Downtown Vancouver Updates

[red_lantern]

Originally Posted by Porfiry

That's gross. The City needs more public washrooms, not less! Next time I see human excrement in a park I'll be reminded how the cost of a single dedicated left turn bay (ref) would have covered these washroom cost shortfalls for ten years!

How about they utilize naming the toilets like they do the park benches, that could raise the funds to keep them open. How about gordy campbell and his old playmates donate and perhaps some stalls could be named after them..lol ""Politics Stinks""

[dleung]

Wow.. the more I hear about the cost of stuff like left turn bays and traffic lights, it seems like road infrastructure is so not worth it. Half the time it looks like they repave perfectly-good roads just to create jerbs for our local trades...

[raggedy13]

That's pretty bad news. It is hard enough to find public washrooms in this city as is. Half the time I have to buy a cup of coffee somewhere just to use their washroom.

I see a transit debate coming on. Let's please keep the transit discussion to the transit threads! Thank you.

[Metro-One]

Ditto on the washrooms

Vancouver already is terrible for public washrooms. In Japan (again with the Japan, but it is what I know, hehe) there are public washrooms everywhere! And not only are there washrooms everywhere, the majority of them are kept in good shape and are relatively clean.

Again though, when you have a society that respects public space you are able to have such luxuries

[SpongeG]

legally i don't think you are allowed to deny people the use of washrooms but many say its for customer use only but they are in fact not allowed to do that

[Login650]

Originally Posted by officedweller

If the only alternative is to close them - make them pay toilets or get Lamar (whoever does the street furniture) to set up some self-cleaning replacements in exchange for advertising.

It's currently against Provincial law to charge for bathroom use in BC. Which is why all public toilets in Vancouver are free (usually covered in ads to defray the cost). http://vancouver.ca/engsvcs/streets/furniture/toilets.htm

Random tidbit: I believe the City is in the process of installing another automated washroom at Robson&Granville.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Login650

It's currently against Provincial law to charge for bathroom use in BC. Which is why all public toilets in Vancouver are free (usually covered in ads to defray the cost). http://vancouver.ca/engsvcs/streets/furniture/toilets.htm

Random tidbit: I believe the City is in the process of installing another automated washroom at Robson&Granville.

Thanks for the info - didn't know that.

In that case, I'd push for more free self cleaning washrooms in exchange for advertising (but the Park Board may also oppose advertising)

[Millennium2002]

The Parks and Recreation board should take in a bit of the money that ads and company sponsorships generate... although Chicago's example with respect to Millennium Park may (or may not) be too extreme.

[Fairbanks]

I'd be in favour of pay toilets in city parks. It would no doubt curb some of the transient activity that takes place in stalls. ie: needle use and public indecency.

[red_lantern]

Originally Posted by Fairbanks

I'd be in favour of pay toilets in city parks. It would no doubt curb some of the transient activity that takes place in stalls. ie: needle use and public indecency.

If the city forces residents to pay for public toilets then we will become like Santa Monica...25cents to use the loo. Most folks will then use the laneway and pee in the bushes.

[SFUVancouver]

Taken by SFUVancouver, December 1st, 2010.

[jlousa]

Constantly surprised how quickly Cosmo is coming along, it could be at ground level by the end of the year, but with holidays I'd think a mid Jan date is more realistic. Great progress. Hopefully we'll see their next project start ground before this one finishes. It's been a long time since we've seen d/t without an active Concord project.

[dleung]

Originally Posted by jlousa

It's been a long time since we've seen d/t without an active Concord project.

A great blessing that was...

[biketrouble]

SFU: am I right in thinking that's part of the old Dunsmuir Tunnel visible at the far end of the pit?

[officedweller]

Yup - check back in the thread for pics of the whole cross-section.

[SpongeG]

City plans to give group site to grow, sell food


BY JEFF LEE, VANCOUVER SUN DECEMBER 11, 2010 12:09 AM


The City of Vancouver is proposing to turn a former scrap yard it owns on Hastings Street over to a group that grows and sells food as part of a Downtown Eastside economic renewal project.

The catch is that the yard is a contaminated site and will have to be either capped or handled in a way to make sure vegetables grown organically in the proposed above-ground beds aren't also contaminated.

The project will be the second SOLEfood urban vegetable garden run by United We Can, the Downtown Eastside group famous for its returnable deposit recycling program that acts as a buying house for binners.

United We Can says the half-acre site at 1015 Hastings will double the output of its urban garden program, which last year produced 10,000 pounds of food, most of which was sold at farmers markets and to restaurants. The group says the new site will employ five more people and put the organization well on its way toward opening eight urban plots within three years.

In considering leasing the site to United We Can for a dollar a year for up to 20 years, the city says it will insist the group not disturb the soils and must also get approval from the provincial Environment Ministry. It will provide water service from the local water main. Council will decide on the proposal at Tuesday's meeting.

Brian Dodd, the executive director of United We Can, and Seann Dory, the group's director of sustainability, say there won't be any risk to foods grown on the site.

"We're going to be using raised beds and we just need to make sure that the agrologist we're working with is satisfied there is no way contaminants can be transferred to the plants," he said. That means capping the land with concrete or some other form of impermeable barrier.

The group already has experience with that issue; it operates a half-acre garden on top of the Astoria Hotel's asphalt parking lot and has had no trouble. Dory said the site produced enough vegetables to keep eight people employed at the peak of the season.

SOLEfood isn't a charity project, Dory said. "We're trying to use food as a tool for economic revitalization in the neighbourhood."

Last season 90 per cent of the food grown at the Astoria Hotel site was either sold at farmers markets or to three restaurants in the downtown area: Au Petit Chavignol, Boneta and Radha Yoga Eatery. The remaining 10 per cent was sold at wholesale cost to community organizations.

...

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/life/City+pl...ll+food/3961813/story.html#ixzz17nWzSiV0
Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/life/City+pl...ll+food/3961813/story.html#ixzz17nWrxPFQ

[eduardo88]

That's an interesting proposal, although 10,000 pounds per year isn't all that much. I'm not going to post it here because I don't want to stray too much off topic, but on YouTube theres a video of a co-op that grows over a million pounds of food and fish on just two acres. I'd live to see some of those high intensity farms here in Vancouver.

[Millennium2002]

Frankly I wish they could just spend several years cleaning it up rather than leaving the mess behind for others to handle... but I guess this proposal is a good step forward for the growth of our local food supply.

[NetMapel]

Skyline may climb as Vancouver mulls building heights

Vancouver is considering raising the maximum height for high towers in the downtown core, as long as they aren’t within several protected view corridors.

But the proponents of a $500-million, three-tower proposal for Burrard Street are already trying to convince the city to exceed the new proposed height restrictions even before they’ve been adopted by council.

On Thursday, council will consider a staff recommendation to raise the maximum building height in the central business district outside of view corridors to 700 feet from 600. They’re also suggesting the city raise to 500 feet from 375 feet the maximum height along the Burrard Street corridor, which affects the Davie/Burrard area.

In October, Reliance Properties and Jim Pattison Developments unveiled a proposal to build a 48-storey, 466-foot tower on Pattison’s Toyota dealership as part of its Burrard Gateway project. The height limit is 375 feet.

But in the report to Thursday’s planning and environment committee, staff say the developers have since submitted a new application for a building 550 feet tall — higher even than the new contemplated limits.

Staff told them they didn’t support the proposal but that it was up to council to decide.

The city is also proposing to raise the maximum heights of signature buildings that can be seen from the approaches of Granville and Burrard bridges, including 300 feet at the foot of Burrard and 425 feet at the foot of Granville.

And it recommends creating a new “shoulder” area in the central business district south of Alberni Street to add to the existing Melville Street shoulder. It suggests raising the heights in those shoulder areas to 550 feet from 400.

But it also is recommending the city keep free of clutter several important view corridors, including those affecting Queen Elizabeth Park and locations on the south side of False Creek. And it recommends that all new towers, which now must meet at least LEED Gold standards for energy efficiency and sustainability, have even higher standards applied.

The report contains “before” and “after” images to show how much the city’s skyline would be changed under the various scenarios.

In January the city created three new view corridors that protect mountain views northward from Choklit Park and the Olympic Village.

Vancouver’s move to protect its signature views that are known around the world began in 1989 as the city’s skyline came under threat from redevelopment pressures. In 1997 it adopted a “General Policy for Higher Buildings” that sought to control the form and height of towers, and over the years planners have tried to control how high developers could build and how far into those corridors the buildings could intrude.

But enforcing the policies of previous councils has often been a lax affair; councils have often granted exemptions to the maximum allowable heights, with the result that Vancouver’s skyline is constantly changing and rising.

However, the report advocates that the city stick with a general theme of keeping higher buildings along “ceremonial streets” like Granville and Georgia, and not approving them on side streets, along the waterfront or in important shopping areas like Robson Street that would be unreasonably shadowed.

It also says the city’s tallest buildings should be signature towers that express an international level of architecture.

Interesting... things are heating up

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by NetMapel

Skyline may climb as Vancouver mulls building heights





Interesting... things are heating up

http://www.queenstown.net.nz/index.php?title=Argonath



"international level of architecture."

We shall see...