Marine Drive Gateway | 102.1m, 77.7m, 63.4m | 35flr, 26flr, 14flr | Completed

[Caliplanner]

jlousa, thanks for the video update. This will be a grand project and definitely a destination to take friends and family via mass transit!

[Klazu]

This is how developers should do project updates!

[BodomReaper]

This is the best update video I've ever seen. Love the soundtrack as well.

[djh]

Originally Posted by Klazu

This is how developers should do project updates!

Looks great. I'd be nervous if every high-rise developer had drones flying around cranes and rail guideways (I wonder if they got a flight licence to film that and hover over the skytrain lines...?). It could become a fad. Up until the first one hits a power line or drops a 5DMk3 on a pedestrian!

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by djh

It could become a fad. Up until the first one hits a power line or drops a 5DMk3 on a pedestrian!

I doubt this one was flying a 5D Mark III, but rather a GoPro. However I do get your point.

[vanman]

That was hypnotizing. I feel so relaxed after watching that. Hopefully this kind of video update becomes a "thing".

[Vin]

They should do a video like this for each of the city centre in the Lower Mainland.

[officedweller]

Nice video.

[vanciti]

Originally Posted by officedweller

In all likelihood, the Wal-Mart would be able to proceed with the current Council - but they have not re-applied.

With the previous COPE (?) Council of the day, Canadian Tire took the fall with Wal-Mart (they couldn't reject one (big bad Ameican multi-national) but not the other (home-grown Canadian icon), and the same would be true going the other way. Canadian Tire has been approved, so Wal-Mart would likely also be approved. But with a Wal-Mart on Grandview Highway and one at Queensborough, a new Wal-Mart on-line for Richmond Alderbridge - the window may have passed for a South Vancouver store.

Many Vancouverites travel to the Richmond Costco - the same would be true for Wal-Mart. Ultimately, a new store has to make economic sense.

I know for a fact that the current council would not support and/or approve the rezoning of the Walmart property to accommodate their plans. They have tried to quietly revive it several times with no support from Council nor Planning. The Grandview Walmart is a tiny store and only got through as it was under existing zoning, until the sign permits were applied no one was actually aware that the store was actually going to be a Walmart.

There is a Costco downtown, west Burnaby and Richmond, which are all similar in areas to existing Walmarts. A Walmart in S. Vancouver, especially with the general demographic of that area would do exceptionally well, as does the current Superstore, being one of the highest grossing stores in the chain.

[theKB]

Originally Posted by vanciti

I know for a fact that the current council would not support and/or approve the rezoning of the Walmart property to accommodate their plans. They have tried to quietly revive it several times with no support from Council nor Planning. The Grandview Walmart is a tiny store and only got through as it was under existing zoning, until the sign permits were applied no one was actually aware that the store was actually going to be a Walmart.

There is a Costco downtown, west Burnaby and Richmond, which are all similar in areas to existing Walmarts. A Walmart in S. Vancouver, especially with the general demographic of that area would do exceptionally well, as does the current Superstore, being one of the highest grossing stores in the chain.

I think the walmart would kill down there but as mentioned there is no way council will approve it. Unlike Costco, walmart isn't highly regarded for their labour practices. That said it does seem like the Canadian tire complex is a complete and utter flop, the only time I have ever seen it busy is when they first opened. Having leased a warehouse in the area I stop by to pick up the odd thing and the parking lot is a constant ghost town and I wouldn't be surprised if best buy pulled the plug on that location sooner or later.

[Zassk]

The Canadian Tire complex really is a flop. The SportChek is smaller than any other that I've seen, zero reason to visit it. And whose idea was it to separate the stores by a parkade with virtually no walkways in between? Not a good way to cross-pollinate customers. Overall it is a very unfriendly layout.

The Richmond Costco has been the busiest in Canada most years (occasionally eclipsed by one branch in Calgary). It is even worse this year, as the parking lot is typically full within 15 minutes of opening. City parking enforcement has a field day there. This Costco greatly expanded the number of checkouts recently, but congestion inside the store is still a terrible problem.

The South Vancouver / Richmond area could really, really use another Costco.

[theKB]

Originally Posted by Zassk

The Canadian Tire complex really is a flop. The SportChek is smaller than any other that I've seen, zero reason to visit it. And whose idea was it to separate the stores by a parkade with virtually no walkways in between? Not a good way to cross-pollinate customers. Overall it is a very unfriendly layout.

Also whoever thought those "speed bumps" in the underground was a good idea needs to be fired...

[cornholio]

Originally Posted by djh

Looks great. I'd be nervous if every high-rise developer had drones flying around cranes and rail guideways (I wonder if they got a flight licence to film that and hover over the skytrain lines...?). It could become a fad. Up until the first one hits a power line or drops a 5DMk3 on a pedestrian!

Any commercially operated drones must be licensed by Transport Canada to operate. Its actually not that easy and that is why you don't see many commercial aerial drones performing aerial photography in Canada. Slowly things are changing but it is more complicated to commercially operate a drone than people realize.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by vanciti

I know for a fact that the current council would not support and/or approve the rezoning of the Walmart property to accommodate their plans. They have tried to quietly revive it several times with no support from Council nor Planning. ...

Originally Posted by theKB

... Unlike Costco, walmart isn't highly regarded for their labour practices. That said it does seem like the Canadian tire complex is a complete and utter flop, the only time I have ever seen it busy is when they first opened. Having leased a warehouse in the area I stop by to pick up the odd thing and the parking lot is a constant ghost town and I wouldn't be surprised if best buy pulled the plug on that location sooner or later.

Just a note that legally, Council cannot discriminate based on who a business is - it can only do so on legitimate planning grounds. That would not extend to a preference for one big box retailer over another. With Canadian Tire already approved and built, the City would likely face a lawsuit if it rejected Walmart's / Smart Centres' application. But that doesn't mean that the City wouldn't make it difficult for them though.

i.e. see the Shell case from the early 1990s - slightly different scenario (Council passed a resolution not to deal with Shell Canada until it withdrew from South Africa - which was overturned at the Supreme Court of Canada as outside its juridiction).
http://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/1108/index.do

Agree on the Canadian Tire complex being awful.

[vanciti]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Just a note that legally, Council cannot discriminate based on who a business is - it can only do so on legitimate planning grounds. That would not extend to a preference for one big box retailer over another. With Canadian Tire already approved and built, the City would likely face a lawsuit if it rejected Walmart's / Smart Centres' application. But that doesn't mean that the City wouldn't make it difficult for them though.

i.e. see the Shell case from the early 1990s - slightly different scenario (Council passed a resolution not to deal with Shell Canada until it withdrew from South Africa - which was overturned at the Supreme Court of Canada as outside its juridiction).
http://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/1108/index.do

Agree on the Canadian Tire complex being awful.

It is pretty easy to deny it on planning principal as that are is not zoned for retail uses. Rezoning applications are completely subjective to the changing winds of a political party, planning staff, and economic climate. If it was actually zoned for their uses it would be far more difficult, however it is not zoned therefore there is nothing wrong with Planning denying the application, happens all the time all over the city, get a new council, a new planning staff and the same project that was denied behind the scenes by a prior administration gets fast tracked and approved.

[Prometheus]

Originally Posted by cornholio

Any commercially operated drones must be licensed by Transport Canada to operate. Its actually not that easy and that is why you don't see many commercial aerial drones performing aerial photography in Canada. Slowly things are changing but it is more complicated to commercially operate a drone than people realize.

That doesn't seem to be the case.

According to this May 19th story on the CBC's The National (filmed in Vancouver), licenses for commercially operated drones are being handed out at a blazing pace. Apparently Canada is one of the world leaders in the commercial drone operation industry:

http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/TV%20Shows/The%20National/ID/2458033142/

[djh]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

That doesn't seem to be the case.

According to this May 19th story on the CBC's The National (filmed in Vancouver), licenses for commercially operated drones are being handed out at a blazing pace. Apparently Canada is one of the world leaders in the commercial drone operation industry:

http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/TV%20Shows/The%20National/ID/2458033142/

Added to that, just because the law says one "must" have a licence, doesn't mean that everybody "does" have a licence!
Hence why I asked the question if the guys making the video actually bothered to get a licence...because I'm pretty sure Transport Canada would have had some reservations about a developer hovering heavy camera gear over public right of ways, electrified lines and operating cranes.

[Prometheus]

And as the CBC story says, if the UAV is less than 35kg and being operated for recreational purposes only, then no license is needed at all.

[djh]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

And as the CBC story says, if the UAV is less than 35kg and being operated for recreational purposes only, then no license is needed at all.

A little off-topic here, but I worry about that. Did anybody see the drone that buzzed a plane landing at YVR, just for the sake of getting a great shot to put on Youtube? Pretty sure that was well under the required weight for licensing.

My point being with the new technology being so readily available to the public, it's only a matter of time before some idiot causes an accident around a construction site

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by vanciti

It is pretty easy to deny it on planning principal as that are is not zoned for retail uses. Rezoning applications are completely subjective to the changing winds of a political party, planning staff, and economic climate. If it was actually zoned for their uses it would be far more difficult, however it is not zoned therefore there is nothing wrong with Planning denying the application, happens all the time all over the city, get a new council, a new planning staff and the same project that was denied behind the scenes by a prior administration gets fast tracked and approved.

True enough before Canadian Tire was approved, but with Canadian Tire's approval as a precedent - it's tougher now to deny the application.

The area is "designated" (if not zoned) for highway-oriented retail. Article from 2007 after Canadian Tire was approved:

In May 2001, council adopted its highway-oriented retail rezoning policies and guidelines, which specifically referenced the Marine Drive industrial lands. The city's new vision encouraged Wal-Mart and Canadian Tire to acquire their properties. Over the years, city staff worked with the companies to ensure they met -- and often exceeded -- Vancouver's stringent sustainability targets. Both Canadian Tire and Wal-Mart developed "green" designs that would have become models of environmentally benign construction. The Canadian Tire store, for example, features water storage and treatment to reduce storm water run-off, clerestory windows to allow daylight into upper level retail units, and highly reflective roofing materials to save energy.

Last July, council reaffirmed its policy to designate properties on Marine Drive for large format retail and, once again, Canadian Tire set to work with city bureaucrats to satisfy their every concern.

http://www.canada.com/story_print.html?id=88d5015a-186e-46e6-b4d5-f65f1326fca8&sponsor=