Downtown Vancouver Updates - Page 351

PaperTiger · #**7001** Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 4:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlousa

The issue with me isn't if the city is getting enough in return, I'm sure the numbers do work out in the cities favour.
It's that the city is reneging on it's policy which has shown success. Spreading social housing throughout the city helps build complete neighbourhoods and has proven more successful for the residents of that housing. Concentrating the units into the dtes has proven much less successful.

Exactly. It’s the politics of it that galls me. Why hold Henderson’s feet to the fire and build the Pender and Abbott women's housing, but allow Concord to build Cosmos instead of putting affordable housing on the spectrum.

If we can take anything from the DTES it is that concentrating poverty is not a good for anybody, except drug dealers and parasitic "social advocates."

wrenegade · #**7002** Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 5:14 PM**

Yep they are only 320 sq. ft. I think the guy may have a bit of a case against the city, Bosa designed the buidling, but the city allowed it to get built. There will be a light well there, but not very big. The guy is out of his mind though if he thinks his property was every worth $10 million.

whatnext · #**7003** Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 6:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by awvan

Yep they are only 320 sq. ft. I think the guy may have a bit of a case against the city, Bosa designed the buidling, but the city allowed it to get built. There will be a light well there, but not very big. The guy is out of his mind though if he thinks his property was every worth $10 million.

But surely its worth more than the $1 million (he claims) Bosa offered? Interesting that he has named mayor and the councillors who voted for it (excluding Anton and Reimer) in the suit. I thought the law shielded them from this kind of action?

This kind of issue is why I have never been a fan of STIR. And 320 sq ft!

hollywoodnorth · #**7004** Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 7:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlousa

The 58 W Hastings St site is worth ~$12M, the 117 E Hastings site significantly less. The issue with me isn't if the city is getting enough in return, I'm sure the numbers do work out in the cities favour.
It's that the city is reneging on it's policy which has shown success. Spreading social housing throughout the city helps build complete neighbourhoods and has proven more successful for the residents of that housing. Concentrating the units into the dtes has proven much less successful. While next door to a casino might not be the ideal location I'm not sure anyone can argue that the Hastings site are an improvement. If this deal does go thru hopefully the city will offload the properties and use the money for additional social housing in a healthier location although we know the pressure against the city will be great.

that's what I think will happen for 1 if not both the sites is they will be flipped. hell maybe Concord will buy them back

haha

wrenegade · #**7005** Posted **Jan 14, 2011, 8:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by whatnext

But surely its worth more than the $1 million (he claims) Bosa offered?

It's assessed at $1.96M, but it's probably worth a little more than that. There is no way in hell it is worth $10M, likely not even $5. The only accurate way to assess it really is by it's income because with buildings on either side of him (when 1142 is complete), his 25 feet is basically useless for redevelopment.

urbandreamer · #**7006** Posted **Jan 15, 2011, 1:36 AM**

Changing the topic from poverty to wealth...but where's the thread for 99 West Pender? Just noticed it here: http://www.buzzbuzzhome.com/99-West-Pender includes renderings. And more dated 21st October 2010 here: http://www.vancouverhoods.com/gastown/stunning-design-99-pender-tower/

Looks sort of like Vancouver's version of 1 Bloor.

jlousa · #**7007** Posted **Jan 15, 2011, 2:16 AM**

Height will not be 225ft but most likely 150ft for 99 W Pender. Apparently the early city documents mentioned the site as able to take additional height of 150ft. Which was assumed to be the 75 allowed plus an additional 150 for 225. But turns out they meant the site could take additional height to bring it up to 150ft.

So I don't believe we will end up seeing that render become reality.

Canadian Mind · #**7008** Posted **Jan 15, 2011, 2:42 AM**

Shame. Was a very neat design.

jlousa · #**7009** Posted **Jan 15, 2011, 4:01 AM**

Couple of downtown updates

Quote:

Project: Mixed-Use Development
Community Area: Downtown Status: Proposed
Location: 1349 GRANVILLE ST
Project Type: Rezoning
Department: Planning Department
Applicant Contact: Cressey Development LLP
Description: Construct a 12 storey market rental residential/commercial building with an FSR of 7.53 and a proposed height of 108 ft. (Included are 109 STIR units)

Seems like such a waste, another STIR project. This one is located just south of the Whitespot, on what is currently a parking lot. Figured they would've gone with more height here.

Next one

Quote:

Project: Mixed-Use Development
Community Area: Downtown Status: Proposed
Location: 424 West Pender St & 454 West Pender St
Project Type: Rezoning
Department: Planning Department
Applicant Contact: Onni Group
Description: This rezoning application is for two separate properties, two separate buildings, being considered as one application. Propose that 424 West Pender St increase from a 5 FSR to 7.49 FSR. And 454 West Pender St increase from a 5 FSR to 8.76 FSR. These buildings will be primarily residential with retail at grade.

This one is a bit more interesting, the addresses line up with what is currently Smile Restaurant, but I don't think they would turn that into two separate buildings. My understanding is most of that block belongs to Onni including the surface lot on the corner. Anyways with FSRs of 7.5 and 8.75 they could place some big density there.

Canadian Mind · #**7010** Posted **Jan 15, 2011, 4:06 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlousa

Seems like such a waste, another STIR project. This one is located just south of the Whitespot, on what is currently a parking lot. Figured they would've gone with more height here.

There is no mandate to maximize height? I would have thought taller, slimmer towers would reduce street-level shadowing more than short and fat towers.

Either way, it'd be a short building, no big loss as long as density is maximized.

delboy · #**7011** Posted **Jan 15, 2011, 5:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlousa

Couple of downtown updates

Seems like such a waste, another STIR project. This one is located just south of the Whitespot, on what is currently a parking lot. Figured they would've gone with more height here.

Next one

This one is a bit more interesting, the addresses line up with what is currently Smile Restaurant, but I don't think they would turn that into two separate buildings. My understanding is most of that block belongs to Onni including the surface lot on the corner. Anyways with FSRs of 7.5 and 8.75 they could place some big density there.

With resepct to west pender, does that mean that some of teh existing older buildings stock will be torn down? I sure hope not!

entheosfog · #**7012** Posted **Jan 15, 2011, 5:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by delboy

With resepct to west pender, does that mean that some of teh existing older buildings stock will be torn down? I sure hope not!

I second that!

jlousa · #**7013** Posted **Jan 15, 2011, 6:40 PM**

Don't know what Onni has planned, they aren't proposing anything at this time, just an increase in FSR, which is a bit odd. Perhaps they plan on transfering that density to another site, although the city isn't in the mood to increase the density bank at this time. We'll just have to wait and see what's planed.

TwoFace · #**7014** Posted **Jan 15, 2011, 6:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbandreamer

Changing the topic from poverty to wealth...but where's the thread for 99 West Pender? Just noticed it here: http://www.buzzbuzzhome.com/99-West-Pender includes renderings. And more dated 21st October 2010 here: http://www.vancouverhoods.com/gastown/stunning-design-99-pender-tower/

Looks sort of like Vancouver's version of 1 Bloor.

That looks like a mighty ambitious development for that location. Power to them, if they can make it work.

Metro-One · #**7015** Posted **Jan 15, 2011, 9:42 PM**

I love the look of that tower! I hope it gets approved without a single change to it.

trofirhen · #**7016** Posted **Jan 15, 2011, 9:57 PM**

Yeah! ! Snazzy is the word for it.

Coldrsx · #**7017** Posted **Jan 16, 2011, 5:31 PM**

Still not sure how they plan on not having units looking directly intoning another...

TwoFace · #**7018** Posted **Jan 16, 2011, 7:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Still not sure how they plan on not having units looking directly intoning another...

Good observation, another reason for that rendering being just a publicity stunt. 10 feet between balconies facing each other is strange to say the least.

hazel · #**7019** Posted **Jan 17, 2011, 2:56 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by golog

I don't believe I can appeal anyone's assessment but my own.

I can complain to the city to ask them to appeal for themselves, but that's about it.

When I appealed my assessment last year because the identical apartment next to ours was assessed much lower, the assessor said that they made an error in the assessment of the adjacent unit, and if I wanted I could appeal that my neighbour's assessment was too low. Right neighbourly of me, wouldn't it be...

SpongeG · #**7020** Posted **Jan 19, 2011, 11:17 PM**

I saw an article in BIV today that made me just open my mouth in shock - I can't find an online link - maybe i will take a pic of it tomorrow if i see it again - it was about a development downtown i think it was on granville - anyway there was a pic with some dude and i didn;t read beyond the caption - i have to paraphrase what it said as i don't recall the exact wording - but it said: so and so opposses the development because people in the new could jump off their balconies and RAPE residents in our building! LOL OMG WTF

i've never heard such a bizarre stupid excuse for not wanting a new building next door RAPE! is jumping off balconies to neighbouring buildings to rape residents a common problem downtown???