Cambie Corridor Updates - Page 15

Jess9 · #**281** Posted **Oct 28, 2013, 5:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlousa

With a 2.5 FSR and only 6 stories allowed I don't he'd get any bites at $3M right now. If your uncle is in no hurry he'd be better off waiting ~5yrs until after the Pearson site and Langara Gardens begin to see action.
Even $2M seems to be pushing the high end it on a buildable sqftage cost for the area. Talk to a couple of realtors from different agencies that specialize in the area as they'll know how much interest there is.

Thanks jlousa, I will tell him $2M might be the max he could ask. He has already talked to some realtors who told him that his house worths only 1.7M.

Jess9 · #**282** Posted **Oct 28, 2013, 5:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by VanK

Yes. $3M is way too much. You can't compare the transactions on an absolute price basis - mainly because lots sizes are different. In my opinion, ROUGH land prices along Cambie should be in the Plus/Minus $150/buildable square foot range. = 13,500sf x $150 = $2,025,000. Now in my personal opinion, the buildable lot values down in the Marine Drive area vs Oakridge/King Ed should be lower. Coupled with the fact that most of the major developers who want to be on Cambie have already bought, there is less demand for Cambie Corridor lots. At $3,000,000 = $222 per buildable square foot. Yes this is WAY too much IMO.

Thanks Vank, I saw some old houses, which have similar lots in the Marpole area and are not under the Cambie Corridor Plan, are asking 1.5M to 1.8M. So I guess $2M might be way to low if his house has the potential for a 6 storey building. I also think since almost all Marpole residents are opposed to the Marpole Rezoning plan, the plan will eventually be dead, and the supply of land will be pretty limited in the Marpole area. I will tell him in order to get a good price near $3M, and he just needs to wait a few more years.
Since my uncle is really old, if he doesn't get a premium price, he really has no motivation to move. So I believe in the coming years the development along Cambie street will slow down a lot.

officedweller · #**283** Posted **Nov 5, 2013, 6:43 AM**

Qualex-Landmark wants to build 50 rental units just east of Cambie on 41st:

http://www.vancouvermarket.ca/2013/10/24/50-unit-rental-project-proposed-for-west-41st-and-cambie/

http://www.vancouvermarket.ca/2013/10/24/50-unit-rental-project-proposed-for-west-41st-and-cambie/

whatnext · #**284** Posted **Nov 22, 2013, 4:16 PM**

The purchasers of all these units must be excited to hear that one of the potential sites of Metro's new waste incinerator is just a couple blocks away at Heather and Kent!

http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/F...es+waste+incineration/9195019/story.html

osirisboy · #**285** Posted **Nov 22, 2013, 4:48 PM**

That would be a good spot for it. It's far enough away people won't notice it. It won't be worse than the transfer station a block away

WarrenC12 · #**286** Posted **Nov 22, 2013, 6:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by whatnext

The purchasers of all these units must be excited to hear that one of the potential sites of Metro's new waste incinerator is just a couple blocks away at Heather and Kent!

http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/F...es+waste+incineration/9195019/story.html

The Mayor has already squashed that location. I can't find the quote, but he said it doesn't mesh with their zero waste plans, and something about this being the first council has heard of the idea.

The transfer station will be far worse from an air quality standpoint, IMO.

jlousa · #**287** Posted **Nov 22, 2013, 7:30 PM**

This council in really inane. What do they expect to happen to the garbage? Why not take care of the problem locally instead of shipping it to another municipality?

The Metro has decided on waste to energy.
Council has decided to push district heating throughout the city.

Seems like those two could complement each other quite nicely. Instead of fighting it they should be embracing it and pushing to get the best waste to energy proposal possible within their boundaries.
Makes much more sense to use your control for good. Have someone build a gasification plant there to feed Marine Gateway/MC2/Marine Gardens/Wesgroup/Pearson/Langara Gardens. Instead you could end up with Burnaby building a dirtier plant and using it to feed their own developments.

officedweller · #**288** Posted **Dec 12, 2013, 6:56 AM**

Another 6 storey at Cambie & 60th:

Quote:

6-Storey Rental Project Proposed for Cambie & W 60th

South Street Development Group have applied to the City of Vancouver to rezone 506 West 60th Avenue and 7645-7675 Cambie Street from RT-1 to CD-1 to allow for two 6-storey buildings rental buildings. The project would be considered under the Rental 100 program. The proposal consists of:
■138 secured market rental units;
■3,500 SF of assembly church space;
■a density of 2.88 FSR;
■a maximum height 71.5 ft; and
■90 parking spaces

http://www.vancouvermarket.ca/2013/12/11/6-storey-rental-project-proposed-for-cambie-w-60th/

http://former.vancouver.ca/commsvcs/planning/rezoning/applications/506w60th/index.htm

squeezied · #**289** Posted **Dec 12, 2013, 8:26 AM**

I have to say I really dislike GBL architecture I find it really cheap and bland. Every other proposal for the Cambie Corridor is by GBL, I'm getting so sick of it. It's the same variant everytime. And unfortunately it's good enough to get approved. Is alternating windows on every other floor suppose to be an architectural element? Bleh... I think it's going to look dated in a couple of years.

logan5 · #**290** Posted **Dec 12, 2013, 9:34 AM**

I guess these rental programs are working. I presume the rents will eventually decrease over time, as these buildings get older, just as all the 3 story walk-ups in Vancouver are now the most affordable places to rent. Replacing the church space is a nice touch...

Crows · #**291** Posted **Dec 12, 2013, 4:26 PM**

They demolished the old buildings beside where the petro canada was

jlousa · #**292** Posted **Dec 12, 2013, 4:38 PM**

Not sure if the idea of heavily subsidizing developers to build rentals is the solution, in fact the city is being taken to court over it by one community group.

officedweller · #**293** Posted **Dec 12, 2013, 8:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crows

They demolished the old buildings beside where the petro canada was

That one's up next week for referral to Public Hearing:

http://former.vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/20131217/documents/p4.pdf

whatnext · #**294** Posted **Dec 26, 2013, 11:22 PM**

"Elizabeth" by Mosaic plods towards completion on Cambie. On the city's grandest boulevard, across from the city's second greatest park, it looks like an utterly pedestrian design that would be equally at home on Kingsway.

But wait, are those solar panels? Oh it's "green", so that makes up for the lack of imagination.

[IMG]

[/IMG]

my photo

Vin · #**295** Posted **Dec 27, 2013, 1:42 AM**

Hate these wooden structures coming up. They creak and leak like crazy over time, become mouldy and musty, and burn up in flames easily. Rather have concrete structures.

squeezied · #**296** Posted **Dec 27, 2013, 2:52 AM**

I don't think this one looks bad based on the renderings. I'm generally pleased with Mosaic's developments. The ones proposed by GBL on the other hand are pretty unimaginative. And I don't those are solar panels, they're just slanted roofs to allow skylight.

Vin, I find your comments to be very narrow-minded. You can't expect tall, slim, podium concrete highrises everywhere. Let's be a bit more realistic here.

Vin · #**297** Posted **Dec 27, 2013, 10:42 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by squeezied

I don't think this one looks bad based on the renderings. I'm generally pleased with Mosaic's developments. The ones proposed by GBL on the other hand are pretty unimaginative. And I don't those are solar panels, they're just slanted roofs to allow skylight.

Vin, I find your comments to be very narrow-minded. You can't expect tall, slim, podium concrete highrises everywhere. Let's be a bit more realistic here.

Haven't you heard of low-rise concrete buildings? Narrow minded huh.

WarrenC12 · #**298** Posted **Dec 27, 2013, 5:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vin

Haven't you heard of low-rise concrete buildings? Narrow minded huh.

Pretty expensive bro... you buying?

whatnext · #**299** Posted **Dec 27, 2013, 6:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by squeezied

I don't think this one looks bad based on the renderings. I'm generally pleased with Mosaic's developments. The ones proposed by GBL on the other hand are pretty unimaginative. And I don't those are solar panels, they're just slanted roofs to allow skylight.

Vin, I find your comments to be very narrow-minded. You can't expect tall, slim, podium concrete highrises everywhere. Let's be a bit more realistic here.

It's not bad a smuch as boring. Cambie is the city's grandest boulevard and deserves better. This looks no better than Bluetree's Main Street which I posted.

Prelude (which is concrete) at 48th is at least a bit more interesting. The city really dropped the ball with the whole Cambie redvelopment. The boulevard deserves more monumental archutecture, not the usual boring dross we get everywhere in Metro.

Vin · #**300** Posted **Dec 27, 2013, 11:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Pretty expensive bro... you buying?

I already got one, thanks for the offer tho.
Expensive? That's what the forestry industry tries hard to make you believe. In the long run, wood frame buildings are way more expensive, especially in wet BC. For the prices they are charging these days, condos at such a beautiful boulevard ought to be built in concrete.