Downtown Vancouver Updates - Page 308

trofirhen · #**6141** Posted **Apr 21, 2010, 10:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bulliver

Is that you Tom Campbell? "broken some heads"? Really? Glad to see there are still some folks out there that support police brutality.

Perhaps the fact that so many folks come downtown for this event that they have to close roads is a pretty good sign that smoking pot shouldn't be a 'criminal activity'. Jeez, maybe that's why they all come down in the first place? Can't get much press holding a rally in your living room.

BTW, it's your job to raise your kids, not the police, and certainly not the COV.

jlousa · #**6142** Posted **Apr 22, 2010, 1:40 AM**

This topic is now closed, anyone interested in continuing it can start a thread in the general forum, next post on this subject gets deleted.

Back onto topic, Looks like the planning dept has axed the proposal for an additional tower at Beach Towers, as per a memo posted by Frances Bula.

flight_from_kamakura · #**6143** Posted **Apr 22, 2010, 6:21 AM**

^ yeah, that's sort of unfortunate. as i think a commenter noted there, one hopes that the developer comes back with something on the 10-12 stories and keeps a similar vision podium vision. a nice, profitable fix. is that the geller project, then? the one he's been alluding to over the past few months?

trofirhen · #**6144** Posted **Apr 22, 2010, 2:51 PM**

If this topic is closed (and I agree it was getting a bit over-ripe) why do't we get back in the mood of downtown Vancouver with some more great and unusual photography.

Raggedy? SFU? Deasine? Bulliver? ................... Anyone else? ...........

SFUVancouver · #**6145** Posted **Apr 22, 2010, 5:42 PM**

I would love to, and I will just as soon as I can.

yogiderek · #**6146** Posted **Apr 23, 2010, 5:55 AM**

So i was passing 1754 Pendrell and saw a new rezoning sign. 21 storey condiminium plus a 5 storey separate building for rental. So this is the second time round for this property. A blank parcel of land, an old house and a hideous 3 storey walk up. Hopefully this one will go through.

SFUVancouver · #**6147** Posted **Apr 23, 2010, 6:35 AM**

The social housing project on Pender between Richards and Homer is under construction. It has a big red luffing crane, the forth that is in use right now.

The social housing project at Pender and Abbot is above grade already.

AlexYVR · #**6148** Posted **Apr 23, 2010, 3:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

The social housing project on Pender between Richards and Homer is under construction. It has a big red luffing crane, the forth that is in use right now.

The social housing project at Pender and Abbot is above grade already.

Does anyone remember how tall the P&A social housing is? (Lazy today, sorry!) Will it compete with Sun Tower for height? Would be a shame being so close.* It's going to block out a lot of light for those gardens behind ST.

*I do understand that social housing is more important than preserving aesthetics. But it's so pretty!

SFUVancouver · #**6149** Posted **Apr 23, 2010, 5:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexYVR

Does anyone remember how tall the P&A social housing is? (Lazy today, sorry!) Will it compete with Sun Tower for height? Would be a shame being so close.* It's going to block out a lot of light for those gardens behind ST.

*I do understand that social housing is more important than preserving aesthetics. But it's so pretty!

The building on the corner of Pender and Abbot is for women and single mothers with young children. It should be about 11 storeys tall, so it will barely come up to the top of the podium/base of the Sun Tower. That escarpment is a mighty big deal.

I think this will be one of the best of the "14 sites" social housing programme. Like all of them, it will achieve a high degree of environmental performance with LEED Gold certification being a requirement. It will also have retail at grade, which is something most social housing projects lack, and a large double-height restaurant at the corner of Abbot and Pender. The building gently terraces so as to create several varied outdoor spaces, including a contemplative landscaped private space for no more than one or two people, a landscaped childrens playground that is overlooked by the building's laundry room and family amenity space, and a dedicated smoking terrace that is well away from operable windows and air intakes. Overall I think this building will not read as an explicitly social housing building, though it will not be mistaken for a mid- to high-end market building either. I certainly hope that the International Village elementary school comes to fruition soon since this building will be home to lots of kids.

I am less of a fan of the one that is being built further up Pender between Homer and Richards. It is intended for the "core need" group of single formerly homeless people who will be referred by BC Housing. One of the non-profit housing societies, not DERA, will be running it and it will be staffed 24/7. Architecturally it will be adequate and little more. I am pleased that it will achieve LEED Gold certification and, unless plans have changed, it will have a rooftop solar hot water array.

LeftCoaster · #**6150** Posted **Apr 23, 2010, 6:03 PM**

^I think the tallest of the 14 sites was 13 floors or so. From what I remember of the steering meetings with BC housing there wasn't anything significantly taller than that.

Smooth · #**6151** Posted **Apr 23, 2010, 6:31 PM**

This idea might be a bit crazy but why doesn't the Vancouver School Board rent out some of the space on the second floor of the International Village Mall as a temporary location for a school. Seeing how the VSB is so short on cash right now I don't see them being able to afford a new building for at least a few years.

SFUVancouver · #**6152** Posted **Apr 23, 2010, 6:58 PM**

^ The crazy thing is that the school board capital budget is doing just fine and major projects are proceeding, such as the new University Hill Secondary school at UBC, and more than half a dozen siesmic upgrade programs. A new elementary school by the Langara golf course should be built shortly.

It is operating funds that they are having issues with.

MistyMountainHop · #**6153** Posted **Apr 23, 2010, 7:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BCPhil

If it were a crowd in front of the Art Gallery that large all throwing back hard liquor, with teens taking hits off Texas mickeys, the Tear Gas cloud released by police would be so large it would not dissipate for 3 days.

I'm all for the legalization of pot, at home or even in bars, but public consumption should fall under the same tolerance as alcohol. And one thing that is not tolerated at all is contributing to the delinquency of minors. The city should not be seen in any light as being supportive of an event that gets kids high. This is public property, in the core of a metropolitan downtown, being openly used for criminal activity and we laugh it off and even close roads for them. The police should have moved in and broken some heads.

If I went down to the Olympics and sold cold beers (a currently legal beverage) out of my cooler on a street corner to 15 year olds, I'm pretty sure I would end up in jail.

Has it occurred to you that the difference may be due to the substances themselves?

The reason public drinking is less tolerated is that it's more likely to cause actual problems. The fact that 10,000 people can gather downtown (or half a million can gather at Woodstock) peacefully might be worth noting here. Aggression from police is not necessary at all, and would create many more problems than it would solve.

LeftCoaster · #**6154** Posted **Apr 23, 2010, 7:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

^ The crazy thing is that the school board capital budget is doing just fine and major projects are proceeding, such as the new University Hill Secondary school at UBC, and more than half a dozen siesmic upgrade programs. A new elementary school by the Langara golf course should be built shortly.

It is operating funds that they are having issues with.

Well the seismic upgrades are completely funded by the province. Every school had to meet a new code and to do so the province was forced to spend around 1.2 billion I believe.

Many schools districts took this as na opportunity to upgrade some other aspects as well though and tacked on some additional renos to the mandated seismic upgrades.

jlousa · #**6155** Posted **Apr 24, 2010, 3:19 AM**

As someone mentioned the Pendrell project above, I figured I'd provide the details on it. I think it looks pretty good, but I'm sure someone will mention how lackluster it is.

Quote:

The project now provides 1-to-1 replacement of the existing 26 rental units on the property with guaranteed affordable units deeded to the City of Vancouver.
Density was proposed at floor space ratio 3.28, now 6.17 is proposed.
Condominium units increase from 34 units to 79 units, with a smaller average unit size.
No changes to proposed building height of 190 feet.

Context Plan
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/planning/rezoning/applications/1754-1772pendrell/documents/context.pdf

Building Elevations
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/planning/re...754-1772pendrell/documents/elevation.pdf

Building Sections
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/planning/re...1754-1772pendrell/documents/sections.pdf

Vancouver_Highrise · #**6156** Posted **Apr 24, 2010, 3:29 AM**

Yeah it is boring... but I'll take anything that is new and has some height in an area where the buildings are... well... old

trofirhen · #**6157** Posted **Apr 24, 2010, 3:46 AM**

People compalin about the monotony of Vancouver's residential (and office) highrises, with some justification. But take Toronto, Lord and Master of all Canada. It's true they have some smashing buildings, like the Royal Bank Plaza, and so forth, but in mid-town, and in the outlying clusters of suburban apartment buildings in Thorncliffe anf Don Mills, for example, you get masses and masses of stereotyped red brick, grey concrete, red brick grey concrete, red brick, grey concrete apartments for miles and miles (or is that km after km,).

The entire effect is a monotonous blaaaaaaaaaah, that looks even worse in winter (December to April inclusive), when there isn't a scrap of greenery to be found anywhere, except the random blue spruce and pine trees found in the parks, on, occasionally, planted on lawns.

It makes Vancouver look like the Garden of Eden with a city planted in it, despite all its design flaws. With more, and exotic, planting at street level, we can do even better. We're doing well, but not living up to our full potential.

Architype · #**6158** Posted **Apr 24, 2010, 3:48 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlousa

As someone mentioned the Pendrell project above, I figured I'd provide the details on it. I think it looks pretty good, but I'm sure someone will mention how lackluster it is.

The West End is starting to look kind of old and neglected; even if it's lackluster I don't understand why people have a problem with increased density in the West End, when the density is what made the West End what it is (special) in the first place.

SpongeG · #**6159** Posted **Apr 24, 2010, 4:17 AM**

because there is already to much noise and too many people its not like it used to be even 10 years ago, people are tired of ambulance noise and the bar crowds walking home at 4 am etc etc

and allowing more people is just going to be more noise and more people

I am being sarcastic but thats what people say and think

Vancouver_Highrise · #**6160** Posted **Apr 24, 2010, 4:48 AM**

I thought you were being serious at first, I lol'd at the ambulance part. But seriously..what do they expect when they live downtown.. that it will be quiet and that once you move there the city can't grow anymore?

it's the same argument over by BC place I just don't get it.