Little Mountain Redevelopment | U/C

[logan5]

Originally Posted by wrenegade

That is the way it is designed. The Little Mountain project won't have anything more than token small retail spaces (coffee shop, etc).

Considering the number of people that are going be injected into the neighborhood, and considering that there isn't much retail close by, I would hope that they would pay better attention to the retail suites. I would hope they would make the spaces attractive to more than just a coffee shop, nail salon, and an insurance office.

The good thing about main street is that most of the retail spaces have their own colors and materials that give each retailer or restaurant their own identity. How much more could it cost to give each retail space a different look, instead of the usual tired old glass storefront.

[djh]

Originally Posted by logan5

Considering the number of people that are going be injected into the neighborhood, and considering that there isn't much retail close by, I would hope that they would pay better attention to the retail suites. I would hope they would make the spaces attractive to more than just a coffee shop, nail salon, and an insurance office.

The good thing about main street is that most of the retail spaces have their own colors and materials that give each retailer or restaurant their own identity. How much more could it cost to give each retail space a different look, instead of the usual tired old glass storefront.

Just playing Devil's Advocate here, but there could be a good thing in only allowing small CRUs to this development. It prevents large chains moving into the village and drawing spending dollars away from Main Street. Imagine if a supermarket or regional retailer went in there. I can imagine several family stores on Main Street wouldn't be able to compete and would disappear.

So yes, in a way, just allowing a few *small* CRUs may ultimately prevent competition that could make that end of Main Street become sterile, like so many other developments that go into cool neighbourhoods and suck the cool out.

[wrenegade]

Originally Posted by djh

Just playing Devil's Advocate here, but there could be a good thing in only allowing small CRUs to this development. It prevents large chains moving into the village and drawing spending dollars away from Main Street. Imagine if a supermarket or regional retailer went in there. I can imagine several family stores on Main Street wouldn't be able to compete and would disappear.

So yes, in a way, just allowing a few *small* CRUs may ultimately prevent competition that could make that end of Main Street become sterile, like so many other developments that go into cool neighbourhoods and suck the cool out.

This was exactly the reasoning.

[SFUVancouver]

Originally Posted by djh

Just playing Devil's Advocate here, but there could be a good thing in only allowing small CRUs to this development. It prevents large chains moving into the village and drawing spending dollars away from Main Street. Imagine if a supermarket or regional retailer went in there. I can imagine several family stores on Main Street wouldn't be able to compete and would disappear.

So yes, in a way, just allowing a few *small* CRUs may ultimately prevent competition that could make that end of Main Street become sterile, like so many other developments that go into cool neighbourhoods and suck the cool out.

Well said.

[Built Form]

Frances Bula's Globe article today. First phase to start late next year. Apparently the city under Sam Sullivan had promised very high density to Holburn which paid a premium for the site.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/brit...e-mountain-ready-to-rise/article4372893/

[phesto]

^Now Holborn just needs a general contractor to build it...

[jlousa]

Some movement on Little Mountain. It's moving at about the pace that Vancouver Turn has.

Going to the UDP on the 30th, but dont get too excited, this is just for a single parcel, but still a good sign.

Proposal for a five storey, 53 unit social housing project for
seniors. It is proposed as the first development on the 15 acre
Little Mountain Housing site, to be guided by the Little Mountain
Housing Policy Statement approved by Council in June 2012. In
the interests of accelerating the provision of social housing on the
site, this project is proceeding in advance of the larger site
rezoning and is being considered under the existing RM-3A zoning

Also of interest the non-Little Mountian area between LM and Main and 33rd is looking at upzoning to allow 4 storey stacked townhomes and 6storey apts.

Stacked townhomes
http://vancouver.ca/files/cov/little-mountain-adjacent-area-info-board-stacked-townhouses.pdf

Apartments
http://vancouver.ca/files/cov/little-mountain-adjacent-area-info-board-apartments.pdf

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by jlousa

Also of interest the non-Little Mountian area between LM and Main and 33rd is looking at upzoning to allow 4 storey stacked townhomes and 6storey apts.

Stacked townhomes
http://vancouver.ca/files/cov/little-mountain-adjacent-area-info-board-stacked-townhouses.pdf

Apartments
http://vancouver.ca/files/cov/little-mountain-adjacent-area-info-board-apartments.pdf

I'd like to see a bit more density.

Townhouses: Up to 2 FSR
Apartments: Up to 2.7 FSR

Perhaps not necessarily that many more units, but make the units more family-orientated. Have more 2+den and 3 bedroom units available. I'm tired of everything being studios and 1 beds!

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by jlousa

Also of interest the non-Little Mountian area between LM and Main and 33rd is looking at upzoning to allow 4 storey stacked townhomes and 6storey apts.

Stacked townhomes
http://vancouver.ca/files/cov/little-mountain-adjacent-area-info-board-stacked-townhouses.pdf

Apartments
http://vancouver.ca/files/cov/little-mountain-adjacent-area-info-board-apartments.pdf

I would be very happy if this was called The Duffin in honour of my No. 1 source for food when I first moved out on my own (Quebec and 33rd).

[officedweller]

I just noticed that the first building (5 storey) of the Little Mountain project @ 155 East 37th Ave. was approved by the DPB back in March:

DPB Minutes:
http://vancouver.ca/files/cov/committees/minutes-development-permit-board-20130325.pdf

Staff Report:
http://vancouver.ca/files/cov/committees/155_East_37th_Avenue_-_DE416511.pdf

Building location:


Uploaded with ImageShack.us


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[theKB]

Guess it would be time to bump this thread....

Province to take in $300-million from Little Mountain sale in Vancouver

Wendy Stueck

Vancouver — The Globe and Mail

Published Thursday, Jul. 04 2013, 3:09 PM EDT

Last updated Thursday, Jul. 04 2013, 3:09 PM EDT


The B.C. government will receive proceeds of about $300-million – made up of cash and non-market housing – through the sale of the Little Mountain property in Vancouver, the province announced Thursday.

The provincial government reached a deal to sell the property, next to Queen Elizabeth Park, to developer Holborn Properties in 2008 but the price was not disclosed at the time....

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/brit...ntain-sale-in-vancouver/article12997592/

[etceteraism]

I'm curious to see if the VSB amends their school zone map to reflect the demographic changes this development is going to bring to the area.

If you look at their school zone map (http://vsb.bc.ca/sites/default/files/publication-files/Vsbmap.pdf) it's obvious that Little Mountain was purposely left out of the catchment for Hamber Secondary (kids instead fall under John Oliver). I doubt many families thinking of buying into the development at market rates will be happy about this, especially considering that the catchment line follows straight along Main from end to end except for this "blip". Of course as the rules stand now, you can send your kid to whatever school they want, but there's no guarantee they'll take you.

[Millennium2002]

I think the blip is more intentional.

Keep in mind that the boundaries are drawn with locality and current/expected enrollment in mind.

Neither the province or the VSB want the situation where some schools are overcrowded and yet others are sitting empty.

[jbrizzy]

Went by on the bus the other day and noticed concrete pillars were up behind the fence.

[WarrenC12]

What exactly is going on next in this area? I go by this area on my commute now and the whole plot looks overgrown and full of building materials(?). That one area is certainly seeing some activity, but it will look weird to say the least when that is complete and nothing else is happening in the rest of this huge area.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by etceteraism

I'm curious to see if the VSB amends their school zone map to reflect the demographic changes this development is going to bring to the area.

If you look at their school zone map (http://vsb.bc.ca/sites/default/files/publication-files/Vsbmap.pdf) it's obvious that Little Mountain was purposely left out of the catchment for Hamber Secondary (kids instead fall under John Oliver). I doubt many families thinking of buying into the development at market rates will be happy about this, especially considering that the catchment line follows straight along Main from end to end except for this "blip". Of course as the rules stand now, you can send your kid to whatever school they want, but there's no guarantee they'll take you.

This isn't quite the modern equivalent of "gracie's finger", so I doubt it will be much of a controversy.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by etceteraism

I'm curious to see if the VSB amends their school zone map to reflect the demographic changes this development is going to bring to the area.

If you look at their school zone map (http://vsb.bc.ca/sites/default/files/publication-files/Vsbmap.pdf) it's obvious that Little Mountain was purposely left out of the catchment for Hamber Secondary (kids instead fall under John Oliver). I doubt many families thinking of buying into the development at market rates will be happy about this, especially considering that the catchment line follows straight along Main from end to end except for this "blip". Of course as the rules stand now, you can send your kid to whatever school they want, but there's no guarantee they'll take you.

I'm surprised Vision hasn't done away with out-of-catchment enrollment - its a recipe for carbon-spewing parents driving their kids all over the city to school. Plus it sucks parent involvement out of schools that need it most.

Regardless, the social housing component is moving right along. With 53 units and 11 parking spaces, these parents won't be driving their kids to school!

[IMG][/IMG]

[SFUVancouver]

^ I disagree with your assessment of out-of-catchment enrolment automatically leads to parents driving their kids to school. From personal experience, I took transit by myself to school for my last couple years of elementary school (False Creek/Granville Island to Oak/King Edward) and to high school (UBC). As for whether cross-boundary enrolment leads to a deficit of parental involvement in schools that need it most, I honestly cannot knowledgeably comment on that part of your critique. However, I suspect that there is some correlation between active parental involvement in the education of their children and the likelihood of cross-boundary enrolment. I suspect that if cross-boundary enrolment were banned there would be a whole lot more self-selection on the parts of families to live within the boundaries of 'good schools' to the greater socioeconomic detriment of the catchment areas of schools without such cache.

With regards to Little Mountain, I rode by it yesterday on a bike ride and was reminded just how much larger the site is than I had appreciated from aerial photos and recollection. The building that is under construction looks good so far and I'm looking forward to seeing the rest come together. It's worth taking a moment's pause to reflect on a seismic shift in the local development community: between here and the Trump Tower, Holborn is actually building things .

[Millennium2002]

Originally Posted by etceteraism

I'm curious to see if the VSB amends their school zone map to reflect the demographic changes this development is going to bring to the area.

If you look at their school zone map (http://vsb.bc.ca/sites/default/files/publication-files/Vsbmap.pdf) it's obvious that Little Mountain was purposely left out of the catchment for Hamber Secondary (kids instead fall under John Oliver). I doubt many families thinking of buying into the development at market rates will be happy about this, especially considering that the catchment line follows straight along Main from end to end except for this "blip". Of course as the rules stand now, you can send your kid to whatever school they want, but there's no guarantee they'll take you.

I thought the purpose of the catchments was to geographically even out enrollment at the schools such that no one school gets too many or too few students, regardless of what parents think of the schools or whether the teaching there is "better" or not.

Surely, John Oliver Secondary has a bit of a stigma associated with it, but it makes no sense to send kids to Hamber if that school already has trouble dealing with the rest of the kids living in the original catchment.

In fact, given it's partly the cause of our school funding crisis, I feel so strongly about this issue that I would opt to reduce cross-catchment enrollments to special programs only if I were able to... Surely it removes parents' choices, but it doesn't make any sense to have the same types of buildings empty in one part of town and full in the other, and all the while spending excess resources to handle both types of situations.

I should also clarify the following, before I get a whole pile of comments about this: in no way does the above statement imply that I want good kids stuck with bad teachers. If individual teachers are suspect, they should be dealt with appropriately and via the proper administrative channels, and not via mobs of parents simply picking one school over another. (Perhaps such actions need to be made easier, but that needs supporting evidence and government action.)

[Pinion]

They better not drive around there since nearly every resident will have you ticketed for parking on the road in front of their place overnight.