Westminster, there local rag.
Quote:
Developer wants more homes
Onni asks city to change plans for Victoria Hill site

Theresa Mcmanus, The Record
Published: Saturday, January 09, 2010

Onni Development is seeking to increase the density on a portion of the Victoria Hill site.

The development company has applied to rezone a portion of Parcel J (275 Francis Way) to allow increased density.

It's also seeking the city's approval to allow commercial uses on Parcel C (22 East Royal Ave.) and Parcel E (26 East Royal Ave.)
Back in 2002, city council agreed to allow the former Woodlands property to be redeveloped into a planned residential community.

A development agreement between the city and the B.C. Buildings Corporation, which owned the site at the time, outlined the site requirements and provided detailed design guidelines.

In order to fulfil Onni's request, city council would have to rezone the properties and approve an amendment to the development agreement.

"We have been talking to Onni about this particular proposal for some time," said senior planner Barry Waitt.

Parcel C is the former Centre Block site and Parcel E is the former recreation centre site. Parcel J is an undeveloped site at the northeasterly corner of the Victoria Hill development.

According to Waitt, the major difference between the original proposal and what's now being proposed relates to the Centre Block and recreation centre.

"They are both no longer there, with the exception of the tower," Waitt said.

Onni is proposing to build three buildings around a town centre plaza on parcels C and E, with the buildings to contain about 183 multiple-family units and 30 live/work units.

"This area includes surplus visitor parking provided to address the current deficiency in visitor parking in the southerly portion of Victoria Hill in general," said a staff report.

"While the proposal shows dedicated visitor parking, the developer is anticipating applying for a development variance for parking required for the additional development. The development proposal includes the retention the Centre Block tower, without indicating its use at this time."

The tower was the only portion of the Centre Block that wasn't destroyed by fire in the summer of 2008. A report about the tower is expected to be submitted to council in February, after consultant studies are done.

The recreation centre was demolished because it was felt it was too costly to upgrade it to an institutional use.

Under the new proposal, Victoria Hill would be able to provide 15,220 square feet of commercial space, mostly on Parcel E. Commercial uses aren't currently permitted in the zoning.

According to Waitt, the town centre concept is one of the keys to the whole Victoria Hill design. In order to make it a more complete community, he said it's felt the area needs to have some commercial components.

"We felt from the beginning Victoria Hill needs a focus," Waitt said. "It needs to have an area that draws people in."

On Parcel J, Onni is proposing to build two highrise residential towers - 24 and 29 storeys tall - and a number of townhouse units.

"The first change, of course, is density," Waitt said. "It is a significant increase in density proposed from the original master plan."

A staff report states that the original design guidelines included a 16-storey residential tower, surrounded by up to four four-to-eight-storey, stepped housing blocks.

Coun. Betty McIntosh expressed concern that the buildings in parcel C are taller than the Centre Block.

"I believe we have told the community it would be the same height as the original Centre Block," she said.

Coun. Bill Harper said he's not concerned that the building would be higher than the Centre Block as he's more concerned with what it would look like.

Harper, however, is concerned about parking at Victoria Hill.

"The size of streets is problematic. There is no street parking at all," he said. "This is a very confined space. That is one of my concerns. ... How are you going to handle that parking? I think the parking issues have to be addressed."

Coun. Jaimie McEvoy questioned whether the commercial development will be viable based on the population of the Victoria Hill alone, as there could be impacts if the businesses start attracting people from other areas.

Waitt said the city has sought a balance between residential units and commercial square footage. While the city would have been significantly more commercial, he said Onni had concerns about the marketability of additional commercial space.

Coun. Jonathan Cote said he likes the town centre complex. He said the tower seems to be on its own on the conceptual drawings.

"It seems to be plopped there in the middle," he said. "It does seem a little haphazard."

Onni is planning to hold an open house to seek input and to make a presentation to the McBride-Sapperton Residents' Association.

© The Record (New Westminster) 2010
Here I have found a development plan from 2002, the lots/parcels should still be valid. Enjoy
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1274  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2010, 8:17 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 41,479
Thanks for posting.

The City of New Westminster should now demand
a contribution from Onni towards the construction of the Woodlands SkyTrain Station.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1275  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2010, 12:51 AM
vanman's Avatar
vanman vanman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 6,480
I completely forgot about that station. I was looking at that plan thinking the Victoria Hill site is not really an ideal spot for increased density. With a Woodlands station however the area would instantly become a TOD. New West should barter with Onni to get that station built, in exchange for even higher densities than Onni is currently proposing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1276  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2010, 7:40 AM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 39,976
Softer, gentler Metro regional plan advances

By Jeff Nagel - BC Local News

A new draft Metro Vancouver regional growth strategy now going out to public comment has been watered down to answer complaints of local cities that feared losing too much control over development.

The Metro Vancouver 2040 plan is to replace the outdated Livable Region Strategic Plan (LRSP) but continue the same core goals – fighting sprawl by containing urban growth, protecting green space and agricultural land, and building more densely so homes and businesses are easier to serve by transit, cycling and walking.

But Metro officials have largely abandoned an earlier vision of a new strategy with considerably more teeth than the old one, which was unable to prevent continued sprawl and construction of office parks outside town centres.

"It's a significant softening from what we brought out in April of last year," said chief administrator Johnny Carline.

But he argues the compromises are acceptable and will still deliver a "vast improvement" over the LRSP.

The revised draft gives local cities more scope to interpret the plan, he said.

Metro has backed off on capping housing densities in rural areas, instead leaving the precise rules to local cities so long as homes aren't packed so close they require urban sewers.

In a key concession to Surrey, planners gave up on a toughly enforced industrial land reserve to prevent further redevelopment of those scarce lands.

Now cities would be left to largely decide what lands they will designate as "industrial" and in a "mixed employment" zone that can legitimize existing office parks.

Industrial can include not just old-style smokestack manufacturing industries, warehousing and the like, but more modern ones like digital media studios.

"It's a tailoring to local needs, not a complete abandoning of the principle," Carline said.

Targets for building affordable housing now won't put as much onus on municipalities to deliver, noting help from the province will be needed.

Metro also eased back on mapping out frequent transit development corridors, leaving cities to work them out with TransLink.

Carline said critical areas of the plan like agricultural and conservation/recreation zones (which together replace the old Green Zone) and the urban containment boundary containing high-density growth will have to be honoured.

Those lines, however, can be redrawn by a two-thirds majority vote of the Metro board.

Most other future adjustments to maps sought by local cities can pass with a simple majority – an even lower bar than now.

Will officials look back in 10 years and view this is where they turned back the relentless march of car-dependent office parks and agricultural land conversions?

"I don't think you ever achieve 100 per cent," Carline said.

He also cautions smarter regional development depends not just on cities and Metro policies but also on TransLink's ability to vastly expand the transit system.

"If we fall behind with that investment, then we'll regret it," said Carline.

New transit lines are needed to serve fast-growing areas like Surrey, Coquitlam and Langley, he said, or else businesses and jobs will keep locating outside of town centres in inefficient areas that doom workers to commute by car.

Metro wants TransLink to build some of the new lines before local population levels justify them to attract riders and shape land-use patterns – a build-it-and-they-will-come philosophy.

But Carline noted it's tough to ask cash-strapped TransLink to build ahead of demand without new funding mechanisms like road pricing.

Langley Township Mayor Rick Green, who voted in November against okaying the current draft, now says the latest changes may win his council's support.

"We're cautiously optimistic," he said. "We have to be very comfortable going forward that we're not going to commit future councils and tie their hands in being able to move forward."

An expected 70 per cent jump in population in Langley Township over the next 15 years could starve the municipality of tax revenue unless it got more scope to open up new land for industrial and commercial development, he said.

Green still wants the draft changed to include the old interurban corridor through Surrey and Langley as a future community rail transportation route, an idea Metro staff so far reject.

"They don't want to step on TransLink's toes," said Green, who has championed community rail.

"We know out here we won't have the population density to ever qualify for SkyTrain technology."

Langley Township's Willoughby area will be added to the list of municipal town centres in the plan, as will Lower Lynn in North Vancouver District.

The plan also designates two metro centres – Surrey Centre as well as downtown Vancouver – and a series of regional town centres most of which were in the previous plan.

...

full storey and video @ source: http://www.bclocalnews.com/news/81545557.html
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1277  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2010, 2:35 AM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 39,976
i've been wondering what they are doing along lougheed hwy from an older article... http://www.canada.com/burnabynow/news/story.html?id=984fd4fb-2adc-4790-bf9d-aee98275e481

Quote:

The projects include:

- Lougheed Town Centre: This project will be located on Lougheed Highway from North Road to Austin Road, and includes landscaping a portion of the centre median, a "Welcome to Burnaby" sign, concrete sidewalks and boulevards with street trees. The project will also include new drainage, irrigation, decorative paving and lighting. It will be ready for tender by the end of March, and construction could begin in mid-May and be completed by late September. In all, the estimated cost of the project is $250,000.

- Production Way/University station to Gaglardi Way: Running on the north side of Lougheed Highway, from the Production Way/University SkyTrain station to Gaglardi Way, this project was initially expected to include street trees, drainage, irrigation, decorative paving and landscaping. But, as the design process continued, it became apparent that there was an opportunity to "celebrate" this area of the city by including special landscape and lighting features at each corner of Gaglardi Way and Lougheed. These will include architectural walls, low-intensity decorative lighting and drought-tolerant plants. The full design will also include street trees on both sides of the highway from Gaglardi Way to Production Way.

The first phase of this project will be ready for tender by the end of March, with completion expected in September, for an estimated cost of $595,000. A second phase to complete the project will be carried out in 2010.

- Edmonds Town Centre - Griffiths medians: This project on Griffiths Drive, extending from 10th Avenue to Rumble Street, includes landscaping the existing median, decorative lighting, the creation of a bridge-like treatment to recognize the crossing of Byrne Creek, improvements to the Griffiths pedestrian overpass and a "Welcome to Burnaby" feature at 10th Avenue. This project is also expected to be ready for tender by the end of March and should be completed by late September, with a cost of $587,000.

- The Heights: This project will run on Hastings Street from Boundary Road to Willingdon Avenue and will include installation of hanging baskets, new trash cans and street furniture refurbishment. The city will consult with the Heights Business Improvement Association to get further input on the extent of improvement, maintenance and operational issues. City staff will bring forward a future report on this project after the design and consultation process is done. The project will likely be done in the fall of 2009 through the spring of 2010.

- Brentwood Town Centre: This project will run from Boundary Road to Madison Avenue along Lougheed Highway, with a landscaped median, drainage, irrigation, lighting and a "Welcome to Burnaby" sign. Further development on the design plan is on hold to coordinate with other required construction in the area and future development. Plans will come forward to council at a later date.
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1278  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2010, 4:08 AM
vansky vansky is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 928
how can sth like surrey become a metro center, funny vision..~~
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1279  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2010, 4:20 AM
paradigm4 paradigm4 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Surrey, BC
Posts: 688
Quote:
Originally Posted by vansky View Post
how can sth like surrey become a metro center, funny vision..~~
Funny? How about proactive, smart planning? I really don't understand your rationale behind putting down Surrey City Centre.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1280  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2010, 4:23 AM
vansky vansky is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 928
Quote:
Originally Posted by paradigm4 View Post
Funny? How about proactive, smart planning? I really don't understand your rationale behind putting down Surrey City Centre.
ppl dont even want to move there, hwo can it sustain a metro center

i dont even know anybody who lives there,

i know guys live in lader, hamiliton...those r the last choices..

richmond got to the pt today because of hk and chinese investment, who's doing the investment in surrey? that's why its plans yrs ago still haven't gone anywhere..
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Metro Vancouver & the Fraser Valley
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:56 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.