HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Downtown & City of Vancouver


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #3381  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2012, 9:05 PM
sacrifice333 sacrifice333 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,460
NEU, Enerpro, Cap Mats, & The Village

There has been a [mis]conception that in spite of all the green and energy saving features uitilized in the village that utility prices are high. As such, last night I attended an information session held at The Village for 4 of the stratas in which the various heating, cooling, billing, etc. was addressed.

The speakers included representatives of the NEU, Enerpro, Cobalt Engineering (Cap Mats), and Crosby PM, with additional comments and attendance by E&Y and Hallmark Heating & Air Conditioning (service reps).

No doubt the crowd was tough, but I was incredibly impressed by how each of the speakers handled themselves and treated the question askers, some very uninformed, with the utmost respect.

The key points of confusion for residents of the Village seem to include:
  • Multiple Service Providers, Engineers, Etc.
  • How Enerpro Works
  • Method of Heating The Village

I've largely addressed who the parties involved are above.

As for How Enerpro Works? Enerpro is basically a system by which common strata costs of domestic hot & cold water usage are removed from the Strata Corp.'s General Budget and applied on a direct usage basis to the individual Strata Lots. Enerpro bills on a bi-monthly basis. The collected funds are then remitted back to the strata-corp, less a meter reading administration fee.

The key premise of Enerpro is that if people see their usage and the associated billing, instead of it just being lumped into their monthly strata bill, they will change their habits and use less energy. [Enerpro has examples of building re-fits where this change alone has resulted in >50% reductions in water usage and the associated energy bills!].

The key challenge in this is that people think their utility bills are higher because they've gone from having 2 bills: BC Hydro for Electricity (including Heat) and Strata Fee, to having 3 bills: BC Hydro for Electricity (not including Heat), Strata Fee (no longer including domestic Hot & Cold Water usage), AND Enerpro (covering Heat AND domestic water).

Regarding the method of the heating the village, the cap mats, and the radiant technology was discussed somewhat by Cobalt Engineering. Many complain that the system does not heat the suites to the desired temperatures. The system being radiant-based, is not instantaneous, and has shown some incompetence under extreme weather IMHO. The life of the cap-mat piping was also addressed with the engineering firm claiming similar systems showing 40+ yr lives.

Question, I know other buildings in SEFC will be hooked up to the NEU, but does anyone know if other buildings plan to use Enerpro?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3382  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2012, 9:16 PM
s211 s211 is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,519
Quote:
Originally Posted by sacrifice333 View Post
There has been a [mis]conception that in spite of all the green and energy saving features uitilized in the village that utility prices are high. As such, last night I attended an information session held at The Village for 4 of the stratas in which the various heating, cooling, billing, etc. was addressed.

The speakers included representatives of the NEU, Enerpro, Cobalt Engineering (Cap Mats), and Crosby PM, with additional comments and attendance by E&Y and Hallmark Heating & Air Conditioning (service reps).

No doubt the crowd was tough, but I was incredibly impressed by how each of the speakers handled themselves and treated the question askers, some very uninformed, with the utmost respect.

The key points of confusion for residents of the Village seem to include:
  • Multiple Service Providers, Engineers, Etc.
  • How Enerpro Works
  • Method of Heating The Village

I've largely addressed who the parties involved are above.

As for How Enerpro Works? Enerpro is basically a system by which common strata costs of domestic hot & cold water usage are removed from the Strata Corp.'s General Budget and applied on a direct usage basis to the individual Strata Lots. Enerpro bills on a bi-monthly basis. The collected funds are then remitted back to the strata-corp, less a meter reading administration fee.

The key premise of Enerpro is that if people see their usage and the associated billing, instead of it just being lumped into their monthly strata bill, they will change their habits and use less energy. [Enerpro has examples of building re-fits where this change alone has resulted in >50% reductions in water usage and the associated energy bills!].

The key challenge in this is that people think their utility bills are higher because they've gone from having 2 bills: BC Hydro for Electricity (including Heat) and Strata Fee, to having 3 bills: BC Hydro for Electricity (not including Heat), Strata Fee (no longer including domestic Hot & Cold Water usage), AND Enerpro (covering Heat AND domestic water).

Regarding the method of the heating the village, the cap mats, and the radiant technology was discussed somewhat by Cobalt Engineering. Many complain that the system does not heat the suites to the desired temperatures. The system being radiant-based, is not instantaneous, and has shown some incompetence under extreme weather IMHO. The life of the cap-mat piping was also addressed with the engineering firm claiming similar systems showing 40+ yr lives.

Question, I know other buildings in SEFC will be hooked up to the NEU, but does anyone know if other buildings plan to use Enerpro?
Ugh. One less reason to buy in this complex. Nothing like living in a failed test tube.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3383  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2012, 9:22 PM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,594
I assume Foundry and Exchange are already hooked up in SEFC, does anyone have first hand experience in either of those buildings?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3384  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2012, 9:39 PM
red-paladin red-paladin is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,626
I think people are complaining because it -does- work. People that otherwise could leave the hot water running all the time are actually billed for it. This is one of the points living in a green development. I know some people didnt' understand the costs, but in the case of the people that couldn't afford their non-market housing related utility bills..... I have difficulty with being compassionate because I live in a more expensive but futher away and crappier location and I'm subsidizing people that complain about such things. I'm all for non-market housing, but if they can't afford the $25 for the bill because it cuts into their one gear bike and old weezer albums budget...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3385  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2012, 9:56 PM
sacrifice333 sacrifice333 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by s211 View Post
Ugh. One less reason to buy in this complex. Nothing like living in a failed test tube.
Actually I would say it's anything but failed. Enerpro mentioned that the building's are actually doing very well energy wise. And the NEU uses approx. 50% less CO2 than alternatives. Note: Our homes are the largest contributors to GH Gasses!

I would say that this is an excellent example of positive policy being received negatively due to poor communication. Much like the HST. But please, I'm not trying to turn this into a political debate, so don't even think of going there... just an example.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3386  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2012, 10:25 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 41,844
WRT the 40,000 sq ft at the Executive Group project:

The City wouldn't be able to give an "exclusive" to a particular retailer - that would amount to "fettering its discretion", which it can't do.

I suppose that the retail categories for the zoning of the other parcels could exclude "food store" so as to focus on the village, but that's not the same as an exclusive to one company and, if a grocery retailer applied for a rezoning to allow another grocery store, it would have to be examined on its merits.

I do, however, recall a dispute about another liquor store wanting to set up "outside" the village and being blocked by the City on planning grounds (wanting to focus retail inside the village) - but liquor licences may treated more strictly.

Sounds like it would be tough to get a tenant - given that most big box retailers are already nearby.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3387  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2012, 10:35 PM
Sir Conga's Avatar
Sir Conga Sir Conga is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by red-paladin View Post
if they can't afford the $25 for the bill because it cuts into their one gear bike and old weezer albums budget...
ಠ_ಠ
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3388  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2012, 10:43 PM
hollywoodnorth's Avatar
hollywoodnorth hollywoodnorth is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 6,395
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrenegade View Post
I've talked to the leasing agents for the space at length about this space. It is going to be difficult. They are hoping for a couple banks (on the corners) but after that it is a crapshoot.
they need to be more creative ... feel free to have them contact me

off the top of my head I would think .... Car Dealership, Video/Audio/VideoGame Studio Space, SmallBigBox ... (ie PetSmart, Staples, etc.), SteveNash FitnessWorld type of client


ALSO I don't think there is any sort of "no grocery of drug store" restriction as that would not be fair. I think in terms of the CITY OWNED LANDS being developed by the city aka what you see now and the lands to the west .... that there will be no more grocery or drug stores as there is not the retail sqft to allow that and that was part of the plan.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3389  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2012, 11:59 PM
Built Form Built Form is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 697
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlousa View Post
The Executive group has submitted DPB plans for it's project at 1751 Manitoba (formerly 105-167 W. 2nd Ave). Can't recall if they've changed anything, the massings look the same as during the rezoning process. Anyways the project calls for 3 towers, Phase one will be a 15 floor tower (east) over a 6 floor podium. Phase 2 will be a 16 floor (west) connected to another 15 floor tower via a 6 floor podium. The 2 phases will be divided by a mid block passage. Height will be 46M, 43.2M and 43.2, total area just under 400K sqft, FSR is high at 5.26. The project will consist of 488 units and 600 parking stalls.

Notification Letter
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/developmentservices/devapps/1751manitoba/notiltr.pdf

Site Plan
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/developmentservices/devapps/1751manitoba/sitepl.pdf

Phase 1 Elevations
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/developmentservices/devapps/1751manitoba/ph1elevations.pdf

Phase 2 Elevations
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/developmentservices/devapps/1751manitoba/ph2elevations.PDF

Landscape Plan 1
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/developmentservices/devapps/1751manitoba/lscapepl1.pdf

Landscape Plan 2
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/developmentservices/devapps/1751manitoba/lscapepl2.pdf

Landscape Plan 3
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/developmentservices/devapps/1751manitoba/lscapepl3.pdf

I predict we'll actually see a slight pause in additional projects starting in SEFC as developers wait for some inventory to be further absorbed. Depending on the market it could be a matter of months to a year even two. Most of the ones that have been talked about will proceed, but nothing new coming forward from the drawing table soon, imo.

Interesting to note there were 2 options available for this site.
Here's the approved design.












And here's the alternate design.
















All pix by Built Form
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3390  
Old Posted Feb 25, 2012, 12:23 AM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,594
Quote:
Originally Posted by officedweller View Post
WRT the 40,000 sq ft at the Executive Group project:

I suppose that the retail categories for the zoning of the other parcels could exclude "food store" so as to focus on the village, but that's not the same as an exclusive to one company and, if a grocery retailer applied for a rezoning to allow another grocery store, it would have to be examined on its merits.
This. As each site is an individually zoned CD-1 designation, large-format grocery and drug stores are precluded everywhere except where Urban Fare and LD are. I should have been more clear, the city didn't give Urban Fare and LD exclusives, but those locations have exclusives.

Quote:
I do, however, recall a dispute about another liquor store wanting to set up "outside" the village and being blocked by the City on planning grounds (wanting to focus retail inside the village) - but liquor licences may treated more strictly.
Liquor licenses are always treated differently.

Quote:
Sounds like it would be tough to get a tenant - given that most big box retailers are already nearby.
Exactly. And a lot of those tenants along Cambie already aren't doing so well. Unconventional spaces and high rent will do that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3391  
Old Posted Feb 25, 2012, 7:41 AM
officedweller officedweller is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 41,844
Maybe a fitness centre could take some of the space
- i.e. Trevor Linden's Club 16?
Bookended by a yogurt or ice cream place and a Starbucks.

Or maybe if the space sits vacant for several years the City may think about expanding the permitted uses
(i.e. think Gastown parkade)


********

I like the approved design better than the alternate.
It's just the white frame boxes and facade treatments that's the difference - the massing looks the same.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3392  
Old Posted Feb 25, 2012, 9:09 AM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 40,140
maybe marshalls? that would be an odd location for it but they might want to open down there
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3393  
Old Posted Feb 26, 2012, 5:22 AM
Joat's Avatar
Joat Joat is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 226
When are they going to develop the space between the village and the cambie bridge? Weren't they going to put a school there?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3394  
Old Posted Feb 26, 2012, 8:02 AM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 40,140
a lot of it will be park space, there were plans and renders posted beside the trail/seawall down under the bridge - the school is set to be close to the olympic village on that gravel patch next to/east of the dog park and playground park area
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3395  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2012, 12:11 AM
sacrifice333 sacrifice333 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,460
Here's an image of the ODP from the City's website:



Yes, some park space on the undeveloped city parcel North of 1st near the bridge, but definitely a "few" buildings too. And as for the elementary school... everyone always says it'll be West of the dog park, but in this image it is clearly within the current bounds of Hinge Park, adjacent to Columbia between Athlete's Way and Walter Hardwick.

Last edited by sacrifice333; Feb 27, 2012 at 2:42 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3396  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2012, 7:37 AM
officedweller officedweller is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 41,844
If that's City land north of 1st Ave between the school and bridge, the City would be smart to let the remaining area develop, jack up values and prices, then develop and reap the profit.
The rest of the area is seeing so much development that letting that area lie low for a while won;t kill momentum.
Of course, it would have to put up with inland purchasers complaining of view blockage.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3397  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2012, 2:48 PM
sacrifice333 sacrifice333 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by officedweller View Post
If that's City land north of 1st Ave between the school and bridge, the City would be smart to let the remaining area develop, jack up values and prices, then develop and reap the profit.
The rest of the area is seeing so much development that letting that area lie low for a while won;t kill momentum.
Of course, it would have to put up with inland purchasers complaining of view blockage.
It appears to be a fairly open plan; numerous websites, etc. all show how it'll unfold. So hopefully not too many people will get their arms up after losing their views. The buildings are supposed to "step-down" toward the waterfront though, so maybe that'll help... a bit.

Last edited by sacrifice333; Feb 27, 2012 at 3:52 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3398  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2012, 1:04 AM
sacrifice333 sacrifice333 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,460
WCFC, West Tower 1, moving on up:

Untitled by sacrifice333, on Flickr

James, new paneling on windows on low-rise and addition of railing to tower balconies:

Untitled by sacrifice333, on Flickr

Last edited by sacrifice333; Mar 1, 2012 at 2:11 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3399  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2012, 1:11 AM
squeezied's Avatar
squeezied squeezied is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,625
great pics, cressey has not failed to impress so far.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3400  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2012, 7:56 AM
dleung's Avatar
dleung dleung is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 6,554
Yawn. It's too bad the olympic village hasn't inspired any change from the usual formula.
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 > Downtown & City of Vancouver
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:24 PM.

     

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